Time to Kill?

[The Rookie Detective]

I thought I'd attempt to start a new thread that aims to re-examine and re-discuss timings...and asks the question...

How much time did the killer have to kill?



I think there's a tendency to look at things from the wrong perspective.

Let's begin with the Nichols murder...

Let's set aside Paul finding Lechmere standing close to Nichols because that's a fact we already know.

The main focus to either strengthen or negate Lechmere as a suspect is to work out the exact time frame from when the last policeman walked past the murder site up to the point that Lechmere claims to have found the body.

We need the widest parameters of time possible so that we know that a time frame outside of those parameters is impossible.

Let's focus on Lechmere's behaviour relative to TIME.

If he is innocent, then he has no reason to run... He doesn't run.

If he is guilty, then it would initially be fair to say that it doesn't make logical sense why he didn't run?!....BUT, here's the rub...

There's actually a perfect reason why he STILL wouldn't have run when he heard Paul approaching... and that is if he had waited for the last policeman to have walked past the site and then slain Nichols with the knowledge he had a certain time frame before another policeman would pass by...

And so... let's imagine he has waited for the policeman to walk past, slain Nichols, but then as he's in the process of mutilating her, he hears Paul...but he CAN'T run because he knows that a policeman has only passed through minutes before and to run in the same direction that the policeman has traveled coupled with the knowledge that Paul would most likely see the body, he would have been physically trapped between Paul approaching and the policeman who he knew had passed by minutes before.

Adding to that scenario, let's imagine that Lechnere DIDN'T murder Nichols. It would mean the real killer had to of slain Nichols BETWEEN the last policeman leaving the street to the point when he would of heard LECHMERE approaching. (Lechnmere would of heard Paul and so the real killer would of heard Lechmere by the same token)


So the REAL question is... What is the longest possible timeframe BETWEEN the last Policeman walking past and clearing the street, to the point when the killer had heard Lechmere approaching AND had already left the scene BEFORE Lechmmere arrived? (Lechmere never mentioned seeing anyone else)

I would hypothesize that if the time between the last policeman having cleared the street to the point when the killer had left the scene before Lechmere arrived is less than 5 minutes, then it would make it much less likely that Lechmere was innocent.

I'm on the fence with this one, but what is more plausible?

A) A Policeman passes by the murder site, the unidentified killer arrives with Nichols and he kills her, he hears Lehmere coming and runs, Lechmere arrives and sees the body, Paul arrives and sees Lechmere...

OR...

B) A Policeman passes by the murder site, Lechmere arrives with Nichols, he kills her, he hears Paul but can't run because he knows a Policeman has recently passed by, Paul arrives and sees Lechnmere


Thoughts Please?

If there's time then there's time, but if there isn't the time, then Lechmere looks like a very interesting suspect indeed...




Please note that this is a post that I initially added to another thread...but then wanted to start my own so as to start from afresh.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I thought I'd attempt to start a new thread that aims to re-examine and re-discuss timings...and asks the question...

How much time did the killer have to kill?



I think there's a tendency to look at things from the wrong perspective.

Let's begin with the Nichols murder...

Let's set aside Paul finding Lechmere standing close to Nichols because that's a fact we already know.

The main focus to either strengthen or negate Lechmere as a suspect is to work out the exact time frame from when the last policeman walked past the murder site up to the point that Lechmere claims to have found the body.

We need the widest parameters of time possible so that we know that a time frame outside of those parameters is impossible.

Let's focus on Lechmere's behaviour relative to TIME.

If he is innocent, then he has no reason to run... He doesn't run.

If he is guilty, then it would initially be fair to say that it doesn't make logical sense why he didn't run?!....BUT, here's the rub...

There's actually a perfect reason why he STILL wouldn't have run when he heard Paul approaching... and that is if he had waited for the last policeman to have walked past the site and then slain Nichols with the knowledge he had a certain time frame before another policeman would pass by...

Surely you aren’t suggesting that Lechmere watched Neil pass at 3.15 and waited around hoping that a prostitute would turn up giving him sufficient time to kill her before Neil returned?

