AC and TOD

[Fisherman]

Some interesting input here, and many differing minds, as could be expected. Myself, I think that the Echo makes it rather clear that they are not writing about events dating around the 12:th and 13:th. Here´s the snippet again:

""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."

So, Phillips have had not "a" consulation, but "another" consultation with the police. Apparently, the first one/s did not result in any agreement about the order of things, but now it has been decided that no matter what Richardson said, the medical evidence points to him having missed the body by having it obstructed from his view by the door. Please note that whilst Chandler did not initially know that Richardson sat down on the steps to cut that piece of leather, it is apparent that this is known by the time the article is written. It says that Richardson must have missed Chapman IN SPITE OF sitting down and cutting his boot.

So were the police satisfied that Chapman was in all probability killed BEFORE Richardson cut away, before Long saw her couple and before Cadosche made his toilet trek that morning? And did they decide on this around the 18:th?

The best,
Fisherman

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Find it hard to believe.

If he sat on the steps he would've had to have tried hard to miss the body. I can't just accept that without serious reservations.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Wickerman.

It seems as if they were satisfied with it. Maybe Richardson was the oblivious type. The explanation satisfies the doctor's tod timeframe so maybe that was good enough for them? Still reeling. How could he sit there and not notice anything? Apologies.

[Fisherman]

I share your reservations to a large degree, Watson. That being said, I think it was said that the door closed itself when opened, meaning that it would have crept close up on Richardson as he sat on the steps. And if it leaned against his left shoulder, then perhaps he could have missed Chapman in the gloom? One must also take into account that there is nothing saying that he sat at a straight angle to the fence, is there? He was there to check the lock on the door to the right as he opened the yard door. He could well have turned his back on Chapman, more or less, if he focused on that lock.

The main thing here is that it seems that Phillips and the police seemingly reasoned their way through to accepting that Richardson could have been there and missed Chapman. And the police must have asked Richardson many a question about exactly what he did and how he did it. And if the Echo is correct, then in the end, it all led up to the information allowing for Richardson missing out, apparently.

It´s a tricky call, since we get an outlined scenario to work from when accepting the lineup Richardson-Long-Cadosche. But if the police arrived at the conclusion that Phillips was right on the TOD, then all witnesses and testimony have been weighed in.

The best,
Fisherman

[Stephen Thomas]

I think it was said that the door closed itself when opened, meaning that it would have crept close up on Richardson as he sat on the steps. And if it leaned against his left shoulder, then perhaps he could have missed Chapman in the gloom?

And maybe the Ripper was hiding in the corner behind the door. Ooooh-errrr.

[Fisherman]

And maybe the Ripper was hiding in the corner behind the door. Ooooh-errrr.

Well, Stephen, technically that would not be impossible. But I think we must accept he was long gone by the time Richardson swung that door open. It sort of goes with the reasoning...
If Phillips was right, then she would have died at the latest around 4.30 and probably earlier than that. If the killer hung around for two hours or more, one would perhaps have expected a bit more damage to Chapman´s body.

The best,
Fisherman

[lynn cates]

Baxter and Bagster

Hello Chister.

"But if the police arrived at the conclusion that Phillips was right on the TOD. . ."

But what did Baxter conclude about TOD and what was Phillips's eventual codicil?

Cheers.
LC

[Fisherman]

Hello Chister.

"But if the police arrived at the conclusion that Phillips was right on the TOD. . ."

But what did Baxter conclude about TOD and what was Phillips's eventual codicil?

Cheers.
LC

Baxter, if you forgive me, was not there on the morning of Chapmans death. He did not make any of the tests that Phillips did. He was not a medico. He was a coroner, and he accepted that the woman Long saw was Chapman, just as he accepted Richardsons words. Having done that, he had painted himself into a corner.
Phillips gave some leeway, since he had never seen a body so extensively mutilated. He said that this could have quickened the cooling off of the body. But all of this went down around a week EARLIER than the Echo article that tells us that Phillips had reconvened with the police whereupon it had been agreed that Richardson must had missed Chapman.
During that week, I think Phillips would have had ample time to consult his fellow colleagues and discuss the matter, which may have resulted in him becoming firmly convinced that Chapman must have been dead already when Richardson went into the yard, leaving two possible explanations:
Richardson did not tell the truth, or Chapman was in the yard, hidden from sight by the door.
Of course, this explanation would effectively take Cadosh and Long out of the picture too.

The best,
Fisherman

[curious4]

Annie

Hello Dig, Dave and Fish

Quite agree - it's the puzzles that keep us going. Not feeling my brightest with yet another cold, but read this on my favourite autopsy site, thought it was interesting. "Never assume that the body temperature is normal at the time of death.". Annie was definitely ill, quite possibly running a fever. How would this affect the doctor's estimate of time of death? I wonder.

All good wishes,

C4

[lynn cates]

back pedaling

Hello Christer. Thanks.

That's a fair enough point, but Baxter and Bagster are, again, back pedaling on the 26th--a week AFTER "The Echo" article.

Cheers.
LC

[curious4]

In other words

Hello again,

In other words, would the Mpemba effect apply to the human body?

???

C4

[Fisherman]

Hello Christer. Thanks.

That's a fair enough point, but Baxter and Bagster are, again, back pedaling on the 26th--a week AFTER "The Echo" article.

Cheers.
LC

Baxter is back pedaling, Lynn, noone else. And Baxter belongs not to either the police or the medico side, the two parts mentioned by the Echo. Whatever back pedaling there is on account of Phillips, is done for him by the good coroner. And he only repeats what Phillips spoke of a week EARLIER than the Echo article.
We all know that Baxter had a mind of his own. But he does only say that IF the witnesses were correct, then Phillips was wrong. I would imagine that it works the other way around too. But I would not count it as forwards pedaling on account on Phillips, since he was not speaking at the inquest on the 26:th.

The best,
Fisherman

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo C4.

Hello again,

In other words, would the Mpemba effect apply to the human body?

???

C4

Had to look that up. It's early in the morning to be learnin'. How dare you?! Kidding aside, don't see why it couldn't but also not sure why would it either??? Seems a possible explanation at first read. Thanks, I learned something today, so I'm done till tomrow

[curious4]

Learning curve

Had to look that up. It's early in the morning to be learnin'. How dare you?! Kidding aside, don't see why it couldn't but also not sure why would it either??? Seems a possible explanation at first read. Thanks, I learned something today, so I'm done till tomrow

Hallo Dig,

To be honest I didn't know that it was called that until I looked it up. First heard of it years ago while watching an ice-hockey match outside in minus 20C and my coffee froze in an instant when I put it down. My ex then said it was due to hot liquids cooling faster than cold but had to check whether it was a myth or not.

If Annie's original body temp was high(er), it might apply.

Best wishes,
C4

[Fisherman]

Yes, fever may cause very quick rigor mortis, that is true. A matter of minutes may suffice. What it does not do, however, is to turn the body cold in that same time! A dead body will normally start to stiffen after 2-3 hours, and it will first be limp but warm up till that stiffening begins, whereupon it will be stiff and warm for between 3-8 hours. After that stiff and cold applies, until rigor mortis tapers off.
When Phillips saw Chapman first the whole body was quite cold, apart from a little rest heat in the stomach area.
This is consistent, not with a quick fever rigor, but instead with her having been dead for a couple of hours.

Plus, of course, the onsetting rigor Phillips felt was ALSO consistent with a TOD two, three hours before he saw her. We cannot treat her as a certain case of fever, can we?

The best,
Fisherman