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:
"The Royal Conspiracy": Annie and Alice Crook photographs. - by harry 2 hours ago.
Non-Fiction: Deconstructing Jack by Simon Wood - by David Orsam 6 hours ago.
Audio -- Visual: Exorcist and JTR - by Sam Flynn 8 hours ago.
Audio -- Visual: Exorcist and JTR - by Simon Wood 8 hours ago.
Audio -- Visual: Exorcist and JTR - by Herlock Sholmes 9 hours ago.
Audio -- Visual: Exorcist and JTR - by Sam Flynn 11 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
"The Royal Conspiracy": Annie and Alice Crook photographs. - (14 posts)
Audio -- Visual: Exorcist and JTR - (5 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Heartburn? - (2 posts)
Non-Fiction: Deconstructing Jack by Simon Wood - (1 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 > Witnesses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-26-2017, 06:00 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,033
Default Robert Paul Time Issues

One thing which as struck me while looking at Bucks Row, is the rather precise timings given by Robert Paul

Its exactly 3.45 as he passes up Bucks Row and its four minutes after he see the body he finds Mizen.


Now its of course possible that this is just Paul attempting to make his story look better, but lets just say its not.

How could he be so accurate to say exactly 3.45?
Even if he had checked a clock at his home as he left, to say "exactly" rather than "about" or similar is somewhat unusual.

I say this based on the time it would have taken him to get to Bucks Row from his home, the entrance of which was approximately 349 feet from his front door, the distance from his front door to Nichols was about 722ft. basic calculations say that even if he was walking at 5 miles an hour(considered very fast) it would have taken him around 50 seconds to reach the entrance to Bucks row , and 1minute 30-1 minute 40 seconds to reach the body.

That would seem to suggest the exactly in his statement was not based on a clock from home.

So what other means would there be for him to make such a statement?

Two possible answer are:

1. There was a clock in Bucks Row, have to say am not aware of this, does anyone know if there was a clock there or not?


2. He had a personal time piece on him.


The same applies to his FOUR minutes, rather too precise, why not say five if he is guessing.

We can make some more suppositions


1. Having seen the time in Bucks Row there was a second clock where there met Mizen, and Paul assumed the two clocks to be synchronized.

2. He just guessed.

3. Again he had a watch.


This leads us to another issue, that of both he and PC Neil claiming to be in Bucks Row at the same time.

One possible resolution to this is that if he indeed did have a watch, he ran it fast, that is ahead of the real time. This would give some allowance for late running, and is still practices by many today.


Its all speculation but anyone have any thoughts on the issue? is he just guessing or are the precise timings he quotes based on something?


Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-26-2017, 06:24 AM
Joshua Rogan Joshua Rogan is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,127
Default

Hi Steve,
Any clock needn't have been on his direct route, only within earshot. Mrs Long said she fixed the time she saw Annie Chapman by the chiming of the brewery clock - there was a big brewery just south of Bath Street. There was also the station which might have had a clock.

Last edited by Joshua Rogan : 03-26-2017 at 06:28 AM. Reason: Addition
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-26-2017, 06:36 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,033
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
Hi Steve,
Any clock needn't have been on his direct route, only within earshot. Mrs Long said she fixed the time she saw Annie Chapman by the chiming of the brewery clock - there was a big brewery just south of Bath Street.

Joshua,

Thanks for that,nice point, had not considered that. It certainly would explain the use of "exactly"; However if that were correct it raises issues with Neil and his finding of the body.
Some research I have been doing suggest, and its no more than that, Neil may arrive between 2-5 minutes after Lech and Paul leave the site.

if Paul did based his statement on such a chime, it does mean that his statement of "4 minutes" must be based on a second clock, and probably one not synchronized with the first.


Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-26-2017, 06:41 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,033
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
Hi Steve,
Any clock needn't have been on his direct route, only within earshot. Mrs Long said she fixed the time she saw Annie Chapman by the chiming of the brewery clock - there was a big brewery just south of Bath Street. There was also the station which might have had a clock.

Hi Joshua,

I don't think there was a back entrance to the station, and he would I think, have to have looked over and down to see the platforms, and these are after the murder site itself.
Don't think that's as possible as the brewery option, which must say I do like.

Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-26-2017, 07:40 AM
Joshua Rogan Joshua Rogan is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
Joshua,

Thanks for that,nice point, had not considered that. It certainly would explain the use of "exactly"; However if that were correct it raises issues with Neil and his finding of the body.
Some research I have been doing suggest, and its no more than that, Neil may arrive between 2-5 minutes after Lech and Paul leave the site.

if Paul did based his statement on such a chime, it does mean that his statement of "4 minutes" must be based on a second clock, and probably one not synchronized with the first.
There was St Olaves church a few hundred yards up Hanbury Street. If this had a visible clock it would be reasonably easy to accurately estimate the time they met Mizen and left the body. No idea if this was the case though, it seems to be a row of flats now.
The platform of Whitechapel & Mile End Station wasn't visible, but was semi-open. Thinking about it, though, I'm not sure a platform clock would chime.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-26-2017, 07:56 AM
Observer Observer is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,357
Default

Hi Joshua

As you proceed alonfg Bucks Row and when you clear the Board School into Whites Row if you look over to your left you can plainly see the clock of the London Hospital above the rooftops in Whitechapel Road
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-26-2017, 08:21 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,279
Default

Hi Steve,

I would first want to consider whether Paul actually used the expression "exactly a quarter to four". It's easy to be seduced by the newspaper article that Paul actually made a "statement", but it's more likely in my view that he was answering a series of questions and the LWN journalist later created a "statement" by Paul based on what he had written in his notes. To that extent, some of the article could easily be the words of the journalist filling in gaps in his notes. One thing for certain is that Paul did not use that expression in his evidence at the inquest.

