Annie's last meal

[Aethelwulf]

It’s sadly par for the course lately Wulf. Fixed idea first, discard evidence against it, discredit witnesses that contradict it, make impossible demands for evidence that can’t exist.

If Jeff found that 25% of the samples were of people who had just eaten potatoes it wouldn’t be enough, if he then found that it was actually 50% potato eaters it wouldn’t be enough! All Jeff now has to do is find the scientist who conducted research on digestion using people that subsisted only on potatoes! Perhaps a collection of 19th century Irish peasant farmers? Then he’d want it narrowed down to all women. Then all women in their 40’s. Then all women in their 40’s with the initials AC..

exactly. what jeff found, and i'm actually surprised he managed to find something so relevant, is fine. what are the chances of finding a large, meaningful study of people eating mainly potatoes. ridiculous.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I can’t see that anyone has answered Joshua’s inconvenient question?

Was it ever stated that the food found in Annie's stomach was actually potatoes, or is that just an assumption?

Telegraph - “The stomach contained a little food.”

Times - “The stomach contained a little food,”

Have we all just assumed that it was potatoes in her stomach?

[JeffHamm]

I can’t see that anyone has answered Joshua’s inconvenient question?

Was it ever stated that the food found in Annie's stomach was actually potatoes, or is that just an assumption?

Telegraph - “The stomach contained a little food.”

Times - “The stomach contained a little food,”

Have we all just assumed that it was potatoes in her stomach?

Oh, that is a good question. I thought Dr. Phillips had mentioned that it was potatoes, but we may know that she had eaten potatoes because of the inquest witness testimony, not because of Dr. Phillips medical examination.

Which, according to some, means we cannot presume she had only eaten potatoes, but may also have had fish, and beef, and pork, and pheasant too and the witness lied to prevent anyone from knowing how high on the hog they lived in Whitechapel (witnesses are not to be relied upon after all).

Seriously, it may be then, that unrecognizable food was found in her stomach, and that tends to (slightly) favor longer PMI. Again, the data shows that food remains in the stomach for long periods of time, so we're just not going to be able to differentiate 50 minutes here.

- Jeff

[Herlock Sholmes]

Oh, that is a good question. I thought Dr. Phillips had mentioned that it was potatoes, but we may know that she had eaten potatoes because of the inquest witness testimony, not because of Dr. Phillips medical examination.

Which, according to some, means we cannot presume she had only eaten potatoes, but may also have had fish, and beef, and pork, and pheasant too and the witness lied to prevent anyone from knowing how high on the hog they lived in Whitechapel (witnesses are not to be relied upon after all).

Seriously, it may be then, that unrecognizable food was found in her stomach, and that tends to (slightly) favor longer PMI. Again, the data shows that food remains in the stomach for long periods of time, so we're just not going to be able to differentiate 50 minutes here.

- Jeff

There’s a strange silence on this point Jeff

[Herlock Sholmes]

A book I’m reading at the moment highlights how judging TOD by digestion is fraught with difficulties. In the opening chapter, a case in 1984 where a wife and 3 children were murdered in the USA. Four prosecution witnesses including the well known Dr. Michael Baden said, based on the digestion of their last meal, pizza, that they’d died 2 hours after eating. But 4 equally eminent experts for the defence disagreed. They testified that TOD can never be pinpointed by something as variable as digestion with so many factors potentially affecting the results, like excitement, the gulping down food in large bites or strenuous physical activity and numerous others.

Eight modern day experts couldn’t agree in 1984 so how can we, as laymen, come to a conclusion on a murder that occurred 96 years earlier when we can’t be certain, a) when Chapman last ate, or even 2) what her last meal was. Even Dr Phillips dint use digestion as a measurement.

One of the defence experts cited a case where an 11 year old murder victim was known to have been alive 4 hours after eating a pizza lunch and the contents of his stomach on autopsy was more than double the combined amount of the 3 children in the case above.

The ‘last meal’ is a complete dead duck.

[Herlock Sholmes]

One more quote for those with an exaggerated opinion of Pathologists estimating TOD (especially Doctors 134 years ago)

From Jay Dix, one of America’s foremost pathologists and author of Time Of Death, Decomposition and Identification (a standard work from 1999) “ I’m continually reviewing case in which pathologists pinpoint death to within a few hours…….Not that I’ve ever seen a case where it was appropriate.”

All these efforts that were seeing on here to narrow down a TOD to a level of such accuracy that a Victorian Doctor couldn’t have been out by an hour is complete and utter crap of the first order. I’m currently reading a book on the subject. It’s eye opending how even today TOD estimate is a lottery.

