Blood oozing

[David Orsam]

Halftime! 1-0 to Man United!! Well, thatīs not what Payne James said, of course, but I believe I have quoted him here before? In an exchange with him, I asked how long a time the bleeding would reasonably go on in Nicholsīcase, and I asked if it was something like three minutes, or five or perhaps seven, to which he replied - as far as I remember - that none of the suggestions could be ruled out, but he found the two shorter periods of time more likely than the longer one.

Yes I recall the very brief exchange very well:

Q. Just how quickly CAN a person with the kind of damage that Nichols had bleed out, if we have nothing that hinders the bloodflow, and if the victim is flat on level ground? Can a total desanguination take place in very few minutes in such a case?

A. Yes

Q. Do you know of any examples?

A. No

Q. Is it possible for such a person to bleed out completely and stop bleeding in three minutes? In five? In seven?

A. I guess blood may continue to flow for up to this amount of time, but the shorter periods are more likely to be more realistic.

He's not even been asked about whether he would be astonished if someone told him a wound was still leaking blood after 15 minutes - I mean, the time of 15 minutes is not even mentioned - so how you think you can answer the question on his behalf is beyond me.

And look at his last answer which starts "I guess...". I was rather hoping to get some information from someone who wasn't guessing.

[Fisherman]

Wrong my dear fisherman on every almost every count. The one which is certainly correct being Mizen arriving over 5 minutes after the attack.

All the best.


Steve

If you think I am wrong and can prove it, why donīt you do that?

[Fisherman]

PC Mizen must have arrived considerably later than 5 minutes after the attack. Thus, even if Lechmere was responsible he first of all waits for Paul to arrive. Then he calls him over and they examine the body. Then they have a discussion and decide to look for a policeman. Then within about 4 minutes of Paul first arriving at the body they meet PC Mizen. However, he doesn't, of course, respond immediately but he finishes his "knocking up" task. Only at this point does he head off to Bucks Row.

The timings can never be certain. But I agree that it seems Mizen arrived at the scene later than five minutes after the attack.

[Fisherman]

The Whitechapel murderer was not a phantom.

Pierre

Correct. He was a carman, by the looks of things.

[Fisherman]

Yes I recall the very brief exchange very well:

Q. Just how quickly CAN a person with the kind of damage that Nichols had bleed out, if we have nothing that hinders the bloodflow, and if the victim is flat on level ground? Can a total desanguination take place in very few minutes in such a case?

A. Yes

Q. Do you know of any examples?

A. No

Q. Is it possible for such a person to bleed out completely and stop bleeding in three minutes? In five? In seven?

A. I guess blood may continue to flow for up to this amount of time, but the shorter periods are more likely to be more realistic.

He's not even been asked about whether he would be astonished if someone told him a wound was still leaking blood after 15 minutes - I mean, the time of 15 minutes is not even mentioned - so how you think you can answer the question on his behalf is beyond me.

And look at his last answer which starts "I guess...". I was rather hoping to get some information from someone who wasn't guessing.

I guess you must be tiring, to make such a whacky remark.

[Fisherman]

Goodnight, yīall.

[David Orsam]

I guess you must be tiring, to make such a whacky remark.

Whacky? You mean the remark about him saying "I guess"?

Do you have any idea what would happen if he said that in court as an expert witness?

[Elamarna]

If you think I am wrong and can prove it, why donīt you do that?

I am going to my dear fisherman, just working my way through all the other Bucks Row work first. And although the blood evidence part is completed it comes at the same time as the rest of the project.

Witness statements first and then the conclusions. Probably in 2 months . Sorry but that's how I work.

Steve

[Pierre]

Correct. He was a carman, by the looks of things.

The Whitechapel murderer was not a carman.

[Abby Normal]

The Whitechapel murderer was not a carman.

Who is it then? Wait! Wait! Don't answer that.

Carry on

[Fisherman]

Whacky? You mean the remark about him saying "I guess"?

Do you have any idea what would happen if he said that in court as an expert witness?

Yes, I do, David. However, we are not dealing with a case of himsaying it in court, are we? We are dealing with him giving his view on how long he supposed that Nichols would have bled for, given the limited knowledge we have about her general physical status, the character of the wounds, the possibilitites of blood exit, the position of her body on the street and the information about her possibly/probably having been strangled or partially strangled before she was cut.

