|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2674
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 1:47 pm: | 
|
I believe I have highlighted this case once before, but it is only after reading it a second time I realised the implication of it all.
For on the night before the so-called ‘double event’ - the murder of Stride and Eddowes - an American by the name of John Johnson attacked a prostitute, Alice Anderson, in the East-End at about 1.45am, throwing her down to the ground, pulling out a large knife and threatening to stab her, but being disturbed he runs away.
Fifteen minutes later, at 2am, he does exactly the same thing to another prostitute, Elizabeth Hudson, but again is disturbed and runs away but is captured by the police.
Now this is the best bit.
In court for the very serious attacks the police testify that both victims are known prostitutes who bother men on the streets, so the magistrate releases John Johnson with no charge!
24 hours later two prostitutes are murdered in very similar circumstances.
I think this little case must lead to a lot of rethinking on the part of many people on this site, including my good self. |
Howard Brown
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Howard
Post Number: 1074
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 3:08 pm: |
|
Wow....
A.P.: Any chance that you know which section of the East End that occurred in? I've never heard of this event and its frankly shocking that he was released.
Is there an article or paper that we can read that contains this disturbing story ?
Thanks very much ! |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1499
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 3:47 pm: |
|
Hi AP,
A very good post to say the least.
A] a American,
b] Throwing the female to the ground[ similar to Nichols and Stride.
The fact that there is a similar attack almost immediately as in the case of Stride/ eddowes,
We will have to assertain if the culprit known as John johnson came to court and released in time to have been the perpretrator of the Double event.
if so a new suspect with a lot going for accusing has sprung to light.
Well done .
Regards Richard. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 5160
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 3:53 pm: |
|
Great find, AP. Anything more you discover about Mr Johnson will be noted down and may be used as evidence against him.
Robert |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2675
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 4:05 pm: |
|
Thanks folks
There is always the possibility that I beggared up the dates, but I don't think so.
The events took place in the Dalston district of London, which I have been told formed part of the East End.
I think the best course to be to ask Robert nicely if he could post the original court report.
My understanding is that the chap was released from the court on the same day.
I should say that my interest is in the double event scenario, rather than a suspect. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 5161
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 4:20 pm: |
|
Sept 29th 1888 :
Robert |
Chris Scott
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chris
Post Number: 2229
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 4:24 pm: |
|
Hi Ap
Here is the Times report dated 29 September 1888
 |
Chris Scott
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chris
Post Number: 2230
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 4:33 pm: |
|
In the 1891 census there appear to be two men of the name James Johnson born in the USA:
1) A footman aged 32 living at 11 Curzon Street, Mayfair, born Columbus, Ohio
and
2) A bus conductor / groom aged 38 living at 4 Salisbury Mansions, Putney. Birthplace given simply as USA.
|
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 977
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 5:33 pm: |
|
In haste - a great find AP, which will indeed need much thought.
As I have often said, your researches are invaluable. I am sure that it is from such detail as this that light will begin to come.
Much to ponder - I'll be back.
With sincere respect,
Phil |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2676
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 5:33 pm: |
|
Thank you Robert and Chris for the support, much appreciated.
Now I can’t be sure of this, but I do suspect that this is the very same James Johnson six years earlier on September 13th 1882 who was prosecuted for sexual assault on three young girls he took with him on a boat for a cruise on the Thames.
In the course of that cruise, two of the girls died, as did a young boy who was steering the boat.
The only surviving member of the cruise attempted to prosecute Johnson but he walked… acquitted. |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 2183
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 6:53 am: |
|
Hi AP,
This is indeed intriguing.
It certainly supports my own two modern examples of a violent man worked up and then thwarted trying again almost immediately.
It's a pity the second victim in your case didn't confirm the knife. It would not have been beyond an East London prostitute, in the habit of accosting men (if that part is true), imagining or even inventing the knife, with the recent horror stories ringing in her ears.
Interesting too that the assailant was from Wandsworth, south west London, but crossed the Thames to get to Dalston, East London, where he man-handled the two women. Of course, his mistake was to allow his victims to scream as he threw them down, forcing him to run away each time.
Hi Chris,
Your number 2 sounds promising - the right age if the Times report is accurate, and Putney and Wandsworth are virtually next to each other.
Love,
Caz
X |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1934
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 11:21 am: |
|
AP, Chris,
Excellent work as ever Guys.
This is indeed an intriguing find. One worthy of further investigation.
Can I throw a little googley in? Just to see what response I get.....and I know AP will be interested.
The report clearly states Johnson threw the victim down. Shades of Stride yes?
Then the report states the assailant tried to stab the victim.
This doesnt happen in Stride murder nor does it happen during the other murders in the series. I know MO changes but to shift from a fairly successful MO to an unsuccessful MO then back again is rather perplexing is it not?
