Cadosch: Dismissed For Being Cautious?

[Joshua Rogan]

How about this interpretation (my addition in bold);

"It was not in our yard, but I should think it came from the yard of No. 29. I, however, cannot say on which side [of that yard] it came from."

[Trevor Marriott]

We can’t be certain about Long of course but she did appear quite convinced. As we all know some people have a very good memory for faces and Long might just have been one of those people. Maybe she just thought that she was?

****

Whereabout where Annie and her companion allegedly standing? If Cadosch went through the door then pulled it shut he’d have been facing the door and to the right of the door (right facing outward from the door) According to how far away from the doorway they were standing he might not have looked left. Did he say that he looked both ways? Just wondering if it’s possible that he might have missed them if they were actually there? But as Colin said...a few seconds here and there, even a minute or two?

****

I don’t really understand what difference Cadosch’s level of attention mattered? Both the ‘no’ and the sound were split second occurrences. Naturally he wasn’t listening out for noises. At that time hearing a voice or a sound from number 29 would have meant nothing to him apart from telling him that one of his neighbours was in their yard. He had absolutely no reason to have given it a second thought. Why would anyone be expected to go peering over a fence simply because heard something from a neighbours yard? Unless someone had screamed ‘murder!’ of course.

I have said many times that Cadosh`s evidence is unsafe, the following extract from the inquest clearly proves that point.

"It was then about twenty minutes past five, I should think. As I returned towards the back door I heard a voice say "No" just as I was going through the door. It was not in our yard, but I should think it came from the yard of No. 29. I, however, cannot say on which side it came from."

I just wish people would take the blinkers off and apply some common sense to the testimony instead of inventing possible uncorroborated scenarios.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[NotBlamedForNothing]

We can’t be certain about Long of course but she did appear quite convinced. As we all know some people have a very good memory for faces and Long might just have been one of those people. Maybe she just thought that she was?

A 'good memory for faces', usually refers to the ability to associate a face with a name - not the ability to briefly observe a stranger while passing them by, and recognizing the same face a few days later, at a mortuary.
Wynne Baxter might have thought Long's testimony to be a big deal, but with 21st century knowledge of the unreliability of eyewitness testimony, we can safely ignore Long.

I don’t really understand what difference Cadosch’s level of attention mattered?

That seems to be the situation. You're admitting here that you don't even 'get' what people like ABE and myself are arguing.

Both the ‘no’ and the sound were split second occurrences. Naturally he wasn’t listening out for noises. At that time hearing a voice or a sound from number 29 would have meant nothing to him apart from telling him that one of his neighbours was in their yard. He had absolutely no reason to have given it a second thought. Why would anyone be expected to go peering over a fence simply because heard something from a neighbours yard? Unless someone had screamed ‘murder!’ of course.

All you're doing here is justifying Cadosch in not taking an interest in what he had heard.
However, there is no question of Cadosch being criticized for not being more aware.

There seems to be some agreement that what Albert heard, sounds quite like the murder is taking place.
In that case, having already heard the 'no, no', then hearing a scuffle and a sort of fall against the fence, he must do one of two things:

1. Take an interest in what he has heard, by paying more attention, and yes, even boldly peering over the fence
2. Regard the sounds as mundane, and therefore inconsequential - leading to him forgetting about what he had heard by the time he walks out onto the street, and never reporting the non-incident to the police

Your understanding of Cadosch seems to be like this:

Cadosch payed little attention to those sounds, but his brain faithfully stored everything he had heard in memory, and recalled it all when Albert heard about the murder, and went to the police to give them all the details.

That is not how human memory works.

[Elamarna]

This is the crux of it. Long made a strong impression on Wynne Baxter; so much so that he preferred her account to that of the police surgeon in determining TOD, which seems extraordinary - especially as he essentially tweaked her time estimate to make it fit the narrative. Certainly if Mrs Long's evidence is accepted as correct in every particular then that of Cadosch becomes irrelevant because it means that the incident described by Cadosch preceded the murder by several minutes. IMHO Mrs Long was probably correct in her recollection of the time (she explained how the brewery clock had just struck the half hour) but probably saw a man and woman who were not Chapman and her killer.
The Turnbull guidelines form the basis of my thinking on this:-

https://www.inbrief.co.uk/court-proc...ll-guidelines/

The issue here is the apparent accepting of times as being not only accurate but syncronized.
i strongly feel the unreliability of time keeping and lack of synrconization means that All times can be at least 5 minutes out in either direction.
This applies to all the murders, not just Chapmans.
longs timing does not mean the cadoschs timing is wrong or irrelevant in my considered opinion.


steve

[Herlock Sholmes]

bingo...and even then apparently ignored it. kellys screams of murder were heard and ignored.

i keep going back to if cadosch didnt hear chapman and her killer, then why didnt that couple raise the alarm of the dead body at there feet? they missed her too? makes zero sense, logistically pointing again to the non dr witnesses more than likely being correct.

