John Richardson

[Herlock Sholmes]

It wasn't omitted, Sherlock, it merely hasn't been discussed at this point. I agree that it is a factor.

We do know the environmental temperature, they are recorded. There is a difference of approx. 1C.

I think at this point it will be worth looking at all of the factors that impact rigor mortis, but before we do that can you clarify exactly what you mean when you say: "Annie's wasting disease".

Evidence of Phillips: "Disease of the lungs was long standing, and there was disease of the membranes of the brain". That is describing a wasting disease like tuberculosis.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Helen, Indeed there is a lot to digest on this topic as you are well aware . I think the most important thing to take away from it tho is this.

That when one weighs up all the evidence, wether it be witness or expert medical opinion, is that one side is no more certain than the other in so much to claim a 5.30 or earlier t.o.d

As has been shown right throughout this topic many problems with witness testimony v the accuracy of medical opinion . Both of course sould be taken into account

The point is, what ever stance you decide is up to you, , i just happen to support an earlier t.o.d based on my interpretation of All the inquest testimony provided, some of which ive judged to be problematic. .You of course are free to make up your own mind.

What we should do is completely disregard Phillips because that’s the only reasonable thing to do. Phillips is irrelevant so we have 3 witnesses all pointing to an earlier TOD. There’s not a single suggestion that either one of them lied so we have to assess if they could have been mistaken.

Could Long have been mistaken? Certainly she could have been.
Could Cadosch have been mistaken? It’s very difficult to see how. He was honest about the ‘No’ so it’s entirely reasonable to assume that he was honest about the noise. So he heard a noise coming from a yard that, if there was a body there, could only have been the killer.
Could Richardson have been mistaken? It’s about as unlikely as you could get. He knew what a door was and that a door can potentially block someone’s view. He couldn’t have ‘not realised’ this. Therefore we’re left with a man (with zero reason for lying) who was 100% certain that he couldn’t have missed a body had it been there.

Therefore the only reasonable position is that it’s overwhelmingly likely (not even close) that Chapman was killed later.

[Dickere]

What we should do is completely disregard Phillips because that’s the only reasonable thing to do. Phillips is irrelevant so we have 3 witnesses all pointing to an earlier TOD. There’s not a single suggestion that either one of them lied so we have to assess if they could have been mistaken.

Could Long have been mistaken? Certainly she could have been.
Could Cadosch have been mistaken? It’s very difficult to see how. He was honest about the ‘No’ so it’s entirely reasonable to assume that he was honest about the noise. So he heard a noise coming from a yard that, if there was a body there, could only have been the killer.
Could Richardson have been mistaken? It’s about as unlikely as you could get. He knew what a door was and that a door can potentially block someone’s view. He couldn’t have ‘not realised’ this. Therefore we’re left with a man (with zero reason for lying) who was 100% certain that he couldn’t have missed a body had it been there.

Therefore the only reasonable position is that it’s overwhelmingly likely (not even close) that Chapman was killed later.

Another aspect to this door business.

The door was at the top of the stairs. Richardson opens it and sits on the stairs. The bottom of the door is still at top step height, it doesn't drop down to ground level, so wouldn't fully hide a body at that level, even if it wasn't laying flat. He'd still have seen some of it as a minimum.

[Fleetwood Mac]

“There seemed very little in it in the way of food or fluid but from the cut end partly digested farinaceous food escaped.”

Are you sure this event took place at the crime scene?

I removed the content of the stomach and placed it in a jar for further examination. There seemed very little in it in the way of food or fluid, but from the cut end partly digested farinaceous food escaped.

Are you sure this isn't an observation from the post-mortem on Sunday afternoon?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Are you sure this event took place at the crime scene?

I removed the content of the stomach and placed it in a jar for further examination. There seemed very little in it in the way of food or fluid, but from the cut end partly digested farinaceous food escaped.

Are you sure this isn't an observation from the post-mortem on Sunday afternoon?

Of course it's an observation from the post-mortem. But it makes no difference. Digestion stops at the point of death, so the amount of partly digested food in the stomach would have been exactly the same at 1.45am as at the time of the post- mortem.

Basically Eddowes had an empty stomach at the time of her death save for a very small amount of partly digested starchy food. How do you explain it?

[Trevor Marriott]

What we should do is completely disregard Phillips because that’s the only reasonable thing to do. Phillips is irrelevant so we have 3 witnesses all pointing to an earlier TOD. There’s not a single suggestion that either one of them lied so we have to assess if they could have been mistaken.

Could Long have been mistaken? Certainly she could have been.
Could Cadosch have been mistaken? It’s very difficult to see how. He was honest about the ‘No’ so it’s entirely reasonable to assume that he was honest about the noise. So he heard a noise coming from a yard that, if there was a body there, could only have been the killer.
Could Richardson have been mistaken? It’s about as unlikely as you could get. He knew what a door was and that a door can potentially block someone’s view. He couldn’t have ‘not realised’ this. Therefore we’re left with a man (with zero reason for lying) who was 100% certain that he couldn’t have missed a body had it been there.

Therefore the only reasonable position is that it’s overwhelmingly likely (not even close) that Chapman was killed later.

can you tell me why it is so important to establish a TOD in this murder?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fleetwood Mac]

Of course it's an observation from the post-mortem. But it makes no difference. Digestion stops at the point of death

You've got a reply on the Annie meal thread. Let's keep it to one thread.

[Dickere]

can you tell me why it is so important to establish a TOD in this murder?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I asked this many pages back, Trevor. The only answer given was that a later TOD gives Lechmere theorists a problem. I don't see that it does, but that was the answer.

[Herlock Sholmes]

can you tell me why it is so important to establish a TOD in this murder?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Are you saying that you're confused as to why you asked Dr Biggs for his opinion about the TOD for this murder?

We can ask that question about any aspect of the case Trevor. Why is it so important whether the ripper wrote the graffito or the letters or whether Stride or Tabram were victims or not? Most things can’t be settled conclusively but one point can and should. The 3 witnesses have to be assessed on their own merit and without using Phillips. That point is black and white. 1+1=2, 5x5=25, the capitol of France is Paris and Dr. Phillips TOD estimate cannot be trusted.

[Fleetwood Mac]

I asked this many pages back, Trevor. The only answer given was that a later TOD gives Lechmere theorists a problem. I don't see that it does, but that was the answer.

In the grand scheme of life, it doesn't matter one bit. Let's say it solves the crime, people will say that's that and move onto some other mystery.

While this case remains unsolved, I do think it is important, however. For example, an earlier TOD would be in line with the other known TODs and could well be instructive in the case of Mary.

[Herlock Sholmes]

In the grand scheme of life, it doesn't matter one bit. Let's say it solves the crime, people will say that's that and move onto some other mystery.

While this case remains unsolved, I do think it is important, however. For example, an earlier TOD would be in line with the other known TODs and could well be instructive in the case of Mary.

And for some it would keep Lechmere in the game as a suspect.

[Fleetwood Mac]

And for some it would keep Lechmere in the game as a suspect.

This is irrelevant.

It should be clear by now that outside of a biblical turn of events, no suspect will be proven to be the WM.

[Herlock Sholmes]

This is irrelevant.

It should be clear by now that outside of a biblical turn of events, no suspect will be proven to be the WM.

It explains why some are willing to defy reason to promote Phillips inaccurate guess and to invent issues against witnesses.

[Fleetwood Mac]

It explains why some are willing to defy reason to promote Phillips inaccurate guess and to invent issues against witnesses.

Everything you post I now read in a Black Country accent.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Everything you post I now read in a Black Country accent.

What’s wrong with a Black Country accent?