Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What makes Druitt a viable suspect?

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

  • Oh wait, I do see what you're saying Martyn and I aplogize for misrepresenting you. And the answer to how I did that was right there in front of my face. Let's review.

    You said:

    "I find the idea of "no jack" relevant to any suspect thread tbh. No railroading, just a interesting sideline to the main track (thread)."

    To which I replied:

    "Great!

    Simon you have a convert who agrees totally that every suspect thread should be sidetracked by interjecting Nojak. What you've been doing for years is catching on. It's all brand new and exciting to Martyn. Itsn't that special."

    Yes I see now the problem you have with my reply. You simply said no railroading, just an interesting sideline. I said you agreed a thread should be sidetracked. Oops. And the answer was right there. It IS all exciting and new to you. Like this Druitt suspect thread is going to get back on track. Well I've got news for you, my friend, its not. It's obviously going to stay NoJacked. See?

    Because again, its' all brand new to you, an interesting diversion, why not do it on each and every Suspect thread. It doesn't work that way, believe me. The NoJacker carefully picks his thread to NoJack. It is one where lots of posters congregate, it's usually one where it's one of the police suspects, or has to do with the evil white police officials. And politicians. The Tony Blairs of the LVP to paraphrase Packers. Then the NoJacker pounces. And he will not let up. Then others get their gumption up and join in. But the NoJacker has phenomenal endurance and staying power. He lives for coming here and NoJacking these threads. Has done it dozens and dozens of times. All with the same result. The thread, whatever it started out as, is well and truly potted when he gets through with it.

    You being new, it's all fun and games.

    Again, please accept my apologies and again, Welcome to the Casebook discussion group.

    Roy

    Sink the Bismark

    Comment


    • Hi Roy,

      You're starting to dribble.

      You need to get over yourself.

      Regards,

      Simon
      Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

      Comment


      • Hello Roy,

        Believe me, its not personal.. I stress that,as will be seen.. But when you write "dozens of times" or suchlike, it would be fair to balance it with the point that over many years, and dozens of threads and posts, you yourself have seemingly made a B-line to criticise anything Simon has written.

        However, you, sir, are not the only one of course to do such things with other individuals either. For some reason, some find that sort of type of discussion "fun".
        It's entirely up to you, them, or anyone for that matter, which "line" they decide to go down in discussions, of course.
        But.. The "dozens of times" can be thrown at many people, for many reasons.. No doubt myself included! (no doubt this, will give someone the chance to say something against me...) But as I said, nothing personal sir. Just a balancing observation.


        Phil
        Chelsea FC. TRUE BLUE. 💙


        Justice for the 96 = achieved
        Accountability? ....

        Comment


        • Originally posted by packers stem View Post
          . I'm guessing you're not suspecting Richardson? and that as there was no corpse around then the usual course is that it would have got lighter after Richardson left .....
          I see no reason to suspect Richardson. Yes it would have gotten lighter (donít see your point PS)

          .
          it's not about what I think , but about what you think regarding the light there
          I believe Phillips TOD to be probably close , I also believe Richardson didn't fall over Chapman
          But what are you basing your opinion that Phillips was probably close with his TOD? We know from modern medical experts that TOD estimations at that time could be wildly inaccurate so to say that we agree or disagree with Phillipís opinion is tantamount to having faith in an unknown.

          And itís not what I think about the light because I wasnít there. Richardson was there and he said that there was enough light to see around.

          .
          You do to cut out organs , not bright sunlight , but adequate light
          You do if you are performing a life saving operation but not if youíre whipping out organs during an act of butchery.

          .
          We will disagree on Miller's Court
          I think so.
          Regards

          Herlock






          "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post



            I see no reason to suspect Richardson. Yes it would have gotten lighter (donít see your point PS)



            But what are you basing your opinion that Phillips was probably close with his TOD? We know from modern medical experts that TOD estimations at that time could be wildly inaccurate so to say that we agree or disagree with Phillipís opinion is tantamount to having faith in an unknown.

            And itís not what I think about the light because I wasnít there. Richardson was there and he said that there was enough light to see around.



            You do if you are performing a life saving operation but not if youíre whipping out organs during an act of butchery.



            I think so.
            With regard to Richardson I don't see your point either ? That isn't the point in time at which the murder took place .
            Well , not in the yard anyway so it has no bearing .
            Yes , dawn was breaking at that point .
            So it would have been getting lighter from that point on .
            The common belief ( not my own ) is that Cadosch heard the murder being carried out by which time it was fully daylight .

            I base my assumption on Phillips TOD in comparison with that of Brown .
            Both arrived at the scene about 40-60 minutes after the normally accepted TOD

            Eddowes was still warm and rigor had not commenced .
            Chapman was different .
            These were both vastly experienced surgeons.
            Those wishing to claim a 5.30 TOD do Phillips an injustice .
            The coldness of the night etc
            Just as cold if not colder in Mitre Square
            You can lead a horse to water.....

