Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

John Richardson

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

  • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    Were not going to agree George. I’ll certainly admit to my miscalculation but whatever the gap between his knees and the door he couldn’t and didn’t miss that body. Nothing will persuade me of this imo baseless suggestion. He didn’t lie, he wasn’t hiding anything, he wasn’t in cahoots with Cadosch. It’s all very simple. Three witness have Chapman alive at 4.45. She was.
    Hi Herlock,

    OK, I can accept you have those opinions and that we disagree. I would still appreciate if you could supply me with a link to the "Fisherman method" please. By the way, and without raising a further matter for disagreement, when I mentioned an accomplice I was thinking of James Hardiman, not Cadosch.

    Cheers, George
    “Contrariwise,” continued Tweedledee, “if it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be but as it isn’t, it ain’t. That’s logic.”

    “Oh, you can't help that,” said the Cat: “we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.” “How do you know I'm mad?” said Alice. “You must be,” said the Cat, or you wouldn't have come here.”

    Comment


    • Originally posted by GBinOz View Post


      I think Abby said it best, though he probably meant the opposite, that Richardson needed to add the step sitting to make it certain that he couldn't have missed the body.

      Cheers, George
      1. And placed himself alone at the scene with a knife.
      2. And risked being found out a liar if the killer had been caught.
      3. And completely ignored the other far better and safer ways that he could have done these.

      I have to admit that I’m struggling with this position George.

      Why didn’t he simply say “I went to the outside loo and as I came back to the door (which was now closed) I could see that there was no body.”

      It’s so, so simple George. A complete no brainier. But you’re suggesting that all that he could come up with, at a knife murder crime scene, was a knife story!?
      Regards

      Sir Herlock Sholmes

      “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Doctored Whatsit View Post

        Hi Fishy,

        If we are going to consider Chandler's inquest testimony, then I think we must consider all of it, not part of it. Chandler told the inquest that Richardson had also said that he was sure that the body was not in the yard. How did Richardson know this? Well, Chandler didn't ask him, so we had to wait to find out, and now we know, don't we? The omission at the time was down to Chandler, not Richardson. Richardson was not being formally interviewed, and he clearly wasn't asked to provide details of everything that had happened.

        Swanson made it crystal clear that Richardson was closely questioned, "there was not a shred of evidence,suspicion could not rest upon him, although the police specially directed their attention to him." We don't have details of the police checks, but confirming that Richardson would have been able to see the body in accordance with his account seems to have been a necessity. Also checking his statement that he had to finish the boot leather cutting at the market also seems to have been required. If they didn't do these two things, I can't imagine what "specially directed" police action there could have been!
        It was the coroner that asked this.... [Coroner] Did he say that he was sure the woman was not there at that time? - Yes.

        As Richardson did not tell /mention the boot incident to Chandler , its possible his meant that when he opened the door to check the lock the vision he had of the yard from his own body position on the step and the angle of the door which would have blocked chapmans body .

        .
        'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

          1. And placed himself alone at the scene with a knife.
          2. And risked being found out a liar if the killer had been caught.
          3. And completely ignored the other far better and safer ways that he could have done these.

          I have to admit that I’m struggling with this position George.

          Why didn’t he simply say “I went to the outside loo and as I came back to the door (which was now closed) I could see that there was no body.”

          It’s so, so simple George. A complete no brainier. But you’re suggesting that all that he could come up with, at a knife murder crime scene, was a knife story!?
          Hey, I thought we had agreed to disagree? He could have come up with any number of stories, but he came up with an original and the augmented step/boot story. There it is, we're stuck with it.

          Cheers, George
          “Contrariwise,” continued Tweedledee, “if it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be but as it isn’t, it ain’t. That’s logic.”

          “Oh, you can't help that,” said the Cat: “we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.” “How do you know I'm mad?” said Alice. “You must be,” said the Cat, or you wouldn't have come here.”

          Comment


          • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

            Day 3, Thursday, September 13, 1888
            (The Daily Telegraph, Friday, September 14, 1888, Page 3)



            Yes, but he also gave a interview to a reporter [i think george posted it ] where he said the same thing as he did to Chandler on the morning of the murder that didnt involve the boot cutting.
            I could only find two interviews, in the Echo & The Star, both likely taken from an agency as the wording was mostly the same.

