Chapman’s death.

[Herlock Sholmes]

And as a reminder:


"The phases of rigor mortis can be extremely helpful in piecing together the circumstances and timing of a death. Rigor is one of the many potential clues examined by crime scene technicians, forensic pathologists, and detectives during an investigation to determine the proper manner of death (i.e., homicide, suicide, accident, or natural causes). It may also verify or refute a witness or suspect statement and can sometimes indicate whether a body has been moved after death. It is a valuable indicator that cannot be overlooked.

About the Author: Jennifer Bucholtz is a former U.S. Army Counterintelligence Agent and a decorated veteran of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. She holds a Bachelor of Science in criminal justice, Master of Arts in criminal justice and Master of Science in forensic sciences. Bucholtz has an extensive background in U.S. military and Department of Defense counterintelligence operations. While on active duty, she served as the Special Agent in Charge for her unit in South Korea and Assistant Special Agent in Charge at stateside duty stations. Bucholtz has also worked for the Arizona Department of Corrections and Office of the Chief Medical Examiner in New York City. She is currently an adjunct faculty member at American Military University and teaches courses in criminal justice and forensic sciences. Additionally, she is a licensed private investigator in Colorado"




The Baron

The Baron trying to use evidence.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Of course youd say that would you , you've totally butchered this thread with your one eyed ,bias ,waffling, continuous post,.

im pretty sure most would accept jack was right handed , all but you .

Prove that definitively.

[Herlock Sholmes]

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.

They have internet in London Dave.

I’d like to draw everyone’s attention to this post because these things get ignored.

Firstly, on the topic.

• Fishy claimed for a fact (not an opinion) that Annie’s killer was on her right for the mutilations.
• I pointed out that he couldn’t say this as a fact.
• He denied that he’d ever said this as a fact
• I produced the post where he’d said this as a fact.

Dave then criticises and insults me as if I’ve gotten it wrong. This is par for the course.

Secondly of course, yet another personal insult which, yet again, I will not report even though I’m the devil incarnate according to Dave.


So to sum up:

• A dishonest statement
• A dishonest statement highlighted
• A dishonest statement denied
• A dishonest statement proved and confirmed
• A dishonest statement defended
• A personal insult thrown in

Pretty much sums up the way some posters operate.

[DJA]

Here's a Prince Albert cachous tin, C 1860. https://www.pinterest.com/pin/303852306086547590/

Thanks.
That's the Thomas Jackson brand mentioned earlier.

[John G]

Yes, I have previously responded to the Jennifer Bucholtz issue. She points out, " In locations where temperatures and environments are moderate, rigor mortis begins to set in one or two hours after death." https://inpublicsafety.com/ (Public Safety, Feb 13, 2019).

This reinforces the point that I have made on numerous occasions.

[JeffHamm]

And as a reminder:


"The phases of rigor mortis can be extremely helpful in piecing together the circumstances and timing of a death. Rigor is one of the many potential clues examined by crime scene technicians, forensic pathologists, and detectives during an investigation to determine the proper manner of death (i.e., homicide, suicide, accident, or natural causes). It may also verify or refute a witness or suspect statement and can sometimes indicate whether a body has been moved after death. It is a valuable indicator that cannot be overlooked.

About the Author: Jennifer Bucholtz is a former U.S. Army Counterintelligence Agent and a decorated veteran of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. She holds a Bachelor of Science in criminal justice, Master of Arts in criminal justice and Master of Science in forensic sciences. Bucholtz has an extensive background in U.S. military and Department of Defense counterintelligence operations. While on active duty, she served as the Special Agent in Charge for her unit in South Korea and Assistant Special Agent in Charge at stateside duty stations. Bucholtz has also worked for the Arizona Department of Corrections and Office of the Chief Medical Examiner in New York City. She is currently an adjunct faculty member at American Military University and teaches courses in criminal justice and forensic sciences. Additionally, she is a licensed private investigator in Colorado"

