Did he have anatomical knowledge?

[Lewis C]

I think that does help, because it provides a plausible explanation for why Paul thought that Nichols might have still been breathing, especially since he seems to have only thought that briefly.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Trevor,

Sorry, this is off-topic, but you once wrote that you might be willing to run any forensic questions past your contact, Dr. Michael Biggs. Does that offer still stand?

I was thinking it might be worthwhile to hear Dr. Biggs' thoughts about "agonal breathing."

It has been suggested by certain Lechmere theorist that when Robert Paul felt Polly Nichols' chest and thought he felt slight movement, it could have been agonal breathing by a still very much alive Polly Nichols.

It would be interesting to know if Dr. Biggs thinks this theory is at all probable, considering the extensive nature of the cuts to Poll Nichols' throat and abdomen. Could a person exhibit agonal breathing 30 or 40 seconds after having their throat cut down to the vertebrae, and could that breathing be interpreted as a slight movement of the chest as described by Robert Paul?

If not, is there any forensic explanation for Robert Paul's testimony, other than a witness simply being mistaken?

(Perhaps these questions need to be formulated in more detail, but that's the gist of it. This was something that came up on the 'Charles Cross' thread).

Many thanks.

I have had the following reply from Dr Biggs

This is an interesting question, for which (as usual!) I'll be unlikely to help take you definitively in either direction.

First of all, it is certainly possible for someone who has suffered a mortal wound, including a throat cut down to the vertebrae, to be exhibiting agonal breathing 30-40 seconds later (or even longer).

However, it is also not uncommon for bodies to appear to exhibit breathing (or similar sounds / movements) when examined after death, especially by those unaccustomed to dead bodies. If, for example, you were to move a body even slightly (such as when checking for signs of life) then you could prompt an escape of air from the chest, lolling of the head, etc. which could be entirely post-mortem, but could mimic breathing or a "last gasp".

(It is also possible for the mind to play tricks, especially in a situation of high drama / shock, when there is poor lighting, etc.)

So it could be that there was no actual breathing / movement / noise, and that the observer was simply mistaken due to the ghastly scene presented unexpectedly. Or it could be that the body had been dead for a period of time, but that the slightest movement triggered an escape of air (accompanied by breathing, gurgling or groaning sounds), which was misinterpreted as a genuine sign of life. Or there could have been some genuine respiratory effort / movement of the chest wall (whether conscious or involuntary) a short period of time after the injuries had been inflicted, but before death had actually occurred.

I know that doesn't help you to decide one way or the other, but it's important to stress that both suggested scenarios are possible, and so can't be ruled out on medical / pathological grounds.

I hope that helps?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[rjpalmer]

I will ask the question !

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Thanks, Trevor.

[Geddy2112]

Sorry, this is off-topic, but you once wrote that you might be willing to run any forensic questions past your contact, Dr. Michael Biggs. Does that offer still stand?

I was thinking it might be worthwhile to hear Dr. Biggs' thoughts about "agonal breathing."

I'm not a doctor, but you can have my opinion from what I found if you like. The main point is the term agonal is obviously from agony. Hardly that of a small child I would suggest.

"Agonal breathing refers to irregular, gasping breaths that happen during cardiac arrest. It is the body’s automatic reflex as the heart stops pumping adequate blood to the brain and vital organs. These sporadic gasps may persist for several minutes after someone loses consciousness. Agonal breaths sound like snorting, gurgling, or moaning noises. The chest may appear to rise and fall.
Agonal breathing should not be confused with normal breathing. It does not represent adequate oxygen intake. Agonal respiration indicates a dire emergency requiring immediate medical intervention.
Key Signs of Agonal Breathing -
Sporadic, infrequent gasping breaths, Abnormal snoring or gurgling sounds, Slow irregular chest movements, Blue skin colour (cyanosis) due to oxygen deprivation, No pulse palpated, Dilated pupils unreactive to light.
Compare agonal breathing to the normal respiratory rate of 12-20 breaths per minute in adults. Agonal gasps occur only 2-3 times per minute or slower. The breathing pattern is markedly abnormal." - Sudden Cardiac Arrest Website.

"it [agonal breathing] may be as brief as one or two breaths to a prolonged period of gasping lasting minutes or even hours." - R.M. Perkin and D.B. Resnik

It has been suggested by certain Lechmere theorist that when Robert Paul felt Polly Nichols' chest and thought he felt slight movement, it could have been agonal breathing by a still very much alive Polly Nichols.

