Archive through 13 June 2002

** 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 **

Archive through 13 June 2002

Casebook Message Boards: Police Officials: General Discussion: Mystery PC of Mitre Square: Archive through 13 June 2002

Author: Robeer Wednesday, 12 June 2002 - 02:10 am
Rosey, My apologies Rosey, actually you were the first to knowingly make the initial contribution by asking a question, so you hold the honor of being first poster to begin the process of building this matrix. Jesse is the first to contribute a long commentary specifically to the matrix concept. I must also give credit to Jon who earlier tried to help but I didn't do a very good job of explaining what I was trying to accomplish, so I think Jon was confused as to where all this was leading and why. It was obvious I had to restart the discussion with better instructions. Sorry Jon we got off to a slow start. That was my fault. Appreciate your input and hope you will join in again. Robeer
Author: The Viper Wednesday, 12 June 2002 - 02:38 am
The Imperial Club was a bit further than 15-16 feet from Church Passage. The research thread we had on the club some time ago has disappeared, and I'll try to reconstruct it this weekend. The club, we concluded, must have been upstairs above Jarman's factory at numbers 16-17 Duke Street. The pair of buildings occupied a place on the street about 30 feet in length, and from the nearest corner of no. 16 to a point directly opposite Church Passage was 40 ft. Not a very significant difference - still only a few seconds' walk. Regards, V.
Author: Caroline Morris Wednesday, 12 June 2002 - 08:34 am
Hi All, Jesse suggested that the murderer was warned of the policeman's approach by a third party. I wonder how many of the problems regarding the ripper's planning, timing, location, luck etc, would disappear if we assume he had help. What problems and objections would take their place, and how easily could they be overcome? For a start, what are the basic objections to a two-man team? Why must we assume Jack worked on his own? The only man to see a victim in trouble shortly before she was found dead was Schwartz, and he reported that there were two men at or near the scene. Is there any reason why an accomplice could not easily have been following Jack and each new Jill at a discreet distance, without anyone � witnesses or victim � being any the wiser? Witnesses reported sightings of couples, or of anyone acting suspiciously. But would a lone man seen walking near a couple have even registered? We know the problem of loyalty doesn't stop killers from choosing to work in pairs or gangs, or serial killers from involving an often emotionally dependent partner. And although it would always be a potential problem while both remained alive, there is no reason to assume Jack's funny little games would have been up if he'd invited a chum out to play with him. If they took turns in killing and keeping watch, for example, it would have been risky for one to turn the other in, both being equally up to their armpits in blood. And it could explain differences in MO. I've always had a feeling that more of the Whitechapel murders were linked somehow, other than by closeness in time and space and victim type, even though there is little doubt that different hands were at work. One could have died, leaving the other unable or unwilling to carry on alone. One could even have turned on the other and killed him. Then loyalty would no longer have mattered, and their secret would have been safe forever - unless of course either had had the forethought to leave something akin to a confession or indictment. Unlikely though. Love, Caz
Author: Ivor Edwards Wednesday, 12 June 2002 - 02:42 pm
Viper and all, At the inquest Lawende stated: "The number of the club is 16 and 17 Duke Street.It is 15 or 16 feet from the club to the passage where they were standing". This information can also be found on page 237, JtR Sourcebook by Evans and Skinner.I would take it that this inquest information was accurate.Lawende walked the distance and he knew how far it was. It is no good if we keep changing the witness evidence to suit ourselves.
Author: The Viper Wednesday, 12 June 2002 - 05:17 pm
Ivor, The location of the club was fixed a couple of years ago in work carried out for the Casebook Productions website. The buildings 16-17 stood opposite the Great Synagogue in Duke Street, positioned slightly back from the line of the pavement. The 30 ft. length of the pair of buildings and the 40 ft. from their nearest corner to a point directly opposite Church Passage are approximate distances, based only on my use of the Goad Plan in Guildhall Library (EC2) and a ruler. That said, the figures should be close. Without knowing which door(s) were used by club members we cannot be precise about the distance that Lawende et al would have walked on Duke Street, but I would maintain that after walking somewhere between 40 and 70 feet they'd be directly opposite the couple. When looking into some of the topography of the murders a couple of years ago we found some of the distance estimates quoted in the 1888 sources to be questionable. In this instance, I'd suggest two possible causes of the error:- 1). That the 15-16 ft. may refer to the distance from which Lawende actually observed the couple, when passing the other side of Duke St. and not the distance from the club. 2). That substituting the word 'yards' for 'feet' would probably give a very close estimate of distance (so therefore a possible transcription error by the Recorder). A more likely explanation, in my view. Regards, V.
