Blood Spray from Decapitation

[Observer]

Dr Philips

"Have you formed any opinion as to the manner in which the deceased's right hand became stained with blood? - It is a mystery. There were small oblong clots on the back of the hand. I may say that I am taking it as a fact that after death the hand always remained in the position in which I found it - across the body."

Small oblong clots on the back of the right hand. It's clear Liz Stride did not use her hands to stem the flow of blood.

[K-453]

... when a victim is not bound, the first action after having their throat cut is to put a hand to the wound.

Not necessarily so. In one of the videos I watched a man was decapitated whose hands were not bound, and he did nothing to defend himself. Well, this guy knew before what was going to happen to him. But still ... Someone suddenly attacked, like Liz Stride, might not put their hand to the wound, but cling to the arms of the attacker to keep him from continuing.

[Wickerman]

Further. The spots of blood could easily have been missed? Why is that? Also, missed "in those days"? Were the late Victorian Doctors and police blood blind? Were they incapable of detecting the presence of blood for some strange reason?

I think one of the contributing problems in the Stride case is that the yard was swilled down about 4:00 am, before it was light.
However, because Stride was found so close to the wall, wasn't it thought that arterial spray should have hit the wall if she had been on her feet?
I thought her throat was sliced when she was on or near the ground, so any arterial blood should have been on the cobbles, and if so, then possibly washed away?

[lynn cates]

near ground

Hello Jon.

"I thought her throat was sliced when she was on or near the ground, so any arterial blood should have been on the cobbles, and if so, then possibly washed away?"

Acute eye for forensics--as usual. I believe her to have been near the ground when she had her throat cut. Else, the spray would have hit the building.

Cheers.
LC

[Cogidubnus]

I saw the Sound of Music last night, so I'm fully qualified to tell you all about Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg...

Dave

[Observer]

And I saw the Secret Life Of Walter Mitty, so I'm fully qualified to tell you all about fantastical hysterical made up stories.

[Observer]

I think one of the contributing problems in the Stride case is that the yard was swilled down about 4:00 am, before it was light.
However, because Stride was found so close to the wall, wasn't it thought that arterial spray should have hit the wall if she had been on her feet?
I thought her throat was sliced when she was on or near the ground, so any arterial blood should have been on the cobbles, and if so, then possibly washed away?

Arterial spray would have hit the wall if she had been on her feet ergo she was not on her feet when cut.

"on or near the ground" you can't have both Jon, she was either near the ground or on it. The two positions would not have displayed the same blood pattern, in my opinion. Dr Philips observed that there was no blood, on the ground, between the body and the wall, this is why he formulated that Liz Stride had been on the ground as she was cut.

You know, what's with this cutting as she fell? What's the point in cutting a victim as she falls? How long would it take to bring someone from the standing position, to the prone? Half a second? Think about it, half a second to locate the throat and cut, and the body is falling all the while, and this in a dark passage. It doesn't make sense to me. Better to wait while the victim is on the ground then cut. This is what I believe happened, as did Doctor Philips. The blood pattern supports the prone position.

I see Mr Cates is now of the opinion that us that the victim was near the ground when cut. Is this possible? "near the ground". What did the killer do ? Prevent her from falling the last couple of inches in order to cut her throat? I can't see, considering the momentum of the body falling, and the rapidity of the fall, that anyone would have the ability to cut the throat just as it was inches from the ground. Even if this was the case by some freak of nature, and the victim was cut, "near to the ground", the blood splatter would not have been as observed by Doctor Philips. As he noted there was no blood between the body and the wall, hence he formed a professional opinion that Liz Stride was lying on the ground as she was cut.

Regards

Observer

[Observer]

Wishful thinking

see next post, don't know what happened here

[Observer]

Wishful Thinking

Hello Jon.

"I thought her throat was sliced when she was on or near the ground, so any arterial blood should have been on the cobbles, and if so, then possibly washed away?"

Acute eye for forensics--as usual. I believe her to have been near the ground when she had her throat cut. Else, the spray would have hit the building.

Cheers.
LC

Before any blood had been washed away Dr Philips stated

"The blood near to the neck and a few inches to the left side was well clotted, and it had run down the waterway to within a few inches of the side entrance to the club-house.
[Coroner] Were there any spots of blood anywhere else? - I could trace none.

Dr Philips again

"My reason for believing that deceased was injured when on the ground was partly on account of the absence of blood anywhere on the left side of the body and between it and the wall."

As Dr Philips observed the blood pattern was entirely consistent with the victim being cut while on the ground

Where's that copy of the Secret life of Walter Mitty, think I'll watch it again.

[Cogidubnus]

If you'd watched, in the film clip the victim has been forced into a kneeling position and such initial arterial spray as there is seems comcentrated on one side, where it might be almost completely concealed by the body if it were cast that way. (Instead, in this clip, decapitation occurs and the body is allowed to flop back).

I've no particular axe to grind here - just anxious to keep open any possibilities which might later prove viable. Is that sufficiently unMitty-like for you?

All the best

Dave

[Observer]

If you'd watched, in the film clip the victim has been forced into a kneeling position and such initial arterial spray as there is seems comcentrated on one side, where it might be almost completely concealed by the body if it were cast that way. (Instead, in this clip, decapitation occurs and the body is allowed to flop back).

