|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 182
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 18, 2004 - 2:05 pm: |       |
Hi Chris,
Oops! Given your past quality of research, I should have known you've already marked the PO. Thanks for pointing me to it.
- Jeff |
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 183
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 18, 2004 - 11:40 pm: | |
Hi,
Ok, I've been playing with this program. And, using a 14 min patrol time for Watkins and 17 mins for Harvey, I've got the following. The references to letters in street names are from the maps Chris has posted in this thread.
I start Harvey at the PO at 1:28.
At 1:30 Watkins arrives in Mitre Square at the S in Square (I start him in a location to ensure this arrival time given his speed; that location is the "R" in King Street)
When Watkins arrives, Harvey is at the 52 on Houndsditch (just above the A in Algate)
Lawdend spots Eddowes after they leave the club at 1:30. At first, I thought that maybe they enter the passage just after this sighting, which would mean they would see Watkin's from their vantage in Church passage (Watkin's has a light and would be exiting Mitre Square at about 1:31:15). If so, JtR would expect Watkins to re-entre from that route, hence this is an unlikely "escape" option. And, if he does see Watkins as he exits, he also knows he now has "maximum time before next patrol".
However, Lawdend makes it clear that they get up to leave at 1:30, and estimates the sighting at 1:35 am.
At 1:35 am, Watkins is on the "u" in Church (near "St. Katharine Cree" in the lower part of the map) and Harvey is approching Bury Street.
About 5 minutes later, Harvey enters Church Passage and reaches the end of it at 1:40:20.
At this point, Watkins is at the M in St. James' Place.
Now, if JtR "holds still" until Harvey gets back to Duke Steet, then at this point Watkins is just about to turn onto the final leg of his St. James' Place patrol.
So, if JtR then heads out to St. James Place, Watkins has just left it, or is just leaving it. If he follow's Harvey down Church Passage, and goes slow (to avoid making noise), he gets to Duke street when Harvey is about halfway between Church Passage and Algate.
Now, both of these routes let JtR spot where the nearest PC is and allow him to head "the other way". He either sees Watkins in St. James Place or he sees Harvey on Duke. Going the "other way" heads him towards the side street leading to Stoney Lane, which he can easily reach by 1:44 walking about the same speed the PC's are patrolling at.
This only gives JtR about 5 minutes to kill and mutilate Eddowes (if Lawdend's time is correct). Move that sighting a few minutes earlier, and there's the additional time for these actions. Move it to the point where Eddowes and JtR traverse Church Passage at 1:30ish, and they spot Watkins on his patrol of Mitre Square (letting JtR know he's now got the maximum time until it's checked again; probably thinking he's got about 10 to 15 minutes as an average patrol time).
The escape route choice can be based upon JtR seeing the police and avoiding them.
- Jeff |
Monty
Chief Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 651
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 11:12 am: | |
Jeff,
"The escape route choice can be based upon JtR seeing the police and avoiding them."
Damn right. But they're the ones he could see. As we know, Halse and his DC cronies were out that night doing their enquiries, stop/search ect. Our boy may have been wary of just about anyone.....but I suppose he would focus more on the uniform boys.
Monty
|
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 184
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 2:09 pm: | |
Hi Monty,
But were Halse and the boys checking lone males or couples? I seem to recall an instruction to check out couples, but I may be misremembering their instructions. If they were only checking couples though, then the lone JtR is, well, not a couple.
- Jeff
P.S. I forgot to mention, at 1:44, Harvey has just started his return leg towards Duke street, which is where he reports being when the whistle blows. So, the 17 min patrol time I used for Harvey is based upon the fact that he ends up in the approximately correct location, and it takes between 3-4 min. for him to get to the end point from Church Passage. So, this patrol time fits his testimony. To the degree his testimony is accurate, 17 minutes appears to be a good estimate of his average beat time. |
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 187
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 7:59 pm: | |
I've built "Jack" into my simulation. Since I obviously don't know how fast Jack is moving when he leaves, don't really know the route he takes, etc, all I'm doing here is testing the proposed exit out through St. James Place.
