Blood oozing

[Fisherman]

There is slightly less than two hour window. It is thought Jane defended herself on the road probably running for her life, reaching the shallow dell where she was forced to her knees. Joseph was welding a knife.
More detail: A bloodstained shawl and bonnet found nearby and marks of blood up to 27 yards away to a spot where there had been a violent struggle and the surface had been broken. A thumb and four fingers had been cut dividing tendons. The knife which belonged to Joseph's uncle was found 22 feet away in a barley field. Pretty nasty.

Miss Marple

I dare say - but do we know when she was cut, that is what I am asking. You say that there is a slightly less than two-hour window. Now, was she cut at the opening minute of that window or was she cut very close in time to when she was found or somewhere inbetween, that is what is of interest here, since the thread concerns itself with the issues of bloodflow and timings of bleeding.

[miss marple]

Your one post behind Fisherman! The blood was still flowing when the policeman and doctor arrived from Luton!

Miss Marple

[Fisherman]

Your one post behind Fisherman! The blood was still flowing when the policeman and doctor arrived from Luton!

Miss Marple

If I am behind, Miss Marple, it is on account of you not producing a time schedule. If youīd be so kind...? Begin with the time she was cut and then fill in all the blanks about bloodflow, timings, position etc.

[Fisherman]

I think what must be taken on board to begin with, is that Jason Payne-James said about Nichols that he was of the opinion that she would have bled out in a few minutes, GIVEN HER POSITION AND THE CHARACTER OF THE WOUNDS. He did not comment on Jane Castle, and it must be realized that all cases are individual cases with individual details involved. There will also inevitably be freak cases, since there always is; people who fall into a lake and sink to the bottom will die after a short period of time, but sometimes, there will be people who survive a very long time with no oxygen. Itīs the nature of things, and it is why we can never be certain.
The one certainty we have here is that Jason Payne-James said that Polly Nichols would reasonably have bled out over a period of not many minutes, more likely three or five than seven. He will have grounded this on his many years of experience in the field, and his opinion will not stand back to any other opinion in terms of professionalism - he is one of the best in the field, and knows his way around these matters.

Iīm sure Jane Castle makes for an interesting case, but Polly Nichols she is not.

[miss marple]

I am not a surgeon, are you Fisherman? All i have done is present an interesting murder case where a woman's throat and arteries were cut between 11 and I and blood was flowing when the body was discovered and then when the police and doctor arrived after being sent for at a distance of 1 and half miles each way, the blood was still flowing! That seems a long time for blood to flow. It is up to people with the relevent knowledge to comment on how long blood flows post mortem.I would like to know.

Miss Marple

[Fisherman]

I am not a surgeon, are you Fisherman? All i have done is present an interesting murder case where a woman's throat and arteries were cut between 11 and I and blood was flowing when the body was discovered and then when the police and doctor arrived after being sent for at a distance of 1 and half miles each way, the blood was still flowing! That seems a long time for blood to flow. It is up to people with the relevent knowledge to comment on how long blood flows post mortem.I would like to know.

Miss Marple

No, I am not a surgeon - which is why I rely on those who ARE specialists. And Jason Payne-James is just such a man, who has commented specifically on the Nichols case.
I will repeat that what is interesting here is the time at which Jane Castle was cut, plus the time when the doctor and police arrived, plus when they were called out. Without those timings, much as the case is interesting per se, it has little or no bearing at all on the discussion of the thread. Sorry, but there you are.
If you divulged all the information you have, it would be helpful. Can you do that, please?

