Witness Testimony: Albert Cadosche

[JeffHamm]

The only reason our conversation is one-sided is that although I have offered you an explanation in # 510, you indicated in # 524 that you will not answer my # 508 (not # 513 as previously stated, although it is quoted there).

Your post at 510 wasn't an answer to my question. It was a reply, but saying "hello" is a reply, but not an answer if the question was "What time is it?".

But, ok. My response is "Yes, it is sunny today."

- Jeff

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Ah, so either you don't have an explanation, or you're unwilling to share it. I've never found such one sided conversations to be very enlightening, so I'll keep my ideas to myself as well.

- Jeff

The only reason our conversation is one-sided is that although I have offered you an explanation in # 510, you indicated in # 524 that you will not answer my # 508 (not # 513 as previously stated, although it is quoted there).

[JeffHamm]

[QUOTE=PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1;n824866]

You expect me to answer your questions, but you will not answer mine, even though you implied that you would.

Correction. I expected you to answer my question. Twice you didn't, hence I'm not answering yours. See how it works? It's not rocket science after all.

- Jeff

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Hi Jeff,

Isn't that what Elizabeth Long did?

Given that Annie was well known in the area, is it more likely that someone that knew her, and saw her that night, would, after hearing of her murder report the sighting, more so than someone who didn't know Annie presuming someone she saw was the victim.

Best regards, George

Let me know if you receive an answer.

I made a similar point in the post immediately preceding yours, in response to Jeff's request that I answer a question of his, but he has since indicated that he will not answer my questions.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

[Phillips] ... when adding his caveat to his ToD, forgot to mention that there was a considerable amount (about 5 or 6 metres...) of internal organs missing from the body that would also have contributed (in fact far more so) to a body being colder than one found dead of natural causes in a hospital bed.

The same thing happened to Eddowes, with the intestines thrown over the shoulder on the same side and in similar weather conditions.

Posters are arguing that Chapman, who was almost completely cold, had been dead for only about one hour.

Eddowes was examined about 42 minutes after death, yet was still warm.

So far I've still seen nothing that suggests Albert Cadosch was unreliable, and just another descent into a desperate push for an earlier Time of Death for Chapman.

If Long was earlier than she thought, then why would she have mistaken the quarter hour chime for the half hour chime, even though they were different, and she went to the market regularly?

And why would she state that she arrived at the market a few minutes after half past if it was actually only a few minutes after a quarter past?

And why would no-one at the market note that she was early, or do you think everyone else there was living in a parallel universe where everything happened a quarter of an hour earlier?

And if, alternatively, Cadoche mistakenly thought it was earlier than it was, why did his colleagues or superiors at work not notice that he arrived late, or were they too living in a parallel universe in which everything happened a quarter of an hour later?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Just a list of variables.


That Annie met her killer and was killed at 4.30 or before.

That Annie met a punter but spent the money on something else.

That Annie met a punter but was robbed.

That Annie met a punter but she considered it too late to waste money on a bed for such a short time so kept the money for later in the day.

That Annie met a punter who took the money back (with the threat of violence or actual violence)

That Annie didn’t find a punter after an hour or so and gave up.

That Annie decided to sleep in a doorway somewhere.

That Annie met a friend and they both found a spot to sleep.

That Annie met a friend who had a room.

That Annie kept some of the potatoes that she eaten in the doss house kitchen and then ate them before she bedded down in a doorway.

That Annie had some other item of food on her like a crust of bread which she ate in a doorway before sleep.

That Annie met a friend who took pity on her and shared some item of food with her.

That Annie stole an item of food from the doss house kitchen and at it later.

That Annie found some item of food that perhaps had fallen from a coasters cart into the gutter.

That the only punter she ran into had no money but offered to pay her in some item of food that she considered at least something.

That her killer gave her some food which she ate as they walked to number 29 (as per Packer)

That Annie earned the money but her bed had been let and Donovan didn’t want to admit that he’d turned her out to her death.

That Annie didn’t eat but there were still remnants of food in her stomach (as per Jeff’s medical evidence)

That Annie’s serious health issues slowed down her digestion (as per medical evidence)


How far can speculation take us? How can we rate any as likely or unlikely?