And so... let's imagine he has waited for the policeman to walk past, slain Nichols, but then as he's in the process of mutilating her, he hears Paul...but he CAN'T run because he knows that a policeman has only passed through minutes before and to run in the same direction that the policeman has traveled coupled with the knowledge that Paul would most likely see the body, he would have been physically trapped between Paul approaching and the policeman who he knew had passed by minutes before.

Firstly I’d say that there’s just no way someone would commit murder knowingly within a balancing act of police beats.

Secondly if he’d seen the Neil pass earlier why would he have expected to have caught up with him?

Thirdly how can we know that he knew where Neil’s beat took him after he left Bucks Row.

Adding to that scenario, let's imagine that Lechnere DIDN'T murder Nichols. It would mean the real killer had to of slain Nichols BETWEEN the last policeman leaving the street to the point when he would of heard LECHMERE approaching. (Lechnmere would of heard Paul and so the real killer would of heard Lechmere by the same token)

What’s wrong with that? It makes more sense for the killer to have fled.

So the REAL question is... What is the longest possible timeframe BETWEEN the last Policeman walking past and clearing the street, to the point when the killer had heard Lechmere approaching AND had already left the scene BEFORE Lechmmere arrived? (Lechmere never mentioned seeing anyone else)

I would hypothesize that if the time between the last policeman having cleared the street to the point when the killer had left the scene before Lechmere arrived is less than 5 minutes, then it would make it much less likely that Lechmere was innocent.

I'm on the fence with this one, but what is more plausible?

A) A Policeman passes by the murder site, the unidentified killer arrives with Nichols and he kills her, he hears Lehmere coming and runs, Lechmere arrives and sees the body, Paul arrives and sees Lechmere...

OR...

B) A Policeman passes by the murder site, Lechmere arrives with Nichols, he kills her, he hears Paul but can't run because he knows a Policeman has recently passed by, Paul arrives and sees Lechnmere


Thoughts Please?

If there's time then there's time, but if there isn't the time, then Lechmere looks like a very interesting suspect indeed...




Please note that this is a post that I initially added to another thread...but then wanted to start my own so as to start from afresh.

I’d say that’s it’s pretty straightforward RD. We know that the killing and mutilation would have taken under 2 minutes. Therefore if he was guilty he would have been there no more than 2 minutes before Paul arrived which again leaves us with a man murdering and mutilating a woman around 20 minutes before he’s due to clock in at work which just isn’t believable in my opinion. Sticking around with all of the risks opposed to fleeing makes him even less likely.

[JeffHamm]

I thought I'd attempt to start a new thread that aims to re-examine and re-discuss timings...and asks the question...

How much time did the killer have to kill?

By this I presume you mean what is the time window available for the murder to have occurred?

I think there's a tendency to look at things from the wrong perspective.

Let's begin with the Nichols murder...

Let's set aside Paul finding Lechmere standing close to Nichols because that's a fact we already know.

The main focus to either strengthen or negate Lechmere as a suspect is to work out the exact time frame from when the last policeman walked past the murder site up to the point that Lechmere claims to have found the body.

We need the widest parameters of time possible so that we know that a time frame outside of those parameters is impossible.

Let's focus on Lechmere's behaviour relative to TIME.

If he is innocent, then he has no reason to run... He doesn't run.

If he is guilty, then it would initially be fair to say that it doesn't make logical sense why he didn't run?!....BUT, here's the rub...

There's actually a perfect reason why he STILL wouldn't have run when he heard Paul approaching... and that is if he had waited for the last policeman to have walked past the site and then slain Nichols with the knowledge he had a certain time frame before another policeman would pass by...

Buck's Row was PC Neil's beat, and he testifies he last patrolled it at 3:15. I believe there is a report of another more senior officer passing through Buck's Row as well. I forget the exact time, but I think it is either around 3:15 as well, or sufficiently close that it makes no real difference.

Moreover, both were travelling east, so in the opposite direction that is proposed for the direction of flight if JtR were interrupted by the approach of Cross/Lechmere or Paul.

And so... let's imagine he has waited for the policeman to walk past, slain Nichols, but then as he's in the process of mutilating her, he hears Paul...but he CAN'T run because he knows that a policeman has only passed through minutes before and to run in the same direction that the policeman has traveled coupled with the knowledge that Paul would most likely see the body, he would have been physically trapped between Paul approaching and the policeman who he knew had passed by minutes before.

