|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Eric Skinner
Police Constable
Username: Eric
Post Number: 7
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 7:59 am: |       |
Hi Everyone!
Does anyone have a good scan of the "Plan of Mitre Square and Surroundings" diagram? I know there's a scan of the diagram on this board but a lot of the detail is lost when it's blown up to a decent size, say six inches by six inches. Thanks in advance and my apologies if this question has already been asked and answered.
Eric |
Chris Scott
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chris
Post Number: 1232
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 2:51 pm: | |
Eric
Drop me a line and I'll send you a scan of the Mitre square diagram
Chris |
Nina Thomas
Police Constable
Username: Nina
Post Number: 7
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 9:43 pm: | |
Hi Eric,
Here's a map I put together, hope it helps.
Nina
|
Donald Souden
Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 248
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 10:37 pm: | |
Nina,
Neat (in all senses) diagram and I assume it is to scale, but if so could you append some measurements? I have heard from someone who visited the area recently that he felt it was quite small, but since my visiting London is at least a year away (if ever) some sense of size would be appreciated.
Don. |
Nina Thomas
Police Constable
Username: Nina
Post Number: 9
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 11:20 pm: | |
Hi Don,
I don't know what the actual measurements are of Mitre square so I used my own scale. The passages are 3' wide, the empty houses are 15' x 9' and the square itself is 36' x 51'. There are some great photos here that can give you an idea of it's size. http://casebook.org/victorian_london/sitepics.w-mitre.html
Nina
|
Thomas C. Wescott
Detective Sergeant
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 85
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 12:41 am: | |
Nina,
Are you an artist of sorts? I'm impressed with your work. If you are, I'd like to chat with you off the site to see if you'd be able to help me with something Ripper-related. I have no skill at drawing or rendering drawings on my comp. My email is tcwes@aol.com. I'd love to hear from you. 
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Eric Skinner
Police Constable
Username: Eric
Post Number: 8
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 7:20 am: | |
Nina,
Wow, thanks! That is truly a terrific map. Have you considered doing maps of the other crime scenes? This is REALLY good (and I'm not just saying that cause I needed it for some research.)
Eric |
Robert W. House
Detective Sergeant
Username: Robhouse
Post Number: 89
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 10:55 am: | |
This is the same map that is in Sugden's book, is it not?
Rob H |
Nina Thomas
Sergeant
Username: Nina
Post Number: 11
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, May 30, 2004 - 12:05 am: | |
Rob H,
I studied the police diagram and the map from Sugden's book, but if you notice my map is not scaled as there's. I didn't want to make it as long as the police diagram or as square as Sugden's. You may have believed my map was from Sudgen's book because I added in Heydemann & Co., which I did because there was a door on the police diagram at the end of the passage near the yard and I thought my map should show where it lead to. There is actually not much difference between all the maps, although I believe the police would have done much better with with some graph paper.
Nina |
Nina Thomas
Sergeant
Username: Nina
Post Number: 12
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, May 30, 2004 - 12:41 am: | |
Tom,
I'm afraid my artistic abilities in drawing are limited to making maps, plans and designs. If I can help you in any of those areas let me know.
Nina
|
Nina Thomas
Sergeant
Username: Nina
Post Number: 13
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, May 30, 2004 - 12:48 am: | |
Eric,
I'm glad I could be of help.
I would like to do a detailed map of Dutfield's yard next if I can get enough details of the area.
Nina |
Thomas C. Wescott
Detective Sergeant
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 98
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, May 30, 2004 - 9:45 pm: | |
Nina,
Yes, that is precisely what I need help in. If you wouldn't mind, please email me at tcwes@aol.com. I'm sorry I can't write more now but I'm a bit pushed for time.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Jon Smyth
Inspector
Username: Jon
Post Number: 349
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 08, 2004 - 12:11 pm: | |
Ok, here's an open question for anyone..
Presently I have been going through statements & news reports to see if the actual time that Eddowes body was removed to the mortuary is indicted anywhere.
From what I can gather the body was expeditiously moved shortly after it's discovery, I'm thinking 2:30-3:00am?, partly because Insp. Collard tells us that once the ambulance arrived, which only had to come a short distance, the body was placed on the conveyance and moved away.
Halse stated that he came by Goul. St at about 2:20am, he then returned to Mitre Sq. and accompanied Insp. Collard to the mortuary. So either the body was moved shortly after 2:30am or it had already gone and Insp. Collard followed later.
There's no mention of Mr Foster, the Surveyor. And we might wonder how he would be able to detail anything in such darkness anyway.
Did the police really immediately run off to awaken the surveyor at such a time? - I think this is hardly believable.
So, where did Mr Foster get his detail of the position of the body from?, and how is it that his drawing is so precisly the same as Dr Browns written notes?
Mr Foster was certainly at the mortuary, his drawing of the face states as much, and we can see no mud on her left cheek in his sketch, so she must have been cleaned up by the time Mr Foster arrived at the mortuary.
I have read that Dr Brown made some sketches of the murder scene on his arrival at Mitre Sq. I am wondering if these sketches, which reside in the London Hospital Medical College, were what Mr Foster used, copying his detail from the medical notes & sketches provided by Dr Brown.
So was Mr Foster ever with the body at Mitre Sq.?
Does anyone know what time the body was removed?
Did Mr Foster actually see what he drew?
Thanks, Jon |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1402
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 08, 2004 - 12:38 pm: | |
Jon,
Re the latter.......damn this is going to ruin my article.
OK, Im doing an article on the lighting and events of Mitre square. Without revealing all, my conclusions are verging on 'it wasnt as dark as we all reckon' theory. I need a little more time (and help) to nail it. But evidence points to the idea that Jack, Foster, Morris and even Watkins could see quite clearly. The only person who would have struggled (who almost entered the square) was Harvey.
I feel that Foster worked with a Bullseye which would assist with the illumination. If Brown could make sketches (with the need for detail) then I see no reason why Foster couldnt do the same.
That said, the path you are hinting at is really worth pursuing and Im afraid I cannot help with the other question yet.
Regards,
Monty
Don't be shocked by the tone of my voice
Check out my new weapon, weapon of choice- Jack the Ripper
|
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 532
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 08, 2004 - 1:12 pm: | |
Hi, Jon
Very interesting, Jon--shrewd reading, if you don't mind my saying so. Here's my two cents, if you're interested: based on what Halse said, it sounds like you've got the time of removal about right. No one appears to mention a specific time for the arrival/departure of the ambulance--if we knew when the doctors left, we'd have a better idea since once the body's gone there's no reason for the doctors to remain.
With most everybody arriving about 2, it sounds like there's a only a thirty minute window there for Foster to come in and do his sketch of the body in situ. However, I can't find any mention of his being there either. The arrival of everyone else does seem to get a mention.
Assuming Foster wasn't in the Square between 2-2:30, I feel his sketch is accurate though. Not only would he have worked from Brown's sketch, but I suspect he also would have worked with Brown and Sequeria directly. The question I have is why were Foster's sketches entered into the inquest record when Brown's weren't? There must have been a reason why they had a surveyor making victim sketches in the first place.
Monty, I'm really looking forward to this article of yours. I also feel that they would have had the Square lit up. Makes me wonder how Clapp could have slept through the entire crime scene investigation, (as he seems to have done).
(Message edited by oberlin on November 08, 2004) |
Jon Smyth
Inspector
Username: Jon
Post Number: 351
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 08, 2004 - 1:13 pm: | |
Thanks Monty
(sorry for pulling the rug out from under you)
I agree, we can drop the lighting issue.
The mortuary sketch is timed at 3:45AM, by which time the body had been undressed, cleaned up and Foster had completed his drawing. But the wording is strange, "From a sketch taken at the mortuary by Mr F W Foster 3:45 AM Sunday Sept. 30th 1888."
