Chapman Timeline

[FISHY1118]

[GBinOz]

Hi Fishy,

There was a time when Herlock took your position on clock times. But to his eternal credit he has accepted the evidence provided on clock times and has adjusted his opinion accordingly. Might I suggest that you reconsider your position on this topic.

Cheers, George

[Doctored Whatsit]

The ''Overwhelming inquest'' evidence suggest she was dead long befor that . Evidence trumps speculation theory everytime . Lets stick to that and leave the dodgy clock theories to the nutters

Er... what "overwhelming inquest evidence"?

[Herlock Sholmes]

How does any of what you suggest change the fact what cadosh and long testified to ? Your inventing something that 'you dont know'' was wrong or right [.i.e clocks ] to try and suggest a different outcome /theory on T.OD !! . See how simple i made it for you ? You have your answer/s , so now you can stop ranting on how you think im ignoring you .


''This would leave him hearing the ‘no’ at 5.31 or 5.32. A minute or two after Long saw the couple out on the street.''

At 5.32 then .......

Its seems very unlikely the killer doing all the mutilations to Chapman in ''not shorter'' than 15 mins according to Dr Phillipps in daylight

Dr. Phillips: I think I can guide you by saying that I myself could not have performed all the injuries I saw on that woman, and effect them, even without a struggle, under a quarter of an hour.

Not relevant. A distraction from you which has no bearing on clocks. This is all that we are discussing…clocks and whether or not they can be poorly synchronised.



You bet its Relevant , You have Annie Chapman alive saying ''NO'' at your 5.32 am and then being Mutilated for the next 15mins to 5.47 am in the daylight


The ''Overwhelming inquest'' evidence suggest she was dead long befor that . Evidence trumps speculation theory everytime . Lets stick to that and leave the dodgy clock theories to the nutters

You haven’t answered as ever. Sorry but I’m not going to keep explaining simple stuff to you that everyone else can understand.

Your post is nonsense from start to finish. Go and discuss something else.

[Fiver]

Third Draft

c6.05 - Harriett Hardiman, a cats meat saleswoman who occupies the ground floor front room is awakened by the noise from the passage. She sends her husband to see what was going on (she thought that there might have been a fire)

This should be her son William. Harriett Hardiman's husband died in 1880.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Er... what "overwhelming inquest evidence"?

There’s none. He’s making it up. The overwhelming evidence is that she died at 5.30. A child could u detest and this stuff but sadly some can’t Doc.

[Herlock Sholmes]

This should be her son William. Harriett Hardiman's husband died in 1880.

Cheers Fiver

[Herlock Sholmes]

I also suggest that anyone is free to checkout my ''John Richardson'' thread, where in reality not fantasy, they will see evidence presented from the inquest that he missed seeing the body of Annie chapman lying dead, as he only went to the back door to check the lock of the cellar door then turned back inside and went to work.

Invention.

Prove it

[Herlock Sholmes]

Just to make it clear all - including you..the question that I asked was this..

Are you of the belief that all clocks and watches in the Victorian era were synchronised?

The answer is a YES or NO

Ive received no direct answer to that simple question.

[GBinOz]

There’s none. He’s making it up. The overwhelming evidence is that she died at 5.30. A child could u detest and this stuff but sadly some can’t Doc.

On behalf of all the "children", I wish to lodge an objection and call nonsense.

[Abby Normal]

I also suggest that anyone is free to checkout my ''John Richardson'' thread, where in reality not fantasy, they will see evidence presented from the inquest that he missed seeing the body of Annie chapman lying dead, as he only went to the back door to check the lock of the cellar door then turned back inside and went to work.

incorrect. his evidence from the inquest testimony was that he also sat on the back step to mess with his shoe. which means if she was there her body and head would not only have been inches from his foot but also in his line of vision as he looked down. no way he misses that.

she wasnt there yet.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I began this thread simply to flesh out a timeline for the chapman murder. I didn’t do it for an argument on unconnected topics. Chapman’s ToD is not relevant here and I didn’t raise the topic. It was raised in post#45 by Fishy whose hobby appears to find any way that he can to get into an argument with me. No matter the topic. It’s boring and it has now taken up half of this thread. Half a thread wasted just because one poster refuses to accept facts. That clocks can be poorly synchronised. That when people estimate the time that they can sometimes be wrong. That when people estimate periods of time they can be inaccurate. Half a thread sidetracked by one person (again) and all so that this person can deny something that is simply a fact. And then as ever he point blank refuses to answer a very simple question that requires nothing more than a yes or no answer.

I hope that we get no further time wasting comments and that any ToD related posts be posted on the Chapman’’s ToD thread. Thanks to those that make sensible posts that are relative to the topic at hand and also those that will honestly answer as well as ask questions.

[Doctored Whatsit]

I think we all know that in Victorian London in 1888 clocks were not synchronized. That is a fact that is beyond dispute. We also know that Long didn't see a clock, she heard it strike. The clock could have been inaccurate - fact, and she might have confused the quarter hour striking for the half hour - fact. We know from her evidence that 5. 15 am would have been quite plausible given her starting time, and the distance she travelled. We know that the Coroner didn't see any problem with her evidence, nor did the police. Suggesting that we today, know better than the Coroner and the police in 1888 is frankly ludicrous.

Let's move on!

[FISHY1118]

Hi Fishy,

There was a time when Herlock took your position on clock times. But to his eternal credit he has accepted the evidence provided on clock times and has adjusted his opinion accordingly. Might I suggest that you reconsider your position on this topic.

Cheers, George

HI George , As you can see regarding the Dodgy Clock Shamozzle that its kinda boring me a little so ill keep it simple . The clocks of 1888, in perticular the ones in question for the Chapman Murder are of little importance imo , for this reason . My stance is and has always been that Long and Cadosch times are based solely on ''their'' sworn statements as they themselves believed them to be tru . I happen to support a earlier T.O.D based on what i see clearly as their contradictory evidence that the informatiom they gave cant ''Both'' be true and or correct . If the clock arguement is used by some to justify why they can be ,then that up to personal preference ,just dont let them say its a ''Fact'' thats the reason why .


Its bad enough when some suggest Long heard the 5.15am clock chime ,mistaking it for the 5,30 am one !!!!

Or even better that a Dog may have been responsible for dragging Eddowes blood stain apron piece to Goulston st .

We seem to have created the ''Mystery Solved Attitude'' when debating all things JtR simple by saying /using the phase ''Its Possible''!!! I prefer the evidence given to us by the people who were there during the times of the murders . Cheers Fishy .

[FISHY1118]

Er... what "overwhelming inquest evidence"?

Er ... The ''John Richardson'' thread of 4000 post that shows it to be so. I certainly wont be reposting any of them again ,but feel free to check it out .