I've no particular axe to grind here - just anxious to keep open any possibilities which might later prove viable. Is that sufficiently unMitty-like for you?

All the best

Dave

Hi Dave the Walter Mitty reference was aimed more at the suggestion that a club member was involved in the death of Liz Stride.

I have no intention of watching the clip, once bitten twice shy as they say, the one I watched was bad enough.

Dr Philips examined Liz Strides clothes ,all he found on them was mud. If the arterial spray was directed down, and then was concealed by the body, I would expect that there would have been blood on Liz Strides clothing. None was found.

A large clot of blood was found by Liz Strides neck, a pound was mentioned. There was then a trail of her blood extending all the way to the club door, 16or 17 feet.

As Tom Wescott has mentioned on another thread, the blood, which flowed to the club door in all probability mingled with rain, however still a large quantity of blood .

Dr Philips

"Roughly estimating it, I should say there was an unusual flow of blood, considering the stature and the nourishment of the body."
"


I believe this quantity of blood which Dr Philips observed, the large clot, and the flow of blood to the club door was the full extent of blood that issued from Liz Strides body that night. I think it convinced Dr Philips that Liz Stride had been lying on the ground when the killer cut her throat.

Regards

Observer

[Wickerman]

Arterial spray would have hit the wall if she had been on her feet ergo she was not on her feet when cut.

I agree.

"on or near the ground" you can't have both Jon, she was either near the ground or on it.

I was making allowances for Blackwell's comment:
"...The throat might have been cut as she was falling, or when she was on the ground."

I can't see Phillips & Blackwell making diametrically opposite suggestions, there must be a medium ground that can accomodate both views.

[Observer]

I can't see Phillips & Blackwell making diametrically opposite suggestions, there must be a medium ground that can accomodate both views.

They most certainly did. Read the inquest report. So you pays your money, and takes your chance. I believe Philips was correct. I can't really say any more on the matter.

Regards

Observer

[Errata]

Arterial spray would have hit the wall if she had been on her feet ergo she was not on her feet when cut.

"on or near the ground" you can't have both Jon, she was either near the ground or on it. The two positions would not have displayed the same blood pattern, in my opinion. Dr Philips observed that there was no blood, on the ground, between the body and the wall, this is why he formulated that Liz Stride had been on the ground as she was cut.

You know, what's with this cutting as she fell? What's the point in cutting a victim as she falls? How long would it take to bring someone from the standing position, to the prone? Half a second? Think about it, half a second to locate the throat and cut, and the body is falling all the while, and this in a dark passage. It doesn't make sense to me. Better to wait while the victim is on the ground then cut. This is what I believe happened, as did Doctor Philips. The blood pattern supports the prone position.

I see Mr Cates is now of the opinion that us that the victim was near the ground when cut. Is this possible? "near the ground". What did the killer do ? Prevent her from falling the last couple of inches in order to cut her throat? I can't see, considering the momentum of the body falling, and the rapidity of the fall, that anyone would have the ability to cut the throat just as it was inches from the ground. Even if this was the case by some freak of nature, and the victim was cut, "near to the ground", the blood splatter would not have been as observed by Doctor Philips. As he noted there was no blood between the body and the wall, hence he formed a professional opinion that Liz Stride was lying on the ground as she was cut.

Regards

Observer

I always pictured "cutting as she fell" to be simply one fluid motion. He came up behind her as she was walking, jerked her backward off her feet so she essentially fell into his chest, cut her throat, and stepped back so so that she would complete the fall. Which might have resulted in the killer blocking the initial spray spray from the cut getting onto the wall.

But of all the throat cuts, her was by and large the most expert. The vessels were cleanly cut through, not just opened. A completely severed artery only has the pressure from the heart behind it. So the spray in such cases is pretty much not a spray as much as just a wave of blood. It's akin to a water balloon. Prick it with a pin, and the spray is impressive. Make a small cut and the water pulses out. Make a big enough cut and the water just falls to the floor.

The only thing that would create a spray would be if the murder weapon was so sharp that the wound was able to seal itself between drops in pressure, causing the blood to have to force itself through the seal. (Not like a healing seal, but like a surface tension/vacuum sort of thing.) I'm not entirely sure anything was sharp enough to do that back then. Well, not metal anyway. Glass occasionally breaks with an edge sharp enough.

[Michael W Richards]

I believe that the thread is supposed to be concerned with the question of blood spray while decapitating, not whether or not some posters agree with some contemporary medical experts as to when Liz Strides throat was cut.....once.

In the cases of Polly Nichols and Annie Chapman, there is a case to be made for a killer who may have sought to decapitate, this deep double cut seems to be an element of some other so-called "Ripper kills"....obviously Liz Strides murder isnt on that list.

Phillips would have been an excellent source for an opinion as to whether Strides killer used a similar knife to those first 2 murders, or exhibited some skills that matched those kills, but neither Blackwell or Phillips offer a scenario that addresses all the concerns of an investigator.

As to decapitation.....I will say that some posters make statements here that seem to be made without using their heads.

You know who you are.

Cheers