Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

3 and a half missing hours...

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 3 and a half missing hours...

    'IF' we believe Annie was killed at around 5.30 ,she had 3.5 hours of wandering beforehand.That's a lot of wandering with no sightings in an area where people were coming and going through the night .If there was a 'case' for believing a ripper victim was not killed on the spot and transported there then surely Annie is the one...and what's the explanation for the blood at no.25?
    You can lead a horse to water.....

  • #2
    Originally posted by packers stem View Post
    'IF' we believe Annie was killed at around 5.30 ,she had 3.5 hours of wandering beforehand.That's a lot of wandering with no sightings in an area where people were coming and going through the night .If there was a 'case' for believing a ripper victim was not killed on the spot and transported there then surely Annie is the one...and what's the explanation for the blood at no.25?
    Let me guess...she was in a pub with Sickert. And the blood was the red paint from one of his brushes?

    Regards Pierre

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Pierre View Post
      Let me guess...she was in a pub with Sickert. And the blood was the red paint from one of his brushes?

      Regards Pierre
      To Pierre

      Before you go taking the piss out of others maybe you should show your own findings/own theory/whatever you want to call it. Having said that I do think Sickert is a silly suspect.

      Cheers John

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by packers stem View Post
        'IF' we believe Annie was killed at around 5.30 ,she had 3.5 hours of wandering beforehand.That's a lot of wandering with no sightings in an area where people were coming and going through the night .If there was a 'case' for believing a ripper victim was not killed on the spot and transported there then surely Annie is the one...and what's the explanation for the blood at no.25?
        Remember what Phillips said at the inquest. He examined Chapman at around 6.30, and stated that he was of the meaning that she had been dead AT LEAST two hours, and PROBABLY MORE.

        So that should take perhaps three hours of that "lost" time, if Phillips was on the money. My own feeling is that he was.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Pierre View Post
          Let me guess...she was in a pub with Sickert. And the blood was the red paint from one of his brushes?

          Regards Pierre
          I have no data on this Pierre... The data is keeping itself hidden until the data interpreter decides to use the data and it was just a topic for discussion, data and bull...t free
          Thank ya very much. Did you know about the blood in 25 Pierre?
          You can lead a horse to water.....

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
            Remember what Phillips said at the inquest. He examined Chapman at around 6.30, and stated that he was of the meaning that she had been dead AT LEAST two hours, and PROBABLY MORE.

            So that should take perhaps three hours of that "lost" time, if Phillips was on the money. My own feeling is that he was.
            Hi Fish
            It makes sense. Also the remains of undigested food, baked potato, at the lodging house would suggest the same. What do we make of someone who can sit on a step cutting leather off his boots and miss a body a couple of feet away though?
            You can lead a horse to water.....

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by packers stem View Post
              'IF' we believe Annie was killed at around 5.30 ,she had 3.5 hours of wandering beforehand.That's a lot of wandering with no sightings in an area where people were coming and going through the night .If there was a 'case' for believing a ripper victim was not killed on the spot and transported there then surely Annie is the one...and what's the explanation for the blood at no.25?
              Hi packers

              First of all she was seen alive around 5:30 in front of the murder scene talking to the man who was probably her killer. a neighbor heard voices in the back yard around the same time and then her body was discovered shortly thereafter.

              My guess is she wasn't wandering but laid down somewhere quiet and out of the way to sleep/ rest for those hours she wasn't seen.
              "Is all that we see or seem
              but a dream within a dream?"

              -Edgar Allan Poe


              "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
              quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

              -Frederick G. Abberline

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                Hi packers

                First of all she was seen alive around 5:30 in front of the murder scene talking to the man who was probably her killer. a neighbor heard voices in the back yard around the same time and then her body was discovered shortly thereafter.

                My guess is she wasn't wandering but laid down somewhere quiet and out of the way to sleep/ rest for those hours she wasn't seen.
                Wow Abby, that's a statement and a half, that she was seen alive.By a witness who didn't know her at all and in the dark
                Have we not just been discussing maxwell on another thread
                You can lead a horse to water.....

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by packers stem View Post
                  Wow Abby, that's a statement and a half, that she was seen alive.By a witness who didn't know her at all and in the dark
                  Have we not just been discussing maxwell on another thread
                  um YOU are the one making the INCORRECT claim she was NOT seen for 3 and half hours before. so you know what you can do with the stupid little emoticon.

                  And yes its so much more likely that she was killed somewhere else and dropped off there other than the more innocuous fact that she was seen and heard around the time of her murder at the location of her murder and killed there. Including the police at the time.

                  Not to mention the fact that the consensus with most people with at least half a brain is that Maxwell is not a credible witness and long is.

                  But I guess its not conspiratorial enough. or stupid.

                  perhaps she was dropped there by little green men who abducted her in there space ship and did medical experiments on her.




                  since you like them so much have some more

                  Last edited by Abby Normal; 10-12-2015, 02:07 PM.
                  "Is all that we see or seem
                  but a dream within a dream?"

