Polly's Wounds: What were they like?

[Elamarna]

Loose tissues are tissues that allow blood to collect. I believe it can be expressed the way Llewellyn did. And I think it would be extremely improductive to make it a battle of semantics.

I do not believe it is semantics if I did I would not in this instance debate it.
Loose tissue is basically the supporting and cushioning tissues which protect the organs.

My reading of Llewellyn is that he is claiming the tissue has adsorbed the blood. That is what he says.

While it has some ability to absorb liquid, particularly if damaged; when he says to a large extent this is just too much.
If he meant ithe blood was pooling and clotting in the cavity he would have said that and not what he did.

Steve

[Fisherman]

No doubt in my mind he wanted to open her. And after reading Tom Westcott's new book it seems possible with just 2 cuts. The point is it's two verticals intersecting. And yes that's a change of view.

Steve

It is possible with one cut, actually.

[Fisherman]

That is not what Llewellyn said:

"Nearly all the blood had been drained out of the arteries and veins, and collected to a large extent in the loose tissues."


Collected IN the loose tissues.

If he had said what you suggest I would have no issue.

Steve

Loose tissues are tissues that allow blood to collect. I believe it can be expressed the way Llewellyn did. And I think it would be extremely improductive to make it a battle of semantics.

[Elamarna]

good morning steve.

i,m with you on the altering patterns of her wounds, steve. today i have it like this: \ | /. tomorrow it,ll probably be like this: # or @ or....

i,m overthinking what we,ve asserted regarding his intention to remove her flesh. [it,s possible ,this, is more of a MoMethMad idea] how much of the blade that went round her neck (practically decapitating her!) did he insert in her small frame to reach her stomach? an inch or two? 3??

the idea is, was he demonstrating some form of control?.. by not maniacally jamming the knife to its hilt into her belly

i,m with you, steve, that the random cuts in her omentum indicate he was jabbing or sawing the knife back and forth with each jagging cut.

buenos dias, fisherman.

No doubt in my mind he wanted to open her. And after reading Tom Westcott's new book it seems possible with just 2 cuts. The point is it's two verticals intersecting. And yes that's a change of view.

Steve

[Elamarna]

Thatīs not how I read it at all - the blood has simply run into the space decribed in the text I offered. It has not been absorbed by the guts.

That is not what Llewellyn said:

"Nearly all the blood had been drained out of the arteries and veins, and collected to a large extent in the loose tissues."


Collected IN the loose tissues.

If he had said what you suggest I would have no issue.

Steve

[Robert St Devil]

good morning steve.

i,m with you on the altering patterns of her wounds, steve. today i have it like this: \ | /. tomorrow it,ll probably be like this: # or @ or....

i,m overthinking what we,ve asserted regarding his intention to remove her flesh. [it,s possible ,this, is more of a MoMethMad idea] how much of the blade that went round her neck (practically decapitating her!) did he insert in her small frame to reach her stomach? an inch or two? 3??

the idea is, was he demonstrating some form of control?.. by not maniacally jamming the knife to its hilt into her belly

i,m with you, steve, that the random cuts in her omentum indicate he was jabbing or sawing the knife back and forth with each jagging cut.

buenos dias, fisherman.

[Elamarna]

Elamarna: Christer
I am simply not of the opinion that the amount of blood hinted at. :
"Nearly all the blood had been drained out of the arteries and veins, and collected to a large extent in the loose tissues."
is viable.

But WHY is it not viable? That is what I am asking!

See my previous post Christer.

Actually you should have a read of Tom's new offering.

He agrees with you on some issues such as the flap however his reasoning for its formation is more compelling to me. It does not involve seperate horizontal cuts at all.
And I am forced to change my view that he had indeed opened the abdomen.

Told you so.

Yes but the reasoning you gave I still see as wrong, that given by Tom works for me.
Interestingly he use information we all used but views it in yet another way.

Just proves what I always say, new evidence or in this case a different presentation of old can change minds.

However he also disagrees in other areas. It's an interesting read. And causing me to reassess some of my research.

Well, if it comes down to a choice between Tom and Cornwell, Iīd say that Mr Wescott is probably in a more pressing need for my money....

I would say it is pertinent to the Bucks Row case and your research in general.


Steve

[Fisherman]

No problem with what it can hold and the condition you describe has blood in the cavity.


However that is not what LLEWELLYN is reporting, he is saying much of the blood has been basically absorbed by the loose tissue.

That is where I see an issue. If he said she had bleed into the cavity which he found to contain blood. Probably by that stage with lots of clotting I would have no issue at all.

By saying the blood had largely entered the loose tissue I, and could be wrong, believe that he has noticed an absence of the amount of blood he would expect to be in the cavity and thus is offering the lose tissue as an answer to this.


Steve

Thatīs not how I read it at all - the blood has simply run into the space decribed in the text I offered. It has not been absorbed by the guts.

