|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** This is an archived, static copy of the Casebook messages boards dating from 1998 to 2003. These threads cannot be replied to here. If you want to participate in our current forums please go to https://forum.casebook.org **
Archive through March 28, 2000
Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Victims: Specific Victims:
Mary Jane Kelly:
The fire in Kelly's room.:
Archive through March 28, 2000
Author: Bob Hinton
Thursday, 28 October 1999 - 12:01 am |        | Dear Wolf et al,
Always interesting as ususal.
I would caution you against believing that Caroline Maxwells testimony was exactly the same on Friday and at the inquest on Monday. It does contain significant differences which I highlighted in my article The Magical Witnesses.
I personally don't agree that MJK died when you think she did, however this is merely my opinion. Fixing time of death is so problematical even today. When I was researching my book I contacted a pathologist at the London Hospital and his answer surprised me. He said the biggest problem is fixing time of death. IF YOU CAN GET TO WITHIN FIVE HOURS YOU'RE DOING WELL.
Given all this its not surprising that there will be opposing views expressed.
all the best
Bob Hinton |
Author: jill
Thursday, 28 October 1999 - 12:30 am | | Hello Wolf, Alan, All
This is an interesting discussion (if you forget the bickering within).
Sorry Alan, but 'set in' sounds also to me as already started, but no way near any completion. Ok, I'm no linguist and English isn't my native language, but as I even dream in English I dare to interprete it. I searched 'setting in' in my dictionary (English->Dutch) and found 'inzetten'. The meaning of 'inzetten' in the Dutch dictionary is 'starten', thus in English 'to start'. If we would look at the grammar used in the sentence "...had set in..." the interpretation would be "...had started..."
Cheers,
Jill |
Author: Bob_C
Thursday, 28 October 1999 - 01:10 am | | Hi all,
I concurr that the discussion is interesting. The result so far, however, still seems to set the TOD as ca. 4.00 am, in spite of Maxwell & Co.
I can (due to my proffession) confirm that using the stage of Rigor Mortis to estimate time of death is very trickey and nowadays other methods are used. A large fire or not in the room would have certainly played a part, plus the rapid cooling of a bloodless, gutted and torn-apart body.
While Dr. Bond can hardly be expected to have had previous expierience with such extreme situations, I do not find it suprising that his estimate be several hours astray.
Best regards,
Bob |
Author: Wolf
Thursday, 28 October 1999 - 03:11 pm | | Gee Alan, I'm really sorry that I've seemed to have struck a nerve here. You really seem to have gone off the deep end again. Well I hope my "long-winded" reply doesn't cause you too much trouble.
Do I continue to invest rigor mortis with any sort of accuracy? I don't, but in the absence of the more reliable algor mortis, (and only if rectal or liver temperatures have been taken,) Rigor is all we have to go on. Dr. Bond merely touching the body in order to get a temperature is indicative of the level of Pathology in 1888 and yes, pathology is not a modern science but Forensic Pathology is relatively new. I suppose you can argue that Neurosurgery is not a modern science since trepanation has been practiced for thousands of years, but I wouldn't.
Now I too have discussed Dr. Bond's estimate of Kelly's death with Forensic Pathologists and have found their answers to be mixed, but the majority have sided with Dr. Hocking. Perhaps you should go back to your Pathologists and ask for some literature on rigor mortis, this might help you understand ‘Medics" table a bit better (I can recommend Gradwohl's Legal Medicine, Taylor's Medical jurisprudence, The Scientific Investigation of Crime by Dr. M.M. Baden, or The Medicolegal Investigation of Death by Drs. W. Spitz and R. Fisher.)
A cold body that has signs of rigor may have been dead anywhere from 3 to 36+ hours, but it would take something like very rapid cooling or refrigeration in order to slow down the onset of rigor for any great length of time. I pointed this out in a couple of earlier posts, so yes, "the time would be more likely to be in the lower half of this scale."like around 4 or 5 hours? So time of death could have been between 9:00 and 10:00 o'clock a.m.?
