Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Herlock Sholmes 2 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Abby Normal 3 hours ago.
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by cobalt 3 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - by David Orsam 3 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A 20th Century Word Processor - by rjpalmer 4 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A 20th Century Word Processor - by David Orsam 4 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - (26 posts)
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A 20th Century Word Processor - (8 posts)
Maybrick, James: Acquiring a Life - (7 posts)
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - (4 posts)
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - (3 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (2 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Victims > Mary Ann Nichols

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-21-2009, 06:21 PM
Jon Guy Jon Guy is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 2,713
Default Brady St bloodstains Aug 31st

Hello

The following refers to the other incident that night, close to Bucks Row.

East London Advertiser
Saturday, 1 September 1888

In Buck's Row, naturally, the greatest excitement prevails, and several persons in the neighbourhood state than an affray occurred shortly after midnight, but no screams were heard, nor anything beyond what might have been considered evidence of an ordinary brawl.


East London Advertiser
Saturday, 8 September 1888

With the exception of one spot in Brady-street, there were no bloodstains in the vicinity.


Evening Standard (London)
1 September 1888

Buck's row runs through from Thomas street to Brady street, and in the latter street what appeared to be blood stains were early in the morning found at irregular distances on the footpaths on each side of the street. Occasionally a larger splash was visible, and from the way in which the marks were scattered it seems as though the person carrying the mutilated body had hesitated where to deposit his ghastly burden, and had gone from one side of the road to the other, until the obscurity of Buck's row afforded the shelter sought for. The street had been crossed twice within the space of about 120 yards. The point at which the stains were first visible is in front of the gateway to Honey's mews, in Brady street, about 150 yards from the point where Buck's row commences.
Several persons living in Brady street state that early in the morning they heard screams, but this is by no means an uncommon incident in the neighbourhood; and with one exception nobody seems to have paid any particular attention to what was probably the death struggle of an unfortunate woman. The exception was a Mrs. Colville, who lives only a short distance from the foot of Buck's row. According to her statement she was awakened early in the morning by her children, who said some one was trying to get into the house. She listened and heard a woman screaming "Murder! police!" five or six times. The voice faded away as though the was going in the direction of Buck's row, and all was quiet. She only heard the steps of one person.

THE PALL MALL GAZETTE
An Evening Newspaper and Review.
SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 1888.

A general belief prevails that the spot where the body was found was not the scene of the murder, and this belief is supported by the fact that what appeared to be blood-stains have been traced at irregular distances on the footpath in Brady-street, which adjoins Buck's-row.

Evening Standard (London)
1 September 1888

Buck's row runs through from Thomas street to Brady street, and in the latter street what appeared to be blood stains were early in the morning found at irregular distances on the footpaths on each side of the street. Occasionally a larger splash was visible, and from the way in which the marks were scattered it seems as though the person carrying the mutilated body had hesitated where to deposit his ghastly burden, and had gone from one side of the road to the other, until the obscurity of Buck's row afforded the shelter sought for. The street had been crossed twice within the space of about 120 yards. The point at which the stains were first visible is in front of the gateway to Honey's mews, in Brady street, about 150 yards from the point where Buck's row commences.

Evening News
London, U.K.
1 September 1888

Buck's-row runs through from Thomas-street to Brady-street, and in the latter street what appeared to be blood stains were, early in the morning, found at irregular distances on the footpaths on either side of the street. Occasionally a larger splash was visible, and from the way in which the marks were scattered it seems as though the person carrying the mutilated body had hesitated where to deposit his ghastly burden, and gone from one side of the road to the other until the obscurity of Buck's-row afforded the shelter sought for. The street had been crossed twice within the space of about 120 yards. The point at which the stains were first visible is in front of the gateway to Honey's-mews, in Brady-street, about 150 yards from the point where Buck's-row commences.
According to her statement she was awakened early in the morning by her children, who said some one was trying to get into the house. She listened, and heard a woman screaming "Murder! Police!" five or six times. The voice faded away, as though the woman was going in the direction of Buck's-row, and all was quiet. She only heard the steps of one person. It is almost needless to point out that a person suffering from such injuries as the deceased had had inflicted upon her would be unable to traverse the distance from Honey's-mews to the gateway in Buck's-row, which is about 120 yards from Brady-street, making a total distance of at least 170 yards.
Therefore the woman must have been carried or dragged there, and here the mystery becomes all the more involved. Even supposing that, with the severe abdominal wounds she had sufficient strength left to call out in the tones which Mrs. Colwell asserts she heard the deceased's throat could not have been cut at the spot where she was found lying dead, as that would have caused a considerably heavier flow of blood than was found there. As a matter of fact but a very small quantity of blood was to be seen at this spot, or found in Buck's-row at all, so the murderer could not have waited here to finish his ghastly task. If he had cut her throat on the onset the deceased could not have uttered a single cry afterwards. Mrs. Colwell's statement, looked at in the light of these circumstances, by no means totally clears up the mystery as to the exact locality which the murderer selected for the accomplishment of his foul deed.

