Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Chapman’s death.

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

  • #76
    There are a number of solutions to the enigmas involved here that can be true. What cannot be true is that Annie Chapman had turned stone cold and was exhibiting traits of onsetting rigor mortis 55 minutes after she was killed or so. How that idea ever got hold is beyond me.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by Ginger View Post
      One of the more interesting speculations that I've heard posited in an effort to reconcile the testimonies of Philips, Richardson, Cadosch, and Long is that Dr. Philips ToD was correct, and Mr. Richardson simply missed seeing her when he sat down to fix his boot. Mrs. Long and Mr. Cadosch were relying on two different clocks (the brewery clock, and the church clock), so one or both were slightly off the correct time - at any rate, Mrs. Long was a few minutes in advance of Mr. Cadosch. The woman she saw was not Annie (who was lying dead in the back yard), but was an unknown prostitute arranging an assignation - #29 seems to have been popular. The unknown pair went into the back yard just after Mrs. Long passed. The muffled "no!" that Mr. Cadosch heard was the horrified exclamation of one of them discovering the murder victim, and falling or leaning against the fence for support.

      I wish I could recall who initially thought this up. Someone on here, I'm sure. It's absolutely elegant, like something from Agatha Christie. By no means does that prove its truth, but it's logically solid.
      Logically, there was no way that Richardson could have missed seeing the body when he sat on that step, even if Annie were a midget. And I'd suggest that, had someone else discovered the body, they'd have done more than just say "No!" - not only would they likely scream the place down, but they'd almost certainly have gone for help.
      Kind regards, Sam Flynn

      "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

        Very true, but sometimes that personal assessment is clouded by a persons own personal theory.

        www.trevormarriott.co.uk
        Some posters don't have a personal theory. It makes no odds to me either way if Richardson or Cadosch were mistaken or untruthful, whereas others will throw them out because their timings upset their particular suspect.

        Comment


        • #79
          Logically, there was no way that Richardson could have missed seeing the body when he sat on that step, even if Annie were a midget. And I'd suggest that, had someone else discovered the body, they'd have done more than just say "No!" - not only would they likely scream the place down, but they'd almost certainly have gone for help.

          Thing is, we cant be 100 per cent certain that he in fact sat on the step .

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post


            Thing is, we cant be 100 per cent certain that he in fact sat on the step .
            But we have no legitimate reason to suspect him of lying. He had nothing to lose by saying - I just opened the door slightly and looked to the right and checked the cellar doors. The body might have been to my left, behind the door, and I didn’t see it.

            He insisted that he’d sat on the step with the whole of the yard in within his view. This put him in the yard in possession of a knife with a mutilated corpse. What would he have gained by this?
            Regards

            Herlock






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

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
              There are a number of solutions to the enigmas involved here that can be true. What cannot be true is that Annie Chapman had turned stone cold and was exhibiting traits of onsetting rigor mortis 55 minutes after she was killed or so. How that idea ever got hold is beyond me.
              Phillip did appear to qualify his TOD estimate though according to The Times report.

              .....but it was right to mention that it was a fairly cool morning, and that the body would be apt to cool rapidly from its having lost a great quantity of blood.

              This is Phillips himself saying that he could have been wrong. And we have at least 2 witnesses that point us in this direction.
              Regards

              Herlock






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

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                Phillip did appear to qualify his TOD estimate though according to The Times report.

                .....but it was right to mention that it was a fairly cool morning, and that the body would be apt to cool rapidly from its having lost a great quantity of blood.

                This is Phillips himself saying that he could have been wrong. And we have at least 2 witnesses that point us in this direction.
                That is Phillips himself saying that in spite of how he thought that Chapman would have been dead for MORE than two hours, he was ready to accept that two hours was within the realms of possibility.

                Otherwise he said "It is my view that she couldn't have been dead for less than two hours, but I am prepared to believe that she had been dead for one hour only".

                The mere idea is ridiculous. Baxter misinterpreted Phillips, and actually, so did Swanson, who said that Phillips believed that Chapman had died around 4.30. He believed no such thing, he offered it as an extreme possibility.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

                  That is Phillips himself saying that in spite of how he thought that Chapman would have been dead for MORE than two hours, he was ready to accept that two hours was within the realms of possibility.

                  Otherwise he said "It is my view that she couldn't have been dead for less than two hours, but I am prepared to believe that she had been dead for one hour only".

                  The mere idea is ridiculous. Baxter misinterpreted Phillips, and actually, so did Swanson, who said that Phillips believed that Chapman had died around 4.30. He believed no such thing, he offered it as an extreme possibility.
                  For info, here is the coroner's statement from the Morning Advertiser, 20 Sept, during Mrs Long's evidence;

                  "A Juror - Is she quite correct about the time? Dr. Phillips, who saw the body soon after six o'clock, said the deceased had been dead two hours.

                  The Coroner - The doctor very considerably qualified the statement, because he gave reasons why the body would get cold sooner."
                  ​​​​

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

                    For info, here is the coroner's statement from the Morning Advertiser, 20 Sept, during Mrs Long's evidence;

                    "A Juror - Is she quite correct about the time? Dr. Phillips, who saw the body soon after six o'clock, said the deceased had been dead two hours.

                    The Coroner - The doctor very considerably qualified the statement, because he gave reasons why the body would get cold sooner."
                    ​​​​
                    Ah! But have a look at what was said by Phillips himself, Joshua. He did NOT say that Chapman had been dead two hours, he said she had been dead AT LEAST two hours - and probably more! I believe Baxter is allowing for something that Phillips did NOT allow for, which is mirrored by Swansons "dismissal" of Long as a witness. If Phillips had really allowed for Chapman dying at a time that dovetailed with Longs evidence, Swanson would not have had any reason to question her.