Medics table may show that even in a warm body rigor may take from between 3 to 8 hours but generally rigor is present from between 2 to 4 hours, (see above text books on Forensic Pathology for conformation. I could quote from them, again, but that didn't seem to satisfy you the last time), that is why Dr. Bonds statement that, "the period varies from 6 to 12 hours before rigidity sets in."is laughable. Perhaps, though, you might want to contact the publishers of these Text books and explain to them that they are wrong, tell them Dr. Bond sent you.
At the risk of confusing you even more, digestion of food also varies considerably depending on circumstances but Bond's statement, "the partly digested food would indicate that death took place about 3 or 4 hours after the food was taken, so one or two o'clock in the morning would be the probable time of the murder."is also laughable. Fish and chips would take from between 1 to 3 hours to completely digest and as Bond notes, the meal was only partially digested so a time of between 1 to 2 hours is probable. So, Dr. Bond seems to be wrong again in his understanding of Forensic Pathology, but hey, he was using the vast knowledge that the Victorian medical profession had at it's fingertips while I am burdened with only modern, 20th century science so you might want to add this to your call to the text book publishers.
As for your facts, I didn't live in London in the 1880's only in the 1960's so I will have to rely on those who did live there on the night of November 9th.
Elizabeth Prater: "It is nothing uncommon to hear cries of murder so I took no notice." Inquest testimony, "I did not take much notice of the cries as I frequently hear such cries from the back of the lodging house where the windows look into Miller's Court." Written statement to Inspector Abberline.
Sarah Lewis: "...there was only one scream. I took no notice of it." Inquest testimony.
Mary Ann Cox: "I should have heard any cry of murder. I heard nothing." Inquest testimony. Yes, it was sheer coincidence, (if it happened at all) considering that Prater's reasons for not investigating or at the very least of Prater and Lewis not merely looking out the window was because of the frequency of such cries, even, apparently, at 4:00 a.m.. Prater, especially, did not seem concerned, not because she was frightened nor because she didn't want to become involved, but because of the everyday nature of the scream. Lewis didn't even live in Miller's Court but she didn't go to the window let alone wake her sleeping hosts. This all points to the normalcy of screams in the night in the East End, even with the Ripper scare on every bodies minds especially on the mind of a prostitute like Elizabeth Prater who was sleeping literally right on top of Mary Kelly.
Set-in, to start or to become established, more accurately, to have started, not literally to just be starting. This really seems to have confused you, I know that you don't want to accept the facts but it might help if you get yourself a decent dictionary. You wrote, "It means it had set in and was established throughout the body." Wrong, once rigor mortis has "established itself throughout the body," it stops or maintains the rigid state until it starts to pass. The body is rigid and can't become more rigid, even if you would like it to do so. When Medic states, "The rigidity can increase up to 12 hours after death", he/she is saying that the rigidity starts in the face and neck and then increases down the body for about 12 hours when it stops at full rigidity. In other words, generally,after 12 hours, the body is as stiff as a board, it can't get any stiffer, rigor mortis is established throughout the body, you can attach wheels and skateboard down the street on them. What Dr. bond observed, however, was that rigor had already started but was still continuing to increase at 2:00 p.m., and as you quoted Medic, it generally increases for about 12 hours when, at that time, generally 12 hours later, it has made the body totally stiff which Kelly's body wasn't. Your argument is along the lines of, "she was dead but death increased during the examination"!
Was Mrs. Maxwell mistaken about who she was talking too? Perhaps there was some other woman who looked like Kelly, who had the same build as Kelly, who had the same length and colour of hair as Kelly, who dressed in the same clothes as Kelly, who was also named Mary and who knew Mrs. Maxwell as Carry. Mrs prater changed her testimony on several points and was contradicted on others but she is considered by you to be a paragon of virtue, no questions asked, but then again, she was interviewed by the police so she must be telling the truth.
I have to wonder why, you think it impossible for Kelly to have been killed and mutilated in around 45 minutes to an hour and a half? The extensive mutilations to Katherine Eddowes took only 2 to 3 minutes and was done in the darkness of Mitre Square but that is only a modern Forensic Pathologists opinion so I'm sure you'll disregard it.
On a parting note, it doesn't surprise me that you would revert to a personal attack on me, someone that you know nothing about, because as in some of your other posts, it is true to your style, or lack there of.
