John Richardson

[FISHY1118]

I agree. My only ‘but’ is that some posters do keep trying to show that Phillips minimum estimate should be regarded as correct. As you say on purely medical evidence she could have been killed at an earlier TOD (which you favour for reasons other than Phillips) or a later one (which I favour for reasons other than Phillips)

Trevor can you please tell me on what "other medical evidence" that which you favour other than Phillips is your belief for an earlier t.od. of Annie chapman.

I'm just curious, from the above if I'm reading it right, we can suggest a earlier t.od. purely on medical evidence, just as long as we don't say that evidence came from Dr Phillips?

I'm sure you can guess what my next point might be regarding the witnesses?

[harry]

Phillips was a witness,but in his case it was expert evidence that was given,or if you prefer expert opinion.It would be the same today.
There is a difference between Knowledge and skill.One can be knowledgable but not skillfull,and the opposite occurs.In the case of Phillips,both ,according to some posters were lacking.
One arguement is that in 1888 there wasn't the knowledge that is available today.On that basis,where did the skills and knowledge to build the great cathedrals of Europe come from.Where did the knowledge and skills to defeat the likes of Yellow fever,come from?
Surgeons like Phillip,he also had a private practice,saved countless lives,but it seems did not have the skill or knowledge to tell how long a person had been dead.Only modern knowledge can do that it appears.

[FISHY1118]

Phillips was a witness,but in his case it was expert evidence that was given,or if you prefer expert opinion.It would be the same today.
There is a difference between Knowledge and skill.One can be knowledgable but not skillfull,and the opposite occurs.In the case of Phillips,both ,according to some posters were lacking.
One arguement is that in 1888 there wasn't the knowledge that is available today.On that basis,where did the skills and knowledge to build the great cathedrals of Europe come from.Where did the knowledge and skills to defeat the likes of Yellow fever,come from?
Surgeons like Phillip,he also had a private practice,saved countless lives,but it seems did not have the skill or knowledge to tell how long a person had been dead.Only modern knowledge can do that it appears.

Very interesting post Harry. I tend to agree .

[GBinOz]

In terms of the series of murders, I reckon the risk can only be quantified when assessed against his other options. I don't think he was flush with options, and I'd be interested to hear a realistic low-risk option.

In the event Cadosh heard a murder taking place, then to my mind this is by far the greatest risk taken. The evidence we have from the other murders, is that when disturbed at the Liz Stride crime scene he left before mutilating and before being heard. 'Possibly disturbed at the Polly Nichols crime scene and left when someone approached and wasn't heard. The other crime scenes were chosen with more privacy.

Furthermore, assuming the voice heard saying 'no' was Annie's, and I think this is the consensus among those who support the 5.30am TOD, then this is not someone incapacitated. 'Possibly capable of screaming. And, the WM would have known someone was in earshot, a few yards away, with only a 5ft whatever fence in the way, when it was light enough to catch him red-handed and see his face.

I'd say no other crime scene displays this recklessness to anywhere near the same degree and it would be highly unusual for a murder to take place in that circumstance.

Hi FM,

Thank you. A discussion post instead of an "I'm right, you're wrong - declare victory, again" post.

Here is what Cadosch originally told the press.
"Albert Cadosch, who lodges next door, had occasion to go into the adjoining yard at the back at 5.25, and states that he heard a conversation on the other side of the palings, as if between two people. He caught the word “No,” and fancied he subsequently heard a slight scuffle, with the noise of a falling against the palings, but thinking that his neighbours might probably be out in the yard, he took no further notice and went to his work".

It sounds exactly like what someone thinks they should have heard after finding out there had been a murder next door. Come the inquest, and Cadosch has seen Richardson being roasted by the coroner and police, and his story had changed. Now, instead of one event, there are two events separated by three or four minutes. First event: "As I returned towards the back door I heard a voice say "No" just as I was going through the door". Just as he was going through the door, with the door closing behind him. Not an optimum position to be determining from which direction the word emanated. In the other murders Jack decided by this time that it was was time to depart, so he could have just cut Annie's throat and fled, as he did with Stride. But no. The potential witness reappears on his way to to toilet and back. Two more times within feet of Jack, and only a paling fence between. Wouldn't Jack have had an "Uh oh" moment?
Now, according to Cadosch, "It seemed as if something touched the fence suddenly". What happened to the shuffle and the scuffle and the "fall" against the palings? And still Jack persists?
IMO the story it is just not believable and it doesn't fit Jack's MO.