Just a view.
Monty
Edited cos Monty kant spel.
(Message edited by monty on October 17, 2005)
Four candles.....you know, handles for forks ! - The Guv'nor
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 2190
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 1:15 pm: |
|
Hi Monty,
Once again, no knife was found in the man's possession. So unless he successfully disposed of it just before being apprehended, it seems that the first victim may have been mistaken or making more of the attack than it warranted.
I think AP was getting at the double event scenario, rather than putting this inept attacker in the frame for Jacky's silent but violent doings.
Love,
Caz
X |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2677
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 1:19 pm: |
|
Yes, Caz, I thought you would like this one!
And you are right, this JJ was well out of his area at 2am, so he must have been a bit of a traveller.
Monty
Unlike you I think the MO could easily change, depending on the reaction of the victim to the initial attack. Here it does appear that JJ might have underestimated the power and degree of the victim’s resistance to his attack.
A few more thoughts on the case.
If one examines the sparse information in the press report it rapidly becomes apparent that JJ is the guilty party here.
Actually running away from the scene of the crime, and only apprehended because he chanced upon a handy constable.
Why would he run away?
Neither of the prostitutes had anything whatsoever to gain by screaming and calling out ‘Murder!’ or ‘Police!’.
Remember these girls avoided the police like the plague, they would hardly call out for a copper unless their need was desperate.
Remember too that the two victims were separated by time and distance, which I feel increases the veracity and reliability of their statements to the police and court.
The woman from the first attack actually sees the second victim lifting herself from the ground after the attack.
But JJ appears to claim that the women were together, and that they had practically attempted to mug him.
I would suggest that the one prostitute had her hand in his pocket for a very different reason.
Also the second victim states that JJ and herself were walking together when he suddenly threw her to the ground. This would suggest that the two of them had already reached some form of agreement as to their business together before the attack commenced.
If they were walking together then JJ had practised deception to fool his victim into believing that he wanted sex, but as soon as he felt comfortable with the surroundings he attacked her.
His behaviour indicates design on his part.
As regards the knife, the police and or the court should have ordered a search for the weapon as JJ obviously dumped it when he started to run.
I have no adequate explanation for the attitude and behaviour of the police and court in releasing JJ without charge, simply because his landlady vouched for him and he had a ‘respectable’ job.
Remember this was September 1888 and the East-End of London.
But the victims were whores I suppose. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 5164
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 2:23 pm: |
|
AP's asked me to post these :
AUG 15th 1882
SEPT 13th 1882
Robert |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2499
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 3:05 pm: |
|
This case interests me a lot Ap---congratulations for unearthing it [and thanks too to Chris and Robert for their reports of them].
There were descriptions of a man carrying a parcel wrapped in an "American" type cloth at the time of the murders.
Also the murder of Stride includes that scenario from the witness Schwartz which could indicate the possibility that two men were in operation together that night.
The route taken could easily have been up Commercial Street onto Kingland Street then the attacks happening near De Beauvoir Square by
this American who may have been his "look out" man or accomplice!
Thanks for this gem AP!
Natalie
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2679
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 4:39 pm: |
|
Thanks so much, Robert.
Although there is a reported discrepancy in the age by three years - not at all unusual in court reports of the time - it is my inclination to believe that this is the very same James Johnson who attacked the two prostitutes six years later.
In 1883 JJ is given as a ‘sail maker’, now, many sail makers were employed on ships, and many of them were American. And it just so happens that I did also find a JJ who was robbed of his earnings in 1882 in a seaman’s pub in the East End docks in a scam.
It would be interesting if Chris could find JJ in the 1881 census, as from what I found he probably arrived on our shores in 1882.
The case Robert just posted is of interest, as the judge stated in open court - after the jury’s verdict - that JJ should ‘more properly have been indicted for man-slaughter.’
Now that is massively unusual.
Let us not be deceptive to ourselves.
This was a big case of the time.
Two very young girls and a young man died in awful circumstance, whilst JJ claimed he slept, but barely a month later we see JJ back in court again, this time for sexual assault on all three young girls, an action brought by the surviving girl.
Are we going to be told again by someone on this site, that an impressionable women or girl, stirred by the trauma of experience, imagined this sexual assault?
Just like in the double event, that the impressionable prostitute stirred by the newspaper reports, imagined the man who knocked her to the ground had a large knife.
But here in the earlier case we have three dead bodies, two young girls, and a young man who may have been a vital witness to murder, and we have a young girl who only survived the experience by grabbing hold of JJ’s leg as he abandoned the killing ship and jumped on the barge, leaving her to be rescued by the crew of the barge.
