Every minute counts

[Fiver]

And I am saying that the Ripper and the Torso killer were doubtlessly the same.

The Torso Killer and the Ripper were clearly different serial killers with different MOs.
The Ripper left the bodies where they lay. The Torso Killer transported them distances of several miles.
The Ripper mutilated bodies in a way that shows it was his goal. The Torso Killer dissected bodies for easier transportation.
The Ripper took trophy organs. There is no sign that the Torso killer did so.
The Torso Killer made sure that the heads were never found, probably to hide the identities of the dead. The Ripper made no attempt to conceal the identities of his victims.
The Ripper posed his victims. The Torso Killer just dumped them.

[Fiver]

Most papers say that Mizen did not continue his knocking up, and only one establishes that he actually did. The single paper will be the one that is correct. Many papers condensed things and when they did, single papers can expose the real facts.

That is an incorrect summary on your part. None of the newspapers established whether or nor not PC Mizen continued knocking up, they recorded whether he denied continuing knocking up.

The Illustrated Police News said that "when the carman spoke to him he was engaged in knocking people up, and he finished knocking at the one place where he was at the time, giving two or three knocks, and then went directly to Buck's-row, not wanting to knock up anyone else." The Illustrated Police News was a tabloid known for sensationalism. Its account is more detailed, but it is also a summary.

According the Daily News, East London Observer, Echo, Star, Times, and the Walthamstow and Leyton Guardian; PC Mizen denied that he continued knocking up. Every one of those papers had a better reputation than the Illustrated Police News. The Daily News and the East London Ovserver quoted PC Mizen as saying "No. I only finished knocking up one person." The Echo summarized Mizen as saying "Witness went to the spot directly Cross told him, and did not stop to knock any one up." The Star summarized as "It was not true that before he went to Buck's-row, witness continued "knocking people up." The Times and the Walthamstow and Leyton Guardian summarized as "He denied that before he went to Buck's-row he continued knocking people up."

The subject was not mentioned by the Daily Telegraph, Evening Standard, Lloyds Weekly Register, or the Morning Advertiser.

So if we go with the unsupported, least reliable source, then PC Mizen finished the house he was at by "giving two or three knocks", which would have delayed him only a few seconds. If we go with the majority of sources, PC Mizen did not delay even those few seconds. Either way, it does not justify the 9 to 10 minutes that you estimate in the OP between discovery of the body and PC Mizen reaching it.

Mizen said the blood was STILL running (and looking fresh, to boot), meaning that there was an ongoing process where blood flowed. There is no way around it.

Blood is not mentioned in the Daily News, Daily Telegraph, East London Observer, Illustrated Police News, Lloyds Weekly Register, Times, or Walthamstow and Leyton Guardian accounts of PC Mizen's testimony.

"There was blood running from the throat towards the gutter." - the Echo

"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." the Star

"I assisted to remove the body. The blood appeared fresh, and was still running from the neck of the woman." - the Evening Standard and the Morning Advertiser.The Standard appears to have gotten its account directly from the Advertiser, including spelling the name "Maizen". So there is one account that says there was "fresh" blood that was "still" running. That account might be correct, but it is far from certain that it is. The account is also unclear if the blood was running when PC Mizen arrived, or if it restarted when the body was moved.

[Scott Nelson]

Normal Abby

[Abby Normal]

I'm computer dyslexic.

too me

[drstrange169]

I'm computer dyslexic.

[Abby Normal]

>>PC Mizen from the inquest, as quoted by The Star, 3rd of September 1888:
He noticed blood running from the throat to the gutter. There was only one pool; it was somewhat congealed.
This quotation establishes that the blood had not fully congealed, and so it was running as in moving. PC Mizen from the inquest, as quoted by The Morning Advertiser, 4th of September 1888:
The blood appeared fresh, and was still running from the neck of the woman.
This quotation establishes the same thing as the quotation above, since the blood is described as "still" running we can be sure that Mizen speaks of an ongoing process.<<

It should be noted that whenever Christer quotes these passages he edits out pertinant information that alters their meaning.

Here are the two quotes in full:

" ... by his instruction (Neil's) witness went for the ambulance. "I assisted to remove the body. The blood appeared fresh, and was still running from the neck of the woman."

and

"He said, "Go for an ambulance," and I at once went to the station and returned with it. I assisted to remove the body. The blood appeared fresh, and was still running from the neck of the woman."

So, Christer is misleading everyone each time he quotes these passages.

To justify this, he sometimes quotes the Echo:

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

Note the sentence is a non sequitur, it makes sense if we insert the line the Echo missed out:

"The Coroner - Was there anyone else there then? - No one at all. On returning I assisted to remove the body... There was blood running from the throat towards the gutter."


