Chapman and the thud on the fence

[Rubyretro]

Thanks for that Tom.

I must say that I have revised the idea about the door hitting the fence -mainly because, as someone pointed out, Cadosche would have been used to that noise.

However, it was the idea about the door, which led on to thinking that it was
an unknown prostitute and her client (seen by Mrs Long) who made the noises heard by Cadosche.

It has always been a seemingly incredible thing that if Cadosche could hear people in the yard of 29, then the people in the yard must have been aware of Cadosche -who had no reason to keep particularly quiet, and who could have shouted for help or investigated further at any moment, trapping Jack in a very tight spot.

It is alot to believe that if Annie was being robbed or felt in fear of a 'weirdo'
that she wouldn't have called for help, sensing that help was close to hand.
It is also gobsmacking that if Jack was aware that the body had fallen against the fence, and someone was on the other side, that he would hang about mutilating and take time to steal rings.

Doesn't it make more sense that the 'No !' could have been an exclamation of surprise emenating from someone seeing the body lying on the ground in the
half light. That person would have no idea that this was a 'Ripper' victim, nor that a uterus was missing. They -or the man - might very well bend down to get a closer look at the body though. Now, the spot was very tight and and
the body very close to the fence. I can't imagine an old prostitute being very lithe and supple and being able to squat down and stand up very easily, and if there was something to grab hold of wouldn't she use it ? There is also the shock of realising the quantity of blood around, and the fact that there were exposed intestines -so falling heavily against the fence figures in my opinion.

That these people would not want to be involved in Police reports coupled together fits, and I think that they would try not to make a noise -but finally they weren't murderers, nor did they risk hanging, so I don't think that they'd take the same care to be silent as Jack would.

I still think that my projected scenario fits the facts.

[Tom_Wescott]

Great thread

Another good one from Ruby! It seems the question is - did the door hit the fence? The answer is almost certainly 'no'. It was not spring action, as most of the contemporary sketches show the door open. The fence seen in the Mason film was constructed years after the murders. As the door can be seen in sketches to 'free stand' (in other words, not swing out upon touch), it's difficult to imagine a prostitute and her client (let alone a murderer) would push the door with such force unnecessarily. It also seems that the recess between the door and the fence was ample enough not to allow the two to touch. A few other points...

* Cadosch was only in his 20's, so it can be presumed his hearing was good, so we have no reason to doubt his accuracy.
* As a next door neighbor, Cadosch would be able to identify particular sounds he was accustomed to hearing and would have commented on a door that hits his fence.
* The two people speaking came BEFORE the 'thud' on the fence, so the people had already entered the yard, therefore why would we expect to hear the door opening and hitting the fence a moment later?

Regarding Ruby's comment about the Ripper not having availed himself of the water pump, it's possible he did. In a rarely reported comment from James Kent, he describes a sheen over the body that made it appear to him that the killer had sprinkled water over Chapman. I personally think it's possible he peed on her. But it could also have been the way the light gleamed on her bodily fluids.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Rubyretro]

[QUOTE=Abby Normal;177631]Hi Ruby

Good post and interesting points. My take is that Long probably saw JtR and Chapman, Cadosch heard chapman say no and then either heard her body brush up against the fence or JtR as he lowered her to the ground. Boot man did not see any body because she was not their yet.

Hi Abby -I've been at work, and couldn't reply before.

It depends whether you put any faith in the police pathologists of the time, or you think that they were often way off. Personally, even taking into account the lacunas in the science in 1888, I think that the doctors knew enough about food digestion and rigor mortis, taking into account the cold yard, to not be out by much (and the same goes for MJK's estimated TOD). You might not think that there is a huge difference between the pathologist's estimate and the witness statements , but infact it makes a very crucial difference.

The doctors' TOD fit with what we know of Annie's last meal and last sightings at the lodging house, and places the murder at a time which correlates with that of MJK. Most of all it means that Mrs Long's description of the supposed murderer must be wrong.