Also, I chose as a speed the average of the two police officers. I've gone with this simply because running might draw attention to Jack, and we have no reports of anyone seeing someone running from the location. Not that this means he didn't, of course, but this is only a test to see if this works!
Also, in the case of MJK, there is the report of hearing receeding footsteps like the "steady tred of a patrol officer". Again, this may not have been Jack leaving Millers Court, but it suggests the possibility that he may have walked at this speed; an attempt to combine speed without raising eyebrows.
Anyway, I start Jack moving at the point where Harvey has completed his patrol of Church Passage and has entered back onto Duke street (1:41 am by the simulations clock). Jack then sets out diagonally across Mitre Square to St. James Passage, through here to St. James Place, diagonally across to Duke street and then on to Stoney Lane.
And, when he enters St. James Place, PC. Watkins is on the first E of Steet for King Street (referenced to Chris's maps he's so kindly provided; Thanks again Chris! These are great!) In other words, Jack is now behind PC Watkins, and Harvey is heading towards Algate, also away from Jack's direction. At the time Jack crosses Duke street from St. James Place, PC Harvey is now on Algate. And at 1:44 when PC Watkins find Eddowes, Jack is crossing Houndsditch into Stoney Lane, and PC Harvey has turned back towards Duke along Algate.
What's nice about this? First, PC Harvey estimates his time from Church Passage to when the whistle blew to be about 3-4 minutes. Which is the time estimated by the program (3 minutes from exiting Church Passage, and 4 upon entering). He's estimated to be in a location that fits with his testimony at 1:44 as well. I start him at the Post Office at 1:28, which he testifies is when and where he checked the time.
From Watkins testimony, he testifies he patrolled Mitre Square at 1:30 (which he does in the simulation), found the body at 1:44 (which he does in the simulation) and that his beat takes 12-14 minutes (14 minutes in the simulation, corresponding to the 1:30-1:44 testified times).
So, the speeds used do seem to place the PC's in the appropriate locations. And, using their average walking speed, a speed that won't draw attention to Jack, gets him out of the area via St. James Place.
The alternative route, follow Harvey out through Church Passage also works easily (I've not simulated it because it's so simple to know it works). He just turns up Duke away from Algate, rather than follow Harvey down Duke towards Algate, and as soon as Harvey's out of sight, Jack could run as there's no PC in the area (that we know of).
Another alternative that is less likely, but may be possible is the following. Out the main access to Mitre Square, turn on Mitre Street towards Algate, and head away from Harvey. However, this doesn't point Jack in the direction of the Graffito, but then, there's lots of time before it was discovered.
Anyway, the results of this simulation is that it seems that it's very possible that both PC Harvey and PC Watkins both were very close to catching Jack. PC Harvey may very well have been at the end of Church Passage at the time when Jack was still with Eddowes, and PC Watkins may just have left St. James Place as Jack crossed it (presuming this was the route he took, of course).
- Jeff |
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 188
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 9:39 pm: | |
Just for fun I've tried the two other routes. And yes, following PC Harvey (using the same paramters as above), gets Jack out of Mitre Square and onto Duke street in time to see PC Harvey on Duke towards Algate. He then heads the other way and avoids PC Watkins altogether. Also, it gets him close to the same location at 1:44 as the St. James Place route (not quite as far along, but then, as distance between him and Harvey increases, he could run by then, or just speed up).
Leaving by the main exit and turning up towards St. James Place means he passes PC Watkins, so thats out. Turning the other way, however, means he would have been spotted by PC Harvey, who would now be heading along Algate away from Duke. Jack only gets "out of sight" just before the whistle blows.
