MJK's Body Identification?

[Michael W Richards]

No. You donīt understand. The door in the passageway leading into the house of 26 Dorset Street was visible from the court. Lewis is talking about a "house" and not a "room." So it is highly relevant.

Regards, Pierre

As far as I recall only one sketch actually shows the door inside the passage, there are others constructed from the POV inside the court where it isnt.

[Pierre]

As far as I recall only one sketch actually shows the door inside the passage, there are others constructed from the POV inside the court where it isnt.

"One sketch"? Goadīs Fire Ensurance plan has it.

Regards, Pierre

[Michael W Richards]

"One sketch"? Goadīs Fire Ensurance plan has it.

Regards, Pierre

That doesnt mean it was visible from the court as you said. What I pointed out was that we only have one visual reference that suggests it was visible, and others that do not. The door to Marys room was certainly visible.

[jerryd]

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread....800#post292800 (post #1)

A possible photo of the door at 13 Miller's Court. (Located by Rob Clack)

[MsWeatherwax]

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread....800#post292800 (post #1)

A possible photo of the door at 13 Miller's Court. (Located by Rob Clack)

I'm just getting broken links from this page...is there anywhere else to see these pictures?

[David Orsam]

I believe the mention of the onset and some of the mitigating factors indicates that she died in the early morning hours, but likely before 8am.

Unfortunately, the Snyder Sachs book that I referred to makes clear that a reliable estimated time of death can be derived from neither the onset of rigor mortis nor the digestion of food in the stomach, and I believe this is uncontroversial amongst pathologists today. There are too many variables.

[John G]

Unfortunately, the Snyder Sachs book that I referred to makes clear that a reliable estimated time of death can be derived from neither the onset of rigor mortis nor the digestion of food in the stomach, and I believe this is uncontroversial amongst pathologists today. There are too many variables.

Hello David,

Yes,of course, you're absolutely correct. As I've pointed out myself many times now, the Forensic Science Regulator's official guidance states that pathologists shouldn't even attempt to measure the post mortem interval because, as Dr Biggs pointed out, estimating time of death is "subjective and highly variable."(Marriott, 2015)

However, regrettably, some posters consistently elect to ignore posts which contradict their own pet conspiracy theories, or seem to consider themselves forensic experts because they might have watched a few episodes of CSI! Or alternatively, they think that the opinions of the Victorian GPs should be accorded the same respect as that of modern experts-maybe someone ought to tell them that medical/forensic science has moved on since 1888!

[Michael W Richards]

Hello David,

Yes,of course, you're absolutely correct. As I've pointed out myself many times now, the Forensic Science Regulator's official guidance states that pathologists shouldn't even attempt to measure the post mortem interval because, as Dr Biggs pointed out, estimating time of death is "subjective and highly variable."(Marriott, 2015)

However, regrettably, some posters consistently elect to ignore posts which contradict their own pet conspiracy theories, or seem to consider themselves forensic experts because they might have watched a few episodes of CSI! Or alternatively, they think that the opinions of the Victorian GPs should be accorded the same respect as that of modern experts-maybe someone ought to tell them that medical/forensic science has moved on since 1888!

Far be it from me to interrupt your patting each other on the back, but for one example, in Law and Order Magazine, Vol 55, No3, published in March of 2007, Vernon Geberth,MS.,MPS. states that when Estimating the Time of Death in Practical Homicide Investigations the state of rigor is one viable factor of many factors to consider. Some other factors are mentioned in the post you and your bud trash talked above.

The only thing I might glean from a CSI episode is how laypeople can pretend to be experts themselves. Based on that, you might want to consider acting, if they dont mind you looking down your nose at people all the time.

[John G]

Far be it from me to interrupt your patting each other on the back, but for one example, in Law and Order Magazine, Vol 55, No3, published in March of 2007, Vernon Geberth,MS.,MPS. states that when Estimating the Time of Death in Practical Homicide Investigations the state of rigor is one viable factor of many factors to consider. Some other factors are mentioned in the post you and your bud trash talked above.

The only thing I might glean from a CSI episode is how laypeople can pretend to be experts themselves.

Did you not read my last post? Dr Biggs isn't a lay person, he's a forensics expert! And I also cited the official guidance from the Forensic Science Regulator: did you not read this?

By the way,Vernon Gerberth isn't a forensics expert, he's a retired Lieutenant Commander of the New York City Police Department department! Moreover, MS isn't a forensics qualification, it stands for Master of Science Degree in Psychology. And neither is MPS, that stands for Masters Degree of Professional Studies!

Unbelievable!

By the way, this is what Gerberth says about modern forensic science's ability to estimate the post mortem interval: "Throughout the years, forensic scientists and pathologists have searched for a definitive method of determining time of death, yet at present there is no single reliable method...Based on an appreciation of a large number of variables, an experienced pathologist can arrive at a reasonable estimation of time of death; usually placing it within a range of hours." See:http://www.practicalhomicide.com/Research/LOmar2007.htm

For some reason, the phrase "hung by your own petard" comes to mind!

