Annie Chapman’s ToD

[Abby Normal]

How can you say “You have no proof his age was a factor.” Of course we have proof that age is a factor - you don’t get 70+ year old serial killers. Gullible would have been entirely unique.

Why do you keep repeating this? “you have no proof his stroke [which he fully recovered from], hampered his mobile ability during the ripper murders.” You keep being reminded Fishy - he had a job that didn’t require physical dexterity and yet his strokes forced him to give it up. He never returned to his practice. So if he didn’t feel physically capable of sitting in a chair in his consulting room and giving out advice to the odd Duke or Duchess then what makes you believe him capable of tearing women to shreds in a coach?

This is like the diary. The whole theory that Maybrick was the killer is based on a forged diary, and as there is zero evidence against Maybrick we can safely dismiss him as a suspect. The Gull theory is based on a story which was proven false 50 years ago. How can anyone read a story that goes….X worked at such and such building (no he didn’t) and he met so and so who lived across the street (no she didnt) and she was a Catholic (no she wasn’t) A Royal Princess knew X (no she didn't) and when her son became pregnant the government killed her son’s girlfriend’s friends. The girlfriend was taken to a hospital (no she wasn’t) where she spent the rest of her life (no she didn’t) The rest of the population read that story and go “yeah right, pull the other one” but you think “yeah..that sounds believable.”

You’re the last man standing on this theory Fishy. It’s deader than a Norwegian Blue.

whats a Norwegian blue? ive never heard that saying before?

[Herlock Sholmes]

whats a Norwegian blue? ive never heard that saying before?

It was the type of Parrot in Monty Python’s Dead Parrot Sketch Abby.

[GBinOz]

It was the type of Parrot in Monty Python’s Dead Parrot Sketch Abby.

Also a prize winning blue vein cheese, which is far from dead, although there are some that think it smells like it is.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Also a prize winning blue vein cheese, which is far from dead, although there are some that think it smells like it is.

I didn’t know that George. Isn’t it strange how some things can smell terrible but taste good?

[kjab3112]

Just for info, and my apologies for repetition as I’ve posted these and more many times…just a few experts telling us about ToD estimating:


From: Forensic Biology For The Law Enforcement Officer by Charles Grady Wilber,1974

'The stiffening of the body or rigor mortis develops usually within an hour or two hours after death.'

………

From: EstimationOf Time Of Death by Ranald Munro and Helen M.C. Munro.

"The time of onset is variable but it is usually considered to appear between 1 and 6 hours (average 2-4 hours) after death.'

…..


"Francis E. Camps stated that ordinarily the rigor mortis appears between 2-4 hours, but sometimes it is seen within 30 minutes of death and sometimes the onset is delayed for 6 hours or more."

….

"Bernard Knight described the method of testing the rigor mortis by attempting to flex or extend the joints though the whole muscle mass itself becomes hard, and finger pressure on quadriceps or pectoralis can also detect the changes. The stiffness may develop within half an hour of death or may be postponed indefinitely."

……

Werner Uri Spitz (1993), a German-American forensic pathologist, "reported that in temperate climate, under average condition, rigor becomes apparent within half an hour to an hour, increases progressively to a maximum within twelve hours, remains for about twelve hours and then progressively disappears within the following twelve hours."

…….

From the English physiologist Sir Andrew Fielding Huxley (1974), who lived and worked in a temperate climate, we get this: 'the rigor mortis, which is cadaveric rigidity, starts developing within 1 to 2 hours after death and takes around 12 hours after death for complete development.'

…..

Furthermore, according to K.S. Narayan Reddy, author of 'Essentials of Forensic Medicine', "In death from diseases causing great exhaustion and wasting e.g. cholera, typhoid, tuberculosis and cancer and in violent deaths as by cut throats, firearms or electrocution, the onset of rigor is early and duration is short".The paper alsostates that,according to W.G. Aitcheson Robertson, author of 'Aids to Forensic Medicine and Toxicology', in "death followed by convulsions, muscular exertion, racing, the rigor mortis will appear earlier". We are told thatMason JK stated "The onset of rigor will be accelerated in conditions involving high ante-mortem muscle lactic acid e.g. after a struggle or other exercise.". So a struggle could bring on rigor earlier than the average, just like a cut throat. Then what about the physical condition of the deceased? Well according to S.C. Basu, author of the Handbook of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, rigor is "hastened or accelerated in feeble, fatigued and exhausted muscles"

…….

