Merged Spontaneous Human Combustion In Ireland

[SnidelyW]

Just a quick note on fire extension- the spread of fire from one area to another. It is never a good idea to assume anything from fire extension alone. Since this fire was apparently localized to the abdomen of the casualty, that alone does not support any specific conclusion.
I must stress that forming any conclusions about fire cause and determination in this case without access to all the evidence, including photos of the body in situ, is only speculation, and should always be taken as such. Informed speculation, perhaps, but always speculation.

 

[Eejit]

Here's an audio report that puts Dr McLoughlin in an even more unfavourable light. He reckoned that it was spontaneous human combustion and that science has no explanation for such a thing. A recognition of woo in a legal ruling... The reporter and the radio host don't seem to be overly curious either.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGVHQyIONdM

 

[bikerdruid]

First Irish case' of death by spontaneous combustion

what say you?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-europe-15032614

A man who burned to death in his home died as a result of spontaneous combustion, an Irish coroner has ruled.

West Galway coroner Dr Ciaran McLoughlin said it was the first time in 25 years of investigating deaths that he had recorded such a verdict.

Michael Faherty, 76, died at his home in Galway on 22 December 2010.

Deaths attributed by some to "spontaneous combustion" occur when a living human body is burned without an apparent external source of ignition.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Was he a smoker?

If not, then a true mystery. Otherwise, a possible explanation for the start of the burning.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Was he a smoker?

If not, then a true mystery. Otherwise, a possible explanation for the start of the burning.

I'd say the mystery is why would a coroner rule death by magical means? It's not like spontaneous combustion has any basis in fact.

 

[elgarak]

1. Already discussed here.

2. The article mentions that there was a fireplace with a fire nearby, but was ruled out as an ignition source. I believe the whole thing was written for sensationalism, with twisting the facts mighty. Such as, for example, the fire inspectors not able to find conclusive evidence that the fire caused the combustion of the victim. That's not the same as "ruling out" -- it simply means "not knowing". I presume something similar misquoting for the pathologist. Essentially, experts not experienced in talking with the press getting their badly worded statements twisted.

 

[This is The End]

Aren't most spontaneous combustion cases explained by the body slowly burning like a candle? With, I assume, a certain type of clothing acting as a wick.

 

[Big Les]

Oh good grief. Your screen-name would seem to apply here Eejit, and not to you!

 

[Soapy Sam]

Sure wasn't your man on a turf diet for the constipation? The methane was something dreadful.

 

[SnidelyW]

Unless we get access to the official verdict, and specifically see the words 'spontaneous human combustion' (SHC) on the record, the official cause of death isn't SHC. It may be bandied about, and likened to SHC, as might be the case in Galway. So far, the only person using this is the reporter, and the coroner, quoted in a statement to the family that the death 'fits in' with SHC. There is no apparent mention in the press of the official record stating SHC.

I stated in an earlier post I'd love to read the transcript of the inquest, to learn what the fire investigators told the court. What I'm not hearing/seeing are any comments from the Galway Fire brigade on this case. If someone has seen any public statement from the firefighters, please enlighten me.

The press can use the SHC term much more freely than the Fire Service can, using it in lieu of an 'undetermined' cause because the sensationalist value to the press is evident. This case has been carried by the world press. Does anyone think an 'undetermined' cause would have garnered the same attention?

My 28 years experience in both firefighting and fire investigation has never led me to ever seriously consider SHC as a bona fide conclusion. The science just doesn't support the concept. When we've ruled out all the potential causes and there's nothing left, we say 'undetermined'.

 

[lucan]

I think it does not work unless the clothing is cotton. Then a small spark will ignite it and it will wick.