Let there be light!

[SirJohnFalstaff]

Hi,

this has been discussed before. Here is a suggestion for were she lived, and then there would have been a large room with a window towards Dorset Street. I have no good source for this idea.

Another suggestion is she went out and saw that the light was out after she heard the scream (if she lived on top of Kelly´s room).

Regards, Pierre

From the inquest: "I did not take much notice of the cries as I frequently heard such cries from the back of the lodging-house where the windows look into Millers Court. »

Thanks for the image, it makes sense. In the Daily Telegraph of Nov 13th, she is quoted saying "I live at 20 Room, in Miller's-court, above the shed. Deceased occupied a room below."

So it's pretty safe in my opinion to deduce that when she said the light was out, she meant the one in the court, not in Dorset Street.

[Mayerling]

Bond does say:

“the body was comparatively cold at 2 o'clock”.

He does not however give any record of a temperature.
Given the level of detail in his reports on 13 Millers Court, if he had taken a body temperature why is such a detail not recorded in his reports?

In this case one must also remember that Kelly had been gutted, with the majority of her body core removed, partially skinned, had muscle mass removed and lost much blood. All reducing body temperature.
To get a time of death in 1888 from body temperature in these circumstances would be extremely unlikely.

regards

Hi Amarna,

It struck as I read this portion of the discussion on RM you wrote that it opens up an odd possibility. If the Ripper had medical knowledge (especially if he was a doctor or surgeon) could the amount of damage done to Mary's body actually have been done intentionally to make timing RM more difficult or less accurate than the authorities would have liked? I have always assumed that Mary's body was destroyed either from hatred (or prostitutes or Mary specifically), or in the frenzy of the killer, or to hide her actual features (and thus hide forever her real identity). But possibly it was more in line with destroying any possible viable timeline to protect Jack's need for a plausible alibi.

Jeff

[GUT]

Hi Amarna,

It struck as I read this portion of the discussion on RM you wrote that it opens up an odd possibility. If the Ripper had medical knowledge (especially if he was a doctor or surgeon) could the amount of damage done to Mary's body actually have been done intentionally to make timing RM more difficult or less accurate than the authorities would have liked? I have always assumed that Mary's body was destroyed either from hatred (or prostitutes or Mary specifically), or in the frenzy of the killer, or to hide her actual features (and thus hide forever her real identity). But possibly it was more in line with destroying any possible viable timeline to protect Jack's need for a plausible alibi.

Jeff

IF The fire had been banked upby the killer, it would contribute as well.

[Mayerling]

[QUOTE=Pierre;375584]

OK, so then it is not science but art. Great! So could the killer have been Mary Jane Kelly? Who knows? Maybe someone killed her out of revenge, couldn´t she have been killing all the rest and then be murdered herself? Oh, and I have been wondering about that Hutchinson. Perhaps he and McCarthy were the killers, and they cooperated, could that have been the case? Could that have been why Hutchinson was standing outside of Miller´s Court, waiting for McCarthy? Could that have happened? And also, could Prater have been mistaken about the time altogether during that night, since she was so drunk? Perhaps the kitten woke her up at two o´clock in the night and she heard "Oh, Murder!"? Is that possible? Could it have happened? Or perhaps it was 10 o´clock in the morning and Prater was to drunk to understand that? What do you think? Could that be the case? No. It must have been Lechmere. He COULD HAVE BEEN at the murder sites!!! IF he was there, he COULD HAVE done it!

Gee this could become a fun popular parlor game: "Plausible or Implausible".
The purpose is to create questions based on the Whitechapel Murder personnel that we never thought of thinking about , and see how many of them may be plausible questions to even ask:

Example: What was Mary Kelly's favorite color? Kelly green or violet? [Obviously implausible]

Did Sir Charles Warren enjoy the theatre? What did he think of the plays of H. A. Jones or Sheridan Knowles? Was "Hawkshaw" the detective a favorite a favorite stage character at the Yard in 1888? [Implausible]

Wilkie Collins was in his last year of life in 1888 - somewhat bedridden. Did he take any interest in the case (especially as his masterpieces, such as "The Moonstone" had elements of the Constance Kent Case and the Northumberland Street Affair of 1861 in it's plot)? [Possibly of interest and plausible]

Spend hours of fun on this - and create possible later questions for future articles or threads.

