MA - Vanessa Marcotte, 27, murdered, Princeton, 7 Aug 2016 #3

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mskin said:
Ive been thinking about this a lot the past 12 hours - and I'm not so sure. I think the phone is worthless as i mentioned, time of last transmittance has no direct link to time of death. Obviously, the phone could have been destroyed well before or after the TOD.

I think its a mistake to think ME would use one piece of criteria to determine a window (like body temp), but more probably a combination of factors. There wouldn't be signs of decomp after 4-5 hours, but certainly some level. Of rigor and temperature loss. Hitting it from the other side of the time line, there may have been trace amount of food in her stomach or intestines. The more i think of it, the more I believe they could zero in on the time frame with more accuracy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I never suggested that any ME would use only one criteria to determine death, that would just be amature and unprofessional if an ME only looked at one factor.

That said I still don't believe the ME would have had evidence that would have allowed them to shave off one precise hour.

I think there were other things that played into narrowing down that timeline.....perhaps things like when her relatives first started looking for her and knowing what time she was normally back for her run, and eye witness statements.

If she was found around 820pm, and then the ME gets called and probably doesn't get there to look at her till at least 9-930, but it's also dark, so they may not have moved her until daylight so they could investigate the crime in daylight hours without disturbing it.....then that would further delay when the ME could really take a close look at the body.

I would think the sooner one can autopsy the body the more precise of a timeline one can get, because it's easier to distinguish things that would take 4 hours to start happening at that point, vs what would be going on with the body at 5 hours. But if the autopsy wasn't done till later, I'm not sure it's likely to shave just an hour off the time of death.

But if anyone has ME expertise please please chime in! I'd love to learn more about this stuff. Thanks in advance.
 
Camerabug said:
In my notes taken at the time, I have the time of the cell phone ping as 2:25 pm...we discussed this in one of the earlier threads. MSM articles have been scrubbed now, but perhaps ThinkHard may remember discussing that ping time..trying to think who else may remember that...
Click to expand...

I actually have 2:25 in my old notes as well but then I thought the time was changed to 2:45. I can't remember exactly when/why and I can't find anything in MSM either.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Camerabug said:
In my notes taken at the time, I have the time of the cell phone ping as 2:25 pm...we discussed this in one of the earlier threads. MSM articles have been scrubbed now, but perhaps ThinkHard may remember discussing that ping time..trying to think who else may remember that...
Click to expand...

Yup! 2:25pm that's the precise time I remember the ping being as well.
 
Rocky1 said:
The cell phone ping at about 2:45 got me thinking.
It was stated that the ping came from a tower near the mountain barn restaurant, which is the first place her family went to looking for her. Some here have suggested that "ping" maybe talk that it means had a conversation with. Others think it means that it is a signal that is sent to/from a tower closest to a phone. I, myself think it is the latter, but either way..
.If VM was near the mountain barn "pinging" around 2:45, ( having a conversation) and the time of death was before 3:00, that doesn't leave much time to complete the crime.If she was at the crime scene at 2:45, and the cell tower near the mountain barn was the closest, and it pinged off of that tower, then that would make sense. But here's the thing. I went over the cell tower positions, measured the distance, and there is another tower much closer.. So why didn't her phone "ping off of that tower? Something is not adding up, unless the perp had her phone, and if he did, why, knowing he could have been tracked.
Click to expand...

Rocky - we've been discussing the actual time of the cell phone ping. Some of us have it in our early case notes as 2:25 but you have 2:45 and I think I've seen it elsewhere as 2:45. Do you know where the 2:45 came from? Thanks!
 
ThinkHard said:
I never suggested that any ME would use only one criteria to determine death, that would just be amature and unprofessional if an ME only looked at one factor.

That said I still don't believe the ME would have had evidence that would have allowed them to shave off one precise hour.

I think there were other things that played into narrowing down that timeline.....perhaps things like when her relatives first started looking for her and knowing what time she was normally back for her run, and eye witness statements.