He would have killed her too, if he could.
Whatever, JJ would have changed jobs after this date. |
Kevin Braun
Detective Sergeant
Username: Kbraun
Post Number: 138
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 5:25 pm: |
|
Congratulations AP on a truly great find(something new). The lack of a knife, JJ's inept attacks and the "bit of a traveler" are minor problems. I have a feeling you know more about the new suspect James Johnson. Well done AP!
Take care,
Kevin
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2680
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 5:55 pm: |
|
Thank you Kevin.
Your words much appreciated.
I just react to the information I find.
And the beauty of it all, is that nobody controls that information.
My aim is simple, and sure... to rid the world of flatulent dinosaurs who can't be arsed to read their Times.
And, of course, arrive at a simple truth. |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1935
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 4:31 am: |
|
Caz, AP,
Caz,
I know the hint AP was making but judging Richards post (and later Nats) the idea the Johnson was Jack is hinted and no doubt will be made completely at some stage. I was merely ahead of the gang.
AP,
Unlike you I think the MO could easily change, depending on the reaction of the victim to the initial attack. Here it does appear that JJ might have underestimated the power and degree of the victim’s resistance to his attack.
Unlike me? I posted.....
......I know MO changes
Man, you authors should learn to read. 
As to the rest of your post address to me, yes I agree. Victims reaction is important and influential. I also feel this is why your work into other attacks will be benificial, so kudos for that.
Monty
Four candles.....you know, handles for forks ! - The Guv'nor
|
Diana
Chief Inspector
Username: Diana
Post Number: 825
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 7:17 am: |
|
My only reservation is that John is a very common name and so is Johnson. |
Gareth W
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 5:12 pm: |
|
AP,
Both these attacks occurred about 3 miles away from Jack's backyard (Dalston/Hackney is roughly that distance from what is more usually described as the "East End"). More interesting though is how far away from his lodgings the alleged assailant was.
If Mr Johnson lived at St John's Hill, Wandsworth then what the heck was he doing in Dalston at that time of the morning? Wandsworth is 10 or 12 miles away from Dalston, and "on the other side of the river". That's quite a trek and one, incidentally, which on foot would almost certainly take one through Whitechapel.
As a bit of fun I tried plotting a route from De Beauvoir Square, E8 to St John's Hill, SW11 and you just won't believe the "shortest route" it worked out. With grateful thanks to the beta version of maps.google.co.uk the blue line reveals all:
I swear I didn't "fix" that, by the way. Now I know that this is only one of an almost infinite number of lines connecting two points etc, so don't read too much into this. Interesting nevertheless. |
Jonathan Menges
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 10:25 pm: |
|
Seems that Alice Anderson was a roommate and close friend of Elizabeth Hudson.
http://casebook.org/press_reports/irish_times/18880929.html
It's an interesting coincidence that two women would claim Johnson assaulted them a day before the double event, but in my opinion more of a coincidence that he would assault two women who happened to be roommates and close friends. My gut tells me not to believe their claim, although I'd like to read more of (maybe this Mr.) Johnson's violent history.
J.Menges |
Steve Swift
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 4:44 pm: |
|
Sorry guys but it sounds to me like the two women tried to roll the guy and failed,you would have to believe the police knew at least one of the women as a pickpocket/hooker.
Remember the one cutting her own throat and screaming murder? then she's found with pennies in her mouth & a knife so they let the guy go.
The warning from the judge was probably on the idiocy of walking around the East End alone at 2am. |
Jeanette S. Brickner
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 2:03 am: |
|
While I realize that no one here probably entertains the idea of this suspact actually being the Ripper (but is interested because of the "double event" nature of this crime), I would (just for the sake of it) like to point out that I find it highly unlikely that anyone would go out the night (presumably)he was released from custody to immediately go on yet another killing spree. That said, thanks for the fascinating info, AP. |
Gareth W
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 3:50 pm: |
|
Intriguing, AP. Apart from demonstrating the unbelievably stupid attitude of the judiciary at a time when serial attacks on prostitutes was already a major issue in the East End, this raises a few questions of its own.
Presumably this chap was not the same as John Johnson, the City police constable involved in the arrest of Charles Ludwig for wielding a sharp knife with menaces in September 1888?
Strikes me that "John Johnson" sounds suspiciously like a pseudonym. Could this have been a certain well-known American quack doctor with a bushy moustache and a penchant for aliases?
Johnson's behaviour sounds a bit unsubtle in its violence, compared with the picture of Jack flirtatiously winning the confidence of Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly. Of course the direct approach might fit the MO of Stride's killer, or perhaps Jack only needed to behave like a smoothie if he realised people were passing by.
When was Johnson discharged? If he was at large on the night of the 30th September then he'd be a potential candidate for the Berner St crime.
