• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Continuation Part Seven: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bill Williams said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsQLKWDskhA

Argue this if you want. at 7:34, the part where he hoists himself up without the bars is clipped out. However he summarizes it as, "bars or no bars, it's not a problem."

Suit yourself. For me, as he hoists himself up just using the sill, the bars (ie. not touching them, but they are still shallowing the place one can put oneself!) are an impediment.... if they are not there, it is simply no problem.

That we are here in 2014 after the channel 5 demo says buckets about what's been wrong with arguing this case.
Click to expand...

Very easy climb with or without bars, very obvious to me anyway. Looks like any reasonably athletic person could do it.
 
AmyStrange said:
-


-

The body loses (on average) 1.4 -1.5 degrees per hour after death.

Once the body temp gets closer to room temperature, it will then not be as reliable because (for one thing) it can stay at room temperature for as long the room stays at that temp.

Let's say room temperature is 70 degrees and Meredith wasn't sick and her body temp was a healthy 98.6 degrees. Subtract room temp from body temp and divide that number by 1.5:

98.6 - 70 / 1.5 = 19.07 hours

So technically, if death occurred less than 19 hours before the temp is taken, and as close to TOD as possible (say within six hours), then you should be able to pinpoint pretty accurately TOD, within an hour or less.

One draw back is that the further temps are apart, the faster the body temp will try to reach room temp. What that means is at death the body loses heat faster (if room temp is less than body temp), but as the body gets closer to room temp, the heat loss is slower.

This can be visualized by putting a body into either an oven or freezer with a temp difference of over 100 degrees and it's easier to understand why the body would lose or raise temps faster. This doesn't happen as dramatically when the body temp and room temp are closer together.

Of course, the calculations are a little different depending on whether the victim is wearing clothes, in water, and also what the weather is like or whether there is a heat or cold source nearby. Also, if the victim is in a fight and their body temp is raised, but all these things can be put into the calculation to make it more accurate.

In conclusion, unless you know with certainty that the TOD was longer than 20 hours (one way is by feeling the body to see how warm it is), TOD of death can be accurately calculated to within an hour or closer if the body temp is taken closer to death, up to six hours after, in my opinion.

After six hours, it jumps to an margin of error of three hours and the closer to room temp (the body gets) the larger the margin of error. But, if they had taken the body temp when Meredith was found, her body would have been warmer than room temp and a calculation could have been made to within three to six hours of actual time of death. That in conjunction with last meal, post mortem lividity, and rigor mortis would have helped tremendously. More evidence is always better than less. It seems the PLE liked less evidence rather than more. They like speculation rather better than actual data.

Waiting more than 24 hours (not to mention also moving the body into another environment and room temperature) DID make the body temp useless, because by then it would have loss all it's body heat and practical use as a gauge for time estimation.

Hope this helps,

d

-
Click to expand...

Thanks. Just a small nitpick: I thought the 1.5º were Celsius, not Farenheit?
 
Chris_Halkides said:
When one does not use the bars, their presence made it harder to climb and to perch. Yes, the video cut away momentarily, but so what?
Click to expand...

Chris,
I just wanted to mention that the podcast was terrific. The way the DNA issues were explained, made it easy for even me to understand. Wonderful job!
 
We don't need no steenkin' facts...

-

GWCarver said:
So, did Mignini ever explain how doing something as routine as taking the temperature of a murder victim's body would destroy evidence? If one took the probe or thermometer used and dropped it into an evidence bag after taking the temperature, what evidence would be missing or destroyed?

I think Mignini didn't allow the body temperature to be taken for the same reason he didn't record the interrogations. It helps him to present evidence favorable to his prosecution rather than allowing his case to be nailed down by facts. After roughly 30 years of experience, I think one can reasonably presume everything he does or doesn't do is for a reason.
Click to expand...
-

I totally agree. It seems that facts just get in the way of speculation. And speculating is what they like to do more than anything,

d

-
 
Last edited:
Katody Matrass said:
Looks to me like he's on the ledge at 1:47. Without using the bars.
Click to expand...

His arms are on the ledge but he up on it which was the contention. The point was that the video should be shown and that the video showed that he could climb without the bars and that the bars made the climb more difficult. That isn't shown. It is not in the video. He says he could lift himself but they don't show it. Why didn't they show it?

This seems to be a case of confirmation bias. People so much want the video to show something they see it when it isn't there.

In fact he says specifically the bars are not a problem, which contradicts what Bill contended.
 