Jeff

[John G]

Pierre,

please let me try and explain this.

In attempting to use Rigor Mortis to establish a possible time of death all that is relevant is the stage of Rigor Mortis the body is in when examining the body.

Rigor Mortis is detected and assessed by:

Attempting to lift the eyelids, depressing of the jaw, movement of the joints and noting the degree of resistance.

If Rigor Mortis is not present complete movement is possible.

If Rigor Mortis has set in there is resistance to movement, but is still possible.

If the maximum degree is reached all the body parts are rigid, the major joints are fixed, fingers and toes may be fixed in a flexed position

This information was all known and used in 1888.



I am therefore confused why the following comments are made:

“So they did have biochemical tests and advanced computer technology in 1888. How interesting. I never heard of it. “

“No, I had no idea he learned regression analysis during his education. Amazing!”


Such methods are not needed nor used.


You then ask

“But you do state that considering his statement for TOD, don´t you?”


Not in that particular post no, but yes I have in others


and then you ask

“You dropped the last bit considering TOD. Why?”

Because in that particular post I was discussing Rigor Mortis as an indicator of TOD, which I do not believe Bond is doing.


I am more than happy to discuss this


Bonds full statement with regards to TOD at 13 Millers Court:


"Rigor Mortis had set in, but increased during the progress of the examination.
From this it is difficult to say with any degree of certainty the exact time that had elapsed since death as the period varies from 6 to 12 hours before rigidity sets in.
The body was comparatively cold at 2 o'clock and the remains of a recently taken meal were found in the stomach and scattered about over the intestines.
It is, therefore, pretty certain that the woman must have been dead about 12 hours and the partly digested food would indicate: that death took place about 3 or 4 hours after the food was taken, so one or two o'clock in the morning would be the probable time of the murder."



In the first few lines Bonds is very clear in saying that he cannot give a reliable TOD based on Rigor Mortis.

He then goes on to discuss the temperature of the body and the digestion of food.

Since the degree of digestion can only tell him how long before death the food was eaten, this cannot help him establish a TOD; unless he knows the time of the last meal. There is no source to suggest he did.

Given that he had already said it is difficult to give a time of death based on Rigor Mortis, it would appear that he is using Body Temperature to arrive at a time of death.

However this is a procedure which depends on the ambient temperatures being recorded and internal body temperatures taken.

Bond does say:

“the body was comparatively cold at 2 o'clock”.

He does not however give any record of a temperature.
Given the level of detail in his reports on 13 Millers Court, if he had taken a body temperature why is such a detail not recorded in his reports?

In this case one must also remember that Kelly had been gutted, with the majority of her body core removed, partially skinned, had muscle mass removed and lost much blood. All reducing body temperature.
To get a time of death in 1888 from body temperature in these circumstances would be extremely unlikely.



Before discussing establishing a TOD based on Rigor Mortis, I would like to look at Bonds statement again

It is interesting that he says:

"6-12 hours before rigidity sets in".


I interperate this has the period after death until the maximum degree of rigidity, the “Rigid” stage as it is sometimes referred to, occurs.

This would put Bond's estimation of the timings of Rigor Mortis roughly in line with the available sources



Niderkorn, 1872 & 1882
Brouardel – Death and Sudden Death pages 63-74 - original publication 1894, English version 1902

This also agrees with a more modern source by H J Mallach , published in 1971, but using data covering the period 1811-1969




I would now like to discuss estimating TOD by Rigor Mortis


If at the beginning of an examination there is no indication of any stiffening, it means either Rigor Mortis has not yet set in or it has passed.

If Rigor Mortis has set in, the estimation of time of death will be at least the time for the onset period, but it is not possible to say how far it has advanced.

If the degree of Rigor Mortis continues to develop during the examination and does not reach the maximum degree of rigidity, then time of death will be less than the 12 hours which is and was the accepted time for “Rigid” stage to occur.

