The Mizen scam

[caz]

Or the fish were naturally gifted sturgeon, Jon.

Love,

Caz
X

[Fisherman]

Jon:

" the woman in that instance died instantly from an injury to her spinal cord. No loss of blood -which is the key issue here."

Nope. Heart reflex pumping is.

"Nichols lost most of her blood, therefore there was no pressure to make the heart pump."

There is no blood needed for that. The heart in the woman described worked on reflex, congesting her lungs. It did not pump because there was blood - it pumped reflexwise.

"Can`t explain those fishes hearts still beating in the kitchen sink, though.
Perhaps, you are a naturally gifted surgeon. ;-)"

I wish! It pays better than journalism. But no, a fishīheart will keep beating for some considerable time even if it is taken out of the body.

The best,
Fisherman

[Jon Guy]

Or the fish were naturally gifted sturgeon, Jon.

You`re on form today, Caz!!

[Fisherman]

Here we go again, Jon:

"When the Aztecs sacrificed people to Huitzilopochtli (the god with war like aspects) the victim would be placed on a sacrificial stone.[25] Then the priest would cut through the abdomen with an obsidian or flint blade.[26] The heart would be torn out still beating and held towards the sky in honor to the Sun-God; the body would be carried away and either cremated or given to the warrior responsible for the capture of the victim."

So, the torn out heart, unattached to the veins, is still pumping outside the body!

Myth? Not necessarily. Letīs look at what we have at play here:

"In cold-blooded animals, such as a frog or tortoise, the heart will beat for days after its removal from the animal, if it be protected from injury and prevented from drying. In warmblooded animals the tissues lose their vitality very soon after they are deprived of their blood supply; however, spontaneous rhythmical movements can be seen in the mammalian heart if removed at once after death. The hearts of oxen, rapidly slaughtered, give a few beats after their removal from the thorax. If a blood current be caused to flow through the vessels of the heart tissue this spontaneous contraction will go on for some time, or will even recommence after having ceased.

The hearts of two criminals who were hanged were found to continue to beat for four and seven minutes respectively after the spinal cord and the medulla had been separated."

So, the heart of warmblooded creatures like oxen give a number of beats after they have been separated from the thorax. And dead peoplesīhearts can go on beating for many a minute!
In Nicholsīcase, yes she was bled to some extent. But it would have taken time to empty her totally. And Neil saw blood oozing from the wound in the throat when he found her, perhaps two, three minutes after Paul had felt her stirring.

I say there is every chance that her heart WAS still beating at that stage, Jon, strange as it may sound.

And the fish! Hereīs the explanation - the heart of a fish can go on beating for DAYS outside the body, if unhurt and kept moist! That means that the minutes Iīve seen it happen are a mere trifle ... Wow!

The best,
Fisherman

[Lechmere]

Getting back to the Llewellyn residence and away from bloody and still beating hearts, I am fairly certain he lived on the north side of Whitechapel Road.
If you walked south down Brady Street to the junction with Whitechapel Road, you turn right and it was about 3 doors down towards the tube station.
I posted up a picture on one thread or another. The building is now part of a single story row - I suspect rebuilt after bomb damage.

[Lechmere]

Just checked this thread;

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=2936&page=2

Llewellyn lived at 152 Whitechapel Road which was indeed on the north side 3 doors from Brady Street.
My photo is also there!

I think another Dr Llewellyn who I seem to remember was his brother, lived on the south side.

[FrankO]

Sorry no map, but it was near the Brady Street corner, the Queen Head (actually on the corner) was 154

Just checked this thread;

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=2936&page=2

Llewellyn lived at 152 Whitechapel Road which was indeed on the north side 3 doors from Brady Street.
My photo is also there!

Thanks Mr Lucky & Lechmere for the info & photo regarding the location of Dr Llewellyn's residence!

The best,
Frank

[curious]

I am quite content that the collected time estimations of four people, three of whom were serving PC:s, must take precedence over a witness testimony that - by coupling it to a train that passed at a given time (3.30) - must be accepted as not belonging to the dealings inbetween Lechmere and Paul. They were not together in Buckīs Row at 3.30.

