Alternative entrences / exits to #29 Hanbury crime scene?

[Ginger]

but the next down after that...didn't that have a factory or something in the back yard?

#23A was also a packing case maker's, presumably a competitor of Mrs. Richardson's.

[Cogidubnus]

Hi Ginger

You're probably right...it's just that I've got a recollection from somewhere that the second house down had it's back yard built over, reducing the possibility of Cadosche's hearing aural input from anywhere other than directly next door...

Dave

[Ginger]

You're probably right...it's just that I've got a recollection from somewhere that the second house down had it's back yard built over, reducing the possibility of Cadosche's hearing aural input from anywhere other than directly next door...

At Annie's inquest, witness James Kent described himself as a packing cae maker in the employ of Mr. Bayley, at #23A Hanbury street.

IIRC (and I cannot find my cite right now, I'm sorry to say - I blame it on this excellent beverage), #21 was a Harrison & Barber knacker's yard, which extended back much further than the other houses. I think maybe that's the covered area that you're remembering. It's on the other side of Bayley's from Mrs. Richardson's place. That was probably manned 24 hours a day, with a watchman at a bare minimum. Given the nature of the business, I'm guessing Jack would have felt pretty secure on the street near there in bloody clothes, especially near shift-changing time.

[Rosella]

Hence the dustman who told the police he saw a man in bloodstained clothing walking down Hanbury Street at after 5am.

It does seem strange that we have no statement from mr Waker or his son, but (a) the witness statements may have been lost or (b) they were asleep and neither heard nor saw anything. They might not have been asked. However, I can't see the police not questioning every tenant in that house.

[RockySullivan]

Rocky, what's your source for Cadosch's "exact words" please? The inquest documents don't survive as far as I know and the newspaper reports tend to be in reported speech.

It was a newspaper quote so "exact words" is probably not the best wording. I do find it interesting that cadosche heard voices and says it sounds like the neighbors. Sometimes I can tell which neighbor is outside by their voices, but we can't be too sure how familiar cadosche was with the tenants. However the fact is....richardson is at the crime scene at the right time with a knife....he was never thoroughly cleared at the time and that leaves him in the position of suspect number one.

[RockySullivan]

Hence the dustman who told the police he saw a man in bloodstained clothing walking down Hanbury Street at after 5am.

It does seem strange that we have no statement from mr Waker or his son, but (a) the witness statements may have been lost or (b) they were asleep and neither heard nor saw anything. They might not have been asked. However, I can't see the police not questioning every tenant in that house.

They didn't thoroughly investigate richardson...especially if the left the cellar unsearched....if they didn't do something that obvious....it's very believeable they didn't get statements from all the tenants.

[GUT]

It was a newspaper quote so "exact words" is probably not the best wording. I do find it interesting that cadosche heard voices and says it sounds like the neighbors. Sometimes I can tell which neighbor is outside by their voices, but we can't be too sure how familiar cadosche was with the tenants. However the fact is....richardson is at the crime scene at the right time with a knife....he was never thoroughly cleared at the time and that leaves him in the position of suspect number one.

Gee another "suspect number one" how many can there possibly be???

[RockySullivan]

Gee another "suspect number one" how many can there possibly be???

Gu'tay! Isn't it common sense when someone who repeatedly changes their story places himself at the murder scene with the murder weapon? Doesn't common sense dictate that person needs to be eliminated before the investigation can move forward? Or do you consider the butter knife alibi to be rock solid??

[GUT]

Gu'tay! Isn't it common sense when someone who repeatedly changes their story places himself at the murder scene with the murder weapon? Doesn't common sense dictate that person needs to be eliminated before the investigation can move forward? Or do you consider the butter knife alibi to be rock solid??

G'day Rocky

Neither really, person of interest perhaps, number one suspect though is just thrown about like confetti.

And it is never necessary to eliminate one person before moving on to look at others.

And you say "places himself at the murder scene with the murder weapon?" how do you figure that, he says he had a knife [he says a butter knife but regardless of that] how does that translate to "the murder weapon".

[RockySullivan]

G'day Rocky

Neither really, person of interest perhaps, number one suspect though is just thrown about like confetti.

And it is never necessary to eliminate one person before moving on to look at others.

And you say "places himself at the murder scene with the murder weapon?" how do you figure that, he says he had a knife [he says a butter knife but regardless of that] how does that translate to "the murder weapon".

By murder weapon I meant simply knife as opposed to gun or bow and arrow. Was the butter knife the knife richardson had out in the yard? In your opinion gut, why did richardson first claim he didn't go into the yard, then he sat and cut his boot, finally he sat but did not cut his boot until later on the market?

[Rosella]

Perhaps he was frightened of being accused of being Jack the Ripper. People get confused and do and say a lot of stupid things when they're afraid.

The police questioned him, but he himself (no-one else) volunteered the information that he had a knife and was at the back steps. He went to the inquest and told his story. There is absolutely nothing that says that the police investigating the murders regarded Richardson as a primary suspect.

[GUT]

Perhaps he was frightened of being accused of being Jack the Ripper. People get confused and do and say a lot of stupid things when they're afraid.

The police questioned him, but he himself (no-one else) volunteered the information that he had a knife and was at the back steps. He went to the inquest and told his story. There is absolutely nothing that says that the police investigating the murders regarded Richardson as a primary suspect.

Nor indeed to say that they didn't make reasonable inquiries about him.

[RockySullivan]

It was clearly stated that richardson's story was viewed with suspicion and the coroner felt his presence in the yard warranted explanation. You want to let richardsons completely different versions of accounts go because he was scared? His story doesn't add up....he tells the coroner two
Completely different things. How would being scared make richardson say to the coroner that he successfully cut the leather from his boot and tied his boot up then the next time he testifies when he produces the knife he says he cut the boot later from a knife at the market. How does fear account for him changing his story? He was caught in a lie...fear of being hung

[RockySullivan]

Nor indeed to say that they didn't make reasonable inquiries about him.

Did they search his workshop in the cellar? Did they confirm his story about hearing of the murder from his coworker that morning? Did they look for the knife he used at the market to cut his boot? Did they search his home at 2 John street...was there a rabbit?

[GUT]

Did they search his workshop in the cellar? Did they confirm his story about hearing of the murder from his coworker that morning? Did they look for the knife he used at the market to cut his boot? Did they search his home at 2 John street...was there a rabbit?

Well don't know, but I expect so, any theory that relies on the police being Keystone Cops and not making basic investigations is bound to fall, in my opinion. They asked him to produce the knife did they not??