No police passed through Buck's Row minutes before Cross/Lechmere's arrival, therefore, if JtR did as you say, then then we're talking about either PC Neil on his beat, or the more senior officer whose name I've forgotten. Either way, as indicated above, both were heading east (towards where Paul was coming from), and neither at a time that would put Paul in the picture.

Adding to that scenario, let's imagine that Lechnere DIDN'T murder Nichols. It would mean the real killer had to of slain Nichols BETWEEN the last policeman leaving the street to the point when he would of heard LECHMERE approaching. (Lechnmere would of heard Paul and so the real killer would of heard Lechmere by the same token)

That would mean we're considering the murder occurring between 3:15 ish, and 3:40ish. That is plenty of time for the murder and mutilations, and even for JtR to have left the scene long before Cross/Lechmere even appears on the scene. The fact that she is still bleeding when discovered by PC Neil at 3:45 isn't a big deal, given Alice McKenzie continued to bleed for about 20 minutes after being discovered. If we take Alice as a rough guide, that would suggest we prioritize a time window in the vicinity of 3:25 to 3:40 ish type thing, and 15 minutes is more than enough time for the murder and mutilations to have been completed before Cross/Lechmere even enters Buck's Row.

So the REAL question is... What is the longest possible timeframe BETWEEN the last Policeman walking past and clearing the street, to the point when the killer had heard Lechmere approaching AND had already left the scene BEFORE Lechmmere arrived? (Lechmere never mentioned seeing anyone else)

I got ahead of myself, but the above includes that.

I would hypothesize that if the time between the last policeman having cleared the street to the point when the killer had left the scene before Lechmere arrived is less than 5 minutes, then it would make it much less likely that Lechmere was innocent.

And it's not less than 5 minutes, but quite a bit more than that.

I'm on the fence with this one, but what is more plausible?

A) A Policeman passes by the murder site, the unidentified killer arrives with Nichols and he kills her, he hears Lehmere coming and runs, Lechmere arrives and sees the body, Paul arrives and sees Lechmere...

OR...

B) A Policeman passes by the murder site, Lechmere arrives with Nichols, he kills her, he hears Paul but can't run because he knows a Policeman has recently passed by, Paul arrives and sees Lechnmere

If Cross/Lechmere is too afraid to run when Paul is coming down Buck's Row because he thinks a policeman will see him, then where does his bravery to commit the murder in the first place come from? If he's confident that the police are not going to discover him committing the murder, he would be confident enough to leave.

Thoughts Please?

If there's time then there's time, but if there isn't the time, then Lechmere looks like a very interesting suspect indeed...


Please note that this is a post that I initially added to another thread...but then wanted to start my own so as to start from afresh.

There's plenty of time, and there was no police patrol that I'm aware of that reduces the time window of interest any significant amount from between 3:15is (PC Neil's previous patrol) and 3:40ish (time of discovery by Cross/Lechmere and Paul). Given what we know about bleeding from the Alice McKenzie murder, we might tend to focus more on the range 3:25 to 3:40 for the murder, but there is so much variation in medical type data from case to case, I would be loath to exclude the period between 3:15 and 3:25.

- Jeff

[Fiver]

Jeff has several simulations that may be of interest.

[jerryd]

There's plenty of time, and there was no police patrol that I'm aware of that reduces the time window of interest any significant amount from between 3:15is (PC Neil's previous patrol) and 3:40ish (time of discovery by Cross/Lechmere and Paul). Given what we know about bleeding from the Alice McKenzie murder, we might tend to focus more on the range 3:25 to 3:40 for the murder, but there is so much variation in medical type data from case to case, I would be loath to exclude the period between 3:15 and 3:25.

- Jeff

Hi Jeff.

Good observations as usual.

What do we know about the bleeding of Alice McKenzie? You say she bled for 20 minutes after she was found. When do you think the knife wounds occurred to Alice McKenzie?

[JeffHamm]

Hi Jeff.

Good observations as usual.

What do we know about the bleeding of Alice McKenzie? You say she bled for 20 minutes after she was found. When do you think the knife wounds occurred to Alice McKenzie?

