Rose Mylett - Murder or Accidental Death?

[Tom_Wescott]

Do you think Mylett was murdered or the victim of her own folly and collar?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Howard Brown]

Excellent idea, Tom...I've voted.

[Stan Reid]

Wow - 100% agree with me!

[Phillip Walton]

DOH! I clicked the wrong button.

[Debra Arif]

Can we also have a poll about what method was used to murder her? I'd like to see if people go with Brownfield or Hebbert's observations on the method used.

I didn't vote btw.

[Lynn Cates]

footprints

Hello Tom. Thanks for starting this poll.

What stands out in my puny mind is this: no footprints were found and the soil was particularly adapted to those had there been any feet about.

Cheers.
LC

[Howard Brown]

Debs:
Would you please write a list of the possibilities you can think of...as to how she died....and if you want, I'll be happy to set up a thread/poll.
Thanks !
XXXXXXXX

[Debra Arif]

Thanks How-It's only two choices- from the only two of the doctors who concluded Mylett was murdered that described the actual method they thought was used.
So rather than have a poll-maybe people could just say on this thread which method they would think most likely and why, if they want to. If that's okay with Tom?

Dr. Brownfield concluded a four strand cord ligature was held in both hands and placed around the neck- strangulation carried out by crossing over of the hands at the back using force-a 'soap cutter' method.

'Dr. Hebbert thought that death was due to compression of the throat and closing the mouth; as there were bruises on both cheeks and scratches on the throat, and the larynx was so markedly ecchymosed..'

These seem to me to be two completely different methods.I just wondered which one people favoured and why.

[Howard Brown]

Thank you Debs....

This is a tough call, lady....to choose between the two methods.

[Debra Arif]

Thank you Debs....

This is a tough call, lady....to choose between the two methods.

I know, How. I'm curious though. A conclusion that she was murdered must be based on something?

[Howard Brown]

Debs:
I'm going with Brownfield's opinions.

[Debra Arif]

Debs:
I'm going with Brownfield's opinions.

Okay.Thanks for answering, How.

[Tom_Wescott]

Thanks How-It's only two choices- from the only two of the doctors who concluded Mylett was murdered that described the actual method they thought was used.
So rather than have a poll-maybe people could just say on this thread which method they would think most likely and why, if they want to. If that's okay with Tom?

Dr. Brownfield concluded a four strand cord ligature was held in both hands and placed around the neck- strangulation carried out by crossing over of the hands at the back using force-a 'soap cutter' method.

'Dr. Hebbert thought that death was due to compression of the throat and closing the mouth; as there were bruises on both cheeks and scratches on the throat, and the larynx was so markedly ecchymosed..'

These seem to me to be two completely different methods.I just wondered which one people favoured and why.

I don't think either are necessarily right or wrong.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Debra Arif]

I don't think either are necessarily right or wrong.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

I would disagree, Tom. Both methods can't have been used. You can't use two hands to strangle someone with a ligature and close their mouth at the same time? It had to be one or the other. If you conclude Mylett was murdered based on the evidence available- which in effect is just the medical evidence as there were no signs of a struggle and no eye witnesses who saw Mylett going in to the yard with anyone, or heard any noise -then there must be a particular aspect of that medical evidence that convinces you it was murder and definitely not an accidental death?

[Tom_Wescott]

I would disagree, Tom. Both methods can't have been used. You can't use two hands to strangle someone with a ligature and close their mouth at the same time? It had to be one or the other. If you conclude Mylett was murdered based on the evidence available- which in effect is just the medical evidence as there were no signs of a struggle and no eye witnesses who saw Mylett going in to the yard with anyone, or heard any noise -then there must be a particular aspect of that medical evidence that convinces you it was murder and definitely not an accidental death?

As relatively rare as murders were in the East End, they were far more common than young women inexplicably choking to death while scratching their self and squeezing their own face. The accidental choking scenario requires Mylett to have been unconscious. The scratches and bruising suggest the opposite. In any other city there would have been no debate over cause of death. Method, perhaps, but there would have been no doubt she was murdered.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott