Originally posted by Abby Normal
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Lechmere was Jack the Ripper
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Jon Guy View PostTrue, but the Doctors could tell Eddowes had been killed recently.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Jon Guy View PostTrue, but the Doctors could tell Eddowes had been killed recently.
but we know, and they did then too, that's the case because of other witnesses/police beats"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 Postbut we know, and they did then too, that's the case because of other witnesses/police beats
Because the body could have been killed earlier and dumped in Mitre Sq.
Dr Brown: The body had been mutilated, and was quite warm - no rigor mortis. The crime must have been committed within half an hour, or certainly within forty minutes from the time when I saw the body.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Abby Normal View Postthey might if their already sick/weak, their throats cut severely, their midsection ripped open, internal organs taken, and there skirt thrown up on a chilly morning.
not sure the good dr had that experience before and or accounted for it all.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Harry D View PostThere's no way Richardson would've missed the body.
This, coupled with Cadosch's evidence, puts the TOD later than Dr. Phillips' estimation.I won't always agree but I'll try not to be disagreeable.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Fisherman View PostTaking a quick look at Richardsons shoe again, I find that he says this at the inquest:
"..... After cutting the leather off my boot I tied my boot up, and went out of the house into the market. I did not close the back door. It closed itself. I shut the front door.
A claim for which there is actually supporting photographic evidence:-
the door (assuming it was the original) was fitted with rising butt hinges.I won't always agree but I'll try not to be disagreeable.
Comment
-
Concerning Richardson, I made a crude drawing, depicting from above the part of the backyard with an 80 cm wide door, and Richardson sitting on the step. I have the door open, it is (of course) also 80 centimeters.
The door swung back on itīs hinges and closed itself, Richardson said, so it is reasonable to suggest that it would have leaned against him as he sat on the step.
I have him turned slightly to his right, since his interest was in the padlock on that side.
Behind the door, lying on the ground, I have drawn in a 160 centimeter figure with the legs drawn up.
Take a look at how much the door hides. From where he sits, it is impossible to see Chapman. And it is still kind of dark too!
Here is the link to my - crude - drawing:
Last edited by Fisherman; 08-29-2018, 10:10 AM.
Comment
-
The back door of 29 Hanbury Street opened outwards, right to left. Two stone steps led down from the passageway to the yard.
When open, the bottom of the doorlevel with the passageway at the top of the stepssat about two feet above the level of the yard, and could not have obscured the body.Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Simon Wood View PostThe back door of 29 Hanbury Street opened outwards, right to left. Two stone steps led down from the passageway to the yard.
When open, the bottom of the door—level with the passageway at the top of the steps—sat about two feet above the level of the yard, and could not have obscured the body.
If, by chance, parts of Chapman could be seen down there, why would we suppose that Richardson would lean down, look to his left and try to make out what he could see between the doorblade and the steps in the murky morning light?
Is that the natural thing to do for somebody who comes to check a padlock in the opposite direction?
What I am saying is that there is no certainty at all that Richardson must have seen the body. That is a myth, one of many.
Normally I donīt agree with you over the perceived myths of the case. This time you disagree with me over one, it would seem. Funny, in a way.Last edited by Fisherman; 08-29-2018, 10:49 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View PostFish, does your drawing take into account Inspector Chandler's inquest evidence;
"Her head was towards the back wall of the house, nearly two feet from the wall, at the bottom of the steps, but six or nine inches away from them."
Even if we move her out somewhat, she will still be obscured by the door, Joshua. And of course, the door angle may have been acuter too. There are plenty of viable angles that support the view that she may have actually have been out of sight for Richardson.
I donīt think anybody has made this kind of drawing before. It is quite instrumental in explaining how Richardson could well have missed her, I believe.
Comment
Comment