[A P Tomlinson]

I like how this thread has from "21st century science tells us that people have bad memories so Albert Cadosche is unreliable" to "21st century science knows naff all compared to a 19th century doctor in terms of establishing Time of Death. people trusted his opinion so Philips was right!"

I mentioned this before on the previous thread, but since this is a new one it's been ignored.
The fact that the killer plunged a 5-6" blade in below the sternum is highly likely (I'm not saying "certain" because I know that THAT word would become the focus of attention rather than the substance...) to have torn open the stomach. Add that the killer removed the small intestine by severing it from the end that connects to the stomach via the mesenteric valve, anything that was at that end of the intestine would have been squeezed back out with some going back into the stomach via the pyloric (? trying to remember the names. My Mrs explained it to me... but...) sphincter, and as the cut to sever the intestine was made the rest would be squeezed into the open cavity in which the mutilations were being performed.

Philips performed his divination without the aid of a thermometre, using inadequate understanding, didn't measure lividity, temp or rigor over any period of time, and when adding his caveat to his ToD, forgot to mention that there was a considerable amount (about 5 or 6 metres...) of internal organs missing from the body that would also have contributed (in fact far more so) to a body being colder than one found dead of natural causes in a hospital bed. (The standard by which he was measuring)
All he did was estimate the difference in temperature between the back of his own hand and that of the surface of the body.
And if the police accepted what he said that's because they knew even less about the science he was practising than HE did!

Here is an addendum to what I said before... Potatoe, as people have pointed out, is very starchy and fairly lightly bound. On death the process of digestion stops as the muscles cease working, but the gastric acid does not stop being acidic immediately. Potatoes eaten four hours prior to death stand a pretty good chance of having dissolved into chyme by that time dead or alive.


I'm not engaging in any back and fro with this, till it gets back to the subject I was advised to focus on by the person who started the thread, who seems to have once again ignored their own advice.

So far I've still seen nothing that suggests Albert Cadosch was unreliable, and just another descent into a desperate push for an earlier Time of Death for Chapman.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

[QUOTE=JeffHamm;n824863]

I gave it in # 510.

Perhaps you missed it.

Can I now have your response to # 513 please?[/QUOTE

No.

You expect me to answer your questions, but you will not answer mine, even though you implied that you would.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Having committed the unforgivable sin of stating that Chapman was not seen by anyone, and being told that it is factually incorrect and that she may have been seen but the sighting not reported, I would not dream of having the temerity to write what you have written above.

I refer you to # 513, in which I asked why it would take Chapman about three and a half hours to find a customer.

To say that she hadn’t been seen by anyone is indeed factual incorrect.

To say that she wasn’t reported as being seen by anyone is factually correct.

[JeffHamm]

[QUOTE=PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1;n824858]



I gave it in # 510.

Perhaps you missed it.

Can I now have your response to # 513 please?[/QUOTE

No.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Swanson was looking at both sides of the story, and demonstrating the contradiction, without expressing any firm conclusion. He considered that if either one of them was correct the other must be incorrect, without concluding that the police favoured one side of the argument.

Up to the present the combined result of those inquiries did not supply the police with the slightest clue to the murderer...

(SWANSON)

He obviously did not believe that Long saw the murderer with Chapman.

[Herlock Sholmes]

It is Wolf Vanderlinden's interpretation.

I quote from his dissertation 'Considerable Doubt' and the Death of Annie Chapman:


The police were obviously depending upon Dr. Phillips' opinions and his standing as a reliable medical expert when directing the course of their investigations. To the detectives working on the Chapman murder, Dr. Phillips' estimated time of death made Long and Cadosch irrelevant.

This sentiment is also expressed in Swanson's report.

hence the evidence of Mrs. Long which appeared to be so important to the Coroner, must be looked upon with some amount of doubt, which is to be regretted.

This "doubt" apparently soon became the conviction that Mrs. Long's testimony was worthless.

It is now time to look at Dr. Phillips' opinions about the time of death of Annie Chapman, opinions that were supported by Scotland Yard.

That the police of the time would have tended toward supporting the medical expert is hardly surprising. They didn’t realise how unreliable his estimation was.