                    The reasons for the body to get cold sooner than expected were offered by Phillips so as to explain why he believed that his own take that Chapman had been dead for considerably longer time than two hours could be wrong. It CLULD BE that it was only two hours, but Phillips recommended a view of more than so.

                    Otherwise, we have Pbillips staking his professional competence on how two hours was a minimum ("AT LEAST two hours), only to them thrown his certainty to the wind and allow for halving his minimum time span. In the same sentence!

                    That was never going to anything but an obvious misconception on Baxters behalf. Keep in mind how he was deeply unhappy about Llewellyns statement that the abdominal wounds came first in the Nichols case: this is a coroner who wants things his way!
                    Last edited by Fisherman; 08-13-2019, 01:45 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

                      That is Phillips himself saying that in spite of how he thought that Chapman would have been dead for MORE than two hours, he was ready to accept that two hours was within the realms of possibility.

                      Otherwise he said "It is my view that she couldn't have been dead for less than two hours, but I am prepared to believe that she had been dead for one hour only".

                      The mere idea is ridiculous. Baxter misinterpreted Phillips, and actually, so did Swanson, who said that Phillips believed that Chapman had died around 4.30. He believed no such thing, he offered it as an extreme possibility.
                      We might as well ask why Phillips didn’t say - but she might have been dead for half an hour less than my estimate but definitely no more.

                      I think that Richardson and Cadosch outweigh Phillips. Genuine experts have called TOD estimates - little more than guesswork. Phillips wouldn’t have been aware for example that the cause of death itself could affect the results of a TOD estimate. We have a discipline that was ripe for error. Richardson on the other hand simply needed eyes and a moderate level of awareness. He said that he saw the entirety of the yard and that Chapman wasn’t there at 4.50. Cadosch heard something brush against a fence that he was a yard or two away from. A fence that bordered a yard where a woman was found murdered. As far as we are aware no one else was in the yard of number 29.

                      For me these are extremely persuasive witnesses and this is without mentioning Long who may have simply been out with her time. If that was the case then we have a witness that saw the victim with her killer, a man that heard the murder and someone say no and a man who testified that Chapman wasn’t in the yard at 4.50. Against a doctor carrying out the notoriously shaky discipline of estimating TOD’s in 1888.

                      No real competition for me.
                      Regards

                      Herlock






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

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                        We might as well ask why Phillips didn’t say - but she might have been dead for half an hour less than my estimate but definitely no more.

                        I think that Richardson and Cadosch outweigh Phillips. Genuine experts have called TOD estimates - little more than guesswork. Phillips wouldn’t have been aware for example that the cause of death itself could affect the results of a TOD estimate. We have a discipline that was ripe for error. Richardson on the other hand simply needed eyes and a moderate level of awareness. He said that he saw the entirety of the yard and that Chapman wasn’t there at 4.50. Cadosch heard something brush against a fence that he was a yard or two away from. A fence that bordered a yard where a woman was found murdered. As far as we are aware no one else was in the yard of number 29.

                        For me these are extremely persuasive witnesses and this is without mentioning Long who may have simply been out with her time. If that was the case then we have a witness that saw the victim with her killer, a man that heard the murder and someone say no and a man who testified that Chapman wasn’t in the yard at 4.50. Against a doctor carrying out the notoriously shaky discipline of estimating TOD’s in 1888.

                        No real competition for me.
                        There's that "guesswork" thing again. It is NOT guesswork, the temperature DOES fall when we die, and rigor mortis will NOT set in within the first hour, least of all in cold conditions. There's nothing shaky about it. I'm sure its very comfortable to try and surf off it, but it does not work. Nor did Long persuade the police, Herlock. You are taken in, they were not. Nor am I.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

                          There's that "guesswork" thing again. It is NOT guesswork, the temperature DOES fall when we die, and rigor mortis will NOT set in within the first hour, least of all in cold conditions. There's nothing shaky about it. I'm sure its very comfortable to try and surf off it, but it does not work. Nor did Long persuade the police, Herlock. You are taken in, they were not. Nor am I.
                          Then why have experts in textbooks and papers called it that?
                          Regards

                          Herlock






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

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

                            There's that "guesswork" thing again. It is NOT guesswork, the temperature DOES fall when we die, and rigor mortis will NOT set in within the first hour, least of all in cold conditions. There's nothing shaky about it. I'm sure its very comfortable to try and surf off it, but it does not work. Nor did Long persuade the police, Herlock. You are taken in, they were not. Nor am I.
                            At the time of death, a condition called "primary flaccidity" occurs. Following this, the muscles stiffen in rigor mortis. All muscles in the body are affected. Starting between two and six hours following death, rigor mortis begins with the eyelids, neck, and jaw.

                            www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                              Then why have experts in textbooks and papers called it that?
                              I think we should avoid being one-dimensional here, Herlock. There are levels in the matter, quite simply. Imagine that Phillips had found that Chapman was completely warm when he found her. That would have meant that she MUST have been very recently dead. And there would be no doubt about that whatsoever - people who lie did in cold conditions will not retain their body warmth for a couple of hours. It WILL go down. And that is not guesswork at all, it is simple logic.

                              The more time we add to the process, the harder it will be to determine these things, and so the element of uncertainty will grow.

                              But it will not grow to enable people who died 55 minutes before to have grown totally cold.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                                At the time of death, a condition called "primary flaccidity" occurs. Following this, the muscles stiffen in rigor mortis. All muscles in the body are affected. Starting between two and six hours following death, rigor mortis begins with the eyelids, neck, and jaw.

                                www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                                Yup. And of course, it is not a fact that no person at all will ever start displaying signs of rigor before two hours - it Can occur, especially in very warm conditions. But here we need to halve the minimum time in conditions that are more likely to double the time instead! It´s a no-brainer.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X