Alternative entrences / exits to #29 Hanbury crime scene?

[GUT]

It was clearly stated that richardson's story was viewed with suspicion and the coroner felt his presence in the yard warranted explanation. You want to let richardsons completely different versions of accounts go because he was scared? His story doesn't add up....he tells the coroner two
Completely different things. How would being scared make richardson say to the coroner that he successfully cut the leather from his boot and tied his boot up then the next time he testifies when he produces the knife he says he cut the boot later from a knife at the market. How does fear account for him changing his story? He was caught in a lie...fear of being hung

And then the police didn't even look into his story, give me a break.

[RockySullivan]

And then the police didn't even look into his story, give me a break.

He was asked to produce the knife at which time he fetched a rusty butter knife and changed his story. The contradicting testimony was not addressed. So did richardson lie in court when he said he did cut the leather or was he lying when he said he didn't?which story is the lie gut....?

[GUT]

He was asked to produce the knife at which time he fetched a rusty butter knife and changed his story. The contradicting testimony was not addressed. So did richardson lie in court when he said he did cut the leather or was he lying when he said he didn't?which story is the lie gut....?

Buggered if I know it's your theory you tell me, all I know is that Swanson said that he was looked into up hill and down dale and his house was searched and there was no suspicion that could attach to the man.

[RockySullivan]

Buggered if I know it's your theory you tell me, all I know is that Swanson said that he was looked into up hill and down dale and his house was searched and there was no suspicion that could attach to the man.

His house was searched or his mothers? The fact that police focused in on him so early means he was the original person of interest, and as we know in serial killer cases the killer is often suspected but nothing can be proven. He obviously lied since his story continually changed, so it's logical to assume he was likely also lying about chapmans body being in the yard...

[GUT]

His house was searched or his mothers? The fact that police focused in on him so early means he was the original person of interest, and as we know in serial killer cases the killer is often suspected but nothing can be proven. He obviously lied since his story continually changed, so it's logical to assume he was likely also lying about chapmans body being in the yard...

See that's just wrong, he lied about one thing so he must have lied about this as well. I lied to my wife when I said that I was late because of work [it was because I was getting her Chrissy present] but I didn't lie when when I said loved her.

According to Swanson it was his house, that was searched, but would anyone suggest that her house, the scene of the crime, wouldn't have been.

[RockySullivan]

Buggered if I know it's your theory you tell me, all I know is that Swanson said that he was looked into up hill and down dale and his house was searched and there was no suspicion that could attach to the man.

See that's just wrong, he lied about one thing so he must have lied about this as well. I lied to my wife when I said that I was late because of work [it was because I was getting her Chrissy present] but I didn't lie when when I said loved her.

According to Swanson it was his house, that was searched, but would anyone suggest that her house, the scene of the crime, wouldn't have been.

We don't have an explanation for why he lied to chandler, or why he said he cut and tied his boot only to admit he did so later at work. I thought when Swanson says "the house was searched" he means 29 hanbury?

[GUT]

Hundreds of Persons of Interest are also NOT the killer, in many investigations to say

The fact that police focused in on him so early means he was the original person of interest, and as we know in serial killer cases the killer is often suspected but nothing can be proven.

Ads zero to the argument.

[RockySullivan]

Hundreds of Persons of Interest are also NOT the killer, in many investigations to say



Ads zero to the argument.

Of course, but in richardsons case he appears more suspicious in the days after the murder. He changes his story twice more after his original statement to chandler....why?

[Ginger]

If Richardson were the murderer, why would he even admit to having been in the yard that morning anyway? IIRC, he volunteered that information to the police, trying to be helpful by establishing that there was no body there when he visited.*

If Richardson murdered Annie, how then did he manage to clean up before going to his job? It would have had to be a pretty thorough washing up, since he talked to the police that same morning. He'd have had to be one cool customer, to have acted normally after something like that.

What would he have done with the uterus that he carried away? I can't imagine the murderer tossing it aside after all that risk to get it.

Ultimately, I find it very hard to believe a theory that requires the Ripper to murder, then to go casually onward to his employ. That ruins Cross/Lechmere for me as well. Perhaps I underestimate the man's madness, but I have to think he'd have been an emotional wreck after the adrenaline wore off.

*Personally, I think there's a good chance she was lying dead behind that door the entire time, but that's neither here nor there. He has an excellent and plausible reason to want to help the police, too, as a woman was just murdered in the back yard of his mother's house.

[RockySullivan]

If Richardson were the murderer, why would he even admit to having been in the yard that morning anyway? IIRC, he volunteered that information to the police, trying to be helpful by establishing that there was no body there when he visited.*

If Richardson murdered Annie, how then did he manage to clean up before going to his job? It would have had to be a pretty thorough washing up, since he talked to the police that same morning. He'd have had to be one cool customer, to have acted normally after something like that.