LLOYD'S WEEKLY NEWSPAPER
LARGEST CIRCULATION IN THE WORLD.
LONDON: SUNDAY, SEPT. 2, 1888.

A LITTLE GIRL'S STORY.
Charlotte Colville, who lives about the middle of Brady-street, made the following statement to our representative on Friday night :- I am 11 years of age, and sleep with my mother. Early this (Friday) morning, before it was light, I heard terrible cries of "Murder! Murder! Police! Police! Murder!" They seemed a good way down Brady-street to the right, where the marks of bloody hands are. Then the sounds came up the street towards our house, and I heard a scuffling and a bumping against our shutters. I got out of bed and woke my mother. The woman kept on calling out "Murder! Police!" and the sounds went on in the direction of Buck's-row, where the body was found. I am sure the first sounds seemed to come from where the blood-stains of hands are on the wall.
Mrs. Colville said that her little girl woke her, and she heard the woman's cries, but the rows go on every night, and people are constantly being knocked down and robbed by the fearful gangs about. It would not be safe for anyone to get out of their beds to go and interfere. People have done so, and only been terribly ill-treated.

LLOYD'S WEEKLY NEWSPAPER
LARGEST CIRCULATION IN THE WORLD.
LONDON: SUNDAY, SEPT. 2, 1888.


1 September 1888 The people living in Brady-street were thrown into a state of excitement on the terrible news spreading. Brady-street is a long thoroughfare that runs to the left from the bottom of Buck's-row. Early on Friday morning fresh blood stains were observed for quite a distance along the side walks. There would be drop after drop two or three feet, and sometimes six feet apart for a distance, and then a larger pool or splash. As soon as the murder became known a lively interest was taken in these blood-stains, and they began to be traced. They were soon found to be on both sides of the street, and it was afterwards seen that the bleeding person had travelled or been carried in a zig-zag line. The trail was easily followed down Brady-street for 150 yards to Honey's-mews. In front of the gateway there was a large stain, looking as if the bleeding person had fallen against the wall and lain there. From here to the foot of Buck's-row, in which the body was found, the trail of blood was clearly marked. It was wet on Friday morning, and at noon, although the sun had dried it, and there had been many feet passing over it, it was still plainly discernible. The zig-zag direction it took crossing and re-crossing the street was and is a matter of mystery. In the space of a hundred yards the woman crossed the narrow street twice, and whenever she crossed a larger stain of blood in place of the drops indicated that she had stopped.

Our representative discovered, however, on making inquiries the same night, that at a house near where the blood spots were a man, early on the morning of the tragedy, had made a murderous assault on his wife and cut her throat. She was carried to the London hospital, and it is very probable some blood dripped from her.

All taken from Casebook "Press Reports"

Last edited by Jon Guy : 11-21-2009 at 06:39 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-20-2009, 12:03 PM
richardnunweek richardnunweek is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,218
Default

Hi Jon,
For many years I always believed that The blood marks were made by a breathless Nichols attempting to escape a murderous assault, as the statement made by young Charlotte seemed genuine.
However it is now evident that another explanation is avaliable, and plausible, that being a woman being carried struggling to the hospital, with her bloodstained hand outright, which would account for the handprint, and indeed the breathless sounds heard.
However we need verification of the time this emergency dash was made to tick that box with any certainty. as a witness in Bucks row heard the breathless sounds at 330am, just as a train passed on time.
Regards Richard.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-20-2009, 01:10 PM
Jon Guy Jon Guy is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 2,713
Default

Hi Richard

Quote:
However we need verification of the time this emergency dash was made to tick that box with any certainty.
The only reference I can see to a possible time for the Brady St dash is in the first paragraph of my original post, which states shortly after midnight.

