Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Long v Cadosch. Seeing vs Hearing.

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

  • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

    Not if you factor in PC Harvey`s time !

    and to put another nail in the organ removal theory there is no evidence to show what time the couple left the point where they were seen by Lawende and moved into the square

    www.trevormarriott.co.uk

    As I pointed out in # 177, it had to be by about 1.38, which is the time at which I have consistently been suggesting the murder took place.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

      A lot longer than has been suggested by Sequeira and Brown, but of course, their times were based on what they saw when they arrived at the crime scene before the organs were ever found missing. Not even a modern-day surgeon could open up a body and remove a uterus and a kidney from a blood-filled abdomen in almost total darkness in those times as stated by the doctors.



      But Brown's estimate of five minutes did take account of the excision!

      Comment


      • Regarding Mrs Long hearing the brewery clock in Brick Lane strike the half hour, it is often thought that maybe she heard it chime 5:15 rather than 5:30. It looks like the Truman Brewery clock in Brick Lane is still there. Is it known for sure that it chimed on the quarter hour? I've always thought that Mrs Long was mistaken in her identification of Chapman. IIRC her identification was 4 or 5 days after the event and by her own admission she didn't pay much attention to the couple.

        Cadosche strikes me as an honest witness, as does Mrs Long (but I suspect she is mistaken). Richardson doesn't strike me as reliable, I feel that he invented the whole boot trimming sitting on the step, and much more likely glanced at the cellar door from the top step to check everything was ok, as he originally stated. The whole thing with the knife, cutting a carrot for a rabbit etc.. isn't convincing to me, especially what he produced as the knife he used. I suppose he could have chosen to produce the bluntest, crappiest butter knife to show that he couldn't possibly have inflicted Chapman's wounds with it.

        Comment


        • '' Much more likely glanced at the cellar door from the top step to check everything was ok, as he originally stated. ''


          Exactly, ''just like he originally stated is the key here'' .

          Its all there on the John Richardson thread ,3444 post pretty much cover all this .
          'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

            This is a point that those who prop up the belief that the killer removed the organs will argue against. Modern-day medical experts opine that it is not just a case of ripping open the abdomen and sticking a hand in, the killer would have to know where the organs were located in the first instance.

            Let me ask a general question how many on here would know where these organs were located and have the knowledge to be able to remove them in almost total darkness from a blood-filled abdomen?

            Dr Sequeira states 3 mins the murder and mutilation could be done in that time but not the removal of the organs

            www.trevormarriott.co.uk
            Perhaps he just stuck his hand in and got lucky. You can't prove otherwise

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Dickere View Post

              Perhaps he just stuck his hand in and got lucky. You can't prove otherwise
              I can prove he didn't do what you have just posted

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Camus View Post

                Richardson doesn't strike me as reliable, I feel that he invented the whole boot trimming sitting on the step, and much more likely glanced at the cellar door from the top step to check everything was ok, as he originally stated. The whole thing with the knife, cutting a carrot for a rabbit etc.. isn't convincing to me, especially what he produced as the knife he used. I suppose he could have chosen to produce the bluntest, crappiest butter knife to show that he couldn't possibly have inflicted Chapman's wounds with it.


                I had been cutting up carrots for my rabbit, and I put the knife into my pocket. I do not usually carry it about with me in my pocket. It must have been a mistake on my part.

                I did not go into the yard, and went away. The yard door closes itself. I shut the front door when I went away. I was there altogether about two minutes.

                (Lloyd's Weekly)


                If Richardson put the knife in his pocket by mistake, why did he happen to become aware of it while visiting number 29?

                Why would he suddenly get the urge to cut some leather as he checked the yard?

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Camus View Post

                  It looks like the Truman Brewery clock in Brick Lane is still there. Is it known for sure that it chimed on the quarter hour?

                  You're not suggesting that some posters have been making an assumption?

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X