This was written across the top of the drawing of the body. The drawing which was presented at the inquest - but it says this drawing was 'from' a sketch, not that it 'was' the sketch. (??)
I suppose if a sketch had been completed by 3:45 am, a sketch which might have taken no more than 15 minutes (3:30am). Previous to that she had been undressed and cleaned up - 30 minutes? (3:00am).
Then she may well have arrived about 3:00am, so leaving Mitre Sq. somewhere between 2:30-3:00am is not unreasonable.
I'd still like to see a time recorded somewhere.
Regards, Jon |
Maria Giordano
Detective Sergeant
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 120
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Monday, November 08, 2004 - 3:01 pm: | |
Monty-
where will we be able to find your article? I'm fascinated by Mitre Square. I find it the most compelling of the murders.
Mags |
Jeff Hamm
Chief Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 552
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 08, 2004 - 3:29 pm: | |
Hi Monty,
At the inquest, Dr. Sequira (sp?) testified to the following:
I am well acquainted with the locality and the position of the lamps in the square. Where the murder was committed was probably the darkest part of the square, but there was sufficient light to enable the miscreant to perpetrate the deed. I think that the murderer had no design on any particular organ of the body. He was not possessed of any great anatomical skill.
I've underlined the most relavant section with respect to the lighting. That said, I think Harvey would have a hard time seeing into the darkest corner because the light from his lantern (or the light over his head) would destroy his dark vision. And, given that his patrol only goes to the end of the passage, which would be lit by the overhead light, once he progressed far enough down the passage, he wouldn't have to walk right up and under the light (he can see that part of his patrol is "fine" and Mitre Square isn't his responsibility). So, I think it is quite possible for Harvey to have patrolled his route in good faith, and to have scared away the Ripper (who may have been alerted to the bull's eye lantern comming down the passage). If the Ripper did work from the right side, he would have been looking towards that passage (when he wasn't concentrating on his "work", of course).
We've discussed this before, so I'm sure I'm not giving away anything in your article.
- Jeff |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1404
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 09, 2004 - 5:49 am: | |
Guys,
Jon,
Don’t apologise. Im not one for holding stuff back so please don’t drop the issue on my account. I enjoying reading this stuff.
Jeff,
Yep, discussed this before. Though the square was dark and the lighting poor there was indeed sufficient light to see if positioned right. This is why I brought up the position of the killer on another thread. The most optimum position in my reckoning is working off Kates left shoulder (and scene evidence/body mutilations support this). As you have mentioned this position would have given the best view down Church passage. He would have a view of the exit to St James passage also and nothing to fear from behind.
Another reason for me favouring this position is light source. The lamps (according to my research and conversations with some Gas lamp/Victorian lighting enthusiasts) would give out as much light as your fridge light, maybe two. Not much cop eh? I have (as Im sure some others have also) 3 reasons to think the square, or rather that corner, was lit sufficiently enough to mutilate…..well maybe dodgy reasons.
1 Moonlight.
Cloud cover was 50% and the lunar cycle was third day last quarter. 29% of the visible disk illuminated. Hardly Blackpool and something Im trying to look at right now, but it all helps
2 Eyesight
Today we are spoiled with regards to night lighting. 1888 lamps by todays standards were poor. No more than markers. Peoples night sight would have been more acute. They would have been more use to working in the dark.
3 Portable lamps.
From what I can gather, portable lamps were fairly common. Despite what I said above about eyesight quite a few people carried them. They ranged from the sophisticated Police Bullseyes* to the cheap candle lamps. The cheaper range were easily obtainable, maintainable and affordable. Not so bulky and if treated carefully fairly safe. This idea, to me anyway, seems unlikely but it has been pointed out that most criminals carried lamps to aid them. Why not Jack ? It could explain how he saw to commit the mutilations, the tin match box empty (yes, I know, wheres the match stick?) and how he saw to write the graffito. Just ideas folks….just ideas.
