Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

John Richardson

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


  • . John Richardson When I was on the ''doorstep'' I saw that the padlock on the cellar door was in its proper place.


    OK so tell me, what does this mean? , im curious .

    .just dont be an as####ss about it
    '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 FISHY1118 View Post




      If Richardson is to be believed which sketch it to be belived more accurate ?
      None. The sketches are poor. The Clarke drawing however is accurate. We can check aspects of it by comparing it to photographs and we can see with our own eyes his attention to detail. All that he’s done is that he’s added the canopy and he’s done that by using the position of the two holes (so it’s not guesswork) which no one can suggest an alternative reason for.
      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

        ''Hallelujah''. Well said George , lets hope for a more peacful debate here on in .
        What do you mean by ‘peaceful?’ I assume that you mean that false statements shouldn’t be challenged for fear of ‘offending’ someone? Please don’t start down the old route of suggesting insults to distract the debate.
        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

          What do you mean by ‘peaceful?’ I assume that you mean that false statements shouldn’t be challenged for fear of ‘offending’ someone? Please don’t start down the old route of suggesting insults to distract the debate.
          Oh i wouldnt dream of it . Peaceful .
          '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

            None. The sketches are poor. The Clarke drawing however is accurate. We can check aspects of it by comparing it to photographs and we can see with our own eyes his attention to detail. All that he’s done is that he’s added the canopy and he’s done that by using the position of the two holes (so it’s not guesswork) which no one can suggest an alternative reason for.
            The evidence suggest otherwise . imo
            '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 FISHY1118 View Post

              The evidence suggest otherwise . imo
              How? The dimensions are clearly wrong. The Clarke drawing has the windows at the correct height compared to the door. The two sketches both add two features that we don't see any evidence for in any of the drawings. Look at the poor way the fences are drawn. Just look at the detail of the Clarke drawing compared to the two very rough sketches provided. The canopy would have had to have been below the window frame and low and behold we see two holes in exactly that position and Clarke situated the canopy using these. The two sketches are useless.
              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
                . John Richardson When I was on the ''doorstep'' I saw that the padlock on the cellar door was in its proper place.

                [Coroner] Did you sit on the top step? John Richardson ,No....... [so he must have stood on the doorstep]

                This evidence by Richardsons own account can only mean one thing , while he was on the doorstep he ''saw'' the lock. just as the sketch suggested he was able to.



                As Herlock mentioned, the proportions on that sketch are out. Looking at the sketch you could be forgiven for thinking there is a lot of space between the top of the cellar door and the window sill. In the photo I counted a maximum of nine courses of bricks. I found a reference to Victorian bricks being 2.5 to 3 inches thick. That would mean in reality that largish looking gap in sketch is only 69 cm. That is a maximum though because the holes show that canopy attached below the sill by about three courses (or 23 cm) so the gap was more like 46 cm. I very much doubt he could have seen the lock from standing on the steps.
                Attached Files

                Comment


                • Originally posted by GBinOz View Post

                  Hi Jon,

                  James Mason - IMDb
                  https://www.imdb.com › name

                  James Mason, Actor: Lolita. James Mason was born in Huddersfield and had a film career spanning over 50 years during which he appeared in over 100 films in ...
                  Height: 5' 11" (1.81 m)

                  I'm 5' 11" and my boot measures 12". I'll try to get a screen dump from the video to show you what I see.

                  Best regards, George
                  I was 6ft tall when I was younger, but James Mason at Hanbury St. is not a young man.
                  Lets not go down pointless avenue's, the photo snip I posted shows his boot overhanging that middle step.
                  Isn't that the point?
                  Regards, Jon S.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                    How? The dimensions are clearly wrong. The Clarke drawing has the windows at the correct height compared to the door. The two sketches both add two features that we don't see any evidence for in any of the drawings. Look at the poor way the fences are drawn. Just look at the detail of the Clarke drawing compared to the two very rough sketches provided. The canopy would have had to have been below the window frame and low and behold we see two holes in exactly that position and Clarke situated the canopy using these. The two sketches are useless.
                    How? Because i made the suggestion based on Richardsons evidence he himself provided .


                    John Richardson When I was on the ''doorstep'' I saw that the padlock on the cellar door was in its proper place.