So, either turn from the main exit gets him spotted by either PC Watkins or PC Harvey. Unless the "City PC Witness" is either Watkins or Harvey, then we can probably rule out this exit. Interesting, if it's PC Harvey, Harvey would only see Jack from behind, meaning he would not be able to give much of a discription anyway. One would expect, however, some other mention in the official documents of the PC who saw Jack from behind as he left Mitre Square. etc.
Anyway, based upon these things, it looks like either passage way works as the escape route if PC Harvey's presence in Church Passage is what prompted Jack to leave Mitre Square. Both get him out of the patrol areas of both Watkins and Harvey by the time Eddowes is found even if he walks at the speed of a patrolling police constable.
- Jeff |
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 189
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 9:54 pm: | |
By the way, the only times and "people on the move" I've not been able to fit in are Lawdend and his friends (Blenkinsop sp? is stationary in St. James Place; he reports being asked by a well dressed gentleman at 1:30 if he saw a man and women pass through recently; and he reports seeing others that he paid no attention to).
Lawdend and Levey report they got up at 1:30 to leave the pub, and left 4 or 5 minutes later (i.e. 1:35). It takes about 2 min to get to Church Passage (1:37 am). That would only give 3.5 minutes before PC Harvey patrolls Church passage. I don't think this is enough time for Jack to get into Mitre Square, murder, and mutilate Eddowes. If they've estimated the time based upon the pub closing, then it's possible the pub called last orders and they figured it was 1:30 (say, it was 1:20, 5 minutes later they leave, 2 minutes later and they pass Church passage a bit earlier than they thought (now 1:27). That would mean they would have passed Jack and Eddowes at 1:27 and 3 minutes later Jack and Eddowes could be in Church Passage, waiting for Watkins to exit, and we have the scenerio I mentioned a few posts ago.
Anyway, the time of their sighting is "about right" but a "bit late" as there's so little time for Jack to perform the mutilations. Since the PCs both check clocks for their times, while these witnesses seem to have estimated them, I suggest their estimations are a bit late (at least relative to the clocks the PCs used).
- Jeff |
Monty
Chief Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 659
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 20, 2004 - 8:32 am: | |
Jeff,
Who is a busy boy ?
Re Halse. Yeah, you're right. But I was refering to Jack loaded with a kidney and a hookey apron. Would you want to be caught out with that gear ? Im just saying that I feel he would be wary of people around him.
Your senarios pan out for me. The simple truth is that we will never really know the exact times and routes. I feel the unidentifed witnesses in St james place back up Lewandes story and therefore the time. I cannot see why the police would keep a cut out of this report unless they feel something is in it.
Good work anyway.
Monty
|
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 190
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 20, 2004 - 2:49 pm: | |
Hi Monty,
I see your point. A fellow walking around while whiping a knife on a piece of old apron and holding a kidney might be cause for a 2nd look!
More seriously, just having committed a murder and having such things on him is likely to induce a bit of caution. However, this also presupposes that Jack thinks about things the same way we are. If, however, he's so pumped up with his narrow escape (PC Harvey or the door opening, etc), he may think he's virtually invisible. This is especially true if he was interrupted with Stride, now knows that someone was just "over the fence" with Chapman, and was interrupted with Nichols (all of which have been suggested before). So, Jack may think he can just walk through the crowd and nobody will pay him a second glance (and maybe nobody did).
Lots of maybes I admit, and all I'm doing is agreeing with you. We can't know for sure. But, these kind of simulations do allow us to examine the validity of some of the testimony. Lawende's time looks to be a touch late. I see that in the witness section of casebook, Lawende's sighting is indicated to be 1:30, but his testimony is that at 1:30 they rose to leave, and he estimates the sighting at 1:35. It only takes PC Harvey 1 min 50 sec to traverse from the entrance to Church Passage to the Public house on Algate. So, if the sighting is at 1:32, with Jack and Eddowes in Mitre Square at 1:33, that now leaves about 7 min 30 sec before PC Harvey is at the Mitre Square end of Church Passage.