He wouldn't be the same "American" discharged on the 4th October, would he? (Snippet from the Times of 5th Oct 1888 attached.)
 |
Prudence
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 6:09 pm: |
|
This would tend to support the boatmen theory, if only the boat which might be loosely connected to other events in London's East End contained Portugese lunatics.
Now could we please move on to something connected with the murders you wafflers? Not being nasty or anything. |
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 594
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 11:19 am: |
|
HI All,
Just thought I could chuck in a bit about the actual site of the attacks. I just thought it was interesting, because the area itself was not that bad an area in 1888, which made me wonder why the alleged attacks might have taken place there. I suppose you would put it in the same bracket as Berner Street and certainly not known for prostitutes as Dorset Street was.
The Square itself is very small and tucked away and would at the time have been surrounded on all sides by very respectable Victorian houses, which were knocked down in the 60's, but the people that lived around the square were upper working class/lower middle class and the square itself was there for their enjoyment and rather celubrious in 1888.
The Metropolitan hospital was sited right next to it, although I am fairly certain at the time it was a workhouse. This probably has a connection to it, as we know that most of the unfortunates ended up in the casual ward more often than not.
Richmond Road, and that part of the Kingsland Road was made up of shops which had accomodation over the top for the shop owners. These were directly opposite the Square, and on Charles Booths poverty map, the area is designated as working class, but not too disreputable I believe.
At the back of those shops is an alley called Glebe Road, which backs onto the railway line, and it has always been used by prostitutes to take clients..... still is. I have to say that in view of the fact that the second victim was allegedly attacked within a few yards of it is probably not a coincedence.
I do wonder though at the fact that the women knew each other and may have set Johnson up......it is very intriguing .....
Great story AP, thank you so much for sharing it with us.
Hugs to everyone
Jane
xxx
(Message edited by jcoram on October 18, 2005) |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2683
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 1:45 pm: |
|
My sincere apologies for that, Monty, I must have been blind drunk when I posted that.
Sorry Diana and others when I typed out the original post for some reason I put ‘John’ when of course it should be ‘James’.
Again the brandy bottle must be held guilty.
Nice bit of work Gareth, the route is highly interesting, and as you say JJ was a long way from home, and he wasn’t out that way to serve at tables but maybe he was polishing his cutlery.
Nicely done, J, and I thank you for finding this additional report on the attacks. However, unlike you, I am not too disturbed to find that the two women were close friends lodging together.
It is a social thing to go out at night with close friends rather than complete and utter strangers, it is normal to start the night out with friends and then end up with strangers.
Witness statements involving late night crime are often shared by groups of friends. I don’t find that unusual at all.
We can see a directly similar situation in some of the Whitechapel Murders where witness testimony is provided by fellow lodgers and friends, and I think mostly of the murder of Tabram here.
After the vast amount of court and police reports that I have read in the past year, I am obviously aware that many prostitutes employed scams and even sometimes employed violence in their dealings with potential clients.
This was very much in my mind when I posted the original story, and unlike Steve, my gut feeling took me entirely the other way, and I think this was mostly based on the fact that neither the police or court even bothered to ask JJ what the devil he was doing where he was such a long, long way from home.
If you read through many of the encounters in the Whitechapel Murders you will soon see that the police constables involved quickly established the reason for the person being abroad so late at night.
This was lacking.
Plus as I said earlier, the two victims appeared to be separated by time and distance.
That seems to be vital to the idea that they may have been mugging JJ.
Anyways, this is still something to be worked on.
Thanks for all the positive comments… and negative. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2687
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 3:52 am: |
|
Gareth
Thinking on your quickest route map, I was wondering if say a person engaged a boatman to row them up and down the Thames - taking into account tidal flows and how they could speed up such a journey - would that then not prove the quickest route between Wandsworth and Dalston?
We do know that the JJ of 1882 did indeed engage such boats and boatmen - with deadly result - and I was thinking that perhaps the JJ of 1888 did as well.
I don’t know much about the tidal flows of the Thames but I was also wondering if anybody had ever attempted a high tide-low tide configuration with the times of the murders? |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1937
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 8:00 am: |
|
AP,
No need to apologise. You have the best of all excuses!!
Monty
Four candles.....you know, handles for forks ! - The Guv'nor
|
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 378
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 10:45 am: |
|
Hi there,
I don't know if we are too quick to condemn this chap.
First off there is nothing to show he was American. It is claimed he spoke with an American accent - nothing more. since people were less well travelled in those times he could have originated from America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand or even South Africa. All these accents may sound American to someone who has not travelled widely.
