Alternative entrences / exits to #29 Hanbury crime scene?

[RockySullivan]

Wolf was a very knowledgeable member, we don't see him around so much these days.
While we have been exchanging views here I was looking for something we talked about some time back, that Insp. Chandler had misinterpreted what Richardson said to him on the Inspectors arrival.
I can't recall what was behind this suggestion, but it came to mind as we were talking.

Hey, that does sound slightly familiar as I attempted to read thru some old threads about richardson lately (there are very few I could find). Possibly the theory that richardson didn't tell chandler he went into the yard because he was on the steps, although he states his feet were on the flagstones.

[RockySullivan]

The above and this is courtesy of Neal Sheldon over at JTR Forums, by the way. Thank you very much, Neal.

Amelia's third son was Robert.

1881 Census.

At 29 Hanbury St lived Thomas Richardson 57, box maker.
Amelia, aged 58.
Thomas Richardson grandson aged 5, scholar.

At the same time, 1881, at 15 Caroline St Lambeth, lived
John Richardson 28, Militiaman.
Caroline Richardson buttonhole maker.
Thomas Richardson aged 7, scholar.
John Richardson aged 3, born Surrey.
Amelia, baby not yet one. Born Lambeth.

As you can see, Amelia Jnr may well have died. Thomas, Amelia's husband, died before the Ripper murders, and, with two Thomas jnrs, the grandson cannot be John Richardson's son.

In the 1871 Census Thomas Richardson, John Richardson's brother, is noted down as a Lunatic.
Robert Richardson married in 1877. John Richardson married Caroline Chaffey on Christmas Day in 1873 at St Thomas's Lambeth.

Hey rosella thanks real interesting stuff. Was Thomas johns bother loving at 29 hanbury? If so it sounds like a real looney bin

[Wickerman]

Thanks wickerman! I certainly take can't credit for it as wolf pointed out the inconsistency in his casebook essay. I'm convinced the torso & ripper murders are connected and I think the stolen tools from the cellar may be a clue. Hopefully some real sleuths may find a connection. I certainly understand what you mean about it being more difficult to take on a theory where the suspect was looked into and "no suspicion could attach". However I do feel there's more chance of someone who was actually questioned could have been the ripper than a random suspect who never was.

Wolf was a very knowledgeable member, we don't see him around so much these days.
While we have been exchanging views here I was looking for something we talked about some time back, that Insp. Chandler had misinterpreted what Richardson said to him on the Inspectors arrival.
I can't recall what was behind this suggestion, but it came to mind as we were talking.

[martin wilson]

Hi all

Fascinating stuff, so Amelia Richardson must have had a sister or sister in law?

Very curious about the lunatic Thomas Richardson.

All the best.

[Rosella]

The above and this is courtesy of Neal Sheldon over at JTR Forums, by the way. Thank you very much, Neal.

Amelia's third son was Robert.

1881 Census.

At 29 Hanbury St lived Thomas Richardson 57, box maker.
Amelia, aged 58.
Thomas Richardson grandson aged 5, scholar.

At the same time, 1881, at 15 Caroline St Lambeth, lived
John Richardson 28, Militiaman.
Caroline Richardson buttonhole maker.
Thomas Richardson aged 7, scholar.
John Richardson aged 3, born Surrey.
Amelia, baby not yet one. Born Lambeth.

As you can see, Amelia Jnr may well have died. Thomas, Amelia's husband, died before the Ripper murders, and, with two Thomas jnrs, the grandson cannot be John Richardson's son.

In the 1871 Census Thomas Richardson, John Richardson's brother, is noted down as a Lunatic.
Robert Richardson married in 1877. John Richardson married Caroline Chaffey on Christmas Day in 1873 at St Thomas's Lambeth.

[Rosella]

Amelia had three sons, I believe, John, Thomas and one other.

In the 1891 Census Amelia, still at 29 Hanbury, still with a packing case business was living with Thomas Richardson, 17 and her grandson, born Spitalfields.
She also in 1891 had a nephew G Gilbody, a widower and a silversmith aged 48 and his son C Gilbody, who was a packing case maker, living with her, (maybe she had got rid of Tyler as an employee.)

In the 1891 Census, at 7 St John's Place Whitechapel (where he lived in 1888) were John Richardson, who had become a bricklayer. His wife Caroline was a shirt maker.
Also present was son John aged 15, a carman, Millicent aged 10, a scholar, Mary aged 6, a scholar, and George aged 4, a scholar. Henry was aged one year. All children of the above.

