John Richardson

[Herlock Sholmes]

My interpretation of Dr Biggs comment is that he is indicating by the example of how Chapmans body was described that her condition could have slowed down the condition of rigor., and might indicate an earlier TOD. I think he has made that clear, again you like Herlock seem to want to interpret the evidence in a way that suits your theories.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

What theories? I have no theory. Wick has no theory. You on the other hand do have a theory. And your theory is that the killer wouldn’t have killed at that time. Therefore the only person with an incentive to deliberately misinterpret evidence is yourself.

And again, Biggs was only saying ‘may.’ Which means that it also ‘may not.’

[Trevor Marriott]

What theories? I have no theory. Wick has no theory. You on the other hand do have a theory. And your theory is that the killer wouldn’t have killed at that time. Therefore the only person with an incentive to deliberately misinterpret evidence is yourself.

And again, Biggs was only saying ‘may.’ Which means that it also ‘may not.’

There you go again forming your own opinions on what he has stated if he was not sure he would have included may or may not in his comment again you want to dismiss experts testimony in favour of an early TOD

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Three witness trump what was little more than an educated guess every time.

Anyone reading the above assertion would probably take it to mean that the testimonies of the three witnesses were in agreement with one another.

Cadoche heard 'a sort of a fall against the fence' a few minutes before 5:30, and he had to leave very soon in order to go to his place of work, whereas Long said that she saw Chapman in the street after 5:30 and she had just heard the clock chime.

There is even doubt as to whether Long saw the couple in front of #29 rather than a neighbouring house, and no evidence that they entered #29.

Cadoche certainly did not see Chapman in the yard of #29 and Long certainly did not see Chapman enter number 29.

Phillips certainly did see Chapman in the yard of #29.

As far as I can see, the only witness whose testimony casts doubt on Phillips' estimate of the time of death is Richardson.

[Herlock Sholmes]

There you go again forming your own opinions on what he has stated if he was not sure he would have included may or may not in his comment again you want to dismiss experts testimony in favour of an early TOD

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

For Christ’s sake Trevor, you don’t even read your own quotes:

"As an aside, if the victim is a malnourished, slight, alcoholic female then rigor mortis may be less pronounced than might be expected, and so detection of rigor mortis in such an individual may indicate a longer time has elapsed since death"

Do you see it?

There in red?

In large lettering?


May

[Herlock Sholmes]

Anyone reading the above assertion would probably take it to mean that the testimonies of the three witnesses were in agreement with one another.

Cadoche heard 'a sort of a fall against the fence' a few minutes before 5:30, and he had to leave very soon in order to go to his place of work, whereas Long said that she saw Chapman in the street after 5:30 and she had just heard the clock chime.

There is even doubt as to whether Long saw the couple in front of #29 rather than a neighbouring house, and no evidence that they entered #29.

Cadoche certainly did not see Chapman in the yard of #29 and Long certainly did not see Chapman enter number 29.

Phillips certainly did see Chapman in the yard of #29.

As far as I can see, the only witness whose testimony casts doubt on Phillips' estimate of the time of death is Richardson.

And as we know that it would be dishonest to assume that all clocks were synchronised then the timings aren’t an issue.

The emboldened parts are my comments of course.

Albert Cadosch [Cadoche] deposed: I live at 27, Hanbury-street, and am a carpenter. 27 is next door to 29, Hanbury-street. On Saturday, Sept. 8, I got up about a quarter past five in the morning, (he uses ‘about’ so he was estimating. We don’t know how he arrived at that time so we have no one of confirming it’s accuracy. Perhaps he was ‘knocked up’ and the knocker up was 5 minutes later than usual? Who knows?) and went into the yard. It was then about ( again he uses ‘about’ so he’s estimating the time between him waking up and going outside) twenty minutes past five, I should think (stressing his uncertainty). As I returned towards the back door I heard a voice say "No" just as I was going through the door. (He doesn’t mention how long he was in the outside toilet so how can we know?) 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 went indoors, but returned to the yard about three or four minutes afterwards (an estimation again). While coming back I heard a sort of a fall against the fence which divides my yard from that of 29. It seemed as if something touched the fence suddenly. (Again, no mention of how long he was in the outside toilet and so we have no way of knowing)
The Coroner: Did you look to see what it was? - No.
[Coroner] Had you heard any noise while you were at the end of your yard? - No.
[Coroner] Any rustling of clothes? - No. I then went into the house, and from there into the street to go to my work. It was about two minutes after half-past five as I passed Spitalfields Church. (We have no way of knowing how accurate the church clock was)