[Elamarna]

I think what must be taken on board to begin with, is that Jason Payne-James said about Nichols that he was of the opinion that she would have bled out in a few minutes, GIVEN HER POSITION AND THE CHARACTER OF THE WOUNDS. He did not comment on Jane Castle, and it must be realized that all cases are individual cases with individual details involved. There will also inevitably be freak cases, since there always is; people who fall into a lake and sink to the bottom will die after a short period of time, but sometimes, there will be people who survive a very long time with no oxygen. Itīs the nature of things, and it is why we can never be certain.
The one certainty we have here is that Jason Payne-James said that Polly Nichols would reasonably have bled out over a period of not many minutes, more likely three or five than seven. He will have grounded this on his many years of experience in the field, and his opinion will not stand back to any other opinion in terms of professionalism - he is one of the best in the field, and knows his way around these matters.

Iīm sure Jane Castle makes for an interesting case, but Polly Nichols she is not.

I agree with that last point Christer, and much of the rest.

However we are back to interpretation of such terms as bleeding and bleedout.

My research suggests very strongly in the Nichols case the heart would stop pumping in considerabley less that 4 minutes given ALL the injuries.

The rest of any blood flow after that is the result of gravity.

Sure you will have a take on it all when it's presented.

Best wishes

Steve

[Elamarna]

I am not a surgeon, are you Fisherman? All i have done is present an interesting murder case where a woman's throat and arteries were cut between 11 and I and blood was flowing when the body was discovered and then when the police and doctor arrived after being sent for at a distance of 1 and half miles each way, the blood was still flowing! That seems a long time for blood to flow. It is up to people with the relevent knowledge to comment on how long blood flows post mortem.I would like to know.

Miss Marple

Your points are well made Miss Maple, the relavent of the term still flowing when the police arrive after a trip of about a mile and ahalf is clear.

Steve

[Fisherman]

I agree with that last point Christer, and much of the rest.

However we are back to interpretation of such terms as bleeding and bleedout.

My research suggests very strongly in the Nichols case the heart would stop pumping in considerabley less that 4 minutes given ALL the injuries.

The rest of any blood flow after that is the result of gravity.

Sure you will have a take on it all when it's presented.

Best wishes

Steve

If the heart pumped for, say, two or three minutes after she was cut, then surely you realize that all or almost all of the blood could - or even would - have been pumped out of the system during that period of time? A decapitated person can bleed out completely in one minute flat, as you will perhaps be aware.

You see, Steve, we are therefore left with a situation where the heart would in all probability NOT have pumped for a very long time after the initial strangulation, but where the blood will in all probability have been left to leak out due to gravity from very early on in the process. And indeed, I think that Payne-James was working from the idea that the blood leaked and dribbled out with little or no underlying pressure. And that he thought that it would make for a bleeding period of a few minutes only, nevertheless.

Much as I will take part of your ideas when they finally arrive, I donīt think that much can be added to the picture. But I am prepared to be surprised.

[John G]

I think what must be taken on board to begin with, is that Jason Payne-James said about Nichols that he was of the opinion that she would have bled out in a few minutes, GIVEN HER POSITION AND THE CHARACTER OF THE WOUNDS. He did not comment on Jane Castle, and it must be realized that all cases are individual cases with individual details involved. There will also inevitably be freak cases, since there always is; people who fall into a lake and sink to the bottom will die after a short period of time, but sometimes, there will be people who survive a very long time with no oxygen. Itīs the nature of things, and it is why we can never be certain.
The one certainty we have here is that Jason Payne-James said that Polly Nichols would reasonably have bled out over a period of not many minutes, more likely three or five than seven. He will have grounded this on his many years of experience in the field, and his opinion will not stand back to any other opinion in terms of professionalism - he is one of the best in the field, and knows his way around these matters.

Iīm sure Jane Castle makes for an interesting case, but Polly Nichols she is not.

Does this mean Payne-James didn't exclude the possibility of seven minutes or longer? And wasn't blood still oozing from the wound as the body was put on to the cart?

[Elamarna]

If the heart pumped for, say, two or three minutes after she was cut, then surely you realize that all or almost all of the blood could - or even would - have been pumped out of the system during that period of time? A decapitated person can bleed out completely in one minute flat, as you will perhaps be aware.