Bill Williams said:
This is a screen capture....

Speak for yourself! I'd never get in in a million years!

The elephant in the room!!???!??? The bars need to be there in the first place....
Click to expand...


And he's not on the ledge.

And Rose the discussion wasn't whether the climb was easy or not. Bill contended that the bars were an impediment and that the guy climbed without them but there is no video showing that.

The climber himself says the bars were not a problem.

Why do you think they didn't show the easy lift to the ledge but instead cut to another camera leaving out the actual move to the ledge?
 
Bill Williams said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsQLKWDskhA

Argue this if you want. at 7:34, the part where he hoists himself up without the bars is clipped out. However he summarizes it as, "bars or no bars, it's not a problem."

Suit yourself. For me, as he hoists himself up just using the sill, the bars (ie. not touching them, but they are still shallowing the place one can put oneself!) are an impediment.... if they are not there, it is simply no problem.

That we are here in 2014 after the channel 5 demo says buckets about what's been wrong with arguing this case.
Click to expand...

RoseMontague said:
Very easy climb with or without bars, very obvious to me anyway. Looks like any reasonably athletic person could do it.
Click to expand...

This was one of the very first things I looked into in Aug 2011 when coming on board. I found Kermit's powerpoint on TJMK, the powerpoint which showed, "the impossibility of the climb".

On top of that was the claim that an experienced burglar would have chosen another point of entry, most notably the balcony on the other side of the building.

Since then, people have posted that the balcony is actually MORE exposed to the road (as it curves around), and lit by a streetlamp to boot!

Then - Channel 5 does the documentary.....

That this is even argued in 2014 is ridiculous. I realize I am open to accusations of confirmation bias on this... but, really..... does ANYONE now think that climb and an intended-burglary through that window is at all doubtful?

On the other matter.... people also doubt that Knox was raising the alarm, pretty much all morning on Nov 2 once she'd returned to Raffaele's apartment. Machiavelli wonders, "Why the 18 minute wait until she called 112?"

To this others (appropriately ask): "Why did Filomena herself not call the carabinieri? When she said, 'this is no burglary', is that because she could not admit that maybe Rudy had stolen her marijuana?"

Filomena is allowed to rummage through her room.... Filomena swipes her own laptop.... Filomena lawyers up immediately, and tells people it is because she's worried she'll be either held liable for the dmaage to her room, or liable for rent for the months-to-come because it's behind crime scene tape....

... and yet is it Knox criticized for being insensitive, for delaying calling 112... sheesh. Please note, I am not accusing Filomena of anything.... but she, herself, must feel lucky that a murder eclipsed any fears she'd had that she'd be busted for drugs... or worse, have this murder pinned on her because she was a key holder.....
 
Grinder said:
And he's not on the ledge.

And Rose the discussion wasn't whether the climb was easy or not. Bill contended that the bars were an impediment and that the guy climbed without them but there is no video showing that.

The climber himself says the bars were not a problem.

Why do you think they didn't show the easy lift to the ledge but instead cut to another camera leaving out the actual move to the ledge?
Click to expand...

Sheesh Grinder... go to Channel 5 yourself and look at the non-youtube video....

Or else I will concede.... you win!
 
-

MDDVS said:
Thanks. Just a small nitpick: I thought the 1.5º were Celsius, not Farenheit?
Click to expand...
-

Good question and not a nitpick (it keeps me honest). I believe it's Fahrenheit, but I could be wrong (it was a long time ago that I learned this, 20+ years ago) so let's use Celsius instead to calculate:

37 c (98.6 f) - 21.1 c (70 f)/ - 1.5 = 10.6 hours

The rest of my explanation is technically accurate and the same, except that Meredith's body would have reached room temp by the time it was found. Room temp is still helpful because even if the body feels cold it could still have registered a few degrees warmer than room temp and more evidence is always better when assembling the facts rather than less evidence. More evidence is NEVER useless.

The only time people say that is when the lack of factual evidence helps their speculative cases, and body temp is factual evidence, not speculative. You can speculate about what the factual evidence means, but you are still bound by the factual evidence on how far you can speculate about it,

d

-
 
Last edited:
Bill Williams said:
Sheesh Grinder... go to Channel 5 yourself and look at the non-youtube video....

Or else I will concede.... you win!
Click to expand...

One of our English posters verified that the YouTube and the Ch. 5 recording he made were identical.

