Mizen's inquest statement reconstructed

[Fisherman]

My suggestions are based in fact, wounds can bleed again if a body is moved.
So yet another incorrect statement from you.

What a truly remarkable response "Mizen would not have said what he did"

Mizen is truthful, he understands forensic pathology, he never says what he does not mean, he is never mistaken, apart of course from tge time he gives for meeting Lechmere and Pauk

Your view of Mizen is so bias that it is now beyond a joke.

Like much of the pro Lechmere argument it as gone far beyond source based evidence to the level of beleif and faith, where of course evidence has no legitimate place.

Steve

This rot really deserves no answer. For example, you speak of how it would be very likely that the wounds were reopened as she was lifted onto the stretcher.

Reopened? A gaping wound in the neck, an inch or two wide? "Reopened"?

And you shamelessly say that I turn the Echo article into "unassailable fact" - always the same, is it not, Steve?

I SUGGEST that this article is the one that sits best with the evidence. The same evidence that you so desperately are trying to discard, that is.

So it is not me making up facts - it´s you throwing them away, sweeping them under the carpet in carefully chosen amounts, to make your own thinking - the, ehrm, "factually based" ditto - fit the bill.

You are really not worth the time and the effort, Steve. Take a look in the mirror and you will know why.

Maybe I can work up the will to comment on your factually based major opus on Bucks Row - the one that will reveal all and finally put Mizen to shame, you know - but I really can´t guarantee it. It sounds like something I would genuinely prefer to avoid in order to look at what really happened instead.

Goodbye, and the fairest of luck.

As for "the ever weakening theory"? Allow me to laugh! Eternally criticized by a bunch of twisters? Yes. Weakened? Not for a second.

[Sam Flynn]

If the blood had ceased to flow, why was the pool only somewhat congealed?

At school, I did a series of experiments on the breakdown of hydrogen peroxide when I entered (and won) the "Welsh Young Scientist of the Year" competition, and used ox blood as one of the catalysts; red blood cells contain the enzyme catalase, which decomposes hydrogen peroxide. I had sealed jars of blood which had been drained from the animal several hours previously, so- obviously - all blood flow had ceased. After opening the jars, the blood started to clot with time (not instantaneously, mind you) but, even when large amounts of clot occupied the jars, there was still plenty of liquid blood left.

[Sam Flynn]

Reopened? A gaping wound in the neck, an inch or two wide? "Reopened"?

OK - widened, then.

[Elamarna]

This rot really deserves no answer. For example, you speak of how it would be very likely that the wounds were reopened as she was lifted onto the stretcher.

Reopened? A gaping wound in the neck, an inch or two wide? "Reopened"?

If all bleeding had stopped, it would in all probability involve clotting in the neck wounds, in particular the Carotids and jugulars. Movement can easy dislodge something.
Of course the body had not completely drained of blood, far from it, given it was laying reasonably flat on the ground, in which case if the wounds had not partially closed, bleeding would be occurring the whole time, even if slowly and purely under gravity.


And you shamelessly say that I turn the Echo article into "unassailable fact" - always the same, is it not, Steve?


Unfortunately its what you tend to do

I SUGGEST that this article is the one that sits best with the evidence. The same evidence that you so desperately are trying to discard, that is.

Discarding nothing, just not inventing as some posts do.

So it is not me making up facts - it´s you throwing them away, sweeping them under the carpet in carefully chosen amounts, to make your own thinking - the, ehrm, "factually based" ditto - fit the bill.

Avoidance of the issues, yet again

You are really not worth the time and the effort, Steve. Take a look in the mirror and you will know why.

Maybe I can work up the will to comment on your factually based major opus on Bucks Row - the one that will reveal all and finally put Mizen to shame, you know - but I really can´t guarantee it. It sounds like something I would genuinely prefer to avoid in order to look at what really happened instead.

Goodbye, and the fairest of luck.

As for "the ever weakening theory"? Allow me to laugh! Eternally criticized by a bunch of twisters? Yes. Weakened? Not for a second.

What other critism is there worth having but External, Having ones followers telling one how great you are is truly pointless.

Steve

[Elamarna]

Christer,
You have made comments that Mizen could have told the differnce between Fresh blood a what i presume you term "non fresh" not puting words in your mouth, but dont know how else to describe it.

I asked a question which you may have missed.