This becomes clear when we read the other newspaper reports:

"The witness went to Buck's-row, when Police-constable Neil sent him for the ambulance. At that time nobody but Neil was with the body. On returning with the ambulance, he helped to put the deceased upon it."

E.L.O.

"The witness went to Buck's row, where Police constable Neil sent him for the ambulance. At that time nobody but Neil was with the body. On returning with the ambulance he helped to put the deceased upon it"

Daily News

"When he arrived there Constable Neil sent him for the ambulance. At that time nobody but Neil was with the body."

Telegraph

"The witness then went to Buck's-row, and Police-constable Neil sent him for the ambulance. Nobody but Neil was with the body at that time"

I.P.N.

"Constable Neil sent him for the ambulance. At that time nobody but Neil was with the body."

Lloyds

"He said, "Go for an ambulance," and I at once went to the station and returned with it. I assisted to remove the body. The blood appeared fresh, and was still running from the neck of the woman."

Morning News

Question:
Were Payne James and Thilblin told this information?

If they were, what did they say?

If they weren't told of an alternative and more accurate timing for Mizen's sighting, how are their statements in anyway relevant?

I've been pointing this out for about 10 years, so it's not as if Christer vis not aware of this alternative, so can it be called deliberately deceptive if the experts were not told all the facts?

you have the most intersting take on the quote function

[Abby Normal]

Sorry, entirely meant for humor and I couldn't resist. It is not really meant as a counter-argument the point Fisherman is making.

- Jeff

pigs fly? lol

[drstrange169]

>>PC Mizen from the inquest, as quoted by The Star, 3rd of September 1888:
He noticed blood running from the throat to the gutter. There was only one pool; it was somewhat congealed.
This quotation establishes that the blood had not fully congealed, and so it was running as in moving. PC Mizen from the inquest, as quoted by The Morning Advertiser, 4th of September 1888:
The blood appeared fresh, and was still running from the neck of the woman.
This quotation establishes the same thing as the quotation above, since the blood is described as "still" running we can be sure that Mizen speaks of an ongoing process.<<

It should be noted that whenever Christer quotes these passages he edits out pertinant information that alters their meaning.

Here are the two quotes in full:

" ... by his instruction (Neil's) witness went for the ambulance. "I assisted to remove the body. The blood appeared fresh, and was still running from the neck of the woman."

and

"He said, "Go for an ambulance," and I at once went to the station and returned with it. I assisted to remove the body. The blood appeared fresh, and was still running from the neck of the woman."

So, Christer is misleading everyone each time he quotes these passages.

To justify this, he sometimes quotes the Echo:

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

Note the sentence is a non sequitur, it makes sense if we insert the line the Echo missed out:

"The Coroner - Was there anyone else there then? - No one at all. On returning I assisted to remove the body... There was blood running from the throat towards the gutter."


This becomes clear when we read the other newspaper reports:

"The witness went to Buck's-row, when Police-constable Neil sent him for the ambulance. At that time nobody but Neil was with the body. On returning with the ambulance, he helped to put the deceased upon it."

E.L.O.

"The witness went to Buck's row, where Police constable Neil sent him for the ambulance. At that time nobody but Neil was with the body. On returning with the ambulance he helped to put the deceased upon it"

Daily News

"When he arrived there Constable Neil sent him for the ambulance. At that time nobody but Neil was with the body."

Telegraph

"The witness then went to Buck's-row, and Police-constable Neil sent him for the ambulance. Nobody but Neil was with the body at that time"

I.P.N.

"Constable Neil sent him for the ambulance. At that time nobody but Neil was with the body."

Lloyds

"He said, "Go for an ambulance," and I at once went to the station and returned with it. I assisted to remove the body. The blood appeared fresh, and was still running from the neck of the woman."

Morning News

Question:
Were Payne James and Thilblin told this information?

If they were, what did they say?

If they weren't told of an alternative and more accurate timing for Mizen's sighting, how are their statements in anyway relevant?

I've been pointing this out for about 10 years, so it's not as if Christer vis not aware of this alternative, so can it be called deliberately deceptive if the experts were not told all the facts?

[drstrange169]

>>Why should we assume that Paul reached the body at 3.46?<<

Because the whole theory falls apart if Christer doesn't take the most unreliable time (Paul's Lloyds story).

[Fiver]

its clear that the fact that nichols was still bleeding puts lech clearly in tje frame for her murder because we all agree at some point bleeding stops. she clearly wasnt murdered a half hour before lech arrived.