But Richard, we know that it was not Polly who was bleeding in Brady St. She was not going anywhere following her knife wounds. There was no blood found in Bucks Row other than around the body. Even if she were carried to Bucks Row there would have been drops of blood.

Quote:
as a witness in Bucks row heard the breathless sounds at 330am, just as a train passed on time.
Regards Richard.
The witness, Mrs Lilley, probably heard Polly`s murder. She was a couple of doors away from where the body lay, and the time is right.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-21-2009, 06:09 PM
perrymason
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Since the first time a knife is used on Polly she is most probably lying on the ground face up, unable to resist or call for help....its clear that Polly went nowhere after her killers knife almost cuts her head off.

Polly wasnt stabbed before those throat cuts, so, no blood of hers should be anywhere but on and around her.

She was cut where she lay, and thats the only place her blood is shed that night.

Best regards
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-30-2014, 12:19 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,521
Default

While reviewing the evidence relating to the Nichols murder, this aspect (of the Brady Street bloodstains) struck me as rather interesting.

Firstly, I should point out that the last paragraph of the OP's evidential summary is misleading because it makes it appear as if the bloodstains must have been the result of the man's "murderous assault on his wife". But the full version of the LWN article makes clear that this was the explanation for two blobs of blood that had been found further up Buck's Row (presumably in the direction towards Baker's Row), not the Brady Street blood.

The explanation for the Brady Street blood is, apparently, given in the Daily Chronicle of Monday 3 September 1888 which does not feature in the OP's post (nor I think in the press reports on this site):

"The conclusion now arrived at is that woman met with her dreadful fate where he body was found. What were at first supposed to have been pools of blood for some distance upon the pavement cannot be relied upon as such, owing to the darkness of the stains".

This information was presumably provided by the police and followed the reports over the weekend, quoted by the OP, about the blood in Brady Street.

Yet, it is a fact that something that looked like blood was spotted by the police in Brady Street. According to the Daily Chronicle's report of Inspector Helson's evidence the inquest (which can also be found in the Illustrated Police News):

"The only suspicious mark about the place was one spot in Brady-street. It might have been blood."

Let us just recap over the evidence about the blood in Buck's Row because it is rather amusing.

The earliest account is to be found in the Weekly Dispatch/LWN from Mrs Green who lived Buck's Row:

"My son went down as soon as the body was taken away and washed away the bloodstains on the pavement. There was quite a little pool, though I understand most of it soaked into the woman's dress....This was four o'clock on Friday morning".

Her timing must be a little out because it was about 4:30am when the body was removed but one cannot tire of reading how the evidence of the blood was simply washed away by a member of the public before it was even light! That this was done was confirmed during the inquest although the point was made that PC Thain was in attendance while the washing was done as if this made it any better. When Inspector Spratling appeared on the site as the blood was being washed away, all he was able to see were "some stains in between the stones".

So what happened next? Well, according to the evidence at the inquest, at about 5am or 6am, PC Thain was tasked to look for bloodstains in Buck's Row, not Brady Street, but it would still have been dark so he couldn't have seen much.

Then, presumably, during the Friday morning, newspaper reporters converged on the scene and in the daylight they appeared to have noticed these zig-zagging bloodstains in Brady Street. The report of the bloodstains in Brady Street first appeared in the Daily Chronicle of 1 September (whose report was repeated in that day's Evening Standard, quoted in the OP).

The Weekly Dispatch/LWN reporter summed up what he had apparently seen:

"The trail was easily followed down Brady-street for 150 yards to Honey's-mews. In front of the gateway there was a large stain, looking as if the bleeding person had fallen against the wall and lain there. From here to the foot of Buck's-row, in which the body was found, the trail of blood was clearly marked".

He makes the point that: "It was wet on Friday morning, and at noon, although the sun had dried it, and there had been many feet passing over it, it was still plainly discernible."

Now, the evidence at the inquest was that Inspector Spratling did not get round to examining the area in daylight until the rather vague "11 or 12 o'clock". Most reports of the inquest say that he examined Buck's Row only but, as some reports also mention Brady Street, we must assume that he did look in Brady Street. He said at the inquest that he looked for bloodstains but couldn't find any, although this is in itself curious in view of the evidence of Inspector Helson (who was on the scene at around 8am or 9am) that he saw something which looked like blood in Brady Street.

