John Richardson

[Fleetwood Mac]

and that he felt he was was therefore not qualified to give an estimate which was reliable.

Which is not supported by Dr Phillips' statement at the inquest.

Dr Phillips stated: "at least two hours".

In the English language, "at least" means a minimum and the least time possible.

It follows Dr Phillips is telling us that in his view, two hours is the least time possible.

This is an unequivocal statement and tells the reader that Dr Phillips felt absolutely confident and qualified.

[Herlock Sholmes]

What does that tell you herlock, the smart ones new it loaded , why dont you ask george what he thought about your trick poll, i noticed you didnt respond to his post about it huh , no of course not . You fed peanuts and the monkeys came a running.

For someone who is always bleating about insults well done for calling all those that took part in the poll monkeys. Nice.

It was so pleasing to Fisherman post this week i guess that modern day medical expert argument now extends both ways. He certainly did you on that .

Fisherman’s post has been refuted and dismissed by reason and honesty.

All your little digs about trump comparions and minority nonsense and suggestion about not understanding the english language. There are just smoke and mirrors, no doubt for your own benifit . So continue with you silly little diversions, but in the end we both know what the evidence tells us either way. You just refuse to admit , thats all .

As if anything that you say is worth paying attention to.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Another tick in the Fisherman box , thanks for that Mac. He sure did a number on some this week.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Another tick in the Fisherman box , thanks for that Mac. He sure did a number on some this week.

[Herlock Sholmes]

This caveat nonsense is a perfect demonstration of why debates on this site will never come close to advancing the subject. If people can't agree on something so unbelievably straightforward, what chance with anything else even slightly more complicated?

Also, I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt once, but two misspellings in a row of 'meant' (ment) and other mistakes (new for knew) undermine your credibility when debating the correct use of English.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Maybe "the minority" in the Socialist world you've created for yourself. I've been watching you twist facts for a couple of weeks now, you should work for the lamestream media.

Fake news! Fake news! If you want to believe the biggest moron and liar that was ever voted into public office that’s up to you. To the rest of the world he’s a clown and a pathetic babyish lying one at that.

Looks like you’re another Fishy

[Doctored Whatsit]

Which is not supported by Dr Phillips' statement at the inquest.

Dr Phillips stated: "at least two hours".

In the English language, "at least" means a minimum and the least time possible.

It follows Dr Phillips is telling us that in his view, two hours is the least time possible.

This is an unequivocal statement and tells the reader that Dr Phillips felt absolutely confident and qualified.

If you read what I wrote, you will find I was quoting George, and pursuing his apparent view. George suggested that the extent of the mutilations and their effect might well have been outside of Phillips' experience. Take it up with him.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Which is not supported by Dr Phillips' statement at the inquest.

Dr Phillips stated: "at least two hours".

In the English language, "at least" means a minimum and the least time possible.

It follows Dr Phillips is telling us that in his view, two hours is the least time possible.

This is an unequivocal statement and tells the reader that Dr Phillips felt absolutely confident and qualified.

He said BUT…..

He didn’t need to say anything after ‘two hours and probably more..’ but he did didn’t he. He added a BUT.

And your dishonest interpretation is that he meant ‘two hours and probably more BUT due to the conditions it was two hours or probably more…’

BUT means that there’s an exception. Learn to read. Then again, I’m sure you understand this perfectly well but just can’t admit what everyone can see.

[Herlock Sholmes]

For anyone willing to discuss this in a reasonable manner:

According to the Daily Telegraph, which Casebook has gone with for the site, Dr Phillips stated:

The body was cold, except that there was a certain remaining heat, under the intestines, in the body.

This quite clearly means that the only warmth Dr Phillips detected in the body, was under the intestines.

This is what Fisherman relayed to Professor Thilbin.

Thoughts?

This quite clearly means that the only warmth Dr Phillips detected in the body, was under the intestines.

Ah, yes! That's finally correct - the only warmth Dr Phillips detected in the body was under the intestines.

But that's not what Fisherman relayed to Professor Thilbin because, by telling him that Dr Phillips had established that the surface of the body was "all cold", he was giving him the impression that Dr Phillips had felt "all" of the surface of the body.

Once you change it to the correct evidence, there is a reasonable interpretation that Dr Phillips was saying that he felt the body (or some part of it) and it felt cold but he also felt under the intestines and detected heat there.

In other words, he wasn't necessarily saying that he had established that the only remaining body heat was under the intestines, simply that this was all he had detected during his examination at the scene, about which we don't know the details of what he actually touched.

If you assume that he felt every single part of the body, you will interpret the doctor's opinion differently from if you think he only felt, say, just the face and hands and under the intestines.

It should have been for the professor to make his own interpretation of what Dr Phillips was saying based on his reported testimony. It wasn't for Fisherman to offer his own biased interpretation and thus mislead the expert.

Furthermore, while I don't fully understand Fisherman's argument, he appears to be saying that Thiblin's opinion is based on the fact that Dr Phillips had established that the heat under the intestines was the only heat remaining INSIDE the body, so that the doctor must have also felt everything inside the body.