We don’t know anything about Cadosch level of intelligence of course but it might be worth considering the risk that he was taking if he was lying. If he’d actually heard nothing then he wouldn’t have had a clue when Annie had been murdered. How could he have been sure that someone hadn’t seen Annie and her client entering number 29 at 3.30am? Or that some inhabitant of number 29 hadn’t heard something suspicious at 3.45am? Or a neighbour in some house overlooking the yard hadn’t seen something at 3.45am? What if someone that knew her had seen Annie alive 3 streets away at 5.30am?

Im just pointing out the risks of been accused of lying to the police Cadosch might have faced had he indeed lied.

Of course we have to accept the existence of the earlier, more detailed, statement that Cadosch gave. We also have to accept that any witness can be accused of lying or being mistaken but with Cadosch it wasn’t as if he was, like Long, just identifying someone that he believed he’d seen in the street. If he’d been shown to have been mistaken on a piece of Long-like identification then he shrugs his shoulders and says “ok, it looks like I was mistaken.” But with his Inquest statement, if he was proven wrong, how does he pass it off as an error? He either heard a ‘no’ and a sound or he didn’t. He was running quite an obvious and needless risk of being branded a liar.

I certainly favour that he heard heard what he said that he did and that there was probably an understandable reason for the earlier discrepancy. Perhaps he’d heard about the doctors TOD and toned down his Inquest statement because he feared being called a liar? Maybe the police pressured him? Maybe the press exaggerated what he’d said in the earlier statement? We can’t be certain of course but it’s at least a possibility.

[Abby Normal]

We can’t be certain about Long of course but she did appear quite convinced. As we all know some people have a very good memory for faces and Long might just have been one of those people. Maybe she just thought that she was?

****

Whereabout where Annie and her companion allegedly standing? If Cadosch went through the door then pulled it shut he’d have been facing the door and to the right of the door (right facing outward from the door) According to how far away from the doorway they were standing he might not have looked left. Did he say that he looked both ways? Just wondering if it’s possible that he might have missed them if they were actually there? But as Colin said...a few seconds here and there, even a minute or two?

****

I don’t really understand what difference Cadosch’s level of attention mattered? Both the ‘no’ and the sound were split second occurrences. Naturally he wasn’t listening out for noises. At that time hearing a voice or a sound from number 29 would have meant nothing to him apart from telling him that one of his neighbours was in their yard. He had absolutely no reason to have given it a second thought. Why would anyone be expected to go peering over a fence simply because heard something from a neighbours yard? Unless someone had screamed ‘murder!’ of course.

bingo...and even then apparently ignored it. kellys screams of murder were heard and ignored.

i keep going back to if cadosch didnt hear chapman and her killer, then why didnt that couple raise the alarm of the dead body at there feet? they missed her too? makes zero sense, logistically pointing again to the non dr witnesses more than likely being correct.

[Herlock Sholmes]

We can’t be certain about Long of course but she did appear quite convinced. As we all know some people have a very good memory for faces and Long might just have been one of those people. Maybe she just thought that she was?

****

Whereabout where Annie and her companion allegedly standing? If Cadosch went through the door then pulled it shut he’d have been facing the door and to the right of the door (right facing outward from the door) According to how far away from the doorway they were standing he might not have looked left. Did he say that he looked both ways? Just wondering if it’s possible that he might have missed them if they were actually there? But as Colin said...a few seconds here and there, even a minute or two?

****

I don’t really understand what difference Cadosch’s level of attention mattered? Both the ‘no’ and the sound were split second occurrences. Naturally he wasn’t listening out for noises. At that time hearing a voice or a sound from number 29 would have meant nothing to him apart from telling him that one of his neighbours was in their yard. He had absolutely no reason to have given it a second thought. Why would anyone be expected to go peering over a fence simply because heard something from a neighbours yard? Unless someone had screamed ‘murder!’ of course.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

By the by, Cadosch claims distraction in the back yard. We have to assume the same on the street. And, since he was unaware of the murder he's just heard, why would he pay any attention to who was around?

Q: Did you see a man and woman talking outside the building, when you went out for lunch today?
A: No, I was thinking about work.

In that fictional exchange, the reason given for not seeing the man and woman is probably unnecessary - go outside thinking of nothing much at all, and you will still not remember seeing that hypothetical man and woman.
It is only if one is deliberately paying attention to the man and woman, that a detail like that is likely to be remembered. Even then, the memory of the man and woman is likely to be full of inaccuracies, and that is why I regard the testimony of Elizabeth Long to be almost worthless.