If during the Examination, the degree of Rigor Mortis reaches the “Rigid” state, assesed as at the start of post, one can then set a TOD of approx 12 hours before that point.


Let us now look at the case in hand.

Looking the available literature the average period until onset seems to be from 3-6 hours after death, let us use 6, it actually does not matter which figures you use for the onset period in attempting to determine TOD.

Bond starts the examination at approximately 2pm. The body is showing signs of Rigor Mortis:

“Rigor Mortis had set in,”

This indicates to him that death occurred at least 6 hours before ( using 6 hours, but we know this can be less).
However it has not reached the “Rigid” stage, so death is less than 12 hours previous to starting the examination.

Bond next says in relation to Rigor Mortis

“but increased during the progress of the examination. “


This indicates that the “Rigid” stage had still not been reach, thus death was less than 12 hours before this information was recorded.

It is unfortunate that he does not actually specify if the "Rigid" stage was reached by the end of the examination of not.

The examination started at 2pm and finished approximately around 4pm

This indicates that Time of Death has indicated by Rigor Mortis had not occurred at the time he suggested:

"one or two o'clock in the morning would be the probable time of the murder"

But at some undetermined time after.


regards

Hi Steve,

Excellent post and extremely informative. What would you say would be the factors that could have hastened the onset of rigor mortis in Kelly's case?

Thus, considering internal factors from a general perspective. Electrocution, of course, would result in rapid onset (cadaveric spasm). I also understand that heavy physical exercise prior to death will hasten onset, such as might be implied by a struggle with an assailant, or a victim attempting to flea a pursuer; this is because cells can still still produce ATP, in the absence of oxygen, via anaerobic respiration, i.e. by breaking down glycogen stores, but exercise will, of course, deplete glycogen levels.

There also seems to be a few exceptional circumstances. For instance, Di Maio et al. (2001) give an example of a woman who died following an overdose of aspirin, and who suffered a cardiopulmonary arrest: she went into full rigor mortis only minutes after being pronounced dead, see:

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=k_zKBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA26&lpg=PA26&dq=Heavy+exercise+rigor+mortis&source=bl&ots=n_t8-n47SX&sig=tJf3jpP9D8soJEf1l-QinML57VA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwih8eD-7fHLAhVDDxoKHWR7ArMQ6AEILDAG#v=onepage&q=Heavy%20exercise%20rigor%20mortis&f=false

And what of environmental factors, such as the contrast between the fire in Kelly's room, which may hace been intense, and the cold night? Cold or freezing temperatures will,of course, delay onset, whereas heat will accelerate the process.

[IchabodCrane]

[QUOTE=Pierre;375572]

You say you "do not change anything", but that's not true is it? Look at your timeline.

"00.00-01.00/01.30 Cox seing Kelly go into her room, Cox hearing Kelly singing.
01.30 Prater going upstairs, seeing no light in Kelly´s room
02.00 TOD (time of death) according to Dr Bond
03.00 Cox seeing that the light was out in Kelly´s room
03.30-04.00 Sarah Lewis and Prater hearing the scream ”Oh, Murder!” (Prater stating she heard it two or three times on 9 November, 1 time on 12 November)
05.00-05.45 Prater going to The Ten Bells, drinking there
08.00 Last possible TOD according to the time frame given by Dr Bond
08.00-08.45 Mrs Maxwell claiming to have seen Kelly on the street"



But according to the other sources it could not have been 1.00.



No, David. You can not change sources. Sources are what they are. Historians interpret sources.

It is really ridiculous to say that anyone would "change" a source. That would be forgery.

Still, Pierre, to be accurate, and to have avoided this tedious thread of people talking at cross-purposes, you probably should have written:

01.00 - 02.00 TOD (time of death) according to Dr Bond

It would thus still be clear that dead people cannot sing. But this was the timeframe given be Dr Bond.

[John G]

Pierre,

please let me try and explain this.

In attempting to use Rigor Mortis to establish a possible time of death all that is relevant is the stage of Rigor Mortis the body is in when examining the body.

Rigor Mortis is detected and assessed by:

Attempting to lift the eyelids, depressing of the jaw, movement of the joints and noting the degree of resistance.

