Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Chapman’s death.

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

  • I now pity Jeff. One of the most balanced, fair posters on here getting the Fish Method.
    Regards

    Herlock






    "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

    Comment


    • I think Herlock is on the warpath again. Let´s see whether he can intimidate me and make me so desperate that I go away this time too! (P S, Herlock - don´t forget to tell us how I would have derailed the thread, something you tell us all that you NEVER would do, whereas I.... you are quite keen to divide people up in little camps, are you not? And you are in the very finest one, bless you! )
      Last edited by Fisherman; 09-26-2019, 02:42 PM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post
        Nichols , Chapman , Stride , Eddowes and Kelly all had their throats cut from left to right, if this is correct would there be any argument if one was to declare that the killer must have been right handed. ?
        Yes there would.
        Regards

        Herlock






        "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

          I’m on a weeks break in London at the moment and I’m not going to waste time bandying words with someone like you. All has been said. Three witnesses outweigh Phillips. End of. Only someone utterly desperate to keep there suspect in the hunt would expend so much effort to try and manipulate the truth. Im hoping now to have a break from this thread. You can keep preaching to your two cheerleaders as much as you want to. I’ve had two years of arrogance, manipulation and bias from you and still you play the victim and try to push all of it on to me. I look at the case in an balanced way. I’ve never said that my knowledge is better than anyone else despite your dishonest last post. I’ve just gone on what the world’s Forensic experts tell us. You know better of course. Wolf Vanderlinden wrote a dissertation. Ok. Fine. I do recall him though. I recall David Orsam picking him to shreds.

          Post what you like Fish. You will anyway.
          Yes, you may rely on that - I certainly will. And I thank you for finally having arrived at the conclusion that it´s best not to try and defend your stance. Apparently, you have grown so desperate so as to flee? Or?

          I am sad to hear that you think you have had two years of arrogance, manipulation and bias from me; that cannot have been easy. Dear me. Then again, why not extend me some little sympathy? I have gone through far worse myself in your company, let me assure you.

          You think you "look at the case in a balanced way". That´s heartwarming. But what good is balance when the scales are both filled with junk?

          PS. You forgot to tell us how I "derailed" the thread. But I can answer for you: I never did. You were wrong on that score too.

          Have a wonderful time in London. The East End is to the right on the maps.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post


            You said:




            You can’t even remember your own dishonesty.

            Any apology?

            Thought not

            Fishy has actually been consistent on that.

            The spray on the fence confirms his viewpoint. Moving to the other side smeared the spray afterwards.

            You have once again displayed the intelligence of a retarded gerbil,with nuts to match.

            Enjoy your holiday.

            WE WILL!

            Highly unlikely you will be able to refrain. Very excitable short fuse.
            My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

            Comment


            • Wolf Vanderlinden has been referred to on more than one occasion, so I thought it would be useful to evaluate his conclusions.

              Unfortunately, he seems to rely somewhat on Dr Phillips' conclusions. As discussed previously, Dr Phillips was not a forensic expert and he didn't have the advantage of modern research. To underline his lack of knowledge in this area, he relied on touch alone to assess the temperature of the victim, even though it had been known since at least the 1860s that this is a completely inadequate if you're striving for any degree of accuracy, and therefore a rectal body temperature should have been taken.

              To put things into perspective, imagine you're a modern forensic expert being grilled by the defence barrister on a trial. You're being questioned on your time of death estimate, which relied largely on body temperature, and the barrister says, "Of course you took a rectal temperature." You reply, "Oh no, I couldn't be bothered with that faff. I just touched the body and then made a guess." Your response wouldn't go down too well, would it?

              Now, it's been suggested on a number of occasions that Dr Phillips, by touch alone, could have been accurate and within a "degree or two." This may not seem a lot but, as I've pointed out before, I'm afraid it makes a great deal of difference: just 0.87 degrees C is equivalent to around one hour in respect of cooling rates post mortem, so being a "degree or two" out would equate to the TOD estimate being wrong by over an hour as a minimum, and over two hours as a maximum.

              Dr Phillips also failed to take into consideration Chapman's severely undernourished state when making his estimate: he's not really culpable here as he didn't have the advantage of modern research: Happily, that's not the position today.

              Thus, whilst the average rectal body temperature of a healthy adult female is 37 degrees C, that's not the case for someone who is several undernourished: In the Biosphere 2 study, which I've referred to before, individuals who were subject to severe calorie restrictions started off in the normal range, 37 C, but following the calorie restriction their body temperature was often in the 35.5 to 36 range, and sometimes below 35.5. (walford et al. 1999).

              To put that into perspective,can severely undernourished Chapman, with a body temperature of, say, 36 degrees, would have the same initial temperature, I.e. whilst alive, as a person of "normal" body temperature more than one hour after death.

              Of course, there are also environmental factors, such as the victim being partially clothed,and the surface the victim was lying on, that could impact on body temperature, none of which Dr Phillips analysed in any sort of detail.

              Based upon the above analysis I would conclude that Dr Phillips' assessment must be regarded as unreliable and cannot stand.