[B]
Full bleed out?
THAT depends on what you mean?
If you mean almost all the blood as left the body that is incorrect. If however we mean that the loss means the volume left is insufficennt to allow the heart to beat the
yes.[/B


You see, Steve, we are therefore left with a situation where the heart would in all probability NOT have pumped for a very long time after the initial strangulation, but where the blood will in all probability have been left to leak out due to gravity from very early on in the process. And indeed, I think that Payne-James was working from the idea that the blood leaked and dribbled out with little or no underlying pressure. And that he thought that it would make for a bleeding period of a few minutes only, nevertheless.

That is where we disagree over what he said and what you have published. It's just intepretation.
You do seem to suggest that bleeding will stop! If that is not your view I withdraw that comment unreservedly.
Research suggests this is certainly not the case, the damage to Nichols I contest that this is very unlikely.



Much as I will take part of your ideas when they finally arrive, I donīt think that much can be added to the picture. But I am prepared to be surprised.

There is plenty to add, that is why it has taken this long and still a while to go yet. However I truly doubt you will be surprise, that you can accept it will be the interesting point.


All the best for now

Steve

[Fisherman]

Does this mean Payne-James didn't exclude the possibility of seven minutes or longer?

I have explained this in extenso before, John. But okay, here goes again!

Payne-James did not exclude anything at all. Nothing, and I mean nothing, was categorically ruled out. The reason being that it is impossible to determine a final bleeding point in time. Timings suggested will only be more or less likely. And some will be very unlikely, so as to be absurd.

He pointed out how he had frequently dealt with lawyers in court who pressed the timings, if you like. For example, if Payne-James said that he thought that a bleeding process would be over in no more than, say, ten minutes, then a lawyer could say "But if it could be ten, then surely it could be ten and a half? Or eleven?" And much as Payne-James did not think that ten and a half or eleven was a very viable proposition, he could not rule it out definitely. To do that, he would need to establish the exact borderline, and there is no such borderline - itīs not as if we can say that ten minutes and fortytwo seconds is possible but ten minutes and fortythree seconds is not.

So this is why he would not say that anything was impossible. He instead said that the timings suggested by lawyers to get their clients convicted or off the hook oftentimes ventured into the absurd.

That is how we must look upon the Nichols matter too. Payne-James, drawing upon his many years of experience, believed that the bleeding would most likely have been over within three or five minutes; something like that. He did not exclude seven minutes, but thought it somewhat less likely. And then, with every added minute it would become even less likely, and somewhere along the line, it would become an absurd suggestion.

Thatīs where Jason Payne-James leaves us.

[Fisherman]

There is plenty to add, that is why it has taken this long and still a while to go yet. However I truly doubt you will be surprise, that you can accept it will be the interesting point.


All the best for now

Steve

I donīt intend to sound disparaging, Steve, but I suspect we will be left with Lechmere fitting the blood evidence quite neatly after your excursions, just as I suspect we will be left with no absolute certainty that it was him. And with no other candidate proven available.

Major surprise, eh?

[Elamarna]

I donīt intend to sound disparaging, Steve, but I suspect we will be left with Lechmere fitting the blood evidence quite neatly after your excursions, just as I suspect we will be left with no absolute certainty that it was him. And with no other candidate proven available.

Major surprise, eh?

The last two points you are absolutely correct on. Especially as I am not looking for a suspect.

However not meaning to be disparaging to you in return I have a very different view on the blood issue, from several differing perspectives and viewpoints.

As I always say time will tell. History will judge.

Steve

[Fisherman]

The last two points you are absolutely correct on. Especially as I am not looking for a suspect.

However not meaning to be disparaging to you in return I have a very different view on the blood issue, from several differing perspectives and viewpoints.

As I always say time will tell. History will judge.

Steve

Time will not always tell, no - we can hope for it, but there can be no certainty that it happens. And history has judged many a killer innocent and many an innocent people killers, as Iīm sure you will agree.

So much for that, Iīm afraid.