|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** This is an archived, static copy of the Casebook messages boards dating from 1998 to 2003. These threads cannot be replied to here. If you want to participate in our current forums please go to https://forum.casebook.org **
The Policeman's 'beat'.
Casebook Message Boards: General Discussion: General Topics:
The Policeman's 'beat'.
Author: Jon
Saturday, 09 December 2000 - 05:50 pm |        | Just airing a little point of trivia here....
In the cases of Nichols, Stride & Eddowes we see how important the testimony of the 'beat' policeman is.
In the case of Kelly, Mary Cox described hearing footsteps in the court, it was suggested that this may have been the patrolling policeman doing his rounds.
In the cases of Tabram & Chapman we see nothing of this beat policemans testimony. Clearly, the 'beat' of a patrolling policeman does not cover private premises, public stairwell's nor private backyards, even though they may be viewed as 'regular places of business'....the policemans beat is out on public streets, unless otherwise arranged?.
So, where is the beat policemans testimony in the Kelly case?
A regular beat, on average, took approx. 15 mins. so because we cannot piece together much in the way of 'events' in and around Millers Court between 1 o'clock & say daybreak, wouldn't it be nice to have had a continuous update every 15 mins on the comings & goings of the residents of Dorset St./Millers Ct.
If Cox heard the steps of a policeman at 6:15am, and if the policeman was present at the inquest, then it's a shame we have no comment from the policemen who were on duty in the area over the time period in question.
Like I said, no big issue here, just a small point of trivia which annoy's the hell out of me.
"Inspector Walter Beck "H" Division, who was first called together with the Constables on the beat, will attend at the inquest......." F. G. Abberline, Inspector
('Ultimate', page 367, Evans & Skinner)
They were there, but did they testify? .....can it really be a case of 'nothing to contribute?'
Regards, Jon |
Author: Grailfinder
Saturday, 09 December 2000 - 07:15 pm | | Hi Jon
Annoying isn't it?
The problem with the lack of beat bobbies reports and assigned beats has vexed me for years.
A few years ago I came up with the following idea:
First we take a detailed Map of the Whitechaple area, scan this into the computer, and then program little blue dots to move about the map with correct timing (15mins per beat).
Each blue dot is assigned the name of the bobby on that beat, we then sit and watch all the dots, taking note of how Jack would have had to have carefully chosen his escape route to avoid bumping into the police.
The project had to be shelved, not because of a lack of Art or programing skills, but because of the lack of info on the bobbies and there beats!
This info/reports should not be a problem to find, the fact that it is, can only add weight to the cover up theories. "Was Jack a Bobby"?
cheers |
Author: Jon
Saturday, 09 December 2000 - 10:00 pm | | ......computerized map of Whitechapel?
......arch enemy, one little red dot?
......dozens of blue dots (good-guys), patrolling in small intersecting beats?
.....try to get one little red dot diagonally across the map, while gobbling up the occasional little white dot (victim) and avoiding the blue dots....
Visions of a boardgame in the making here :-)
(snakes & ladders, Cluedo and Pacman, all rolled into one)
--------------------------------------------- |
Author: Harry Mann
Sunday, 10 December 2000 - 04:10 am | | To me it is one of the mysteries surrounding the Kelly killing,that presuming Dorset St was some constables beat,and accepting your fifteen minute patrol time,why did Hutchinson not include seeing a policeman during his forty five minute vigil,or alternately why did not some constable report seeing him.
Hutchinson although in shadow,was seen by one witness,and a more vigilant constable would hardly miss him.
Perhaps it was a case of Hutchinson not wanting to be seen by the law,who might take more than a passing interest in his presence there,and took such action that prevented him from being seen.
Just a thought.
H.mann |
Author: Leanne Perry
Sunday, 10 December 2000 - 04:56 pm | | G'day,
Major Henry Smith, the acting Commissioner of the city of London Police, wrote his memoirs 'From Constable to Commissioner' in 1910.
He wrote: 'There is no man living who knows as much of those murders as I do'....he was: 'within five minutes of the perpetrator one night...', and wrote: 'The assasin had evidently wiped his hands with the piece of apron. In Dorset Street, with extraordinary audacity, he washed [his hands] at a sink up a close, not more than six yards from the street.'
People dont believe Smith's memoirs, saying things like: 'he was writing 22 years after the event!'
I was gonna research this further and write more here, but I have to go a catch a bus! BYE!
Leanne! |
Author: Grailfinder
Sunday, 10 December 2000 - 05:40 pm | | Hi Leanne
I think the main reason why people are a little doubtful of Major Henry Smith's claims, is that he was an exaggerator of the truth! he was never a Constable! he joined the force at the rank of Chief Superintendent, which makes the title of his book a joke! and therefore we have to take all that he says with a large pinch of salt.
The story you relate about the bloody apron, would seem to point to the Mitre Sq murder, and the apron found in Goulston St, but Smith associates it with Dorset St, getting confused in his old age with Millers Ct perhaps.
So his claim of knowing more than anyone else about Jack and his crimes, seems to be nonsense, don't you think?
cheers |
|
|
|
|
