Polly's Wounds: What were they like?

[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....

[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.

[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]

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]

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

[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]

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

[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

[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.

[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.

[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

[Elamarna]

It is possible with one cut, actually.

Yes if it changes direction by a considerable degree. Extreme example would be a u shaped cut.

The one in Eddowes is much like that but seems to be two distinct cuts.

Steve

[Fisherman]

Elamarna: 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.

I do think that is just about what he both meant and said.

[Elamarna]

Elamarna: 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.

I do think that is just about what he both meant and said.

Christer

All we can know is what he said. He clearly did not say the blood was pooled in the cavity.
Nowhere does he say anything which suggests the condition in you post.

We can have no idea at all about if he meant something different

Steve



Edit.

Let me rephrase that.

I see no reason to believe that Llewellyn meant that blood had collected on or was somehow trapped by the loose tissue that is not what he said.

[Fisherman]

Christer

All we can know is what he said. He clearly did not say the blood was pooled in the cavity.
Nowhere does he say anything which suggests the condition in you post.

We can have no idea at all about if he meant something different

Steve



Edit.

Let me rephrase that.

I see no reason to believe that Llewellyn meant that blood had collected on or was somehow trapped by the loose tissue that is not what he said.

And still, the blood had to go SOMEWHERE.

Maybe it emigrated to the Ivory Coast?

By the way, Helson said it for him, after having heard his view:

"Dr Llewellyn, however, is understood to have satisfied himself that the great quantity of blood which must have followed the gashes in the abdomen flowed into the abdominal cavity"

It neednīt be harder than that.