Another nail in the Lechmere coffin?

[Abby Normal]

The whole boards went into acute spasm when Lechmere was first presented.

However, Dr Biggs writes "usually", but Jason Payne-James was able to fix the full details - if both the internal and external carotid artery in the neck are severed, then there can be no vessel contraction. That is why you will never see a beheading where no blood exits the neck, Trevor.

Then again, you were just beheaded yourself with no blood present. Maybe that can be a comfort?

LOL!!

".....and the brain absent."

[Jon Guy]

Ha! Didnīt you know that netfishing is more efficient...?

But not as effective as Trevor`s method of chucking sticks of dynamite into rock pools.

[Fisherman]

But not as effective as Trevor`s method of chucking sticks of dynamite into rock pools.

Maybe thatīs where his "dead in the water" verdicts come from, then?

[Elamarna]

Hi Fisherman,

I wonder if you can help here, going over many newspaper reports and official documents.

One thing I am failing to find is the words of mizen with regards the blood flow he saw. assume i must skipped over it somewhere, and not noticed.
a link or name of doc will do me fine if you can.


many thanks


Steve

[drstrange169]

He is referring to the highly edited version in the Echo 3/10/88 which leaves out relevant information

"Police-constable George Myzen, 55 H, said that on Friday morning, at twenty minutes past four, he was at the corner of Hanbury-street, Baker's-row, when a man, who looked like a carman, said, "You are wanted in Buck's-row." Witness now knew the man to be named Cross, and he was a carman. Witness asked him what was the matter, and Cross replied, "A policeman wants you; there is a woman lying there." Witness went there, and saw Constable Neil, who sent him to the station for the ambulance.

The Coroner - Was there anyone else there then? - No one at all, Sir. There was blood running from the throat towards the gutter.

By the Coroner - There was another man in company of Cross when the latter spoke to witness. The other man, who went down Hanbury-street, appeared to be working with Cross.

By the Jury - Witness went to the spot directly Cross told him, and did not stop to knock any one up."


The Star on the same day gives the relevant information.

"...found Policeman Neil there, and by his instruction witness went for the ambulance. He assisted in removing the body. He noticed blood running from the throat to the gutter. There was only one pool; it was somewhat congealed. Cross,
when he spoke to witness about the affair, was accompanied by another man."


There is a good deal of misinformation like this in this particular thread, hopefully I'll get some chance to discuss in detail later in the week.

[GUT]

He is referring to the highly edited version in the Echo 3/10/88 which leaves out relevant information

"Police-constable George Myzen, 55 H, said that on Friday morning, at twenty minutes past four, he was at the corner of Hanbury-street, Baker's-row, when a man, who looked like a carman, said, "You are wanted in Buck's-row." Witness now knew the man to be named Cross, and he was a carman. Witness asked him what was the matter, and Cross replied, "A policeman wants you; there is a woman lying there." Witness went there, and saw Constable Neil, who sent him to the station for the ambulance.

The Coroner - Was there anyone else there then? - No one at all, Sir. There was blood running from the throat towards the gutter.

By the Coroner - There was another man in company of Cross when the latter spoke to witness. The other man, who went down Hanbury-street, appeared to be working with Cross.

By the Jury - Witness went to the spot directly Cross told him, and did not stop to knock any one up."


The Star on the same day gives the relevant information.

"...found Policeman Neil there, and by his instruction witness went for the ambulance. He assisted in removing the body. He noticed blood running from the throat to the gutter. There was only one pool; it was somewhat congealed. Cross,
when he spoke to witness about the affair, was accompanied by another man."


There is a good deal of misinformation like this in this particular thread, hopefully I'll get some chance to discuss in detail later in the week.

Must have been Myzen what killed her, using a name he never used before tricking people by replacing the "I" with a "Y" or maybe it was "Baul", pack o' name changers the lot of 'em.

[Henry Flower]

The whole boards went into acute spasm when Lechmere was first presented.

Beautiful work Fish. I actually went into a cute spasm when I read that joke.

[Elamarna]

He is referring to the highly edited version in the Echo 3/10/88 which leaves out relevant information

"Police-constable George Myzen, 55 H, said that on Friday morning, at twenty minutes past four, he was at the corner of Hanbury-street, Baker's-row, when a man, who looked like a carman, said, "You are wanted in Buck's-row." Witness now knew the man to be named Cross, and he was a carman. Witness asked him what was the matter, and Cross replied, "A policeman wants you; there is a woman lying there." Witness went there, and saw Constable Neil, who sent him to the station for the ambulance.

The Coroner - Was there anyone else there then? - No one at all, Sir. There was blood running from the throat towards the gutter.

By the Coroner - There was another man in company of Cross when the latter spoke to witness. The other man, who went down Hanbury-street, appeared to be working with Cross.

By the Jury - Witness went to the spot directly Cross told him, and did not stop to knock any one up."


The Star on the same day gives the relevant information.

"...found Policeman Neil there, and by his instruction witness went for the ambulance. He assisted in removing the body. He noticed blood running from the throat to the gutter. There was only one pool; it was somewhat congealed. Cross,
when he spoke to witness about the affair, was accompanied by another man."


There is a good deal of misinformation like this in this particular thread, hopefully I'll get some chance to discuss in detail later in the week.

Thanks for he link dusty, I had been looking at so many articles last 24hrs, I had obviously missed it


Steve

[Robert St Devil]

There,s a Wikipedia reference under ,penetration wound, Fisherman. that will probably back up the claim that the abdomen has the capacity to hold a lot of blood: Blank-Reid C (September 2006). "A historical review of penetrating abdominal trauma". Crit Care Nurs Clin North Am. 18 (3): 387–401.