Author: Robeer Wednesday, 12 June 2002 - 05:56 pm
Caz, Isn't that precisely the theory Thomas Neagle has been advocating, that Prince Eddy and J. K. Stephens would go slumming together and murder whores for sport? Robeer
Author: Robeer Wednesday, 12 June 2002 - 06:10 pm
Updated Matrix, Based on detailed information provided by Ivor Edwards: ______________________________________________________________ 1) Watkins inspects Mitre Square at 1:30 AM. 2) A couple is observed at the entrance to Church Passage at 1:33 - 1:35 AM. 3) PC Harvey inspects Mitre Square at either 1:41 AM or 1:42 AM. 4) PC Watkins enters Mitre Square at 1:44 AM and discovers the body of Catharine Eddowes. ______________________________________________________________ If we can agree on the above information then we can make the following conclusions: ______________________________________________________________ A. JtR murdered and mutilated Eddowes before Harvey inspected Mitre Square. B. JtR was interrupted by Harvey's approach and finished the mutilations after Harvey departed. C. JtR murders and mutilates Eddowes after Harvey inspects the square before Watkins arrives. ______________________________________________________________ In other words JtR murders/mutilates Eddowes: A) Before Harvey inspects the square. [ 1:33 or 1:35 AM - 1:41 or 1:42 AM ] 6 - 9 minute window B) Before and after Harvey inspects the square. [ 1:33 or 1:35 AM - 1:44 AM ] 9 - 11 minute window C) After Harvey inspects the square but before Watkins arrives. [ 1:41 or 1:42 AM - 1:44 AM ] 2 - 3 minute window Time window from most to least: B) 6 - 9 minutes A) 6 - 7 minutes C) 2 - 3 minutes Any comments? Robeer
Author: Warwick Parminter Wednesday, 12 June 2002 - 07:12 pm
Hello Robeer, I would favour the option B. I see no reason at all why Harvey could not have missed seeing Kate lay at the far end of the square or the Ripper crouched over her. When Harvey would come to the end of Church Walk and the entrance to the square it was just a formality to look into the square, he wasn't going to see anything, not with a street lamp over his head or there abouts. I think you are all giving a bulls eye lamp too much credit. I think the Ripper could have been there, and he would have heard Harvey coming,-- if Harvey was wearing normal police boots,--then the Ripper would have crouched low and kept still. I think he would have been more concerned with Mitre Street entrance, especially if he had got wind that some constables had devised a way of walking quietly. But it does sound like he knew Harvey wouldn't come into the square. I will mention it again, did Harvey go down Church Walk to the square?, was he feeling vulnerable that night?, or could he have just said, "Sod it"?. That would make some difference I would think, it would mean the Ripper kept his cool and he had more time. He may have been so clever in taking the kidney, but he wasn't clever enough to avoid cutting into the large intestine, and get himself into a dirty mess, just think, if he hadn't done that we wouldn't have half an apron to ponder about. Rick
Author: Martin Fido Wednesday, 12 June 2002 - 07:32 pm
Not that many two-man serial killing teams, Caz. And where they have been found they nearly always entail the rape of the victims (Hillside Stranglers, Lucas and Toole, for example). Post mortem on K Eddowes rules that out in our case. All the best, Martin F
Author: Ivor Edwards Wednesday, 12 June 2002 - 08:48 pm
Viper, Lawende stated that the distance from the club to the passage was 15-16feet. That is not the same as meaning the distance from where he stood to where he saw the couple.He made a specific statement that cannot mean anything else. Now whether or not a mistake was made in quoting him is another matter. But we can use that augument with any statement made by any witness.I know the difference between 40 feet and 15 feet as I am sure Lawende did. Has anyone checked out the London Photographic Libary for pictures of Dukes Street do you know ? When I was up there I was finding pictures in the wrong boxes and recogised a photo of Woods Dwellings which had the wrong address on the back of it.In all I found three photos ( in one Session ) which they had listed wrong and thay had to correct them.