If Rigor Mortis is not present complete movement is possible.

If Rigor Mortis has set in there is resistance to movement, but is still possible.

If the maximum degree is reached all the body parts are rigid, the major joints are fixed, fingers and toes may be fixed in a flexed position

This information was all known and used in 1888.



I am therefore confused why the following comments are made:

“So they did have biochemical tests and advanced computer technology in 1888. How interesting. I never heard of it. “

“No, I had no idea he learned regression analysis during his education. Amazing!”


Such methods are not needed nor used.


You then ask

“But you do state that considering his statement for TOD, don´t you?”


Not in that particular post no, but yes I have in others


and then you ask

“You dropped the last bit considering TOD. Why?”

Because in that particular post I was discussing Rigor Mortis as an indicator of TOD, which I do not believe Bond is doing.


I am more than happy to discuss this


Bonds full statement with regards to TOD at 13 Millers Court:


"Rigor Mortis had set in, but increased during the progress of the examination.
From this it is difficult to say with any degree of certainty the exact time that had elapsed since death as the period varies from 6 to 12 hours before rigidity sets in.
The body was comparatively cold at 2 o'clock and the remains of a recently taken meal were found in the stomach and scattered about over the intestines.
It is, therefore, pretty certain that the woman must have been dead about 12 hours and the partly digested food would indicate: that death took place about 3 or 4 hours after the food was taken, so one or two o'clock in the morning would be the probable time of the murder."



In the first few lines Bonds is very clear in saying that he cannot give a reliable TOD based on Rigor Mortis.

He then goes on to discuss the temperature of the body and the digestion of food.

Since the degree of digestion can only tell him how long before death the food was eaten, this cannot help him establish a TOD; unless he knows the time of the last meal. There is no source to suggest he did.

Given that he had already said it is difficult to give a time of death based on Rigor Mortis, it would appear that he is using Body Temperature to arrive at a time of death.

However this is a procedure which depends on the ambient temperatures being recorded and internal body temperatures taken.

Bond does say:

“the body was comparatively cold at 2 o'clock”.

He does not however give any record of a temperature.
Given the level of detail in his reports on 13 Millers Court, if he had taken a body temperature why is such a detail not recorded in his reports?

In this case one must also remember that Kelly had been gutted, with the majority of her body core removed, partially skinned, had muscle mass removed and lost much blood. All reducing body temperature.
To get a time of death in 1888 from body temperature in these circumstances would be extremely unlikely.



Before discussing establishing a TOD based on Rigor Mortis, I would like to look at Bonds statement again

It is interesting that he says:

"6-12 hours before rigidity sets in".


I interperate this has the period after death until the maximum degree of rigidity, the “Rigid” stage as it is sometimes referred to, occurs.

This would put Bond's estimation of the timings of Rigor Mortis roughly in line with the available sources



Niderkorn, 1872 & 1882
Brouardel – Death and Sudden Death pages 63-74 - original publication 1894, English version 1902

This also agrees with a more modern source by H J Mallach , published in 1971, but using data covering the period 1811-1969




I would now like to discuss estimating TOD by Rigor Mortis


If at the beginning of an examination there is no indication of any stiffening, it means either Rigor Mortis has not yet set in or it has passed.

If Rigor Mortis has set in, the estimation of time of death will be at least the time for the onset period, but it is not possible to say how far it has advanced.

If the degree of Rigor Mortis continues to develop during the examination and does not reach the maximum degree of rigidity, then time of death will be less than the 12 hours which is and was the accepted time for “Rigid” stage to occur.

If during the Examination, the degree of Rigor Mortis reaches the “Rigid” state, assesed as at the start of post, one can then set a TOD of approx 12 hours before that point.


Let us now look at the case in hand.

Looking the available literature the average period until onset seems to be from 3-6 hours after death, let us use 6, it actually does not matter which figures you use for the onset period in attempting to determine TOD.

Bond starts the examination at approximately 2pm. The body is showing signs of Rigor Mortis:

“Rigor Mortis had set in,”

This indicates to him that death occurred at least 6 hours before ( using 6 hours, but we know this can be less).
However it has not reached the “Rigid” stage, so death is less than 12 hours previous to starting the examination.

