"Murder...!" cry

[John G]

Indeed so but, if anyone has the "stomach" for it, they could easily conduct their own experiments
I'm pretty sure it didn't look at variation between individuals, John. I've no doubt there would be variation, but perhaps not to such a great extent as for stomach emptying.

When considering the breakdown of food, we're ostensibly looking at a chemical reaction involving the same ingredients: protein, pepsin and hydrochloric acid. As with any chemical reaction, the greater the surface area of the substrate, the more effective the chemical reaction, which is why chewing food helps with digestion. With fish, as opposed to (say) steak, the food is already in a spindly, flaky form as soon as it enters the mouth, which increases its surface area right off the bat, making it much easier for the gastric juices to break it down.

Thanks Gareth, and sorry for the bad grammar which I've noticed in my last couple of posts-the perils of posting too quickly! However, taking into account the position of the Forensic Science Regulator, how accurate do you think this method is for determining TOD?

[Wickerman]

Digestion is not an accurate means of determining time of death: http://www.vivo.colostate.edu/hbooks...s/transit.html

That said, there is no accurate means of determining time of death, which is why the Forensic Science Regulator advises that it shouldn't even be attempted.

Of course, this means that even Caroline Maxwell cannot be excluded as a witness.

Hi John.

Can you imagine a pathologist showing up in court to say, "we have no idea when the victim died as there is no reliable means to estimate this, so we didn't bother trying."

That would raise some eyebrows, don't you think?

Even in the late 19th century, surgeons of the time knew that determining a reliable time of death was precarious. Yet, where possible, they always attempted to satisfy that legal requirement. (Macdonald failed to do this).

Rigor Mortis, Algor mortis & Livor Mortis were accepted as being the principal three methods, followed by putrification & digestion.
It is accepted that no single method will provide a satisfactory result, the best that can be hoped for is that a majority, at worst, or all five methods, at best will indicate one particular time.

[David Orsam]

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.

Interestingly, there was a very similar situation in the case of the murder of Emily Dimmock in 1907 for which there is a surviving Metropolitan Police File (or at least a significant part of it). The doctor in that case also offered an estimated time of death based on stomach contents despite there not being any evidence as to when Dimmock ate her last meal.

My belief is that the doctor also estimated when Dimmock ate her last meal, possibly based on her normal eating habits (although there is no record of such habits in the file).

There was also some confusion in that case as to whether Dimmock had eaten fish or lamb for her last meal.

I deal with this in my book 'The Camden Town Murder Mystery' which is now available on Kindle if anyone is interested in reading it.

[John G]

Hi John.

Can you imagine a pathologist showing up in court to say, "we have no idea when the victim died as there is no reliable means to estimate this, so we didn't bother trying."

That would raise some eyebrows, don't you think?

Even in the late 19th century, surgeons of the time knew that determining a reliable time of death was precarious. Yet, where possible, they always attempted to satisfy that legal requirement. (Macdonald failed to do this).

Rigor Mortis, Algor mortis & Livor Mortis were accepted as being the principal three methods, followed by putrification & digestion.
It is accepted that no single method will provide a satisfactory result, the best that can be hoped for is that a majority, at worst, or all five methods, at best will indicate one particular time.

Hi Jon,

Yes, even with modern science it seems that estimating time of death is a precarious endeavour. Here's a thorough analysis of the various methods, which also highlights some of the difficulties that even modern pathologists are faced with: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...mortis&f=false

[Sam Flynn]

However, taking into account the position of the Forensic Science Regulator, how accurate do you think this method is for determining TOD?

I'm actually taking the cry of "Murder!" as determining the time of death. All I'm saying about the still-recognisable fish is that it indicates approximately how long before the cry of "Murder!" she ate her last meal.

How accurate that is, I can only expand on the chemical reaction analogy I gave earlier: Given what we know about the rate of destruction of substance X in the presence of Y we can infer, from the amount of X remaining, the approximate time that elapsed before the supply of Y ran out.

[John G]

I'm actually taking the cry of "Murder!" as determining the time of death. All I'm saying about the still-recognisable fish is that it indicates approximately how long before the cry of "Murder!" she ate her last meal.

