Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Chapman’s death.

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

  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    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.
    Cachous is not some brand name item, it is a generic name for a breath freshening lozenge, of which there were plenty of varieties available in London during the LVP. If you are referring to some kind of Lancôme version of them, I would agree that expensive breath fresheners were beyond the reach of the average Unfortunate. Since they could get a bed for 4D a night, and she was paid 6d for cleaning that afternoon, there was plenty to get the flowers and the fresheners contextually.

    Leave a comment:


  • DJA
    replied
    Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

    I remember when I told you that convection was an important factor in the cooling off of a dead body and you claimed I was stupid and arrogant. You added that it was all a question of radiation. Here is some more information in the errand that I saved for you:

    "During life the human body loses heat by radiation, convection, and evaporation. Heat loss by conduction is not an important factor during life, but after death it may be considerable if the body is lying on a cold surface. The fall in body temperature after death mainly depends upon a loss of heat through radiation and convection, but evaporation may be a significant factor if the body or clothing is wet. The cooling of a body is a predominantly physical process which, therefore, is predominantly determined by physical rules."

    So if I´m arrogant, I am in fact arrogant and correct.

    So much for one of us ignoring the facts.
    Heat radiates.

    Chapman was well insulated by clothing,as were the other C5.

    She was lying on a cold backyard.

    Those are the facts.

    Shame you are incapable of dragging up relevant facts,like the publication Joshua and I posted about.

    Good save on your sweetmeats vs cachous post

    Leave a comment:


  • John G
    replied
    Originally posted by DJA View Post

    By 1895 the French cachous were an established item,however not in 1888.Spent a fair bit of time on that a decade ago.

    0/3 was the AWE for medical attendance of a small family in 1888
    Yes, apparently as cheap as a quarter pound of barley sugar. Mind you, seems about right for Dr Phillips!

    Leave a comment:


  • DJA
    replied
    Originally posted by John G View Post

    Well, according to the Harrods catalogue of 1895, cachous were priced at 0/3 per ounce, although I seriously doubt that Stride purchased her cachous from Harrods, so she may have paid considerably less. Anyway, to put that into perspective 0/3 was equivalent to the price of 3 candles in 1888 or, if you prefer, around half the price of the average weekly expenditure on cocoa: :http://www.victorianweb.org/economics/wages4.html
    By 1895 the French cachous were an established item,however not in 1888.Spent a fair bit of time on that a decade ago.

    0/3 was the AWE for medical attendance of a small family in 1888

    Leave a comment:


  • John G
    replied
    Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
    On body temperatures, from a book on mountaneering, where hypothermia is a real risk: "Approaching a body temperature of 32 degrees Celsius, uncovered skin can begin to swell and color, feeling ice cold to the touch. At this stage, a person might be semi-conscious, with dilated pupils and a barely registrable pulse."

    Does this remind us of Annie Chapman? Really?
    That's hypothermia. Do you have source material for the proposition that a body would have to reach 32 degrees C to be cold to the touch? Where did Dr Phillips say that Chapman felt iced cold?
    Last edited by John G; 09-26-2019, 05:39 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • John G
    replied
    Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

    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!
    I agree that rigor has many variables, which is why it is such an unreliable indicator and should be discounted. Two hours is not quick onset, but within the average range. Chapman was clearly severely undernourished, so I see no reason why her initial body temperature couldn't have been in the very low range, say, 35.5 C. 1 hour after death this would have fallen to around 34.63 degrees C. Note: a body temperature lower than 35C equates to hypothermia.

    Have you a source for the argument that the body temperature would have to sink as low as 32 degrees to he regarded as cold to the touch?
    Last edited by John G; 09-26-2019, 05:36 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fisherman
    replied
    Originally posted by DJA View Post

    Both you and Shylock make up "facts" to suit yourselves and then embark on a circular argument totally ignoring the facts.

    Hypothermia - Wikipedia
    I remember when I told you that convection was an important factor in the cooling off of a dead body and you claimed I was stupid and arrogant. You added that it was all a question of radiation. Here is some more information in the errand that I saved for you:

    "During life the human body loses heat by radiation, convection, and evaporation. Heat loss by conduction is not an important factor during life, but after death it may be considerable if the body is lying on a cold surface. The fall in body temperature after death mainly depends upon a loss of heat through radiation and convection, but evaporation may be a significant factor if the body or clothing is wet. The cooling of a body is a predominantly physical process which, therefore, is predominantly determined by physical rules."

    So if I´m arrogant, I am in fact arrogant and correct.

    So much for one of us ignoring the facts.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fisherman
    replied
    On body temperatures, from a book on mountaneering, where hypothermia is a real risk: "Approaching a body temperature of 32 degrees Celsius, uncovered skin can begin to swell and color, feeling ice cold to the touch. At this stage, a person might be semi-conscious, with dilated pupils and a barely registrable pulse."

    Does this remind us of Annie Chapman? Really?

    Leave a comment:


  • John G
    replied
    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.
    Well, according to the Harrods catalogue of 1895, cachous were priced at 0/3 per ounce, although I seriously doubt that Stride purchased her cachous from Harrods, so she may have paid considerably less. Anyway, to put that into perspective 0/3 was equivalent to the price of 3 candles in 1888 or, if you prefer, around half the price of the average weekly expenditure on cocoa: :http://www.victorianweb.org/economics/wages4.html

    Leave a comment:


  • DJA
    replied
    Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

    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.
    Both you and Shylock make up "facts" to suit yourselves and then embark on a circular argument totally ignoring the facts.

    Hypothermia - Wikipedia

    Leave a comment:


  • Fisherman
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fisherman
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fisherman
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fisherman
    replied
    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!

    Leave a comment:


  • DJA
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X