I dont know whether Thomas Richardson aged 17 and living with his grandmother, was John's or the offspring of her other sons.

[RockySullivan]

But the leather apron theory never had anything to do with Jack the Ripper, really. Once Pizer was arrested then released the 'leather apron' story died. Therefore whether Richardson had a leather apron, whether he saw 'leather apron' on the street or not, is neither here nor there.

We don't know, because police documentation is gone, but if for instance Richardson and his family were at a family celebration in Bow on Bank Holiday Monday and there were masses of relatives sleeping at the house of Richardson's in laws in every spare corner, that would be a pretty good pointer to his not being Tabram's murderer.

Similarly, if one of Richardson's children was sick on the night Polly Nichols was killed and both husband and wife were sitting up with him/her for a few hours, he could hardly have been in Bucks Row bumping Polly off.

It's no coincidence that Ripper profilers have speculated that the Ripper was unmarried and without ties. It is often much too difficult for married family men to be able to get away. And yes I know in the face of that that some serial killers have been married with children, but it is still a valid point.

Sorry I should've been more clear, when I said leather apron I was referring I was actually referring to the strange story about richardson accusing the man in the street of being "the real leather apron". That strikes me wrong. Was richardson actually married? Was his son the one who lived at 29 with the grandmother?

[Rosella]

But the leather apron theory never had anything to do with Jack the Ripper, really. Once Pizer was arrested then released the 'leather apron' story died. Therefore whether Richardson had a leather apron, whether he saw 'leather apron' on the street or not, is neither here nor there.

We don't know, because police documentation is gone, but if for instance Richardson and his family were at a family celebration in Bow on Bank Holiday Monday and there were masses of relatives sleeping at the house of Richardson's in laws in every spare corner, that would be a pretty good pointer to his not being Tabram's murderer.

Similarly, if one of Richardson's children was sick on the night Polly Nichols was killed and both husband and wife were sitting up with him/her for a few hours, he could hardly have been in Bucks Row bumping Polly off.

It's no coincidence that Ripper profilers have speculated that the Ripper was unmarried and without ties. It is often much too difficult for married family men to be able to get away. And yes I know in the face of that that some serial killers have been married with children, but it is still a valid point.

[RockySullivan]

Hi Rocky.
Isn't that worse than the Mizen scam ?

Hi dvv, what do u hear what do u say! Yes I think so, richardson knew annie, his gaiter spring was next to the body. There are a number of things that makes richardson more suspicious than Lechmere. The leather apron story is real out there for instance

[RockySullivan]

Yesterday I did a little experiment, I got an old boot, with a small tear on the sole [where I had probably stood on it] and an old knife, I cut the leather [that was old and stiff and brittle] with the BACK of the knife. It wasn't a very good cut it wasn't a clean cut, but I cut a piece off.

But mr. Gut I thought you didn't go into the yard at all? What's that...you actually didn't use this knife but you cut it later once you got to spitalfields market?

[RockySullivan]

Good luck with your theory Rocky.

Thanks wickerman! I certainly take can't credit for it as wolf pointed out the inconsistency in his casebook essay. I'm convinced the torso & ripper murders are connected and I think the stolen tools from the cellar may be a clue. Hopefully some real sleuths may find a connection. I certainly understand what you mean about it being more difficult to take on a theory where the suspect was looked into and "no suspicion could attach". However I do feel there's more chance of someone who was actually questioned could have been the ripper than a random suspect who never was.

[DVV]

He changed his story twice

Hi Rocky.
Isn't that worse than the Mizen scam ?

[DVV]

Richardson is a better suspect than Crossmere, I must admit.
I foresee he'll be Fish's 2016 champion.

[GUT]

As for why didn't he say he finished the job at the markets, go and sit in Court for a week or so and see how often witnesses are asked "Why wasn't that in your affidavit/statement" about 90% of the time the answer is "I didn't think that it was relevant" and guess what 99% of the time it's not.

Richardson also didn't tell us if the first case of produce he moved that day at the markets was n a case made by him did he, and guess why, because it was irrelevant.

[GUT]

Yesterday I did a little experiment, I got an old boot, with a small tear on the sole [where I had probably stood on it] and an old knife, I cut the leather [that was old and stiff and brittle] with the BACK of the knife. It wasn't a very good cut it wasn't a clean cut, but I cut a piece off.