Wolf. |
Author: Alan
Thursday, 28 October 1999 - 04:07 pm | | | ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ |
Author: Nicky
Thursday, 28 October 1999 - 04:15 pm | | I consider that Wolf's posts are getting sicker and sicker, how could he suggest attaching wheels to a deceased person and using them as a skateboard.
This is in exceedingly bad taste, especially in view of Caz's earlier post. Our sympathy goes out to her and I hope she isn't reading this nonsense. |
Author: Caz
Thursday, 28 October 1999 - 11:51 pm | | Actually, I'm here reading as usual (perfect therapy before going away for a long weekend). I wasn't going to post anything for a while but I must speak up for Wolf.
I laughed out loud at the skateboard analogy and I thought Wolf explained everything very well for the non-medics among us like me.
I would not think it likely, however, that Elizabeth Prater was sleeping 'literally' on top of MJK!!! :-)
Glad to see Alan's sleeping like a baby.....
Love to all and thanks for all the good wishes.
See you soon.
Caroline |
Author: Caz
Thursday, 28 October 1999 - 11:58 pm | | Sorry Nicky, I really appreciate your sympathy (it's my awful sense of humour that keeps me going sometimes).
Please don't anyone feel they have to 'tone down' their posts for my sake.
I really am going now :-)
Love,
Caz |
Author: John
Friday, 29 October 1999 - 12:06 am | | I have just re-read Sugden on Mary kelly's time of death and he argues very well for the 3.30 to 4.00 a.m. time, I think I'll stick with that.
We're thinking of you Caz. |
Author: Sarah R. Jacobs
Friday, 29 October 1999 - 07:06 am | | The "skateboard" joke made me laugh out loud, too. My cat looked at me like I was crazy ;-)
Actually, we do need humour here. Otherwise, we might begin to take the actual subject matter (dead women killed by a vicious serial killer) lightly, rather than the facts of the case (rigor mortis... and what to do with it... ;-D
Well, I'll see y'all at the virtual Crown Pub. We should start a virtual Ripper-era pub, too...! |
Author: Bob_C
Friday, 29 October 1999 - 07:17 am | | Hi all,
Wolf's description of a method of transport of deceased persons is not to be recommended, I believe the police would tend to request enlightment as to the reason for such activity. It did clearly explain how full rigor mortis affects a body, however.
Regards,
Bob |
Author: anon
Friday, 29 October 1999 - 10:01 am | | | Sarah - the cat was right! |
Author: Simon Owen
Friday, 03 March 2000 - 10:55 am | | | My suspicion is that MJK's fire was stoked up with the fatty tissues from her body. Yerrgh ! |
Author: Simon Owen
Monday, 27 March 2000 - 09:31 am | | I managed to get hold of James Tully's ' The Secret of Prisoner 1167 ' this weekend and a very good book it is too ( I understand Stuart Evans doesn't agree with parts of it though ). But I was most impressed by Tully's argument for an earlier time of death than 1am-2am for Mary Jane Kelly. Dr Bond is wrong when he states rigor mortis commences 6-12 hours after death , rigor mortis can start as quickly as an hour after death and is generally complete after about 8 hours. After 12 hours the corpse is as rigid as a board. So we would assume a time of between 6am and 9am for the death of the victim , the rapid chilling of the body would have delayed rigor but not by too much as the roaring fire would have cancelled some of the effect out. Incidentially this is reasonably consistent with Dr Phillip's estimation of the time of death as given in the newspapers : 5am-6am. If we assume Phillips was accurate in respect of the time of death to within an hour we might assume the murder took place between 5am-7am in the morning.Thus Dr Bond overestimated the TOD because the body was ' comparatively cold ' , the extreme loss of blood and mutilation had caused this. Nevertheless , I believe Bond was an experienced enough surgeon not to wildly overestimate the time of death , but he was probably wrong by a few hours. Thus placing the murder again around 6am. This would tie in with the fact that Bond stated rigor had set in ( takes 5-8 hours ) but increased ( I presume he means intensified since he does not say ' spread ' or give specific details ) during the post-mortem : this fits in with a 5am-8am time of death. Thus it is my assertion that the victim was murdered between 5am and 7am. I know rigor isn't a very reliable means of determining TOD but Tully quotes the opinion of the late Dr Dennis Hocking , an examiner who performed over 40,000 post-mortems , to back up the assertion that death occured later in the morning. That is an impressive statistic. If we thus correlate all these times , I believe they show Dr Phillips made an impressive assessment on the TOD. If Dr Phillips was right , then the person heard leaving the yard at c.6.30am could well have been the murderer and it would explain why Mrs Prater heard nothing - she was out at the time. If there had been banging about in the room downstairs during the night it would probably have woken her up. |
Author: Guy Hatton
Tuesday, 28 March 2000 - 04:55 am | | As a side issue, Simon. Phillips too was an experienced surgeon. By logical extension, what you say about Bond could reasonably be applied to Phillips. He wouldn't have "wildly overestimated [the] time of death", but he could be "wrong by a few hours". You realise, don't you, that this stands in flagrant contradiction to your previous argument relating to Phillips' estimate of Chapman's T.O.D. Have you modified your opinion in that case?