As you may appreciate, no absolute certainty can be reached about the duration of the bloodflow, working with these parameters - in fact, even if we did have much more exacft information, we would still not be able to pin down any exact bloodflow duration. So all Payne-James, or indeed any other expert, could do, was to combine the information we have with his own experience of other cases where bloodflow has been a factor, and try and make as good a suggestion as possible, resting on this combination of knowledge and experience.

If he was in a court of law, and if he said that there was no possibility that Nichols could have bled for eight or nine minutes, he would have been laughed out of court. If he said that eleven or twelve minutes was impossible, the same thing would happen. It is NOT any exact science, it hinges on the individual and the surrounding circumstances on each and every occasion, and any lawyer or judge worth his or her salt will be very much aware of this. Therefore, much as he would not use the word "guess" there, he WOULD use estimate - and it would all oil down to the same impossibility to be exact.

What I dislike very much is any whacky - yes, that IS the word - suggestion that Payne-James would be dealing in guesswork only. You should stay away from such hints. He is an extremely experienced and knowledgeable expert in the field, and the fewest experts have offered any view at all on the specific case we have at hand. What he said remains as valuable as ever, and was stated with all the authority that comes from the kind of experience and knowledge he has gained over the years and which has taken him to the position he has today: given the information we have on Nichols, his estimation was that it would be less likely for her to bleed for seven minutes than for three or five. Vert clearly, if Mizen was correct, it seems that she DID bleed for a longer time than three or five minutes, and so all we can say is that it was a longer time than Payne-James would have expected, and logically, he would not have expected her to bleed for an even longer time.

All of this points to how Charles Lechmere fits the frame eminently, and it furthermore points to how a phantom killer would have proven an even longer - and less likely - bleeding time of more than seven minutes.
In conclusion, if Payne-James was to give an opinion on who was the likely killer of Polly Nichols, BASED ON THE BLOOD EVIDENCE ONLY, I cannot see any other option than him voting for Lechmere, since any alternative killer would stretch the time window well beyond his expectations. However, it is a fact that he said that he would not rule out such an alternative killer - of course meaning that he could not, based on the available information - rule out that Nichols would bleed for a long enough time for this to occur. He did not, however, expect it.

I think this covers what needs to be said from my side.

[Fisherman]

I am going to my dear fisherman, just working my way through all the other Bucks Row work first. And although the blood evidence part is completed it comes at the same time as the rest of the project.

Witness statements first and then the conclusions. Probably in 2 months . Sorry but that's how I work.

Steve

Said it before, and Iīll say it again - take your time, and donīt rush things. We have seen enough of people not checking their information these last few days.

I am intrigued by how you say that you WILL prove me wrong. It should make for an interesting future.

[Fisherman]

The Whitechapel murderer was not a carman.

Put up or shut up. Sorry to be so frank, but you give me no other option.

[Elamarna]

Said it before, and Iīll say it again - take your time, and donīt rush things. We have seen enough of people not checking their information these last few days.

I am intrigued by how you say that you WILL prove me wrong. It should make for an interesting future.

I couldn't agree with you more on that.

The decision to take an in-depth look st Bucks Row has been a truly fascinating and ultimately intellectually rewarding one.

So many areas to cover, and without the impediment of a suspect. Yes much of the work is revolved around Lechmere, but only to the extent of was this or that possible?
Somethings have provided an answer of no, while others have been yes.
Some issues I have still to examine fully and some I obviously have therefore not reached a conclusion on.

Getting there slowly.

Steve

[Fisherman]

I couldn't agree with you more on that.

The decision to take an in-depth look st Bucks Row has been a truly fascinating and ultimately intellectually rewarding one.

So many areas to cover, and without the impediment of a suspect. Yes much of the work is revolved around Lechmere, but only to the extent of was this or that possible?
Somethings have provided an answer of no, while others have been yes.
Some issues I have still to examine fully and some I obviously have therefore not reached a conclusion on.

Getting there slowly.

Steve

I seem to remember that you have somewhere presented the view that the blood could not have been running as Mizen arrived at the scene...? Oh well, all good things to he who waits!