I don't know about you, but I can't find anything in common between Lawende's and Longs descriptions -one of them has to be wrong.

I couldn't choose before, because I am unwilling to choose arbitrarily between seemingly honest witnesses, and Long would appear to be supported by two independant statements.

I guess I go with the conventional view on this one as it seems to make the most sense

.
I agree totally that it can only make good sense that Cadocshe's and Long's statements dovetail ; although theoretically Cadosche heard a noise coming from 'anywhere' thereabouts, and Mrs Long's couple could have gone off 'anywhere' rather than the yard of 29, it was always too many coincidences to accept. Mr Richardson would have had the open door masking the body, the dark, and his attention fixed on the cellar and his boot -that is easier to explain, in my opinion.

So -to recapitulate -the precise details of Chapman's killer are important to us in honing an image of 'Jack' and his habits -if only to discount Long's description of the suspect. My scenario gives a logical expanation, without tarring anyone as 'false'.

[Errata]

Where was this water pump? I'm picturing it sort of in the middle of the yard, and if so, then I'm surprised people didn't hear more thuds and quite a bit of swearing if he didn't know it was there.

Even more problematic - and difficult - must have been the steps down into the basement. These appear to have stretched some way back into the yard, especially in photos taken from some angles. It may be a trick of perspective, but I don't think I have ever seen a proper, measured plan of the yard which would settle things.

It is worth looking at as many picture of the yard at No 29 to get an impression. In later pictures the depression occupied by the descending steps is covered by wooden sheets. "Jack" would not seem to have had a lot of room to manoeuvre between Annie and the steps behind him, not to mention the steps going UP to the backdoor. A very restricted space indeed.

Phil

In other words it may have been so quiet because Jack spent some time unconscious at the bottom of the stairs.

He HAD to have been there before, or there had to be a light source. Right?

[Phil H]

Where was this water pump? I'm picturing it sort of in the middle of the yard, and if so, then I'm surprised people didn't hear more thuds and quite a bit of swearing if he didn't know it was there.

Even more problematic - and difficult - must have been the steps down into the basement. These appear to have stretched some way back into the yard, especially in photos taken from some angles. It may be a trick of perspective, but I don't think I have ever seen a proper, measured plan of the yard which would settle things.

It is worth looking at as many picture of the yard at No 29 to get an impression. In later pictures the depression occupied by the descending steps is covered by wooden sheets. "Jack" would not seem to have had a lot of room to manoeuvre between Annie and the steps behind him, not to mention the steps going UP to the backdoor. A very restricted space indeed.

Phil

[Errata]

One thing that always got me, was that there was a water pump in the garden, but no indication that Jack had used it...of course, if it was dark when he went there, then he might not have seen it or remembered it.

Where was this water pump? I'm picturing it sort of in the middle of the yard, and if so, then I'm surprised people didn't hear more thuds and quite a bit of swearing if he didn't know it was there. The irony of rushing out responding to girlish shrieks of pain to find Jack the Ripper clutching his knee...

[lynn cates]

invitation

Hello Phil. Ah, but they were invited in.

Cheers.
LC

[Phil H]

...around this time, a chap with a foreign accent was roaming London and staying in other people's houses

In fact, thousands of them were, they were eastern Eurpoan immigrants, some Jewish, who were establishing themselves in London.

Phil

[Errata]

But it was not just about the "quality" of the light. From dawn on it would be getting consistently lighter, and we know that the house and its residents were waking up. Anyone going to a rear window of 29 and perhaps in neighbouring houses could have looked down into the yard.

People were about: Richardson had been into the yard; people like Cross/Lechmere and Paul (from the Nichols killing) would have been at or well on their way to work; Davis went into the yard not much later; Cadoche was about.

I cannot help but feel "Jack" would have been aware of that. If he was consistent with the murder of Nichols, he struck earlier and when it was darker and safer to do so. Bt that's just my opinion.

