Blood oozing

[Elamarna]

Murder of Alice McKenzie in Castle Alley:

Report of Supt Arnold dated 17 July 1889 states that "There can be no doubt that the crime was committed as near as possible about 12.40am".

Body discovered by PC Andrews "at 12.50am" (Report of Arnold and inquest evidence of PC Andrews, Times, 18 July 1889).

Death caused by "syncope arising for the division of the vessels of the neck" (Post Morten Report of Dr Phillips, 22 July 1889).

Inspector Reid was notified of the murder at 12.55am and ran to Castle Alley: "I saw she had a cut on the left side of the throat, and there was a quantity of blood under the head which was running into the gutter." (Inquest evidence, Times, 19 July 1889).

Dr Phillips report says he arrived at 1.10am: "Found the body of a woman lying on back. Face turned sharply to right...Blood poured out from wound in neck...the whole amount of blood lost would not amount to more than 2 pts".

Here we have a case of blood pouring from the neck wound some thirty minutes after the cutting of the throat.

I don't believe that this case is known to have rewritten all the text books on "post-mortem bleeding".

it depends on the damage done and to which vessels . Far less damage than in the Nichols case. So bleed out would be slower. It has been argued over on JtR forums that she was technically alive for some time after discovery.

But it does show that bleeding will not just stop after a set number of minutes.


Steve

[Pierre]

Calculations based on data within the sources given then linear regression and use of simple mathematics to give the times. For example, the superior mesenteric artery would take over a minute to lose 450ml of blood

1. What data have you performed regression on exactly?

2. What exactly is "data within the sources given"?

3. Do you have a random sample or not?

4. What independent variables are in your model?

Pierre

[John G]

Hi Fisherman

It would be possible to bleed to death from abdominal wounds, but I personally doubt it would be the case with Polly. My understanding of what's remained of the descriptions of the abdominal wounds suggest they were through the abdominal wall only (no organs having been removed) having not fully bared the abdomen. Given the presumed length of the knife and required angle, most of the cuts would be fairly superficial into the cavity.

Assuming the cuts did penetrate deep enough to reach the main abdominal vessels, unlike the carotids, with the exception of the aorta the abdominal vessels have significantly reduced blood flow as blood volume drops.

To give perspective, the ascending aorta has a flow of five litres per minute, so a complete transection would result in fatal haemorrhage in approximately thirty to forty seconds. Each common carotid has a mean minute flow in women of 370ml/min, but a minimal drop as blood volume drops until over forty percent blood loss. In comparison, the three main abdominal arterial branches are the superior mesenteric artery, the splenic artery and the common hepatic artery. Their per minute flow in a fasted normal status are 430ml, 300ml and 225ml respectively. Given the reduction in flow due to blood loss however my calculations for the minimum time for 2.5 litres of blood loss would be 13 minutes, 17 minutes and 25 minutes respectively (assuming complete transection with no vessel spasm). It would be near impossible to hit all three blindly with a knife in a head-foot perpendicular to the skin direction. Thus I can't see any abdominal wound causing sufficient blood loss to maintain unconsciousness after the recovery from a partial strangulation, which would not fit with the lack of any defence wounds given the number of knife cuts made.

Regards

Paul

Excellent analysis. Thanks for this Paul.

[kjab3112]

Hi Paul,

You wrote:

"Given the reduction in flow due to blood loss however my calculations for the minimum time for 2.5 litres of blood loss would be 13 minutes, 17 minutes and 25 minutes respectively (assuming complete transection with no vessel spasm)."

Are your calculations based on data material or is this hypothetical?

Pierre

Calculations based on data within the sources given then linear regression and use of simple mathematics to give the times. For example, the superior mesenteric artery would take over a minute to lose 450ml of blood

[David Orsam]

Classic Case Study

Murder of Alice McKenzie in Castle Alley:

Report of Supt Arnold dated 17 July 1889 states that "There can be no doubt that the crime was committed as near as possible about 12.40am".

Body discovered by PC Andrews "at 12.50am" (Report of Arnold and inquest evidence of PC Andrews, Times, 18 July 1889).

Death caused by "syncope arising for the division of the vessels of the neck" (Post Morten Report of Dr Phillips, 22 July 1889).

Inspector Reid was notified of the murder at 12.55am and ran to Castle Alley: "I saw she had a cut on the left side of the throat, and there was a quantity of blood under the head which was running into the gutter." (Inquest evidence, Times, 19 July 1889).

