Found Deceased UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #12 *ARREST*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
If it was found that Libby drowned, would biological pathology be able to determine whether the drowning was in the river Hull at Oak Road or in the estuary? Presumably the latter is saltier, but as the river is tidal it must contain salt too, as well as mineral and plant deposits not present in the open water.

It's been proven that things like pollen and spores can infer where a body found on land has died, but what about in water?
 
If it was found that Libby drowned, would biological pathology be able to determine whether the drowning was in the river Hull at Oak Road or in the estuary? Presumably the latter is saltier, but as the river is tidal it must contain salt too, as well as mineral and plant deposits not present in the open water.

It's be proven that things like pollen and spores can infer where a body found on land has died, but what about in water?

That's a savvy point, well made.
 
If it was found that Libby drowned, would biological pathology be able to determine whether the drowning was in the river Hull at Oak Road or in the estuary? Presumably the latter is saltier, but as the river is tidal it must contain salt too, as well as mineral and plant deposits not present in the open water.

It's been proven that things like pollen and spores can infer where a body found on land has died, but what about in water?

I imagine they will be able to tell from what type of water it is in her lungs? If she hasn't drowned, they will know because there will be no water in her lungs.
 
I imagine they will be able to tell from what type of water it is in her lungs? If she hasn't drowned, they will know because there will be no water in her lungs.

That's what I'm thinking: the biology of the water might determine the location. If it wasn't drowning would the body still contain "clues" from being saturated by water in a specific area? There must be quite a difference in water content in each area, but I haven't come across this before and wondering if anyone knows of a precedent.
 
That's what I'm thinking: the biology of the water might determine the location. If it wasn't drowning would the body still contain "clues" from being saturated by water in a specific area? There must be quite a difference in water content in each area, but I haven't come across this before and wondering if anyone knows of a precedent.

Just found this

"A pathologist will also attempt to provide evidence that the deceased died in fresh or salt water. This is particularly useful if there are suspicions of foul play. For example if the deceased is found in salt water but the water in their lungs is fresh water than it can be reasonably assumed that they did not die in that body of water in which they were found."

Drowning and Forensics
 
"When you drown, your lungs fill up with water, and the air sacs inside your lungs act like a sponge. This process causes your body to get denser than the surrounding water and sink to the bottom.

Using this information, pathologists can determine whether a person drowned or if they were deceased prior to submersion. In a short enough time frame, victims have the tendency to float since their lungs are still full of air rather than water."


8 Things That Happen To A Body When It Decomposes Underwater

Maybe you're right, 'short enough time frame' could be significant here.
 
As the body was not found by divers that would suggest that it was floating in the water as opposed to sunk to the bottom?

Would a body floating in the water be consistent with drowning or the dumping of an already dead body into the river?
 
As the body was not found by divers that would suggest that it was floating in the water as opposed to sunk to the bottom?

Would a body floating in the water be consistent with drowning or the dumping of an already dead body into the river?

I think buoyancy can change as the body's composition changes - as well as being influenced by tides and weather conditions etc. Just because it's floating at one point, doesn't mean that's been the case since it entered water.
 
I wonder if the sighting/s at Paull were significant enough for police to request ongoing searches on the water in the area? If they required a boat to bring the body to shore it suggests the deceased was found in the water as oppose to washed up on land. So have there perhaps been ongoing searches since the Paull reports. Just more discreetly with the RNLI taking boats out rather than police?
 
As the body was not found by divers that would suggest that it was floating in the water as opposed to sunk to the bottom?

Would a body floating in the water be consistent with drowning or the dumping of an already dead body into the river?

I don't believe it indicates anything on its own. Also, if it is Libby, it's hardly likely that she's been floating around undetected all this time.

Here's a quick overview of dead body behaviour in water:
Why Do Corpses Float? » Science ABC
 
So are we all agreed that the latest statement is basically the police saying we know who it is but can't or won't say until official confirmation? If they didn't think it was Libby, they'd have said so right? They always have done whenever there's been an incident

In my experience, the Police do not speculate and will wait for a confirmation of identity before releasing that information to the press.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
135
Guests online
2,098
Total visitors
2,233

Forum statistics

Threads
602,052
Messages
18,134,030
Members
231,225
Latest member
DenaJ
Back
Top