All the Best
Guy |
Author: Simon Owen
Tuesday, 28 March 2000 - 06:22 am | | | Chapman is a slightly different case , because if she was killed at 5.30am the body would still have been warm and rigor would not have yet started at 6.20 am when Phillips examined her, however it was commencing in the upper limbs at this time. However , I would revise my opinion that it was unlikely the killer killed at 5.30 because the other crimes had been committed under darkness , having studied the Kelly case further. I would accept the possibility of a 5.30am time of death , but I would say it would have to be unlikely. |
Author: Guy Hatton
Tuesday, 28 March 2000 - 08:30 am | | Agreed that the two cases differ, Simon. My point is that there are so many variables at work, that, without in any way suggesting incompetence or deliberate deception, we might expect that any of the doctors' T.O.D. estimates could suffer from inaccuracies. The most difficult point here appears to be that even the modern authorities seem to disagree markedly as to the time required for the onset of rigor, such that we still cannot judge the statements of Bond and Phillips conclusively. It is notable, though, that a T.O.D. for Kelly somewhere in between Bond's and Phillips' estimates is supported by other witness evidence, and that Phillips himself, as has been said here before, appeared to reconsider the firmness of his Chapman T.O.D. estimate after the event.
All the Best
Guy |
Author: Simon Owen
Tuesday, 28 March 2000 - 09:21 am | | Surely though , Phillips was backtracking because his evidence was being brought into question by other witnesses reporting they had seen Chapman after the T.O.D. , thus his credibility and his reputation were at stake. It is important to note that Coroner Baxter supported Mrs Long rather than Dr Phillips as well , thus leaving the good doctor having to shuffle his feet a bit. In any case , if Bagster Phillips was right about the Kelly T.O.D. , why not also the Chapman T.O.D. ? Dr Bond had simply overestimated the time that Kelly was killed. If George Hutchinson is right then Kelly was alive between 2am-3am anyway. I should think the minimum time rigor mortis would take to have appeared , let alone set in , in the Chapman case would have been an hour ( then perhaps another hour to set into the face and upper limbs ). Phillips examined the body at 6.20am , if Mrs Long had seen Chapman at 5.30am then that is a time of 50 minutes. On a reasonably cold morning and given the mutilations involved chilling the body further , this would surely not be enough time. Its not impossible but its very unlikely. |
Author: Simon Owen
Tuesday, 28 March 2000 - 10:00 am | | | Its possible that the murderers could have waited for Mrs Prater to go out in the morning before striking ; the victim in 13 Miller's Court could have been asleep under the covers , hence the stabbing through the sheet. Since she lived above , Elizabeth Prater would have heard any bumpings around in the flat below as she heard Joe and Mary having arguments and so on. Thus the time was chosen to ensure secrecy, as the murderers may have locked the door with a skeleton key and left via the window. The mysterious footsteps heard at 6.30am would have been the killer then ( or one of the killers ) leaving the alleyway. |
Author: Jill De Schrijver
Tuesday, 28 March 2000 - 10:10 am | | Hi Simon,
I believe there wasn't any key needed to lock Mary's room. It was enough to pull it, so that the lock would fall in its place. There is a large discussion file under thr MJK board, with the keys as topic.
Cheers,
Jill |
|
|
|
|
