"Murder...!" cry

[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.

[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.

[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

[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.

[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]

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

[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.

[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.

[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?

[Sam Flynn]

This is obviously a very complex area. However, my understanding is that there has been a lack of relevant research in this area, making it difficult to arrive at any form conclusions.

Indeed so but, if anyone has the "stomach" for it, they could easily conduct their own experiments

Did the research that you discovered conclude that their was wide variability between individuals, as appears to be the case with gastric emptying?

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.

[Darryl Kenyon]

Following from my last post, I know he doesn't mention it but could Joe Barnett have brought the fish to Mary during the evening before she died when he visited. He was a fish porter and would probably know where to get it cheap. Mary then could have left it simmering before she went out and ate it when she came back or sobered up.

[Darryl Kenyon]

Just wondering if MJK cooked the potatoes and fish in the kettle during the night. I know kettle of fish these days means a muddle but cooking fish and veg in a kettle [ admittedly a different sort of kettle, IE a large pan ] was an old recipe. There was the remains of a large fire in the grate and if the spout was no good she could have used it as a cooking vessel., Didn't they tend to be bigger, kettles that is, in Victorian times ?

[John G]

Thanks again, John. Again, that focuses primarily on gastric emptying, not the breakdown of food whilst still in the stomach. Many years ago I found some research which analysed the breakdown of specific foodstuffs, in which fish was shown to be dealt with comparatively rapidly. I'm pretty sure I posted it on Casebook, but I can't find the original reference.

Hi Gareth,

This is obviously a very complex area. However, my understanding is that there has been a lack of relevant research in this area, making it difficult to arrive at any form conclusions.

Did the research that you discovered conclude that their was wide variability between individuals, as appears to be the case with gastric emptying? As Payne-James remarks, " Many different anatomical and functional disorders caused delayed or rapid gastric emptying."

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Gareth,

Maybe this will be more useful: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...estion&f=false

Thanks again, John. Again, that focuses primarily on gastric emptying, not the breakdown of food whilst still in the stomach. Many years ago I found some research which analysed the breakdown of specific foodstuffs, in which fish was shown to be dealt with comparatively rapidly. I'm pretty sure I posted it on Casebook, but I can't find the original reference.

[John G]

Thanks John
Genuinely useful stuff, but that deals primarily with the movement of food through the alimentary canal, not the rate at which certain foodstuffs are broken down whilst still sitting in the stomach.

Hi Gareth,

Maybe this will be more useful: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...estion&f=false