*Going back to the Bullseye. These would have been lit at the station and shuttered off till required. So Watkins should have already had his lamp on when he entered the square. I propose he saw the body without the aid of his lamp and only flicked open the spring-loaded shutter when he realised just what he had there. I could go into greater detail about these lamps but I shall not bore you.
As for Harvey, you are exactly right Jeff. Standing under the lamp he wouldn’t have been able to see into that corner for the reasons you give. He states he didn’t go into the square but to the end of the passage so his position would have been right under the lamp. I disagree with your idea that his Bullseye would have triggered his flight. That I feel that was Morris’s doing when opened the door. I reckon Jack was still in the corner when Harvey approached but that’s just my view and hell knows its not the first time Ive been wrong.
Mags,
The article may not be happening, Ive just given you 80% of it !
Cheers,
Monty
Don't be shocked by the tone of my voice
Check out my new weapon, weapon of choice- Jack the Ripper
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 1244
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 09, 2004 - 6:55 am: | |
Hi everyone,
Jon,
this means that maybe Forster didn't see the body afeter all is that what you are saying?
Monty,
don't give it all away!!
Jenni |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 3407
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 09, 2004 - 7:48 am: | |
Hi Monty
It sounds like a great article and I can't wait to read it (or what there is left of it  ). But re the moon : we'd need to know how high it was in the sky at that hour on that day of the year, as there were tall buildings nearby. On the other hand, isn't there a reference somewhere to Lawende seeing his couple in the moonlight?
Robert |
Jon Smyth
Inspector
Username: Jon
Post Number: 356
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 09, 2004 - 10:35 am: | |
Monty/Jeff.
I do completely agree about the level of lighting and if I remember correctly, it was such a long time ago. We got Stewart Evans involved in helping us determine the approximate range of a bullseye, something in the order of 15-20ft radius if I'm not mistaken - it's on the Casebook CD if anyone wants to start digging.
The position of the killer?, yes absolutely, his initial position by her right shoulder to cut the throat, etc, but I have always maintained that he must surely have repositioned himself to her left shoulder so as not to be working in his own light and so he does not have his back to the open yard. Two entrances would be directly behind him and also if he positioned himself with his back to the house wall he could see directly up Church Passage - prettywell everything you mentioned I agree.
Jenni.
That is what I was leading up to yes. We know Foster was present at the mortuary by about 3:30am, but was he at Mitre Sq. between 2:00-2:30am, thats the biggy. And as Dr Brown was making a sketch, then this suggests Foster may not have been present, doesn't it?. Coupled with the fact his presence is not referred to anywhere that I have seen.
I guess a clue lies in the drawings done by Dr Brown, if Browns version is an obvious model for Fosters drawing then we might admit Foster was not present. If both drawings are entirely different (even two people viewing the same scene will never draw the same orientaion, perspective or detail), then we must grant that Foster must have been present.
I want to see Dr Browns drawings..
Regards, Jon
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 1246
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 09, 2004 - 10:40 am: | |
Hi Jon,
I kind of got the feeling that this is what you were suggesting!
I just assumed that Forster was at the scene but as you say there isn't really anything to indicate that he was. Perhaps he used Dr Browns drawings and what he saw at the mortuary as you suggest.
I take it Dr Browns drawing is lost...?
Jenni |
Jon Smyth
Inspector
Username: Jon
Post Number: 357
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 09, 2004 - 12:15 pm: | |
Hi Jenni.
Actually no, they are, or certainly were, on display at the London Hospital Medical College, ....I'll be contacting Stewart Evans, surely he will have a copy.
Regards, Jon |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 1251
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 09, 2004 - 2:45 pm: | |
Jon,
ah relief someone somewhere will have a copy then.