We've always known that Dr Phillips said that the body was cold and that there was heat under the intestines. More importantly, Dr Phillips knew it! Using that exact information, he estimated (on the basis of his knowledge and experience of dead bodies) that the body had been dead at least two hours and probably more when he examined the body at 6.30am. But he qualified that opinion by saying that, in the particular circumstances of the case, due to the cool weather and loss of blood, he might have got it wrong. So what has Thiblin added to our knowledge of the case? I personally have no idea.

The only question the professor should have been asked is: "Are the circumstances of the case as described by Dr Phillips inconsistent with Annie Chapman having been murdered at 5.30am". That is literally the only question he should have been asked. I have no idea why he wasn't asked it, or rather I do know why he wasn't asked it by Fisherman: because he is scared of the answer.

[Fleetwood Mac]

If you read what I wrote, you will find I was quoting George, and pursuing his apparent view. George suggested that the extent of the mutilations and their effect might well have been outside of Phillips' experience. Take it up with him.

Which is disingenuous.

You drew that conclusion from George's comments. Revisit your own post 2280.

[Fleetwood Mac]

This quite clearly means that the only warmth Dr Phillips detected in the body, was under the intestines.

Ah, yes! That's finally correct - the only warmth Dr Phillips detected in the body was under the intestines.

But that's not what Fisherman relayed to Professor Thilbin because, by telling him that Dr Phillips had established that the surface of the body was "all cold", he was giving him the impression that Dr Phillips had felt "all" of the surface of the body.

I've decided not to reply to this but I do want to highlight this opening from which you go on to build a case.

[Herlock Sholmes]

This caveat nonsense is a perfect demonstration of why debates on this site will never come close to advancing the subject. If people can't agree on something so unbelievably straightforward, what chance with anything else even slightly more complicated?
.

And this is the crux of the issues that we face. It’s a sad state of affairs when something can be stated which should utterly beyond argument and yet we get posters tying themselves up in knots to defend an indefensible position. Some are still resistant the fact that TOD estimation, which is fraught with the possibility of error even in the 21st century, was somehow more accurate or more reliable 134 years ago! This is what we need to focus on…..why would anyone question this fact? How many experts would be required before it sunk in? The fact that some still find the need to question this can only, and I really do mean only, be down to bias and to the fact that they desperately want this to be the case when it’s not. It’s simply impossible that intelligent, educated people, all laymen, feel for some reason that they can dismiss the worlds experts. That the standard textbooks on the subject should be torn up or burnt because Fred Bloggs on Casebook.Org doesn’t believe them! People who believe that a Victorian Doctor could simply lay his hand on a corpse and pronounce with authority a 2 hour minimum TOD when experts with thermometers can’t be that accurate today. We’ve left ‘preposterous’ kicking its heels in the starting gate on this point.

Its way, way past time that some posters made a decision…….do they want to keep arguing forever in the non-existent hope that they might ‘win’ or do they want to show the integrity required to admit when they are wrong. And on this point they are wrong. Not possibly wrong but definitely, without a solitary shadow of a doubt wrong.

Those of us who aren’t resistant to facts and truth have long accepted that nothing proves that Phillips was wrong or that he couldn’t on occasion get a TOD correct but there was nothing exact about this. But those on the other side accept no such even-handedness. No they keep attempting to skew the evidence to try and push it towards ‘Phillips was probably correct.’ Even then it wouldn’t eliminate the witnesses but on they press with these embarrassing offences to logic, reason, evidence and the English language.

Hats off to the genuine posters on here who can see through this blatant chicanery.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I've decided not to reply to this but I do want to highlight this opening from which you go on to build a case.

Thank you, that's very kind of you

[Fleetwood Mac]

Fake news! Fake news! If you want to believe the biggest moron and liar that was ever voted into public office that’s up to you. To the rest of the world he’s a clown and a pathetic babyish lying one at that.

:

Had someone shown me this post and asked me who posted this, you would have been the first person to spring to mind.

You believe Donald Trump occupies minds around the world. Allow me to enlighten you and give you the good news, where I come from nobody gives the first shite about Donald Trump.

I think it's a fair bet you spend an inordinate amount of time on politics message boards arguing with strangers about Donald Trump. Consider that for a moment and the utter futility of it.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Had someone shown me this post and asked me who posted this, you would have been the first person to spring to mind.

You believe Donald Trump occupies minds around the world. Allow me to enlighten you and give you the good news, where I come from nobody gives the first shite about Donald Trump.

I think it's a fair bet you spend an inordinate amount of time on politics message boards arguing with strangers about Donald Trump. Consider that for a moment and the utter futility of it.

Wrong - but you’re used to that.

1. Never been on a political message board in my life.

2. Only ever been a member of 3 Forums (including this one and JTRForums)

3. Trump doesn’t interest me. I was responding to a post.

So another to add to your growing collection.