Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Was John Richardson Jack the Ripper?

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

  • Thank you again John. So as far as Annie is concerned we are left with a death, knowing that she probably swallowed her last food at about 1:45am, of within the range of the times we've been discussing. Back to more reading about the possible temperature of the body etc!

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Jon Guy View Post
      If she had her last meal at 1.30am, John, when was her TOD ?
      Hi Jon,

      Well, based upon the study I cited, it would most commonly be the case that time of death was 2-6 hours after the last meal-because unidentifiable semi digested food contents were found in the stomach-so sometime between 3:30 am and 7:30 am, although I think we can safely rule out the latter estimate, based upon the time the body was discovered!

      Comment


      • Originally posted by John G View Post
        Hi Jon,

        Well, based upon the study I cited, it would most commonly be the case that time of death was 2-6 hours after the last meal-because unidentifiable semi digested food contents were found in the stomach-so sometime between 3:30 am and 7:30 am, although I think we can safely rule out the latter estimate, based upon the time the body was discovered!
        Thanks John
        That`s pretty much what Phillips estimated.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Pandora View Post
          Iím a Richardsonite? Oh dear.

          Yes it all hinges on what Cadosch heard. I think there is enough evidence we know of (Dr Philips TOD, the half digested potatoes, the unlikeliness of Jack killing in daylight - sunrise was 5:25am that morning) to suggest an earlier time for the murder, but who on earth did Cadosch hear at (approx) 5:20am, and (approx) 5:30am, and who on earth did Mrs Long see at (approx) 5:32am?

          While I have no doubt the police did go to the markets and question Richardsonís fellow workers, itís whether they did it that day, or several days later that I wonder about. Several days later may have skewed their memories of the time.

          And I just canít wrap my head around the idea, that Richardson would place himself at the scene, if he hadnít actually gone there that morning, just because his mother would find out heíd shirked his responsibility. A woman was ripped open in her back yard, so I very much doubt Amelia would have cared whether or not John had checked the lock or not that morning. More likely, in my opinion, he placed himself there because he was there, and couldnít be sure he hadnít been seen.

          And to go back to my original argument, if Dr Philips was right about the TOD, then Annie would have already been dead when Richardson says he turned up. So I guess it depends if you believe he could have missed her body in the yard that morning, both the sight, and the stench - especially if he'd sat down on that step & fiddled with his boot for several minutes.
          Hi Pandora
          I agree-I doubt he would lie and PLACE himself at the murder scene with that lie.

          IMHO he would have seen the body lying at his feet a few feet away, especially since his attention was directed downward toward his boot!

          I think he may have sat down to cut the leather, couldn't do it with the dull knife and later cut it at the market. he just didn't get into that amount of detail the first time he told the story.

          Long and Cadosh IMHO were valid honest witnesses who saw/heard Chapman and either one was off on their times a bit.


          If anything-I would focus on the wet leather apron that was found at the scene and belonged to him. Why was it wet? was it wet from rain or had it been recently rinsed off? did it rain recently that night/ morning?

          These aren't rhetorical questions-do you know the answers?

          Because if it hadn't rained and looked like it had been recently washed then why and by whom? did Richardson wash and leave his apron there recently??
          I think you see where I'm going with this.
          "Is all that we see or seem
          but a dream within a dream?"

          -Edgar Allan Poe


          "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
          quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

          -Frederick G. Abberline

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
            Hi Pandora
            I agree-I doubt he would lie and PLACE himself at the murder scene with that lie.

            IMHO he would have seen the body lying at his feet a few feet away, especially since his attention was directed downward toward his boot!

            I think he may have sat down to cut the leather, couldn't do it with the dull knife and later cut it at the market. he just didn't get into that amount of detail the first time he told the story.

            Long and Cadosh IMHO were valid honest witnesses who saw/heard Chapman and either one was off on their times a bit.


            If anything-I would focus on the wet leather apron that was found at the scene and belonged to him. Why was it wet? was it wet from rain or had it been recently rinsed off? did it rain recently that night/ morning?

            These aren't rhetorical questions-do you know the answers?

            Because if it hadn't rained and looked like it had been recently washed then why and by whom? did Richardson wash and leave his apron there recently??
            I think you see where I'm going with this.
            Hi Abby

            John`s mum at the inquest:
            On Thursday, Sept. 6, I found my son's leather apron in the cellar mildewed. He had not used it for a month. I took it and put it under the tap in the yard, and left it there. It was found there on Saturday morning by the police, who took charge of it. The apron had remained there from Thursday to Saturday.