The contentions you made were not accurate.
 
Grinder said:
His arms are on the ledge but he up on it which was the contention. The point was that the video should be shown and that the video showed that he could climb without the bars and that the bars made the climb more difficult. That isn't shown. It is not in the video.
Click to expand...
To me it is. He's on the ledge at 1:47. Not just arms. If not for the bars blocking the way he would be inside.


He says he could lift himself but they don't show it. Why didn't they show it?
Click to expand...
They do show it, IMO. He lifts himself onto the ledge. If you mean showing the entry, the answer is because the bars block the way.

In fact he says specifically the bars are not a problem, which contradicts what Bill contended.
Click to expand...
He says climbing without bars is not a problem, while showing it.
 
Last edited:
Bill Williams said:
When you see the demonstration, it becomes clear that the bars (on today, not there on Nov 1, 2007) are an impediment to climbing, not a help.
Click to expand...

This is what started it.

Katody Matrass said:
To me it is. He's on the ledge at 1:47. Not just arms. If not for the bars blocking the way he would be inside.
Click to expand...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JL6nIkaYLs#t=90

He isn't even close to being in - his waist is below the sill. There is nothing in the video that makes it appear that the bars are an impediment. NOTHING.


They do show it, IMO. He lifts himself onto the ledge. If you mean showing the entry, the answer is because the bars block the way.
Click to expand...

They show him with his waist below the sill and then after switching cameras he is on the sill. They even pan to the lawyers in between.

He says climbing without bars is not a problem, while showing it.
Click to expand...

And that was my point from the beginning. Bill has repeated this and he was wrong each time. I assume there is somewhere else that this factoid is accepted as fact and people love to repeat it.

The lawyers even make the point of asking if the climb would be as possible without bars. They don't ask if the bars make it harder. Obviously the bars make it much, much harder to enter the room. But not to climbing which was the contention.
 
-

SOME MORE INFO:

FROM: http://forensicpathologyonline.com/e-book/post-mortem-changes/cooling-body

"The cooling of the body Algor mortis; "chill death" after death is a complex process, which does not occur at the same rate throughout the body. The body cools more rapidly on the surface and more slowly in the interior. For about half to one hour after death, the rectal temperature falls little or not at all. Then the cooling rate is relatively uniform in its slope. Then it gradually becomes slower as the temperature of the air is approached. The body heat is lost by conduction, convection and radiation. Only a small fraction of heat is lost by evaporation of fluid from the skin. In serious illness, circulation beings to fail before death, and hands and feet become cooler than the rest of the body; this coolness gradually extends towards the trunk... "

-
==========
http://www.trutv.com/shows/forensic_files/techniques/tod.html

"TECHNIQUES

"ESTIMATING TIME OF DEATH (TOD)

"Estimating Time of Death (TOD)

"Coroner measures temperature of liver to determine time of death.
Medical investigators look for various signs to help them estimate a time frame - usually a two to four-hour window of time - in which the victim probably died. These signs may include the following:

"Rigor mortis
(the stiffening of the muscles that occurs shortly after death)
Lividity (pooling of blood)
Body core temperature
Clouding of the corneas
Evidence of a decompositional process
Presence/absence of purge fluid
Drying of the tissues.

"The organs most commonly used to determine the body core temperature are the liver and the brain, because of their mass and density. After death, the body temperature falls toward the temperature of the surroundings at a rate of about one-and-a-half degrees per hour. This rate will vary depending on the amount of body fat, the amount of blood loss, the amount of type of clothing worn by the victim, the location of the body (whether it was lying near a heating or air conditioning vent or inside a cooler), and, if the body was found outdoors, on the weather conditions, including air temperature, wind, and precipitation (rain or snow).

Diagram showing how liver temperature, relative to room temperature, determines time of death. Since the temperature of a dead body falls at about one-and-a half degrees per hour, the 87 degree liver temperature indicates death at 6-7 hours before.

SOURCES:
Zachary Lysek, Northampton County Coroner, Northampton County, PA
Gardner R. Crime Lab 101. New York, Walker and Company, 1992.

-
==========
FROM: http://www.dundee.ac.uk/forensicmedicine/notes/timedeath.pdf

"Considering the variables which influence the rate of body heat loss, the best one can say about the reliability of algor mortis as a post mortem clock is that it permits a rough approximation of the time of death. Errors in over-estimating and under-estimating the post mortem interval based on body cooling are common, even in the face of considerable experience by those making the estimate. Body temperature as an indicator of the post mortem interval should be correlated with all other phenomenon and observations utilised in establishing the time of death". (Ref. 12 at p. 164.)