              As an aside, Wolf also refers to the rigor mortis issue. Unfortunately, this is a very unreliable way of estimating time of death, due to the many variables. For instance, as discussed previously, both cut-throat and wasting diseases, like tuberculosis, both of which applied to Chapman, rigor will have an early onset: Kori, 2018. I would therefore further conclude that the rigor mortis issue is of little value to the present case.







              Comment


              • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

                I believe the fact that she doesn't have the money she made that afternoon on her, and that she hadn't been drinking that night, and that she had a new flower arrangement on her jacket and cashous in her hand, is indication that she bought those herself. And without knowing where she would stay that night? I don't think so. I think she knew where she would stay, but not how long she would stay there. She was there meeting a date. Or a cleaning job client...she was at work "among the Jews".
                It's possible that Stride was meeting someone, such as a secret boyfriend, maybe someone from the club, and they agreed to meet in Dutfield's Yard, and that individual killed her.

                I agree that it is likely that Stride bought the cachous herself.

                Comment



                • Her TB,as mentioned in a publication Joshua gave us reference to,could have seen her usual temperature as low as 32C.

                  Due to her health and diet,ATP production/levels would have been low,hence early onset of rigor mortis.
                  Last edited by DJA; 09-26-2019, 04:40 PM.
                  My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by DJA View Post
                    Her TB,as mentioned in a publication Joshua gave us reference to,could have seen her usual temperature as low as 32C.

                    Due to her health and diet,ATP production/levels would have been low,hence early onset of rigor mortis.
                    Thanks for this. Excellent points, which further underline how unreliable Dr Phillips' assessment was.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by John G View Post


                      I agree that it is likely that Stride bought the cachous herself.
                      Cachous were an expensive,very new product from France at that time.

                      Doubt they were on sale in the vicinity.

                      My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by John G View Post

                        Thanks for this. Excellent points, which further underline how unreliable Dr Phillips' assessment was.
                        His assessment of rigor mortis onset would be correct.

                        He did an autopsy on lungs and brain later.
                        My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by John G View Post
                          Wolf Vanderlinden has been referred to on more than one occasion, so I thought it would be useful to evaluate his conclusions.

                          Unfortunately, he seems to rely somewhat on Dr Phillips' conclusions. As discussed previously, Dr Phillips was not a forensic expert and he didn't have the advantage of modern research. To underline his lack of knowledge in this area, he relied on touch alone to assess the temperature of the victim, even though it had been known since at least the 1860s that this is a completely inadequate if you're striving for any degree of accuracy, and therefore a rectal body temperature should have been taken.

                          So why do you think the doctors relied on touch, if they all knew that rectal body temperatures by way of thermometer was so verty much more reliable? Any thoughts on that one? Were they obstructing the course of justice, all of them? Twenty yers had passed, and that is an eternity in medical sciences that wee under swift development. And why is it, do you think, that even today medicos use hand palpation for warmth and rely on what they feel? It´s 150 years down the line now. Shouldn´t they know better?

                          To put things into perspective, imagine you're a modern forensic expert being grilled by the defence barrister on a trial. You're being questioned on your time of death estimate, which relied largely on body temperature, and the barrister says, "Of course you took a rectal temperature." You reply, "Oh no, I couldn't be bothered with that faff. I just touched the body and then made a guess." Your response wouldn't go down too well, would it?

                          Then again, no forensic expert who used hand palpation would say that he "took a guess", would he? And any thermometer-lacking personel first on site in a murder case WILL feel the body for warmth; it is common procedure, for the simple reason that there is a wish for important information not to go lost while waiting for a medico. many cases will be settled even today by way of acknowledging the value of hand palpation - if somebody has been killed and found by a policeman who says that the body was quite warm, the jury and judge will accept that death had not occurred many hours before the palpation was carried out. But this is what we are expected to believe in Phillips´ case: that he may have misjudged the time catastophically and mistaken a warm body for a cold one.

                          Now, it's been suggested on a number of occasions that Dr Phillips, by touch alone, could have been accurate and within a "degree or two."

                          No, it has been proven that in 75 per cent plus of the cases, hand palpation can tell temperatures of one or two degrees apart even if it is carried out by laymen. If we are to extrapolate this knowledge to Phillips, we may see that he is not likely to have mistaken warm for cold, quite simply. And we know that Eddowes was described as "quite warm, some 445 minutes after death, just as we know that there was still fluid blood on the site whereas Chapmans blood was desfribed by Phillips as "well clotted". We aLso know that there were no signs whatsoever of rigor in Eddowes´ case, wheras there was in Chapmans. All of this points unanimously towards a TOD numerous hours away, unless we are dealing with a victim who never read the manuals.

                          This may not seem a lot but, as I've pointed out before, I'm afraid it makes a great deal of difference: just 0.87 degrees C is equivalent to around one hour in respect of cooling rates post mortem, so being a "degree or two" out would equate to the TOD estimate being wrong by over an hour as a minimum, and over two hours as a maximum.