Spratling did not get an easy time from the coroner. He was supposed to be telling him about his search for bloodstains but he told the coroner that he found no weapon when he looked along the railway yard and lines. According to the Star, the following exchange occurred:

""You are looking for the weapon and I am looking for the blood," said the Coroner rather sharply.
"No, no blood," answered witness [Spratling] hastily".

Oddly considering the explanation for the bloodstains in the Daily Chronicle of 3 Sept referred to above, Spratling made no mention of these "dark stains" in Brady Street which supposedly confused the reporters for the Daily Chronicle and Weekly Dispatch.

Is it possible that Spratling's search was not very thorough? Or perhaps he did not arrive on scene until after midday at which point the stains were fast vanishing. Even if he did get there between 11 and 12 as he said, considering the number of people in the street at that time of day, did he really have a good opportunity to conduct a thorough search for bloodstains? If he assumed that the murder had happened in Buck's Row did he even bother to look in Brady Street much at all? Perhaps he only went back and looked after the Saturday morning papers came out.

So could Nichols have been murdered in Brady Street and carried to Buck's Row? I don't know but it might explain how the murderer had sufficient light to see what he was doing when Paul and Cross could barely see what was right in front of them at the spot where the body was found in Buck's Row.

And what was the evidence about the Nichols being murdered where the body was found? Not terribly convincing is the answer. Dr Llewellyn said that there was no marks of any struggle or blood "as though the body had been dragged" (but he said nothing about whether it could have been carried). The evidence that Nichols was murdered where she was found came from Inspector Helson. As reported in the Daily Chronicle:

A Juror: Did the body look as if it had been brought dead to Buck’s-row?

Witness: No, I should say that the offence was committed on the spot.”

The report in The Times elaborates a little on this:

"Witness was also of opinion that the murder was committed at the spot where the body was found. The clothes were very little arranged thus showing the body could not have been carried far."

And that - the clothes being little arranged - seems to be the only reason offered as to why Nichols was murdered in Buck's Row. Could she have been murdered in Brady Street and carried to Buck's Row? It seems at least possible.

I should add that the coroner stated that "The condition in which the body was found appeared to prove conclusively that deceased was killed on the exact spot where she was found". However, he seems more uncertain when he goes on to say "if the deceased was killed where she was found, she met her death without a cry of any kind". The word "if" appears to betray his uncertainty and the evidence as reported certainly does not appear to prove anything "conclusively".
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk

Last edited by David Orsam : 11-30-2014 at 12:39 PM. Reason: final paragraph added
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-01-2014, 11:05 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,521
Default

A couple of additional thoughts on this.

Why would Spratling have searched for blood in Brady Street but not any other nearby streets such as Thomas Street or Baker's Row? Searching in Buck's Row was understandable but why confine any further searches to just one street? It would only make sense if he was searching in response to the newspaper claims of blood in Brady Street but these did not emerge until Saturday morning, whereas he claimed to have carried out his search on Friday.

Also, is it not suspicious that there is no mention of the search for bloodstains in Spratling's report of Friday, 31 August? In that report he refers to searching the stations and premises of the East London and District Railways and all wharves, and enclosures in the vicinity, but this was specifically stated to have been a search for the murder weapon.

I can't help feeling that Spratling only looked in Brady Street for bloodstains on the Saturday, in response to the newspaper claims, or possibly even on the Sunday when they were repeated, and by this time they were no longer visible.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-01-2014, 12:23 PM
Tom_Wescott Tom_Wescott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,676
Default

If I remember correctly, a fellow by the name of John Hummerstone was responsible for the blood stains.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-01-2014, 12:33 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,521
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
If I remember correctly, a fellow by the name of John Hummerstone was responsible for the blood stains.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott
Hi Tom,

As mentioned in my post, there were two sets of blood stains. One set in Buck's Row (further up towards Baker's Row) and one set in Brady Street. It was the Buck's Row stains that Hummerstone (the man who made the "murderous assault" on his wife) is said to have been responsible for. This still leaves the mystery of the supposed blood in Brady Street.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-01-2014, 01:09 PM
Tom_Wescott Tom_Wescott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,676
Default

Hi David, my apologies. I failed to read your posts before posting. I will do so shortly as this is a topic I'm interested in as well.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-01-2014, 01:43 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,521
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
Hi David, my apologies. I failed to read your posts before posting. I will do so shortly as this is a topic I'm interested in as well.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott
No worries, will be interested to read any thoughts you have.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.