Good luck locating one
Jenni |
Frank van Oploo
Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 340
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 09, 2004 - 3:23 pm: | |
Hi Jon et all,
Yesterday I was reading some of the posts regarding the sketch you attached to your initial post. They confused me a bit as I seemed to remember that this sketch was made by Dr Brown. To be sure I consulted The Ultimate JtR Sourcebook and JtR and the Whitechapel murders, both by Evans & Skinner.
The Sourcebook tells us that the sketch you posted was by Mr. Foster. The other title contains among other things a detailed plan and drawings of the Mitre Square murder scene that were prepared for the inquest by Mr. Foster. The sketch you initially posted is also there and directly below it is written in pencil: “Position of the body when found from a sketch made on the spot by Dr. F. Gordon Brown.”. This implies that it was in fact made by Dr Brown and not by Mr Foster.
Hope this helps.
All the best,
Frank
|
Jon Smyth
Inspector
Username: Jon
Post Number: 358
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 09, 2004 - 6:47 pm: | |
Hi Frank.
Buddy, you lost me, this is the one I initially posted, which the Ultimate attributes to Foster, but you say is actually by Dr Brown?
Thanks, Jon |
Donald Souden
Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 300
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 09, 2004 - 7:56 pm: | |
Frank,
It seems nothing is ever straight-forward when it comes to Ripperology, but a parsing of the sentence you quoted would tend to indicate that what is being relied upon as from a sketch by Dr. Brown is the position of the body and not the appearance of the body. It suggests, at least to me, that Dr. Brown made a rough sketch (however accurate his measurements may have been) at the scene of the location of the body.
Don. |
Jeff Hamm
Chief Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 557
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 12:14 am: | |
Hi Monty,
Yes, the opening of the door could have caused Jack to flee as well. There are a number of events around that time, any of which would do it, and the estimated times of those events are close enough that it's hard to say for sure "which came first". But that's a different issue. The various simulations I ran awhile back worked quite well, whether Jack leaves before or after Harvey does his patrol (for whatever that is worth).
As for Jack with a lamp, I suppose it's possible, but it goes against all witness reports (unless these lamps are small enough for a pocket?).
- Jeff |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1406
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 3:55 am: | |
Jeff,
They would have fitted into a pocket or hung of the belt or trouser top in a similar mode to the Bulls eye.
Re the simulations....can I contact you about that ?
Monty
Don't be shocked by the tone of my voice
Check out my new weapon, weapon of choice- Jack the Ripper
|
Frank van Oploo
Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 343
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 8:21 am: | |
Hi Don & Jon,
“It seems nothing is ever straight-forward when it comes to Ripperology…”
I completely agree. They could have made it much easier for us if they would just have written: ‘This is a sketch by Dr. Brown made on the spot’ or ‘This is a sketch by Mr. Foster and was based on a sketch by Dr. Brown of the position of the the body.’ Now that they didn’t, we are left wondering who actually made the sketch.
Likewise, as you (Jon) already suggested, one may also wonder if the second sketch you posted, that of Eddowes’ face with the text written above it, was made by Mr. Foster or not.
Although English is not my native language, perhaps back then ‘from a sketch taken by so and so’ and ‘from a sketch made by so and so’ was an official roundabout way of saying that the sketch was actually made or taken by so and so. I don’t know.
Frank
 |
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1074
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 10:10 am: | |
Hi Jon et al.
Jon, Frank's helpful clarification appears to answer your question of November 08, 2004 - 12:11 pm, that Foster was not in Mitre Square when the corpse was there. Apparently he relied on Dr. Brown's on-the-spot sketch for the position and appearance of Eddowes' body when discovered. My assumption is that Foster went back to the murder scene in daylight after removal of the body to recheck the layout of the area to finalize his plan and drawing of Mitre Square showing the body in the corner of the square.
All the best
Chris
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
Jon Smyth
Inspector
Username: Jon
Post Number: 360
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 11:06 am: | |
Thankyou Frank, so it seems my instinct was correct about Dr Browns testimony and the body drawing having a common source. Though I was under the impression Mr Foster had used Browns notes to create the drawing, all the while it was the doctor himself who created both.