It’s obvious from the above how much estimation went on. We don’t need any stretches of the imagination here. No inventions. All that we have to allow is a margin for error of around 5 minutes and Cadosch and Long’s times tie up. Alternatively we have Elizabeth Long seeing a woman who looked like Annie outside number within 5 minutes of Cadosch hearing things in the yard where Annie was murdered.

I know which I think the likelier.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Well, Herlock, that would require either Cadoche not to know how late it was getting when he needed to get to work, and the church clock to be similarly slow, or Long, who apparently was on a routine trip to the market, to have mistaken the quarter past chime for the half past chime, or the clock to be perhaps a quarter of an hour fast.

That assumes too that rigor mortis set in unusually quickly and that the body cooled remarkably quickly.

It also means that Scotland Yard should have been looking for a man of foreign appearance in his forties.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Well, Herlock, that would require either Cadoche not to know how late it was getting when he needed to get to work, and the church clock to be similarly slow, or Long, who apparently was on a routine trip to the market, to have mistaken the quarter past chime for the half past chime, or the clock to be perhaps a quarter of an hour fast.

That assumes too that rigor mortis set in unusually quickly and that the body cooled remarkably quickly.

It also means that Scotland Yard should have been looking for a man of foreign appearance in his forties.

We don’t need Long to have mistaken her time. All it would have required was the clock that she used to have been 5 minutes fast. George posted a quote recently by a guy called Chris McKay who is something of an experts on clocks and timekeeping of that era and he said at the end of the quote:

“Overall I think that if you found a clock in the East End that was telling time to within 10 mins of GMT you were doing well.”

So of course we can’t assume that a clock was fast or slow but we have to allow for it as the reasonable possibility.

So, for example, Long hears the 5.30 chime but it was actually 5.25 when she passed the man and the woman. Cadosch said that he got up at ‘around’ 5.15 and went into the yard 5 minutes later and heard the ‘no.’ But if he’d actually got up at 5.20 and went into the yard 5 minutes later (at 5.25) it lines up.

Five minutes is hardly a leap is it?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Cadoche certainly did not see Chapman in the yard of #29 and Long certainly did not see Chapman enter number 29.

Phillips certainly did see Chapman in the yard of #29.

As far as I can see, the only witness whose testimony casts doubt on Phillips' estimate of the time of death is Richardson.

I’ve asked the question before and no sensible, plausible explanation has been forthcoming. Cadosch, standing a very few feet from the fence hears something hitting against that fence after being alerted to a presence in that yard by the ‘No.’ What else could it have been? What innocent explanation could there have been for something moving around in that yard if the body was already lying there?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

We don’t need Long to have mistaken her time.


So, for example, Long hears the 5.30 chime but it was actually 5.25 when she passed the man and the woman. Cadosch said that he got up at ‘around’ 5.15 and went into the yard 5 minutes later and heard the ‘no.’ But if he’d actually got up at 5.20 and went into the yard 5 minutes later (at 5.25) it lines up.

Five minutes is hardly a leap is it?

You have not allowed for the time that it would have taken for the couple to finish their conversation and make their way into the yard.

The other thing is that the sound of the fall against the fence occured about 5 minutes later then the 'no' sound.

What would the Whitechapel murderer have been doing in the meantime?

[Trevor Marriott]

For Christ’s sake Trevor, you don’t even read your own quotes:

"As an aside, if the victim is a malnourished, slight, alcoholic female then rigor mortis may be less pronounced than might be expected, and so detection of rigor mortis in such an individual may indicate a longer time has elapsed since death"

Do you see it?

There in red?

In large lettering?


May

Yes if death was earlier that's the interpretation, read digest and understand

https://www.trevormariott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

You have not allowed for the time that it would have taken for the couple to finish their conversation and make their way into the yard.

The other thing is that the sound of the fall against the fence occured about 5 minutes later then the 'no' sound.