If she was found around 820pm, and then the ME gets called and probably doesn't get there to look at her till at least 9-930, but it's also dark, so they may not have moved her until daylight so they could investigate the crime in daylight hours without disturbing it.....then that would further delay when the ME could really take a close look at the body.

I would think the sooner one can autopsy the body the more precise of a timeline one can get, because it's easier to distinguish things that would take 4 hours to start happening at that point, vs what would be going on with the body at 5 hours. But if the autopsy wasn't done till later, I'm not sure it's likely to shave just an hour off the time of death.

But if anyone has ME expertise please please chime in! I'd love to learn more about this stuff. Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

They can also use entomology to determine time of death in addition to other information. I'm not sure how precise they can get with that, but bugs can be surprisingly informative. (Americans lead the way on entomology forensics.) I really don't know much at all, other than being an acquaintance with someone in this field...but not well-acquainted enough to call out of the blue with this question. (Maybe I need to nurture the relationship for the sake of WS, lol!)

jmopinion
 
ThinkHard said:
I never suggested that any ME would use only one criteria to determine death, that would just be amature and unprofessional if an ME only looked at one factor.

That said I still don't believe the ME would have had evidence that would have allowed them to shave off one precise hour.

I think there were other things that played into narrowing down that timeline.....perhaps things like when her relatives first started looking for her and knowing what time she was normally back for her run, and eye witness statements.

If she was found around 820pm, and then the ME gets called and probably doesn't get there to look at her till at least 9-930, but it's also dark, so they may not have moved her until daylight so they could investigate the crime in daylight hours without disturbing it.....then that would further delay when the ME could really take a close look at the body.

I would think the sooner one can autopsy the body the more precise of a timeline one can get, because it's easier to distinguish things that would take 4 hours to start happening at that point, vs what would be going on with the body at 5 hours. But if the autopsy wasn't done till later, I'm not sure it's likely to shave just an hour off the time of death.

But if anyone has ME expertise please please chime in! I'd love to learn more about this stuff. Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

And really it wasn't just the time of death, it was the window during which they were asking the public for information, right? So LE determined that not only the time of death occurred by 3:00, but that the assailant had time to burn her body and leave the scene by 3:00. Such a small window of time.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
1306kayaker said:
And really it wasn't just the time of death, it was the window during which they were asking the public for information, right? Just my opinion but it sounds like LE knew enough to determine that not only the time of death occurred by 3:00, but that the assailant had time to burn her body and leave the scene by 3:00.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You're right - we're looking for the time of the crime, not necessarily the time of death (though obviously the time of death would be at/after the crime).
 
What doses the ping prove?? What significance?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Mskin said:
Ive been thinking about this a lot the past 12 hours - and I'm not so sure. I think the phone is worthless as i mentioned, time of last transmittance has no direct link to time of death. Obviously, the phone could have been destroyed well before or after the TOD.

I think its a mistake to think ME would use one piece of criteria to determine a window (like body temp), but more probably a combination of factors. There wouldn't be signs of decomp after 4-5 hours, but certainly some level. Of rigor and temperature loss. Hitting it from the other side of the time line, there may have been trace amount of food in her stomach or intestines. The more i think of it, the more I believe they could zero in on the time frame with more accuracy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I agree with you . She could have been dead and the cell phone could have pinged caused by the perp. so using the cell phone to determine time of death, I don't think would be accurate.
I don't think the ME used just one piece of criteria to determine TOD, but a combination of things together. JMO, but if she was left there burning for an hour, that would affect body temp, so using rigor wouldn't be accurate either. I am not sure how Livor would be affected by an external heat source either, which got me thinking about stomach contents. That wouldn't change.
If it can take up to 6 hours to empty the stomach, and VM ate her last meal at 10:00 am, and her stomach was empty when she was found, that would mean that she was alive for at least 6 hours after she ate. She would have been alive at 4:00 pm.
If she ate at 10:00 am, and her stomach was half full, that would but the TOD closer to 1:00 pm. I know time would vary depending on who it is, and what they ate, but the DA did have a 2 hour window and was focused on that.
I know that a ME can't determine the exact time of death with anyone, but in this case, where she was found so soon after the crime, I think stomach contents played a large part in determining TOD.
I am using this for nothing more than an example of how a ME could determine TOD, or exclude TOD. I have no idea what time VM ate, or what she ate, but in this case, because the timeline was so short to begin with, I think it would easier to use this example as a guide. especially if her family knew the last time she ate.