            Comment


            • Originally posted by packers stem View Post

              With regard to Richardson I don't see your point either ? That isn't the point in time at which the murder took place .
              Well , not in the yard anyway so it has no bearing .
              Yes , dawn was breaking at that point .
              So it would have been getting lighter from that point on .
              The common belief ( not my own ) is that Cadosch heard the murder being carried out by which time it was fully daylight .

              I base my assumption on Phillips TOD in comparison with that of Brown .
              Both arrived at the scene about 40-60 minutes after the normally accepted TOD

              Eddowes was still warm and rigor had not commenced .
              Chapman was different .
              These were both vastly experienced surgeons.
              Those wishing to claim a 5.30 TOD do Phillips an injustice .
              The coldness of the night etc
              Just as cold if not colder in Mitre Square
              It doesnít matter what time he arrived at the scene. TOD estimations were inaccurate and no amount of wigs thinking is going to alter this fact. They cannot be relied upon just because they might fit a theory.

              No great amount of light was required but there was obviously sufficient.

              Theres not a solitary shred of an iota of a smidgeon of a scintilla of evidence that Chapman was killed anywhere other than the backyard of 29 Hanbury Street. Any other suggestion is baseless nonsense.

              Do we have any reason why Cadosch might have lied? 15 minutes of fame? Possibly I suppose. But thereís a very real possibility that he heard the ripper.
              Regards

              Herlock






              "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

              Comment


              • Phil you are absolutely right. I have been incredibly guilty of bad behavior. Even to the point of what you said Simon, I'm losing it or however you put it.

                But honestly I'm only making an observation. Simon never kicks off a thread and says there was no Jack the Ripper. He always chooses to interject into another thread.

                And just look at this thread - what it has become over the past week or so. It is no longer a Druitt thread in any shape or fashion. This thread is well and truly potted. Mission accomplished. Because you can't turn a pickle back into a cucumber. You just can't.

                And Macnaghten took heat here of course. What I don't get is why folks have not pointed out he was manager of a plantation. In India. Why people aren't all over that like flies on dookie. Wow, if this was the US, he was manager of a plantation, that's spelled P-L-A-N-T-A-T-I-O-N, he was subjugating people of color in a colonial setting. Goodness gracious, turn out the lights in Dallas, Irene, the howl that would go up here over that.

                Maybe in the future yall will get to the plantation angle more fully. I sense the railroading has only begun. Track is being laid. More converts come out the woodwork and get the gumption to join in.

                Carry on, because this thread is toast.

                Good news is NoJak thread is up and running. For everybody. See you there.

                Roy
                Last edited by Roy Corduroy; 06-13-2019, 01:35 PM.
                Sink the Bismark

                Comment


                • Roy, Apology accepted.

                  Martyn

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                    It doesnít matter what time he arrived at the scene. TOD estimations were inaccurate and no amount of wigs thinking is going to alter this fact. They cannot be relied upon just because they might fit a theory.
                    Nothing whatsoever to do with fitting into a theory .She could have died anytime for me but for you not so , because Richardson is a problem. Had Richardson not entered the yard you would quite happily accept Phillips and have dumped Cadosch in the 'irrelevant' bin with Long .
                    I explained why Phillips testimony is relevant in that yes , things have moved on now , but if Eddowes body was still warm and rigor had not commenced then why should Chapman be different ?
                    I don't expect Phillips to be spot on but to ignore him just so you can claim a sound of something touching a fence as confirmation of TOD as ridiculous .

                    No great amount of light was required but there was obviously sufficient.
                    Yes , sufficient light was necessary
                    There we agree
                    Unfortunately there was none in Mitre Square so all I do is look for the answers instead of trying to convince myself that the impossible was possible .


                    Theres not a solitary shred of an iota of a smidgeon of a scintilla of evidence that Chapman was killed anywhere other than the backyard of 29 Hanbury Street. Any other suggestion is baseless nonsense.
                    There is ..... you counter it by convincing yourself Philips was wildly inaccurate .
                    Yet later events proved Brown to be accurate .
                    That's the first point ... the next I'll discuss under your next comment .

                    Do we have any reason why Cadosch might have lied? 15 minutes of fame? Possibly I suppose. But thereís a very real possibility that he heard the ripper.
                    Who says Cadosch lied?
                    Nor will I suggest he was simple enough to get the day wrong ....
                    No , I wouldn't dream of giving him the 'maxwell' just to explain him away so he disappears into the sunset and stops upsetting a theory like happens to our number one witness.....

