John Richardson

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

So unless you can prove that that clock that Long used and the method that Cadosch used for his times aligned perfectly then we have to say that there is no issue with Long and Cadosch’s timings. Three witnesses all telling us that Annie was still alive at close to 5.30.

I have to prove something and if I cannot do so, then it is a fact, proven by testimony, that Chapman was alive at 5.30 a.m.??

Does anyone reading that actually believe it?

[Doctored Whatsit]

Let's agree to disagree.

Well, we certainly do! Unfortunately, I have never been able to grasp exactly why we don't understand each other, as we both speak English, and read the same info. But yes, let's call it a day, because it must be very boring for everyone else to see us saying the same things every time.

[Lewis C]

You wrote: it's not a question of less than probably 3, but less than 2.

If Phillips thought that it was probably three hours, then his qualification applies to three hours and not two.

Not if you read the whole sentence, the way that it's punctuated. It's possible that the journalist wrote the sentence poorly.

This isn't an important point that we're discussing anyway. We know that the methods used at the time that determined TOD are unreliable. So even if you're right that Phillips never admitted the possibility that the TOD could have been less than 2 hours, that would just mean that he didn't acknowledge the degree to which his methods were unreliable. The methods of the time couldn't have narrowed the window during which the TOS occurred any more than what we already know from when she left the doss house and when John Davis discovered her body.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I have to prove something and if I cannot do so, then it is a fact, proven by testimony, that Chapman was alive at 5.30 a.m.??

Does anyone reading that actually believe it?

What I said was that there is no timing conflict between Long and Cadosch. Therefore we have three witnesses all pointing to her being alive at 5.30. If you choose to assume that they were all lying or mistaken then that’s up to you PI.

[Herlock Sholmes]

No response to post #5732 I see. No surprise there. And I get accused of avoidance. I haven’t dodged a single question. If I’ve missed one then that person only has to point it out or repeat it.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

What I said was that there is no timing conflict between Long and Cadosch.

There is a conflict, and its existence was acknowledged by the coroner.

You made an assumption that the clock heard by Long was 5 minutes fast and on the strength of that assumption, you have declared that there is no conflict!

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

No response to post #5732 I see. No surprise there. And I get accused of avoidance. I haven’t dodged a single question. If I’ve missed one then that person only has to point it out or repeat it.

How can failing to respond to a comment posted by you, which was not even addressed to anyone in particular, and which was devoted largely to a discussion of the meaning of the preposition 'but' be considered to be a form of avoidance?

[Herlock Sholmes]

There is a conflict, and its existence was acknowledged by the coroner.

You made an assumption that the clock heard by Long was 5 minutes fast and on the strength of that assumption, you have declared that there is no conflict!

The coroner clearly didn’t take into consideration issue with clocks.

I didn’t make an assumption. I just stated a very reasonable possibility PI. Even today clocks can be poorly synchronised or fast or slow.

[Herlock Sholmes]

How can failing to respond to a comment posted by you, which was not even addressed to anyone in particular, and which was devoted largely to a discussion of the meaning of the preposition 'but' be considered to be a form of avoidance?

It was a deconstruction of what Phillips said using proper definitions of the words and the grammar and by using the only correct meaning in terms of a medical statement.

There can be no doubt what Phillips meant. None at all. He meant that a later ToD was possible. He cannot have meant anything else because that would fly in the face of the science and the grammar.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I didn’t make an assumption. I just stated a very reasonable possibility PI. Even today clocks can be poorly synchronised or fast or slow.

In that case, I will rephrase my comment in # 5751:


You speculated that the clock heard by Long was 5 minutes fast and on the strength of that speculation, you have declared that there is no conflict!

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

There can be no doubt what Phillips meant. None at all. He meant that a later ToD was possible. He cannot have meant anything else because that would fly in the face of the science and the grammar.

There is considerable doubt as to whether Phillips considered a time of death as late as about 5.30 a.m. to be a reasonable estimate.

[Herlock Sholmes]

In that case, I will rephrase my comment in # 5751:


You speculated that the clock heard by Long was 5 minutes fast and on the strength of that speculation, you have declared that there is no conflict!

Yes. Five minutes is nothing. We can no more say that the clocks were spot on or synchronised than we can say they weren’t. Each is as likely as the other. So there is no conflict in reality.

[Herlock Sholmes]

There is considerable doubt as to whether Phillips considered a time of death as late as about 5.30 a.m. to be a reasonable estimate.

None whatsoever.

As I explained. A ‘but’ is “used to introduce a phrase or clause contrasting with what has already been mentioned.”

So Phillips wasn’t introducing a clause that meant an earlier time because he’d already said that. So there would have been no contrast and the ‘but’ part would have been unnecessary.

And we also know that a more rapid cooling can only mean a reduction in the gap between death and the examination.

How could it be clearer?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Yes. Five minutes is nothing. We can no more say that the clocks were spot on or synchronised than we can say they weren’t. Each is as likely as the other. So there is no conflict in reality.

But you speculated in such a way that the conflict was resolved.

You did not speculate that the church clock was fast instead.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Sorry, Herlock, but your assertion that Phillips considered a time of death as late as about 5.30 a.m. to be a reasonable estimate is contradicted by the report in The Echo on 19 September 1888 that Phillips was definite that Chapman was already dead at 4.45 a.m.