I found this link. It is is a good read. If you don't want to read it all, scroll down to Gastrointestinal Tract Contents, and read paragraph 2.
http://www.practicalhomicide.com/Research/LOmar2007.htm

I would love to hear any other possible evidence that may/may have not determined TOD.
 
1306kayaker said:
Rocky - we've been discussing the actual time of the cell phone ping. Some of us have it in our early case notes as 2:25 but you have 2:45 and I think I've seen it elsewhere as 2:45. Do you know where the 2:45 came from? Thanks!
Click to expand...
I mentioned 2:45 only because I read it someplace here. I may have mentioned 2:30 in a post as well. No info from LE, or the news, just what I read here.
Where did the 2:25 come from?
 
Inthedetails said:
They can also use entomology to determine time of death in addition to other information. I'm not sure how precise they can get with that, but bugs can be surprisingly informative. (Americans lead the way on entomology forensics.) I really don't know much at all, other than being an acquaintance with someone in this field...but not well-acquainted enough to call out of the blue with this question. (Maybe I need to nurture the relationship for the sake of WS, lol!)

jmopinion
Click to expand...
Good point. I think a lot hinges on how long her body was burning, and if it was left to burn. If the area where her body was was hot. I would think that would delay the arrival of bugs. JMO. This was such a short window as far as the timeline goes.
 
rosesfromangels said:
1306 kayaker,

No wonder you haven't heard back on your tip; the article says LE has "hundreds" to sort through.
Glad the citizens are involved and stepping up. Prayers for resolution.
Click to expand...
If LE had talked to 1306kayaker, rather than him leaving a recorded message, and got all the info they needed, would they call him back?
 
It appears he knows exactly what he is doing and it only looks disorganized because Vanessa unexpectedly fought so much and he had to rush trying to cover up evidence. Then, ran out of time. Thank God for great work by law enforcement to find her so quickly. He could have planned to go back in the dark to cover up more or take her elsewhere. This is a very sick individual who needs to be stopped ASAP and held accountable.
 
ThinkHard said:
I never suggested that any ME would use only one criteria to determine death, that would just be amature and unprofessional if an ME only looked at one factor.

That said I still don't believe the ME would have had evidence that would have allowed them to shave off one precise hour.

I think there were other things that played into narrowing down that timeline.....perhaps things like when her relatives first started looking for her and knowing what time she was normally back for her run, and eye witness statements.

If she was found around 820pm, and then the ME gets called and probably doesn't get there to look at her till at least 9-930, but it's also dark, so they may not have moved her until daylight so they could investigate the crime in daylight hours without disturbing it.....then that would further delay when the ME could really take a close look at the body.

I would think the sooner one can autopsy the body the more precise of a timeline one can get, because it's easier to distinguish things that would take 4 hours to start happening at that point, vs what would be going on with the body at 5 hours. But if the autopsy wasn't done till later, I'm not sure it's likely to shave just an hour off the time of death.

But if anyone has ME expertise please please chime in! I'd love to learn more about this stuff. Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

Apologies if this sounded acusational. The mistake was in my thinking, late last night I was thinking about body temp in isolation. That was a mistake. I am not an ME.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Camerabug said:
Accuracy in the timeline for one thing.
Click to expand...

Can you please explain? How does it establish accuracy?

I think it potentially becomes a very important clue if it can be determined it occurred either before or after time of abduction or death. Without that, I see it as meaningless.

I ask for clarrification because I know I could. Be missing something, so again, please expand upon your comment..

Thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 62 more.
Total: 1,573 (members: 63, guests: 1,510)

Online statistics

Members online
63
Guests online
1,510
Total visitors
1,573
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
605,550
Messages
18,188,579
Members
233,431
Latest member
Crunchy Riff
Back
Top