Murder at the Mayfair Diner

Author : Tom LoFaro

Present by: Keangsinh Taing

Department: Civil Engineering

Course: Differential Equations

Lecturer: Abdulkasim Akhmedov

Content
 Introduction

 Objective

 Analysis

 Discussion

 Conclusion
 Introduction

The body of Mr. Joe D. Wood was discovered in the refrigerator of

the Mayfair Diner at 5:30 AM. He was murdered, by one of the following

suspects: Twinkles the dancer, Slim the bookie, and Shorty the cook.

Twinkles Slim Shorty

 Objective

 To determine the time of death then conclude which suspects should be

detained, based on their times of entry and exit from the Mayfair Diner as

stated by eyewitnesses.
 Analysis

 First Assumption: Mr. Wood was murdered in the refrigerator

In this case, we can model the scenario using Newton’s Law of Cooling which
given as:

dT
 k (T  Tm)
dt

T : represent the temperature of the body at time t

Tm : represent the external temperature
Additional Clue
At 5:30 a.m. the body of one Joe D. Wood was found in the walk in
refrigerator in diner's basement. At 6:00 a.m. the coroner arrived and
determined that the core body temperature of the corpse was 85 degrees
Fahrenheit. Thirty minutes later the coroner again measured the core body
temperature. This time the reading was 84 degrees Fahrenheit. The
thermostat inside the refrigerator reads 50 degrees Fahrenheit.
6:00 AM
4:00 AM 8:00 AM Time

2 -2 t
0
1
T  0   85 , T ( )  84 , Tm  50 ( oF )
2
Following the detail above:
dT
Hence,  k (T  50)
.
dt
1
dT  k dt
T  50
1
 T  50 dT   k dt
ln T  50  kt  c , c  
 T  50  Ae kt , A   (1)
1
We know that T  0   85 , T ( )  84
2
Hence, 8 5  50  A (2)
1
 k
84  50  A 2
(3)
From (2), we obtain A   35
Substitue A into (3), we obtain 2 solutions:
1
 k 34
84 = 50 + 35e 2
 k  2 ln 0
35
or
1 1
 k 34  k
84 = 50  35e 2
 e 0
2

35
since e x  0 x   thus k  
Substitute value A and k into (1) to obtain final solution:
34
2 t ln
 T = 50  35e 35
(4)
We know that the normal body temperature is 37 oC or 98.6 o F
Substitute T  98.6 into (4) , we obtain t = 5.66
 Hence, according to this analysis, Mr. Wood was murdered 5.66 hours,

or approximately 5 hours 40 minutes, before 6:00 AM – that is, at

approximately 12:20 AM that night

 Second Assumption: Mr. Wood was not murdered in the refrigerator
In this case, we can model the scenario using the following equation:

dT
 k (T  Tm (t ))
dt
where,
Tm (t ) depend on the unit funcion U (t  h)

t : represent the number of hour that Mr.Wood was murdered prior to 6:00 AM.
h : represent the number of hour that body has been in refrigertaor prior to 6:00 AM
 Additional Clue
In the restaurant there is an grease-streaked thermostat above the
empty cash register. It reads 70 degrees Fahrenheit.

Base on the additional clue,

We get Tm (t )  50  20 U (t  h)
0 , 0  t  h
Which U (t  h)  
1 , t h
 dT
Denoting T'
dt
We hav e T '  k ( T  Tm(t ) )
T '  kT  kTm(t )
T '  kT  50k  20kU (t  h)  0
Take Laplace Transformation of both sides, giving:
L{T '}  k L{T }  50k L{1}  20k L{U (t  h)}  L{0}
50k 20ke  hs
s L{T }  T (0)  k L{T }   0
s s
50k 20ke  hs
T (0)  
L{T }  s s
sk
85 50 50 20 e  hs 20 e  hs
    
sk s sk s sk
Hence,
 85
1 50 50 20 e  hs 20 e  hs 
T L      
 s  k s s  k s s  k 
1  e  1  e 
 hs  hs
 1 
1 1  1  1  1 
 85 L    50 L    50 L    20 L    20 L  
 s  k   
s  s  k   s   s  k 
 85 e kt  50  50 e kt  20 U (t  h)  20 e k (t  h ) U (t  h)
 50  35 e kt  20 U (t  h)  20 e k (t  h ) U (t  h)
 34 
From the previous solution in Assumption 1 we obtain k  2 ln  
 35 
98.6  50  35 e kt  20 U (t  h)  20 e k (t  h ) U (t  h)
48.6  35 e kt  20 U (t  h)  20 e k (t  h ) U (t  h) (5)
Clearly, t  h, since Mr.Wood has to be murdered before his coarpse can be moved.
Thus, t  h  0  U (t  h) 1
Substitue into (5), we have
35 e kt  20  20 e k (t  h )  48.6
 20 
e kt  35  kh   28.6
 e 
 
 28.6 
ln 
20
 35  kh 
 t  e  , k   2 ln  34  (6)
 
k  35 
By using the equation (6) we can construct the following table below:
h Time body was moved Time of death

12 6 PM 3:42 AM

11 7 PM 3:17 AM

10 8 PM 2:50 AM

9 9 PM 2:20 AM

8 10 PM 1:48 AM

7 11 PM 1:13 AM

6 12 AM 12:34 AM

5 1 AM 11:52 AM

4 2 AM 11:04 PM

3 3 AM 10:12 PM

2 4 AM 9:13 PM
Discussion
If we assume that Mr. Wood was murdered before being moved, the result only
make sense for h ൏ 6, as shown in the table above.

Base on eyewitness account of 3 suspects we can construct the following table below:

Suspects Entry Time Exit Time

Twinkle 5 PM 6 PM

Slim 10 PM 11 PM

10:30 PM (Took Unusually

Shorty 2 AM
Break)
According to both table, Shorty is the most suspected person.

Base on this we can conclude 2 scenario that:

 Mr. Wood was murdered at 11:52 PM and his corpse was move at 1 AM

 Mr. Wood was murdered at 11:04 PM and his corpse was move at 2 AM
Note: It is also worth noting that algor mortis is not perfectly explained by Newton’s

Law of cooling. A more accurate estimate could be given by Glaister Equation

Conclusion
We have determine the time of Mr. Wood’s death as well as the time
his body was moved into the refrigerator by using various method to solve
differential equation which are Laplace Transform and Separable Equation.

The analysis present here is a simplification of the actual method

used in forensic investigation.
Thanks you for your attention!!!!!

OWWW! I need to take Differential Equations class

Wow !!!! I should have take Differential Equations class
Reference :
http://docshare.tips/murder-at-the-mayfair

diner`solution_58426d8fb6d87f9b658b479c.html?fbclid=IwAR2pnYV

UwO517vHy1ZfyMHuiw_n8NGHmQVUgU9sN4EuIfno1JFJ0lXV7dw