Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes
View Post
Saying that there is NOTHING reliable about TOD estimates is not true, by the way. It is not an exact science by any means and was less so back then, but it nevertheless applies that when somebody is very freshly dead, that somebody will not be all cold. Yes, I know: maybe Phillips wasn't up to scratch (or touch) that day, but I really think he was very certain and for good reasons. Not least because there was onsetting rigor that should not have been there if the victim had only been dead less than an hour.
The closer in time to death the medico examines a victim, the smaller the chance that he will get things very wrong. If an hour only had passed, the body would still be warm, simple as. And there would not be any onsetting rigor, simple as.
However, if Chapman had been dead for some three hours or so, then although it was cold, there would probably be a commencing rigor and the body would be cold, or almost cold - which was the case here.
Witnesses are very often unreliable. Witnesses in high-profile cases like the Ripper case, are perhaps even more likely to be unreliable, not least in the respect that they may be making things up or exaggerating to make it into the papers. It is not as if we were not aware of the mechanism, is it?
Let the Baron be happy about my post if he wants to, Herlock. If we were to disallow views wo do not like, we would run the risk of becoming Ripperologists.
Comment