Hi jerryd,

To be honest, that wasn't my observation but rather was pointed out by someone else in a previous post a while ago (can't remember who to credit, sorry). I'm not confident enough in my knowledge of the Alice McKenzie case to answer your question. Also, medical evidence is incredibly messy with regards to working backwards (from crime to time in particular), so while Alice's case shows that bleeding can continue for quite a long time, it doesn't show that it always does nor that her case represents a maximum. All it tells us is that bleeding for 20 minutes can happen, but not whether that is common or rare. Based on what we know, it does mean we can't rule out Nichols being murdered 20 minutes prior though and arguments to the contrary are demonstrably invalid by her example.

I keep meaning to go over the McKenzie case in detail but that's been on the back burner for awhile. I probably should get around to it though, as her case is probably the most similar to the C5 series and so warrants that scrutiny. I know many have looked at her before now, though, and as far as I know very few, if any, end up including her with any real confidence in the series, so I doubt I would get any further than the typical "hmmm, maybe maybe not", but I do like to look at things "from scratch" and draw my own conclusions, even if they end up agreeing with what others before me have already concluded.

On the other hand, if there is enough details available, it might be interesting to try and put together a simulation. If there is, that might be reason enough for me to have a close look at her murder as it would be interesting either way.

- Jeff

[jerryd]

That's fair, Jeff. The only civilian witness in the case, Isaac Lewis Jacobs, observed the body of Alice McKenzie very closely several minutes after PC Andrews found her and stated blood was spurting from her neck. Other reports state Jacobs said the blood was gushing or running very fast from the neck. Does that sound like a cut to the neck at 12:30 to 12:45? Jacobs would have been at the body just shy of 1 o'clock.

[JeffHamm]

That's fair, Jeff. The only civilian witness in the case, Isaac Lewis Jacobs, observed the body of Alice McKenzie very closely several minutes after PC Andrews found her and stated blood was spurting from her neck. Other reports state Jacobs said the blood was gushing or running very fast from the neck. Does that sound like a cut to the neck at 12:30 to 12:45? Jacobs would have been at the body just shy of 1 o'clock.

Hi Jerry,

I think the 20 minutes refers to a statement that she continued to bleed for 20 minutes after discovery, and obviously she started some amount of time before that, but how much we don't know.

I'm not a medical expert, so keep that in mind, but it seems to me if the blood was "spurting" when she was found, then that indicates her heart had not yet stopped. I would think, therefore, she couldn't have been murdered much before her discovery. I think the same could be said even if the descriptions "gushing" and "running very fast" are the more accurate. Although the latter two might allow for a slightly longer interval between murder and discovery, I think both would lead to the inference that her murderer heard PC Andrews approaching and fled the scene. While bleeding might continue for quite some time, it only spurts while the heart is pumping, and as the blood drains from the body, the rate of flow is going to go down, hence my cautious, and admittedly non-qualified, opinion.

Hmmm, if one thinks that is reasonable, that her murderer fled the scene because he heard PC Andrews approaching, then it might be worth considering that as a possible explanation as to why the knife wound to her abdomen is not as extensive as in the C5 (well C4) cases. If JtR did kill Alice (and I'm not saying he did, only starting from that as a point to consider), and he's been interrupted just after cutting her throat but before he could get started on the abdominal mutilations, then the shallower cut could be a "last minute quick slash", to both leave his mark and to gain at least some satisfaction. I know I'm pushing things here, and my lack of familiarity with the details of her case could now be showing, but I thought I would put that out all the same.


- Jeff

[jerryd]

Hi Jerry,

I think the 20 minutes refers to a statement that she continued to bleed for 20 minutes after discovery, and obviously she started some amount of time before that, but how much we don't know.

I'm not a medical expert, so keep that in mind, but it seems to me if the blood was "spurting" when she was found, then that indicates her heart had not yet stopped. I would think, therefore, she couldn't have been murdered much before her discovery. I think the same could be said even if the descriptions "gushing" and "running very fast" are the more accurate. Although the latter two might allow for a slightly longer interval between murder and discovery, I think both would lead to the inference that her murderer heard PC Andrews approaching and fled the scene. While bleeding might continue for quite some time, it only spurts while the heart is pumping, and as the blood drains from the body, the rate of flow is going to go down, hence my cautious, and admittedly non-qualified, opinion.