Would you care to explain how fresh bleeding, after the heart stops would differ in apperance from say a large neck wound, which started bleeding again after movement of the body? Seriously please explain, without doing an internet search, just on your own knowledge as an educated person.


It would be very helpful and enlightening to have your answer/comments on such



Steve

[Herlock Sholmes]

And how do you explain that he said it was "still" running? Another turn of a phrase?

The Star: "He noticed blood running from the throat to the gutter. There was only one pool; it was somewhat congealed."

If the blood had seized to flow, why was the pool only somewhat congealed? Are you aware of how the process of congealing works?

The emboldened phrase could easily mean non-flowing blood and that he was explaining a trail of blood from the throat to the gutter. You can say “there was a fence running from the house to the garden gate” but it doesn’t mean that the gate was flowing. Its a way of describing the direction.

[Sam Flynn]

The emboldened phrase could easily mean non-flowing blood and that he was explaining a trail of blood from the throat to the gutter. You can say “there was a fence running from the house to the garden gate” but it doesn’t mean that the gate was flowing. Its a way of describing the direction.

True enough, Herlock, however Mizen said that blood "was still running from the neck" - according to the Evening Standard, at least. Not sure if there are any other reports to that effect.

[Elamarna]

True enough, Herlock, however Mizen said that blood "was still running from the neck" - according to the Evening Standard, at least. Not sure if there are any other reports to that effect.

The Morning Advertiser also says still running.

That leaves several possible alternatives does it not.

1. Mizen sees bleeding when he first arrives( however this is certainly only slight flow under gravity, NOT under pressure).

2. Mizen sees bleeding when he returns with the ambulance.

Following on from these we have further choices

3. The bleeding has stopped at least once and restarted due to movement or/and examination.

4. The wounds are such that bleeding never fully stops, due to the examinations and movements of the body.

All are medically viable, however the weight of reports suggests that Mizen's observation is after the return of the ambulance. While one cannot be 100% certain of this, it seems the most likely.

What however is clear is that the bleeding is not under pressure.
What is good to note is Christer now apparently seems to accept that Neil most probably did not see bleeding under pressure.


Steve

[Sam Flynn]

The Morning Advertiser also says still running.

It appears to be the same source as the Evening Standard, in that the words are almost identical, and both papers share the mis-spelling "Maizen".

[Elamarna]

It appears to be the same source as the Evening Standard, in that the words are almost identical, and both papers share the mis-spelling "Maizen".

Agreed.


This of course is the big issue with relying on press reports.



Steve

[Sam Flynn]

This of course is the big issue with relying on press reports.

Yup. What appears to be two, or more, sources might be just the one, and if the original contains errors the copies usually inherit them.

[Abby Normal]

The Morning Advertiser also says still running.

That leaves several possible alternatives does it not.

1. Mizen sees bleeding when he first arrives( however this is certainly only slight flow under gravity, NOT under pressure).

2. Mizen sees bleeding when he returns with the ambulance.

Following on from these we have further choices

3. The bleeding has stopped at least once and restarted due to movement or/and examination.

4. The wounds are such that bleeding never fully stops, due to the examinations and movements of the body.

All are medically viable, however the weight of reports suggests that Mizen's observation is after the return of the ambulance. While one cannot be 100% certain of this, it seems the most likely.

What however is clear is that the bleeding is not under pressure.
What is good to note is Christer now apparently seems to accept that Neil most probably did not see bleeding under pressure.


Steve

Hi El and everyone else.

I was just curious what everyones take on this is.

Apparently there was still some sort of blood flow, oozing, movement whatever from Pollys neck wound when it was noticed.


Given everything we know about it-her position when found, the time of night, temp, size of the wound etc. whats your outer limit on when you think that wound could have been made?


two hours beforw her discovery? four ? 30 minutes?

[caz]

The Morning Advertiser also says still running.

That leaves several possible alternatives does it not.

1. Mizen sees bleeding when he first arrives( however this is certainly only slight flow under gravity, NOT under pressure).

2. Mizen sees bleeding when he returns with the ambulance.

Following on from these we have further choices

3. The bleeding has stopped at least once and restarted due to movement or/and examination.

4. The wounds are such that bleeding never fully stops, due to the examinations and movements of the body.

All are medically viable, however the weight of reports suggests that Mizen's observation is after the return of the ambulance. While one cannot be 100% certain of this, it seems the most likely.