I suppose it depends upon how much time Jack needs to kill and mutilate Eddowes. If 5 minutes 30 secons is thought to be enough, then Lawende's testimony is perfectly fine.
Anyway, what's the testimony of the unidentified witness in ST. James Place? I know of Blenkinsop, and he reports that at 1:30 he was asked by a well dressed man if a man and women recently passed through. If this was 2:30 it would suggest a detective or doctor is looking for witnesses, but 1:30 is before the murder (Watkins is patrolling Mitre Square at 1:30, Lawende and friends are getting up to leave the pub). I can't see Jack asking this, why would he? I know some think it's an undercover cop who's supposed to be following Eddowes, but that is just a story made up out of air as there is nothing in the documented evidence to suggest the police did any such thing. So, it seems Blenkinsop's testimony is probably of an innocent question, however because of the events that occur shortly after it looks very suspicious in hindsight. The alternative is to suggest his time is out by an hour, which I'm hesitant to do. Finally, Blenkinsop also indicates he saw other people in St. James Place, but didn't pay any attention to them (could one have been Jack? It looks like yes from these sims).
Anyway, what's the testimony of the unidentified witness in St. James Place? And how does it back up Lawendes times? I've forgotten this piece of information.
- Jeff |
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 191
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 20, 2004 - 8:27 pm: | |
Oh, and just to propose something to think about, what if we have the following "theory".
The door opening prompts Jack to leave, and not PC Harvey. This occurs just about when PC Harvey enters Church passage. Jack leaves through Church Passage and is spotted by PC Harvey in the alley. However, with no reason to stop and question him (apron is hidden under a jacket; hands in pockets; just bare with me for a second), so he lets Jack pass. PC Harvey finishes his patrol of Church passage and can't see Eddowes in the corner (the gas lamp hinders his vision into the dark corner).
Now, what would such a hypothetical situation do in terms of "odd stories about Jack"? First, it provides us with the "City PC Witness". Second, it ends up being the source for Smith's tale about meeting Jack in an alley shortly before a body is found (although Smith claims it was him, not Harvey; it is Smith who tells this tale isn't it?).
Anyway, I personally don't think this is at all likely, but it goes to show how easy it is to "make the odd things fit" when you look at this case. The obvious problems are 1) "How could Jack pass that close to Harvey and not get caught? He's got the apron, he's got blood on his hands, etc". 2) Why is there absolutely no record of this sighting by PC Harvey in any of the internal police communications and yet it must have been known by Smith? 3) Once the murder was discovered, why didn't PC Harvey immediately go looking for this fellow he passed in the passage? 4) Smith's stories are unreliable. And I'm sure we could all think of other problems with this scenerio.
The reason I'm even mentioning this is because I think it's important for us, as researchers, to look at "what doesn't fit" with just as much weight as "what does fit", if not even more weight. In this case, we have 2 suspect bits of evidence that can be made to fit (dodgy support), and all sorts of stuff to suggest the "theory" is wrong. As much fun as it is to suggest "this happened", most of the time the evidence will point to the opposite.
- Jeff |
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 192
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 20, 2004 - 8:53 pm: | |
Finally (yah right), the route out through the main exit of Mitre Square and down towards Algate does have a short "window of oppertunity". If Jack leaves when PC Harvey starts his patrol of Church Passage, rather than when PC Harvey is at the Mitre Square end of it, then this route gets Jack out of sight of Harvey by the time he rounds the corner of Duke to Algate. The sim estimates it takes PC Harvey about 40 seconds to walk the entire length of Church Passage (without entering Mitre Square). If Jack sees PC Harvey enter (sees Harvey's light) and flees immediately (first 10 seconds) then at no more than a patrolmans walk, he would not be spotted by Harvey. The route through St. James Place, however is not yet clear (Watkins would spot him).