Forget Phillips because you’re wasting your time. Ditch this silly sentimental view of good the old competent, experienced Doctor. Inhabit the real world. Any attempt to bolster the accuracy of Phillips TOD is bias. Nothing else but bias.

[Parisi North Humber]

I think stomach contents of a deceased give us clues or identifying markers, minimums etc, but as to TOD the only CERTAINTY to my mind is that death occured after ingestion of the stomach contents.
I say this as my daughter suffers from C.V.S. or what was called abdominal migraines back in the day. As such, food ingested can stay in her stomach for three days before vomiting it up. I am of course not saying that was Annie's case but, retarded/atypical/dysfunctional or even rapid digestion is not that much of a rarity and I think that a malnourished TB sufferer on medication (of sorts) could exhibit atypical digestion one way or the other . I'm only throwing it out there as from experience digestion is not an exact science.

Helen x

[Herlock Sholmes]

I think stomach contents of a deceased give us clues or identifying markers, minimums etc, but as to TOD the only CERTAINTY to my mind is that death occured after ingestion of the stomach contents.
I say this as my daughter suffers from C.V.S. or what was called abdominal migraines back in the day. As such, food ingested can stay in her stomach for three days before vomiting it up. I am of course not saying that was Annie's case but, retarded/atypical/dysfunctional or even rapid digestion is not that much of a rarity and I think that a malnourished TB sufferer on medication (of sorts) could exhibit atypical digestion one way or the other . I'm only throwing it out there as from experience digestion is not an exact science.

Helen x

Absolutely Helen, it certainly isn’t exact as the experts tell us. What we also have to contend with in this case is the fact that it appears that an assumption has been made - that the food found in Annie’s stomach was potatoes (fitting her last known meal) but Dr Phillips didn’t specify what food it was. So it could have been anything for all that we know. We also can’t be sure that the potatoes that she was seen eating at 1.45 was actually her last meal. So we don’t know what her last meal was or when she ate it. Even if we knew for certain when her last meal was and what it consisted of it still wouldn’t give us any certainty. And we don’t know either of these things.

[Herlock Sholmes]

There’s a strange silence on this point Jeff

The tumbleweeds are blowing through the one-horse town.

[Fleetwood Mac]

A reminder for anyone still interested in the OP:

My belief is that around 3am the last people are coming in off the streets to go to bed (where they have a bed to go to). This is the case in the Mary witness statements, and whether or not you believe he was there, George Hutchinson has in his mind that after 2am it's quietish. I can't remember which of the witnesses said this in Mary's case, but one of the women who lived in Miller's Court said something like McCarthy's shop could be open until 3am. I think we're getting to the general, approximate time where there is no market for food because the vast majority of people are off the streets.

I'm looking at this and I'm thinking: Annie finished eating approx. 1.45am, she leaves her lodging house to find her doss money and tells them not to let her bed, in the event she gets a client who isn't her murderer, before 3am, does she use that money to buy food or go back to her lodging house? In my mind, given that she has eaten around an hour previously, she goes back to her lodging house. The conclusion being that eating again before 3am is unreasonable, and after 3am there doesn't appear to be a market for shops selling food being open.

Assuming the TOD is approx. 5.30am, then she will have eaten again somewhere around 4.15am (in the absence of science to suggest otherwise). From where exactly does she get this food and why, given provision of food has never been prerequisite for street prostitution?

I appreciate there are thousands of possibilities, but what I'm interested in is something reasonable. I'm just not seeing it.

[etenguy]

A reminder for anyone still interested in the OP:I appreciate there are thousands of possibilities, but what I'm interested in is something reasonable. I'm just not seeing it.[/I]

The truth is we simply do not have the information for t.o.d. to be calculated from digestion. We do not know what Annie ate that night nor at what time, beyond a potato at 1.45am. Jeff has brought research to the thread explaining how even if we did know exactly what Annie ate and at what time, it would not be possible to estimate time of death to the precision you suggest. I appreciate you are relying on information which states potatoes are usually digested within an hour. Even if that were always absolutely correct, we do not know the time Annie last ate potatoes. We do not even know if the food that was found included potatoes. Also, Annie may have eaten more complex (to digest) foods before or after her 1.45am potatoes meal. We simply do not have the starting data to begin to make an estimate based on digestion and even if you (unreasonably in my view) wish to discard the data that Jeff brought to the thread because it is not entirely potato based - who is to say her last meal was potatoes.