            ALL my point being was that he didnt say it at 6.45 to Chandler on the morning, or later in the day later when interviewed . Why the delay ? A bit strange i should think.
            What delay?
            Chandler was busy, he arrived about 6:15, sent for the doctor & an ambulance. Cleared the yard & passage, supervised the removal of the body, gathered evidence from the yard, and left to arrive at the mortuary by 7:00, or thereabouts.
            He managed to fit in a few words with Richardson around 6:45, he didn't have time to take a formal statement. Richardson gave a brief account of himself and his reason for being there. The fact he didn't give every detail is not at all surprising.

            Fishy, you're creating a mystery where none exists. All he had to say was that he did go down the steps into the yard, there's no-one to contest that. There would then be no doubt that he would have seen the body, had it been there.
            Regards, Jon S.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

              I could only find two interviews, in the Echo & The Star, both likely taken from an agency as the wording was mostly the same.



              What delay?
              Chandler was busy, he arrived about 6:15, sent for the doctor & an ambulance. Cleared the yard & passage, supervised the removal of the body, gathered evidence from the yard, and left to arrive at the mortuary by 7:00, or thereabouts.
              He managed to fit in a few words with Richardson around 6:45, he didn't have time to take a formal statement. Richardson gave a brief account of himself and his reason for being there. The fact he didn't give every detail is not at all surprising.

              Fishy, you're creating a mystery where none exists. All he had to say was that he did go down the steps into the yard, there's no-one to contest that. There would then be no doubt that he would have seen the body, had it been there.


              I was talking about the delay between the time Richardson spoke with Chandler at 6.45 on the morning and when he gave a statement to the press , with out mentioning the boot story .

              Wick, i dont have to create any mystery, only the facts as i see them .

              There indeed is enough evidence that exist from that which we all share to make up our oun minds. As previously suggested, the degree of uncertainty and the ambiguous nature of the inquest testimony of both Richardson and Chandler in no way leans towards one being more believable /true /correct /right than the other . You can take that to the bank .
              'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

              Comment


              • Originally posted by GBinOz View Post

                Hey, I thought we had agreed to disagree? He could have come up with any number of stories, but he came up with an original and the augmented step/boot story. There it is, we're stuck with it.

                Cheers, George
                I think we’ll have to George.
                Regards

                Sir Herlock Sholmes

                “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

                Comment


                • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post



                  I was talking about the delay between the time Richardson spoke with Chandler at 6.45 on the morning and when he gave a statement to the press , with out mentioning the boot story .

                  Wick, i dont have to create any mystery, only the facts as i see them .

                  There indeed is enough evidence that exist from that which we all share to make up our oun minds. As previously suggested, the degree of uncertainty and the ambiguous nature of the inquest testimony of both Richardson and Chandler in no way leans towards one being more believable /true /correct /right than the other . You can take that to the bank .
                  How would you explain the news stories that Joshua posted that did mention the sitting on the steps? They could only have got that from Richardson himself. Therefore as there were newspaper stories at the same time that omit this we surely can believe that Richardson gave different stories at different interviews. The stories where the steps are omitted were surely a result of Press error. I posted a few other examples of press error too. One from as late as the 10th that said that John Davis ‘crossed the yard.’ We don’t believe that to have been the case so why can’t the examples of omitted the sitting on the steps have been Press error too?
                  Regards

                  Sir Herlock Sholmes

                  “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                    How would you explain the news stories that Joshua posted that did mention the sitting on the steps? They could only have got that from Richardson himself. Therefore as there were newspaper stories at the same time that omit this we surely can believe that Richardson gave different stories at different interviews. The stories where the steps are omitted were surely a result of Press error. I posted a few other examples of press error too. One from as late as the 10th that said that John Davis ‘crossed the yard.’ We don’t believe that to have been the case so why can’t the examples of omitted the sitting on the steps have been Press error too?
                    What I cant understand is why everyone is arguing about the time of death, It changes nothing about the murder whether it was early or late and it has no bearing on any suspect because at this time there is no suspect.

                    www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

                      hi mac
                      my last post made me ponder, why would richardson, if the killer, admit about having a knife. and lo and behold i then read your post.

                      if he was the killer, and thought someone like cadoshe might have seen him with a knife, then he has the ready made answer.

                      kind of like why would hutch later add he stood by marys window..worried someone saw him there.

                      classic guilty behavior 101. changing your story to account for if a witness saw you there.
                      Hi Abby, I usually just read threads without logging in because I feel observing others and their logic process is invaluable because it's a different POV. This thread has a few people scratching their head as to certain things.

