Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Hutchinson, George: Hutchinsons statement.... - by Varqm 43 minutes ago.
Non-Fiction: Ripper Confidential by Tom Wescott (2017) - by Tom_Wescott 2 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Kansas Physician Confirms Howard Report - by TradeName 3 hours ago.
General Discussion: New claims Jack the Ripper was noted poet who studied as a priest in the North East - by harry 3 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Hutchinsons statement.... - by Abby Normal 4 hours ago.
General Discussion: New claims Jack the Ripper was noted poet who studied as a priest in the North East - by Pcdunn 4 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Scene of the Crimes: Blood oozing - (69 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Hutchinsons statement.... - (24 posts)
Letters and Communications: An experiment - (11 posts)
General Police Discussion: Missing Special Branch Record - (6 posts)
General Discussion: New claims Jack the Ripper was noted poet who studied as a priest in the North East - (5 posts)
Non-Fiction: Ripper Confidential by Tom Wescott (2017) - (4 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Witnesses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #81  
Old 03-30-2017, 09:34 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,600
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
1. The ones who made the docu are the ones responsible for it. I have told you before that I would have done it differently in some respects, although I think it is overall quite good.
Seriously? The ones who made the documentary are responsible for you saying "Then we've got a discrepancy of about 9 minutes or something like that."?* I could have sworn I saw your lips move. Was this an overdub of someone else's voice added to your lips?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
2. Even if the police sometimes will "paint with a broad brush", they will try and see to it that it is nevertheless the CORRECT brush. Is is not as if they could not care less, and as if they reason that it does not matter what they put in their reports, as long as they do put SOMETHING there. We rely on these reports for a reason.
The Swanson reports were written for the Home Office in 1888, not members of the public or researchers in 2017. It is clear from reading all his reports that Swanson was interested in approximate times only.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
3. If one report says 3.40 and if an ensuing report says 3.45, then the first time given HAS actually been changed inbetween the reports, believe it or not.
Well I don't believe it at all because they are BOTH approximate times and they are BOTH in effect saying the same thing: about 3.45 and about 3.40 were effectively the same time, especially in a pre-digital age. But as I've said, it looks like Abberline just took a bit more care with the detail, having realised that Cross and Paul couldn't have found the body AND spoken to Mizen at 3.45, so he adjusted accordingly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
4. The fact that somebody gives a timing without saying that he or she got that timing from the chiming of a clock is not equivalent to that somebody not possibly having gotten the timing that way.
I didnít say it wasn't possible but my point was that, while a number of witnesses positively identified hearing a clock chime in other cases, not a single witness did in the Nichols case. The natural conclusion is that these witnesses didnít hear a clock chime. You asked me for the conclusion and I gave it to you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
5. Donald Swanson WAS involved in the Ripper investigation - all murders included - at the time he wrote the October 20 report.
I didn't say he wasn't involved in the Ripper investigation. I said he did not investigate the murder of Mary Ann Nichols. That was done by Detective Inspector Abberline. By the time Swanson was brought on board the investigation into that particular murder was effectively concluded. He had no role to play in it. All he could have done was read the documents. Abberline was the investigating officer on the ground in early September who would have spoken to the witnesses and followed any leads.


p.s. So much for "I realize that this is the first of twenty-odd posts from you. What you donīt realize is that the rest will go unanswered for the usual reason - you are bickering about unimportant and uninteresting matters.". Why do you keep posting these types of statements when you don't have the self-control to stick to what you say?
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 03-30-2017, 09:39 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,600
Default footnote to previous post

*The discrepancy of "9 minutes" (i.e. "Then we've got a discrepancy of about 9 minutes or something like that." per Christer Holmgren) is based on Cross leaving his house at exactly 3.30am (for which there is no evidence) and taking 7 minutes and 7 seconds to reach Bucks Row (which is the time it supposedly took Christer Holmgren and Andy Griffiths to walk along a modern route which did not exist in 1888 from Doveton Street to Durward Street), arriving at 3.37:07am, and on Robert Paul walking into Bucks Row at exactly 3.45am (for which there was no evidence presented at the inquest). To most people, 3.45 less 3.37 is 8 minutes (and should strictly be 7 minutes and 53 seconds) but Christer seems to have added on a whole extra minute, as you do, just for jolly, presumably because the documentary stated that "Robert Paul was in Bucks Row for a full minute before he noticed Lechmere." However, when I asked Fisherman to explain this statement he told me: "I cannot say what the documentary meant by stating that Robert Paul was in Bucks Rof (sic) for a full minute before he noticed Lechmere." Hence, the extra minute added to the so called timing "discrepancy" by Christer Holmgren must remain a mystery.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 03-30-2017, 10:05 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 14,270
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
Seriously? The ones who made the documentary are responsible for you saying "Then we've got a discrepancy of about 9 minutes or something like that."?* I could have sworn I saw your lips move. Was this an overdub of someone else's voice added to your lips?



The Swanson reports were written for the Home Office in 1888, not members of the public or researchers in 2017. It is clear from reading all his reports that Swanson was interested in approximate times only.



Well I don't believe it at all because they are BOTH approximate times and they are BOTH in effect saying the same thing: about 3.45 and about 3.40 were effectively the same time, especially in a pre-digital age. But as I've said, it looks like Abberline just took a bit more care with the detail, having realised that Cross and Paul couldn't have found the body AND spoken to Mizen at 3.45, so he adjusted accordingly.



I didnít say it wasn't possible but my point was that, while a number of witnesses positively identified hearing a clock chime in other cases, not a single witness did in the Nichols case. The natural conclusion is that these witnesses didnít hear a clock chime. You asked me for the conclusion and I gave it to you.



I didn't say he wasn't involved in the Ripper investigation. I said he did not investigate the murder of Mary Ann Nichols. That was done by Detective Inspector Abberline. By the time Swanson was brought on board the investigation into that particular murder was effectively concluded. He had no role to play in it. All he could have done was read the documents. Abberline was the investigating officer on the ground in early September who would have spoken to the witnesses and followed any leads.


p.s. So much for "I realize that this is the first of twenty-odd posts from you. What you donīt realize is that the rest will go unanswered for the usual reason - you are bickering about unimportant and uninteresting matters.". Why do you keep posting these types of statements when you don't have the self-control to stick to what you say?
Uninteresting twaddle.

See? I answered AGAIN! Silly me.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 03-30-2017, 10:40 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,600
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Uninteresting twaddle.

See? I answered AGAIN! Silly me.
You certainly did. And the absence of any substance in your answer - especially to the "9 minutes" criticism - is very teling.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 04-01-2017, 05:26 AM
Michael W Richards Michael W Richards is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,837
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
Hi Steve,
Any clock needn't have been on his direct route, only within earshot. Mrs Long said she fixed the time she saw Annie Chapman by the chiming of the brewery clock - there was a big brewery just south of Bath Street. There was also the station which might have had a clock.
And if Cadosche is accurate with his story, then Annie is already being mutilated when Mrs Long makes her sighting.
__________________
Michael Richards
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.