                    He heard a voice ...... male or female ,he never specified say "no"
                    He didn't know what side it came from .
                    Here's what many forget ..... it was three or so minutes later he went back into the yard to the privvy..... then returning back he heard the thud against the fence .
                    So you've got four or five minutes probably between the "no" and the thud .
                    During this time ,your killer (and victim) weren't heard to utter a word during his second visit ??
                    No noises , no muffled cry as he was in the privvy ?
                    What do you suggest happened in the four or five minutes between the "no" and the body presumably falling against the fence if that was when she was killed as you suggest .
                    Why no sound ..... at all
                    I suggest Cadosch heard her body being dumped .... at best
                    and that something accidentally touched the fence in this time

                    Adolphus Caposch (sic), carpenter, lodging next door to 29, Hanbury street, said - About a quarter past five o'clock in the morning of the 8th inst., I was in the yard. I returned in about five minutes, and heard a voice close to me, but I could not say on which side, or in which yard, say "No." I went in and came back into the yard in three or four minutes, and then I heard a sort of fall against the fence which divides the yard from No. 29.

                    What sort of noise was it? - Well, as if something had touched the fence suddenly.
                    You can lead a horse to water.....

                    Comment


                    • He heard a voice ...... male or female ,he never specified say "no"
                      He didn't know what side it came from .
                      Here's what many forget ..... it was three or so minutes later he went back into the yard to the privvy..... then returning back he heard the thud against the fence .
                      So you've got four or five minutes probably between the "no" and the thud .
                      During this time ,your killer (and victim) weren't heard to utter a word during his second visit ??
                      No noises , no muffled cry as he was in the privvy ?
                      What do you suggest happened in the four or five minutes between the "no" and the body presumably falling against the fence if that was when she was killed as you suggest .
                      Why no sound ..... at all
                      I suggest Cadosch heard her body being dumped .... at best
                      and that something accidentally touched the fence in this time

                      Adolphus Caposch (sic), carpenter, lodging next door to 29, Hanbury street, said - About a quarter past five o'clock in the morning of the 8th inst., I was in the yard. I returned in about five minutes, and heard a voice close to me, but I could not say on which side, or in which yard, say "No." I went in and came back into the yard in three or four minutes, and then I heard a sort of fall against the fence which divides the yard from No. 29.

                      What sort of noise was it? - Well, as if something had touched the fence suddenly.
                      If the Ď’noí’was unconnected, and it might have been, then we have Cadosch hearing something/someone fall against the fence. If the ‘Ďnoí’ was connected then we donít know why the gap. I bit of haggling, a drunken Chapmen being a bit chatty, Cadosch being mistaken about the length of the gap, Chapman going to the bottom of the yard to relieve herself before they commenced business? Absolutely anything is more plausible that someone dumping a body.

                      Who dumped the body?
                      Where was she killed?
                      Why dump the body?

                      Three simple questions that, if answered, will allow me to understand your position. At the moment PS itís very unclear.
                      Regards

                      Herlock






                      "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

                      Comment


                      • There is ..... you counter it by convincing yourself Philips was wildly inaccurate .
                        Yet later events proved Brown to be accurate .
                        Its very simple.

                        If inaccurate methods are occasionally accurate this does not make them reliable. Would you buy a SatNav that got you to your location 60% of the time?
                        Regards

                        Herlock






                        "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

                        Comment


                        • Yes , sufficient light was necessary
                          There we agree
                          Unfortunately there was none in Mitre Square so all I do is look for the answers instead of trying to convince myself that the impossible was possible
                          No we donít agree. Iím saying that poor light was sufficient. Almost no light was sufficient.

                          There is no evidence that she was killed elsewhere. The idea of a body being carried along the street is a joke. It cannot be taken seriously because it didnít happen. She was killed in Mitre Square therefore whatever light was available was sufficient to do what was done to her and unless you can prove otherwise, which you cannot, then this is what weíí’re left with in the real world.
                          Regards

                          Herlock






                          "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

                          Comment


                          • Hi Herlock,

                            Greetings to the real world.

                            You can't prove that Eddowes was murdered and disemboweled in a less-than-nine-minute window of opportunity in Mitre Square. And if, as you say, "Almost no light was sufficient to do what was done to her," she may well have been murdered on the other side of the gate in the fence [marked on Foster's map as 'Passage to House'] and carried a couple of feet into position once the coast was clear. Nobody would have seen what was going on.

                            And before you say it: No, I can't prove it. But I'm open to the idea. It makes a lot more sense that the story of Jack's lightning kerbside surgery skills.

                            Regards,

                            Simon
                            Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

                            Comment


                            • It also makes a lot of sense to accept that the police would search on the other side of that fence for trace evidence; footmarks, blood, signs of a disturbance.
                              Apparently, they found no evidence of either.
                              Regards, Jon S.

                              Comment


                              • Hi Jon,

                                Do you know for a fact that they looked?

                                Also, don't forget, they were dab hands at washing away blood.

                                Regards,

                                Simon
                                Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X