[Elamarna]

On the issue of whether the abdominal cavity can hold much blood or not:

Hemoperitoneum (sometimes also hematoperitoneum) is the presence of blood in the peritoneal cavity. The blood accumulates in the space between the inner lining of the abdominal wall and the internal abdominal organs. Hemoperitoneum is generally classified as a surgical emergency; in most cases, urgent laparotomy is needed to identify and control the source of the bleeding. In selected cases, careful observation may be permissible. The abdominal cavity is highly distensible and may easily hold greater than five liters of blood, or more than the entire circulating blood volume for an average-sized individual. Therefore, large-scale or rapid blood loss into the abdomen will reliably induce hemorrhagic shock and, if untreated, may rapidly lead to death.

No problem with what it can hold and the condition you describe has blood in the cavity.


However that is not what LLEWELLYN is reporting, he is saying much of the blood has been basically absorbed by the loose tissue.

That is where I see an issue. If he said she had bleed into the cavity which he found to contain blood. Probably by that stage with lots of clotting I would have no issue at all.

By saying the blood had largely entered the loose tissue I, and could be wrong, believe that he has noticed an absence of the amount of blood he would expect to be in the cavity and thus is offering the lose tissue as an answer to this.


Steve

[Fisherman]

On the issue of whether the abdominal cavity can hold much blood or not:

Hemoperitoneum (sometimes also hematoperitoneum) is the presence of blood in the peritoneal cavity. The blood accumulates in the space between the inner lining of the abdominal wall and the internal abdominal organs. Hemoperitoneum is generally classified as a surgical emergency; in most cases, urgent laparotomy is needed to identify and control the source of the bleeding. In selected cases, careful observation may be permissible. The abdominal cavity is highly distensible and may easily hold greater than five liters of blood, or more than the entire circulating blood volume for an average-sized individual. Therefore, large-scale or rapid blood loss into the abdomen will reliably induce hemorrhagic shock and, if untreated, may rapidly lead to death.

[Fisherman]

Elamarna: Christer
I am simply not of the opinion that the amount of blood hinted at. :
"Nearly all the blood had been drained out of the arteries and veins, and collected to a large extent in the loose tissues."
is viable.

But WHY is it not viable? That is what I am asking!

Actually you should have a read of Tom's new offering.

He agrees with you on some issues such as the flap however his reasoning for its formation is more compelling to me. It does not involve seperate horizontal cuts at all.
And I am forced to change my view that he had indeed opened the abdomen.

Told you so.

However he also disagrees in other areas. It's an interesting read. And causing me to reassess some of my research.

Well, if it comes down to a choice between Tom and Cornwell, Iīd say that Mr Wescott is probably in a more pressing need for my money....

[Elamarna]

Elamarna: I take your point but that really is not picking I was trying to give Robert a full view of the possibilities if you think that Llewellyn is correct you must also believe that the wounds were deeper than just the omentium; such is unlikely to cause death.

I really don't think it is inconsistent with your posted opinion given that I did qualify it by saying you used Llewellyn' statements.

Next time I will actually quote.

That would be nice - the problem I have is that I dislike having it stated about me that I would have voiced a total certainty about matters like these. It often ends up in acuusations from other posters, led on by somebody having expreesed views on my behalf that are not a 100 per cent true. I do think that Llewellyn was correct, and consequentially, I do think the wounds were deep and that vital parts were damaged. But it is a firm belief and not a certainty!

Which I believe is simply unrealistic.

Precisely why?

No there is a pool under her back and a sperate one near to her neck. The one near her neck is running off into the gutter..
Your view of the degree of blood on the clothing is certainly open to debate.

It is stated in a number of sources that the uooer parts of the garmens only were bloodsoaked. Thain said that when he lifted the body, he got blood on his hands, but he may well have lifted by the shoulders.

There were two places on the ground where there was blood - the pool under her neck, and then there was some blood that was placed where Nicholsī legs had been. The latter contingent is rarely spoken of and sparsely sourced.

It is that statement of Llewellyn which my own background finds very hard to accept..
We do certainly have counter arguments.
We have discussed this many times and do not agree.

Even when trying to give another poster a full picture of the possible depth of the wounds giving both views you still feel a need to push one view.

So be it.

There is no need to doubt Llewellyn that I know of - blood can easily seep into the abdomonal cavity if there is damage done there, and the cavity is sizeable enough to hold a lot of blood.

As for me "pushing" views, I would prefer another choice of words on your behalf. But one can only hope for so much, I guess!

Christer
I am simply not of the opinion that the amount of blood hinted at. :
"Nearly all the blood had been drained out of the arteries and veins, and collected to a large extent in the loose tissues."
is viable.

Actually you should have a read of Tom's new offering.

He agrees with you on some issues such as the flap however his reasoning for its formation is more compelling to me. It does not involve seperate horizontal cuts at all.
And I am forced to change my view that he had indeed opened the abdomen.

However he also disagrees in other areas. It's an interesting read. And causing me to reassess some of my research.

Steve

[Fisherman]

Elamarna: I take your point but that really is not picking I was trying to give Robert a full view of the possibilities if you think that Llewellyn is correct you must also believe that the wounds were deeper than just the omentium; such is unlikely to cause death.

I really don't think it is inconsistent with your posted opinion given that I did qualify it by saying you used Llewellyn' statements.