What would he have done with the uterus that he carried away? I can't imagine the murderer tossing it aside after all that risk to get it.

Ultimately, I find it very hard to believe a theory that requires the Ripper to murder, then to go casually onward to his employ. That ruins Cross/Lechmere for me as well. Perhaps I underestimate the man's madness, but I have to think he'd have been an emotional wreck after the adrenaline wore off.

*Personally, I think there's a good chance she was lying dead behind that door the entire time, but that's neither here nor there. He has an excellent and plausible reason to want to help the police, too, as a woman was just murdered in the back yard of his mother's house.

But see he didn't admit to chandler he went into the yard...if he has nothing to hide....why lie to chandler then lie again at the inquest about cutting the leather from his boot? Fear of a witness motivated him to admit he was in the yard with a knife...

[RockySullivan]

See that's just wrong, he lied about one thing so he must have lied about this as well. I lied to my wife when I said that I was late because of work [it was because I was getting her Chrissy present] but I didn't lie when when I said loved her.

According to Swanson it was his house, that was searched, but would anyone suggest that her house, the scene of the crime, wouldn't have been.

But he didn't lie about one thing. First he lied to chandler that he only looked at the cellar padlock. Then he lied to the coroner that he cut the leather from his boot and tied it up. What we have is a pattern of lying from richardson...if he was willing to lie to chandler and the coroner about his actions that morning...why should we believe chapmans body wasn't in the yard when dr tells us she would have been?

[Rosella]

As with Lechmere so with Richardson. There's a great gap between lying to the authorities for all sorts of reasons and being a brutal serial killer.
Again, (and there is absolutely no evidence that anyone else saw Richardson with boot and knife on the back steps) no-one would have known he was using a knife or was even there, had he himself not said so.

[RockySullivan]

As with Lechmere so with Richardson. There's a great gap between lying to the authorities for all sorts of reasons and being a brutal serial killer.
Again, (and there is absolutely no evidence that anyone else saw Richardson with boot and knife on the back steps) no-one would have known he was using a knife or was even there, had he himself not said so.

One of the neighbors or even the back tenants of 29 could have seen richardson and kept quiet. While Lechmere was found with a body, richardson is at the murder scene with a knife out. And he admits he wasn't cutting the boot on the third try at his story....so it raises the question just what WAS he doing in the yard with a knife out. According to the drs report the body was there when he was...rosella....tell me this...do you believe the ripper would have hard to work on chapman from the steps? There's also another thing besides a knife that puts richardson in a different class than Lechmere....he knew the victim

[Rosella]

It is a question of timing isn't it, more than anything. Dr Phillips gave a time of death for Annie of about 4:30am, and possibly earlier (though he amended his opinion about the coolness of the body later at the inquest).

If we accept that Dr Phillips is correct then the killer murdered Annie in the yard in complete darkness and everyone in the house except for Thompson, who'd gone to work, was probably asleep. Little chance of anyone glimpsing a knife from neighbouring windows, then.

Richardson arrived in the yard at around 4:45am, and whether he had a knife or not, he would, I agree, have either spotted the Ripper rapidly departing or seen Annie Chapman's body lying in front of him as he stood/sat on the steps.

Now the trouble with this is that, even today, estimation of time of death by medical professionals is often just a little bit more than an educated guess.

What is more, if Phillips is right, it completely knocks away the evidence of Mrs Long/Durrell (who may or may not have seen Annie and her client at about 5:15 am - 5:30am) and Albert Cadosch, who definitely heard a bump against the fence at around 5:30am.

It couldn't have been Annie making the fence rock as, according to the good doctor, she'd been dead for an hour. Their times are messed up but Wynne Baxter believed Cadosch and Long and discounted Phillips' evidence. Are you suggesting that Richardson was skulking around his mother's yard before 4:30am and was still there moving Annie's body at 5:30am? Hope not!

[martin wilson]

Hi all

According to Google maps. it's a five minute walk from Hanbury Street to the old Spitalfields Market. The market opened at 5 a.m, which at least gives Richardson's evidence some consistency, he was there at 4.45 to 4.50 checking the cellar before going to work.
On the other hand, the dustman sighting is interesting, and implicates Richardson, unless we can accept that someone else murdered Anne in the 10 minutes or so after Richardson said he left.
Where this leaves Long, Cadosch et al, no idea.
With all the hysteria about Leather Apron, and the press speculation about the murders being committed by one man, I wonder if we are not heading towards the estimable Mr Wood's territory.
All the best.