[packers stem]

Hi John
On a scale of 1 to 10
If 'hypothetically' the victim of millers court had a fish supper at midnight and was killed at 10am then Bond, during his examination could detect fish and potato
1 being highly unlikely and 10 certainly

Nothing to do with any pet theory I can assure you or conspiracies or cover ups which some refuse to accept ever occur as we all live in some sort of utopia of goodness and honesty

[David Orsam]

Far be it from me to interrupt your patting each other on the back, but for one example, in Law and Order Magazine, Vol 55, No3, published in March of 2007, Vernon Geberth,MS.,MPS. states that when Estimating the Time of Death in Practical Homicide Investigations the state of rigor is one viable factor of many factors to consider. Some other factors are mentioned in the post you and your bud trash talked above.

I haven't patted anyone on the back. I was posting my understanding that it is impossible to accurately estimate time of death based on the onset of rigor mortis.

I haven't read the article by Vernon Geberth that you mention but I see that the abstract of that article states as follows:

"Estimation of time of death is important evidence in a homicide case, because it can corroborate or disprove a suspect's alibi regarding where he/she was at the time of the victim's death. Over the years, forensic scientists have attempted to develop a definitive method for determining time of death, but no single reliable method has been developed. Moreover, it is impossible to fix the exact time of death because of the many variables that influence the rate of a corpse's decomposition. The best estimate of time of death by an experienced analyst will be within a range of hours. In estimating time of death, it is important that the first trained investigator who observes the body record its condition and the characteristics of the environment that can influence the rate of the body's decomposition. After explaining the biological processes that sustain human life, this article describes what happens in the body from the moment these life-giving processes cease at death. Physical symptoms of the stages of decomposition are described, including skin color and body heat, rigor mortis and livor mortis, insect activity in and around the body, stomach contents of the body, and putrefaction (decomposition). Other crime-scene information pertinent to time of death is also discussed."

[John G]

Hi John
On a scale of 1 to 10
If 'hypothetically' the victim of millers court had a fish supper at midnight and was killed at 10am then Bond, during his examination could detect fish and potato
1 being highly unlikely and 10 certainly

Nothing to do with any pet theory I can assure you or conspiracies or cover ups which some refuse to accept ever occur as we all live in some sort of utopia of goodness and honesty

Hi Packers,

Well, I notice you offer no evidential support for a conspiracy argument, but if you really want to know how such a scenario was likeky to turn out I strongly suggest you read the inqusrt testimony of the Mary Ann Austin Murder (she was also attacked and mutilated in Dorset Street)

And, as I keep noting, the state of digestion is not an effective way of determining the time of death.

"The state of digestion and transportation rate of food from the stomach into the duodenum depend on many ante mortem (e.g. anatomical, physiological, psychological, pathological, food types) factors which contribute to the great intra-and inter-variability of gastric emptying. Estimations, considering all circumstances, should only be made with great reservation. Digestion itself does not cease at death but progresses after death due to enzymatic activity; the state of digestion is therefore only of little value in estimating the time" (Payne-James et al. 2003).

Dr Bond did not say that he could detect fish and potatoes, but only guessed that was the case. However, for what it's worth, Horowitz and Pounder (1985), in their study of gastric emptying, estimated around 2-3 hours for 150g of potatoes and 2-3 hours for 200g of boiled fish.

Oh, in answer to question, the issue is quantifiable due to the factors that I have discussed above.

[packers stem]

Hi Packers,

Well, I notice you offer no evidential support for a conspiracy argument, but if you really want to know how such a scenario was likeky to turn out I strongly suggest you read the inqusrt testimony of the Mary Ann Austin Murder (she was also attacked and mutilated in Dorset Street)

And, as I keep noting, the state of digestion is not an effective way of determining the time of death.

"The state of digestion and transportation rate of food from the stomach into the duodenum depend on many ante mortem (e.g. anatomical, physiological, psychological, pathological, food types) factors which contribute to the great intra-and inter-variability of gastric emptying. Estimations, considering all circumstances, should only be made with great reservation. Digestion itself does not cease at death but progresses after death due to enzymatic activity; the state of digestion is therefore only of little value in estimating the time" (Payne-James et al. 2003).

Dr Bond did not say that he could detect fish and potatoes, but only guessed that was the case. However, for what it's worth, Horowitz and Pounder (1985), in their study of gastric emptying, estimated around 2-3 hours for 150g of potatoes and 2-3 hours for 200g of boiled fish.

Oh, in answer to question, the issue is quantifiable due to the factors that I have discussed above.