The other thing I find puzzling is the conversation allegedly heard by Long. "Will you", "Yes". If this was Annie propositioning a customer, was he unaware of the range of services on offer, or the likelihood of acceptance?

Cheers, George

[GBinOz]

Phillips was a witness,but in his case it was expert evidence that was given,or if you prefer expert opinion.It would be the same today.
There is a difference between Knowledge and skill.One can be knowledgable but not skillfull,and the opposite occurs.In the case of Phillips,both ,according to some posters were lacking.
One arguement is that in 1888 there wasn't the knowledge that is available today.On that basis,where did the skills and knowledge to build the great cathedrals of Europe come from.Where did the knowledge and skills to defeat the likes of Yellow fever,come from?
Surgeons like Phillip,he also had a private practice,saved countless lives,but it seems did not have the skill or knowledge to tell how long a person had been dead.Only modern knowledge can do that it appears.

Good points harry. The Colossi of Abu Sambal were put in place in one piece, a task that couldn't be repeated when they were moved for the dam 3000 years later.

Cheers, George

[FISHY1118]

Good points harry. The Colossi of Abu Sambal were put in place in one piece, a task that couldn't be repeated when they were moved for the dam 3000 years later.

Cheers, George

Fascinating example George , i wonder if there are more like this that posters would like to add to. Just for interest sake .

[DJA]

Has it's own graffito and all

[drstrange169]

>>... thiblin agreed with Phillips evidence and assessment of 2 hour probably more explaining why <<

Actually that's not true.

According to Christer's account, he told Professor Thiblin,

"I pointed out to him that Dr Phillips felt for warmth in the abdominal cavity, under the intestines, and discerned some little warmth there"

But that was incorrect information. (Incorrect information, in incorrect information out). Phillips's actual quote was,

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

How much is "a certain remaining heat"?

What modern forensic department would accept that as an accurate measurement good enough to base a a solid opinion on?
I realise some may call that nitpicking, but I can assure you it would not get through any present day courtroom unchallenged. Christer made a judgement on what Phillips meant and supplied Thiblin with corrupted information.

Thiblin's answer, quite rightly, allows for a longer time, but does not commit to it or dismiss an earlier time.

"If Phillips felt a clear difference between surface and core, then it speaks for the option of a PMI of 3-4 hours instead of one of 1 hour only.

As to Thiblin explaining his opinion, he never did, in so far as Mrs Chapman's case is concerned.

He just agreed that feeling for internal body heat was better than feeling cold skin. He then explained the "rule of thumb" about the rate a body losses temperature after death. That "rule of thumb" he referred to is the heat dissipation from a body that has no blood loss or disembowelment. What we really want an expert to tell us is how the injuries Mrs Chapman sustained would affect body heat loss.


>>So a modern day doctor supported that evidence ,as was what fisherman showed in his post<<

Because he was give selected information, some of which was Christer's personal interpretation of Phillips actual testimony, Thiblin's opinion must be treated with great care. I refer again to the disastrous comments by the three experts in the documentary I posted a link to earlier, as to how experts can give misinformation if they are not fully conversant with all the facts of the case.

Yes, it does offer some support to Phillips's t.o.d, but is most definitely isn't an agreement and it does not give us an answer.

[drstrange169]

>>Here is what Cadosch originally told the press.
"Albert Cadosch, who lodges next door, had occasion to go into the adjoining yard at the back at 5.25, and states that he heard a conversation on the other side of the palings, as if between two people. He caught the word “No,” and fancied he subsequently heard a slight scuffle, with the noise of a falling against the palings, but thinking that his neighbours might probably be out in the yard, he took no further notice and went to his work".<<

There isn't a direct quote, apart from the word "no" in that whole paragraph, so it isn't what Cadosch told the press, it's what the press wrote about Cadosch. Which is a very different thing. It maybe accurate or it may have been a beefed up story by the reporter to sell to his editor.


