An idea about the signs of asphyxia

[Errata]

So, I could use some hole poking in a idea here. I'm not sure if this would explain the asphyxia, but I think it's an interesting idea.

Wickerman and I recently went a few rounds on strangulation and throttling and why these women didn't fight like hell. And it got me thinking that there had to be something else going on. So I sort of backtracked and came across something that might work.

I was looking for something that would not allow the victim to cry out, move, fight, or do much of anything until unconsciousness, when they would be laid down and their throats were cut. But it at least one, maybe two or three instances, either not work, or not cause death. Because Nichols and Chapman showed clear signs of asphyxia. The others did not.

And then after some very peculiar reading I came across something called a reflex vagal inhibition death. Which is where through some mechanism the Vagus nerves are overstimulated, causing cardiac arrest. A punch to the throat, strangulation, hanging, whatever. But it doesn't always happen. There are some martial arts moves that enhance the possibility, but there is no guaranteed way to make this work. But the most common way this ends up killing people is choking, like on a ham sandwich. Now these women clearly didn't choke on food. But one of the Coroners mentioned that Chapman (?) would not have been able to cry out had she been gagged. Which got me thinking.

If Jack the Ripper used a gag, not one of those cop comedy ones, but a real one, shoved down past the epiglottis, this not only prevents crying out, but also severely inhibits any vocalization. It also makes a person literally gag, constantly, which generates a lot of nasal mucus. So even when you can breathe through your nose between gagging, its too stuffed to get any real air. Evidently this works fairly well. It isn't as fast as strangulation, but it has the advantage of leaving the killer free to physically subdue the victim. So they can't fight. It leaves them helpless until they die. Constantly retching might do that as well, but this would ensure it. This could explain why Nichols and Chapman had signs of asphyxia. AND Eddowes didn't. (personally, I don't either Stride or Kelly were JtR's victims, and that is going to color my analysis on this)

Neither Nichols nor Chapman have all the signs that one normally associates with death by asphyxia. I think it's possible that Nichols was suffocated by the gag. Not to death, but to unconsciousness. I think Chapman, because she was dying of lung disease had a much more fragile system. I think the gag caused reflex vagal inhibition death. Which could account for the earwitness. And I think that either the gag didn't suffocate Eddowes at all (although it still would have kept her quiet) or something made him not wait for it to work, and he killed her while she was still aware.

Major holes in this theory include:
Limited victim selection
no evidence
how do you put a gag in someone's throat without them biting the crap out of you?

It's an idea.

[Wickerman]

....how do you put a gag in someone's throat without them biting the crap out of you?

Or more to the point, how do you install a gag without her screaming & shounting first?
A gag is what you install 'after' you have subdued the victim, preferably with their hands and feet tied together.

Regards, Jon S.

[Errata]

Or more to the point, how do you install a gag without her screaming & shounting first?
A gag is what you install 'after' you have subdued the victim, preferably with their hands and feet tied together.

Regards, Jon S.

I mean, people are gagged all the time. Relatively speaking. I mean even in your scenario, valid by the way, a person could easily be screaming their head off while you tie their hands and feet together. So if the screaming doesn't matter during that phase, why would it matter after?

And there is still the teeth. Which is a not insignificant obstacle.

It's not that I don't see how a gag is put in this situation, I don't see how it's put in in any situation. Even if they are bound. But I have profound bite fear which might be limiting my imagination. Maybe you tell a really funny joke and when they start laughing just jam it in? And I'm only kind of kidding, because I'm not sure that it isn't possible to do a fairly good job of it by surprise.

Although there was this strange turn of the century mini fad of shoving rags soaked in various liquids down peoples throats...

[lynn cates]

bruises

Hello Errata. Your theory might work for Liz, Kate and MJ. Polly and Annie, however, had bruises on the face and throat corresponding to a man's fingers/thumb. Polly's tongue was lacerated and Annie's face was swollen and her tongue protruded. If she had died from blood loss, she would have been livid.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

...It's not that I don't see how a gag is put in this situation, I don't see how it's put in in any situation. Even if they are bound.

I was trying to point out, rather briefly, that your victim already needs to be physically restrained before a gag is applied. That being the case, you don't want to try to gag an unrestrained person out in the street, it simply will not work.

How to apply a gag?
Pinch the victims nose so they cannot breathe, they will open their mouth however briefly.
Alternately, assuming your victim has enough teeth missing that they can still breathe between their teeth with their jaws still tightly closed, take a blunt instrument and smash their teeth in.
You cannot clench your jaws shut with a mouthful of broken teeth.

But as I say, your victim is already physically restrained before you attempt to apply the gag.

Regards, Jon S.

[lynn cates]

gag

Hello Errata, Jon. Coincidentally, Phillips was asked precisely this question. He pointed to the signs of strangulation.

Cheers.
LC

[Errata]

See, I was under the impression that the bruises were from positioning the head to open up the throat. Well, to expose the throat. Certainly the jaw bruises.

And I don't think that Chapman died of blood loss, I think she may have had her heart stop from vagal inhibition. Essentially, she died of heart attack before the onset of too many signs of asphyxia.