Bond next says in relation to Rigor Mortis

“but increased during the progress of the examination. “


This indicates that the “Rigid” stage had still not been reach, thus death was less than 12 hours before this information was recorded.

It is unfortunate that he does not actually specify if the "Rigid" stage was reached by the end of the examination of not.

The examination started at 2pm and finished approximately around 4pm

This indicates that Time of Death has indicated by Rigor Mortis had not occurred at the time he suggested:

"one or two o'clock in the morning would be the probable time of the murder"

But at some undetermined time after.


regards

Hi Steve

Doesn't the problem that you've highlighted once again illustrate the problem of placing too much reliance on contemporary medical sources? Thus, as your post makes clear, we have a medical report lacking in sufficient detail to enable us to arrive at any definitive conclusions: "It is unfortunate that he doesn't actually specify if the rigid stage was reached by the end of the examination or not."

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve,

Excellent post and extremely informative. What would you say would be the factors that could have hastened the onset of rigor mortis in Kelly's case?

Thus, considering internal factors from a general perspective. Electrocution, of course, would result in rapid onset (cadaveric spasm). I also understand that heavy physical exercise prior to death will hasten onset, such as might be implied by a struggle with an assailant, or a victim attempting to flea a pursuer; this is because cells can still still produce ATP, in the absence of oxygen, via anaerobic respiration, i.e. by breaking down glycogen stores, but exercise will, of course, deplete glycogen levels.

There also seems to be a few exceptional circumstances. For instance, Di Maio et al. (2001) give an example of a woman who died following an overdose of aspirin, and who suffered a cardiopulmonary arrest: she went into full rigor mortis only minutes after being pronounced dead, see:

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=k_zKBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA26&lpg=PA26&dq=Heavy+exercise+rigor+mortis&source=bl&ots=n_t8-n47SX&sig=tJf3jpP9D8soJEf1l-QinML57VA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwih8eD-7fHLAhVDDxoKHWR7ArMQ6AEILDAG#v=onepage&q=Heavy%20exercise%20rigor%20mortis&f=false

And what of environmental factors, such as the contrast between the fire in Kelly's room, which may hace been intense, and the cold night? Cold or freezing temperatures will,of course, delay onset, whereas heat will accelerate the process.

Hi John

thank you for the questions.

The problem we have with regards to the physical state of the victim at death is that we cannot be certain if she was killed:

1. in her sleep- it has been suggested has it not that the killer may have been a client, whom killed her while she slept?

2. Having just been Awakened, - someone had let themselves into #13 and she awoke just before she was attacked, this does give an answer for the cry at in the dark.

3. She was fully awake, and had granted the killer admission, this would also account for the cry.

However the sources do not contain evidence which suggests a struggle, but this could be due to the degree of mutilation and the killer moving objects after the attack,

We have no way of knowing which of the above is the correct model.
All that we can say is that if she was aware of the attack, this would lead to an increase of Adrenalin and a potential increase in the production of energy in the muscles. this could lead to an increase in the rate of RM onset.

However we can not know which is correct , therefore it is best to use Model 1 above, and assume no physiological changes which may have increased the onset of RM.


With regards to the room, that there had been a fire is not disputed, the ashes were still warm when Abberline checked the fired.
We do not however know how intense it was: one assumes hot enough to melt the solder on the kettle; Unfortunately I do not have the information on the melting point of late 19th Century solder so am unable to suggest how hot the fire may have been or for how long it burnt.

John you are correct to say a warm environment can I speed-up the onset of RM and cold one slow it down; however while the night may have been cold outside, the sources we have do not indicate that the room was unusually cold when entered.

regards

Steve

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve

Doesn't the problem that you've highlighted once again illustrate the problem of placing too much reliance on contemporary medical sources? Thus, as your post makes clear, we have a medical report lacking in sufficient detail to enable us to arrive at any definitive conclusions: "It is unfortunate that he doesn't actually specify if the rigid stage was reached by the end of the examination or not."

John
I would have to agree & disagree and with you to an extent.