Another supporting probabilty factor that her throat was cut where she lay is her bonnet. In several cases, the bonnet is removed, and left aside the woman. i believe he removed the bonnet to afford him better access for cutting her throat; the knot and strings being an obstruction. This leaves me with 2 trains of thought:
1. the less likely idea that he cut her throat elsewhere, and brought the bonnet along with the bundle
2. the more likely idea that he removed the bonnet then and there on Buck,s Row, and cut her throat.

This thought does not support when the abdominal wounds were inflicted. i could believe that she was strangled and stabbed at the slaughterhouse - the injury to her left side being most fatal - with her body being transported to Buck,s Row. It,s the injury to the throat that i see being performed in front of the stableyard.

However, Elizabeth Stride and Mary Kelly,s murders frame the sequence for the throat being one of the first places attacked.

[Fisherman]

drstrange: He is referring to the highly edited version in the Echo 3/10/88 which leaves out relevant information

This is of course typical Dusty work: If there is a paper that goes against your beliefs, call it highly edited and misinforming.

The Echo is actually one of the best sources we have, often covering things we otherwise would not know. One example is how the Echo informs us that Mizen had not taken the carmensī names, by pointing out that the PC did not know Lechmeres name until the inquest day.
To be frank, he did not know it then either, since Lechmere gave an alias, but nevertheless!

The Echo very much belongs to a correct understanding - more so than most papers. Those who dislike that, are for some reason also those who claim that Mizen was referring to the remove in time when he helped put Nichols on that stretcher, when he said that the blood was STILL running, that it was looking fresh, that it was partially coagulated and that it was running into the gutter.

[Fisherman]

Thanks for he link dusty, I had been looking at so many articles last 24hrs, I had obviously missed it


Steve

"In these matters it is the little things that tell the tales" - Coroner Wynne Baxter during the Nichols inquest.

[Fisherman]

There,s a Wikipedia reference under ,penetration wound, Fisherman. that will probably back up the claim that the abdomen has the capacity to hold a lot of blood: Blank-Reid C (September 2006). "A historical review of penetrating abdominal trauma". Crit Care Nurs Clin North Am. 18 (3): 387–401.

Another supporting probabilty factor that her throat was cut where she lay is her bonnet. In several cases, the bonnet is removed, and left aside the woman. i believe he removed the bonnet to afford him better access for cutting her throat; the knot and strings being an obstruction. This leaves me with 2 trains of thought:
1. the less likely idea that he cut her throat elsewhere, and brought the bonnet along with the bundle
2. the more likely idea that he removed the bonnet then and there on Buck,s Row, and cut her throat.

This thought does not support when the abdominal wounds were inflicted. i could believe that she was strangled and stabbed at the slaughterhouse - the injury to her left side being most fatal - with her body being transported to Buck,s Row. It,s the injury to the throat that i see being performed in front of the stableyard.

However, Elizabeth Stride and Mary Kelly,s murders frame the sequence for the throat being one of the first places attacked.

Thanks for that, Robert!

A few factors of interest:

If Tabram was the Ripperīs, then we can see that she lived through the first 38 stabs, according to Killeen. So the idea was to get at the abdomen and the trunk and cut into it. It was only as a last matter the coup-de-grace was dealt.
Nichols is the same - the abdomen first, that is where his interest lies. Only when he is disturbed (probably), he deals the coup-de-grace.

Then it seems he has learnt that he minimizes the riska and maximizes his chances to work on the abdomen undisturbed if he FIRST cuts the neck.

One more thing: If Nicholsī neck came first, many will say that he had strangled her to begin with, and the heart will have stopped, so that was why there was no blood spurting; the pressure was gone.
But the heart may go on to beat long after you have been strangled. People who are hanged may have a beating heart many minutes afterwards. It is a very strong muscle, and it works by way of reflex.
Normally, the ehart will NOT stop immediately that you are strangled, and therefore, if the killer cut the neck in combination with the strangulation, then spurting blood would have been to expect.

If the abdomen was cut first, and she died from those injuries - as suggested by Llewellyn - then it is another thing. Even if the heart went on pounding, there would have been cut vessels in the abdomen where the blood would go out, and the pressure would taper off and disappear.

[Fisherman]

Must have been Myzen what killed her, using a name he never used before tricking people by replacing the "I" with a "Y" or maybe it was "Baul", pack o' name changers the lot of 'em.

Yes, papers where anything at all was misspelt should be immediately discarded as reliable sources, and thus not be used in the future. Very good of the always informed Gut to point that out!

Goodbye The Daily Telegraph, The Times, The Morning Advertiser, The Star... And, first and foremost, The Echo.

Problem gone!

[Fisherman]

There is a good deal of misinformation like this in this particular thread, hopefully I'll get some chance to discuss in detail later in the week.

Anytime, Dusty, anytime. I suspect it will be more of your "more papers said.." stuff. But never mind, been there, done that...

[Fisherman]

One thing for Steve to ponder!

-If there was another killer than Lechmere, and if this killer was still in the street when Lechmere entered it, subsequently managing to sneak out unseen...

-If Paul really was 30-40 yards behind Lechmere, as stated by the carman, and therefore arriving at where Lechmere stood perhaps fifteen to twenty seconds after the carman had stepped out into the street ...

...then we must assume that if Lechmere had ended up in standing "in the middle of" Bucks Row thirty seconds earlier or ten seconds later, then he would reasonably either have noticed the killer leaving Bucks Row, or Robert Paul would have seen himself step out into the street.

It is a very, very miniscule window of time. To think that Lechmere just happened to fit into it so snugly!

And of course it can happen. I know that. I am just sad about how Lechmere, who could have been put safely in the clear on account of so many details, did not have the luck to have one single such detail working for him.