Chapman’s death.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Found it !!

Lloyds Sept 10th 1888:
Our representative spoke to the son of the lady who lived in the house where the murdered woman was found.
John Richardson, a big man peculiarly twisted to the right, swept the long hair back from his face and with his one good eye surveyed the small, muddy yard where the mutilated woman was discovered two days ago.

Now that’s what I call research Jon.

Game over.

[Jon Guy]

Now that’s what I call research Jon.

Game over.

Thank you, HS
The devil is in the detail !!

[Michael W Richards]

Richardson was sitting on the second step, with both feet on the flags of the yard, one of which he'd have lifted at some point to remove and repair his boot. In such a configuration, a person would have their legs spread apart (as opposed to clamped together like a meek Victorian girl), and the door would have to have been at least 90 degrees open, giving Richardson a totally unimpeded view of what lay in front of the bottom step, which would have been directly in his field of vision and practically under his very nose. There's absolutely no question about this, and it's borne out by Richardson's having been so adamant that he could not have missed seeing the body if it had been there at the time.

Bingo Sam. There is no doubt, Annie was not there at that time. She was not killed before 5am, and that is clearly evident. Ergo, Phillips estimate was wrong, and likely due to the state of the corpse and the cool morning air.

How many disemboweled bodies lying in the street had any of these men seen before these crimes? Ill bet none.

[The Baron]

Found it !!

Lloyds Sept 10th 1888:
Our representative spoke to the son of the lady who lived in the house where the murdered woman was found.
John Richardson, a big man peculiarly twisted to the right, swept the long hair back from his face and with his one good eye surveyed the small, muddy yard where the mutilated woman was discovered two days ago.

Fantastic mighty find Jon!!!

Twisted to the right!
Long hair on his face!
One good eye!


Thank you!!


The Baron

[Jon Guy]

Fantastic mighty find Jon!!!

Twisted to the right!
Long hair on his face!
One good eye!


Thank you!!

Mon plaisir, Baron.
Thank you

[Sam Flynn]

Found it !!

Lloyds Sept 10th 1888:
Our representative spoke to the son of the lady who lived in the house where the murdered woman was found.
John Richardson, a big man peculiarly twisted to the right, swept the long hair back from his face and with his one good eye surveyed the small, muddy yard where the mutilated woman was discovered two days ago.

Hilarious!

[Aelric]

All of this back and forth about how many degrees the door was open and whether it would have blocked Annie's body from being seen or not is all well and good, but what about the smell of freshly spilled innerds and blood? Unless Richardson was anosmic, there's no way he would have missed that with it being right there next to the steps and his feet on the flagstones.

[Aelric]

Also, reading through the thread I noticed mention of a diagram. Is there a link to it at all, as I can't recall seeing it.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Also, reading through the thread I noticed mention of a diagram. Is there a link to it at all, as I can't recall seeing it.

Hi Aelric,

Hope the link works.

https://forum.casebook.org/forum/ripper-discussions/suspects/lechmere-cross-charles/10321-lechmere-was-jack-the-ripper/page19

Its In post #279

[Michael W Richards]

Has anyone ever approximated Annies final position on the ground in relation to the step? I think the splatters on the fence were pinpointed at some point in time, that should help. I think though Richardsons POV and the fact he sat there for a moment or 2 are the telling features..he couldnt have missed her.

[Sam Flynn]

Has anyone ever approximated Annies final position on the ground in relation to the step? I think the splatters on the fence were pinpointed at some point in time, that should help. I think though Richardsons POV and the fact he sat there for a moment or 2 are the telling features..he couldnt have missed her.

Phillips said that the body was on the left hand side of the steps, with the head 6 to 9 inches from the level of the bottom step. Her body and feet were pointing towards the shed at the back of the yard.

[Joshua Rogan]

Inspector Chandler's descriptions;

The Times
"Her head was towards the back wall of the house, but it was some 2ft. from the wall, and the body was not more than 6in. or 9in. from the steps. The face was turned on the right side, and the left hand rested on the left breast. The right hand was lying down by the left side, and the legs were drawn up. The body was lying parallel with the fencing, and was about two yards distant."

Daily News
"I saw the body of a woman lying on the ground on her back. Her head was towards the back wall of the house.
Touching the wall? - No, nearly two feet away. It was about six or nine inches from the steps. The face was turned to the right side, and the left hand resting on the left breast. The right hand was lying on the right side. Her legs were drawn up. The body was lying parallel to the fencing"

Daily Telegraph
"I saw the body of a woman lying on the ground on her back. Her head was towards the back wall of the house, nearly two feet from the wall, at the bottom of the steps, but six or nine inches away from them. The face was turned to the right side, and the left arm was resting on the left breast. The right hand was lying down the right side. Deceased's legs were drawn up, and the clothing was above the knees. A portion of the intestines, still connected with the body, were lying above the right shoulder, with some pieces of skin. There were also some pieces of skin on the left shoulder. The body was lying parallel with the fencing dividing the two yards."

Echo
"I saw the body of the deceased lying on the ground on her back. Her head was nearly two feet from the wall at the bottom of the steps.
How far from the steps? - Not more than six or nine inches. Her left hand was resting on her left breast; the right hand was lying down by her right side. Her legs were drawn up, and her clothing was above her knees. Portions of the viscera were lying by her right shoulder, and some pieces of skin were also the left shoulder, in a pool of blood. (Sensation.)
Was the body lying parallel with the steps? - With the fence, Sir, dividing the yard."