The Baron

Yes, that's very true. There is information that rigor can tell an investigator. For example, if a body is found on their back, but the arms are raised off the floor, defying gravity, it tells you the body has been moved, for example. But as an indicator for time of death, it provides only a very wide window spanning many hours. The progression, including time of onset, time required to reach full rigor, its duration, and subsequent fading, is very variable from case to case, though obviously each "phase" occurs at a later time than the previous. Trying to tell apart 2 points in time separated by only 1 hour would be like trying to pick up a particular grain of rice wearing boxing gloves, meaning for that is is not very precise. Most of the estimates for ToD are actually not very exact, but if you have a suspect saying they were with the victim and left them 4 hours ago, but the body has gone through rigor and returned to limp again, let's say, you know there's a problem. But that's differentiating 4 hours from over a day, which is not the same thing.

As far as I can tell so far, Dr. Phillips information, on the whole, is consistent with a time window that doesn't preclude the witnesses based one, other than his stated estimated for the ToD. The latter being based upon what he thought was a valid procedure, but from what we've learned since then, one we now know isn't accurate. It's not about being against Dr. Phillips in any way, it's just examining the evidence. It's like how most tend to reject the sighting of Mary Kelly at 8 am of the morning of her death. That just doesn't fit in with everything else, and seems highly suspect in terms of its accuracy. Dr. Phillips stated ToD, being based upon unreliable measure for that purpose, is the only thing from him that is inconsistent with the witnesses. The rest all seems to fit (in that the fairly large window of possible times it would give us would include the witness based time).

- Jeff

[The Baron]

And as a reminder:


"The phases of rigor mortis can be extremely helpful in piecing together the circumstances and timing of a death. Rigor is one of the many potential clues examined by crime scene technicians, forensic pathologists, and detectives during an investigation to determine the proper manner of death (i.e., homicide, suicide, accident, or natural causes). It may also verify or refute a witness or suspect statement and can sometimes indicate whether a body has been moved after death. It is a valuable indicator that cannot be overlooked.

About the Author: Jennifer Bucholtz is a former U.S. Army Counterintelligence Agent and a decorated veteran of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. She holds a Bachelor of Science in criminal justice, Master of Arts in criminal justice and Master of Science in forensic sciences. Bucholtz has an extensive background in U.S. military and Department of Defense counterintelligence operations. While on active duty, she served as the Special Agent in Charge for her unit in South Korea and Assistant Special Agent in Charge at stateside duty stations. Bucholtz has also worked for the Arizona Department of Corrections and Office of the Chief Medical Examiner in New York City. She is currently an adjunct faculty member at American Military University and teaches courses in criminal justice and forensic sciences. Additionally, she is a licensed private investigator in Colorado"




The Baron

[John G]

Here's a reminder of the Forensic Science Regulator's guidance:

6.3.2 When providing a ToD estimate to the investigator the pathologist must take the following steps.

a) The pathologist must make clear that the estimate is only an estimate and the accuracy cannot be determined.

b) The psthologist must explain that the death could have occurred outside of the estimated period and, perhaps, a significant period outside it.

C) Advise that the estimate should not be used to:

i. Define the period in which death occurred.
ii. Assign probabilities to likely periods of death; or
iii. Include or exclude a suspect from the investigation.

The Use of Time of Death Estimates Based on Heat Loss From the Body, FSR-G-21, Issue 1, 2014.

[John G]

Regarding rigor mortis:

As a reminder, the most comprehensive research in this area was undertaken by Mallach, and he concluded that the average time for onset was 3 hours, plus or minus 2 hours. 1 hour is therefore within the confidence interval. https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...0james&f=false


And this from Kori:

" Similarly, the rigor mortis, which is cadeveric rigidity, starts developing withn 1 to 2 hours after death..." ( Kori, 2018)

[John G]

As mentioned before,the medication/breath freshener has been around for thousands of years.

Returns as a fad, usually marked by marketing and packaging.

Such was the case with Cachou Lajaunie,a formulation from 1880 which was marketed from 1890 in a small yellow tin designed by a watchmaker.

If anyone locates evidence of cachous being marketed in London 1888,I would be very,very interested.

