Chapman's Death

[curious]

Hello Curious. That is an excellent piece. I've read it twice and it helped me get a better perspective on AC's TOD.

The best.
LC

And that's all any one of us can really do -- get our own perspectives.

But isn't it interesting and fun getting there?


curious

[lynn cates]

mind

Hello Curious. Right. I never fear for one whose mind is both open and engaged.

The best.
LC

[curious]

The phrase "violent deaths happening with intense emotion" of course made me think of the Ripper victims, but in particular of Liz Stride, who died with her package of cachous still clutched in her hand.

Best regards, Archaic

Hi, Archaic,

Thanks, that seems very astute to me and cadaveric spasm explains something for me that had been unexplainable before.

curious

[Archaic]

re: Cadaveric Spasm & Time of Sunrise

Hi, Curious; thank you for your kind words.

The sources that I read stated that Cadaveric Spasm was a "rare" occurrence, but unfortunately none of them explained how rare by giving any kind of statistic to help put it in perspective. And of course I can't say that C.S. happened to Liz, but I thought of her right away when I read the passage that I quoted.

I agree with you that Wolf's piece on Annie is an excellent resource, as is the Ripper Wiki. We are very fortunate to have them.

Hello, Lynn, thanks for finding out that sunrise was at 5:23 AM.
I asked because I've never been able to imagine the Ripper killing Annie in any kind of "daylight" conditions, though he might have wanted just a bit of light in order to disembowel her and remove her uterus.
There would have been no backyard lights, of course, and any interior lights from candles and such would have been weak to illuminate the yard.
The layout of old Hanbury Street- a tall, rather cramped row of houses with fenced yards and a large building behind- would presumably have kept the deadly corner in #29's backyard in shadow for at least a little while longer as the sun started to come up.

(I would imagine that this could be calculated based upon factors like the height & geographical position of #29, if anyone wants a project...)

Best regards, Archaic

[perrymason]

Hi, Curious; thank you for your kind words.

The sources that I read stated that Cadaveric Spasm was a "rare" occurrence, but unfortunately none of them explained how rare by giving any kind of statistic to help put it in perspective. And of course I can't say that C.S. happened to Liz, but I thought of her right away when I read the passage that I quoted.

I agree with you that Wolf's piece on Annie is an excellent resource, as is the Ripper Wiki. We are very fortunate to have them.

Hello, Lynn, thanks for finding out that sunrise was at 5:23 AM.
I asked because I've never been able to imagine the Ripper killing Annie in any kind of "daylight" conditions, though he might have wanted just a bit of light in order to disembowel her and remove her uterus.
There would have been no backyard lights, of course, and any interior lights from candles and such would have been weak to illuminate the yard.
The layout of old Hanbury Street- a tall, rather cramped row of houses with fenced yards and a large building behind- would presumably have kept the deadly corner in #29's backyard in shadow for at least a little while longer as the sun started to come up.

(I would imagine that this could be calculated based upon factors like the height & geographical position of #29, if anyone wants a project...)

Best regards, Archaic

If her killer was the same one that killed Catharine, the lack of almost all artificial or natural light was not a deterrent, nor do I imagine that the weak available natural light in Hanbury was any problem...nor of any great assistance.

Best regards

[Archaic]

Lighting Conditions & Time of Annie's Death

Hi, Perry.
I agree that poor lighting/pre-dawn darkness in the backyard of #29 was not a deterrent to the killer.

In fact, I think that the presence of light would have been a deterrent to him, especially when a whole houseful of people would be waking up, and at least some of them could be expected to use the privy in the early morning.

The Ripper was very comfortable in the dark, and knew how to use darkness to his own advantage. If he killed Annie at a time when there was just a peep of daybreak, it wouldn't have been because he personally needed some light in order to operate; rather I feel it would have been so he could enjoy the sight of his own gruesome handiwork. Any light at all would automatically increase his degree of personal risk...he enjoyed risk, but on the other hand he didn't want to get caught.