And the lacerations on the tongue are also consistent with having a gag put in, and with the act of gagging. Essentially the spasms of the tongue when you retch grate against the teeth and tear up the sides.

I feel like actually getting the gag in is a surmountable problem. I just don't know how. I still don't think I believe this is what happened, but I feel like I need more holes to dismiss it as a possibility.

[Rya]

Well, Errata, the simplest way to gag someone is by ensuring their acquiescence through a show of deadly force. The killer would need some ruse, some credible demand, that would (a) persuade the woman that force and the gag that came with it was necessary plus (b) assure the victim that she would remain unharmed assuming she cooperated. This idea, that the killer, far from ambushing these women in some dramatic fashion, may have negotiated their silence up to the point where he had complete control over the situation, has always seemed rather plausible to me. Frankly however, if he could do such a thing as I'm suggesting, its unlikely that he would have needed a gag at all. It would most likely seem superfluous and therefore arouse suspicion rather than confidence. And what sort of demand could he plausibly make on a homeless women selling her body on the street for a few pence anyway?

Also, in order for the kind of vagal inhibition you're describing to take place, the gag (cloth or whatever) would have to have been forced very far into the throat of the victim, at least enough to induce the gag reflex. Trying to do that would inspire immediate resistance, and probably end up in a struggle as manic as if he throttled the women with his hands. It seems like an excessively laborious exercise to me. Why not just knock them over the head? Except we don't seem to have any evidence of that sort of force being used.

Perhaps we are simply too hung up on the issue of noise. I would wager that at least one if not more of these women did manage to cry out, perhaps repeatedly. Perhaps, in the deadening and gruesome cacophony of the poor neighborhoods where these crimes took place, nobody was listening.

[Errata]

Well, Errata, the simplest way to gag someone is by ensuring their acquiescence through a show of deadly force. The killer would need some ruse, some credible demand, that would (a) persuade the woman that force and the gag that came with it was necessary plus (b) assure the victim that she would remain unharmed assuming she cooperated. This idea, that the killer, far from ambushing these women in some dramatic fashion, may have negotiated their silence up to the point where he had complete control over the situation, has always seemed rather plausible to me. Frankly however, if he could do such a thing as I'm suggesting, its unlikely that he would have needed a gag at all. It would most likely seem superfluous and therefore arouse suspicion rather than confidence. And what sort of demand could he plausibly make on a homeless women selling her body on the street for a few pence anyway?

Also, in order for the kind of vagal inhibition you're describing to take place, the gag (cloth or whatever) would have to have been forced very far into the throat of the victim, at least enough to induce the gag reflex. Trying to do that would inspire immediate resistance, and probably end up in a struggle as manic as if he throttled the women with his hands. It seems like an excessively laborious exercise to me. Why not just knock them over the head? Except we don't seem to have any evidence of that sort of force being used.

Perhaps we are simply too hung up on the issue of noise. I would wager that at least one if not more of these women did manage to cry out, perhaps repeatedly. Perhaps, in the deadening and gruesome cacophony of the poor neighborhoods where these crimes took place, nobody was listening.

Yeah I thought about that. I'm not really all the familiar with the mechanism in the throat, but given my own experiences with intubations and scopes it seems pretty possible that he could just just ram the gag down the pharynx by simple force. Then he could just clamp his arms around her until she stopped struggling.

I'm not going to say the noise thing doesn't bother me. It does. But it's the lack of physical struggle that I find most baffling. The problem with strangulation is that it leaves the victims body free to flail, lash out, try to run, tear up the ground... the immediate surrounds, the victim, and the assailant should have taken quite a beating, if only for about 10-30 seconds. A gag solves that. A rolled up piece of leather could be jammed down the throat pretty quickly, and that leaves the killer's hands free to subdue the victim.

But if that were true, then it changes things some. Strangulation doesn't necessarily mean something. It can be just a way to get to the parts that do mean something, like the mutilations, or perhaps even the throat cutting. A gag means something. Not that it doesn't have benefits over throttling, but if you are going to use a gag, you have to on some level appreciate the symbolism. Which would mean that it would be part of his ritual, not just a means to an end.

In a way, if the grapes bit had been true, it would have provided an answer as to how he gained their cooperation long enough to shove a gag in. Open your mouth and close your eyes. But clearly we are not meant to have such facile explanations.

[Wickerman]

..... he could just just ram the gag down the pharynx by simple force. Then he could just clamp his arms around her until she stopped struggling.

What are your arms and legs doing while this stranger is "simply?" ramming something down your throat?

What would convince you to allow a stranger to force something down your throat?
The scenario does not seem logical, unless, you have already been tied up by the killer.

Regards, Jon S.

[Errata]

What are your arms and legs doing while this stranger is "simply?" ramming something down your throat?

What would convince you to allow a stranger to force something down your throat?
The scenario does not seem logical, unless, you have already been tied up by the killer.

Regards, Jon S.

Yeah, application of a gag is a problem. No denying it.