Anyway, what this simulation seems to suggest is that if Jack leaves upon Harvey's entrance to Church Passage, the route directly away from PC Harvey works. If he waits until Harvey exits Church Passage (risking Harvey patrolling Mitre Square) then the route out through St. James Place or Church Passage work.
Why take the 2nd chance? The most reasonable explanation is that Jack did not spot PC Harvey until PC Harvey was near the end of the passage (he's concentrating on other things; spots him as he gets close, then Harvey turns around, and Jack gets out of there!). He doesn't head away from Harvey out the main exit, because the diagonal route to St. James Place is less "in the open" (he's almost spotted so getting hidden is a priority due to fear), and this route "opens up" at this time because Watkins is now finishing his patrol of St. James Place, etc.
Still, the simulations, to the extent they accurately place the two police officers, do seem to suggest that PC Harvey may very well have been in Church Passage while Jack was in Mitre Square, and that his presence is what prompted Jack to leave.
If this is the case, then Jack may have been interrupted as many as 3 times:
1) Nichols - interruption has been suggested
2) Stride - if she's a Ripper victim, interruption is usually used to explain lack of mutilations
3) Eddowes - Harvey's presence would be the interruption
Although the neighbor is thought to be in the yard next door at the onset of the attack, Jack didn't leave at that point, so this is not an interruption. But, that makes 3 of the 4 first victims (as a maximum).
- Jeff |
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 193
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 20, 2004 - 9:40 pm: | |
And now a question. Do we know the address of the Imperial Club where Lawende and co were? I've re-read his testimony on the site and he says its on Duke street (which means it's not the PH marked on the map; it's on Algate). If it's right at Church passage, then the sighting is at about 1:33-1:35 based upon Lawende and Levey's testimonies. And, these times fit quite nicely (with the earlier being a bit better). This means that the actual murder could take place by 1:35-1:36. Dr. Sequera (sp?) suggests 5 minutes as a minimum for the mutilations, which means murder and mutilations finished at 1:40ish, which is the time these sims are suggesting Jack leaves due to PC Harvey's patrol of Church Passage!
With 1:35 as the "late sighting", and say 1 minute for Jack and Catharine to get to the murder scene, we really only have 4 minutes, but we're dealing with an error of only 1 minute, which given the information, I think is pretty good.
Anyway, with all of this combined, I think it's looking pretty likely that PC Harvey was only seconds away from catching Jack in the act. And PC Watkins wasn't that far off either. Ok, so we probably knew they were close simply because of their patrols, and it's not like it hasn't been suggested before, but all of these bits of testimony seem to fit together and don't seem to produce too many conflicts.
- Jeff |
Louis van Dompselaar
Sergeant
Username: Etaoin
Post Number: 13
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 21, 2004 - 10:15 am: | |
Jeff,
The Imperial Club was at nos. 16-17 Duke Street,
according to Lawende's testimony at the inquest.
(JtR Sourcebook page 213).
Oddly enough the A-Z turns that into Duke's Place for some reason.
Louis
|
Monty
Chief Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 666
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 21, 2004 - 11:58 am: | |
Jeff,
Im working from memory here so please forgive me.
Re Unidentified witnesses in St James Pace. If I remember correctly a press report was found in the Met records (why Met? It was a City case). A Daily Telegraph Report dated either 12th Nov 88 or 12th Dec 88. The report claims that a couple (or 2 people)passing through St James Place peered down St Jame Passage and saw a man and a woman in Mitre Sq. It seems (according to this report) that they saw the continuation of what Lewande saw the begining of. I cannot remember the time they stated but it was around the time Lewande spotted his couple. This account can be found in the A-Z or (again, I think) in the Scourebook.
Monty
PS Re lamps and lighting. Check out the Victims topic..Eddowes...movement after Eddowes..the archived stuff dated 26th June onwards. I think it will interest you. |
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 194
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 21, 2004 - 2:19 pm: | |
Hi Louis,
Thanks for that! I'll try and locate the address on the map.