What would the Whitechapel murderer have been doing in the meantime?

wrong to ask him that question you can expect some mad brained explanation

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I’ve asked the question before and no sensible, plausible explanation has been forthcoming. Cadosch, standing a very few feet from the fence hears something hitting against that fence after being alerted to a presence in that yard by the ‘No.’ What else could it have been? What innocent explanation could there have been for something moving around in that yard if the body was already lying there?

Cadoche could not state with certainty that the 'no' came from number 29.

I cannot explain the falling noise against the fence, but by way of clarification, Cadoche stated:

It seemed as if something touched the fence suddenly.

[Trevor Marriott]

I’ve asked the question before and no sensible, plausible explanation has been forthcoming. Cadosch, standing a very few feet from the fence hears something hitting against that fence after being alerted to a presence in that yard by the ‘No.’ What else could it have been? What innocent explanation could there have been for something moving around in that yard if the body was already lying there?

He wasn't standing he was on his way to the toilet !!!!!!!!!!!!

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[A P Tomlinson]

Well, Herlock, that would require either Cadoche not to know how late it was getting when he needed to get to work, and the church clock to be similarly slow, or Long, who apparently was on a routine trip to the market, to have mistaken the quarter past chime for the half past chime, or the clock to be perhaps a quarter of an hour fast.

That assumes too that rigor mortis set in unusually quickly and that the body cooled remarkably quickly.

It also means that Scotland Yard should have been looking for a man of foreign appearance in his forties.

Point one. You think that LESS likely that a man using unreliable methods in a situation he was unused to, with extreme obstacles to his judgement, could have been wrong?

Point two. For the reasons the man using the unreliable methods ina situation he was unused to ne even more wrong we have a situation where a great deal of the stuff that keeps a body warm after death was on open display to the elements, about 16 to 18 feet of it being somewhere over her right shoulder... of COURSE it would get colder quicker.
The truly remarkable thing is that people are still treating Philips ToD as some sort of science based process.

He was relying on a system that was abandoned when it was seen to be useless, and improved on many times over the intervening 135 years and STILL Medical Examiners are not capable of determining an accurate time of death on site the way you would have us accept that Philips could.

And it's is NOT unusual for rigor to set in in the extremities earlier than 2 hours. It would have been just as usual/unusual for lividity to have NOT set in over two hours. If you want to insist rigor indicates 2 hours, where was the lividity? What were her calcium levels like? Did she have a cold at the time? What was her BP like? Her BMI? Any arterial hardening? How much of a temperature drop does the immediate removal of the vast quantities of blood and small intestine cause. If it's 1.5 degrees or more, that sets an estimated ToD back by about an hour... but Philips wouldn't know because he didn't use a bloody thermometre.
What was Philips circulation like? If he had poor circulation the body would have felt warmer, if he was in good health it would have felt colder. If he had a cold or infection she would probably have felt warmer. If he removed his glove immediately before testing her, she would have felt colder...
All these things are why it is a flawed, untrustworthy method of establishing an accurate time of death.
He doesn't note the temperature. He doesn't test it over time to measure its decline on a curve to improve his understanding.
He didn't know to do that.

Please, by all means explain to me how HE was better than 135 years of advancement in medical science, and was able to get it right. Overcoming all the obstacles I just pointed out.
His ToD remains a guess at best, and he admits as such to the coroner when he accepts and states taht the external, nvironmental circumstances weren't taken into account in his initial estimate.
If he wasn't taking the bloody weather into account for his estimate, he wasn't taking any of the more intricate details into account.

[Herlock Sholmes]

You have not allowed for the time that it would have taken for the couple to finish their conversation and make their way into the yard.

The other thing is that the sound of the fall against the fence occured about 5 minutes later then the 'no' sound.

What would the Whitechapel murderer have been doing in the meantime?

You can’t put a time on finishing a conversation though. They could have ended that conversation the second that Long passed them.

I don’t see the gap between the ‘no’ and the noise as much of an issue. It’s not a given that the ‘no’ was the beginning of the attack. It could just have been part of a sentence from one of the two where the one word was just emphasised and said slightly louder. But there’s only an issue if we assume that the noise was the body falling against the fence. That noise could have occurred after she was dead. It could have been the killer himself brushing against the fence. Perhaps changing his position to do what he did?