Taking place at 125 W. Ninth St., Jeffries a resident of the adjacent edifice, believed to have heard Thorwald yelling at his wife before her disappearance. Neighbours have issued complaints against Jeffries, regarding his voyeuristic tendencies, calling his actions as ‘socially wrong’. In spite of this, the actions of Jeffries violate no codified law, thus, elicit no response from the police. The culpability of Anna Thorwald’s death is yet to be decisively linked to her husband. Thorwald is placed as a likely figure that undertook the murder, though additional research will be conducted in the case. Moreover, charges will be exacted against Thorwald for his volitional endangerment off Jeffries. Free counselling will also be provided to provide solace to the victims affected if required.

The following is Jeffries’ testimony, showcasing the supposed night of the murder: “I was quite somnolent, trying to get some shut-eye. It was …show more content…
Thorwald. The body’s entrails were absent and her limbs were segmented, placed together elusively underneath the public garden bed. Contusions and lacerations were apparent on the disembodied parts, including the arms and legs and torso. The forensic’s operation concluded that the contusions were inflicted ante-mortem. Also, adding to the fact that Anna suffered severe head trauma from a blunt object, being the causal factor of her death. She was dismembered post-mortem. Thorwald has admitted to beating his wife, stating their relationship was ‘dysfunctional and toxic.’ However, denies being the person who killed Anna. Determining the PMI (post-mortem interval), the forensics team was able to extrapolate that Anna died between the time frame of 2:14 AM - 3:05 AM, coinciding with the time Jeffries stated he heard Anna Thorwald scream, ‘No, please!’, at approximately 2:40