It was certainly worth exploring whether there were other indicators we could use to help us estimate t.o.d - and there may exist some useful evidence somewhere (beyond the witnesses who you, I think, are cautious to rely on). But with the paucity of information we have about Annie's food intake that night, the digestion approach is not it.

[Fleetwood Mac]

I appreciate you are relying on information which states potatoes are usually digested within an hour.

See George's post: experts in the field considered a meal of potatoes and based on their conclusion Annie would have eaten again in order for a 5.30am TOD to fit.

If you accept this, then refer to post 100.

[Herlock Sholmes]

A reminder for anyone still interested in the OP:

My belief is that around 3am the last people are coming in off the streets to go to bed (where they have a bed to go to). This is the case in the Mary witness statements, and whether or not you believe he was there, George Hutchinson has in his mind that after 2am it's quietish. I can't remember which of the witnesses said this in Mary's case, but one of the women who lived in Miller's Court said something like McCarthy's shop could be open until 3am. I think we're getting to the general, approximate time where there is no market for food because the vast majority of people are off the streets.

Yes, she couldn’t have nipped into Asda. We agree on that. We absolutely cannot say, hint at or even suggest that she couldn’t have acquired food. She might have had food on her person, she might have met a friend who shared some with her. These are absolutely possible and cannot be dismissed at your convenience.

I'm looking at this and I'm thinking: Annie finished eating approx. 1.45am, she leaves her lodging house to find her doss money and tells them not to let her bed, in the event she gets a client who isn't her murderer, before 3am, does she use that money to buy food or go back to her lodging house? In my mind, given that she has eaten around an hour previously, she goes back to her lodging house. The conclusion being that eating again before 3am is unreasonable, and after 3am there doesn't appear to be a market for shops selling food being open.

No it’s not unreasonable and you know that it’s not unreasonable. In the guise of being ‘reasonable’ you are simply trying to shape events to suit your own agenda which is to try and prove that she was killed earlier. It’s plain for all to see.

Assuming the TOD is approx. 5.30am, then she will have eaten again somewhere around 4.15am (in the absence of science to suggest otherwise). From where exactly does she get this food and why, given provision of food has never been prerequisite for street prostitution?

We don’t need to know where she got food from. We don’t know where she had her clothes from but we know that she wasn’t naked.

Why do you keep saying this silly ‘wasn’t a prerequisite for street prostitution!? People can give food out of friendship and not because it’s a duty.

I appreciate there are thousands of possibilities, but what I'm interested in is something reasonable.

You’re not interesting in anything reasonable. You’re ducking and diving as usual.

I'm just not seeing it.

Because you don’t want to.

We don’t know what food was found in Annie’s stomach. A fact that you are avoiding like the plague. So, to sum up…

We categorically don’t know when Annie last had something to eat.

We categorically don’t know what her last meal consisted of.

We categorically don’t know, and therefore cannot assume to know, what Annie did, where Annie went, who Annie saw, who Annie didn’t see, what Annie ate or what Annie didn’t eat.

Stop wriggling. This thread can achieve nothing. Your agenda has crumbled. Your game is up. It’s just a case of whether you will admit the obvious or not,

[Herlock Sholmes]

The truth is we simply do not have the information for t.o.d. to be calculated from digestion. We do not know what Annie ate that night nor at what time, beyond a potato at 1.45am. Jeff has brought research to the thread explaining how even if we did know exactly what Annie ate and at what time, it would not be possible to estimate time of death to the precision you suggest. I appreciate you are relying on information which states potatoes are usually digested within an hour. Even if that were always absolutely correct, we do not know the time Annie last ate potatoes. We do not even know if the food that was found included potatoes. Also, Annie may have eaten more complex (to digest) foods before or after her 1.45am potatoes meal. We simply do not have the starting data to begin to make an estimate based on digestion and even if you (unreasonably in my view) wish to discard the data that Jeff brought to the thread because it is not entirely potato based - who is to say her last meal was potatoes.

It was certainly worth exploring whether there were other indicators we could use to help us estimate t.o.d - and there may exist some useful evidence somewhere (beyond the witnesses who you, I think, are cautious to rely on). But with the paucity of information we have about Annie's food intake that night, the digestion approach is not it.

Exactly

[Herlock Sholmes]

See George's post: experts in the field considered a meal of potatoes and based on their conclusion Annie would have eaten again in order for a 5.30am TOD to fit.

If you accept this, then refer to post 100.

Please tell us all where Dr. Phillips said that he found potatoes in Annie’s stomach.