One paper has it a quarter TO four, the other has it a quarter PAST four. Given that Llewellyn said "Henry Llewellyn, surgeon, said: "On Friday morning I was called to Buck's-row about four o'clock", which paper do you think erred?

You claim that accepting Lilley will reconcile the time estimations with the facts, but that is not so. The only "fact" that would reconcile anything with is that it would lend some sort of credibility to your suggestion that Lechmere left home around 3.25 and arrived in Buckīs Row at the approximate time that the train Lilley speaks of passed by. Accepting this would, however, fly in the face of all the timings given by all the participators involved in the Lechmere drama - it went down at around 3.45.

Hi, Fisherman,
I believe that your post No. 815 on July 30, clears the time matter up and exonerates Lechmere.

For instance, Harriet Lilley, who lived at 7 Buck's Row, heard gasps and the train.

The Echo checked and a train ran at 3:30 a.m. What a perfect way to cover the sounds of murder -- a train. Plus, it was even possibly a way to get away from the murder scene: hop on the train (outside, just holding onto a ladder or something) then drop off a few blocks from the body -- no one seen or heard leaving the area.

Then, Lechmere arrives on the scene about 3:40 and was standing looking at the woman -- perhaps wondering if she needed help or it was part of an ambush -- when Paul came along. Together they checked on the woman.

The murderer had 10 long minutes to be gone by the time Lechmere arrived, so there was no way he would have heard steps retreating.

I do think, though, IF Lechmere had been the murderer, he would have said he heard retreating steps. By the time he talked to the police officers, Lechmere already knew how far he and Paul had traveled before finding an officer, so he would have known that a retreating murderer would NOT have encountered a policeman who could blow his story to smithereens.

So, the murder happening as the train went by accounts for everything -- even getting in within the 30 minutes the doctor on the scene Nichols had died within.

You're right, Fisherman, the "participators involved in the Lechmere drama - it went down at around 3.45" ---- exactly.

It is possible that Lilley dozed and then heard the whispering of Paul and Lechmere and had lost track of the passage of time.

Lechmere was just a man who found a body and has gone down into history because the case is so famous.

curious

[Cogidubnus]

Thank god for that...another Harriet Lilley believer...

No first hand testimony really survives in this case, but this is the next best thing and unbelievably nobody else seems to listen...

All the best

Dave

[curious]

Thank god for that...another Harriet Lilley believer...

No first hand testimony really survives in this case, but this is the next best thing and unbelievably nobody else seems to listen...

All the best

Dave

Hi, Dave.

Good, I'm not alone. Nor you either.

I don't recall ever just going through reading all the testimony before. But this one seems very simple, time line wise.

No convoluted, twisting and turning necessary, just straight forward.

Of course, that does not tell us who killed Polly.

curious

[Cogidubnus]

Spot on...

All the best

Dave

[Fisherman]

Okay, here we go again, the Lilley train once more!

Letīs begin by establishing how the material looks, as given in the papers:

“Mrs. Lilley said: I slept in the front of the house, and could hear everything that occurred in the street. On that Thursday night I was somehow very restless. Well, I heard something I mentioned to my husband in the morning. It was a painful moan - two or three faint gasps - and then it passed away. It was dark, but a luggage train went by as I heard the sounds. There was, too, a sound as of whispers underneath the window. I distinctly heard voices, but cannot say what was said - it was too faint. I then woke my husband, and said to him, "I don't know what possesses me, but I cannot sleep to-night." Mrs. Lilley added that as soon as she heard of the murder she came to the conclusion that the voices she heard were in some way connected with it. The cries were very different from those of an ordinary street brawl.”

...and:

“It has been ascertained that on the morning of the date of the murder a goods train passed on the East London railway at about half-past three - the 3.7 out from New-cross - which was probably the time when Mary Ann Nicholls was either killed or placed in Buck's-row…”

Now, Curious thinks that Lechmere is suddenly exonerated - things really move fast sometimes..! But letīs see what Curious says:

"The Echo checked and a train ran at 3:30 a.m. What a perfect way to cover the sounds of murder -- a train. Plus, it was even possibly a way to get away from the murder scene: hop on the train (outside, just holding onto a ladder or something) then drop off a few blocks from the body -- no one seen or heard leaving the area."

