Another Death in the Home

[bernardgreen]

Is it confirmed as electrocution ? It might have been a heart attacked induced by the stress of dealing with a flood.

Or it might be that the washing machine was correctly earthed and the flood water was Live due to contact with a Live conductor elsewhere.

 

[JohnW2]

Is it confirmed as electrocution ? It might have been a heart attacked induced by the stress of dealing with a flood.

We don't know, so that's not impossible, but I think you are rather 'scraping the barrel'. The most obvious answer is usually the correct one - and, of course, most heart attacks don't result in immediate (or rapid) death.

Or it might be that the washing machine was correctly earthed and the flood water was Live due to contact with a Live conductor elsewhere.

That's certainly possible. We also don't know whether there was any RCD protection in this installation.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Or an earth.

 

[JohnW2]

Or an earth.

True. However, as bernard has implied, it's not impossible that it was the fact that the appliance was earthed which actually 'caused' this death.

If there were an L-E 'fault' in the appliance due to water ingress, it's unlikely that an OPD would operate as a result - which is why I mentioned RCDs.

Kind Regards, John

 

[bernardgreen]

but I think you are rather 'scraping the barrel'. The most obvious answer is usually the correct one -

Taking account of all possible reasons is essential when determining the cause of death, injury or damage. Taking the obvious reason as the cause is the easy solution but can leave the real reason undiscovered and thus repeat incidents will not be prevented.

 

[JohnW2]

but I think you are rather 'scraping the barrel'. The most obvious answer is usually the correct one -

Taking account of all possible reasons is essential when determining the cause of death, injury or damage. Taking the obvious reason as the cause is the easy solution but can leave the real reason undiscovered and thus repeat incidents will not be prevented.

Of course, but we are not the investigators of this death (who, as you say, must be objective and open-minded). We are merely outsiders who 'talking about it', and the probability is high that the investigation will confirm that death was due to electrocution.

You are, of course, free to speculate about less likely outcomes of the investigation. As I said, since we have so little information, little is impossible.

Kind Regards, John

 

[westie101]

As far as I could see, the initial report was electric shock or heart attack. By the time our staff got there it had been confirmed as electric shock by medical staff on site

 

[JohnW2]

As far as I could see, the initial report was electric shock or heart attack. By the time our staff got there it had been confirmed as electric shock by medical staff on site

Thanks for the update.

The reality is that the two are quite likely to be indistinguishable, even at autopsy, other than on the basis of circumstantial evidence. If a 'heart attack' results in sudden death, it does so by inducing exactly the same sort of heart rhythm disturbance (e.g. ventricular fibrillation) as does an electric shock (which, in any event, is not in itself detectable at autopsy). The presence of electrical burns serves as circumstantial evidence, but still doesn't preclude the possibility (similar to what bernard proposed) that the (emotional) 'shock' of a (non-fatal) electric shock might have precipitated a heart attack! In the case of a 'heart attack', the coronary arteries may or may not provide suggestive evidence at autopsy. It is therefore very improbable that 'medical staff on site' could really come to a totally confident conclusion.

Kind Regards, John

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

Do you know what the first thing I did was?

Rifled the wallet of the poor b****r who was lying there zapped?

Not if they were still connected to live, defo isolate first, before going treasure hunting!