In Cadosch's case, if we assume the quote in #175 to be the closest to what he said, the problem is that there are almost two of him - the backyard Cadosch that pays scant attention to the noises he hears, including human ones - and the on the street Cadosch who is not only aware of what he did see, but who is also sure about what he didn't see.

Perhaps Cadosch put his brain into gear, the moment he walked out the front door. In that case, what he claims to see then might be a reasonable approximation to the truth.
I can't accept the same for the backyard stuff, though. Cadosch says he gives those noises minimal attention. Therefore, like the man and woman outside the building at lunchtime, there is little hope of remembering the details.

Having said that, we still have to deal with the fact that what Cadosch claims to have heard, sounds rather like a murder in process!
The resolution to this dilemma is to neither accept everything he says at face value, nor dismiss him out of hand, but to suppose that what he really witnessed was quite a bit more than he was willing to admit, and he came up with his very watered-down version of events to save face - he didn't want to look cowardly.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Morning Advertiser 20 Sept

"The Coroner - Did you see a man or woman in the street? - No; I only saw workmen passing by to their work"

A fair point Josh. I'm not out to back up or dismiss Alb, but essentially, it's a question of observation, or more so, the importance attached to the observation. If it's deemed acceptable to take Albert's stance that he gave passing interest to the noises in Hanbury's back yards because he was preoccupied with work, then the same logic applies to his observations in the street.

Can we accept his lack of definite observation as he was contending with out house issues combined with worries about work while in the yard, but accept his observations once he's on the street? Perhaps he'd firmed up by then, and realising he wouldn't he be late, he made impeccable observations. But if he was sketchy on one side of the door, why not the other?

Purely by his own admission.

Personally, I think Long got her chime wrong, it was the quarter past she heard, based on the two possible locations of her address, the route, and the times. And I don't think Albert is key to the TOD. And I'm going to hide behind JeffHamm on this, he did the legwork into Longs address and walk.

By the by, Cadosch claims distraction in the back yard. We have to assume the same on the street. And, since he was unaware of the murder he's just heard, why would he pay any attention to who was around?

All just parts of the puzzle.

[Joshua Rogan]

Morning Advertiser 20 Sept

"The Coroner - Did you see a man or woman in the street? - No; I only saw workmen passing by to their work"

[Bridewell]

Is the following specifically meant to contradict Long...

Cadosch: I did not see any man and woman in the street when I went out.

Would AC have heard EL testify?

I'm guessing he said that in answer to a specific question on that point. If you time the shortest route from where 27, Hanbury Street once stood to the point where you first see the clock on Christ Church Spitalfields it's 2 minutes give or take. If the timings were accurate (which is a pretty big 'if') Cadosch would have left home around the same time as Mrs Long's encounter with a man and a woman she later identified as Chapman - but an error of just a few seconds in either of those timings would account for his not seeing them.

[Herlock Sholmes]

To dismiss out of hand means to not even consider the various options, does it not?

If so, I am not dismissing Cadosch out of hand, but instead I am doing so after careful consideration.

Point taken Fish.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

This is the crux of it. Long made a strong impression on Wynne Baxter; so much so that he preferred her account to that of the police surgeon in determining TOD, which seems extraordinary - especially as he essentially tweaked her time estimate to make it fit the narrative. Certainly if Mrs Long's evidence is accepted as correct in every particular then that of Cadosch becomes irrelevant because it means that the incident described by Cadosch preceded the murder by several minutes. IMHO Mrs Long was probably correct in her recollection of the time (she explained how the brewery clock had just struck the half hour) but probably saw a man and woman who were not Chapman and her killer.
The Turnbull guidelines form the basis of my thinking on this:-

https://www.inbrief.co.uk/court-proc...ll-guidelines/

Is the following specifically meant to contradict Long...

Cadosch: I did not see any man and woman in the street when I went out.

Would AC have heard EL testify?

[Abby Normal]

If what he heard falling against the fence wasn't Chapman we have another conundrum - who or what was it that fell and what happened to it, given that Chapman's body was found in the same place? If Cadosch's account is truthful the logical inference is that what he heard was the body falling against the fence.

exactly. and if the sound he heard wasnt chapman and her killer, and she was already there, these people inexplicably said nothing of it?

[Bridewell]

Well the question is moreso did the noise that Cadosch hear have anything to do with the murder? He was certain he had heard a voice say 'no' and something then fall against the fence. We of course will never know for certain that it had any connection to Annie Chapman's death but my own opinion is that it was. Not sure though what that does for the case as we know Annie Chapman was murdered in the back yard of 29. It may give us an accurate time of death certainly but not much else?

If what he heard falling against the fence wasn't Chapman we have another conundrum - who or what was it that fell and what happened to it, given that Chapman's body was found in the same place? If Cadosch's account is truthful the logical inference is that what he heard was the body falling against the fence.