Here's a Prince Albert cachous tin, C 1860. https://www.pinterest.com/pin/303852306086547590/

[John G]

Normally, a body will feel cold to the touch after 4-6 hours. That means that if it falls from 36 degrees, it will fall by 3.2 - 4.8 degrees, approximately, reaching around 31-32 degrees. During the first three hours after death, medicos will typically be able to pick up some degree of warmth. And neither Phillips nor I said that Chapman felt ice cold, John - both of us knew/know that there was a little warmth left under the intestines.

Overall, your case is not a useful one. Chapman would not have grown cold in an hour only, we just don´t do that.

Christer,

Could you please cite a source for your proposition that body temperature would need to drop to as low as 31-32 degrees to be "cold to the touch"?


I have already demonstrated how Champan's body temperature could have fallen below 35 degrees (a hypothethermic state for a live person) after an hour, and that's without taking into consideration numerous environmental factors which could accelerate cooling rates: surface the body was on, partially clothed, body size, air movements and, per the Forensic Science Regulator, " The potential impact of injuries/wounds to the body (e.g large abdominal lacerations.)"

[JeffHamm]

According to Kori, the one who the Anti-Phillips always like to quote:



Table 4: Effect of Temperature in The Development of Rigor Mortis. Condition of body Time since death



1. If body feels warm and flaccid:
Dead less than 3 hours

2. If body feels warm and is stiff:
Dead from 3-8 hours

3. If body feels cold and is stiffc:
Dead from 8-36 hours

4. If body feels cold and flaccid:
Dead more than 36 hours


Chapman was cold, except that there was a certain remaining heat, under the intestines and stiffness was evidently commencing, I would say option 2 or 3 is the case here, having Dr. Phillips saying at least 2 hours probably more is 100% in agreement with resent studies, and by giving a minimum of 2 hours he was very very generous indeed taking into account all other factors that hasten the onset the Rigor.

Notice how they say (feels cold), no thermometer?! what the .. they must have lost their minds ?!


And yet we have lovely posters who tell us that Dr. Phillips statement should be safely discarded, was wrong, not accurate, to throw it out of the window, and that it was better for him not to do any examination and not to give any TOD at all, because we have learned now that it was by luck, and luck only, everything that they managed rightly to estimate.




The Baron

Hi The Baron,

Ok, let's use that table the way you want us to. Dr. Phillips reports she felt cold and was not stiff. Dr. Phillips indicates that rigor was commencing, which is not stiff (that would be complete rigor) that must mean you're saying she was therefore dead in the backyard for more than 36 hours. But later that day, Dr. Phillips reports rigor was now marked, so she was "cold and flacid", putting her at 36 hours incorrectly.

Why? Because the warm/cold touch test doesn't work for bodies found outside in the cold.

The table is based upon bodies found clothed, indoors, at room temperature, and not cut open and mutilated. Under those conditions, a body will cool more slowly becaues it's not in a cold environment, with breezes, and skin exposed, etc. The table is about the progression of rigor, where then, you really just need to differentiate between whether the body is flacid because rigor has not started, or is only just starting, or if it is flacid because they've been there long enough that rigor has passed. Under those circumstances, the touch test is enough information to use as a rule of thumb. But once the body is outside, in the cold, the warm/cold bit can't be used, and you have to wait to see if rigor starts up and gets stronger or weakens/never develops after discovery, and use that to determine if the body was found early or late. So basically, she was flacid, at the start of rigor, so death is estimated as within the previous 3 hours. Covering both time windows.

- Jeff

[FISHY1118]

Today, 05:44 AM
According to Kori, the one who the Anti-Phillips always like to quote:



Table 4: Effect of Temperature in The Development of Rigor Mortis. Condition of body Time since death



1. If body feels warm and flaccid:
Dead less than 3 hours

2. If body feels warm and is stiff:
Dead from 3-8 hours

3. If body feels cold and is stiffc:
Dead from 8-36 hours

4. If body feels cold and flaccid:
Dead more than 36 hours


Chapman was cold, except that there was a certain remaining heat, under the intestines and stiffness was evidently commencing, I would say option 2 or 3 is the case here, having Dr. Phillips saying at least 2 hours probably more is 100% in agreement with resent studies, and by giving a minimum of 2 hours he was very very generous indeed taking into account all other factors that hasten the onset the Rigor.