Secondly the way I read the reports it does seem like two prostitutes tried to roll him. It's an amazing coincidence that these two girls were apparently roomates. Also only one of the girls mentions a knife - no trace of which was ever found.
He apparently did not resist arrest but let himself be taken in charge.
He was in respectable employment and had a witness who attested to his good character, on the other hand one of the girls had been cautioned previously - possible for trying to roll a drunk?
As for linking this man with the unfortunate boatman this is a bit tenuous. For a start the ages are different. Secondly I would be interested to know when he was supposed to have comitted the indecent assault.
Three girls and a boy together with the man Johnson were in a boat. The boat hits a barge and overturns. One girl is saved by clinging on to Johnson. Saying nothing at the time she later decides to accuse him of assault.
As for the man being charged with manslaughter this would have been very difficult since the inquest jury had decided the deaths were 'Accidental' and not unlayful.
I do think we ought to read these reports with an open mind and not be in too much of a hurry to condemn someone when the people who presumably had all the facts ( not the few we are privvy to) have decided there is no case to answer.
Bob |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2688
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 12:11 pm: |
|
I tend to agree with a lot of what you say, Bob, and I agree there should be no general rush to either label this chap as anything or to judge him on the little we know.
It was reported that he spoke with a ‘strong American accent’, and unlike you I believe the folk of old London town were quite a cosmopolitan bunch able to easily distinguish between the various accents that arrived in the LVP.
In particular, Americans were not uncommon in the East-End at all, and I have personally read many police and court reports featuring Americans on the wrong side of the law.
Then there is the 1891 census details found and posted by Chris which clearly show the James Johnson of whom we speak and his birth place is given as ‘USA’.
Most criminals in the LVP when apprehended by the police did not ‘resist arrest’ because when they did it usually meant being buried under an avalanche of coppers responding to their colleagues difficulty. A few cases of violent resistance do occur from time to time but these tend to involve what I would call ‘riotous assembly’ or encounters between the police and some of the very rough and tough gangs that inhabited the East End of London.
Some of your statements regarding the respectability of the attacker and the disrespectability of the victim leaves me with the impression that you should have been in court on that day along with the others.
As I think I’ve said once already, the central issue remains to be resolved, and that is just what the devil was JJ doing in that area of the East End at 2am in the morning?
I’m holding my fire on the boat episode, till I know more, but JJ was not a ‘boatman’, he was a ‘sail maker’.
JJ picked the three girls up and took them on his cruise.
Now why would a 30 something year old man pick up three young girls, get them in his hired boat and then promptly fall asleep for several hours - look at the journey - until that boat rams a barge?
There was no inquest into the death of the two girls.
One assumes that their bodies were never found. |
Jonathan Menges
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 9:42 am: |
|
He was brought in for the alleged attack on Elizabeth Hudson, at which point, in court, her roomate claimed that Johnson assaulted her also (if I'm reading this right). The police only saw him running away from Hudson, and he was caught with no knife.
Many men ran in fear when they were suddenly accused of being a murderer on the street.
I lean towards him being hassled by Hudson, who then, out of spite, put the fear of God into him the most popular way of the day, screaming "Murder".
By the way, Paul Begg does mention this case very briefly in Jack The Ripper: The Facts, using the newspaper source that only mentions the one "attack" on Hudson. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2506
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 12:38 pm: |
|
Bob ,
On the other hand you yourself seem quite ready to condemn these two women with
only the famous prejudice of prostitutes "asking for it" or in this case two women being "up to no good"-because they were on the streets at the same hour as a man was----!
Times don"t much change----or well prejudices don"t seem to!
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2689
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 1:36 pm: |
|
I am really not adverse to the idea that the prostitutes involved may have been hassling this man with some scam or the other, however the street situation is very unusual for such an event.
The normal scams involved getting the man back to a common lodging house or similar, and then the prostitutes and their pimps employed their skills at such events. There are some classic cases out there, including the one already mentioned where the prostitute robs the chap, stuffs the silver in her mouth and draws a blunt knife across her throat whilst screaming ‘Murder!’.
The more usual scam was for the pimp to burst into the room and threaten the man for being with his girl. This worked very well.
Street scams must be rare as I have found none yet, and I’ve read through thousands of cases involving prostitutes and their clients.
My feeling is that it might not be reflective of the case to prefer the Irish report to that of The Times, simply because it was a telegraphic message where brevity was required.
The real concerns here have yet to be addressed.
Why was JJ there at two in the morning?
From The Times report it does appear as if the two prostitutes were clearly separated by time and distance.
If Elizabeth Hudson was so well known to the police in the negative manner implied then why did the police follow through with a serious court prosecution?
If the police had seriously believed this to have been a scam or similar the situation would have been sorted out at the front desk by the duty inspector.