                  -Edgar Allan Poe


                  "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                  quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                  -Frederick G. Abberline

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                    um YOU are the one making the INCORRECT claim she was NOT seen for 3 and half hours before.
                    Incorrect claim? How is that incorrect.Who else do you wish to believe saw her after 2

                    and yes its so much more likely that she was killed somewhere else and dropped off there other than the more innocuous fact that she was seen and heard around the time of her murder at the location of her murder and killed there.
                    So pleased you agree and are beginning to think straight
                    She wasn't heard....presuming again?A thud was heard along with 'voices'

                    Not to mention the fact that the consensus with most people with at least half a brain is that Maxwell is not a credible witness and long is.
                    Proof of this is??? Or is it just a whim
                    A typical case of choosing evidence to suit a theory,so disappointing

                    Afraid the rest of the garbage isn't worthy of an adult response
                    You can lead a horse to water.....

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Well, Mrs Long/Durrell and Albert Cadosch did see/hear what they believed was Annie with a male between the time of approximately 5am and 5:30 am. The police believed them and they themselves were convinced enough to go and appear at Annie's inquest and give testimony. That's more than many witnesses that we've discussed on the forum managed, (Schwartz, Hutch for instance.)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Rosella View Post
                        Well, Mrs Long/Durrell and Albert Cadosch did see/hear what they believed was Annie with a male between the time of approximately 5am and 5:30 am. The police believed them and they themselves were convinced enough to go and appear at Annie's inquest and give testimony. That's more than many witnesses that we've discussed on the forum managed, (Schwartz, Hutch for instance.)
                        Hi Rosella
                        It's a recurring theme that many witnesses who saw little or nothing were called to the inquest.It wasnt Schwartz' decision not to go,he was kept away from it.
                        As for Hutchinson,comes down to whether or not you believe he was any more than a figment of Abberline's imagination really. Not saying this lady who gave 2 different surnames and who at first said she didn't think she could recognise anyone but then later on said she could recognise Chapman is unreliable.... Or am I? upto everyone else to decide, apparently based upon their own pet theory,but in terms of reliability if she's a 2 out of ten maxwell would be an 8
                        You can lead a horse to water.....

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by packers stem View Post
                          Hi Rosella
                          It's a recurring theme that many witnesses who saw little or nothing were called to the inquest.It wasnt Schwartz' decision not to go,he was kept away from it.
                          As for Hutchinson,comes down to whether or not you believe he was any more than a figment of Abberline's imagination really. Not saying this lady who gave 2 different surnames and who at first said she didn't think she could recognise anyone but then later on said she could recognise Chapman is unreliable.... Or am I? upto everyone else to decide, apparently based upon their own pet theory,but in terms of reliability if she's a 2 out of ten maxwell would be an 8
                          Sorry, I disagree. Long has at least two corroborating witnesses who partially back her up - Richardson and Cadosch. Her statement is far from perfect, but you do your own argument a disservice by giving her statement so little credence.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by jason_c View Post
                            Sorry, I disagree. Long has at least two corroborating witnesses who partially back her up - Richardson and Cadosch. Her statement is far from perfect, but you do your own argument a disservice by giving her statement so little credence.
                            Hi Jason
                            I understand what you're saying but there are issues with it all.She said at first she didn't think she could recognise either person again.As time went on this changed,so did her name.She only saw the back of the head of the man, this turned into a full blown description with deer stalker hat,height,foreign appearance and even something about a vest I think.
                            I don't think Cadosch corroborates anything at all really, could be any voices... We don't even know if they're male or female so whose to say her body wasn't dumped there between Richardsons two visits to the yard and that's what Cadosch heard. The TOD certainly points towards this possibility.
                            My main point is that we can't take long as being absolute and throw maxwell out cos it doesn't fit a theory... Maxwell should be considerably more believable than long due to daylight and knowing her and talking to her.To be fair it's no contest is it really
                            You can lead a horse to water.....

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Hi Packers,

                              We don't know why Schwartz didn't testify. He could have nicked off so he couldn't be found, told the police privately that he'd made a mistake (or more likely the police found out what he witnessed had been a simple domestic argument) the police may have found him unreliable in the end, he may have been very ill and unable to turn up to testify. We simply don't know.

                              Lots of things about East End life seem weird to us now, including a propensity to use nicknames or two surnames. I don't happen to ascribe sinister motives to this, unlike many on the forum, maybe because I come from a small place in Norfolk where several people had nicknames and some women were still known informally by their maiden names.

                              Long was apparently Elizabeth Durrell's married name. Maybe Durrell was her maiden name and somehow it got muddled. That doesn't mean that automatically her testimony or that of Cadosch is worthless, simply because it doesn't fit a current theory.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X