How accurate that is, I can only expand on the chemical reaction analogy I gave earlier: Given what we know about the rate of destruction of substance X in the presence of Y we can infer, from the amount of X remaining, the approximate time that elapsed before the supply of Y ran out.

I know it's been discussed oft times before, but my problem with the "oh murder" theory is that it's inconsistent with what I believe to be JtR's mature MO, i.e. attacking his victims quickly from behind, giving them little chance to resist. Of course, Kelly wasn't Mercado a JtR victim, but I believe she most probably was.

Moreover, both the nightdress, and the position of the body, raise the possibility that she was killed whilst asleep, although I acknowledge Jon's excellent points on this subject :see post 385 http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?p=413533

Of course, accessing the room whilst she was asleep would have presented little difficulty to an intruder, considering the proximity of the catch to the broken window.

[Wickerman]

As for the frequency of repeated cries of "murder", the Star (12 Nov. 1888) provides two examples of cries of "murder" which occurred Sunday night, 11th Nov.

Great excitement was created last night about a quarter past nine in Wentworth-street, Commercial-street, close to Dorset-street, by loud cries of "Murder" and "Police" which proceeded from George-yard-buildings.

The article goes on to say that a woman, nearly blind had stepped outside to go to the outhouse and had been startled by the sudden appearance of a young man, who came to visit her daughter.

The second instance occurred about 45 minutes later.

Shortly after ten o'clock last night, as a woman named Humphreys was passing George-yard, Whitechapel, she met in the darkness......... a powerful-looking man wearing large spectacles..... The woman shouted "Murder" several times and soon alarmed the neighbors.

It turned out to be another innocent encounter

[GUT]

I know it's been discussed oft times before, but my problem with the "oh murder" theory is that it's inconsistent with what I believe to be JtR's mature MO, i.e. attacking his victims quickly from behind, giving them little chance to resist. Of course, Kelly wasn't Mercado a JtR victim, but I believe she most probably was.

Moreover, both the nightdress, and the position of the body, raise the possibility that she was killed whilst asleep, although I acknowledge Jon's excellent points on this subject :see post 385 http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?p=413533

Of course, accessing the room whilst she was asleep would have presented little difficulty to an intruder, considering the proximity of the catch to the broken window.

Totally agree.

[GUT]

As for the frequency of repeated cries of "murder", the Star (12 Nov. 1888) provides two examples of cries of "murder" which occurred Sunday night, 11th Nov.

Great excitement was created last night about a quarter past nine in Wentworth-street, Commercial-street, close to Dorset-street, by loud cries of "Murder" and "Police" which proceeded from George-yard-buildings.

The article goes on to say that a woman, nearly blind had stepped outside to go to the outhouse and had been startled by the sudden appearance of a young man, who came to visit her daughter.

The second instance occurred about 45 minutes later.

Shortly after ten o'clock last night, as a woman named Humphreys was passing George-yard, Whitechapel, she met in the darkness......... a powerful-looking man wearing large spectacles..... The woman shouted "Murder" several times and soon alarmed the neighbors.

It turned out to be another innocent encounter

And in the case of MJK the witness said she paid no attention because such cries were common.

[Wickerman]

I know it's been discussed oft times before, but my problem with the "oh murder" theory is that it's inconsistent with what I believe to be JtR's mature MO, i.e. attacking his victims quickly from behind, giving them little chance to resist. Of course, Kelly wasn't Mercado a JtR victim, but I believe she most probably was.

What stays at the back of my mind is that these women would come and go at all hours of the day and night, and visit each other for a variety of reasons.
We have a perfect example in Sarah Lewis, who visited a friends house at 2:30 in the morning.
We also have Catherine Pickett who knocked on Kelly's door at 7:30 that morning to borrow a shawl.

The cry of, "Oh murder" is better explained to my mind as coming from someone who stumbled on the crime. Possibly a nighttime visitor who knocked at the door, but receiving no acknowledgement, but noticing the light of a fire through the windows, she peeked through one of the holes in the glass, pushing back the curtain/coat she saw a sight that took her breath away....., "Oh, murder!"

If this is what happened, the fact she never came forward is not at all surprising to me.

[DJA]

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.