What does Fisherman's own favourite expert, Jason Payne James, have to say about using rigor to estimate the time of death? Well let's have a look in Simpson's Forensic Medicine, updated 13th edition by Jason Payne James, Richard Jones, Steven Karch and John Manlove (2011):

"The only use of assessing the presence or absence of rigor lies in the estimation of the time of death, and the key word here is estimation, as rigor is such a variable process that it can never provide an accurate assessment of the time of death. Extreme caution should be exercised in trying to assign a time of death based on the very subjective assessment of the degree and extent of rigor.

……

Mason JK stated "The onset of rigor will be accelerated in conditions involving high ante-mortem muscle lactic acid e.g. after a struggle or other exercise.". So a struggle could bring on rigor earlier than the average, just like a cut throat

……..

From the Textbook Of Forensic Medicine And Toxicology:

The time of onset and duration of Rigor is varied by multiple factors as will be discussed shortly but in general it is likely to be apparent in about 1-2 hours after death,

……

From Simpson's Forensic Medicine, 13th edition (updated by Jason Payne James and others)

'...a body is not a uniform structure: its temperature will not fall evenly and, because each body will lie in its own unique environment, each body will cool at a different speed, depending on the many factors surrounding it.'

…….

The examples given of factors affecting the rate of cooling of a body are:

1. Mass of the body
2. Mass surface area
3. Body temperature at time of death
4. Site of reading of body temperature
5. Posture of the body - extended or in a fetal position
6. Clothing - type of material, position on body - or lack of it
7. Obesity - fat is a good insulator
8. Emaciation - lack of muscle bulk allows a body to cool faster
9. Environmental temperature
10. Winds, draughts, rain, humidity


And yet Dr Phillips touches Annie Chapman and gives a set-in-stone, spot on, indisputable ToD according to Fishy.

…….

Phillips only felt the body for warmth using his hand when he should have taken the temperature rectally using a thermometer. But we have no mention from him of doing this or of temperatures.

……

All of the above are wrong. None of them know what they are talking about but Professor Fishy does. Ignore the legendary names like Camps, Simpson, Knight. Ignore those that edit the standard textbook on the subject of forensic medicine. Fishy knows best. Our miracle worker Dr Phillips, 137 years ahead of his time couldn’t have been wrong.

I’ll leave everyone to arrive at their own conclusions.

Even though you have ruled out my pet theory of a marauding murderous maneating aardvark, it should also be remembered that the standard text for the time for a body to cool was based on times in Sri Lanka and varied between 0.5 and 2F per hour from a known starting temperature. Bond at least based his estimates on all evidence (including when was the likely time of last meal) and effectively invented the specialty of forensic medicine with his students studies of the torso killings. A cursory look and feel does not set a time in stone.

Paul

[Doctored Whatsit]

Even though you have ruled out my pet theory of a marauding murderous maneating aardvark, it should also be remembered that the standard text for the time for a body to cool was based on times in Sri Lanka and varied between 0.5 and 2F per hour from a known starting temperature. Bond at least based his estimates on all evidence (including when was the likely time of last meal) and effectively invented the specialty of forensic medicine with his students studies of the torso killings. A cursory look and feel does not set a time in stone.

Paul

Based on your comments about the standard text time for a body to cool, the aardvark theory starts to appear more plausible in comparison.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Even though you have ruled out my pet theory of a marauding murderous maneating aardvark, it should also be remembered that the standard text for the time for a body to cool was based on times in Sri Lanka and varied between 0.5 and 2F per hour from a known starting temperature. Bond at least based his estimates on all evidence (including when was the likely time of last meal) and effectively invented the specialty of forensic medicine with his students studies of the torso killings. A cursory look and feel does not set a time in stone.