I think the important word is 'fancied' as in he was not sure. I'm also sure if Cross was the killer and he thought Paul was suggesting Polly was still alive then he would have killed him too. There is a great deal of information that makes no sense with Polly's murder. This is one such thing.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Trevor,

Sorry, this is off-topic, but you once wrote that you might be willing to run any forensic questions past your contact, Dr. Michael Biggs. Does that offer still stand?

I was thinking it might be worthwhile to hear Dr. Biggs' thoughts about "agonal breathing."

It has been suggested by certain Lechmere theorist that when Robert Paul felt Polly Nichols' chest and thought he felt slight movement, it could have been agonal breathing by a still very much alive Polly Nichols.

It would be interesting to know if Dr. Biggs thinks this theory is at all probable, considering the extensive nature of the cuts to Poll Nichols' throat and abdomen. Could a person exhibit agonal breathing 30 or 40 seconds after having their throat cut down to the vertebrae, and could that breathing be interpreted as a slight movement of the chest as described by Robert Paul?

If not, is there any forensic explanation for Robert Paul's testimony, other than a witness simply being mistaken?

(Perhaps these questions need to be formulated in more detail, but that's the gist of it. This was something that came up on the 'Charles Cross' thread).

Many thanks.

I will ask the question !

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[rjpalmer]

As Jack Nicholson said in the film "A few good men" "The Truth, you cant handle the truth"

www,trevormarriott.co.uk

Hi Trevor,

Sorry, this is off-topic, but you once wrote that you might be willing to run any forensic questions past your contact, Dr. Michael Biggs. Does that offer still stand?

I was thinking it might be worthwhile to hear Dr. Biggs' thoughts about "agonal breathing."

It has been suggested by certain Lechmere theorist that when Robert Paul felt Polly Nichols' chest and thought he felt slight movement, it could have been agonal breathing by a still very much alive Polly Nichols.

It would be interesting to know if Dr. Biggs thinks this theory is at all probable, considering the extensive nature of the cuts to Poll Nichols' throat and abdomen. Could a person exhibit agonal breathing 30 or 40 seconds after having their throat cut down to the vertebrae, and could that breathing be interpreted as a slight movement of the chest as described by Robert Paul?

If not, is there any forensic explanation for Robert Paul's testimony, other than a witness simply being mistaken?

(Perhaps these questions need to be formulated in more detail, but that's the gist of it. This was something that came up on the 'Charles Cross' thread).

Many thanks.

[Trevor Marriott]

Make it lifelong, please. And far away.

And no Internet for you!

As Jack Nicholson said in the film "A few good men" "The Truth, you cant handle the truth"

www,trevormarriott.co.uk

[C. F. Leon]

havent you forgot the look outs ?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

And the coach man.

And don't forget the Mastermind behind the desk, giving orders. While stroking his cat/*****.

Which brings up the question (probably best for another thread): which of the suspects had cats? Maybe THAT'S the clue to link EVERYTHING together!

[lynn cates]

Bond's the name.

Hello Jon.

"[Bond] saw the same evidence as five other experienced doctors, even his superior, yet he arrived at a contradictory conclusion.
A fact which does not instill confidence in how he draws his conclusions."

Quite. And he saw only ONE canonical.

Cheers.
LC

[Karl]

[Fisherman]

Well part of it was bad enough, tell me when you are posting the rest and i will book a long holiday

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Make it lifelong, please. And far away.

And no Internet for you!

[Trevor Marriott]

No, Trevor, I did not - I only mentioned part of it. The largest part is something In have not divulged yet.

So whichever the plot IS, you are as usual unknowing of it.

That never stopped you from commenting, though, did it?

Well part of it was bad enough, tell me when you are posting the rest and i will book a long holiday

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

You wrote it in your post.

Are you losing the plot now ?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

No, Trevor, I did not - I only mentioned part of it. The largest part is something In have not divulged yet.

So whichever the plot IS, you are as usual unknowing of it.

That never stopped you from commenting, though, did it?

[Trevor Marriott]

Since you do not know what my formula is, how do you know that?

You wrote it in your post.

Are you losing the plot now ?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

Only thing i can say is that, without Miller's Court, i would have swear that one of the motives of the ripper was to spread terror in the streets, possibly in the name of his hate of women. Miller's Court MAY suggest something different, but it's of course still impossible to rule out the terrorism and the hate.

What would have made you so sure that the agenda was to spread terror, going by the murder spots and the finds there? Many people reason that the killer could have been disorganized, and if so, he would reasonably not have had the aim to spread terror.
I donīt think he WAS disorganized, but I am curious about how you reason here.