John Richardson

[Herlock Sholmes]

No wick , the problem lies with you and others that won't accept what the coroner ask Richardson. Did you go into the yard? ," Not At All "was his reply.

You can twist it any way you want. Richardson did not go into the yard, he ought to know, thats what he told the coroner

If you and others want to misrepresent that piece of evidence to suit your theory go ahead just dont tell me I'm wrong when my interpretation tell me differently.

Fishy, please just try. Disengage your ‘Richardson was a liar’ thinking for just a minute.

If Richardson sat on the steps would you consider him to have ‘gone into the yard?’

I assume that you wouldn’t and we know that this is what Richardson said that he’d done.

The position that it’s being suggested that might have stood would have meant that his feet would have been on the same spot as they would have been when he’d sat down…..on the flags (probably a foot or two away from the steps)…..ok?

So the question has to be……..why would you think that sitting or standing, with feet on the same spot, that one option should be considered as being ‘in the yard’ when the other shouldn’t.

I don’t think it can be made any simpler Fishy. You are nitpicking over a press account of what was said.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Ah, you agree he was not "in the yard"?
Maybe, we are getting somewhere.

You obviously believe Richardson, unlike some others.
So, tell me where did he sit?

Coroner - Did you sit on the top step?
Witness - No, the second step.

He sat on the second step - right?
Where were his feet?

Coroner - Where were your feet?
Witness - On the flags of the yard.

Tell me, in your own words - "where were his feet?"

Take your time, ....I'm going to bed.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Seeings how you only have 124 post ill let you off the hook for your blind misgivings regarding the topic of the thread .
.

Are you saying that AP’s opinions are less valid because he’s only made 124 posts?

[Herlock Sholmes]

By the Jury: The back door opens outwards into the yard, and swung on the left hand to the palings where the body was. If Richardson were on the top of the steps he might not have seen the body.Joseph Chandler, ''He told me he did not go down the steps.''


Richardson lied or Chandler lied . Period.


;

There were two sets of steps in that yard. Why do you assume which set was meant?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Your forgetting one thing , the bit where its been suggested that Richardson looked at the cellar lock while standing in front of the entrance of the cellar steps .!!In the yard , which when asked ''Not at all'' he went into .

Who suggested that?

[FISHY1118]

There are no shenanigans Fishy. I’m simply stating a truth. All that you are doing is pointing to one version of what was said and then using the wording to try and create doubt so that you can dismiss a witness. It’s very noticeable from my viewpoint Fishy how personal this is with you. My opinions on this aligns exactly with those of Jeff, Wickerman, Hair Bear, AP and Lewis and yet it’s only me that you get angry with. This seems to indicate that your main focus is to try and ‘beat’ me in an argument rather than examine the evidence. I often get the impression that if I suddenly said that I now believe the Knight/Sickert theory you would change your mind just so that you could disagree with me.

The only one playing games here is you Fishy. You should stick to looking at the evidence as a whole.

Not so Herlock, My veiw has and will alway be evidence based , my opinions in case you havent noticed are aligned with George , Trevor , and P.I so why you seem to like to single me out for your nasty rebuttles ,its you who has problem with my views and opinions that requires you to make it personal .

Ive been looking at the evidence as a whole since i started this topic , what the hell have you been doing ? Game playing indeed .

[FISHY1118]

Further evidence that you’re simply playing games Fishy.

No, im simply commenting on a post from George that i happen to agree with. Are you Trolling me ? .... because its begining to look like it to me .

[FISHY1118]

Further evidence that you’re simply playing games Fishy.

Your probably Misreading and Misinterpreting the evidence .

[Herlock Sholmes]

Not so Herlock, My veiw has and will alway be evidence based , my opinions in case you havent noticed are aligned with George , Trevor , and P.I so why you seem to like to single me out for your nasty rebuttles ,its you who has problem with my views and opinions that requires you to make it personal .

Ive been looking at the evidence as a whole since i started this topic , what the hell have you been doing ? Game playing indeed .

I’ve said absolutely nothing nasty in the slightest. Not once.

[Herlock Sholmes]

No, im simply commenting on a post from George that i happen to agree with. Are you Trolling me ? .... because its begining to look like it to me .

And you used the exact same phrase that Wickerman used in response to me. Are you claiming coincidence?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Your probably Misreading and Misinterpreting the evidence .

The irony.

[FISHY1118]

It's to provide sufficient evidence to establish the name of the deceased and the circumstances of their death.

Any answer to how you account for the people who heard the testimony accepting the sitting on the steps and being able to see the yard statements lining up with your doorway theory yet?
Was he telling two completely conflicting stories in the space of half a dozen sentences, and they were just too dumb to see it, or did they simply understand what he meant?

They heard the same evidence we have available to us today. , they dont get to chose who was right or wrong just as we dont . Silly question .

[FISHY1118]

Fishy, please just try. Disengage your ‘Richardson was a liar’ thinking for just a minute.

If Richardson sat on the steps would you consider him to have ‘gone into the yard?’

I assume that you wouldn’t and we know that this is what Richardson said that he’d done.

The position that it’s being suggested that might have stood would have meant that his feet would have been on the same spot as they would have been when he’d sat down…..on the flags (probably a foot or two away from the steps)…..ok?

So the question has to be……..why would you think that sitting or standing, with feet on the same spot, that one option should be considered as being ‘in the yard’ when the other shouldn’t.

I don’t think it can be made any simpler Fishy. You are nitpicking over a press account of what was said.

If Richardson sat on the steps ''No he is not in the yard ,whether his feet are over the edge of the step touching the ground or not .

I dont think it could be made any simpler Herlock. How is this press report Nitpicking ?



Daily News
United Kingdom
13 September 1888


[Coroner,] Did you go into the yard at all?-Not at all, sir.!!!!!!!!!!!

I thought you went there to see that the cellar was all right?- [Richardson] Yes; ''but you don't need to go into the yard'' to see that. You can ''see the padlock'' of the cellar door ''from the back door steps.''!!!!!!!!!!



1. Did you go into the yard at all?-Not at all, sir

2.[Richardson] Yes; ''but you don't need to go into the yard''

3.You can ''see the padlock'' of the cellar door ''from the back door steps.''!!!!!!!!!!

[A P Tomlinson]

They heard the same evidence we have available to us today. , they dont get to chose who was right or wrong just as we dont . Silly question .

I don't want to break it to you too harshly but weighing up and coming to a conclusion sufficient to deliver a verdict based on the evidence presented to it, IS kind of the job of a jury.
And they accepted that he sat on the step.
Why?
They heard the actual evidence, not the newspaper reports. Which in my opinion gives them the edge. They looked him in the eye while he spoke, they saw him react to cross examination, they heard all the words that came out of his mouth. And understood EXACTLY what he meant when he made his statments that he sat on the steps but did not go into the yard.

And still swerving the point of how you account for the sitting on the steps part being perfectly acceptable to alll of them, most of us, but not to you, when the level and quality of evidence you keep quoting is of exactly the same standard as the part where he sat on the steps.

I wonder how many members of the Jury had corroborating the early ToD firmly on their agenda when trying to decide the veracity of the witnesses?
Not enough it seems.

[FISHY1118]

Are you saying that AP’s opinions are less valid because he’s only made 124 posts?

Is that how your interpreting it ? Arnt my opinions less valid in your mind because they dont align with yours ?