If the report had been complete and clear it would of course be correct to place a great deal of reliance on it. It is after all a report on the examination of the body in #13 Millers Courts by one of those whom conducted that examination.

However it is not complete: yes the report give us important information, that RM was taking place, but leaves out the equally important information on the state of RM at the end of the examination.

In addition there is no record of either a room or body temperature.

These omissions need to be taken into account when conducting ones analysis and criticism of the source.

Neither is the report clear: Bond does not make it clear what he means by "6-12 hours before rigidity sets in", and has GUT asked earlier, is this not confusing.

There is the same level of confusion over what Bond is basing his TOD on. He mentions 3 possible indicators, but fails to make it clear which he is using; however it is possible to deduce which indicator he is probably using by analysing what he says about 2 of the indicators.
This of course will be open to interpretation.

There is no problem with using the medical source in this case, it is how you interoperate it that is the problem.

steve

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=John G;375565]

Well didn't Kuhn argue that when a scientific paradigm was replaced by a new one the new one was always better, not just different?

With the theory about scientific paradigms Kuhn introduced the idea of discontinuity within science and this view is opposed to the positivist idea of science as an accumulative development.

But this is all somewhat irrelevant. Please explain how you think the 1888 definition of rigor mortis conflicts with the modern definition?

There are dimensions of the theoretical concept of "rigor mortis" today that were not present in 1888, especially the chemical, biochemical and technological dimensions, which, through conceptualization of the theoretical "rigor mortis", or, if you prefer an inductive approach, through the use of advanced technological instruments, has changed the old concept from being a concept of physical indications into being a concept of chemistry, biochemistry and technological measurement. The conflict lies therefore in saying that "rigor mortis" means the same in 2016 as it did in 1888. There is still the conceptual component of "physical indications" in the concept, with some of the 1888 operational definitions in this component, but since there has been added knowledge about chemical processes, you also have a chemical component in the concept "rigor mortis". This component can not be put into the theoretical concept of 1888, since it was not there, and therefore it would be conflicting. Also, the use of methods are different since the mathematical components used for detecting rigor mortis today did not exist in 1888. This means that for the operational level for the chemical and biochemical conceptual components, the concepts are dependent on a wide set of additional methods which constitute the base for the theoretical concept of rigor mortis, that were not accessible in 1888. And also, using controls in experimental tests of rigor mortis, was not available. Therefore you have results today on both micro level and on structural level that are more robust. So the concept of rigor mortis of today can not be applied on sources from 1888.

Do you understand now?

Kind regards, Pierre

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Elamarna;375598]

Noted GUT

several points, the period for full rigor to be reached is accepted to be approx 12 hours after death, such was recorded in 1872, 1882, 1894 , 1971 and present day sources.

Therefore if the Body was not in Full Degree rigidity at the start examination it cannot be backdated to 2am. if it is still not in that state at the end of the examination it pushes the time of death later in the morning


On the issue of "set in" Bond starts his report by saying:

"Rigor Mortis had set in."

The later comment says :

"6 to 12 hours before rigidity sets in."


The key to interpreting this is the word rigidity.

The body does not become rigid until the maximum degree of Rigor Mortis has set in. This is often referred to as the "Rigid" or "Rigor" stage.

The body can remain in this state for many hours or even days,after which Rigidity disappears and the body become flexible again.

Of course it can be interpreted differently, but such an interpretation goes counter to the know time scales for Rigor Mortis.

hope that helps

As you prefer to use postmodern sources, you should also tell us that rigor mortis can be observed up to at least 48 hours in cold rooms/environments.

[John G]

[QUOTE=Pierre;375628]

With the theory about scientific paradigms Kuhn introduced the idea of discontinuity within science and this view is opposed to the positivist idea of science as an accumulative development.