Monty,
That's interesting! I don't recall ever seeing these. If, however, the time is similar to Lawende and friends, given that the shift from the entrance to Church Passage to the corner of Mitre Square would take less than a minute, giving the same time would simply suggest that Eddowes and Jack moved into the square just after Lawende and friends passed by. This is what I've suggested might have happened as well, so it's nice to see there's something that fits with that. Too bad the one thing that fits is an unverified press report where the witnesses are not named, etc. And, thanks for the pointer to the Eddowes thread. I'll check it out.
- Jeff |
Alan Sharp
Inspector
Username: Ash
Post Number: 367
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 22, 2004 - 7:54 am: | |
Monty,
It was DT 12 November 1888. I have still not seen the original report, but I imagine it must be included in The News from Whitechapel, a book I keep meaning to order but never seem to get around to. Otherwise it's another trip to Colindale. I'd like to see the original wording, as I tend to wonder if it is merely a garbled account of Lawende and Levy's sighting. |
Monty
Chief Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 674
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 22, 2004 - 11:53 am: | |
Jeff, Alan,
Jeff, whoa there big lad...like Alan, I cannot find the original report. There may be more to it. Also, like Alan, I have a feeling its a hybrid of Lewandes sighting and, to put it nicely, a load of old Bull.
That said, if it were true then I agree, it certainly fits the timeline and, more importantly, confirms seperately that Lewande saw a couple in that area.
You got to the post (Movements after Eddowes murder thread) on Stewart Evans experiment with Bulls eye lanterns yet ?
Monty
|
Alex Chisholm
Detective Sergeant
Username: Alex
Post Number: 63
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 22, 2004 - 12:07 pm: | |
Hi Alan, Jeff, Monty,
The following extract is taken from the Daily Telegraph, 12 Nov. 1888, page 5:
“A correspondent forwards copies of descriptions of certain men who were last seen in the company of the woman who was murdered in Berner-street and of the woman who was mutilated in Mitre-square. These authentic descriptions, we have reason to know, have been secretly circulated by the authorities of Scotland-yard since Oct. 26, but the complete details have never been made public. This reticence is one of the mysteries of police administration, and it is difficult to find an explanation to account for the fact that this important information has been “confidentially communicated” to police-officers throughout the kingdom, but has been withheld from the people who have had the best opportunities of seeing and of, therefore, recognising the assassin. The point which the police appear to have been at most pains to suppress is the significant one that the unknown murderer has the “appearance of a sailor.”
The notice is headed: “Apprehensions sought. Murder. Metropolitan Police District”; and it proceeds:
“The woodcut sketches, purporting to resemble the persons last seen with the murdered women, which have appeared in The Daily Telegraph, were not authorised by police. The following are the descriptions of the persons seen:
“At 12.35 a.m., 30th September, with Elizabeth Stride, found murdered at one a.m., same date, in Berner-street - A man, aged 28, height 5ft 8in, complexion dark, small dark moustache; dress, black diagonal coat, hard felt hat, collar and tie; respectable appearance; carried a parcel wrapped up in a newspaper.
At 12.45 a.m., 30th, with same woman, in Berner-street, a man, aged about 30, height 5ft 5in, complexion fair, hair dark, small brown moustache, full face, broad shoulders; dress, dark jacket and trousers, black cap with peak.
“Information to be forwarded to the Metropolitan Police Office, Great Scotland-yard London, S.W.
“At 1.35 a.m., 30th Sept., with Catherine Eddows, in Church-passage, leading to Mitre-square, where she was found murdered at 1.45 a.m., same date, a man, age 30, height 5ft 7 or 8in., complexion fair, moustache fair, medium build; dress, pepper-and-salt colour loose jacket, grey cloth cap, with peak of the same material, reddish neckerchief tied in knot; appearance of a sailor.