Evening News
"I saw the body of the deceased lying on the ground on her back. Her head was towards the back wall of the house about two feet from the wall at the bottom of the steps. the face was turned on to the right side, and the left hand was resting on the left breast. The breast was not exposed. The right hand was by her side. The legs were drawn up, and the clothing was above the knees. Part of the intestines still connected with the body were lying above the right shoulder with some pieces of skin and flesh. There were also some pieces of skin over the left shoulder and a pool of blood. The body was lying parallel with the fencing"

Morning Advertiser
"I saw body of the deceased woman lying on the ground. She was on her back, her head being towards, but about two feet from, the back wall of the house. Her head would be only about six or nine inches from the steps leading from the passage to the yard. The face was towards the right side, and the left hand was lying on the right breast. The left arm was by the side. Her legs were exposed as far as the knees. A portion of the intestines still connected with the body were lying over the left shoulder. There were pieces of skin on the ground near the head, just over the left shoulder, lying in a pool of blood. The body was lying parallel with the fencing. "

[Fisherman]

Okay, I will make one final post on whether Richardson "must have seen" Chapman or not.

I have pointed out that the door may have obstructed the body from view. It will have depended on whether it was wide open or not, and I have made the point that we cannot know whether it was wide open or not. Some have made the point that the door MUST have been open to AT LEAST 90 degrees (in which case Chapman would quite possibly have been obscured anyway. It will also have depended on which position Richardson was in, and - of course - some will have it that he MUSRT have been in a position that allowed him to see Chapman, whereas I fail to see how we can possibly know what position he was in.

Once we cannot know, we cannot say. It really is that simple.

It also applies that to see something, you have to look in the direction where that something is. Arguably, the area of least interest to Richardson would be the one behind the door blade, since he was there to check the padlock to his right hand side. We have no idea whether he even looked to his left.

It was also dark, and things are not as easy to see in darkness as they are in light.

It is said that determining TOD is guesswork only (which it is not by any means), and that this would render Phillips verdict an uncertain one. Actually, witnesses are the perhaps best example of uncertain factors in an investigation, and it seems that many people are by now ready to let go of Long and Cadosch, on account of how they are very far from being viable in relation to the rigor observation made by Phillips. The odd thing is that that does not make people go "Oh, so both Long and Cadosch must have been wrong - then the tells us to be very cautious about witness testimony" - it instead makes them go "Oh, so both Long and Cadosch must have been wrong - well then, in that case Richardson MUST have been right!"

The police at the time made the observation that it was possible that Richardson had missed Chapman on account of the door. Out here, it is said that Richardson was so very certain that he must have seen Chapman if she was there, that this certainty must mean that he had checked all parameters in retrospect, to make sure that he could not possibly have been wrong. If so, it seems odd that the police nevertheless pointed to the possibility that he WAS wrong.

This is as far as we can come, the way I see things. To waste any more time on posters who refuse to accept what the police accepted back then, and who refuse to accept that Richardson can have been positioned in any other way than the one they believe in themselves is of course utter madness, and so I will not engage any more in the business for now (I say "for now" so that I am not reminded by Dr Strange in the future that I have promised to stay away from a topic...)

[FISHY1118]

I think you've made some very good points in this thread Fisherman , i have to say im with you when it comes to Long , Codosch and Richardson . Ive posted many times on Chapmans demise and how i think it went down, and when one really looks at all the evidence and what witnesses said and whats they saw, it more likely when you add it all together, in my opinion Dr Phillips was right from the very beginning, and that Chapman was indeed murdered between 4.00am and 4.30am and that Richardson just plain out failed to look to his left when he stood at the top step and glanced to his right to check the lock, then turned back into the hallway and left. He never sat on the step and he never cut any strap off his boot , that part he made up ''TWO'' days later [ see Inspector Chandlers inquest testimony]. SO FOR THE FINAL TIME , HERE IT IS AGAIN.


Inspector Joseph Chandler was the first policeman on the scene when he was informed of the murder at 6:10 a.m. He interviewed John Richardson at about 6:45 that morning and was told "he had been to the house that morning about a quarter to five. He said he came to the back door and looked down to the cellar, to see if all was right, and then went away to his work.

The Coroner: Did he say anything about cutting his boot?

Chandler "No." ¹⁸

The Foreman of the jury then made the point that it was possible that the back door, which opened outwards into the yard and towards where the body was lying, obscured the body from view to one just standing at the top of the stairs. If, however, Richardson had gone down into the yard he was bound to see it. Chandler could only reiterate his earlier testimony and answer that Richardson had told him that"he did not go down the steps, and did not mention the fact that he sat down on the steps and cut his boot." ¹⁹

[Joshua Rogan]

It's almost certain that Richardson did sit on the steps and cut leather from his boot, just as he said. One of the things the police discovered at the scene was the spring from a man's gaitor, which in all probability he lost when removing his gaitor and his boot.

Dr Phillips, Daily Telegraph;
"There was also a piece of steel, flat, which has since been identified by Mrs. Richardson as the spring of her son's leggings."