Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"Murder...!" cry

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Problem is we have no idea when she ate it.

    Or

    Where she got it.

    I'd expect the police looked into it, but no idea if they found out.
    G U T

    There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by GUT View Post
      Problem is we have no idea when she ate it.
      The point is that, if the cry of "Murder!" indeed pointes her approximate time of death, we can work backwards, using the presence of recognisable fish in the stomach to work out roughly when she ate it. I'd suggest that this would have been within 2 hours of the cry of "Murder!" itself.
      Kind regards, Sam Flynn

      "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
        Maybe blotchy treated Mary to some fish and chips on the way home.
        Naaah. Too boring.
        Naaah. Too early. There would have been precious little evidence of fish in her stomach if it had been ingested 4 or so hours before her death.

        BTW, If anyone's brave enough to make themselves sick after two hours of eating a modest portion of fish, and examining what gets chucked up, there's an experiment going begging here.
        Kind regards, Sam Flynn

        "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

        Comment


        • Originally posted by GUT View Post
          Problem is we have no idea when she ate it.

          Or

          Where she got it.

          I'd expect the police looked into it, but no idea if they found out.
          Any doctor knows it is impossible to calculate a time of death by digestion without being given a 'time of consumption' for the food.
          The fact Bond was able to provide an estimate indicates he had been given something to work with, be it right or wrong is another matter.
          That suggests to me the police did find out, or at least came up with a time to give the doctor.
          Regards, Jon S.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
            The point is that, if the cry of "Murder!" indeed pointes her approximate time of death...
            ... "pointes" isn't a ballet reference, but an amalgam of "points to" and "indicates" which ended up as a typo
            Kind regards, Sam Flynn

            "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
              The point is that, if the cry of "Murder!" indeed pointes her approximate time of death, we can work backwards, using the presence of recognisable fish in the stomach to work out roughly when she ate it. I'd suggest that this would have been within 2 hours of the cry of "Murder!" itself.
              Ok, and Lewis says she heard the cry "a little before 4:00", Prater is less sure, "sometime between 3:30-4:00, or a little after".

              So, if the cry indicates the beginning of the assault, then 2 hours earlier she ate?
              So she ate at 2:00 am., after Blotchy but before she met Hutchinson. Maybe that is why she was in Commercial street at 2:00, she had just come from the chippy?
              Regards, Jon S.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                Naaah. Too early. There would have been precious little evidence of fish in her stomach if it had been ingested 4 or so hours before her death.
                Is that because it would have been digested to the point it would be hard to recognise as fish (except perhaps by smell), or because most of it would have already left the stomach?

                BTW, If anyone's brave enough to make themselves sick after two hours of eating a modest portion of fish, and examining what gets chucked up, there's an experiment going begging here.
                I would have given that a try, but I've just realised I don't eat fish!

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                  So, if the cry indicates the beginning of the assault, then 2 hours earlier she ate?
                  That's what I'd suggest, Jon.
                  Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                  "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
                    Is that because it would have been digested to the point it would be hard to recognise as fish, or because most of it would have already left the stomach?
                    A bit of both, Josh, although primarily the former: digestion to the point of being difficult to recognise.
                    Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                    "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                    Comment


                    • Thanks Sam. To my mind, the state of digestion would be less reliable as an indicator of TOD than the progress of a meal through the alimentary canal. I'm not sure how long after death the stomach enzymes keep working (probably not very long, as Kelly's last meal was apparently still recognisable up to 12 hours after consumption) but transit would most probably stop completely at death.

                      Dr Bond's report says;
                      "In the abdominal cavity there was some partly digested food of fish and potatoes, and similar food was found in the remains of the stomach attached to the intestines."

                      So does that suggest that no food was found in the small intestine?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
                        Dr Bond's report says;
                        "In the abdominal cavity there was some partly digested food of fish and potatoes, and similar food was found in the remains of the stomach attached to the intestines."
                        I've read that line over and over.
                        We can appreciate that there shouldn't be any food in the abdominal cavity, so this food must have spilled out of an injured organ.
                        What does "remains of the stomach" mean?

                        Does Dr. Bond mean 'what remains of the stomach' - meaning that it has been injured or cut open?
                        Or, does he mean the 'remains of food' in the stomach - meaning that this recognisable food was found among what remained of other unrecognisable food, in the stomach?

                        So does that suggest that no food was found in the small intestine?
                        That's a good question.
                        Regards, Jon S.

                        Comment


                        • The abdominal cavity usually contains the stomach,duodenum which is the first part of the small intestine,small intestine,large intestine,liver,etc.
                          Jack had actually emptied that cavity.
                          The stomach only ever partially digests food which is then called chyme.
                          When that enters the duodenum,it is mixed with digestive enzymes.
                          Generally suggests one meal has been eaten.
                          Very important in roughly determining time of death.
                          My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
                            Dr Bond's report says;
                            "In the abdominal cavity there was some partly digested food of fish and potatoes, and similar food was found in the remains of the stomach attached to the intestines."
                            Indeed, which suggests that the fish was eaten even closer to the time of her death than might at first be thought. In other words, not enough time had elapsed for the fish to have been thoroughly broken down before her stomach had been cut open. Bits of fish had spilled out of her stomach into the abdominal cavity and were still recognisable as such. To my mind, this makes a "time of consumption" within two hours of 3:30-4AM even more likely - in other words, Kelly almost certainly ate, if not went out to buy, her meal of fish and potatoes after the sing-song with Mr Blotchy.
                            Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                            "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                              I've read that line over and over....What does "remains of the stomach" mean?
                              Does Dr. Bond mean 'what remains of the stomach' - meaning that it has been injured or cut open?
                              That's certainly how I read it, Jon. Unless I'be overlooked it, Bond doesn't directly mention the stomach's location in the room. But the intestines were reportedly on the right side of the bed, so the "remains of the stomach attached to the intestines" would be there too. And presumably a portion of indeterminate size was left in the abdomen.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                                To my mind, this makes a "time of consumption" within two hours of 3:30-4AM even more likely - in other words, Kelly almost certainly ate, if not went out to buy, her meal of fish and potatoes after the sing-song with Mr Blotchy.
                                Or - possibly - Blotchy provided supper (which Kelly sang for) and the early Telegraph reports of "Murder" being heard at around quarter to two were correct...?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X