“Information respecting this man to be forwarded to Inspector M’William, 26, Old Jewry, London, E.C.”
It will be observed that there is by no means an agreement of testimony in regard to the important point of the supposed murderer’s personal appearance. In this connection it may be recalled that the following descriptions were given in evidence. Wm. Marshall said, on the night of the Berner-street murder, at a quarter to twelve o’clock, he saw in that thoroughfare a middle-aged man, 5ft 6in high, talking to Stride. His dress was a black cutaway coat and dark trousers, a round cap with a small peak, such as a sailor would wear. He was without whiskers, looked like a clerk, carried nothing in his hand, and spoke in the tone of an educated man. Another witness testified that he saw a man with the deceased woman in Berner-street an hour later than did Marshall. The man was 5ft 7in high, and had a long dark overcoat. Smith, the police-constable, who also observed the couple, described the man as 5ft 7in high, wearing dark clothes, cutaway coat, hard felt hat, twenty-eight years of age, and of respectable look. He carried a parcel, wrapped in a newspaper.
As regards the Mitre-square victim, reference was made at the inquest to a man, rough and shabby, with a peaked cloth cap, who was observed by two witnesses at the corner of Church-passage at twenty-five minutes to two a.m. on Sunday, Sept. 30, but details were, at the request of Mr. Crawford, the City Solicitor, not pressed for. Statements not taken in evidence were made by Matthew Packer, a shopkeeper, of Berner-street, and other persons, as to the identity of the man seen with Stride in Berner-street.”
The Daily Telegraph, 13 Nov. 1888, page 5 reported:
“It is noteworthy, however, that there were two descriptions given of the suspected Mitre-square and Hanbury-street murderers, which agree in some respects with that furnished by the witness Cox of the man seen in Kelly’s company on Thursday night. About ten minutes before the body of Catherine Eddowes was found in Mitre-square, a man about thirty years of age, of fair complexion, and with a fair moustache, was said to have been seen talking to her in the covered passage leading to the square. On the morning of the Hanbury-street murder, a suspicious looking man entered a public-house in the neighbourhood. He was of shabby-genteel appearance and had a sandy moustache. The first of these descriptions was given by two persons who were in the Orange Market and closely observed the man. The City police have been making inquiries for this man for weeks past, but without success, and they do not believe that he is the individual described by Cox. On the other hand the Metropolitan authorities are inclined to attach significance to it. Cox stated that the man who accompanied Kelly to her home carried a can or pot of beer. No trace of this beer has been found in the room, nor of the pewter in the ashes of the grate. Inquiry has equally failed to obtain evidence of Kelly or any person similar to the man described having bought beer at any of the neighbouring public-houses. Considering the amount of drinking on and off the premises of these establishments near midnight the mere absence of evidence on this point would not be surprising in any case.”
Hope that helps.
Best Wishes
alex
|
Jim DiPalma
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jimd
Post Number: 58
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 22, 2004 - 12:11 pm: | |
Alan,
I went trawling through "The News from Whitechapel" looking for the report and did not find it. I would still recommend the book though, it is quite good.
The third edition of the A-Z carries a synopsis of the report, confirming it is from the Nov 12 Daily Telegraph, but did not contain a verbatim copy of the report itself.
Alex, thanks very kindly for taking the time to post the report, much appreciated.
Jeff, great work on the sims, very useful in visualizing the movements of the various players. It's true we'll never know exactly what happened, but this type of work is helpful in determining what most likely happened.
Best to all,
Jim
(Message edited by jimd on January 22, 2004) |
Monty
Chief Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 678
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 22, 2004 - 12:15 pm: | |
Alex,
It helps me.
I know Ive asked this before but...
Why would this newspaper report be found in the Met files? Im not suggesting its soley because of the 'Orange market' sighting due to the fact that it covers pretty much every witness sighting from Chapman to Kelly. Im just wondering why the police held on to this when they obviously had the info themselves.