Author: Robeer Wednesday, 12 June 2002 - 08:50 pm
Warwick, Thanks for the reponse. I hope others will join in. Robeer
Author: Jeff Hamm Wednesday, 12 June 2002 - 09:49 pm
Robeer, With your given time windows above, I think a reasonable scenerio is the following. Eddowes and the Ripper enter before Harvey. Harvey inspects Church Passage, but does not notice the Ripper crouched over Eddowes. The Ripper, however, spots Harvey (sees his lamp comming down the passage, but it turns and leaves). As Harvey walks back down Church Passage, the Ripper sneaks out Mitre Square via a different route, making as little noise as possible. By leaving immediately after Harvey inspects Church Passage, this gives the Ripper a 2-3 minute headstart over Watkins. Also, the ripper doesn't have time to wipe his hands off on her clothing, (or however he cleaned up), but has to take the piece of apron and wipe off his knife/hands on the run. We've had a few reasonable explanations as to how Harvey could have missed the Ripper. None can be proven to have actually happened, of course. For example, an equally good explanation is that the Ripper leaves just before Harvey inpects the square because he spotted the lamp as Harvey starts comming up the passage and bolts then? Harvey certainly wouldn't have seen that activity. Although the Ripper's back was probably to Church Passage, in this scenerio that means he had mutilated Eddowes to the point she was found in already. It's possible he always kept lookout for himself (some have suggested that Nichols mutilations may be less severe because the Ripper was interupted by the workmen comming down Buck's Row. Again, I think the Ripper's back would have been facing those comming down the road - but I'm not sure), or that he had a lookout. (Lawende doesn't mention anyone else, nor does Elizabeth Long witness for the Chapman murder). Anyway, it may be that the Ripper was scared off by Harvey, either when he entered Church Passage (and Ripper leaves as Harvey comes towards him), or the Ripper leaves when Harvey turns his back because he didn't see the Ripper in the darkness. All we can be totally sure of, though, is that the murder occurred after Watkins inspected Mitre Square on his previous patroll (I don't have that time), but before he inspected it at 1:44 am. Lawende may not have seen Eddowes. - Jeff
Author: Robeer Wednesday, 12 June 2002 - 11:08 pm
Jeff, Thanks for the input. What information within the matrix had the most influence on your opinion? Did your opinion prior to reading the matrix change in any way and if so, why? Robeer
Author: The Viper Thursday, 13 June 2002 - 04:35 am
From The Times, 12th October 1888. "By Mr. Crawford. - The distance between the Imperial Club and the top of Church-passage, where he [Lawende] saw the man and the woman standing together, was about nine or ten yards. He fixed the time of leaving the club at half-past 1 by reference to the club clock and to his own watch, and it would have been about 25 minutes to 2 o'clock when he saw the man and woman standing together�" From the Manchester Guardian, same date. "By Mr. Crawford: The distance from the club to the spot where they [Lawende & friends] saw the two persons was about ten yards. The man and woman were talking quietly, and there were no sounds of quarrelling�" So in response to Crawford�s cross-examination of Lawende we have two newspaper accounts of a different figure to that recorded in the official record. The words "ten yards" and "fifteen feet" don�t sound at all similar, so that�s not the cause of the difference. It�s a fair guess that the distance was queried by the City Solicitor with a question such as "Are you sure?" In the Recorder�s hand-written transcript the words "from the club to the passage" have been added above a carat, presumably as an attempt at clarification (which is why I go with a mis-transcription or misunderstanding on the part of the clerk as much the more likely source of error). Yes, one would hope that somebody could tell the difference between fifteen feet, ten yards and forty feet, though in my experience most people are quite hopeless at estimating distance, in much the same way as they are at guessing somebody�s height. Still, the proof is all out there on the requisite maps and plans so students will have to make up their own minds based upon the evidence. I'm not sure how much any of this really matters, the important point being that once in the street Lawende and his friends would have reached the couple at the corner of Church Passage within a few seconds. Regards, V.