                    I was merely pointing out that one sketch, the one that was done at the scene at the time of the murder was more accurate than the other. Which by the way was used to claim Richardson couldnt have seen the lock according to the clarke drawing .

                    In the end, does it really matter which one ? if Richardson is to be believed, he saw the lock no matter which drawing or /sketch we chose. Would that be a fair assumption based on the evidence at hand . ?
                    '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 Aethelwulf View Post

                      As Herlock mentioned, the proportions on that sketch are out. Looking at the sketch you could be forgiven for thinking there is a lot of space between the top of the cellar door and the window sill. In the photo I counted a maximum of nine courses of bricks. I found a reference to Victorian bricks being 2.5 to 3 inches thick. That would mean in reality that largish looking gap in sketch is only 69 cm. That is a maximum though because the holes show that canopy attached below the sill by about three courses (or 23 cm) so the gap was more like 46 cm. I very much doubt he could have seen the lock from standing on the steps.

                      . John Richardson When I was on the ''doorstep'' I saw that the padlock on the cellar door was in its proper place.

                      Can then explain this for me ?

                      Because i know what a door step is and he wasnt sitting on it, so how did he see the lock from that position ? whatever canopy was there.
                      '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
                        Click image for larger version

Name:	Step1b.jpg
Views:	91
Size:	7.8 KB
ID:	791207 Click image for larger version

Name:	Step2b.jpg
Views:	93
Size:	8.0 KB
ID:	791206
                        Photoshopped.
                        It's the same right foot overhanging, I see you have his left foot in the air. How can we compare a foot hovering above a step?
                        Regards, Jon S.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                          How? The dimensions are clearly wrong. The Clarke drawing has the windows at the correct height compared to the door. The two sketches both add two features that we don't see any evidence for in any of the drawings. Look at the poor way the fences are drawn. Just look at the detail of the Clarke drawing compared to the two very rough sketches provided. The canopy would have had to have been below the window frame and low and behold we see two holes in exactly that position and Clarke situated the canopy using these. The two sketches are useless.



                          Echo, 20 September 1888

                          A further consultation of the detectives engaged in the case was held this morning, and an officer again visited the back-yard of No. 29, Hanbury-street, and made a careful inspection of the palings leading from that house to No. 27, where resides the young man Cadosh, who stated at the inquest that he heard sounds proceed from the spot where the body lay at a quarter-past five on the morning of the murder. An examination of the fence shows that immediately over the place in the yard there is an aperture in the palings by which the dead body could have been plainly visible, while anyone moving in the yard might easily have been seen.14
                          The backyard of 29 Hanbury Street from a contemporary newspaper illustation, showing the precarious nature of the fence
                          '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 FISHY1118 View Post
                            . John Richardson When I was on the ''doorstep'' I saw that the padlock on the cellar door was in its proper place.


                            OK so tell me, what does this mean? , im curious .

                            .just dont be an as####ss about it
                            Fishy.

                            This is what we call 'selective editing'.
                            The answer is on that same page, but you pretend it is not there in the hope no-one else looks for it.

                            Daily Telegraph, 13 Nov.

                            Richardson was asked, "Did you go into the yard?"

                            To which he replied: "No, the yard door was shut. I opened it and sat on the doorstep,....."

                            Richardson cont. "...When I was on the doorstep I saw that the padlock on the cellar door was in its proper place."


                            What did he mean by "doorstep"?
                            The very next line that you choose not to show gave you that answer.


                            Did you sit on the top step? - "No, on the middle step; my feet were on the flags of the yard".


                            Conclusion, you know very well that Richardson claimed to see the padlock while sitting on the middle step.
                            Regards, Jon S.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                              It's the same right foot overhanging, I see you have his left foot in the air. How can we compare a foot hovering above a step?
                              Don't you see the space behind his right heel?
                              “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


                                . John Richardson When I was on the ''doorstep'' I saw that the padlock on the cellar door was in its proper place.

                                Can then explain this for me ?

                                Because i know what a door step is and he wasnt sitting on it, so how did he see the lock from that position ? whatever canopy was there.
                                When did the words “on the doorstep’” mean “stood on the doorstep?” He sat “on the doorstep.” It’s very simple.
                                Regards

                                Sir Herlock Sholmes

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

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X