I think that would certainly be his ideal scenario. You gotta wonder how often his ideal situation arose, as except for Kelly he never had control of his scenes of the crime. I think counting on a late sunrise and possible cloud cover would have been idiotic, but if he had trouble finding a victim until it was late, or alternatively got stuck in the yard by the inhabitants of the house, the dimness and shadows could have given him cover until he could get out.

[lynn cates]

accent

Hello Ruby. Although I don't believe in Jack, I do know that, around this time, a chap with a foreign accent was roaming London and staying in other people's houses.

Cheers.
LC

[Rubyretro]

I think you are on to something here. Recall the story of the man in the passage way with the foreign sounding voice? Sugden feels sure that he was in that passage way a month before.

Well, you know Lynn, there must have been loads of men with foreign sounding voices in London in 1888. There must of been loads of men dossing in buildings in which they could enter.

Why do you think that Jack had a "foreign sounding voice" ? He may or may not have done.

I don't think that the man that Mrs Long saw with a prostitute outside Number 29 Hanbury Street was 'Jack' -which is one purpose of this thread.

[Rubyretro]

The back door of 29 was on a sping was it not/or rising butts/hinges? It closed automatically? If so, the noise might have been the door closing as whomever said "No!" retreated and the door swung (softly?) closed - a thump rather than a bang.

Hi Phil !
-No, this is something that I've never been able to go with ...that Cadosche
was mistaken about something hitting the fence.

Cadosche is a perfectly believable witness by his total lack of drama and embellishment to his account. He said that he heard something falling against
the dividing fence -and whilst he is candid that he couldn't tell where the 'No!' came from, he was sure about the 'thud'. That's not just an audible sound, that's an -perhaps barely perceptible- vibrating of the fence.
It was also not an alarming sound to him, it was an habitual occurance.

As Kensei said -Cadosche must have been used to the door closing next door, and he was also used to things thudding on the fence, and I believe that he knew the difference. This is just the reason why I had so much trouble with Wolf's " (Cadosche) must have been mistaken" in the first place.

However, if it were Long's 'couple' who lean't heavily against the door/fence when bending down -and if they were intending to be quiet and not be caught together in the yard-then that would explain the noise adequately.
They were not panicked when they saw Annie's body at first, since they couldn't know the extent of her injuries in the dark, nor know that she was a Ripper victim. They probably thought that she was drunk ; they might have seen that she was dead, but they left sharpish.

[lynn cates]

passage way

Hello Ruby.

"I think that 'Jack' probably knew the yard in Hanbury St before the murder of Chapman, but obviously that might be for any one of a variety of
reasons. Some that I've wondered about are:
-he might have dossed in the passage before
-he might have already have been led there by a prostitute, without him agressing her
-he might have been employed casually by the packing case business
-he might have attended a religious meeting in the rooms above
-he might have been invited before by one of the people living in the building , as a friend or aquaintance.
-he might have passed prostitutes soliciting in front of the entrance before,
and simply checked it out."

I think you are on to something here. Recall the story of the man in the passage way with the foreign sounding voice? Sugden feels sure that he was in that passage way a month before.

Cheers.
LC

[Abby Normal]

On another thread the subject of Annie Chapman's murder was touched on,
and specifically the 'No!' heard by Cadoche, followed by a thud against the fence as opposed to the TOD according to the police pathologists, which put the murder at about an hour earlier.

There was of course two other witnesses, Mrs Long who claimed to have seen the victim alive and with a man outside number 29, which despite a minor discrepancy over the time would tend to support Cadoche, and Richardson who came into the yard of 29 slightly earlier and did not see a body.

Wolf Vanderlinden wrote a beautiful dissertation ('Considerable Doubt and the Death of Annie Chapman') which showed how the Coroner prefered to take
the three witnesses accounts above that of the doctors. I was much taken with his account, and it sucessfully showed how Mrs Long and Mr Richardson
could have easily have been mistaken. Even Cadoche wasn't certain that the voice that he heard came from the yard next door. However, that thud on the fence was ultimately too big a 'fly in the ointment' for me in the end, to discount Cadoche's testimony (how could he have been wrong about that ?), and taken together with Mrs Long's couple and the 'No !' there seemed too many coincidences to just sweep under the carpet, and so
finally I came down on the side of the coroner.