Many thanks though.
Monty
|
Sarah Long
Chief Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 509
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 22, 2004 - 12:21 pm: | |
"About ten minutes before the body of Catherine Eddowes was found in Mitre-square, a man about thirty years of age, of fair complexion, and with a fair moustache, was said to have been seen talking to her in the covered passage leading to the square."
I might as well say it before the Barnettists do (if they come on here) but doesn't his man sound familiar?? |
Alan Sharp
Inspector
Username: Ash
Post Number: 373
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 22, 2004 - 12:26 pm: | |
Thanks Alex, it is very helpful indeed. It seems then that the A-Z got the date wrong and it was actually the 13th November DT. It also sounds to me very much like my suspicion was correct and that the two persons were actually Lawende and Levy and the location was mis-reported. |
Alex Chisholm
Detective Sergeant
Username: Alex
Post Number: 64
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 22, 2004 - 12:51 pm: | |
Hi Monty
I think the reason this report was held in the Met. Files is that it forms part of the Daily Telegraph coverage of Kelly’s Inquest. As Alan rightly identifies, the ‘Orange Market’ report is attributed to the Daily Telegraph 12 Nov. 1888 in the A-Z but this is incorrect, MEPO 3/140 f224-226 is the ‘Orange Market’ and Kelly Inquest extract from the Daily Telegraph 13 Nov. 1888.
This is probably why Jim couldn’t find the extract in NfW (thanks for the plug Jim). The Orange Market report can be found under the 13 Nov. coverage on page 211 of News from Whitechapel.
Best wishes
alex
|
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 197
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 22, 2004 - 3:09 pm: | |
Hi Monty,
Having seen the above press report, it does look like the "Orange Market" people are probably Lawende and Levy or Harris with their location transported. Basically, I was running with the idea that if there was a 2nd report of a man and women seen at the "other end" of Church Passage (and if this 2nd report were "true"), all it does is confirm the time-line. However, given the fact that Eddowes was found in Mitre Square, we know she got there at some point after Watkins patrolled it at 1:30 and before Watkins finds her at 1:44. If, however, the report was unreliable, it wouldn't matter much. In other words, it's "one way evidence", it fits with what we know must have happened based upon Lawende's testimony, Watkins testimony, and the body discovery time and doesn't really provide any "new critical information" concerning the events. The one "scenerio" it could work against would be the idea of "Jack chased her into Mitre Square" rather than she went in with him voluntarily. This might be used in the "prostitution" question. However, given that this "2nd report" is probably just an inaccurate re-telling of Lawende's story, it shouldn't be presented as such.
And yes, I found the bull's eye lantern posts. Interesting. I recall reading about the experiments and knew the light wasn't great. But, we have to remember that although the light wouldn't help PC Harvey see Jack, Jack could easily see PC Harvey's light. It's like lighting a match in a dark gymnasium isn't going to help you see the fellow at the far end, but he's going to see the match. In fact, the match will destroy your dark vision, and you'll probably see less. That's what I think may have happened with the light and the end of Church Passage. As PC Harvey approaches that, he can't really see into Mitre Square. Since it's not part of his beat, he's not going to shine his light around it. Etc.
- Jeff |
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 198
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 22, 2004 - 3:16 pm: | |
For those interested, I've sent a copy of the simulation program to Stephen to check out. He's going to make it available for download. I think it's fairly straight forward to use. Eventually I'm going to try and make it a bit more general, so that one can load different maps, add people, routes, change the speed of different people, etc. This, however, may take me some time as the project has a lot of parameters to deal with. Still, it may turn into a useful research tool for the examining of various routes, and times, etc.
What I'm thinking of as well is that one could save their "scenerio" and send it to other people (with the appropriate map file). Then, we could all have a look at what each other is "seeing". No promises that I can actually get such a thing off the ground, or how long it might take me, but I'll give it a go as I get the time.
- Jeff |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
