The English Language and the purpose of a caveat.

[Herlock Sholmes]

At Chapman’s inquest when Doctor Phillips was asked for his estimated TOD he said:

“I should say at least two hours, and probably more; but it is right to say that it was a fairly cold morning, and that the body would be more apt to cool rapidly from its having lost the greater portion of its blood.”

I’ve emboldened the obvious caveat.

As we all know a caveat is only used when it allows for some kind of alteration or leeway or exception in the original or main part of the statement. As we can see his maximum estimation is simply ‘…..and probably more;’ so he really couldn’t have meant ‘and probably more but due to the conditions probably even more than probably more.’ Therefore he must have been making an allowance that the conditions that morning could have effected his minimum estimate. This might seem very obvious but there are actually some that dispute this.

What we also know is that the coroner, who heard every word of Phillips statement, also interpreted the caveat in the same way. That Phillips was allowing for error on the lower end of the estimate:

“It is true that Dr. Phillips thinks that when he saw the body at 6.30 the deceased had been dead at least two hours, but he admits that the coldness of the morning and the great loss of blood may affect his opinion;”

So there are 2 choices.

Firstly that Phillips added his caveat to make allowances for the conditions affecting his earlier TOD estimate

or

That he made his caveat but it had no meaning as he was still rigidly adhering to his lower estimate.

[Azarna]

It seems like he is being very ambiguous, to me.

"I should say at least two hours, and probably more;" = TOD was at least two hours before the body was found, but probably earlier than that
The Emboldened Caveat = TOD could appear earlier than it actually was because the body cooled quickly = TOD is later than two hours before the body was found

So the TOD is 4:30, but is "probably" earlier, and simultaneously could possibly be later due to the weather.

[Kattrup]

I have no doubt he allowed for the possibility of less than two hours.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I have no doubt he allowed for the possibility of less than two hours.

Seems as clear as day Kattrup.

[MrBarnett]

I think the caveat is meant to qualify his ‘probably’.

[Ms Diddles]

Yeah, I've voted that he's allowing for a later TOD.

The alternative makes no sense to me.

[Herlock Sholmes]

[Abby Normal]

good to see most people on here understand the english language. most

[Herlock Sholmes]

good to see most people on here understand the english language. most

Even Americans Abby

[Parisi North Humber]

Caveat or Qualifier? Just throwing it out there for jollies Lol.

Helen x

[GBinOz]

good to see most people on here understand the english language. most

At least those who don't are fortunate to have the opportunity to learn from your eloquent vocabulary, mastery of punctuation and grammar, and history and quality of posts. lol.

[Abby Normal]

At least those who don't are fortunate to have the opportunity to learn from your eloquent vocabulary, mastery of punctuation and grammar, and history and quality of posts. lol.

Thank you George! Despite your pseudo conspiracy and minor discrepancy tendencies, Ive always considered you a perfect gentleman on here. : )

[OneRound]

Hi Herlock,

I know next to nothing about this whole case compared to you and your fellow Ripper experts. However, as a company secretary for many years, I know a bit about minuting meetings at which some invited specialist has spoken where I've struggled to follow the exact drift of his words. Sometimes such a speaker might be characteristically nervous and/or intimidated by the unusual setting he finds himself in resulting in ambiguous or even contradictory comments. A friendly query during the meeting or an informal word at the end can often sort out such uncertainties.

I recognise such a solution is sadly long gone as regards the words of Doctor Phillip which I find to be unclear. However, I would not get too hung up on exactly what he said as there is no guarantee that is exactly what he meant!

Meant helpfully although probably not.

Best regards,
OneRound

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock,

I know next to nothing about this whole case compared to you and your fellow Ripper experts. However, as a company secretary for many years, I know a bit about minuting meetings at which some invited specialist has spoken where I've struggled to follow the exact drift of his words. Sometimes such a speaker might be characteristically nervous and/or intimidated by the unusual setting he finds himself in resulting in ambiguous or even contradictory comments. A friendly query during the meeting or an informal word at the end can often sort out such uncertainties.

I recognise such a solution is sadly long gone as regards the words of Doctor Phillip which I find to be unclear. However, I would not get too hung up on exactly what he said as there is no guarantee that is exactly what he meant!

Meant helpfully although probably not.

Best regards,
OneRound

Hi OneRound

Thanks for that. Another issue connected to this of course is that we’re relying on press reports and not verbatim transcripts. It takes very little to alter the meaning of a sentence or collection of sentences.

[OneRound]

Hi OneRound

Thanks for that. Another issue connected to this of course is that we’re relying on press reports and not verbatim transcripts. It takes very little to alter the meaning of a sentence or collection of sentences.

Very true, Herlock.

Best,
OneRound