Hmmm, if one thinks that is reasonable, that her murderer fled the scene because he heard PC Andrews approaching, then it might be worth considering that as a possible explanation as to why the knife wound to her abdomen is not as extensive as in the C5 (well C4) cases. If JtR did kill Alice (and I'm not saying he did, only starting from that as a point to consider), and he's been interrupted just after cutting her throat but before he could get started on the abdominal mutilations, then the shallower cut could be a "last minute quick slash", to both leave his mark and to gain at least some satisfaction. I know I'm pushing things here, and my lack of familiarity with the details of her case could now be showing, but I thought I would put that out all the same.


- Jeff

A couple of things to consider here, Jeff. I'm going to use absolute times (at the risk of the Victorian time police) to illustrate the few minutes prior to Isaac Lewis Jacobs arriving to the body. At 12:48 (according to Sgt Badham), Sgt Badham meets PC Andrews across from the Three Crowns Tavern. I have a picture of the Three Crowns looking toward the murder site if anyone cares to see it. They are approx. 60 yards or so from the murder site surely within earshot of the scene. I contend they had visual site as well. The murder occurred under a lamp. At around this same time (12:50) Isaac Lewis Jacobs leaves his house enroute to McCarthy's on Dorset Street for some supper. At approx. 12:50 Andrews finds the body and determines Alice has been murdered. He then hears the footsteps of Jacobs at the top of the Street near Wentworth and runs up to see who he is and has a brief questioning. At that point, Andrews whistles twice, which is heard by Badham on Bell Lane. Badham runs down to where they are and the three men run to the body together. This is all recorded in inquest and news clippings by the way.

If blood was spurting from the neck the several minutes it took Isaac Jacobs to get there, what did PC Andrews see several minutes earlier when he touched her abdomen and decided she was dead? There were actually two cuts to the neck to insure death. Alice was in a position that the neck wound was open and free to flow blood.

[JeffHamm]

A couple of things to consider here, Jeff. I'm going to use absolute times (at the risk of the Victorian time police) to illustrate the few minutes prior to Isaac Lewis Jacobs arriving to the body. At 12:48 (according to Sgt Badham), Sgt Badham meets PC Andrews across from the Three Crowns Tavern. I have a picture of the Three Crowns looking toward the murder site if anyone cares to see it. They are approx. 60 yards or so from the murder site surely within earshot of the scene. I contend they had visual site as well. The murder occurred under a lamp. At around this same time (12:50) Isaac Lewis Jacobs leaves his house enroute to McCarthy's on Dorset Street for some supper. At approx. 12:50 Andrews finds the body and determines Alice has been murdered. He then hears the footsteps of Jacobs at the top of the Street near Wentworth and runs up to see who he is and has a brief questioning. At that point, Andrews whistles twice, which is heard by Badham on Bell Lane. Badham runs down to where they are and the three men run to the body together. This is all recorded in inquest and news clippings by the way.

If blood was spurting from the neck the several minutes it took Isaac Jacobs to get there, what did PC Andrews see several minutes earlier when he touched her abdomen and decided she was dead? There were actually two cuts to the neck to insure death. Alice was in a position that the neck wound was open and free to flow blood.

Hi Jerryd,

Hmmm, we're dealing with pretty tight times here (12:48 and 12:50; if the latter is the time of discovery, then the former cannot be the time Badham responds to Andrews whistle, as Andrews doesn't blow the whistle until after he finds the body in the first place! Hence, that alone tells us there are issues to be dealt with in regards to time). But to run 60 yards, at an average running speed of 6.1 mph would take about 20 seconds. If sprinting (not just running), that would be more like 14.2 mph based upon a quick search, which would mean 60 yards in about 8 or 9 seconds. So, we might want to suggest they would run faster than average under the circumstances, but probably not exactly sprinting, and estimate the time to cross that distance around 15 seconds?

Do we have Jacobs' home address? He would be walking (so travelling around 3.2 mph), and if we knew where he started, and where he ends up, we could estimate the time he would have left based upon the time he was encountered.