                          And - again - after around one hour there will not have been any significant loss of temperature at all, as clearly shown in the Eddowes case. Stride and Nichols were also "quite warm", in spite of how doctors cited by Herlock claim that the skin goes cold in 10-20 minutes. So either it did NOT do so in these three cases - or medicos pick up on the underlying core temperature while palpating.

                          Dr Phillips also failed to take into consideration Chapman's severely undernourished state when making his estimate: he's not really culpable here as he didn't have the advantage of modern research: Happily, that's not the position today.

                          No, he did not. He very clearly stated that she had been badly fed. And he would be very aware that fat people retain heat in a more efficient way than meagre ones. Insulation is not a modern idea.

                          Thus, whilst the average rectal body temperature of a healthy adult female is 37 degrees C, that's not the case for someone who is several undernourished: In the Biosphere 2 study, which I've referred to before, individuals who were subject to severe calorie restrictions started off in the normal range, 37 C, but following the calorie restriction their body temperature was often in the 35.5 to 36 range, and sometimes below 35.5. (walford et al. 1999).

                          But we don´t know that Chapman suffered calory restrictions on the night she died. And fuel is fuel. Once again, we are seemingy trying to make Chapman a very odd figure, with a body temperature bordering on hypothermia - who nevertheless was able to develop an extremly quick rigor! There are factors that speak IN BOTH DIRECTIONS, John, let´s be fair now!

                          To put that into perspective,can severely undernourished Chapman, with a body temperature of, say, 36 degrees, would have the same initial temperature, I.e. whilst alive, as a person of "normal" body temperature more than one hour after death.

                          Yes, she could have. There is - as I have said a zillion times - an initial plateau during half an hour to an hour, during which the temperature does not fall within the body core! It is a chemically induced matter and there are actually those who get a RAISED temperature in this phase. And if Chapman was 36 degrees (although we should work from 37,2 degrees, since that is the normal temperature), she would still be warm to the touch. It is not until 4-6 hours have elapsed that medicos say that the body has become cold to the touch, and at that stage, some 5 degrees will have gone lost, making the body arounbd 32 degrees. And THAT - or lower - is the kind of temperature Phillips will have recognized in Chapmans body. She was LONG DEAD, John, and Long and Cadosch should never have been allowed to pollute the inquest.

                          Of course, there are also environmental factors, such as the victim being partially clothed,and the surface the victim was lying on, that could impact on body temperature, none of which Dr Phillips analysed in any sort of detail.

                          And this yoou know, since...? Why would Phillips NOT know that clothing insulates, for example? WOuld he not be aware that his own clothes kept HIM warm? Really, John!

                          Based upon the above analysis I would conclude that Dr Phillips' assessment must be regarded as unreliable and cannot stand.

                          Based on my analysis of your analysis, I´d say that your take on things is irrational. Sorry, but there you are.

                          As an aside, Wolf also refers to the rigor mortis issue. Unfortunately, this is a very unreliable way of estimating time of death, due to the many variables. For instance, as discussed previously, both cut-throat and wasting diseases, like tuberculosis, both of which applied to Chapman, rigor will have an early onset: Kori, 2018. I would therefore further conclude that the rigor mortis issue is of little value to the present case.




                          Rigor in itself is not very reliable - or unreliable. But when coupled with body temperature, it is another thing altogether. All of Phillips´ observations support each other. Also, as I have repeatedly pointed out, there are things that speak for a SLOWER onset of rigor in Chamans case, just as there are things that speak of a swifter one. But IF she had developed rigor in TWO hours only, it would be slightly odd, given the temperature. Two hours is a quick onset - the scale works with 2-4 hours being the normal span. So to allow for two hours is generous. To allow for one is out of touch with reality.

                          it is time to wake up now!

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by DJA View Post
                            Her TB,as mentioned in a publication Joshua gave us reference to,could have seen her usual temperature as low as 32C.

                            Due to her health and diet,ATP production/levels would have been low,hence early onset of rigor mortis.
                            32 degrees Celsius is hypothermia. We shudder and shake helplessly long before that stage, and actually seize to do so when we creep under 32 degrees - because we enter the death zone, more or less. There are no signs at all that Chapman suffered from hypothermia - in all probability, she kept the same temperature as most of us, meaning that she was above 36 degrees.

                            And two hours would have been an early onset of rigor. One hour is not likely in the least.

                            It is time to stop promoting a picture of Chapman as a unique medical specimen. It is much, much, much, much, much likelier that Long and Cadosch were wrong - that does not take any extreme body temperatures or any rocket rigor.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by DJA View Post

                              Cachous were an expensive,very new product from France at that time.

                              Doubt they were on sale in the vicinity.
                              The pills were also described as "sweetmeats" - candy. There is no reason to think they must have been French breath tablets.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by John G View Post

                                Thanks for this. Excellent points, which further underline how unreliable Dr Phillips' assessment was.
                                How can it be an "excellent point" to suggest that Chapman can have had a body temperature of 32 degrees Celsius...? Is it because it sits well with your convictions? Because it is not in any way likely.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X