No Trophies

[Mr Lucky]

I won't bore you with a lesson in LVP timekeeping (we've both seen sufficient)

Hi Lynn

What's the difference between LVP timekeeping and timekeeping nowadays?

Thanks

[lynn cates]

about time

Hello Christer. Thanks.

Still think something needs to come off the 3.55 end. we cannot have Polly being cut, discovered, AND a policeman arriving ALL at 3.45.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

tempus fugit

Hello Lucky. Thanks.

"What's the difference between LVP timekeeping and timekeeping nowadays?"

Well, the "lecture" (heh-heh) I usually receive is that timepieces were not terribly synchronised, so may have varied a good bit.

Cheers.
LC

[Fisherman]

Still think something needs to come off the 3.55 end. we cannot have Polly being cut, discovered, AND a policeman arriving ALL at 3.45.

Cheers.
LC

True enough - but how does that equal us having to detract from the 3.55? Why would them being wrong not equal us having to add to the time ...?

My stance - and I believe I have mentioned it before - is that it would be very odd for Paul to state that he walked down Buck´s Row at "exactly" 3.45 if this was not so. His estimate is the only one that has a certainty added to it, and it is not as if Paul gained anything from lying about it or just making it up.

And for the record, we actually CAN have Nichols cut (by Lechmere) and discovered (by Paul) at 3.45. Of course, we cannot have Neil arriving at 3.45 (and there was more; both Thain and Mizen ALSO state that they were drawn into the drama at 3.45). If Lechmere did the cutting, and did not discover Paul until very late, then it stands to reason that he would have been cutting away at Nichols seconds before Paul reached the spot. If so, there is a chance that Mizen could have seen blood running from Nichols´neck when he arrived. And just to please you, Lynn, I may even be willing to detract a minute or two from the 3.55 time. Let´s say that the carmen reached Mizen at 3.49, just as Paul suggests, let´s accepth that Lechmere only spoke to him for half a minute and that Mizen finished his knocking up business in another half a minute; then we arrive at 3.50. Let´s assume that Mizen then sped off briskly, making the distance down to Buck´s Row in two minutes flat, putting him in place at 3.52.
This would have two distinctive advantages:
1. It would keep you happy, since I drop the 3.55 suggestion, and
2. It would make it more feasible that Nichols was still bleeding, seven minutes after she had had all the bloodvessels in her neck cut off. Because when the main arteries on both sides of the neck are severed, the body will normally be drained of blood in rather a short time. And much as I respect your estimate of 3.30-3.35, the 17-22 minutes we would be facing with a 3.52 arrival time for Mizen sounds very much out of the question to me.

Out of interest, why do you opt for 3.30? She would have been very dead at 3.45, and Paul said he felt a movement when he felt her chest. That is ruled out with a cutting time at 3.30. Neil and Mizen both saw her bleeding from the neck wound, and that too would be uncomparable with a cutting time of 3.30. Plus, of course, there is nothing at all to suggest a cutting time of specifically 3.30.
So why?

I´m off to bed, but I will check for any answers and suggestions on your behalf tomorrow, Lynn!

All the best,
Fisherman

[Mr Lucky]

Well, the "lecture" (heh-heh) I usually receive is that timepieces were not terribly synchronised, so may have varied a good bit.

Hi Lynn

If you mean public clocks, why wouldn't they be synchronised? Most of them strike, if it wasn't in sync with it's neighbours it would just be adjusted until it was.

Individual's timepieces may be out but that's independent of the 'LVP'

[Wickerman]

I suppose I side with those arguing that he was interrupted with Nichols and not with Chapman. While it is true that there might be a tight timeline with Chapman, it either wasn't that tight or he didn't need much time, as we know he was not caught. Maybe it took him but 5-10 minutes; perhaps he was just unluckily interrupted with Nichols.

In my opinion, the Nichols/Chapman mutiliation issue reminds me of the Double Event mutiliation debate, just on a slightly longer time scale. The killer strikes and if all goes well (Chapman, Eddowes, Kelly) there is an extended cooling off period. If his is interrupted (Nichols, Stride) he gets to work shortly thereafter. There are too few data points to make any definitive case, but to me this is suggestive.