Author: Caroline Morris Thursday, 13 June 2002 - 07:33 am
Hi Robeer, Judging from Martin's kind response, giving me precisely the sort of objection to a two-man team I was asking for, ie that rape of the victims is nearly always involved in known cases, I am now happy to judge Thomas Neagle's theory, that Prince Eddy and J. K. Stephens went slumming together to murder whores for sport, even more unlikely than I did previously - if that's possible. Love, Caz
Author: Monty Thursday, 13 June 2002 - 08:03 am
Robeer, Can I just throw something in which may not have any relevance at all. NWM Morris stated that he was working at Kearley and Tongue warehouse since 7pm. He stated that he had the door to the Square a jar for about two minutes before Watkins came knocking on it. Now I was wondering, do you think Morris's action of opening the door was the indicator for Jack to do a runner ? Or would he have been long gone before then ?? Monty
Author: Robeer Thursday, 13 June 2002 - 10:59 am
Monty, If we assume Morris had his time correct like every other witness, he would have opened the door at exactly the same time Harvey looked into the square 1:41/1:42 AM. As we know, Watkins entered the square 2 minutes later at 1:44 AM. Your guess is probably correct. If Harvey is heard coming down Church Passage with his bull's eye light beam leading the way and Morris opens his door and leaves it open I would think that is enough noise and activity to convince JtR its time to make his escape. Up to this point the square had been empty but that situation was suddenly about to change. JtR would have to be an extreme risk taker to stay next to the body with the obvious approach of a PC coupled with the chance that at any moment a night watchman could walk out or even glance out the open door. That is a good find Monty. Where did you come across this statement by Morris? Robeer
Author: Jon Thursday, 13 June 2002 - 11:35 am
Robeer. Your matrix is clearer now, thanks Sorry I have not contributed, its the nature of my job, it takes me away from home, I have been in Chicago for the past few days. Jesse. With reference to one of your postes on the 12th (archived), firstly thanks for a lucid contribution. Now, a couple of things come to mind, you mentioned Jack working over Eddowes with his back to Church Passage. A year or more (2?) ago we were blessed with the contributions of a Dr. Thomas Ind who worked at the London Hospital and attempted to help us with the mutilations in the Eddowes case. He noticed the direction of the cuts to the abdomen were strange, or difficult to explain, if we were thinking of Jack being right-handed. I suggested to the Dr. that in my opinion, if I was the killer, after slitting the throat from the conventional side (by her right shoulder) I would step over the body and crouch with my back to the wall taking advantage of what little light there was, so I am not working in my own shadow, and secondly, I am now able to see directly up Church Passage and am better able to view all three entrances to the square. There is enough room between her body and the house wall for the killer to assume such a position, and especially with the poor lighting this to me seems reasonable. Dr. Ind agreed and now was satisfied because that, he explained, would account for the awkward cut to the abdomen which troubled him so much. A right-handed man cutting up her abdomen from her left-side would explain it, he said. Of course, its only another suggestion but I cannot see any killer working with his back to the open square, and to two of the three entrances, and working in his own shadow. That just doesn't make sense to me. I think he crouched on her left side to mutilate the body. Regards, Jon Congrats Robeer, you have initiated an interesting line of discussion. P.S. Jack did not need to know the timing of the beats of the P.C.'s, Catherine would know that, she likely led Jack into that corner just after Watkins left the square, if she was a regular in this area (the City police knew of her) then she would know that Watkins would not be back for 15 minutes, and she could have told Jack that the other copper (Harvey) "don't come into this square anyhow",...Catherine would/could have known.
