Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Chapmanís death.

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by DJA View Post
    Great link John. Thanks.

    The various Guidelines on autopsy practice pdfs are interesting reads.
    No problem. For some reason the specific page that I found didn't copy- through. However, it can be found by searching, " What Happens During a Post Mortem."

    The relevant information is:

    " A long incision is made down the front of the body to enable the internal organs to be removed and examined. A single incision accross the top of the head allows the top of the skull to ne removed so that the brain can be examined."
    Last edited by John G; 09-20-2019, 11:16 AM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by PaulB View Post
      Herlock, there is no point in arguing. They're not listening.
      Youíre right Paul. Tying to apply reason and logic to the assessment of evidence is becoming akin to trying to teach a goldfish to tell the time. Itís a sad state of affairs when posters refuse to be objective especially when, in some cases, its because they need an earlier TOD to bolster a theory. Itís similar to the reaction that occurred on the Druitt thread when some posters reach a point of apoplexy purely because we suggested that Macnaghten cannot be dismissed and that consequently Druitt is at least worthy of consideration. And now we here were faced with the bizarre spectacle of someone accepting that Phillips TOD was unreliable but still insisting on favouring it over three witnesses. Have you ever heard anything like it? I bet you never thought that youíd be debating thinking like this when you set out in the field?
      Regards

      Sir Herlock Sholmes



      “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

      “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

      Comment


      • Originally posted by John G View Post
        It's certainly standard procedure for post mortems today: https://www.rcpath.org/
        "A System of Legal Medicine" published on 1894 contains a section on PM procedures, so it was then too.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Errata View Post

          Well, it was and it wasnít. Itís an exacting procedure with often no fruit for a ton of effort. So some coroners even today tend not to bother unless there is some other indication of head injury, such as palpable cracks in the skull, penetrating injury, or swelling. It certainly was not a procedure regularly done on essentially the homeless. But they really should have in these instances. Because all of these women have injuries consistent with a blow to the face or side of the head. And I never thought about what that meant until I had my own brain injury two years ago. Annie Chapmanís brain is consistent with a closed head injury. Yes, some of her brain condition is due to disease, but dark blood, fluid, the texture, classic closed head injury. Perhaps even a concussion, but with no injury to the skull. And having the other brains described as thoroughly as Chapmanís would have been useful. Though with little knowledge of brain injury aside from injury from insult, Iím not confident of what their conclusions would have been.
          Dr Killeen appears to have carried out a brain biopsy on Matha Tabram, from the limited details in ELA 15 Aug;

          "He had since made a post mortem examination, and on opening the head found there was an effusion of blood between the scalp and the bone. The brain was pale but healthy."

          Possibly prompted by external signs of trauma on the scalp, or, perhaps like Dr Phillips, maybe he was a stickler for doing things by the book?

          Comment


          • Page 33 mentions ecchymosis,etc (showing Chapman's neck wound was inflicted while alive),swollen tongue and lips due to strangulation ..... 634 pages to go

            Page 36 ...... "The ordinary dissecting-case is therefore not well adapted for the purpose of an autopsy".

            Page 37 ..... the brain (first on the list) of things to do.

            Page 57 ..... Government Regulations,basically informs that the above are largely NOT done.
            Last edited by DJA; 09-20-2019, 12:06 PM.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by DJA View Post
              Page 33 mentions ecchymosis,etc (showing Chapman's neck wound was inflicted while alive),swollen tongue and lips due to strangulation ..... 634 pages to go
              I'm pretty sure the section by Hebbert on the torso autopsies (from memory, page 86 or so) is quite thorough too, though obviously doesn't cover the brains...

              Page 36 ...... "The ordinary dissecting-case is therefore not well adapted for the purpose of an autopsy".
              That line has always leapt out at me, too!

              Page 37 ..... the brain (first on the list) of things to do.
              Quite. But all the major organs and the spinal column should also be examined.
              Perhaps all the autopsies on the victims were as thorough as they should be, but only mentioned and organ if it had suffered damage or illness?
              Killeen, again, comments on the state of health of most of Martha's organs followed by the number of stab wounds. And most of the PMs comment on the victims' lungs.

