Lechmere The Psychopath

[Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Elamarna

It really all depends on the circumstances, and here the circumstances do not back the view you expressed.

Steve

Because?

[Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Henry Flower

Hi Steve. Hypothetical question. Given what we have as approximate timings of Lech, Paul, and the descriptions by Paul of what he saw / felt, let me ask you: yes, we all expected an inconclusive answer to the forensic question. That was inevitable. But what answer (if any) would it take to convince you that Lech might just be the man? My thinking is as follows:

If death were very fast, say within a minute, it would have been something that I think might have caught Paul's attention as he approached. I would expect at least 20 seconds of gurgling, coughing blood, gasping through the throat wound. I'm thinking of the horrific sounds I can never forget from one of those repugnant ISIS videos. I couldn't watch it and averted my eyes, but the sounds were terrible enough. However, maybe the one I endured documented a noisier death than others. I'm so sick of all these variables!

So I suspect that if she's died recently enough to land Lechmere well and truly in the frame then Paul is going to have noticed more than he did. One possible feint chest movement suggests to me she's not been sliced within the past minute.

But as you say, this isn't an exact science. Maybe she could show almost no sign or sound of life "almost instantaneously". If the blood had not coagulated then that gives me pause.

So I'm asking, given all the known factors and timings, is there a biological answer that might've caused you to think, "Hello, this is maybe worth a very close look"?

In the ISIS case you refer to, I suspect that the cutting of the throat was the only damage inflicted.
In Nichols´ case, we must also weigh in how Llewellyn opted for the neck being cut AFTER the damage was done to the abdomen, lethal damage as it were.

So if we have a sequence where the killer subdued Nichols by strangling her partially, and where she fainted, only to then be lowered to the ground and have her abdomen ripped open, receiving a number of wounds that were enough to ensure a swift death, then the cutting of the neck would have followed that process.
Therefore, I would not think there would be much respiration and gasps coming from Nichols as the neck was severed, and I think that Paul could well have arrived thirty, forty seconds after it was done, without Nichols moving or sounding discernably at all.
This is also why there was no arterial spray coming from the neck wound and why there was so little blood under the neck - she had done most of the bleeding inside the abdomen already.
The movement he felt was quite likely a twitch in the nervous system, interpreted as breath on account of Paul feeling her chest when he noticed it.

This is how I read things.

[Elamarna]

Originally Posted by Henry Flower

Hi Steve. Hypothetical question. Given what we have as approximate timings of Lech, Paul, and the descriptions by Paul of what he saw / felt, let me ask you: yes, we all expected an inconclusive answer to the forensic question. That was inevitable. But what answer (if any) would it take to convince you that Lech might just be the man? My thinking is as follows:

If death were very fast, say within a minute, it would have been something that I think might have caught Paul's attention as he approached. I would expect at least 20 seconds of gurgling, coughing blood, gasping through the throat wound. I'm thinking of the horrific sounds I can never forget from one of those repugnant ISIS videos. I couldn't watch it and averted my eyes, but the sounds were terrible enough. However, maybe the one I endured documented a noisier death than others. I'm so sick of all these variables!

So I suspect that if she's died recently enough to land Lechmere well and truly in the frame then Paul is going to have noticed more than he did. One possible feint chest movement suggests to me she's not been sliced within the past minute.

But as you say, this isn't an exact science. Maybe she could show almost no sign or sound of life "almost instantaneously". If the blood had not coagulated then that gives me pause.

So I'm asking, given all the known factors and timings, is there a biological answer that might've caused you to think, "Hello, this is maybe worth a very close look"?

Nice questions.

To fit it purely to Lechmere we would have needed a reply it would take between 2 min and 2min 30. Not up to 2 or 2.5 but exactly . Such would leave no option but to say Lech was there when it was done. However we were never going to get

A really short period under 1 minute would exclude Paul from detecting breathing; however such would not preclude Lech from being the killer.

These type of things while looking interesting are very rarely conclusive or actual even helpful.


I have to say, having looked at this and to a far greater extent bleeding I can see nothing in the evidence which would from a biological viewpoint make me really think interesting.


Have to say it was nice to read Kjab3112's first post last night. Makes me realise I have not forgotten everything.


Steve

[Elamarna]

Originally Posted by Fisherman

In the ISIS case you refer to, I suspect that the cutting of the throat was the only damage inflicted.
In Nichols´ case, we must also weigh in how Llewellyn opted for the neck being cut AFTER the damage was done to the abdomen, lethal damage as it were.

So if we have a sequence where the killer subdued Nichols by strangling her partially, and where she fainted, only to then be lowered to the ground and have her abdomen ripped open, receiving a number of wounds that were enough to ensure a swift death, then the cutting of the neck would have followed that process.
Therefore, I would not think there would be much respiration and gasps coming from Nichols as the neck was severed, and I think that Paul could well have arrived thirty, forty seconds after it was done, without Nichols moving or sounding discernably at all.
This is also why there was no arterial spray coming from the neck wound and why there was so little blood under the neck - she had done most of the bleeding inside the abdomen already.
The movement he felt was quite likely a twitch in the nervous system, interpreted as breath on account of Paul feeling her chest when he noticed it.

This is how I read things.

Agree with you on what Paul probably felt, and that even if earlier he may not have detected much.

Of course we will not agree on the order of the cuts, but such is the nature of things.

An interesting observation Fish, and not meant to start more debate. If the Neck was first then the cuts to the abdomen would bleed less and the chance of getting blood on the hands or anywhere would be reduced. But who knows; certainly not either of us.


Steve

[Elamarna]

Originally Posted by Fisherman

Because?

Many things, including order of cuts, how open the area of the wounds is and of course actually know if any deep vessels such as the Aorta have been cut. And despite Llewellyn's statement we really Don't know that.
The diagram used by Payne-James did not show an obvious wound which may have hit the aorta.


We won't agree I am sure. We could go on all day as we both know , but what would it achieve.


Steve

[Elamarna]

Originally Posted by Fisherman

Well, Steve, I´m quite aware that we must be dealing with a spectre of times, and that it can never be established what applied to Nichols. However, if Paul can make some general outlining about it all, that would be very interesting to hear.
Jason Payne-James was always very careful in his way of expressing matters and he always allowed for this kind of spectre, and when he said what he did about bleeding times, it was in reply to my question. He would of course never claim that there is a timetable with exact bleeding times. It all boils down to many years of experience and a rational guess based on that experience, and that is about as much we can hope to get from Paul.

Agreed.



Steve

[Henry Flower]

Originally Posted by Elamarna

Agreed.



Steve

Thanks for your thoughts Steve.

This has all become very reasonable, realistic, and amicable.

It has me quite spooked

[Elamarna]

Originally Posted by Henry Flower

Thanks for your thoughts Steve.

This has all become very reasonable, realistic, and amicable.

It has me quite spooked

No reason for this particular part of the thread not to be.
Most of us taking part could see what the likely outcome would be no matter which side of the Lechmere debate we stand.

If you exclude Lech from the debate as such, has is largely done on this issue ( the only point which needs to be looked at is the length of the encounter with Paul) I find it works much better.


Steve

[Pierre]

[quote=Henry Flower;419871]

You've built a very tempting little funhouse here, if only we could be certain the foundations weren't made of sand.

Pierre

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Fisherman

Once we are, we have found our man. If that ever happens.
As for the foundations, I would describe them as a mixture of concrete and sand right now; sadly, the proportions are not correct to allow for all and sundry to move in just yet. Of course, I sleep fearlessly in the house every night myself, but the building council bureaucrats won´t allow me to run a full hotel service for some reason.

Science will always win.

Pierre