Paul

I’d never ditch your aardvark theory Paul (I even used one of my own once in opposition to Trevor’s ‘suggestion’ that the apron piece might have been taken to Goulston Street by a dog!) Yes, it’s strange how some can get so fixated on a suggestion, like an earlier ToD (often because it suits a pet theory or suspect) that they are willing to tell the worlds experts that they don’t know what they are talking about. Unlike you, I have no medical knowledge, so how would it appear if I started question you on medical points that you might have made in the past? The criticism that I’d get would be entirely justified but when it comes to Chapman it seems quite ok for people to attempt ‘correct’ the standard texts on the subject. As they say in the USA “go figure!”

[Fiver]

(I even used one of my own once in opposition to Trevor’s ‘suggestion’ that the apron piece might have been taken to Goulston Street by a dog!)

That's more credible than his other suggestions. If the Ripper dropped the apron piece wrapped around organs it would have been just meat to a hungry animal. Grabbing it and bolting somewhere to avoid having the food taken away is possible.

[Newbie]

Hi Lewis,

It’s such an amazing assumption that I genuinely find it hard to believe that he’s serious about it. That when Cadosch said that he got up at around 5.15 ( an estimation therefore) it couldn’t have been a very few minutes out. And that he completely fails to accept that Cadosch never tells us how long he was in the loo for. So according to Fishy the combination of being slightly out on his time added to the unmentioned time in the loo couldn’t have added up to 5 or 6 minutes? Pull the other is all that I can say.

Just for your information Lewis - on the subject of having a motive for desiring an earlier time, two of the most vociferous proponents of the earlier ToD on here have been Fisherman and Fishy. What do they have in common (apart from having ‘Fish’ in their names of course)? Fisherman desperately wants an earlier ToD because he realises how ludicrous is the suggestion that Cross, 90 minutes into his shift, parked up his cart, found Annie, killed and mutilated her and then continued with his deliveries. Whilst Fishy needs the murder to have been done under cover of darkness so that John Netley and Walter Sickert could carry the corpse into the yard from the carriage outside where Sir William Gull the ripper was putting away his knives. This is why reason, logic and evidence is disregarded.

You think Pickfords carmen fire out of the gate in their carts at 4 am sharp already loaded up? Is there a face palm emoji here?
And Fishy's idea is that Lechmere's first stop that morning was Spitafields, where Lechmere was free to wander while they offloaded goods.
There was a long animated discussion at the time about young attendants accompanying Carmen on deliveries ... you don't remember it?
Evidently not.

I go to check out an Annie Chapman thread, primarily because Abbey normal is one of the few unbiased people here, and I run immediately into Brainlock making a typical highly questionable statement,
and then insulting a Lechmerite who is no longer here to defend themself, misrepresenting their oppinion while furnishing them with a cute little insulting name ... a real class act you are.

Last time I was here you were proposing Bury as being a plausible suspect .... but you caved in quickly. Are you going to thank me for disabusing you of that silly little notion?

[Geddy2112]

...and then insulting a Lechmerite who is no longer here to defend themself, misrepresenting their opinion while furnishing them with a cute little insulting name

Oh Fisherman is still an 'active' member of these boards and can 'defend' himself if he wishes too. He just chooses not to post. Most can guess why.

[Herlock Sholmes]

You think Pickfords carmen fire out of the gate in their carts at 4 am sharp already loaded up? Is there a face palm emoji here?

So you’ve decided to dig back to post that I made over a week ago just so that you can take the opportunity for an insult or two. Grow up.

So you’re suggesting that when Chapman killed, 90 minutes after his shift, Cross was still at the depot scratching his a**e and reading a newspaper?

And Fishy's idea is that Lechmere's first stop that morning was Spitafields, where Lechmere was free to wander while they offloaded goods.