Common wording alerted me to the possibility that the creator of the drawing had read Dr Browns notes which he used for his testimony - it is clear now.
(Jon does cartwheels across the floor), what was that Chris?, for a minute I though you said we agree on something!!!
Yes, it does appear that there is no reason to believe Mr Foster was present in Mitre Sq. though as we know he made a package of drawings for the Coroner, he had to have returned in daylight. There are two different pencil sketches which have been posted recently, one is attributable to Mr Foster, the full body sketch done at the mortuary, but the other is just a head sketch, I'm not sure if it is attributed to him or not.
I guess they both must be by Mr Foster, both show ^^ on the cheeks, whereas Dr Browns coloured sketch shows more accurately an arch or curve.
(and we know the doctor got it right, right? )
I wonder if Dr Browns sketch is water colour or crayon? - and when was it coloured?
Thanks for the input Gentlemen.
Regards, Jon
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2216
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 12:24 pm: | |
Hi Jon,
I would say, as a former painting artist and an art historian, that the full body sketch with the mutilations (the one you initially posted) is done with pencil and water colour (looking at the colour reproduction plate in the box Jack the Ripper and the Whitechapel Murders, one notices that there are quite many colours in there as well) -- could be that there is ink pen and crayon in there as well, but I really need the original to confirm that -- while the full body mortuary sketch attributed to Foster is pencil and ink pen.
The head sketch seems to be pencil.
All the best,
G, Sweden
P.S. Jon... cartwheels...I had no idea you were into gymnastic...
"Want to buy some pegs, Dave?"
Papa Lazarou |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1408
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 12:29 pm: | |
Chris,
Extract from St James Gazette 1.10.88
"The news of the policeman's discovery brought a number quickly upon the scene, and the body was removed to the City mortuary. Early in the day the police took possession of the square for the purpose of searching for possible clues and making a plan of the surrounding locality for the use of the coroner. Later, however, the cordon of constables withdrew, and the hundreds of persons collected in the neighbourhood were enabled to get a nearer view of the spot where the tragedy was enacted.
Monty
Don't be shocked by the tone of my voice
Check out my new weapon, weapon of choice- Jack the Ripper
|
Jon Smyth
Inspector
Username: Jon
Post Number: 361
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 12:34 pm: | |
Glenn, I need to be fit, because, believe it or not, in order to get my point across I often have to jump through hoops!!!
We talk of things as wrong or right,
or clear as night and day.
But life is rarely black or white,
but multiple shades of grey. |
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1075
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 1:17 pm: | |
Hi Monty
Many thanks for posting that quote from the St James Gazette of October 1, 1888, which confirms that the police cordoned off the square in order to make a plan of the murder scene. Presumably then it was at this time, in the daylight, that Foster both did the plan of the square and the sketch showing Eddowes' body where it had lain in the corner of the square.
Hi Jon
I wasn't agreeing with you, only admiring your gymnastic skills.  
All the best
Chris
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
Jeff Hamm
Chief Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 558
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 2:22 pm: | |
Hi Monty,
Thanks for the information on the size of the lamps. I think it would be risky for Jack to use such a thing (visible from a large distance). And, I think it unlikely he would have had it at Nichols's murder (it seems reasonable to think he may have been interupted by the fellows coming down Buck's Row. If he had a lamp, they would have seen the light, and his departure). And, he wouldn't have needed one for Annie Chapman. Stride (if a Ripper Victim; and interupted by Diemschetz (sp?)) seems unlikely, or again, he would have been spotted by Mr. D., and Kelly he doesn't need one either since there was the fireplace. That only leaves Eddowes, and testimony suggests he doesn't need one there. I think, therefore, it unlikely that Jack had a lamp, but not needing one and not having one are two different things.