Well spotted.
Implies the stomach was cut at the gastric cardia,or lower,which makes sense.
Probably done similar many times back in my hunting days.Just part of getting rid of the guts.(No offense GUT )
Reckon Jack was pretty mad with Mary Kelly.
If Hutchinson's statement had any truth to it and the cries of "Oh - Murder" are related to the actual murder,there is the possibility that Jack came calling with some fush and chups (for our Kiwi members) around 2.45/3.00 am.
Well done Red!

[Wickerman]

Interestingly, there was a very similar situation in the case of the murder of Emily Dimmock in 1907 for which there is a surviving Metropolitan Police File (or at least a significant part of it). The doctor in that case also offered an estimated time of death based on stomach contents despite there not being any evidence as to when Dimmock ate her last meal.

My belief is that the doctor also estimated when Dimmock ate her last meal, possibly based on her normal eating habits (although there is no record of such habits in the file).

There was also some confusion in that case as to whether Dimmock had eaten fish or lamb for her last meal.

I deal with this in my book 'The Camden Town Murder Mystery' which is now available on Kindle if anyone is interested in reading it.

Ok, thankyou David.

From what you say above then, it would appear there is no indication that the police provided the doctor with a time Emily Dimmock last ate, which leads to the drawing of conclusions.
Should such an indication be evident?

I have not had much success with Kindle books, old habits die hard I'm afraid, you cannot beat a good old reliable book.
(Every Kindle I have ever bought, against my better judgement I might add, has been lost to the ether - yes, even the back-ups)

[Michael W Richards]

I know it's been discussed oft times before, but my problem with the "oh murder" theory is that it's inconsistent with what I believe to be JtR's mature MO, i.e. attacking his victims quickly from behind, giving them little chance to resist. Of course, Kelly wasn't Mercado a JtR victim, but I believe she most probably was.

Moreover, both the nightdress, and the position of the body, raise the possibility that she was killed whilst asleep, although I acknowledge Jon's excellent points on this subject :see post 385 http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?p=413533

Of course, accessing the room whilst she was asleep would have presented little difficulty to an intruder, considering the proximity of the catch to the broken window.

There is ample evidence that she was facing the wall when her throat was cut John, and since no sounds were heard after the cry out that was heard "as if from the court", not as if within the house, ...supported of course by the fact that Sarah heard it as if "at her door",..a scenario which has perhaps reluctant granted access and Mary sliding over to the right side of the bed, on her right side, after letting the late night visitor in is quite plausible. I suspect that not long after the cry out she began to doze again, and began to flail as she was woken by the feeling across her throat.

The problem with the latch and the broken panes is this....how much light was available to see the potential latch access, and how does he get in and close the door without waking someone who is a few mere feet away. All of this taking place on creaky floorboards, that Elizabeth heard whenever Mary moved things about in her room.

The presumption that Mary went out again after 11:45 is all well and good, we even have some witnesses who claim to have seen her out. None of which we can be sure knew Mary at all or even what she looked like. The question is why. Why would she go out? Pubs are closed, she has no money that we know of, and she has for some time been reluctant to go out and earn money, (the arrears), and Joe acknowledges she needed whatever coins he could spare almost daily. Add to that she has evidently already gotten drunk that night, and perhaps had a nosh. Then entertained someone in her room for over an hour. Whether Blotchy is still there when the lights go out is questionable, but the fact that the room does quiet down to silence, and darkness, is suggestive of a completed act for me.

[Sam Flynn]

The question is why. Why would she go out? Pubs are closed.

We know of at least one fish and chip vendor who wasn't closed. Besides, as you say, "she has no money that we know of" - so, another reason for her going out might have been that she wanted to try to earn some money, as some other Miller's Court residents were also doing in the small hours of that morning.

[Sam Flynn]

Of course, accessing the room whilst she was asleep would have presented little difficulty to an intruder, considering the proximity of the catch to the broken window.

Assuming they knew about the "window trick"; were brave enough to stick their arm past the jagged shards of a broken pane of glass in the dark; that they could open the door from inside the court without it banging against the furniture; that they had time to scoot around the corner to enter said door, without alerting Kelly and risking her screaming her head off (to more than the tune of a cry of "Oh, murder"). That's one savvy and confident killer.