And of course, customers awaiting deliveries wouldn’t bother that their days ‘goods for sale’ were late turning up. And of course Cross wouldn’t have been concerned that some local might have mentioned seeing a Pickford’s cart nearby with the driver missing for half an hour or so? Or that he would jump off his cart and walk around on the off-chance of finding a prostitute at 5.30…possible with an assistant just sitting there (if he had one)?

Yeah right.

There was a long animated discussion at the time about young attendants accompanying Carmen on deliveries ... you don't remember it?
Evidently not.

I do remember the conversation but I’m clearly not as easily impressed as you. So a guilty Cross disappears for a quick murder and hopes that his ‘attendant’ keeps schtum when he realises that a murder happened a street or two away just when Cross had walked off. Be serious.

I go to check out an Annie Chapman thread, primarily because Abbey normal is one of the few unbiased people here, and I run immediately into Brainlock making a typical highly questionable statement,

A pointless insult.

I agree that Abby is unbiased - why don’t you ask him his ‘unbiased’ opinion of me….or would he suddenly become ‘biased’ if he didn’t agree with you?

and then insulting a Lechmerite who is no longer here to defend themself, misrepresenting their oppinion while furnishing them with a cute little insulting name ... a real class act you are.

Everything that I’ve said, I’ve said directly to Christer when he was posting which you would have known if you had checked rather that just jumping on a chance to continue an infantile grudge.

Last time I was here you were proposing Bury as being a plausible suspect .... but you caved in quickly. Are you going to thank me for disabusing you of that silly little notion?

This is a complete invention by you brought on by the fact that you appear to be unable to read or comprehend posts. I said that Bury was a plausible suspect, no more….you misunderstood and reacted as if I was proposing him positively as the killer. And you haven’t ’disabused’ me of that ‘notion.’ Anyone who claims to know that Bury wasn’t the ripper cannot be taken seriously. He might have been; he might not have been.

Another fragile ego who feels the need to get ‘revenge.’ Grow up Newbie, post about the case and the evidence, and not me.

[Herlock Sholmes]

This silly grudge has it’s roots when I made a post comparing Cross and Bury by using the usual points that are made in connection to the killer….violence toward women, connection to prostitutes, early criminal behaviour, alcohol, drug issues etc. It would have been obvious to all that I was simply comparing the two.

You made some rather pointless points…why didn’t he choose elsewhere, why was he in Bucks Row when the pubs closed. For some reason you considered these incisive points. You finished by saying that if I couldn’t answer your questions the Bury was an absurd suspect (even though you think that a bloke on his way to work isn’t an absurd suspect)

During my response I very clearly told you that I wasn’t saying that he was the killer. I then showed why your points were poor (which wasn’t difficult to do as it was obvious to all but you apparently)

In post #75, Abby, who you call unbiased said: “im really surprised at all the negativity around Bury for the ripper.” And “Bury is exactly the type.”

I’m guessing though that Abby won’t get the kind of comments that you’ve aimed at me for saying the same thing?

In post #79 I state that we don’t know who the killer was. So again, re-stating that I’m not saying that Bury was the ripper. But you get it completely wrong because in post #89 you say “Suddenly he's not a candidate to be the ripper you say? Does this mean you are backing away from Bury?”

I said that Bury was a candidate….after your comment I stressed that I wasn’t saying that he was definitely the ripper….somehow you interpreted that as me saying that I no longer considered him a suspect. It’s not difficult stuff. You were wrong. It’s in black and white.

In post #92 I accepted that I’d missed a couple of specific questions so I revisited your post and answered each one individually. Of course, you didn’t acknowledge this.

Then after criticising me and others for simply suggesting Bury as a ‘possible’ you proceed to some utterly baseless fantasy about Cross molesting his daughter. Is there anything else that we could accuse Cross of?

Then you babbled on about alcoholism which resulted in Roger Palmer, one of the best, most balanced and respected researchers on the subject saying “ Seriously. What do you hope to gain by making things up as you go?”

…..

There’s no point in getting miffed because someone disagrees with you and then to go looking for opportunities for ‘revenge.’ It just makes you look petty. Read peoples posts properly and respond, if you want to.