Chapman's Death

Hello Mike. Shhh. You were supposed to pretend he was talking of someone ELSE--not us.

Cheers.
LC

Ahh......I see. ......well then, nevermind.

Best regards

[lynn cates]

coy

Hello Mike. Shhh. You were supposed to pretend he was talking of someone ELSE--not us.

Cheers.
LC

What some folks around here are addicted to certainly would make good cinema.

Its about Exploration....not Addiction Sam.

Some folks are less likely to blindly accept the opinions of people when those opinions do not make sense to those same people, and some of those people tend to look about for more agreeable and logical answers to satisfy themselves by exploring the evidence in more practical, less "madman serial killer of 5" terms. In some cases, those kinds of arguments already exists and were put forth by contemporary investigators and medical authorities.

Such as a killer who killed and mutilated "skillfully" so he might obtain certain female organs, a killer that wouldnt know where to find a Uvula let alone a Uterus in the daylight let alone the pitch black night, a killer who slashes at resisting women with his knife, a killer who seems to have some knowledge of what he is doing but is sloppy in his actions and mutilations putting in question the skills exhibited, and a killer who knew that cutting a throat could kill......well, all of those guys are the Canonical Group murderer.

More likely and reasonably, they are all not the same killer....and perhaps some women died for different reasons.

My best regards Gareth

[lynn cates]

agreed

Hello Sam. You get that feeling too?

The best.
LC

[Sam Flynn]

Hello Mike. What many of us believe about Whitechapel in 1888 is what books and the cinema have led us to believe. I'm delighted that you are addicted to reality.

What some folks around here are addicted to certainly would make good cinema.

[lynn cates]

reality

Hello Mike. What many of us believe about Whitechapel in 1888 is what books and the cinema have led us to believe. I'm delighted that you are addicted to reality.

The best.
LC

Hello Mike. Quite plausible. Almost any time after 4:30 should have allowed a bit of light.

Your socio-economic-political theory is shared by Jonathan H who has some quite interesting theories in that regard. Have you chatted him up yet? It would well repay the effort.

The best.
LC

I havent Lynn, but I do follow his posts closely and have seen some of the thinking you described. Im pleased that others have the wherewithall to take a step back before making any suppositions about the killer....because what we have been led to believe happened the Fall of 1888 in London is very likely not what actually occurred.

There were many areas of concern in those specific neighborhoods that had nothing at all to do with the Unfortunates being murdered in them.

Best regards mate.

[lynn cates]

socio-economic-political theory

Hello Mike. Quite plausible. Almost any time after 4:30 should have allowed a bit of light.

Your socio-economic-political theory is shared by Jonathan H who has some quite interesting theories in that regard. Have you chatted him up yet? It would well repay the effort.

The best.
LC

I think that its important that we remember that Annie Chapman's murder, although its performed later in the day than any other Canonical murder, was almost certainly committed by the killer publicly called Jack the Ripper in early October. Which means, the time of day and the available light may well be something he wanted, not something he was forced to accept.

Polly is killed where some light was available, so was Annie.....and they are to me, the two 99% certain Ripper victims in the "Canon". They were also killed in spots where the murder might easily be seen by witnesses.

Liz was killed in a very dark spot, Kate was killed in a spot at the opposite end of the court from the nearest gas lamp, and all we know about room 13 is that a fire did exist in the fireplace, but we dont know how large it may have been while the killer was there,... and a partial candle is found.

Its quite possible that the killer of Polly and Annie showed us that he required some light by those 2 murders, and the very public nature of the locations suggests that he may have wanted to be "shocking" with these acts. Which suggests to me that the murders may have been born from some socio-political motivations. The killer may have wanted attention....but for what specifically, and from whom...its hard to say.

Best regards all.

[Chava]

Hello Chava.

"So why should he be deterred by the dawn half-light?"

Because:

1. It was time for many to go to work.

2. It was a market day.

3. Many people lived at 29 Hanbury.

The best.
LC

1. Market porters went to work a lot earlier than 5.30 am. Nicholls was found by a couple on their way to the market a couple of hours earlier than that.

2. Every day was a market day. Spitalfields Market was open all the time. We're not talking Petticoat Lane here.

3. Many people lived in Bucks Row as well.

[curious]

Morning, Archaic,

I agree with you that the police spoke with Richardson immediately his mother told them that he came by on market days.

What I have in my head (and don't have time to research this morning) is that the story "grew" from the time of first inquiry until the inquest.

Now that means we're dealing with my non-existant memory.

curious

[Archaic]

What if this exact thing did happen -- but on a different morning?

If my memory is right, Richardson waited a couple of days before telling his story.

Hi, Curious. This is off the top of my head, but I believe the police went immediately to speak to Richardson, didn't they? I believe he told them the what had occurred that morning, then he repeated a couple of times at later dates when being questioned about the events of that morning.

However, I do think that with many other witnesses to the Whitechapel murders, it might have been a simple case of good intentions but confused dates and details.

Best regards, Archaic

[curious]

This is primarily why I think he was telling the truth. The things he describes doing are perfectly routine and mundane- nothing exciting or heroic- yet they could easily incriminate or even endanger him.
If he wanted to make up a lie, why not say he went out to check the lock & use the privy or something?

Why risk getting himself jailed or even lynched by mentioning a knife and placing himself beside the crime scene?

Best regards, Archaic

Hi, Archaic,

What if this exact thing did happen -- but on a different morning?

If my memory is right, Richardson waited a couple of days before telling his story.

Memories being what they are (and varying widely along with the intelligence of the person) he got to telling himself that it had happened on the same morning as the murder (I don't know how many days a week were market days).

Then, once he'd told that story, it's "oh XXXXXX what HAVE I done" when asked to produce the knife.

curious

[lynn cates]

reasons

Hello Chava.

"So why should he be deterred by the dawn half-light?"

Because:

1. It was time for many to go to work.

2. It was a market day.

3. Many people lived at 29 Hanbury.

The best.
LC

[Archaic]

Hi, everyone, and thanks for all the interesting posts.

I just re-checked John Richardson's testimony and apparently he was only in the back yard for about 3 minutes total. It was approximately 4:45 AM, and it does say the morning was just getting light enough to the point that he could see into the yard.

Does anyone think its possible that Annie Chapman knew Richardson's early-morning routine, and that once he was gone the coast was clear to enter the backyard?
The local prostitutes probably made it their business to know convenient locations for business, and therefore the habits of the residents near those locations. Conversely, the killer might have been the one who knew about the backyard at #29 and Richardson's habits.

Either way I feel the murder must have happened very shortly after Richardson left the yard, well before the sun was up.
I agree with Lynn in that I can't see the Ripper committing his crimes in daylight when he relied on the darkness to make a safe getaway.

Nor can I picture the Ripper boxing himself into the back yard of a houseful of working people who must all be waking up with the sun, getting ready to start their day, and at least some off whom could be expected to look out the window or use the backyard privy. Yes, he was a risk-taker, but I still believe he was smarter than that.

So I wonder if it's possible that Annie and her killer watched Richardson leave before they themselves entered the backyard?
This would put them in the yard at some time close to 4:48 AM.

Best regards, Archaic