More importantly, the context of the article of 2 September 1888 is that it was being officially claimed that a police constable had discovered the body of Nichols at 3.45am. The LWN article was clearly a response to this with the point being that this could not be true because it was Paul who discovered the body at that time. So 3.45am was not necessarily a time volunteered by Paul but might have been a response to a leading question from the journalist.

For me, the best evidence in terms of timing is that of PC Mizen who said, in his sworn evidence, that he was approached by Cross/Paul at "a quarter past 4". He was then engaged in calling-up - so it must have been important for him to know the correct time - and I suspect that he was in the process of calling up people who wanted to be woken up at 3.45am. So I think his time is probably reliable.

Inspector Abberline wrote in his report dated 19 September 1888 that the body was discovered by Cross at "about 3.40". He must have been the officer with the most knowledge of the facts and I see no good reason to doubt that this is the best time of the discovery that is, and ever will be, available to us.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-26-2017, 08:22 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,033
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
There was St Olaves church a few hundred yards up Hanbury Street. If this had a visible clock it would be reasonably easy to accurately estimate the time they met Mizen and left the body. No idea if this was the case though, it seems to be a row of flats now.
The platform of Whitechapel & Mile End Station wasn't visible, but was semi-open. Thinking about it, though, I'm not sure a platform clock would chime.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Observer View Post
Hi Joshua

As you proceed alonfg Bucks Row and when you clear the Board School into Whites Row if you look over to your left you can plainly see the clock of the London Hospital above the rooftops in Whitechapel Road
Joshua and Observer, both valid points thank you.
However the impression Paul gives is that it was 3.45 when he was walking down Bucks Row, before he saw Lechmere, or am I reading it wrong?

And the 4 minutes he claims until he meets Mizen is from that time. so he needs to have a base time to claim the 4 minutes from.

Of course Joshua he may, as you say, have heard a clock chime and seen the clock in Hanbury Street and therefore the 4 minutes is based on that.

Or as Observer says he may have looked across at the London Hospital, in which case he must have added a minute or so on to allow for finding the body and reaching that point.


The more I think about it, the more the 4 minutes is a pure guess, or he had access to a watch.

Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-26-2017, 08:32 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,033
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
Hi Steve,

I would first want to consider whether Paul actually used the expression "exactly a quarter to four". It's easy to be seduced by the newspaper article that Paul actually made a "statement", but it's more likely in my view that he was answering a series of questions and the LWN journalist later created a "statement" by Paul based on what he had written in his notes. To that extent, some of the article could easily be the words of the journalist filling in gaps in his notes. One thing for certain is that Paul did not use that expression in his evidence at the inquest.

More importantly, the context of the article of 2 September 1888 is that it was being officially claimed that a police constable had discovered the body of Nichols at 3.45am. The LWN article was clearly a response to this with the point being that this could not be true because it was Paul who discovered the body at that time. So 3.45am was not necessarily a time volunteered by Paul but might have been a response to a leading question from the journalist.

For me, the best evidence in terms of timing is that of PC Mizen who said, in his sworn evidence, that he was approached by Cross/Paul at "a quarter past 4". He was then engaged in calling-up - so it must have been important for him to know the correct time - and I suspect that he was in the process of calling up people who wanted to be woken up at 3.45am. So I think his time is probably reliable.

Inspector Abberline wrote in his report dated 19 September 1888 that the body was discovered by Cross at "about 3.40". He must have been the officer with the most knowledge of the facts and I see no good reason to doubt that this is the best time of the discovery that is, and ever will be, available to us.
Thank you David

Much of that is inline with my thinking.
I raised the suggestion of a watch running fast to allow for his timings and wanted to see what other were thinking on the issue.

It all starts to come together in my mind, if they meet Mizen at say 3.45 it also ties in with the rough timings I have for Neil, and where he would have been when Paul and Lechmere left the scene.

And 3.40 fits remarkable well with Cross/Lechmere leaving home around 3.30 even if he took the fastest route, depending on his speed hes there about the right time.

Of course some may not agree with that at all.


Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-26-2017, 12:25 PM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 4,589
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
Hi Steve,

I would first want to consider whether Paul actually used the expression "exactly a quarter to four". It's easy to be seduced by the newspaper article that Paul actually made a "statement", but it's more likely in my view that he was answering a series of questions and the LWN journalist later created a "statement" by Paul based on what he had written in his notes. To that extent, some of the article could easily be the words of the journalist filling in gaps in his notes. One thing for certain is that Paul did not use that expression in his evidence at the inquest.

More importantly, the context of the article of 2 September 1888 is that it was being officially claimed that a police constable had discovered the body of Nichols at 3.45am. The LWN article was clearly a response to this with the point being that this could not be true because it was Paul who discovered the body at that time. So 3.45am was not necessarily a time volunteered by Paul but might have been a response to a leading question from the journalist.

For me, the best evidence in terms of timing is that of PC Mizen who said, in his sworn evidence, that he was approached by Cross/Paul at "a quarter past 4". He was then engaged in calling-up - so it must have been important for him to know the correct time - and I suspect that he was in the process of calling up people who wanted to be woken up at 3.45am. So I think his time is probably reliable.

Inspector Abberline wrote in his report dated 19 September 1888 that the body was discovered by Cross at "about 3.40". He must have been the officer with the most knowledge of the facts and I see no good reason to doubt that this is the best time of the discovery that is, and ever will be, available to us.
Hi David
Isn't a quarter past 4 4:15? How does this jibe with 3:45? Confused.
__________________
"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"

-Edgar Allan Poe


"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

-Frederick G. Abberline
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 07:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.