HI John
Thanks for the quote which pretty much confirms that the reasoning behind why digestion of food should be used with caution in determing TOD is that digestion does continue after death .So basically after all that were back where I first suggested at between 1 and 3 hours. It's a surprise that Bond found anything at all considering digestion does continue after death ,although the rate of which is likely reduced considerably .
Incidentally there is no mention of guesswork on Bond's part
"In the abdominal cavity was some partly digested food of fish and potatoes and similar food was found in the remains of the stomach attached to the intestines "

[John G]

Hi John



Well thats twice more than any other witness.
And that is good reason to dismiss as unreliable ?
Personally I prefer to go with the evidence and not attempt to portray someone as unreliable simply because it's inconvenient to a theory



Coroner] This would be about what time ? - Between eight and nine o'clock. I was absent about half-an-hour. It was about a quarter to nine.
[Coroner] What description can you give of this man ? - I could not give you any, as they were at some distance.

Above is the relevant testimony .You missed the important line where the time is qualified at "about quarter to nine"
There is no confusion on Maxwell's part at all .



I find it perfectly natural that the women in the street would be on first name terms .This was Dorset street .The West end Victorian etiquette you hint at would have been sadly lacking



McDonald was from a different class to the Dorset street residents so for etiquette see the previous response



The evidence is still greater than any evidence that it was Kelly .If you'd like to produce any shred of evidence that it was Kelly then we can discuss it .
It's not about fairy tales it's about what evidence is available to us


Already explained this more than once .Show me any witness accounts from the customers of the brittania for the previous evening and you may have a point but.....there aren't any



What I've said about TOD relates to the digestion of food and nothing else .Potatoes start to digest almost immediately .For Bond to have know about the fish and potatoes the victim died very soon after eating

Hi Packers,

I would contrast what happened in the Stride investigation, in respect of witnesses, with the Kelly investigation. Thus, Stride was wandering around a neighbourhood where she wouldn't have been well-known-or known at all-at a time when it would have been very dark, and when relatively few people were about. Nonetheless, she was identified, or allegedly identified, by numerous witnesses: Best and Gardner, Marshall, Schwartz, PC Smith, James Brown and Matthew Packer. This clearly suggests to me that not only were witnesses with potentially vital information willing to come forward, but so were individuals with dubious accounts-possibly attention seekers, or people hoping to claim a share of the reward, or to sell their story to the press.

However, if Lewis and Maxwell's evidence is to be accepted, then Kelly may well have been wandering around her local neighbourhood-where she was presumably very well-known-for over two hours, in broad daylight, at a time when the locality could have been teaming with people, and yet she was only seen by a maximum of two people during this period-or at least they were the only witnesses willing to come forward. This really makes little sense to me.

And, as noted earlier, Lewis claims he saw her talking to several people in the Britannia , her local pub, but not one of these witnesses came forward, either. And I would consider the Best and Gardner sighting of Stride in the Bricklayers Arms a very different situation-Stride may have been misidentified; she was seen with only one man, who may have been her killer; and it wasn't her local pub.

The point I was making about Maxwell is that she had plenty of time to consider her evidence prior to the inquest, and yet she starts of by saying that she saw Kelly, outside the Britannia, between "eight and nine o'clock' and then immediately corrects herself and says it was "about a quarter to nine." That suggests to me she was somewhat confused as to timings.

Finally, a woman was discovered in MJK's room and MJK was never seen or heard from again. It's therefore reasonable to assume that the victim was Kelly, and any other scenario would surely have to involve a major conspiracy for which there's no evidence. And, anyway, a Forest Street conspiracy didn't exactly turn out too well in the Austin case!

[Michael W Richards]

Did you not read my last post? Dr Biggs isn't a lay person, he's a forensics expert! And I also cited the official guidance from the Forensic Science Regulator: did you not read this?

By the way,Vernon Gerberth isn't a forensics expert, he's a retired Lieutenant Commander of the New York City Police Department department! Moreover, MS isn't a forensics qualification, it stands for Master of Science Degree in Psychology. And neither is MPS, that stands for Masters Degree of Professional Studies!

Unbelievable!

By the way, this is what Gerberth says about modern forensic science's ability to estimate the post mortem interval: "Throughout the years, forensic scientists and pathologists have searched for a definitive method of determining time of death, yet at present there is no single reliable method...Based on an appreciation of a large number of variables, an experienced pathologist can arrive at a reasonable estimation of time of death; usually placing it within a range of hours." See:http://www.practicalhomicide.com/Research/LOmar2007.htm

For some reason, the phrase "hung by your own petard" comes to mind!

Well done on the Gerberth background, Im impressed. I accept its not exact science John, and I never claimed it was the determining factor in making that assessment. What I did say was that it is a factor that is considered when attempting to determine when death occurred. We dont know exactly what measurements were used by Bond in addition to that observation, I dont recall reading anywhere about body temperatures being taken for one thing, but even with a time range we can eliminate some more contentious claims about what was seen and done by witnesses.