They themselves must have felt there was more to the case to have brought prosecution. |
Steve Swift
Police Constable
Username: Swift
Post Number: 3
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 3:03 pm: |
|
Why was JJ there at two in the morning?
He was 'slumming' or he was after sex?
If Elizabeth Hudson was so well known to the police in the negative manner implied then why did the police follow through with a serious court prosecution?
Police officers simply do not have that power in England AP.If the girls insisted on pressing charges then it had to go before the magistrate who then decides if there is a case to answer or not.
'A good plan violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan executed next week' - George S. Patton
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2694
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 5:20 pm: |
|
But not the same day, eh Steve?
And I think you know that where drunks are concerned their statements cannot be taken until they are sober.
You and me both know that the power of the police officer on the front desk is absolutely discretionary.
If the senior officer at the station really felt that there was no charge to answer he would have detained the entire crew in the cells overnight and then released them the following morning with no charge.
The senior officer involved obviously did not think this was the case... and charged JJ.
It requires a senior officer to press a criminal charge in court, not a witness, or a constable. |
Steve Swift
Police Constable
Username: Swift
Post Number: 4
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 6:19 pm: |
|
'It requires a senior officer to press a criminal charge in court, not a witness, or a constable'
True - but ONLY if it becomes a police matter AP. If the women in question had preferred to not press charges the police would then have the option where they could.
Remember Liz Stride & Mr Kidney? She had him arrested but preferred not to press charges and nobody took it any further.In the case you describe we know it was the two girls who pressed charges because one of them is described as the prosecutrix - meaning she brought the charge of assault.
The police were not the prosecutors here and may well have advised the magistrate that there was no charge to answer.
More awesome work btw AP
'A good plan violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan executed next week' - George S. Patton
|
Stanley D. Reid
Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 469
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 6:32 pm: |
|
Hi Steve,
Welcome aboard! Now we can argue in real time. Just kidding!!
Stan |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2695
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 6:32 pm: |
|
Thanks Steve
The Stride-Kidney incident never reached court.
Arrested is not pressing charges.
Anyone arrested may not be charged.
The police were the prosecutors in this case.
They were acting for the prosecutrix.
Your kind words much appreciated, and your input to this site a real blessing.
I need to be pulled up by the reins very often. |
Steve Swift
Police Constable
Username: Swift
Post Number: 6
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 7:42 pm: |
|
Off topic but.....Stan, you are a true gentleman sir, thank you so much for getting me here.
AP,I'm honoured to be in such illustrious company.
'A good plan violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan executed next week' - George S. Patton
|
Stanley D. Reid
Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 471
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 8:13 pm: |
|
You're welcome Steve. Glad to do it.
Stan |
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 379
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 20, 2005 - 3:39 am: |
|
Natalie,
Whoa hang on a minute. I read the accounts and I see them differently. I did not 'pre-judge' the situation, I read the available material and judged the situation on that.
Two prostitutes, one of which has already been cautioned by the police for her behaviour, accuse a man, apparently of steady employment and good character, of a violent assault.
One says he attacked her with a knife, no knife was found, the other doesn't mention a knife at all. The two prostitutes, although claimiong seperate attacks are in fact room mates.
Now I come to the conclusion that these two were trying to roll a drunk, and when he pushed them off yelled murder to either scare him off, or to get their retaliation in first.
AP. Sorry to disagree but it was not the usual scam to take a punter back to a room and have the man break in on them ( the Badger Game) it was far more likely that while a prostitute and punter were engaged up an alley he would be struck on the head and robbed. Very few prostitutes had the luxury of a room to conduct their business in.
I'm sorry I must have missed something, how have you established that the Johnson in the census is the one we are talking about?
How have you established that the Johnson in the boating accident is the same one we are talking about?
I referred to him as 'boatman' to identify him not to give him an occupation - to differentiate him from prostitute man.
Bob |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 3066
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 20, 2005 - 4:14 am: |
|
Hi all,
As has been said 'A great find' AP and worth a look.
The closing line of your first clipping that the prisoner had 'got into an awkward acrape by his own silliness' is staggering!.
He appears to have been 'walking' with Alice Anderson,wonder where that 'walk' originated? Did he approach her as she was 'standing' on the street like Elizabeth Hudson?
The line 'she put her hand in his pocket' may of course suggest a pecuniary motive on the part of the women,but it strikes me as no more than an opportunist attempt by two drunken unfortunates,picking on a likely (but as it seems the wrong) punter to grab a few coppers to carry on carousing,rather than for the need for a few pence for a bed,which didn't go exactly to 'plan'.