Notice how they say (feels cold), no thermometer?! what the .. they must have lost their minds ?!


And yet we have lovely posters who tell us that Dr. Phillips statement should be safely discarded, was wrong, not accurate, to throw it out of the window, and that it was better for him not to do any examination and not to give any TOD at all, because we have learned now that it was by luck, and luck only, everything that they managed rightly to estimate.

The Baron


Great post Baron, im getting a little sick and tired of posters claiming Dr Phillips was guessing and was lucky, and all the other rubbish when it came to his expert medical opinion with Chapman t/o/d

[The Baron]

According to Kori, the one who the Anti-Phillips always like to quote:



Table 4: Effect of Temperature in The Development of Rigor Mortis. Condition of body Time since death



1. If body feels warm and flaccid:
Dead less than 3 hours

2. If body feels warm and is stiff:
Dead from 3-8 hours

3. If body feels cold and is stiffc:
Dead from 8-36 hours

4. If body feels cold and flaccid:
Dead more than 36 hours


Chapman was cold, except that there was a certain remaining heat, under the intestines and stiffness was evidently commencing, I would say option 2 or 3 is the case here, having Dr. Phillips saying at least 2 hours probably more is 100% in agreement with resent studies, and by giving a minimum of 2 hours he was very very generous indeed taking into account all other factors that hasten the onset the Rigor.

Notice how they say (feels cold), no thermometer?! what the .. they must have lost their minds ?!


And yet we have lovely posters who tell us that Dr. Phillips statement should be safely discarded, was wrong, not accurate, to throw it out of the window, and that it was better for him not to do any examination and not to give any TOD at all, because we have learned now that it was by luck, and luck only, everything that they managed rightly to estimate.




The Baron

[JeffHamm]

"Fihserman: Once again, extrapolating the fact that hand palpation is less safe than thermometer reading into a belief that a doctor cannot tell warm bodies from cold ones is not a clever thing to do."

No, it's not particularly clever because it's manifestly obvious.

Ooops, I left out a bit as I got distracted at the time when posting. This should read:

"No, it's not particularly clever because it's manifestly obvious that the critical point of the discussion is whether or not the latter is useful for ToD estimations, and it is not."

Nobody, including myself, has ever suggested we cannot perceive that two things might differ in their relative temperatures. But I might as well argue that we know it's possible to tell the difference between cooked and raw potatoes so how much are fish on Tuesdays? Detecting a relative temperature difference is as meaningless as that statement with respect to basing an estimate for ToD. Even if the body felt warm, you have to factor in the clothing worn, and external temperature, and other things, as a body, well insulated, away from the breeze, in a warmer room, will not cool down as quickly as the same body in a colder room, and certainly not as fast to a body that has the clothes pulled up and exposes the abdomen and legs, and cuts open and removes flaps from the belly. That body will cool very rapidly to the touch; and a body with a larger surface area will cool at a different rate than a body with a smaller surface area, and so forth. And even if we knew all the important values, and the equations required to calculate the drop in temperature over time, you still need to know the starting temperature. You can't use the normal internal body temperature of 37C (+-1 roughly), as the surface of our skin is not at that temperature (feel your hand, then feel your table, they probably feel very similar in temperatures, but I doubt you've got your room at 37C).

Annie had been out in the streets since 1:30 am. Her hands and face at least would already feel colder to the touch than someone who was indoors. Seriously Fisherman, this isn't hard stuff, and no, it doesn't require being particularly clever either. It just requires a moment of stopping and thinking about what we're talking about; feeling a body and based upon that making an estimation of ToD. Once you consider the measurement taken, it becomes clear that the body surface temperature is so widely dependent upon things other than the ToD that the body surface temperature itself, let alone the more vague and variable "perceived warmth" metric, is just incapable of providing information useful towards making that estimation. It's an erroneous belief, held by the doctors in 1888, that it could be done, but we have learned since then they were wrong. Ergo, Dr. Phillips estimate is not worth considering.


- Jeff