Author: Robeer Thursday, 13 June 2002 - 12:22 pm
Jon, Thanks for the story on Dr. Ind and his observations. If Eddowes was familiar with Mitre Square chances are she knew the timing of the PC beats. Your theory sounds logical. JtR would need to take advantage of what limited light source was available while at the same time keeping an eye on the entries to the square. A matrix can help put things in focus by gathering all available information and giving it some structural clarity. Glad you like the concept. Robeer
Author: Jon Thursday, 13 June 2002 - 12:49 pm
Robeer. Dr. Ind's contributions on this matter are listed under "JtR's Hysterectomies" http://forum.casebook.org/messages/1/2073.html?963364324 Its alot to read but well worth it if you can find the time. More can be found under...... Casebook Message Boards: Miscellaneous: Medical / Forensic Discussions. Regards, Jon
Author: Jon Thursday, 13 June 2002 - 01:00 pm
Just to enlarge on the previously mentioned misconception that keeps popping up ie, "Jack had to have known the beats of the P.C.'s" It is generally accepted that Kelly led Jack back to her place, that Chapman led Jack to the backyard of No. 29 and likely that Catherine led Jack into the darkest corner of Mitre Sq. If you think about it, they unwittingly did his work for him, they provided a secluded place and should he have asked if they will be disturbed, they would have replied that there wont be any disturbances for 'n' amount of time. Nichols may have known the beat of the P.C. in Bucks Row. Chapman, who it has been suggested, frequented Hanbury St. could have known about Richardson's morning visits to the backyard. Catharine equally could have known of the beats around Mitre Sq. And, well, Kelly just handed herself to him on a plate, so to speak. Regards, Jon
Author: Robeer Thursday, 13 June 2002 - 01:46 pm
Jon, Simon, Ivor, I should have asked this question earlier but what are your sources for the various times that have been quoted as to when PC Harvey examined Mitre Square? Jon > 1:38 AM Simon > 1:40 AM Ivor > 1:41 - 1:42 AM Just curious what are the various sources where these times are referred to by authors, researchers, or where Harvey himself may be quoted. This 4 minute variance is significant because apparently JtR had no more than 10 minutes to work with, so 4 minutes is a critical amount of time in this scenario. According to one medical opinion that is enough time for JtR to eviscerate Eddowes twice. Robeer
Author: Ivor Edwards Thursday, 13 June 2002 - 02:02 pm
Jon, The News of the World printed a story in which it was stated that the killer knew all about the police beat times on the murder sites.This would have meant that the murders were carefully planned in advance. Much speculation arose at the time about the killer knowing the beat times. In Mitre Square there were emtpy houses where Jack could observe the comings and goings of police at a particular time. In the area of the killings over 1,200 police officers, vigilantes,private detectives,etc were looking for the killer. You just dont rush in like a bull at a gate to achieve what Jack achieved hoping that luck is on your side.To do what he achieved and to pull it off in the manner it was done was not down to sheer chance. He did his homework and he was a very careful planner which was another comment made by The News of the World. Many police officers believed he was a careful planner.He knew all about the steps which were being taken to catch him and he simply counter acted them.I believe he not only knew about the beat times but he had access to other information.What I find interesting is the cover D'Onston used when he signed into the Hospital.He signed in as a journalist and this was one of the few times he ever used this cover.So did he use such cover because he knew something was about to happen which was going to make news.A reporter can nose around and ask questions and find out what steps are being taken to catch the killer.He had contacts on the force and he had known Inspector Rootes for 20 years.
Author: Jesse Flowers Thursday, 13 June 2002 - 03:45 pm
Hello Jon- Thanks for alerting me to the "Hysterectomies" discussion- very interesting reading. As I said at the end of the post you mentioned, I am always willing to consider alternative explanations and new information. I try not to be too dogmatic, and when I give my personal opinions generally label them as such. However, after reading through the thread, I'm still a bit confused. I understood Dr. Ind to say, more than once, that he thought the murderer worked from Eddowes' right side- which is essentially what I am saying also. I do, however, take your point that a position on the victim's left would afford more light and a better view of the square. But Kate does display some incidental injuries which, to my layman's eye, seem like they would be pretty awkward to inflict from her left side. Robeer- Harvey's inquest testimony, as reported in theTimes, puts him at the end of Church Passage at "18 or 19 minutes to 2 o'clock." His written statement, contained in the Corporation of London Records Office, puts the time at "20 to 2". Hope this helps AAA88
Author: Ivor Edwards Thursday, 13 June 2002 - 07:13 pm
Robeer, I got my time of 1.41am-42 from the inquest as reported in the media. That is also the time given in Stewarts book as reported in the Times.Clocks and watches in 1888 unlike today were mechanical and if not properly maintained would run fast or slow. If the club clock was running two minutes slow for example Levy's time could be placed at 1.31am and not 1.33am. With the times we are dealing with it would be a wise move to allow a few minutes either way.As Melvin Harris pointed out it would be nigh impossible to get the times spot on.If I am wearing a watch and someone asks me the time I never give a precise time to the exact minute especially if it is dark. For example if the minute hand is anywhere between 15 mins past and 20 mins past I either state, "It has just gone 15min past," or that, "It is nearly 20mins past". I would think quite a lot of people do that. I would tend to agree with Melvin. Although I give precise times from witnesses they are used as a guide only, because one must allow for a witness not being spot on to the minute.