            [Coroner] Was this tap used? - Yes, by all of us in the house. The apron was on the stones. The police took away an empty box, used for nails, and the steel out of a boy's gaiter. There was a pan of clean water near to the tap when I went in the yard at six o'clock on Saturday. It was there on Friday night at eight o'clock, and it looked as if it had not been disturbed

            Comment


            • Thank you...it's interesting the police took the "steel out of a boy's gaiter" that was found next to the body. They may have thought it had some significance.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Jon Guy View Post
                Hi Abby

                John`s mum at the inquest:
                On Thursday, Sept. 6, I found my son's leather apron in the cellar mildewed. He had not used it for a month. I took it and put it under the tap in the yard, and left it there. It was found there on Saturday morning by the police, who took charge of it. The apron had remained there from Thursday to Saturday.

                [Coroner] Was this tap used? - Yes, by all of us in the house. The apron was on the stones. The police took away an empty box, used for nails, and the steel out of a boy's gaiter. There was a pan of clean water near to the tap when I went in the yard at six o'clock on Saturday. It was there on Friday night at eight o'clock, and it looked as if it had not been disturbed
                Thanks Jon
                well that answers that!

                unless it should have been dry by the time the police found it.
                "Is all that we see or seem
                but a dream within a dream?"

                -Edgar Allan Poe


                "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                -Frederick G. Abberline

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                  Thanks Jon
                  well that answers that!

                  unless it should have been dry by the time the police found it.
                  Unless Mrs R was covering for John and put it under the tap that morning.
                  But she does say other people used the tap, and it was a leather apron... but notice that she checks the tray of water by the tap at 6am on Sat morning with a dead body lying a few feet away. You`d think she`d be otherwise occupied by the nearby corpse.

                  Perhaps she`s just cleaned up after John ?!?!? Rinsed his leather apron and chucked away the bloody water from the tray.
                  She also says he hadn`t used his apron for a month, which takes us back to the date of the Tabram murder.
                  Last edited by Jon Guy; 02-09-2016, 10:09 AM.

                  Comment


                  • I've always found the clean water strange, why wouldn't the ripper have used it to wash his hands? I could see why she check the tray of water, to see if the ripper had used it..

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by RockySullivan View Post
                      I've always found the clean water strange, why wouldn't the ripper have used it to wash his hands?
                      Time, probably, Rocky.
                      One thing about the Ripper is that he knew not to hang around.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by RockySullivan View Post
                        I've always found the clean water strange, why wouldn't the ripper have used it to wash his hands? I could see why she check the tray of water, to see if the ripper had used it..
                        If it was pitch dark, how would he see it?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                          If it was pitch dark, how would he see it?
                          Whose saying it was that dark...it was light enough for the mutilations

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                            Thanks Jon
                            well that answers that!

                            unless it should have been dry by the time the police found it.
                            She had put it on the flagstones to dry. It probably would have taken longer to dry there.

                            Best wishes
                            C4

                            Comment


                            • I still feel like we are missing part of the story with no info on Francis Tyler. Does anyone know where lived? I thought he lived with John but I'm not sure if that's correct. Anyone have any info on Tyler?

                              What exactly is steel from a "boy's gaiter"? Does this mean a childs gaiter? Did the police thing coukve belonged to the killer since it was found by the body? If it was just trash in the yard would they have taken it as evidence? If it does mean a child could the killer have had a boy as an accomplice
                              Last edited by RockySullivan; 02-09-2016, 02:04 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Pandora View Post
                                I agree that the knife John Richardson fetched was not the murder weapon. My point is, if the police had searched his house already looking for weapons, they would have also looked at, and discarded the "table knife" as a possible murder weapon, so why didn't anyone at the inquest say this, instead of sending him home to collect it? It suggests to me, that his house had not been searched, and the "table knife" had not been excluded, and so there was still reason to suspect it was the murder weapon.
                                The Coroner can obtain and hold any evidence he chooses, regardless of whether the police have rejected it as material evidence.

                                If I can make a suggestion, for what its worth.

                                Richardson produced this table knife on the second day (Wednesday) of the inquest, the Coroner decided to hold it, possibly because Dr. Phillips was due to appear the next day (Thursday).
                                The Coroner might have though to ask Dr. Phillips if this table knife could possibly have been the murder weapon.

                                On Thursday, Coroner Baxter led Dr. Phillips into answering questions about the type of knife used in the mutilations. Quite possibly, once Phillips began to describe the murder weapon (It must have been a very sharp knife, probably with a thin, narrow blade, and at least six to eight inches in length, and perhaps longer.) Coroner Baxter realized the table knife did not satisfy the requirements described by Dr. Phillips.

                                It's quite possible the police had gone through this exercise previously (ie; showing the knife to Phillips), but as Baxter didn't ask and didn't explain his intentions, Abberline who was in court, couldn't offer any assistance.
                                Regards, Jon S.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X