Surgeon Clark saw the headless Pinchin Street torso at least half an hour after it was discovered. Clark testified that "On moving the body I found that there was a little blood underneath where the neck had lain. It was small in quantity and not clotted. The blood had oozed from the cut surface of the neck."

paul dosnt see or hear him walking in front of him.

"he saw in Buck's-row a man standing in the middle of the road. As witness drew closer he walked towards the pavement, and he (Paul) stepped in the roadway to pass him." - Robert Paul testimony

by lechs own admission on when he left his house he has time to commit the murder.

This is incorrect. Lechmere said he left for work "About half-past three" and gave no time estimate for his discovery of the body.

there is no other evidence of anyone else around.

Emma Green "heard no unusual sound during the night." Walter Purkiss "had heard no sound, neither had his wife." Alfred Mulshaw "heard no cries or noise." Green, Purkiss, and Malshaw didn't hear Lechmere, Paul, PC Neil, PC Thain, PC Mizen, or Dr Lllewellyn; but they were all there.

[Fiver]

As Mizen arrived at the murder site, he said that the blood was still running from the neck, and that it had at this stage started to run into the gutter. He said the blood looked fresh and that it was partly coagulated in the pool. Coagulation begins at around the four minute mark and so it all makes sense.

The immediate fact that leaps out is that the estimation of a likely bleeding time of 3-5 minutes as per Payne-James and Thiblin does not cover the actual bleeding process. If I am correct on the nine minute timing, then Nichols will have bled for a substantially longer time, almost twice as long as the pathologists both expected.
However, neither of them ruled out as such that the bleeding time could be longer. Thiblin actually said that he believed that we could be looking at a maximum of 10-15 minutes, and 9 minutes is of course well within that scope.

But this nevertheless leaves us with the implication that Lechmere is by far the LIKELIEST cutter! Not only does he occupy the 3-5 minute period judged as the likeliest outcome by the pathologists - he occupies a four minute scope BEYOND that time, all the way up to nine minutes.

If we go by your assumptions about bleed times and what you claim Mizen observed, then it rules Lechmere out as a suspect and means that Nichols was killed sometime after Lechmere and Paul left her and before PC Mizen reached Nichols' body.

As Baron noted:

PC Neil makes for a better suspect than Lechmere!

Paul thought he detected a faint breath, she could have been still alive when they examined here.

Both Paul and Lechmere didn't notice any Blood.

So the most logical suspect for having killed Nochols, using Fisherman's blood evidence would be PC Neil. If Lechemere had killed her, the blood would have almost no chance of still looking fresh or still flowing 9 minutes later. While a "likely bleeding time of 3-5 minutes" before PC Mizen arrived matches PC Neil's arrival on the scene.

[Fiver]

The thing is, if we work from the assumption that Paul reached the body at 3.46, then the nine minute scenario has Thain leaving for Llewellyn in the correct time, justaboutish, and so that seems to make for at least some corroboration.

Why should we assume that Paul reached the body at 3.46?

PC Neil said he saw Nichols body "at a quarter to four o'clock".

PC Mizen said that Lechmere and Paul contacted him at "about a quarter to four o'clock".

Those times, which are estimates mean that Paul probably reached the body around 3:40. That 3:40 estimate also fits with both Lechmere's and Paul's estimates of when they left home.

[drstrange169]

One more major problem with Christer's "blood evidence". Dr Llewellyn mentions nothing about the blood running into the gutter.

"There was a very small pool of blood in the pathway ..."

The only time blood running to the gutter is mentioned, is when the body was moved.

[drstrange169]

The advantage of Steve's book is that he gives all the available evidence, whereas Christer's book selects and edits the evidence he gives his reader. Not that that is unique to Christer, the bulk of suspect books do exactly the same thing.

[Elamarna]

I would suggest that if anyone wants to look at real figures for "bleeding" whatever that may mean, that they look at the 2 chapters on that subject in "Inside Bucks Row".

There you will find real blood flow rates, taken from actual medical literature, not the vague numbers mentioned here.

To be brief, given the nature of the wounds, its highly unlikely that Neil could have physically seen blood flowing under pressure when he arrived.
With regard to Mizen its medically impossible for him to have seen blood flowing under pressure, blood flowing under gravity is all he, and probably Neil, saw.

If the blood flow seen by either or both Policemen was not under pressure, then i am very much afraid that all talk of the relevance of bleeding times is completely pointless, given that bleeding under gravity and clotting does not conform to a consistent pattern, and any movement can induce "bleeding" to restart.

Those are the medical/scientific facts.


steve