What however is clear is that the bleeding is not under pressure.
What is good to note is Christer now apparently seems to accept that Neil most probably did not see bleeding under pressure.


Steve

Hi Steve,

Firstly, it seems quite clear to me that Fish's post #6 was highly misleading, and I'm not suggesting this was deliberate. A little more care taken over his use of the numbers 1 to 4 to illustrate his argument could have saved everyone's time!

There are a number of layers involved:

1. Mizen goes to Bucks Row.
2. Mizen sees that there is blood flowing, appearing fresh.
3. Mizen is sent for an ambulance.
4. Mizen returns with the ambulance and helps placing the corpse on it.

The Daily News has it 1-3-2-4.

The Daily Telegraph has it 1-3-2.

The Morning Advertiser has it 1-3-4-2.

Only the Echo has a clear and logical sequence, EXPLAINING why the order never turned out 1-2-3-4, not even with themselves, who had it 1-3-2, but were able to clarify how it actually went down.

It's all very well to claim afterwards that his first number 2 - Mizen seeing the blood - was never meant to represent the same thing as his subsequent number 2s, and that this was clear from the actual newspaper quotes he used earlier in the post, where the blood wasn't mentioned. But really, is it any wonder people get frustrated, when Fish refuses to see any problem here? If Fish's number 2s are not the same, when used within the same post to make a direct comparison between his 'layers' and what the papers say, there's something very wrong, isn't there? Perhaps he should see a bowel specialist or at least go for softer loo paper.

Secondly, assuming Nichols was dead when Mizen eventually made it to the scene, there would be no more bleeding under pressure by then anyway, so whenever he saw what looked to him like 'fresh' blood still running, it would have been due to leakage from the wound and gravity. She had 8 pints of it to start with, so there must have been a fair bit still inside her in liquid form, not pumping, but gradually draining downwards internally as she was lifted onto the ambulance. You only have to cut your finger with a knife to know it can start oozing or dripping blood again at any time after initially stopping, if you knock it during the healing process. Was there literally no liquid blood left in the area of the throat wound by the time Nichols was moved, which could have run out and downwards if the very recent wound was disturbed? Just the way she was lifted could have caused her head and shoulders to be lower than the rest of her for a few seconds.

Thirdly, the newspaper sources don't need to be interpreted in the way Fish does, and I can't even see why he wants to put Mizen's bleeding observation before he is sent for the ambulance, when it seems to me far more likely that it came about when Mizen himself "assisted to remove the body". Neil seems to have sent Mizen off for the ambulance pretty sharpish, so how long would Mizen have had in reality to stay and gawp at the corpse and make his observation, with Neil standing there tutting, wondering when the silly constable was going to do what he was told and stop impersonating a doctor?

Love,

Caz
X

[Sam Flynn]

How "fresh" can blood be anyway, when viewed in a dark alley by the glow of a bulldog lamp?

[Elamarna]

Hi El and everyone else.

I was just curious what everyones take on this is.

Apparently there was still some sort of blood flow, oozing, movement whatever from Pollys neck wound when it was noticed.


Given everything we know about it-her position when found, the time of night, temp, size of the wound etc. whats your outer limit on when you think that wound could have been made?


two hours beforw her discovery? four ? 30 minutes?

I honestly dont think we can give a definitive answer to that question.

If we had a report which said it had stopped at some point we would be in a better position.
The best we probably have is Llewellyn and he indicates that the flow was no more than a trickle, it may even have stopped but he is not clear on that, so not safe to assume so.

The "blood evidence " theory, unfortunately does not really work, for several reasons, one of those being we have no reported stoppage, but that is not the only problem with it.

It is also extremely unlikely from the reports we have that Neil saw blood pumping under pressure.

If we accept the Neck as cause of Death, that gives a time frame of under 4 minutes from cut to heart failing. However if we go with Christer's suggesting of the abdomen wound being fatal, we are in all probaility looking at less than a minute.
Which is the cause is also open to debate. The saturated clothing and clotts between clothing suggest the neck, but it is not 100%.


A best bet would be be sometime within 10-15 minutes of Neil arriving at the site. That of course fits well within his last round of the beat.

If we accept for the sake of argument that Lechmere was not the killer, the cuts were probably made sometime in the previous 10 minutes.
I honestly do not feel we can be anymore pricise.


Hope that helps Abby


Steve