Basically, what I try and do is take one person from the testimony and use them as the "keeper of standard time". Then, based upon testimony about movements, try and work out how long various journeys would take, and use that to work out the time for that person but in "standard time". I don't expect the "standard time" and their stated time to differ too much, although it is not uncommon to find one witness who does appear to be working on a very different clock setting.

It is also very helpful to know the police movements prior to the discovery, and if we know their full beat (or can work something out that seems reasonable), then that helps to fill in the context around the event. Often, by knowing where the police were at different times, we can narrow down the range of possibilities as to where the victim and/or their killer could be.

- Jeff

[jerryd]

Hi Jeff.

There is a lot of detail I left out. When Badham and Andrews met at the Three Crowns at 12:48, it was a brief "Alright?" Then Badham left and headed north to Bell Lane and it was there that he heard the whistle of Andrews. The 60 yards was from the Three Crowns to the murder site. The Three Crowns was about the halfway point of the street. The top was Wentworth Street and the bottom was Whitechapel High Street. The bottom half was called Castle Alley and the top was Castle Street. Here is a map to help.

So as to not detract from this thread, I can PM any details if you want to do a simulation. The beat is complicated and was split between Andrews and Joseph Allen. According to Andrews in a press release, he stated he was in the alley every 10-15 minutes. DI Reid stated the alley was hardly left for 5 minutes. At the entrance from Whitechapel High Street was stationed a fixed man. PC Allen states times where he was located during this time and states he had a watch. We also have timing from the closing of the Three Crowns when they were seen closing up at 12:30.

The Blue dot (by the Board School) is about where Badham and Andrews met. The red line is the route from home for Jacobs (12, Newcastle Place.). The blue line is a direct route for Andrews to run from the murder site and meet up with Jacobs at the top of the street. Sgt. Badham would have headed up to Wentworth Street, made a left and a quick right to get to Bell Lane.

[JeffHamm]

Hi Jeff.

There is a lot of detail I left out. When Badham and Andrews met at the Three Crowns at 12:48, it was a brief "Alright?" Then Badham left and headed north to Bell Lane and it was there that he heard the whistle of Andrews. The 60 yards was from the Three Crowns to the murder site. The Three Crowns was about the halfway point of the street. The top was Wentworth Street and the bottom was Whitechapel High Street. The bottom half was called Castle Alley and the top was Castle Street. Here is a map to help.

So as to not detract from this thread, I can PM any details if you want to do a simulation. The beat is complicated and was split between Andrews and Joseph Allen. According to Andrews in a press release, he stated he was in the alley every 10-15 minutes. DI Reid stated the alley was hardly left for 5 minutes. At the entrance from Whitechapel High Street was stationed a fixed man. PC Allen states times where he was located during this time and states he had a watch. We also have timing from the closing of the Three Crowns when they were seen closing up at 12:30.

The Blue dot (by the Board School) is about where Badham and Andrews met. The red line is the route from home for Jacobs (12, Newcastle Place.). The blue line is a direct route for Andrews to run from the murder site and meet up with Jacobs at the top of the street. Sgt. Badham would have headed up to Wentworth Street, made a left and a quick right to get to Bell Lane.

Ah, ok.

I'm just about to go into a very busy time at work, so probably won't be able to get at a simulation for awhile, but would greatly appreciate a PM with the details that you have. Would be great if you have sources to recommend as to where to look for details on her case (I suppose there will be some information on the victims page, but if there are newspaper articles, even just the paper and date would be enough as I can, hopefully, find them here in the archives). Can take me awhile to do these, though, so don't expect anything soon. At least the information in a PM won't get lost in the threads.

- Jeff

[The Rookie Detective]

Interesting discussion gentleman...

May i add this hypothesis...


What if Andrews was the killer and it was the sound of Jacobs footsteps that stopped him?

What if Andrews was in the alley for a few minutes longer than he claims. He said every 15 minutes, but he was away for 27 minutes.

Do we have proof of where Andrews was the entire 27 minutes?

[The Rookie Detective]

For me this feels like a JTR killing that was interrupted.