Anyway, feel free to contact me about the simulation. Use the "send private message" option in my profile to send me an e-mail. I'm hoping, when I get the time, to get the program working in a more flexible way. Eventually, what I would like it to do is allow the user to create their own simulations. Then, we could post our simulation "script" (a text file) and the corresponding graphic of the map used, and we could all load up and look at each other's idea in action. That will take some "doing" I'm afraid. I had sent a copy to Stephen awhile back, but it appears he's not found a suitable way to make it available on the site (or, with all his other responsibilities, he's forgotten about it! I know I've forgotten to ask him again! ha!)
- Jeff |
Jon Smyth
Inspector
Username: Jon
Post Number: 362
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 6:10 pm: | |
Monty.
You mention the bull's-eye lamps.
I know I read somewhere about the police using those lamps, if you got your info from an official source then we can't question that but failing that, I read that the beat constables did not walk around with the lamp lit.
It was designed to clip over their belt when not in use, and only used to investigate close-up details not for distances. The range was minimal at best.
Constanbles would pull it out and light it when required but not carry it around all night.
I'll try to locate my source, I'm sure it was a web-site or possibly a contemporary news article?.
I just cant recall for certain.
Regards, Jon
We talk of things as wrong or right, or clear as night and day.
But life is rarely black or white, but multiple shades of grey. |
Nina Thomas
Detective Sergeant
Username: Nina
Post Number: 137
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 8:03 pm: | |
Hi Jon,
Perhaps this was your source?
http://www.constabulary.com/mystery/bullseye.htm
Nina |
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1077
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 8:56 pm: | |
Hi Jon
I am not sure I can think of a reference for the bull's eye lantern, although I do remember we did talk considerably to Stewart Evans in the old chat room about the bull's eye lantern and its capabilities and use. Could Stewart be the "source" you were thinking of?
All the best
Chris
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1410
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 11, 2004 - 5:26 am: | |
Jon,
Mailed Stewart early in October asking about the exact results of his Bulls eye experiment some years back. I remember from the time that the beam wasn’t that brilliant but was useful up close. At a distance though he said the lamp could be useful for signalling. His reply was that he couldn’t remember the exact results (its his age you know) but did remember the light given off as poor.
I cannot reveal the name of my source that stated that Police lamps were lit as the PC left the station. Im not being evasive you understand just that I have not been granted permission by them to place their name in public. I will say that this person is a lamp/lighting enthusiast of some years and that their name was passed on to me by The Gas Museum, for whom they advise. Speaking of the Gas Museum, they have been very helpful as well not only with my research into portable lamps but gas lamps also.
I will say that the problems regarding heat etc, was raised by myself. I was informed that while the lamp itself would be hot the handles would not and that there was a heat shield built to protect the user when clipped to the belt. The lamp would have been shuttered off to prevent any light escaping (the cowling at the top is designed to let heat escape but no light...see the picture in the link Nina kindly put up for us) and opened when needed. The shutter was spring loaded apparently. All this I am currently trying to confirm.
Monty
PS Jeff, I will be in contact soon. Many thanks.
(Message edited by monty on November 11, 2004)
Don't be shocked by the tone of my voice
Check out my new weapon, weapon of choice- Jack the Ripper
|
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 534
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 11, 2004 - 10:30 am: | |
Hey, Monty
Stewart posted a little bit about his experiment and hopefully won't mind if I reproduce it for the sake of discussion. This is off the Casebook CD, which I often find is a useful research tool:
Author: Stewart P Evans
Thursday, 18 July 2002 - 01:32 pm
At last I have fuelled up my old bull's-eye lantern and tested the power of its beam.
The flame is adjusted by turning the knob on the burner which raises the wick. However, there appears to be an optimum setting, below which it is too dim and above which it smokes badly and gets hot. Assuming that the patrolling Victorian policeman would have it set around this level I tried it out. To actually discern what you are looking at in reasonably dark conditions about ten yards appears to be a maximum distance. Beyond this the light is very diffused and loses its power. At a reasonably close distance (7 yards and under) quite a good beam, yellow in colour, is produced.
