|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1813
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 11, 2004 - 5:21 am: |       |
Leanne, are you sure your computer isn't boomerang shaped, so that every time you throw it out, it keeps coming back? Could this be the same computer all along?
Robert |
Robert Clack
Inspector
Username: Rclack
Post Number: 186
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 11, 2004 - 12:46 pm: | |
Hi Leanne
It would take around 10 minutes to get from Church Lane to Church Passage. If the Church Lane sighting happened about 1.15 I would be more inclined to listen to it. The police had two sightings about 1.30 I would presume the Church Passage one took precedent as that was a more positive sighting.
I've attached a wider view of the area so you can place the relevent sights.
Red = Berner Street
Blue = Mitre Square
Orange = Church Lane
Green = Millers Court
Good Luck getting a new computer, I'm on my second
Rob |
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1062
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 11, 2004 - 5:30 pm: | |
G'day,
The big problem with this sighting is the estimated time. I wish the police had have been able to trace the sources to verify the possible Church Lane sighting.
If there was a church with a clock at one end of Church Lane, the man who saw the suspect probably looked at the clock when he got to the end of the street.
If the man sitting on the doorstep was the killer, he probably cleaned up and took off as soon as the witness was out of sight, in case he brought a policeman back. He could have pretended he was one of those who were running to find a policeman too.
I think 1:30 a.m. in the morning was an unrealistic time for anyone to be innocently wipping their hands.
LEANNE |
Dan Norder
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, January 11, 2004 - 1:07 pm: | |
Leanne wrote:
"Yes it's 'third-hand' hearsay, but how long are we going to ignore it?"
Personally? Forever. Second hand info is unreliable enough as it is without getting yet another person involved.
You might as well be asking, "So it was a known liar who said it, and sure he was on drugs at the time, but how long are we going to ignore it?" |
Robert Clack
Inspector
Username: Rclack
Post Number: 187
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 12, 2004 - 2:36 pm: | |
Hi Leanne
It was the St Mary's Church, Whitechapel. There is a photograph of it in The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Sourcebook/Companion. It's in the first section of photographs.
Rob |
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1063
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 13, 2004 - 9:07 am: | |
G'day Dan,
Where did this unknown source get the sailor's hat description from, before a sailor's hat was even mentioned? What a lucky liar!
LEANNE |
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 175
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 14, 2004 - 8:17 pm: | |
The Church Lane sighting is interesting. If we go with the notion that Stride and Eddowes were killed by the same person, this report suggests one possible route by which Jack may have gotten from A to B. The problem with the estimated time can be easily dealt with as being attributed to the fact people didn't wear watches.
For example, Edward Spooner testified at Strides inquest "...I believe it was twenty-five minutes to one o'clock when I arrived in the yard. ..." However, he came to the yard when called about the murder, and those who checked clocks/watches etc all indicate that the body wasn't discovered until 1 am. This is an error of 25 min in the estimated time from body discovery, add a couple minutes for him to hear about the murder and get to the location and we're looking at a 30 min error.
In otherwords, the time of the sighting is probably within acceptable limits to make this sighting just interesting enough to wonder about. The discription is similar enough to men seen with women near both murder locations, the time is in the right ball park, and the location is not out of the question.
This doesn't prove these are all connected, or that this was the route taken, etc, but it's a suggested theory that comes from the data. It may be supported or rejected depending upon any future discoveries as well. But, at the moment, there's not much more that can be done with it apart from notice that another sailor hat wearing man was spotted, possibly between the times of two murders and in a location which might suggest a route between the two locations.
- Jeff
PS. Notice the error in time estimation? For the sightings in the Chapman murder we're dealing with estimations that differ in the order of a few minutes. In other words, making anything out of Long and Cadoch's different "guestimates" of the time is probably not worth the time it takes to type it.
|
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1068
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 15, 2004 - 8:41 am: | |
G'day,
I am trying to find a newspaper report that mentions a sailor's hat, and was published before the first day of October 1888. I can't.
Not here anyway!
LEANNE |
Dan Norder
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 10:37 pm: | |
Leanne wrote:
"Where did this unknown source get the sailor's hat description from, before a sailor's hat was even mentioned?"
Gee, I don't know, perhaps from seeing all the sailors in the area? Or is that too logical for you and not enough of a conspiracy theory for your tastes?
It's not like a sailor's cap is all that unusual what with the freakin' docks right there. |
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1074
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2004 - 5:47 pm: | |
G'day Dan,
What's this 'conspiracy' schitt?!!!
LEANNE |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page