All of this goes back to the question regarding the time of Annie's death, and at what time before the body was discovered at approximately 6:00 AM it might have occurred.

Best regards, Archaic

[Chava]

The thing is we don't know what normal ambient light was at the time. They had street lighting, so even though the lamp posts of Hanbury St wouldn't have illuminated the backyard, there would have been some contribution to the general light of the area. You're not looking at the pitch-black of the deep countryside where there are no lights and you're dependent on the moon for light. I imagine there was fairly viable ambient light in the city. And it was dawn right around the probable time of the murder. Even if she was murdered an hour or so earlier, there would have been enough light to kill her and enough light to see her body.

The only way Richardson could have missed it would have been if he had been walking through a brightly-lit passageway and so comes into the dark from the light, and his eyes would have taken a while to adjust. But something tells me that the hallway of #29 was probably not equipped with florescent lighting...

[Jon Guy]

Hello Lynn

With regard to John Richardson missing the body whilst he looked right to the cellar door in the yard, this is what resident, John Davies, said at the inquest:

"Directly I opened the door I saw a woman lying down in the lefthand recess, between the stone steps and the fence."

This is what James Kent said :

"standing on the top of the back door steps, I saw a woman lying in the yard between the steps and the partition between the yard and the next."

Richardson was not going to miss her if she was lying there.

[lynn cates]

repetitive procedures

Hello Jon. It is true that both men saw Annie. Of course, in Kent's case, he was directed to it.

What about Davis? Did he not go INTO the yard?

I agree that, if Richardson's testimony is exactly as stated, without tweaking or embellishment, he could not have failed to have seen Annie. But I am claiming that Richardson merely looked right and saw the lock secure. Whereupon he withdrew and went about his business.

Many of us go through repetitive procedures and miss the obvious, simply because we are not looking for such.

The best.
LC

[Jon Guy]

Hello Lynn

Davis did not enter the yard, he was directly confronted with Chapman`s body as soon as he pushed open the door, which incidentally, swung right back to the wall. Forgive the bold!!

As you say, we can miss the obvious when looking for something else, but remember the whole point of Richardson calling in at number 29 on his way to the market was because someone broke in, therefore, he was looking for people in the yard, or on the staircases where they sometimes slept, he was not just checking locks.

[lynn cates]

anomaly

Hello Jon. Here's an anomaly for you.

I looked at the inquest testimony--yet again--and his statement is as you say. However, on p. 71 of "The Ultimate Companion" it is stated that he went down the steps.

But perhaps your point requires neither in particular? Perhaps you are merely pointing out that Davis could not avoid seeing Annie's body?

That is a good point; however, would it not be more obvious half an hour AFTER sunup (Davis) as opposed to half an hour BEFORE sunup (Richardson)?

The best.
LC

[Jon Guy]

Hi Lynn

I grant you that Ultimate Sourcebook also states that Davis went down the steps, and went no further when he saw the body. But yes, my point is that it reads unavoidable that he saw the body.

Yes, Richardson was half an hour before sun-up, but it was light enough see all around the yard, and to cut the leather off his boot, plus the smell, and the fact he was looking for something suspicious, like someone in the yard!!

[lynn cates]

main point

Hello Jon. I thought I had correctly ascertained your main point. Thank you.

"Yes, Richardson was half an hour before sun-up, but it was light enough [to] see all around the yard"

Indeed. Of course, this is contingent upon looking all round the yard. Did he?

"and to cut the leather off his boot"

Which, according to his own testimony, he both did and did not do.

The best.
LC

[Jon Guy]

Ah, Lynn, but are you not reading different press interpretations of the one testimony he gave? Rather than Richardson changing his story?

[lynn cates]

leather

Hello Jon. I think you refer to the first report about his not going into the yard. This may be the one that the jury flung at him during the inquest.

Actually, I waive that one.

No, I refer to his tale about cutting off the leather and binding his boot up. He was (obviously) then questioned about the knife and declared he did NOT cut off the leather as the knife was too dull.

Perhaps he misspoke on one of those occasions?

The best.
LC