For what it's worth.
Hope that helps.
Dave |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1411
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 11, 2004 - 11:30 am: | |
Jon,
I dont know if this backs up the idea that the Bulls eyes were constantly lit but heres a section of PC Watkins testimony at Eddowes inquest.
[Coroner] Had anything excited your attention during those hours? - No.
[Coroner] Or any person? - No. I passed through Mitre-square at 1.30 on the Sunday morning. I had my lantern alight and on - fixed to my belt. According to my usual practice, I looked at the different passages and corners.
Now would you keep lighting and re lighting you lamp or just have it on with the shutter closed till you needed it?
It seems to me that Watkins had his lamp on at 1.30am.
Just a thought.
Monty
Don't be shocked by the tone of my voice
Check out my new weapon, weapon of choice- Jack the Ripper
|
Jon Smyth
Inspector
Username: Jon
Post Number: 366
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 11, 2004 - 11:36 am: | |
Hi Monty, you are correct, thats clear enough, it only takes one example.
Regards, Jon
We talk of things as wrong or right, or clear as night and day.
But life is rarely black and white, but multiple shades of grey. |
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1078
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 11, 2004 - 11:57 am: | |
Hi Monty
You wrote: "I dont know if this backs up the idea that the Bulls eyes were constantly lit but heres a section of PC Watkins testimony at Eddowes inquest."
And then you quote the inquest testimony--
[Coroner] Had anything excited your attention during those hours? - No.
[Coroner] Or any person? - No. I passed through Mitre-square at 1.30 on the Sunday morning. I had my lantern alight and on - fixed to my belt. According to my usual practice, I looked at the different passages and corners.
To me, this implies that the lantern was not constantly on, but that it was only on when the policeman needed to put it on to shine in a dark corner or passage. The wording "I had my lantern alight and on" indicates to me that there were times while on the beat that he did not have the lantern on.
All the best
Chris
(Message edited by ChrisG on November 11, 2004)
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1412
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 11, 2004 - 12:05 pm: | |
Chris,
True, this is why Im not so sure. Just wanted others opinion.
But you'll go through a hell of a lot of matches lighting and re lighting. Also you cannot say to Burgular Bill "Hold on Mate, I just gotta light this so I can see yer".
Another point is what if the full stop in the highlighted sentence was in the incorrect spot? It changes the meaning completely. I know this idea will be scorned and maybe thats fair but I have read many IUC transcripts where this has happened. I just hope that the Eddowes inquest notes were typed correctly.
And please, this is not my view, just possibilites....I dont want to be lynched again.
Monty
Don't be shocked by the tone of my voice
Check out my new weapon, weapon of choice- Jack the Ripper
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 1258
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 11, 2004 - 12:12 pm: | |
Monty,
do we ever lynch you?
Anyway, my point (yeah I actually have one)
when he says he had his lantern on, could he just be saying he was following procedure. especailly since he mentions according to practice.
like one might say, i don't know, erm, you might say, er, i was wearing my cycle helemt, or whatever 9sorry that is such a bad, bad eg there!)
Jenni |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 3419
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 11, 2004 - 3:05 pm: | |
Another reference concerns Long - the Sourcebook reporting Long's evidence under "Times" 12th October "His light was on at the time."
I don't know whether it helps, but in "Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde" there is a passing mention of a policeman's bull'seye lamp. It may be nothing important, of course. It's some time since I read the book and I could not pinpoint the passage, but Alex Chisholm would know.
Robert |
Chris Scott
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chris
Post Number: 1521
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 11, 2004 - 3:53 pm: | |
He told me “yes” by a constrained gesture; and when I had bidden him enter, he did not obey me without a searching backward glance into the darkness of the square. There was a policeman not far off, advancing with his bull’s eye open; and at the sight, I thought my visitor started and made greater haste.
Jekyll and Hyde, page 66
Chris |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