As to a room!!!.Such a luxury was almost beyond the dreams of avarice!!!,as we know in the case of Mary,where it was remarked upon at the time at length.Even if such a thing was a more common occurence it would invariably been also inhabited by a cast of sundry other 'unfortunates',children,dependants etc and hardly conducive to'business'.Mind you in Mary's case a few cast members may have been to her advantage!
Suzi |
Steve Swift
Police Constable
Username: Swift
Post Number: 8
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, October 20, 2005 - 8:13 am: |
|
Hello Bob,
it was far more likely that while a prostitute and punter were engaged up an alley he would be struck on the head and robbed. Very few prostitutes had the luxury of a room to conduct their business in.
It sounds like this is basically what happened to Thomas Sadler on the night Frances Coles died. She may well have known Sadlers attackers and thats the most likely reason she did not intervene on his behalf.We english are still oddly tribal and tend to know when people are not locals or if they are 'outsiders' if you like.After Sadler was long gone Coles knew she had to live and work in the area so she kept out of it.
'A good plan violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan executed next week' - George S. Patton
|
Gareth W
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 4:33 pm: |
|
AP: "Why was JJ there at two in the morning?"
SS:"He was 'slumming' or he was after sex?"
Twelve miles away from home, and on the "wrong side of the river"? Sounds unlikely unless, of course, Johnson worked near Dalston and fancied "a bit" on his way back to his lodgings. However, there was enough prostitution much closer to home.
Waterloo, for instance, is only about 4 miles away from Wandsworth and its streets were as popular with "penny-whores" as the East End was in the latter half of the 19th Century. There was also Wandsworth Common itself and, less than 10 minutes' walk away, Clapham Common - both of them magnets for those seeking sexual gratification then as now.
|
Jonathan Menges
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 2:25 pm: |
|
AP
I'll try to address some of those points you made, albiet from a defense prospective.
Earlier up you had said that it was not uncommon for friends and roomates to be out together, which I agree, but then there is the time and distance between the "attacks" (one of which is only heard about later in court), and that's what I find fishy about the situation. According to Alice, the two women were together when Hudson got up off the ground, so very near each other when the attack on Hudson took place. this agrees with Johnson's story that the two of them tried to pick his pocket. They were near each other, but Johnson wasn't the one doing the attacking. The copper was nearly there for one altercation but there is no reason to believe the first incident even happened, unless you take the word of Alice Anderson, who as I see it was there to bolster the claim of her friend and roomate.
A serious court prosecution for what? Trying but failing to pick someone's pocket? Screaming "murder!" when there was no murderer?
I can't say what he was doing there at that hour, but it seems to have been a fairly busy neighborhood at all hours of the day and night. Now, for the last one about the whole thing being sorted out at the front desk, would that have been possible if Hudson brought charges against him? I don't know, but it may have had to end up in front of a judge. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2696
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 20, 2005 - 1:56 pm: |
|
Right, here we have a case that is almost identical to the one we discuss in every detail, apart from the motive for the attack. We have two prostitutes as witnesses, obviously friends before the encounter. We have a man throwing one of them down in the street, and then running away, although not apprehended by a nearby constable, he is observed running quickly away from the scene.
Now who do we believe in this case?
The man claims it was a scam, set up by common prostitutes, that is his defence. The girls claim that one of them has been robbed.
The only difference in this case it is that the missing beads were recovered in the man’s dwelling.
In the case of JJ no knife was found, but if it had been, then he would have been found guilty.
It rests entirely on that issue.
Until a full court transcript becomes available we could argue the moon down from the night sky… but reading previous cases involving prostitutes does help.
All this man in this case had to do was throw the beads away as he ran, and he would have avoided that painful death penalty.
Methinks JJ did just that.
Second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice Patteson.
1206. JAMES HARRIS was indicted for feloniously assaulting Margaret Jennings , on the 18th of July, at St. Leonard's Shoreditch, putting her in fear, and taking from her person, and against her will, 1 necklace, value 10s., her property .
MARGARET JENNINGS. I am a shoe binder, and live in Felix-street, Hackney-road. On the 18th of July, I was in Shoreditch, near upon twelve o'clock, with Susan Steel ; we went to the Gun public-house, Shoreditch, and had a quartern of rum - the prisoner was standing at the bar - I had never seen him before, but I am certain of him - while I was having the rum, he put his hand on my shoulder; I pushed it off and drank the rum, and came out of the public-house; I cannot say whether he came out before me or after me - I had a necklace of seven rows of coral beads on my neck - when I came out, a young man outside took hold of my necklace; when I got a few doors from the public-house, the prisoner snatched them off my neck, and ran away with them - Steel was on a little before me at that time; I was a little distance from the public-house, walking along, when the prisoner took hold of my necklace, that is all he did - I fell down, because the way of his catching hold of the necklace, threw me down on my back; he did not get the necklace off till I fell on the ground, because it got entangled with my cap-strings; he got it off before he ran away - he did not strike me, he threw me down; it was by pulling the necklace that he threw me down.