And now, I have switched right back to Wolf's side of the argument.

It was Phil H. who suggested that the thud on the fence could have been caused by the back door of 29 banging against it. He is right, because we can watch the clip of James Mason actually in the yard and the space is so tight, that the door could effectively touch the fence. This puts a different complexion on the things, because of course it logically explains the thud, and it need not be either Annie nor her killer who banged the door.

Phil suggested that it was Mr Richardson who lied about not seeing the body.
I had trouble with this, because I find that his statement does not sound
rehearsed (and if he had been sitting on the top step looking down at his boot, and glacing down to the cellar door, then the body would have been masked by the door), and it still left the 'coincidences' of the 'No!' and the couple in the street. And too many coincidences are problematic for me, as
is just throwing out witnesses because they don't fit our favourite scenarios.

But what if all the witnesses were right ? -and the police pathologists , too ?

What if Mrs Long's prostitute and client were about to go into the yard of 29
-but they weren't Annie and Jack (Mrs Long said she didn't pay attention to the couple, as she often saw such couples at that time in the morning).
This explains why the description of 'Jack' is at odds with Lawende's description (I don't buy Jack-of-many-hats).

The prostitute led her client to the yard, and it was they who saw the body
and this unknown woman who Cadoche heard exclaiming 'No!' It may even have been this woman who took Annie's rings -because although I think that Jack stole his victim's money, the rings could have been incriminating. It is one of these people who lean't against the door and made it bang the fence.

I think that it would make perfect sense why a prostitute would not come forward to the police to admit that she had taken a customer to the yard
-it was illegal, and why a man would not come forward to have his name linked to using a prostitute (particularly if he had a wife and family).

In this way the 'coincidences' between Cadoche's statement and Mrs Longs disappear, but Wolf Vanderlinden is still right in his assessment of the murder.

Hi Ruby
Good post and interesting points. My take is that Long probably saw JtR and Chapman, Cadosch heard chapman say no and then either heard her body brush up against the fence or JtR as he lowered her to the ground. Boot man did not see any body because she was not their yet.

At 5:30 in the back corner of a building and fence with the sun just coming up I think would have still been sufficiently dark enough for JtR. i go with the witness statements on this one for TOD because the Drs TOD was not that far off from 5:30 anyway. I guess I go with the conventional view on this one as it seems to make the most sense.

However it is possible she was killed earlier and bootman missed her because it was too dark and his attention was drawn to the other side of the steps to the cellar and then to his boot. But I cant help but think that if he could have seen his boot and the cellar he should have seen a body right there.

[Phil H]

there was a water pump in the garden, but no indication that Jack had used it...of course, if it was dark when he went there, then he might not have seen it or remembered it.

Of course, that might also be an indication that he was unfamiliar with the yard, wanted to get away immediately his work was done, and also perhaps an unconcern about bloodstains, or a certainty he was not too bloody from his work.

If "Jack" was Kosminski - for instance - and it was dark, he might have had quite a short walk in the darkness back to his family home.

Something else I have thought of : If you look at the pictures of the corridor between the front door and the yard of No 29 (their in both Philip Hutchinson's book and Robert Clack's, I think) it must have been VERY dark in there before dawn. So either "Jack" or Annie would need to have known the layout - there was a "kink" in the hallway by the stairs - in order to avoid banging and crashing and falls. I suspect she had used the yard before - rather than him - and knew her way, hence led him. But that does not rule out a familiarity on his part with the house and rear yard.

Finally on the thump/bang:

The back door of 29 was on a sping was it not/or rising butts/hinges? It closed automatically? If so, the noise might have been the door closing as whomever said "No!" retreated and the door swung (softly?) closed - a thump rather than a bang.

I'd be interested in your thoughts,

Phil