Look at the way the Yorkshire Police dismissed suspects (like Sutcliffe) and various testimony because they were convinced that the killer had a Geordie accent. The police followed this route because not enough of them question George Oldfield’s confidence and decision-making. So we can hardly criticise the police for assuming that the Doctor was unlikely to have been wrong. There’s no mystery in this.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

An alternative idea that would account for her not being seen by anyone would be that she was lying dead in the backyard of #29.

Having committed the unforgivable sin of stating that Chapman was not seen by anyone, and being told that it is factually incorrect and that she may have been seen but the sighting not reported, I would not dream of having the temerity to write what you have written above.

I refer you to # 513, in which I asked why it would take Chapman about three and a half hours to find a customer.

[Herlock Sholmes]

It would help if you could explain why it would take Chapman about three and a half hours to find a customer.


Do you think that the streets would have been exactly teeming with potential punters after 2am? When these women went out onto the streets do you think that it was always the case that they ran into a punter within an hour or so or was the reality that they often stood around for hours having no luck? We know that there were a huge amount of prostitutes in that area (I can’t recall the actual figures) so there was much competition for trade and, with respect to Annie, there were younger, more attractive ones around too.

Then we surely have to consider that there would have come a point where she would have thought “even if I got some money now would it be worth getting a bed at this time of the morning?” I’m not certain but weren’t the occupants of doss-houses kicked out at some time in the morning? So, as I’ve suggested before, she might have just given up and bedded down somewhere. Another suggestion, and that’s all that it is, is that she might have met a friend who, like Mary Kelly, had her own room and put her up for the night.


Chapman's last words as she left the lodging house are reported as: I shan't be long before I am in.


Yes, it’s reminiscent of Mary Nichols “see what a jolly bonnet…” comment. Mary was drunk, Annie was the worse for drink too. Again, as I’ve said before, alcohol isn’t known as a means to sensible thinking or decision-making. Annie couldn’t actually have known how long it would have taken her to find a punter but she wanted Donovan to keep a bed for her so she wanted him to believe that she would be back soon.


The last sighting of Nichols alive was at at 2:30 AM.

An hour later, she met her killer.

Stride was seen with a man at 12:35 AM, with another man at about 12:45 AM, and met her killer before 1:00AM.

Within half an hour of being released from the police station, Eddowes met her killer.


You can’t compare the others as if it was a case of catching a bus or a taxi PI. These were individual circumstances. If I went out shopping for a certain item and found one in an hour it wouldn’t follow that you would find the same item in an hour too. Life isn’t as prescribed as you appear to think PI.


We know the Whitechapel murderer was on the prowl in the early hours of the morning.

We also know that Chapman was looking for a customer from 1.50 AM onwards.

Why would it have taken 3 1/2 hours for their paths to converge?


Because life isn’t that simple PI. There are some things that we can state with confidence. Annie was unlikely to have attended a meeting of a local Morris Dancing troupe for example. We can hardly state however that it was unlikely that Annie slept in some doorway for an hour or two. Or that she ate a crust of bread or a potato or an apple or whatever. Or that she couldn’t find a punter. Or that she, like Polly, found a customer but spent the money on something else. Or that she found a punter but due to the lateness she decided to sleep rough and keep the money for later.

There’s no point in picking at any individual piece of speculation because it amounts to us trying put ourselves into Annie’s position. To think and behave as Annie would have because that would be impossible. We are faced with a period of time for which we have absolutely no information. Any deductions based on what we know about Annie’s situation and intentions beforehand are just as much speculation as any other points. And just as likely to be wrong or right.

And to top this off PI we can add that even if we knew for a fact that Annie didn’t eat during that unrecorded period then that still would help toward an earlier ToD. Jeff has produced the medical evidence and I’ve added that Annie’s health and advanced lung condition could have slowed down her digestion.

So basically you are speculating on a complete unknown to get you to a point which still doesn’t get you to an earlier ToD. So it’s not exactly a convincing point is it?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Ah, so either you don't have an explanation, or you're unwilling to share it. I've never found such one sided conversations to be very enlightening, so I'll keep my ideas to myself as well.

- Jeff

I gave it in # 510.

Perhaps you missed it.

Can I now have your response to # 513 please?