Thatīs colourful! Of course, the killer would need to get down by the tracks and be able to board the train while moving - but letīs leave that aside! Curious is of course correct that a train would offer a wall of sound against which a murder could be acoustically drowned.

Further:

"Lechmere arrives on the scene about 3:40 and was standing looking at the woman"

3.45 if you ask me. Paul was adamant on the time, and he had no reason to lie about it. So I think he is the best source in this matter.

"The murderer had 10 long minutes to be gone by the time Lechmere arrived, so there was no way he would have heard steps retreating."

Or fifteen, even!

"So, the murder happening as the train went by accounts for everything -- even getting in within the 30 minutes the doctor on the scene Nichols had died within."

Wait a sec here, Curious! Letīs ask Llewellyn about that:

"Mr. Henry Llewellyn, surgeon, of 152, Whitechapel-road, stated that at 4 o'clock on Friday morning he was called by the last witness to Buck's-row. The officer told him what he was wanted for."

Aha. So at 4 he was called by Thain. But after that, he had to get his clothes and shoes on and do the walk up to Buckīs Row, right?

"On reaching Buck's-row he found deceased lying flat on her back on the pathway, her legs being extended. Deceased was quite dead, and she had severe injuries to her throat. Her hands and wrists were cold, but the lower extremities were quite warm. Witness examined her chest and felt the heart. It was dark at the time. He should say the deceased had not been dead more than half an hour."

So when would he be in Buckīs Row, if called by Thain at his practice in Whitechapel Road? How long a time must we add to the 4 ó clock time before he is in place? Five minutes, perhaps? And what does that do to the half-hour time-frame? "No more than half an hour" was Llewellyns judgement. And that means that he at a stretch would say that it could have happened as early as 3.35 - at which time the train had passed Buckīs Row long since. But generally speaking, I think we must accept that Llewellyns best guess would be that Nichols died at a time closer to the middle of 3.35 and 4.05.

And keep in mind that blood was still oozing from the neck wound as Neil first saw her, perhaps at around 3.48-3.49.

Curious, again:
"It is possible that Lilley dozed and then heard the whispering of Paul and Lechmere and had lost track of the passage of time."

Is this the sort of ironclad proof that "exonerates" Lechmere? Lilley could possibly have dozed off after hearing the murder, only to awake later and conveniently hear a conversation held between Lechmere and Paul, some fifteen minutes after the murder? Quoting Curious herself: "No convoluted, twisting and turning necessary, just straight forward."

Aha.

The police had plenty of time to summon Lilley to the inquest proceedings starting on the 17:th. But they did not do so. Could it be because they did not see relevance in her testimony?

Finally, Buckīs Row was a street where prostitutes took their Johns to do business in relatively undisturbed surroundings. Polly Nichols would not have been the only one to ply her trade there. Therefore, the moans and gasps may have belonged to just such an affair. For if Lilley heard Nicholsīdeath moans and gasps after having had her throat severed, then who did the talking afterwards? She heard voices. Was it the Ripper talking to himself in different voices? considering the damage he had caused Nichols, she would not be doing much talking at all at that stage.

The train time and the Lechmere and Paul conversation time is divided by a quarter of an hour. Lilley has it all baked into the same remove of time. Her interview is interesting but not consistent with having overheard the killing. And we also have Mrs Green and Mrs Purkiss to ponder. The coroner tells us in summing up that Mrs Green, under whose window it all went down, was a light sleeper. She heard nothing. And Mrs Purkiss was awake in Essex Wharf - and heard not a iota.

So no, Lechmere is anything but exonerated by Lilley.

The best,
Fisherman

[Monty]

Christer is quite correct Curious,

Seeing as Cross is free from guilt, and the case is pure conjecture based on personal interpretation, he is actually completely free from guilt and remains so.



Monty

[Sally]

Lechmere was just a man who found a body and has gone down into history because the case is so famous.

Yep.

Course, if he really had been found 'crouching over the body' attempting to cover the wounds, the story might have been different.

But he wasn't, was he?

No.

[Fisherman]

Monty:

"Christer is quite correct Curious,

Seeing as Cross is free from guilt, and the case is pure conjecture based on personal interpretation, he is actually completely free from guilt and remains so."

Getting more and more scientific by the day, Monty!

The best,
Fisherman