Dr Phillips report says he arrived at 1.10am: "Found the body of a woman lying on back. Face turned sharply to right...Blood poured out from wound in neck...the whole amount of blood lost would not amount to more than 2 pts".

Here we have a case of blood pouring from the neck wound some thirty minutes after the cutting of the throat.

I don't believe that this case is known to have rewritten all the text books on "post-mortem bleeding".

[Pierre]

Here are the references

Cardiac flow through the aorta - any physiology book, personally I have Guyton
Ackroyd et al Journal vascular surgery vol3 pp846-853 1986 - common carotid blood flow (calculations based on a selection of journals I've not got immediately to hand)
Nakamura et al Journal Clinical Ultrasound vol 17 pp261-8 1989 - abdominal arterial flow numbers
Steiner Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica vol51 p143 2007 - change in abdominal arterial flow in hypovolaemia

The calculations are my own based on multiple parallelograms (I tried to properly create formulae but my calculus is a tad rusty)

The figure of fifty percent blood loss is based on the ATLS Shock categories with background extension reading

The ten seconds to unconsciousness with carotid pressure is based on multiple sources posted on forensicmed.ac.uk of recorded hangings

Hope that answers your queries

Paul

Hi Paul,

You wrote:

"Given the reduction in flow due to blood loss however my calculations for the minimum time for 2.5 litres of blood loss would be 13 minutes, 17 minutes and 25 minutes respectively (assuming complete transection with no vessel spasm)."

Are your calculations based on data material or is this hypothetical?

Pierre

[kjab3112]

The figures were presented without references.

Pierre

Here are the references

Cardiac flow through the aorta - any physiology book, personally I have Guyton
Ackroyd et al Journal vascular surgery vol3 pp846-853 1986 - common carotid blood flow (calculations based on a selection of journals I've not got immediately to hand)
Nakamura et al Journal Clinical Ultrasound vol 17 pp261-8 1989 - abdominal arterial flow numbers
Steiner Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica vol51 p143 2007 - change in abdominal arterial flow in hypovolaemia

The calculations are my own based on multiple parallelograms (I tried to properly create formulae but my calculus is a tad rusty)

The figure of fifty percent blood loss is based on the ATLS Shock categories with background extension reading

The ten seconds to unconsciousness with carotid pressure is based on multiple sources posted on forensicmed.ac.uk of recorded hangings

Hope that answers your queries

Paul

[Elamarna]

The figures were presented without references.

Pierre

Yes I know, Paul does have them However.

Sure once he sees he forgot them he will give them.


Steve

[Pierre]

Very impressive Paul.

I didn't have the figures for the abdomenial vessels; but they look very compelling data for several questions.

Can I thank you on behalf of many here for that data.


All the best


Steve

The figures were presented without references.

Pierre

[Elamarna]

Hi Fisherman

It would be possible to bleed to death from abdominal wounds, but I personally doubt it would be the case with Polly. My understanding of what's remained of the descriptions of the abdominal wounds suggest they were through the abdominal wall only (no organs having been removed) having not fully bared the abdomen. Given the presumed length of the knife and required angle, most of the cuts would be fairly superficial into the cavity.

Assuming the cuts did penetrate deep enough to reach the main abdominal vessels, unlike the carotids, with the exception of the aorta the abdominal vessels have significantly reduced blood flow as blood volume drops.

To give perspective, the ascending aorta has a flow of five litres per minute, so a complete transection would result in fatal haemorrhage in approximately thirty to forty seconds. Each common carotid has a mean minute flow in women of 370ml/min, but a minimal drop as blood volume drops until over forty percent blood loss. In comparison, the three main abdominal arterial branches are the superior mesenteric artery, the splenic artery and the common hepatic artery. Their per minute flow in a fasted normal status are 430ml, 300ml and 225ml respectively. Given the reduction in flow due to blood loss however my calculations for the minimum time for 2.5 litres of blood loss would be 13 minutes, 17 minutes and 25 minutes respectively (assuming complete transection with no vessel spasm). It would be near impossible to hit all three blindly with a knife in a head-foot perpendicular to the skin direction. Thus I can't see any abdominal wound causing sufficient blood loss to maintain unconsciousness after the recovery from a partial strangulation, which would not fit with the lack of any defence wounds given the number of knife cuts made.

Regards

Paul

Very impressive Paul.

