AC and TOD

[Wickerman]

Swanson makes a point of the fact Richardson was intensely questioned, and rightly so. The police would much rather proceed with the evidence given by Dr Phillips, but as Richardson appeared to be unwavering then they were stuck.

If Richardson did check the cellar entrance every morning, then we can't expect him to take an inventory of the yard, he just opened the door a crack & glanced to his right. Perhaps missing the body at his left?

He might have been wary of mentioning the fact to Chandler that he was in possession of a knife in a yard where a body has just been found, so chose not to mention it at first?

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Just saw this.

Yes Christer, the article has been suggested to contain an assumption with respect to Richardson.
Apparently, it was Insp. Chandler who assumed the door would have obstructed Richardson's view because Chandler was not aware that Richardson had sat down on the steps, just that he had looked into the yard after opening the door. This was deemed to be the source of the confusion.

This might be the exchange (Witness is Insp. Chandler):
[Coroner] Did you see John Richardson? - I saw him about a quarter to seven o'clock. He told me he had been to the house that morning about a quarter to five. He said he came to the back door and looked down to the cellar, to see if all was right, and then went away to his work.
[Coroner] Did he say anything about cutting his boot? - No.
[Coroner] Did he say that he was sure the woman was not there at that time? - Yes.
By the Jury: The back door opens outwards into the yard, and swung on the left hand to the palings where the body was. If Richardson were on the top of the steps he might not have seen the body. He told me he did not go down the steps.

I think this might just be what occured. So, how far did he open the door and how easily could the body have been seen at a quarter till five? Why the embelishment then? So he didn't appear like a dolt who wouldn't notice a dead body right under his nose? Who admits to being in a spot with a knife where a body is when they weren't? Seems insane.

[curious4]

The knife

I rather get the impression Richardson might've made it up somewhat as he went along...firstly in his statement as quoted by Chandler at the Inquest, he visited the yard to see if his mothers cellar door was still locked...no mention of boot...

Later at the Inquest he introduces the fact that he sat on the step (not the top one) with his feet on the flags of the yard, and trimmed some leather from his boot.

When the Coroner quite rightly picks up on the fact that here's a chap with a knife at the murder scene,he's sent to fetch the knife.

The knife he subsequently produces is a broken and blunt table knife...and apparently the story is now that he sat down, found the knife wasn't sharp enough to cut the leather, and so went to work where he found a knife that would do the trick.

Looks to me as if either Chandler's been incredibly slack taking the witness statement or the witness is embroidering

All the best

Dave

Hello again,

Yes, I've always thought the knife business very fishy. And very trusting to send him home for it - he could have produced any knife - and probably did, innocent or not. No-one was going to admit to having a very sharp knife in the yard on that particular night.

I wonder why he mentioned it at all, unless he was afraid someone had seen him put a knife in his pocket. Presumably the rabbit (for whom he was chopping up carrots) was at his home, strange that he should put the knife in his pocket at all.

Best wishes,
C4

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Richardson.

If he poked his head in I can see him missing the body. Anything more invading more than likely would've resulted in its discovery. That and he would've been basically on top of Chapman. I wonder if he would've not noticed the smell? Of course it may have been overpowered by other smells.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Cogi, all.

So a complete fabrication then? ie he was never there?

[Cogidubnus]

I rather get the impression Richardson might've made it up somewhat as he went along...firstly in his statement as quoted by Chandler at the Inquest, he visited the yard to see if his mothers cellar door was still locked...no mention of boot...

Later at the Inquest he introduces the fact that he sat on the step (not the top one) with his feet on the flags of the yard, and trimmed some leather from his boot.

When the Coroner quite rightly picks up on the fact that here's a chap with a knife at the murder scene,he's sent to fetch the knife.

The knife he subsequently produces is a broken and blunt table knife...and apparently the story is now that he sat down, found the knife wasn't sharp enough to cut the leather, and so went to work where he found a knife that would do the trick.

Looks to me as if either Chandler's been incredibly slack taking the witness statement or the witness is embroidering

All the best

Dave

[curious4]

Correction

Sorry, "middle step, with his feet resting on the flags of the yard". Must learn to check things BEFORE posting! In any case, he could hardly have missed the body if it had been there.

C4

[curious4]

Richardson

Hello all,

Wasn't Richardson reported to have sat on the bottom step, with his feet in the yard? Seem to remember it that way.

Best wishes,
C4

[Fisherman]

Thanks for the comments, guys. However, Chandler´s commentaries on Richardson were given in at the inquest on the 13:th. The article in the Echo was printed on the 19:th, a good many days after, and it does of course not mention Chandler. It instead has it that the police and Phillips have agreed that Richardson must have missed Chapman due to that door.

If that all transpired before the 13:th, then why is it in the Echo many days later?

The best,
Fisherman

[Cogidubnus]

Looking at the celebrated photos of the crimescene, if Richardson had just glanced into the yard from a standing position at the doorway, door half open, and hadn't bothered stooping to check the cellar entrance...and hadn't sat on the step as he testified...then the Echo account might just've had some credence...

However, as we all, without exception, accept Richardson's testimony wholesale, including the fact that not only did he at least stoop to check the padlock on the cellar door, but he also sat on the step to trim his bootleather, then the Echo is clearly wrong? Yes?

All the best

Dave

[Wickerman]

Yes Christer, the article has been suggested to contain an assumption with respect to Richardson.
Apparently, it was Insp. Chandler who assumed the door would have obstructed Richardson's view because Chandler was not aware that Richardson had sat down on the steps, just that he had looked into the yard after opening the door. This was deemed to be the source of the confusion.

This might be the exchange (Witness is Insp. Chandler):
[Coroner] Did you see John Richardson? - I saw him about a quarter to seven o'clock. He told me he had been to the house that morning about a quarter to five. He said he came to the back door and looked down to the cellar, to see if all was right, and then went away to his work.
[Coroner] Did he say anything about cutting his boot? - No.
[Coroner] Did he say that he was sure the woman was not there at that time? - Yes.
By the Jury: The back door opens outwards into the yard, and swung on the left hand to the palings where the body was. If Richardson were on the top of the steps he might not have seen the body. He told me he did not go down the steps.

[Fisherman]

Only just saw this, from the Echo, September 19th:

"Dr. G.B. Phillips, the divisional surgeon, has had another consultation with the police authorities respecting certain theories advanced. There are three points upon which there is agreement - that Annie Chapman was lying dead in the yard at 29 Hanbury street, when John Richardson sat on the steps to cut a piece of leather from his boot, his failure to notice the deceased being explained by the fact that the yard door, when opened, obstructed his view; that the poor creature was murdered in the yard, and not in a house, as had been at one time suggested; and that the person who committed the deed was a man with some knowledge of human or animal anatomy."

This is a week after Phillips witnessed and gave his estimations as to the time of death. And now the Echo says that he and the police agreed that Annie was in the yard as Richardson cut away at his boot...?

Anybody seen anything to support this take on things? Or is it very Echoish?

The best,
Fisherman

[lynn cates]

google map job

Hello Mike. In that case, it looks like a job for GOOGLE MAPS!

The best.
LC

Hello Mike. An excellent tool indeed.

Have you wondered how far it is from Mrs. Long's home to 29 Hanbury? Do you sense a time discrepancy here?

The best.
LC

Good question mate, and I dont have that answer.

Cheers Lynn

[lynn cates]

time

Hello Mike. An excellent tool indeed.

Have you wondered how far it is from Mrs. Long's home to 29 Hanbury? Do you sense a time discrepancy here?

The best.
LC