"Formerly, it was a hallowed "rule of thumb" that the rectal temperature dropped at an average of 11/2oF per hour, rather faster during the first few hours. This method was a guarantee of inaccuracy, but little has been found to replace it. In previous editions of this book a simple calculation based on the drop in centrigrade from 37o related to a factor for environmental temperature was advocated, but further experience has shown serious errors in the method, and it is now no longer recommended". (Ref. 8 at p. 119-120.)

d

-
 
AmyStrange said:
-


-

Good question and not a nitpick (it keeps me honest). I believe it's Fahrenheit, but I could be wrong (it was a long time ago that I learned this, 20+ years ago) so let's use Celsius instead to calculate:

37 c (98.6 f) - 21.1 c (70 f)/ - 1.5 = 10.6 hours

The rest of my explanation is technically accurate and the same, except that Meredith's body would have reached room temp by the time it was found. Room temp is still helpful because even if the body feels cold it could still have registered a few degrees warmer than room temp and more evidence is always better when assembling the facts rather than less evidence. More evidence is NEVER useless.

The only time people say that is when the lack of factual evidence helps their speculative cases, and body temp is factual evidence, not speculative. You can speculate about what the factual evidence means, but you are still bound by the factual evidence on how far you can speculate about it,

d

-
Click to expand...

Based on what I found quickly on the web the drop is roughly 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit per hour. However the drop is exponential and not linear as your post suggests. That is over time as the temperature of the body drops the rate of cooling declines as well.

I didn't read the entire source I found for this, but the source didn't seem to have some of the detail that I was looking for. My understanding of the situation is that forensic examiners have very detailed tables that include the ambient temperature, the body weight and the kind of clothing the deceased was wearing to more accurately predict the time of death.

As an aside, in television dramas that deal with the issue taking the body temperature is absolutely standard procedure. The first issue when a dead body is found where murder is suspected is often what was the time of death. It strikes me as one of the strangest and apparently most incompetent moments of this case that the body temperature wasn't taken at the earliest possible opportunity.

http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4412&context=jclc

Source is from 1956. I am sure there are many other sources that are more recent.
 
-

davefoc said:
Based on what I found quickly on the web the drop is roughly 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit per hour. However the drop is exponential and not linear as your post suggests. That is over time as the temperature of the body drops the rate of cooling declines as well.

I didn't read the entire source I found for this, but the source didn't seem to have some of the detail that I was looking for. My understanding of the situation is that forensic examiners have very detailed tables that include the ambient temperature, the body weight and the kind of clothing the deceased was wearing to more accurately predict the time of death.

As an aside, in television dramas that deal with the issue taking the body temperature is absolutely standard procedure. The first issue when a dead body is found where murder is suspected is often what was the time of death. It strikes me as one of the strangest and apparently most incompetent moments of this case that the body temperature wasn't taken at the earliest possible opportunity.

http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4412&context=jclc

Source is from 1956. I am sure there are many other sources that are more recent.
Click to expand...
-

Actually I said the 1.5 degrees is average. If you read my original post again (a few post up from the celsius post you quoted), you'll see that I explained it wasn't linear; cooling is faster at first then slows as body temp reaches room temp.

I did forget to add that the outside cools faster than the inside. The best temperature gauges are the liver and brain, but the rectum is a pretty close third. I also didn't explain that the rectum actually stays as warm as (if not warmer than) room temp for an hour or two after death,

d

-
 
Last edited:
Grinder said:
This is what started it.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JL6nIkaYLs#t=90

He isn't even close to being in - his waist is below the sill. There is nothing in the video that makes it appear that the bars are an impediment. NOTHING.




They show him with his waist below the sill and then after switching cameras he is on the sill. They even pan to the lawyers in between.



And that was my point from the beginning. Bill has repeated this and he was wrong each time. I assume there is somewhere else that this factoid is accepted as fact and people love to repeat it.

The lawyers even make the point of asking if the climb would be as possible without bars. They don't ask if the bars make it harder. Obviously the bars make it much, much harder to enter the room. But not to climbing which was the contention.
Click to expand...
Bill\Grinder


Do either of you recall? What were the conclusions of the channel 5 programme self-defence expert used to demonstrate whether a single person could have restrained Meredith and use a knife at the same time?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom