Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who's talking Cobblers ? John Richardson ?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • One poster (tom?) suggested richardson was taking $ to allow prostitutes to use the yard. I think it's very very interesting that dark annie frequented 29 hanbury, knew richardson well and even conducted some legal business there. Scott the man you said slept on the stairs was supposedly a market worker....could richardson have allowed co-workers to doss in the yard/steps or charged Them a small fee. I'm interested in the man mrs richardson said worked with her son but was lazy and was usually late....I need to check the inquest and find his name. I wonder how good a friend he was of John Richardson?

    Comment


    • It just does not make sense that John Richardson would walk to his mothers, and sit on the backyard steps and try to cut the piece of leather from his boot with an old table knife. If it was really bothering him he would have stopped to cut it on the wakl to hanbury street. He first claims he did cut it, then once he produces the knife he says he didn't actually cut it while he sat on the steps with his knife out, but later at work. It just doesn't add up and there's no reason to not view John Richardson as a person of interest when he lies to chandler, lies at the inquest and places himself at the murder with a knife out.

      Comment


      • Richardson: After cutting the leather off my boot I tied my boot up, and went out of the house into the market. I did not close the back door. It closed itself. I shut the front door."

        John Richardson (recalled) produced the knife - a much-worn dessert knife - with which he had cut his boot. He added that as it was not sharp enough he had borrowed another one at the market.

        Richardson was clearly caught in a lie at the inquest. Why wasn't this addressed by coroner? If richardson had produced a sharp
        Knife would he have been detained as a suspect?

        Comment


        • The hired hand at the Richardsons' packing case workshop in the cellar was Francis Tyler. Mrs Richardson stated that Tyler had worked for her for eighteen years. He was supposed to start work at 6am but she said he had turned up at 8am which was not unusual when business was slack.

          Comment


          • Why would Richardson admit he had a knife in the yard. He was sitting on the steps with his feet on the ground, knife out...correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't the ripper have to sit on the steps to cut annie and go thru her belongings....doesn't that put richardson in the exact position as the ripper? And they both have a knife out....although John richardson wasn't cutting his boot according to his final version of events....so what was he doing sitting on the steps with a knife out? The only reason to admit he was there with a knife out is he though someone may have witnessed him....possibly he thought cadosche saw him or one of the many tenants of 29 hanbury.

            Comment


            • Why didn't Cadosch or any of these other tenants mention it to the police then? After all, Cadosch testified at the same inquest as Richardson. If he had seen his neighbour loitering about the back steps of No. 29 with a knife surely he would mention it in passing, considering he put minute details into his testimony about a woman saying "No", etc?

              Comment


              • He did say :As I thought it was some of the people belonging to the house, I passed into my own room, and took no further notice. " ...a good guess?

                Comment


                • Cadosch's first thought, knowing that there were a lot of tenants in No 29, would naturally be that it was a couple of the neighbours having a discussion about something. His thoughts wouldn't immediately go to "Oh, that's an prostitute entertaining a bloke in the back yard". It's a very big jump from that to inferring that his neighbour's son had a knife and is a murderer, and in fact Cadosch doesn't make that leap.

                  Comment


                  • Hi all

                    The Old Bailey Online, 27th February 1888, Benjamin Hewlett.

                    May be of interest from those earlier in the thread discussing epilepsy.

                    No idea about Richardson, although I find it very remiss of the police not to search that cellar.

                    All the best.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Rosella View Post
                      Cadosch's first thought, knowing that there were a lot of tenants in No 29, would naturally be that it was a couple of the neighbours having a discussion about something. His thoughts wouldn't immediately go to "Oh, that's an prostitute entertaining a bloke in the back yard". It's a very big jump from that to inferring that his neighbour's son had a knife and is a murderer, and in fact Cadosch doesn't make that leap.
                      Your right rosella , common sense would tell him it was neighbors in the yard...

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by martin wilson View Post
                        Hi all

                        The Old Bailey Online, 27th February 1888, Benjamin Hewlett.

                        May be of interest from those earlier in the thread discussing epilepsy.

                        No idea about Richardson, although I find it very remiss of the police not to search that cellar.

                        All the best.
                        It's inexcusable if they didn't search the cellar, which I have a hard time believing they didn't....but if it's true they didn't it shows richardson was never fully looked into or cleared and was simply ruled out by his butter knife alone....they really didn't search the cellar?
                        Last edited by RockySullivan; 12-25-2014, 04:03 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Do we know specifically that they didn't? So much has disappeared, notebooks, witness statements, memos, documentation etc.

                          Comment


                          • Hi all

                            I'm not quite sure what is meant by cellar, Richardson mentioned a shed and a tool chest, perhaps he meant the tool chest. I couldn't find any mention of the police searching either, which is not to say they didn't but with the discrepancy over TOD it does offer a different scenario, even something as simple as waiting for better light.
                            All the best.

                            Comment


                            • There was a cellar belonging to the house,where the packing case business was carried on. It lay immediately to the right of the back door, through double wooden doors. I believe they can be seen in the James Mason film 'The London Nobody Knows', filmed before the whole house was demolished.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Rosella View Post
                                There was a cellar belonging to the house,where the packing case business was carried on. It lay immediately to the right of the back door, through double wooden doors. I believe they can be seen in the James Mason film 'The London Nobody Knows', filmed before the whole house was demolished.
                                Here you are...
                                The canopy looking assembly by the steps, covering the entrance to the cellar.

                                Regards, Jon S.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X