The absolute maximum time an arterial bleed would take to bleed out would be 20 minutes and so if we have proof that Alice was still bleeding out around 1am, then she had to have been murdered no earlier than 12.40am.

What is the latest time we have for a witness stating Alice was still bleeding out?

In fact, this has more hallmarks of a JTR killing than Stride!

for me, the Three Crowns closing time of 12.30am may suggest that the killer exited the pub at closing time.

If it wasn't Andrews, then the murder had to have taken place between 12.40am - 12.45am.


The facts are... We have to know the time when Alice stopped bleeding out and then subtract a maximum of 20 minutes. The attack couldn't have taken place before that. An average bleed-out time for an arterial bleed from the neck is around 2 to 5 minutes without intervention and so 20 minutes is at the extreme end of the realm of possibility. Alice was laying down and so that would have slowed the time slightly. However, it was July and started raining at 12.45am and so it wasn't a cold night either and so the weather wouldn't have slowed it down either.

The rain starting at 12.45am i believe is the real reason why the killer fled. It changed the parameters and gave him less control of his environment.

And so...


Before 12.40am is impossible if she was still bleeding out at 1am
After 12,45am is impossible if it dry under her body and it started raining.

a 5 minutes time window that exonerates Andrews..or does it?

[The Rookie Detective]

So let's start with the science, maths and logic to build a solid framework...


Alice McKenzie was found by Andrews at approximately 12.50am - she is bleeding out
Inspector Reid who arrives at approximately 01.10am notices that she is still bleeding out.

That is an approximate bleed out time of OVER 20 minutes.

This is because the killer had to of left the murder site BEFORE 12.50am and thus inflicted the wounds BEFORE 12.49am

Andrews hear's Jacobs approaching and orders him to stay with the body until help arrives.

He blows his whistle at 12.50am

The killer would need a 30 second window to CLEAR escape being seen by Andrews.

Is has been stated that it began to rain at approximately 12.45am.

The ground underneath Alice was dry and so she must have been laying there BEFORE it began to rain.

Andrews was last at the murder site at 12.23am meaning the killer and Alice needed to have got to the murder site AFTER 12.24am, because they need a 30 second CLEAR time to not have been seen by Andrews.

The average bleed out time is between 2 to 8 minutes for the nature of the injury Alice sustained, but it can be pushed to a maximum of 20 minutes in some circumstances. Alice was laying on the ground and so that would have slowed the bleed.

A reduction of her blood pressure would have also slowed the bleed.

But extending the 20 minute parameter past 25 minutes (an additional 5 minutes) would be impossible from a clinical perspective.

So let's say 25 minutes as the longest possible time for an arterial bleed out.

If Alice was STILL bleeding out at 1.10am BUT... the bleeding has STOPPED by 1.12am, then we need to subtract 25 minutes in order to give us the earliest time possible for the wound to have been inflicted.

That would make the physical attack to her neck having occurred NOT BEFORE 12.45am.

It began to rain at approximately the same time.

But of course,even though the neck injury couldn't have occurred BEFORE 12.45am, the attack on her could have commenced prior to that.

The local pub closed at 12.30am


So here's my hypothesis...


Alice has arranged to meet the man who she was heard talking to earlier that evening.
She's in a rush because he has promised her something she can't refuse.

Andrews leaves the murder site at 12.23am

The killer and Alice arrive at the murder site at approximately 12.35 - 12.40am after the pub has closed.

Within minutes he strangles Alice, overpowers her and slams her to the floor causing bruising to her abdomen in the process. She begins to stir and so he is forced to hold her down and as it starts to rain at 12.45am, he inflicts 2 stab wounds to her neck at 12.45am.

She is laying down before it starts to rain at 12.45am but the neck wounds are inflicted after she is laying down.

he then begins his ritual of attacking the abdomen by inflicting an injury down to her naval, but then the rain falls heavier and he can't perform the ritual how he wants because the rain dilutes the blood flow. He also becomes aware of the time and realizes that the policeman is due back from his beat and so he flees at 12.48am just as Andrews arrives.


I think a combination of it starting to rain and it taking longer than anticipated because he is a bit rusty and hasn't killed in months all add to why he left it unfinished. Had he of stayed and continued cutting through the rain, then Andrews would have caught him.