But to a certain extent, the body's reaction to a gag aids the killer. Let's say somehow, someone convinces me to close my eyes and open my mouth. (Not that I think this is what happened, but it facilitates the explanation) If someone were to then ram a rolled up piece of leather down my pharynx, the first that happens is that I would go instantly rigid for a split second. Then the gag reflex kicks in, which means trying to lean over, reverse peristalsis starts, mouth opens very wide. Every unconscious internal movement is devoted to vomiting up the gag. Humans are incredibly vulnerable while retching. It is insanely difficult to achieve any purposeful movement when we vomit. We're just helpless. Even when we are sick and aware of the fact we are in no danger, and just puking because we have the flu, we can't even manage to pull our own hair out of the way.

When people are retching, they aren't breathing, and they aren't trying to breathe. Eventually we have to draw breath, but it either waits until the retching pauses, or it doesn't and people choke on their vomit. It doesn't seem like the body should prioritize vomiting over breathing, but if you can't stop long enough to draw a clean breath, then maybe it does. But either way, If someone shoves something down my throat, there are going to be several seconds before I realize my airway is compromised. Even then I still might not be capable of purposeful movement. But there would be a short time where I am not even trying to get my hands up to my mouth, So I don't think restraint is going to be at all difficult once the gag goes in.

But as usual, it breaks down at the point where the gag has to go in. I mean, there are ways. But in order to go through all of various scenarios that could get a gag in a woman's mouth like that, the gag would have to be important. I mean, doing it would not be easy or particularly efficient. So you'd have to really want to do it to bother with the whole thing.

The easiest thing would be to hit them in the solar plexus really hard, and then just jam it in while they stand there gaping like a fish. But that would mean bruises on the solar plexus. Of which there are none.

I realize the unlikeliness of this theory. Of course, after rejecting hitting them over the head, everything starts sliding into unlikely by various degrees. And any unlikely theory can be potentially explained away by fetish. But is there something in the evidence that rules this out? Is something there, ergo it didn't happen, or is something not there, ergo it didn't happen? I've been over it, and I haven't found anything that stands out to me. But it doesn't matter how likely it is if the evidence rules it out. So I would ask that judgements on probability be set aside for now, and poke at it in terms of evidence or mechanics. Like maybe gagging someone thoroughly enough to inhibit the vagus nerve means that other physiological signs should be there, and are not. Or maybe certain bruises or certain marks rules it out. I need help finding out if this is possible. Probable is the next problem.

[Errata]

Is it possible that these women had their necks broken?

And it seems like the answer is an obvious no, and probably is, but I was just reading a story about how 1 in 20 broken necks are missed in the first round of examinations today. Which is a little mind boggling. But with deep throat cuts and probably a lot of nicks on the cervical spine, it would seem like peri-mortem spinal injury could easily be chalked up to post mortem knife wounds.

I mean its not easy to break a neck, although you can even break a neck without actually fracturing anything. But in a lot of ways it makes more sense than any kind of strangulation. It's quicker, quieter, and if it doesn't kill instantly, cervical fractures take out the diaphragm, and C1 or C2 fractures tank the lungs. So the victim would suffocate to death.

And bigger people have bigger necks, which makes them harder to break. So it seems like a larger woman has less of a chance of a clean break, and more of a chance of suffocating to death. And the way you grab someone from behind to break the neck could explain the jaw bruises.

But would that have been missed? Or not mentioned because the neck wounds made the state of the spine fairly obvious?

And there is something indelicate I have never been clear on. And I don't know if it's because it's indelicate and these are Victorians, or because I just lack this knowledge. Death often leads to incontinence. And I haven't seen that mentioned, though to be honest I haven't looked for it. But it is a certainty with certain kinds of death or injury, and if it didn't happen then many possible injuries can be ruled out.

[RedBundy13]

So, I could use some hole poking in a idea here. I'm not sure if this would explain the asphyxia, but I think it's an interesting idea.



Major holes in this theory include:
how do you put a gag in someone's throat without them biting the crap out of you?

It's an idea.

I do like your idea. If you were still wondering how to get a gag in someone's mouth without too much of a fight? Heres one way, the attacker could attack from behind and put her in a choke hold with one arm and insert the gag with the other when the victim opens her mouth trying to catch a breath.

[RedBundy13]

And bigger people have bigger necks, which makes them harder to break. So it seems like a larger woman has less of a chance of a clean break, and more of a chance of suffocating to death. And the way you grab someone from behind to break the neck could explain the jaw bruises.



And there is something indelicate I have never been clear on. And I don't know if it's because it's indelicate and these are Victorians, or because I just lack this knowledge. Death often leads to incontinence. And I haven't seen that mentioned, though to be honest I haven't looked for it. But it is a certainty with certain kinds of death or injury, and if it didn't happen then many possible injuries can be ruled out.

It is actually extremely difficult to break an adults neck with bare hands. Not impossible, but very hard. And in my opinion it probably wouldn't be something a person would rely upon to kill or disable his victims. But like you say it can't be ruled out. If 1 in 20 people today are missed for broken necks, I would guess that it would be like about 1 in 3 or 4 people would have been missed back then. Maybe even 50% would have been missed???

[DVV]

I am such an irresistible male that women usually suffocate when they see me for the first time, but neither Blotchy nor Sailor Man seem to have been charming as I am, I must say.