Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Kosminski, Aaron: Is Kosminski still the best suspect we have? - by Damaso Marte 2 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: The Lechmere/Cross "name issue" - by drstrange169 3 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: The Lechmere/Cross "name issue" - by drstrange169 3 hours ago.
Elizabeth Stride: Lipski - by c.d. 7 hours ago.
A6 Murders: Here we go again.... - by moste 8 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: The Lechmere/Cross "name issue" - by John G 8 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: The Lechmere/Cross "name issue" - (10 posts)
A6 Murders: Here we go again.... - (9 posts)
Kosminski, Aaron: Is Kosminski still the best suspect we have? - (7 posts)
Tumblety, Francis: More Newspaper Articles - (4 posts)
Elizabeth Stride: Lipski - (3 posts)
Non-Fiction: Patricia Cornwell - Walter Sickert - BOOK 2 - (3 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Suspects > Lechmere/Cross, Charles

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #991  
Old 02-16-2017, 02:08 PM
John G John G is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,220
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
David ,

Very true if the wound was oozing I fail to see how it could fix a time at all.

However is not the argument which has been given that the blood was still flowing, meaning that Lechmere had to be at the murder site at the approximate time the fatal cut?


Steve
Hi Steve,

The problem is PC Neil effectively contradicted himself at the inquest. Firstly, he said blood was "oozing" from the wound, but then he described it as "running from the wound in her neck." It's also worth noting that Paul said he believed she was still breathing when he examined her, i.e. after he placed his hand on her heart.

Last edited by John G : 02-16-2017 at 02:14 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #992  
Old 02-16-2017, 02:19 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 4,975
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
The problem is PC Neil effectively contradicted himself at the inquest. Firstly, he said blood was "oozing" from the wound, but then he described it as "running from the wound in her neck."
How is that a contradiction?
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #993  
Old 02-16-2017, 02:25 PM
John G John G is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,220
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
How is that a contradiction?
Put simply, oozing means slow, whilst running generally means quick.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #994  
Old 02-16-2017, 02:26 PM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: north london
Posts: 2,116
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
If you mean that Fisherman has put this argument forward Steve then that's possible but I'm not aware of any witness saying that the blood was "flowing".

Oozing means to flow slowly or gently but that's as fast as I am aware that the blood was seen to be flowing.


David
Neil certainly uses oozing.
However Mizen does not say oozing and that as I understand it is part of the issue.

If I am wrong about this I am sure I will be corrected quickly.

Once again if it's only oozing there is no way to pinpoint the time of the fatal cut.

Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #995  
Old 02-16-2017, 02:33 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 4,975
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
Put simply, oozing means slow, whilst running generally means quick.
So if I say my nose is running, it must mean mucus is coming out quickly?

I can't say my nose is running slowly?

And if I take a piece of chalk and draw a line on the ground, can I say: "I have drawn a line running from point A to point B?". Does that imply speed of any kind?
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #996  
Old 02-16-2017, 02:34 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 4,975
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
David
Neil certainly uses oozing.
However Mizen does not say oozing and that as I understand it is part of the issue.
But he doesn't say it was "flowing" either.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #997  
Old 02-16-2017, 02:40 PM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: north london
Posts: 2,116
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
Put simply, oozing means slow, whilst running generally means quick.
John this is the issue is it not.

Neil at first says the wound was oozing, he then says the blood is running from the neck on to the roadway.

Is that a contradiction?

I guess it all about how we use language is it not?

I see oozing being the description of the flow from the wound and the running the description of the flow on the road.
For instance the blood was running from the body onto the road and into the gutter.
I mean would one say it was oozing across the road? I certainly would not.


I therefore suggest on the balance of probability that he used ooze to describe the actual wound because that is what he saw.


However I am sure others will disagree on that interpretation.


Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #998  
Old 02-16-2017, 02:42 PM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: north london
Posts: 2,116
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
But he doesn't say it was "flowing" either.
I agree David.

However that is how the evidence has been interpreted by some I believe.


Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #999  
Old 02-16-2017, 02:46 PM
John G John G is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,220
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
So if I say my nose is running, it must mean mucus is coming out quickly?

I can't say my nose is running slowly?

And if I take a piece of chalk and draw a line on the ground, can I say: "I have drawn a line running from point A to point B?". Does that imply speed of any kind?
I would agree that, in this context, the word is ambiguous!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1000  
Old 02-16-2017, 02:51 PM
John G John G is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,220
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
John this is the issue is it not.

Neil at first says the wound was oozing, he then says the blood is running from the neck on to the roadway.

Is that a contradiction?

I guess it all about how we use language is it not?

I see oozing being the description of the flow from the wound and the running the description of the flow on the road.
For instance the blood was running from the body onto the road and into the gutter.
I mean would one say it was oozing across the road? I certainly would not.


I therefore suggest on the balance of probability that he used ooze to describe the actual wound because that is what he saw.


However I am sure others will disagree on that interpretation.


Steve
Hi Steve,

Yes, this is a possible interpretation. Thus, "running" could have referred to the "pool of blood just where her neck was lying", not to the blood emanating from the wound in her neck.

Last edited by John G : 02-16-2017 at 02:54 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.