There are dimensions of the theoretical concept of "rigor mortis" today that were not present in 1888, especially the chemical, biochemical and technological dimensions, which, through conceptualization of the theoretical "rigor mortis", or, if you prefer an inductive approach, through the use of advanced technological instruments, has changed the old concept from being a concept of physical indications into being a concept of chemistry, biochemistry and technological measurement. The conflict lies therefore in saying that "rigor mortis" means the same in 2016 as it did in 1888. There is still the conceptual component of "physical indications" in the concept, with some of the 1888 operational definitions in this component, but since there has been added knowledge about chemical processes, you also have a chemical component in the concept "rigor mortis". This component can not be put into the theoretical concept of 1888, since it was not there, and therefore it would be conflicting. Also, the use of methods are different since the mathematical components used for detecting rigor mortis today did not exist in 1888. This means that for the operational level for the chemical and biochemical conceptual components, the concepts are dependent on a wide set of additional methods which constitute the base for the theoretical concept of rigor mortis, that were not accessible in 1888. And also, using controls in experimental tests of rigor mortis, was not available. Therefore you have results today on both micro level and on structural level that are more robust. So the concept of rigor mortis of today can not be applied on sources from 1888.

Do you understand now?

Kind regards, Pierre

Hello Pierre,

The definition of rigor mortis is entirely incidental. The fundamental question is this: Could Dr Bond, given the level of scientific knowledge at the time, accurately determine time of death? Moreover, can his report be questioned for other reasons, i.e. lack of clarity, an important issue that Steve has raised, thus potentially rendering his report, and conclusions, unintelligible.

If the answer to these questions is in the negative then, frankly, Dr Bond is about as useful as a source for accurately determining time of death as a local pork butcher.

And no amount of equivocation, via abstract reasoning, is going to change that. Quod erat demonstrandum.

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Elamarna;375599]

It also indicates that the death had occurred a few hours before, we cannot know exactly, but we certainly do know she was dead 3 hours before the examination began.

There you see the value of historical sources.

If we knew when the body reached the "Rigid" stage, we would have a much better idea of TOD. Unfortunately we do not, there is no way around that.

Yes, there is interpreting the historical sources.

[Elamarna]

[QUOTE=Pierre;375634]

As you prefer to use postmodern sources, you should also tell us that rigor mortis can be observed up to at least 48 hours in cold rooms/environments.

Pierre

I have been using sources from 19th century in my posts; Not so called post-modern sources.
Pierre, it must now be obvious to all, including you that we will not agree on this.

Cheerrs

Steve

[John G]

Hi John

thank you for the questions.

The problem we have with regards to the physical state of the victim at death is that we cannot be certain if she was killed:

1. in her sleep- it has been suggested has it not that the killer may have been a client, whom killed her while she slept?

2. Having just been Awakened, - someone had let themselves into #13 and she awoke just before she was attacked, this does give an answer for the cry at in the dark.

3. She was fully awake, and had granted the killer admission, this would also account for the cry.

However the sources do not contain evidence which suggests a struggle, but this could be due to the degree of mutilation and the killer moving objects after the attack,

We have no way of knowing which of the above is the correct model.
All that we can say is that if she was aware of the attack, this would lead to an increase of Adrenalin and a potential increase in the production of energy in the muscles. this could lead to an increase in the rate of RM onset.

However we can not know which is correct , therefore it is best to use Model 1 above, and assume no physiological changes which may have increased the onset of RM.


With regards to the room, that there had been a fire is not disputed, the ashes were still warm when Abberline checked the fired.
We do not however know how intense it was: one assumes hot enough to melt the solder on the kettle; Unfortunately I do not have the information on the melting point of late 19th Century solder so am unable to suggest how hot the fire may have been or for how long it burnt.

John you are correct to say a warm environment can I speed-up the onset of RM and cold one slow it down; however while the night may have been cold outside, the sources we have do not indicate that the room was unusually cold when entered.

regards

Steve

Hi Steve,

Given the obvious problems in accurately determining time of death, even with modern techniques, and difficulties in interpreting Dr Bond's report due to lack of clarity, as you correctly highlighted, do you think we can even assess how probable it is that Kelly was alive after, say, 9:00 am?

And, of course, there are numerous variables to consider, a number of which are unknown, such as the ambient temperature at time of death.

Then there are the exceptional cases, such as the example I gave of the woman who died after overdosing on aspirin, and going into full rigor mortis within minutes of being pronounced dead.

It's certainly a bit of a conundrum.