I didn't have the figures for the abdomenial vessels; but they look very compelling data for several questions.

Can I thank you on behalf of many here for that data.


All the best


Steve

[kjab3112]

Hi Paul!

Yes, I agree that partial strangulation may have been what happened. I am, however, placing my bet on the abdomen being cut first, and large amounts of blood escaping into the abdominal cavity from the severed vessels in there. To me, it makes sense that this explains the scarcity of blood by the neck. If Nichols was only partially strangled, the heart would go on beating, and we should have had arterial spray at the scene, but there was no such thing recorded.

For two and a half litres to have escaped that via the neck, there would also need to be 2,2 litres in the clothing, since there was only about 0,3 litres in the pool under the neck. And the police reports tell us that the clothing was bloodsoaked only at the collar and the upper parts around the shoulders.

If the blood did not travel longer than that in the clothing, the capillary power offered by the cloth was not large, and consequently, to my mind, there would not be much blood in the clothing at all - let alone a stiff two litres!

Can you give me a hint if my perspective would work?

Thanks for your input, by the way - much appreciated!

Hi Fisherman

It would be possible to bleed to death from abdominal wounds, but I personally doubt it would be the case with Polly. My understanding of what's remained of the descriptions of the abdominal wounds suggest they were through the abdominal wall only (no organs having been removed) having not fully bared the abdomen. Given the presumed length of the knife and required angle, most of the cuts would be fairly superficial into the cavity.

Assuming the cuts did penetrate deep enough to reach the main abdominal vessels, unlike the carotids, with the exception of the aorta the abdominal vessels have significantly reduced blood flow as blood volume drops.

To give perspective, the ascending aorta has a flow of five litres per minute, so a complete transection would result in fatal haemorrhage in approximately thirty to forty seconds. Each common carotid has a mean minute flow in women of 370ml/min, but a minimal drop as blood volume drops until over forty percent blood loss. In comparison, the three main abdominal arterial branches are the superior mesenteric artery, the splenic artery and the common hepatic artery. Their per minute flow in a fasted normal status are 430ml, 300ml and 225ml respectively. Given the reduction in flow due to blood loss however my calculations for the minimum time for 2.5 litres of blood loss would be 13 minutes, 17 minutes and 25 minutes respectively (assuming complete transection with no vessel spasm). It would be near impossible to hit all three blindly with a knife in a head-foot perpendicular to the skin direction. Thus I can't see any abdominal wound causing sufficient blood loss to maintain unconsciousness after the recovery from a partial strangulation, which would not fit with the lack of any defence wounds given the number of knife cuts made.

Regards

Paul

[Sam Flynn]

Hey, I'd never previously heard of a "wordle diagram". That's really clever Sam!

Thanks JG, but all due credit to the technology. There are a few sites online where you can generate your own Wordle pictures, and I availed myself of the service on wordle.net for this one.

The relative sizes of the words in the diagram reflect how frequently they occur in the text. As a visual analytical aid, they're quite handy, and I've used them quite often in a work context.

[John G]

If there's one thing we can be sure of, it's that Payne-James gets mentioned a heck of a lot, as this "Wordle" diagram amply illustrates:

[ATTACH]18053[/ATTACH]

Is this, perhaps, a manifestation of the "Appeal to Authority" fallacy?

Hey, I'd never previously heard of a "wordle diagram". That's really clever Sam!

[Sam Flynn]

I can only assume that Fisherman deluded himself into thinking that Payne-James had said something he had not because he was so keen to pin the murder on Lechmere that he could not imagine that Payne-James would be saying anything different.

If there's one thing we can be sure of, it's that Payne-James gets mentioned a heck of a lot, as this "Wordle" diagram amply illustrates:



Is this, perhaps, a manifestation of the "Appeal to Authority" fallacy?

[Elamarna]

Pigs/cattle which have had their throats cut are left hanging upside down on a rail for 5 or more minutes to accelerate the exit of blood. Even then, some blood will remain in the vessels and tissues, only to - ahem! - ooze out over time. (Source: my father, who used to be a slaughterman.)

We know, of course, that Nichols was not hung upside down.

I have made the very same point myself several times but someone is not listening to us.

Nichols's heart would stop after approx 50% of blood volume was lost.

That would be in under 5 minutes, not just under but well under. Therefore it is not possible that Neil or Mizen saw blood being pumped by the heart, just blood leaving by gravity.


Steve