Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Chapmanís death.

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by The Baron View Post


    So you couldn't. Was expected.

    Who is the one saying Chapman was killed 5:20 am beyond all reasonable doubt ?!


    He has to prove that. wheather you like this or not.

    You know what, it helps when you read all the posts, it may give you a better understanding of the situation in hand.




    The Baron
    Unintelligible drivel. Again. Please stop posting Baron.
    Regards

    Herlock






    "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

    Comment


    • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post
      Phillips was a medical man, he was quite right to give his expert medical opinion on her t.o.d, i questioned his judgement when saying that Chapman was killed where she was found on the bases he was not qualified to make such a call. Answered.

      Not answered properly. There are no qualifications for looking for signs of blood. What a ludicrous suggestion. Policemen didnít have qualifications. They had eyes...like Phillips.

      As for whether it was Annie or the killer that made the noise that hit the fence , you believe it was one or the other, and ive given a very plausible explanation that it might not have been either ,but you ignore it just like everything else. so be it , let the frustration continue

      And at least 6 times, after me explaining it to you, youíve continued to post the same falsehood. Is this honest posting?
      You havenít given a single plausible explanation. Youíve even claimed to know where the killer knelt. Something that no one can know. You just keep making things up Fishy.

      Please try not to.

      Regards

      Herlock






      "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

      Comment


      • I donít think he was. It would be hard to cut with steps in the way. I think he stood Above her head. ''I think he lowered her down by the shoulders'', and stood at the top of her head. Itís tight, but youíre not reaching over things.

        This would be after he rendered her unconscious due to strangling her , is that correct ?

        Right after she said ''no'' is this also correct ?

        And they were between the steps and the fence and there was no sign of a struggle ? correct?

        Just want to make sure we agree on this .

        my apologies this was a response i was referring to from another post

        Comment


        • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

          Answer the 3 question first
          I havenít a clue what these three questions mean. Re-phrase them. Youíre posting in riddles. Iíve never dodged a question unlike you.
          Regards

          Herlock






          "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

          Comment


          • Iím about to go out so Iíll begin to respond to your nonsense at around 3.30. It will give you a chance to get your thoughts together. Hopefully.
            Regards

            Herlock






            "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

            Comment


            • Not answered properly. There are no qualifications for looking for signs of blood. What a


              ludicrous suggestion. Policemen didnít have qualifications. They had eyes...like Phillips.

              thanks you just prove my point . like i said answered .

              Comment


              • omg..... just read post 1746 its not rocket science for Christ sake

                Comment


                • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post


                  thanks you just prove my point . like i said answered .
                  On what planet?!

                  Estimating TOD is a matter of science requiring knowledge and training. Itís not something that anyone can attempt to do.

                  Checking for evidence that a person was killed anywhere is simply a matter of checking for signs. Mainly blood. This requires eyesight. Itís of no great difficulty.

                  And so....

                  Why do you believe that Phillips was correct on something so difficult; something with so many variants (some of which Phillips wouldnít have been aware of in 1888) and yet you think him incompetent to look for blood?

                  Itís like saying that a person is capable of juggling six balls but is incapable of juggling two!
                  Regards

                  Herlock






                  "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post


                    This would be after he rendered her unconscious due to strangling her , is that correct ?

                    Has it been proven that she was strangled? Iím not saying that she wasnít of course but I wasnít aware that this was a proven fact.

                    Right after she said ''no'' is this also correct ?

                    If the ďnoĒ came from Annie then Iíd tend toward the fact that she said it before she died, yes.

                    And they were between the steps and the fence and there was no sign of a struggle ? correct?

                    Errata is suggesting that the killer knelt above Annieís head to do the mutilations. Unlike you Errata isnít claiming to be psychic. He/she is suggesting a possibility.

                    Just want to make sure we agree on this .

                    my apologies this was a response i was referring to from another post
                    The only reason that ive responded to this is because you asked me to respond the three questions and Iím assuming that these are the three questions that you were talking about?

                    I donít see what point you are trying to make? The fact is that none of us know what position the killer was in when he committed the mutilations and itís entirely plausible that he changed position during the mutilations to get better access. Thereís nothing controversial about this suggestion as far as Iím aware. The only issue here is that youíve stated something as a fact when itís only your opinion.
                    Regards

                    Herlock






                    "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

                    Comment


                    • We know that blood splatters were on that fence, about 12-18 inches from the bottom of the fence if I recall, That proximity to the fence, and the fact that it was thought to be arterial spray, meant her position in relation to the fence might have easily been the cause of the thud as he lowered her onto her back. I think this killer first choked his victim to unconsciousness, like he did with Polly.
                      Michael Richards

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
                        We know that blood splatters were on that fence, about 12-18 inches from the bottom of the fence if I recall, That proximity to the fence, and the fact that it was thought to be arterial spray, meant her position in relation to the fence might have easily been the cause of the thud as he lowered her onto her back. I think this killer first choked his victim to unconsciousness, like he did with Polly.
                        On the wooden paling between the yard in question and the next, smears of blood, corresponding to where the head of the deceased lay, were to be seen. These were about 14 inches from the ground, and immediately above the part where the blood from the neck lay.
                        My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post
                          The killer was indeed on the right side of Chapman when he cut her throat, not her left where he could have kicked the fence so codosch could hear him.
                          Blood smears suggest he/she/it moved around on the fence side after cutting her throat.
                          Last edited by DJA; 09-25-2019, 03:49 PM.
                          My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post




                            I challenge you to prove that Amelia Richardson didnít kill Annie Chapman assisted by Fred Abberline both dressed in rabbit costumes!

                            Holy Grail - Killer Bunny - YouTube




                            My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                            Comment


                            • From Chandler:

                              ĒThere were also a few spots of blood on the back wall, near the head of the deceased, 2ft from the ground. The largest spot was of the size of a sixpenceĒ

                              This surely puts to bed any idea of the body being killed/mutilated elsewhere? These would have been behind the door so thereís no way that they could have gotten there any other way that as spray from the body or maybe a drop or two flying from the knife as he wielded it.
                              Regards

                              Herlock






                              "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
                                From Chandler:

                                ĒThere were also a few spots of blood on the back wall, near the head of the deceased, 2ft from the ground. The largest spot was of the size of a sixpenceĒ

                                This surely puts to bed any idea of the body being killed/mutilated elsewhere? These would have been behind the door so thereís no way that they could have gotten there any other way that as spray from the body or maybe a drop or two flying from the knife as he wielded it.
                                Yeah, I think the argument that Chapman was killed elsewhere is a none starter, and not supported by any of the evidence.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X