Next time I will actually quote.

That would be nice - the problem I have is that I dislike having it stated about me that I would have voiced a total certainty about matters like these. It often ends up in accusations from other posters, led on by somebody having expressed views on my behalf that are not a 100 per cent true. I do think that Llewellyn was correct, and consequentially, I do think the wounds were deep and that vital parts were damaged. But it is a firm belief and not a certainty!

Which I believe is simply unrealistic.

Precisely why?

No there is a pool under her back and a sperate one near to her neck. The one near her neck is running off into the gutter..
Your view of the degree of blood on the clothing is certainly open to debate.

It is stated in a number of sources that the upper parts of the garments only were bloodsoaked. Thain said that when he lifted the body, he got blood on his hands, but he may well have lifted by the shoulders.

There were two places on the ground where there was blood - the pool under her neck, and then there was some blood that was placed where Nicholsī legs had been. The latter contingent is rarely spoken of and sparsely sourced.

It is that statement of Llewellyn which my own background finds very hard to accept..
We do certainly have counter arguments.
We have discussed this many times and do not agree.

Even when trying to give another poster a full picture of the possible depth of the wounds giving both views you still feel a need to push one view.

So be it.

There is no need to doubt Llewellyn that I know of - blood can easily seep into the abdominal cavity if there is damage done there, and the cavity is sizeable enough to hold a lot of blood.

As for me "pushing" views, I would prefer another choice of words on your behalf. But one can only hope for so much, I guess!

[Elamarna]

Please be a bit more careful, Steve. I am not arguing "that the cuts must have been deeper and that major vessels must have been cut." I am arguing that I THINK Llewellyn knew his business, and that it therefore seems to me that the cuts were deep and that the damage done was enough to kill.

It may seem nitpicking to you, but I really do not like having my views altered by other posters, and presented as if they came from me.

I take your point but that really is not picking I was trying to give Robert a full view of the possibilities if you think that Llewellyn is correct you must also believe that the wounds were deeper than just the omentium; such is unlikely to cause death.

I really don't think it is inconsistent with your posted opinion given that I did qualify it by saying you used Llewellyn' statements.

Next time I will actually quote.

UAs for your misgivings about the blood having flowed into the abdominal cavity, those misgivings are in direct conflict with what the doctor said himself: "Nearly all the blood had been drained out of the arteries and veins, and collected to a large extent in the loose tissues."

Which I believe is simply unrealistic.

The blood that did not end up in the abdominal cavity was the blood found in the pool under the neck - which woud have ended up as Thainsī clot. There was also a quantity of blood in the clothes, but only furthest up, so it would not have been very much.

No there is a pool under her back and a sperate one near to her neck. The one near her neck is running off into the gutter..
Your view of the degree of blood on the clothing is certainly open to debate.

We have the man who did the autopsy telling us that the blood went into the loose tissues of the abdominal cavity. I am willing to accept that this was so, especially since there is no sound counterbid.

It is that statement of Llewellyn which my own background finds very hard to accept..
We do certainly have counter arguments.
We have discussed this many times and do not agree.

Even when trying to give another poster a full picture of the possible depth of the wounds giving both views you still feel a need to push one view.

So be it.


Steve

[Fisherman]

Robert

That is a point of debate. However we know that at least one penetrated the abdomenial wall and cut the omentium in several places. The fact it did not clean cut the omentium in one single cut suggests that the killer was not cutting at a consistent depth.

If he cut deeper we cannot be sure. Christer argues that the cuts must have been deeper and that major vessels must have been cut. He supports this byLlewellyn 's statement that the killer attacked the vital areas and that the abdomen wounds were the cause of death.
However there is no detail on this at all and it seems possible that he reached this conclusion because he could see little blood from the neck wound.

Llewellyn further suggested that the tissues around the intestines absorbed much of the blood from the abdomenial wounds.

I would however point out that such suggests he found little blood or clots in the cavity and this suggestion of Llewellyn is to me unconvincing.

In addition he did not appear to allow for the blood soaked into her clothing or more importantly the clot Thain descriptions under Nichols body.

End of day the cuts were in some cased deep. How deep is unclear.

Steve

Please be a bit more careful, Steve. I am not arguing "that the cuts must have been deeper and that major vessels must have been cut." I am arguing that I THINK Llewellyn knew his business, and that it therefore seems to me that the cuts were deep and that the damage done was enough to kill.

It may seem nitpicking to you, but I really do not like having my views altered by other posters, and presented as if they came from me.

As for your misgivings about the blood having flowed into the abdominal cavity, those misgivings are in direct conflict with what the doctor said himself: "Nearly all the blood had been drained out of the arteries and veins, and collected to a large extent in the loose tissues."
The blood that did not end up in the abdominal cavity was the blood found in the pool under the neck - which woud have ended up as Thainsī clot. There was also a quantity of blood in the clothes, but only furthest up, so it would not have been very much.

We have the man who did the autopsy telling us that the blood went into the loose tissues of the abdominal cavity. I am willing to accept that this was so, especially since there is no sound counterbid.