              Incidentally, does Dr Phillips mention TB specifically in Chapman's case, or is that your diagnosis? As far as I can recall, most of their lungs showed "firm adhesions" which are characteristic of something like pleurisy, but can only recall Phillips mentioning generalities.

              Comment


              • Excellent, calm, reasoned post as ever Jeff. Totally wasted on some though.
                Still doesn't prove Annie was killed at 5.30am tho does it herlock. Stop trying to make 100% certain long codosch Richardson make Annies t.o.d a certainty. unreliable and contradictory testimony from all 3 .

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

                  Incidentally, does Dr Phillips mention TB specifically in Chapman's case, or is that your diagnosis? As far as I can recall, most of their lungs showed "firm adhesions" which are characteristic of something like pleurisy, but can only recall Phillips mentioning generalities.
                  "Disease of the lungs was long standing, and there was disease of the membranes of the brain" Meh .... dropsy of the brain.Oops

                  Pretty sure it was TB.

                  You missed Page 57.

                  Pages 75 onward concern cases in London with Mr Bond from 1887 to 1889.

                  Bloody good read.

                  Comment


                  • ANNIE CHAPMAN WAS MURDERED AT AROUND 5.25/5.30 BEYOND ALL REASONABLE DOUBT APART FROM TO THE BIASED OR THE BLOODY MINDED!!!!!

                    Now im certain you've lost the plot with a ridiculous statement like this , take a break from this thread herlock, your just being dishonest and deceitful .

                    Comment


                    • Please go away.

                      Adults are talking.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by DJA View Post
                        Please go away.

                        Adults are talking.
                        Regards

                        Sir Herlock Sholmes



                        “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

                        “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

                          Still doesn't prove Annie was killed at 5.30am tho does it herlock. Stop trying to make 100% certain long codosch Richardson make Annies t.o.d a certainty. unreliable and contradictory testimony from all 3 .
                          Without getting too annoyed by your nonsense and dishonesty Iíll give you one challenge in regard to your post Fishy.

                          Please point to the post or cut and paste the quote where I have said that Annieís TOD was a 100% certainty. Youíve made a statement which you are claiming to be true. Iím telling you that itís false. You made the statement so the burden of proof is with you. Where have I said that Annieís TOD is 100% certain? I said - beyond all reasonable doubt - a statement that I stand by because itís true.
                          Regards

                          Sir Herlock Sholmes



                          “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

                          “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post


                            Now im certain you've lost the plot with a ridiculous statement like this , take a break from this thread herlock, your just being dishonest and deceitful .
                            To add to the challenge Iíll ask a question that Iíve asked numerous times but youíve never had the honesty or integrity to provide an answer. Youíve simple ignored it or tried to change the subject. Iíll embolden it and put it in colour in case you might miss it again.

                            Please tell me why you are so convinced that Phillips was correct when estimating the TOD (given that all of the worldís experts tell us that he could not have made a reliable estimate using the methods that did) and yet, when he was performing the very much simpler task of checking for evidence of Annie being killed elsewhere with the help of the police (as you believe that she was) he said this:

                            [Coroner] In your opinion did she enter the yard alive? - I am positive of it.


                            This is cherry-picking. Purely and simply.
                            Regards

                            Sir Herlock Sholmes



                            “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

                            “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

                            Comment


                            • [Coroner] Were they talking loudly? - They were talking pretty loudly. I overheard him say to her "Will you?" and she replied, "Yes." That is all I heard, and I heard this as I passed. I left them standing there, and I did not look back, so I cannot say where they went to.

                              Suspect Long overheard a blackmail attempt by Chapman.

                              Sutton has put a strangle hold on Chapman and dragged her off the street and out the back.

                              Doesn't sound like a street walker and a John to me.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
                                Quite.
                                Pages 109 and 117 strongly suggest Chapman and Stride died from asphyxiation not hemorrhage.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X