Chapman time of death poll

[Damaso Marte]

I am curious what the breakdown is, percent-wise.

Does belief in a later (or earlier) time correlate in any systematic way with other beliefs about the murders? Are early timers more or less likely to believe in fewer victims killed by the same hand?

[sdreid]

I said sunrise and - WOW - everybody agrees with me!

[Phil H]

I have voted for "in the dark" since that precludes "Jack" having to avoid a house (and adjacent houses) stirring for work. It is also in line with the time Polly was killed.

Phil H

[Barnaby]

I voted for the canonical time but I'm not sure if that was at sunrise or if it was still dark or twilight. My vote was meant to convey that I think the body was NOT THERE when Richardson was in the yard around 4:45.

[Phil H]

I think the body may well have been there when Richardson "looked in", but he did so cursorily and missed it. His testimony changed (or at least developed) and I think it shows him trying to ret-con (as the saying goes) his behaviour.

Phil H

[lynn cates]

high time

Hello Damaso. Some time ago I held out for a 4.30 time. That was because I believed in a cunning serial killer who offed the unfortunates of Whitechapel and then taunted the police.

But once freed from that extravagant notion, I saw no reason to impugn Long and Cadosch--except to say that Long misheard the clock striking.

Annie died around 5.30.

Cheers.
LC

[curious]

The condition of the body -- the temperature and the beginning of rigor tell me she had to have died earlier than 5:30.

[Cogidubnus]

Hi Phil

I think the body may well have been there when Richardson "looked in", but he did so cursorily and missed it. His testimony changed (or at least developed) and I think it shows him trying to ret-con (as the saying goes) his behaviour.

Yes I agree Richardson's testimony seems to have been built on brick by brick...my initial suspicion was that he'd lied to his mother about looking in every day, felt committed to the lie, perpetuated it and then got himself into deeper and deeper trouble as the lies built up...culminating of course with the knife....

However, Debs' discovery that Richardson might've been discharged from the army with epilepsy could possibly lead to other scenarios...

So perhaps he suffered a petit mal type event and lost some period of time...or maybe (and just conceivably) worse...

I'm personally aware of at least one person in my past whose otherwise harmless epilepsy on occasion triggered violent episodes...the poor chap in question was resident in what could only (in the 70's) be described as a Mental Hospital (Haywards Heath) ... and as a casual visitor frankly one generally wondered why...he was a gentle and genial soul, a little confused sometimes, with a love of railway history...It was only after a couple of unfortunate events (one of which involved the attempted strangulation of a minibus driver taking him and others out for the day - during which incidentally he decked the attendant - me - with a single blow to the temple) that it emerged that his home prior to Haywards Heath had been Rampton...something which the authorities had chosen not to disclose to the charity I was working for!

I don't want to unjustly accuse John Richardson of something for which he might well've been totally innocent...but I'm keeping a very much open mind on the subject...particularly considering Colin's revelations regarding Cadosche and the possibly dubious nature of the Long sighting

All the best

Dave

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

Saturday 8th September 1888—

Dawn: 04.51 A.M.
Sunrise: 05.25 A.M.

Regards,

Simon

[Damaso Marte]

Hello Damaso. Some time ago I held out for a 4.30 time. That was because I believed in a cunning serial killer who offed the unfortunates of Whitechapel and then taunted the police.

It's quite clear that the perpetrator(s) of the Whitechapel killings were willing to take major risks, whether because of insanity, natural nerves of steel, or heavy drinking before going out a-ripping.

But once freed from that extravagant notion, I saw no reason to impugn Long and Cadosch--except to say that Long misheard the clock striking.

I think I've said before that threads on this forum would should be a lot shorter if everybody did not make the assumption that Victorians could infallibly tell the time with precision down to the minute.

Annie died around 5.30.

Interesting that you defer to the medical examiner's opinion for Eddowes, but not Chapman. I suppose you have an extra leg to stand on because of eyewitnesses who contradict the evidence.

In any event, accepting an earlier time for Chapman and accepting Schwartz would both further your core theory, but you deny both. A remarkable feat of intellectual honesty in this day and age, for which I commend you.

[lynn cates]

Behold, the Bagster.

Hello Damaso. Thanks.

“It's quite clear that the perpetrator(s) of the Whitechapel killings were willing to take major risks, whether because of insanity, natural nerves of steel, or heavy drinking before going out a-ripping.”

Let’s emend that to, “did take major risks.” I don’t think the will was involved in Polly and Annie’s cases.

“Interesting that you defer to the medical examiner's opinion for Eddowes, but not Chapman.”

In a way, I do. Bagster later backed off slightly from his initial pronouncement citing atmospheric conditions. Believe me, there are few people I trust more that the good doctor. He was a precise, meticulous and conscientious man.

“I suppose you have an extra leg to stand on because of eyewitnesses who contradict the evidence.”

You mean Long and Cadosch? Yes, they saw something. But perhaps not the main event? As of now, I am inclined to think they did. Perhaps I mistake?

“In any event, accepting an earlier time for Chapman and accepting Schwartz would both further your core theory, but you deny both.”

I agree with you about Schwartz, but I don’t see the application to Chapman?

“A remarkable feat of intellectual honesty in this day and age, for which I commend you.”

I thank you. As I say, I have no book to promote.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

I'm with Lynn on that, Mrs Long misheard the clock strike, Chapman died sometime between 5:30-6:00 am.
And, we also have Thimbleby who saw a young man fleeing Hanbury St. about 6:00 am who's description is consistent with what is read elsewhere.

Regards, Jon S.

[GregBaron]

A State of Confusion...

Sorry to be a dweeb you all, but I'm a little confused.

First off, can someone tell me the difference between dawn and sunrise?

Secondly, what does someone seeing a young man run off have to do with Mrs. Long's sighting of an old man?

Thirdly, I'm afraid I haven't made up my mind about a T.O.D but I'd like to offer a thought.

I know 29 Hanbury was probably a very stinky place, but who thinks it likely that Richardson would have been overwhelmed by the smell of an eviscerated corpse a couple of feet to his left?

I also agree with those who find Richardson less than a reliable witness..

What do y'all think?



Greg

[Wickerman]

40 isn't "old".
Interestingly though, forty is described as "young" elsewhere.

The reason a corpse begins to smell is due to decomposition, the body had not been dead long enough for that.

[Chris]

Interesting that you defer to the medical examiner's opinion for Eddowes, but not Chapman. I suppose you have an extra leg to stand on because of eyewitnesses who contradict the evidence.

The problem with Phillips's opinion is that we know in scientific terms that even in the most favourable circumstances and with the benefit of precise measurements of body and ambient temperature, time of death estimates have a wide margin of error. In this case there were no actual measurements of temperature and the circumstances were about as far as they could be from ideal. Phillips's opinion could reflect nothing more than a guess about the time of death.