>>Come the inquest, and Cadosch has seen Richardson being roasted by the coroner... <<

Witnesses aren't allowed to watch other witnesses for that very reason. They wait in another room to be called.


>>The other thing I find puzzling is the conversation allegedly heard by Long. "Will you", "Yes". If this was Annie propositioning a customer, was he unaware of the range of services on offer, or the likelihood of acceptance?<<

Not that I'm an expert in these things, but since it was illegal, details are discussed in private not in public surely?

[GBinOz]

Fascinating example George , i wonder if there are more like this that posters would like to add to. Just for interest sake .

Eratosthenes, 2,200 years ago, calculated the polar diameter of the earth to be 7,850 miles-only 50 miles short of the true polar diameter. He did this using only a well shaft, a wooden staff and a man employed to pace a distance. Crude methods, remarkable result.

Cheers, George

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor can you please tell me on what "other medical evidence" that which you favour other than Phillips is your belief for an earlier t.od. of Annie chapman.

I'm just curious, from the above if I'm reading it right, we can suggest a earlier t.od. purely on medical evidence, just as long as we don't say that evidence came from Dr Phillips?

I'm sure you can guess what my next point might be regarding the witnesses?

In my opinion there is no other primary medical evidence which supports an earlier or later time of death to that end I have again contacted Dr Biggs who is a modern day forensic patholgist and below is his comments on establishing and accurate TOD

"It is not possible to be accurate when it comes to estimating time of death, as there are simply too many variables. Even if core body temperature and ambient temperature had been objectively measured at the time, any calculations would still give an estimation that would necessarily spread far wider than the “two hours or more ago” estimate quoted. In other words, a more “accurate” estimation ends up being less precise (i.e. saying the time range was “between 12 hours and one minute ago” would definitely be more accurate, in that it is far more likely to include the “true” answer… it’s just so imprecise as to be useless. Similarly, “47.5 minutes ago” is a precise time, but is much much more likely to be wrong.) When it comes to bodies “feeling” cold, the estimations are even less reliable – live people can feel cold, and dead people can still feel warm, depending on the circumstances.

Blood can clot very soon after it has left the body, and the onset of stiffness is a highly variable phenomenon that can also be over-estimated by examiners. A modern scenario that we frequently encounter is when paramedics arrive at a scene of death, and state that a person has been dead for several hours because they feel “stiff”. In reality, someone who is unaccustomed to manipulating dead bodies can interpret the “dead weight” of a limb as “stiffness”, giving a false impression of when stiffening actually started. In reality, it can be many hours (especially in cold conditions) before this is truly noticeable.

So, whilst not criticising Dr Phillips, or anyone else involved with the cases at the time, I would have to say that this particular victim could have died considerably more than 2 hours before discovery, but also could potentially have been killed as recently as 05.30 as suggested by the (unreliable) witness account. Of course, I’m not saying that she was killed earlier or later, I’m just saying that all would have been possible and there is no way of being certain (either back then or here and now).

So we are left with the balance of probabilities do we believe the witnesses, or do we say that a later TOD is not consitent with the TOD of the other victims, and ask why would the killer take such a risk at killing in that location at that later TOD

Sadly none of the answers to the above issues are going to prove conclusivley an accurate TOD

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[drstrange169]

Just occurred to me whilst walking the dog. Baxter had copies of the police witness statements, that how he chose who to call. If Cadosch's testimony changed radically from his police statement, Baxter would have torn him a new one, if you catch my drift.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Thanks Trev. And of course, many thanks to Dr Biggs.

[drstrange169]

>> I’m just saying that all would have been possible and there is no way of being certain (either back then or here and now)<<

Yes Trevor, that's how I see it too.

[DJA]

Just occurred to me whilst walking the dog. Baxter had copies of the police witness statements, that how he chose who to call. If Cadosch's testimony changed radically from his police statement, Baxter would have torn him a new one, if you catch my drift.

That reminds me of our bull terrier who refused to be walked.Just sat there and had to be dragged until we realized we were creating a bottomless pit