Thats pretty much the same type of reasoning I shared with Michael recently, I'm just not sold on Stride being the first of two. If I could see some suggestion of an attempt at strangulation with Stride then I'd buy it.

.

[Wickerman]

Hello Barnaby.

Difficult to see how a week and two days counts as shortly thereafter.

Cheers.
LC

He had to wait a week the first time he was interrupted, but it was too long?
"I'm not waiting another week, this time!!!"



(I'll have to watch what I say, I'll be talking myself into believing this if I'm not careful)

[lynn cates]

no more delays

Hello Jon. Thanks.

"He had to wait a week the first time he was interrupted, but it was too long?
"I'm not waiting another week, this time!!!" "

Cute.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

time

Hello Christer. Thanks.

"Of course, we cannot have Neil arriving at 3.45 (and there was more; both Thain and Mizen ALSO state that they were drawn into the drama at 3.45)."

Ah ha!

"I respect your estimate of 3.30-3.35, the 17-22 minutes we would be facing with a 3.52 arrival time for Mizen sounds very much out of the question to me."

Well, bleeding occurs at different rates, but I shan't labour the point. And is syncope always fixed? Some with stopped hearts can begin later (of course, I am thinking of cold water drownings).

"Out of interest, why do you opt for 3.30?"

I think the attack began around the time the train passed--it was about 3.27. I think they were talking (as in Chapman's case over a week later). He felt frustrated and struck her then held her mouth. When she crumpled, his deluded mind began to act out what he had watched at the horse slaughter yard.

So the cut could have been as late as, say, 3.40--but a ten minute attack seems long to me.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

L V P

Hello Lucky. Thanks

"If you mean public clocks, why wouldn't they be synchronised?"

I know many public clocks that are not synchronised--even today.

"Most of them strike, if it wasn't in sync with it's neighbours it would just be adjusted until it was."

Eventually.

"Individual's timepieces may be out but that's independent of the 'LVP''

True enough. At inquest, you often see the question, "By what did you fix the time?"

Cheers.
LC

[Michael W Richards]

With all this discussion about the estimated timings of the comings and goings....its worth emphasizing that there seems to be some traffic around Mary Ann in death, ..I think enough to ponder whether an interruption was a very possible thing there. That would, for me, set up a good premise for the missing "trophies" question.

We also have to consider the fact that the next murder in many ways is quite similar to Mary Anns, the further outrages could be explained by privacy of the backyard venue. The man with Annie in that yard would likely believe that his only threat is really that hallway to the street. Tenants use it as do passing ladies with their gentlemen, apparently.

I think that might explain the position of her body to some extent. The vantage point for him.

Best regards

[Wickerman]

I think that might explain the position of her body to some extent. The vantage point for him.

Best regards

Hi Michael.

We are told the backyard door swung closed automatically. Are you suggesting the killer held it open by some means intentionally?

.

[Beowulf]

Hello Phil. Davis was awake from 3 to 5, by his inquest statement. If the murder were around 4.30, I wonder whether he would have not have heard it? Or possibly have heard people in the passageway?

Cheers.
LC

"At the inquest one of the witnesses, Mrs. Elizabeth Long testified that she had seen Chapman talking to a man at about 5:30 a.m. just beyond the back yard of 29 Hanbury Street, Spitalfields. Mrs. Long described him as over forty, and a little taller than Chapman, of dark complexion, and of foreign, "shabby-genteel" appearance."

Chapman's body was discovered at just before 6:00 a.m. on the morning of 8 September 1888 by a resident of number 29, market porter John Davis. She was lying on the ground near a doorway in the back yard. John Richardson, the son of a resident of the house, had been in the back yard shortly before 5 a.m. to trim a loose piece of leather from his boot, and carpenter Albert Cadosch had entered the neighbouring yard at 27 Hanbury Street at about 5:30 a.m., and heard voices in the yard followed by the sound of something falling against the fence."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annie_Chapman

Doesn't this establish the window of time the murder occurred?

[lynn cates]

accuracy

Hello Barbara. Thanks.

Pretty close. Of course, it depends upon the accuracy of her testimony.

Cheers.
LC

[Mr Lucky]

I know many public clocks that are not synchronised--even today.

Hi Lynn

'even today' - yes, that's my point, there's no LVP timekeeping, there's just timekeeping.

Best Wishes.