Q. After losing it, what did you do? A. I had been to my mother's before I lost it, and I returned there again; one of the officers picked me up - I lost sight of the prisoner and went to my mother's, and one of the officers came there - he had the prisoner outside the door; I went to the station-house, and saw the prisoner; he is the man, I am quite sure - Sergeant Grove had my necklace.
Prisoner. Q. Were you in liquor or not? A. I was the worse for what I had had.
COURT. Q. Could you walk straight? A. Yes; I was sober enough to distinguish the person of the prisoner- I have not a doubt but he is the man; Steel was near enough to see him.
SUSAN STEEL . I was at the Gun with Jennings, on the night in question; we had some liquor there - she was rather the worse for liquor, and so was I; I saw the prisoner in the house - he is the man; he put his arm on her neck, and played with the lock of her beads; I asked her to give me the beads, and I would take care of them until she got home; because I thought I was more sober than she was - I went out before her, and was on a few yards before her; I turned round, and saw her down on the ground - nobody was near her then, because the prisoner had then ran away; I saw the prisoner, because I hallooed out "Stop thief" after him.
Q. How do you know it was him? A. He was against her when they came out of the public-house - he was close to her; and when I saw her on the ground, I saw him running away; it was about twelve o'clock - I hallooed out "Stop thief" after him, and ran after him; he turned round Austin-street, and I lost sight of him - I went to the station-house the same night, and saw him, and was certain it was the same man; I have not a doubt about him.
WILLIAM BARROW . I am a policeman. On the night of the 18th of July, I was on duty in High-street, Shoreditch - I heard the cry of "Stop thief," from a female, and saw a man run round Shoreditch-church, and turn down Austin-street - I looked, and saw the prosecutrix laying on the ground; I ran over and helped her up- I then pursued the man as quick as possible; I lost sight of him when he turned down Collingwood-street - I was forty or fifty yards behind him; and it is a very dark street - my brother officer, (H 125,) came up, and we went to No. 12, Collingwood-street, knocked at the door, and an old man let us in; I saw the prisoner coming out of the back yard - I could see his countenance then, and told him I wanted him for the coral beads - he said he had not been out for an hour - he was then very much out of breath; quite exhausted with running so fast - he had got his hat and coat off then; he was so out of breath, he could hardly speak - the man I saw running before, had his hat and coat on; I took him into the front room, and gave my lanthorn to Grove, and told him, in the prisoner's hearing, to search all the back yards over, and to search the privy, as the prisoner said he had just been to the privy - I kept him in my custody till he was locked up.
WILLIAM GROVE . I am a sergeant of the police. I was at the house in Collingwood-street, and searched the back yard, and found these beads, which I now produce - they were outside of the back window, hanging on the ledge or sill of the window - I brought them into the
See original house, and told the prisoner I had found them; he made no observation at all - I took them to the station-house, and showed them to the prosecutrix; she made no hesitation in identifying them.
EDWARD TEMPLE . I am a policeman. I was at the end of Collingwood-street on duty, about twelve o'clock at night; and the prisoner ran past me at a very quick pace - I could see his face as he passed close by me; I am sure he is the man - he went up Collingwood-street, and from the manner he ran, I thought something was wrong - he knocked at the door, No. 12, in the street - I spoke to him at the door; I saw him go into the house when it was opened; he told me a girl had scratched his face - he came from Shoreditch Church.
MARGARET JENNINGS re-examined. This is the necklace I had on that night; I know it by the silk I threaded it with, and by the lock, and the way I have joined the thread.
JURY. Q. Had you been drinking together in the public-house? A. No; I knew nothing of him - I gave the liquor to a young woman, who tried to make herself known to me - but I did not know her, and I believe she gave it to him to sip, but not in my presence - I never saw him before.
SUSAN STEEL . I did not know him before.
Prisoner's Defence. I can prove the woman to be a common prostitute; I have had connexion with her time after time, and because I would not correspond with her one night, she said she would set a project some day to take away my life; I met her this night, she was very much intoxicated; she pulled her beads off her neck outside the Gun, and gave them to me, to mind, to take care of for her, and then sung out Police, that she had been robbed; I immediately went away.
GUILTY - DEATH . Aged 24. |
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 966
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, October 20, 2005 - 8:56 pm: |
|
AP,
Got to agree with Bob and others here, this looks like a rather clumsy set up on the part of these roommates. Your first message to the thread promised attacks and double events, but the actual reports that get posted bear little to no similarities to how you described the situation.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
 Profile  Email  Dissertations  Website
|
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