                      1. Why bring up the knife and sitting with his feet on the yard?
                      2. How could Richardson see the padlock from the top step?
                      3. Was the frame recessed or where on the door was the padlock?

                      I'm glad I could give you a different perspective on #1.

                      On #2 have you seen how low the canopy was in actuality? The illustrations do it no justice and makes it a lot taller than it really is. The actual photo shows that the holes where the supports went were very low in relation to the ground. You would practically have to crawl underneath and if not paying attention would run right into it slightly above your xiphoid process. I also remember someone questioning if those holes were really for the canopy after 70 odd years lol. Well yeah, it's obvious. That canopy was probably erected because that stairwell was being flooded and holes were just crudely knocked into the wall after the building was already completed.

                      And #3 I feel is mental clutter, imo the canopy was far too low to see unless squatting from the second step and that is iffy. He does everything he can to keep himself out of the yard yet says his feet were on the flagstones which is the yard.

                      And #4, how do you guys put quotes underneath your posts? Is it the subscript button? Asking for a friend. :-)Click image for larger version

Name:	backyard 29 Hanbury.jpg
Views:	92
Size:	129.7 KB
ID:	790334

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by The Macdonald Triad View Post

                        Hi Abby, I usually just read threads without logging in because I feel observing others and their logic process is invaluable because it's a different POV. This thread has a few people scratching their head as to certain things.

                        1. Why bring up the knife and sitting with his feet on the yard?
                        2. How could Richardson see the padlock from the top step?
                        3. Was the frame recessed or where on the door was the padlock?

                        I'm glad I could give you a different perspective on #1.

                        On #2 have you seen how low the canopy was in actuality? The illustrations do it no justice and makes it a lot taller than it really is. The actual photo shows that the holes where the supports went were very low in relation to the ground. You would practically have to crawl underneath and if not paying attention would run right into it slightly above your xiphoid process. I also remember someone questioning if those holes were really for the canopy after 70 odd years lol. Well yeah, it's obvious. That canopy was probably erected because that stairwell was being flooded and holes were just crudely knocked into the wall after the building was already completed.

                        And #3 I feel is mental clutter, imo the canopy was far too low to see unless squatting from the second step and that is iffy. He does everything he can to keep himself out of the yard yet says his feet were on the flagstones which is the yard.

                        And #4, how do you guys put quotes underneath your posts? Is it the subscript button? Asking for a friend. :-)Click image for larger version  Name:	backyard 29 Hanbury.jpg Views:	0 Size:	129.7 KB ID:	790334
                        Good post.

                        To put quotes in like this, click on the inverted commas icon. The quote brackets will appear where you’ve left the curser. Just widen them out and cut and paste your post inside.
                        My apologies if there was too much obvious info there. I shouldn’t assume that everyone is as useless with tech as I am.
                        Regards

                        Sir Herlock Sholmes

                        “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                          Good post.



                          My apologies if there was too much obvious info there. I shouldn’t assume that everyone is as useless with tech as I am.
                          Hi Herlock, that's not what I meant as you can tell I'm requoting posts ok. I mean what's after the post, almost like a signature. Yours for example says "Regards Herlock Sholmes" every time. The user GBinOz for example has something about Tweedledee (does my head in lol) every time. Like a signature.

                          Comment


                          • Going off the photos, Richardson only misses Annie's body in the event he is lying. 'Gone as far as the top step and opened the door slightly but enough to see the cellar.

                            I'm just wondering what Richardson stood to gain from lying.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by The Macdonald Triad View Post

                              Hi Herlock, that's not what I meant as you can tell I'm requoting posts ok. I mean what's after the post, almost like a signature. Yours for example says "Regards Herlock Sholmes" every time. The user GBinOz for example has something about Tweedledee (does my head in lol) every time. Like a signature.
                              Ahhh, sorry. Go to your User Profile, click Edit Settings, click Account at the top then scroll down to Edit My Signature.
                              Regards

                              Sir Herlock Sholmes

                              “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

                              Comment


                              • Something to consider. The bottom edge of the door was not flush to the ground but three steps high. Or two feet approximately. Even if Richardson opened the door at least 45 degrees and it stayed butted up against his left side I don't think he'd even get the chance to turn right as that two foot drop would diminish any defilade considerably.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X