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 Elamarna 2 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Debra A 2 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Debra A 2 hours ago.
Conferences and Meetings: American Jack the Ripper - True Crime Conference, Baltimore, April 7-8, 2018 - by ChrisGeorge 2 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Sam Flynn 3 hours ago.
Thompson, Francis: Jack the Poet - by Simon Webb 3 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - (35 posts)
Martha Tabram: Probibility of Martha Tabram Being a JtR Victim - (9 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Was Jack caught by London underworld? - (4 posts)
Conferences and Meetings: American Jack the Ripper - True Crime Conference, Baltimore, April 7-8, 2018 - (2 posts)
Maybrick, James: 25 YEARS OF THE DIARY OF JACK THE RIPPER: THE TRUE FACTS by Robert Smith - (2 posts)
Non-Fiction: Jack the Poet - (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
  #11  
Old 03-26-2017, 01:14 PM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 15,406
Default

I have always thought that the best suggestion we have for the wording "exactly 3.45" is indeed that Paul heard a nearby clock chime the quarter stroke.

At the inquest, Paul said "I am a carman, and on the morning of the murder I left home just before a quarter to four." That is totally consistent with him having had knowledge that he was in Bucks Row as the clock chimed.

That leaves us with the four minute estimation: "Not more than four minutes had elapsed from the time he first saw the woman."
To begin with, I would say that I do not think that Pauls word were grounded in a second reading of a clock. The reason for this is that if this had been the case, then he could have been sure of the time, and he would reasonably have said something like "Four minutes had passed" - he would have the exact knowledge (or think he had - if he had looked at two different clocks, they could have been unsynchronized), and not "Not more than...", which is clearly an estimation.
So how could he estimate it? Well, I myself had the same route to work for twentyfive years. And I knew exactly how long time it would take for me to get home from different observation points along the road; Passing the Landskrona crossroads, I had fifteen minutes home, from the restaurant at Glumslöv, I had ten minutes to home, from the place where I left the highway, I had a little less than four minutes to home, and so on.
If Paul knew these timings after having walked to work for a number of years, then he may have judged the distance, thinking that it normally took a certain time to cover, and then he concluded how long it would have taken given the circumstances of the murder night.

That, at least, is my five cents.

Last edited by Fisherman : 03-26-2017 at 01:23 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-26-2017, 01:52 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,915
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
Hi David
Isn't a quarter past 4 4:15? How does this jibe with 3:45? Confused.
Yes, you are quite right Abby. That was an error in the Times which I repeated.

This is from the Daily Telegraph:

"Police-constable Mizen said that at a quarter to four o'clock on Friday morning he was at the crossing, Hanbury-street, Baker's-row, when a carman who passed in company with another man informed him that he was wanted by a policeman in Buck's-row, where a woman was lying. When he arrived there Constable Neil sent him for the ambulance. At that time nobody but Neil was with the body."
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-26-2017, 01:57 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,915
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
I have always thought that the best suggestion we have for the wording "exactly 3.45" is indeed that Paul heard a nearby clock chime the quarter stroke.
Did public clocks in Whitechapel even strike the quarter hour during the middle of the night? I rather doubt it.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk

Last edited by David Orsam : 03-26-2017 at 02:08 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-26-2017, 04:31 PM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,067
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
Yes, you are quite right Abby. That was an error in the Times which I repeated.

This is from the Daily Telegraph:

"Police-constable Mizen said that at a quarter to four o'clock on Friday morning he was at the crossing, Hanbury-street, Baker's-row, when a carman who passed in company with another man informed him that he was wanted by a policeman in Buck's-row, where a woman was lying. When he arrived there Constable Neil sent him for the ambulance. At that time nobody but Neil was with the body."
Ok thanks!
__________________
"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
  #15  
Old 03-26-2017, 10:07 PM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 15,406
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
Did public clocks in Whitechapel even strike the quarter hour during the middle of the night? I rather doubt it.
John Davis got up at 5.45 on the morning of the 8:th of September, and he said that he was certain of that time as he had heard the clock in Christchurch strike the quarter hour. That much resembles what Paul said.
Christchurch, of course, was around 800 yards or so from Bucks Row. But if Christchurch chimed every quarter hour, I don´t see why other churches could not have done the same - it was an era when there was a need for such things to help out with the timekeeping.
If you are suggesting that the clocks did not strike in the earlier hours, it would be nice to see some evidence for that.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-27-2017, 12:03 AM
harry harry is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,683
Default

Twice now Fisherman,I have to agree with you.First ,that Paul out of habit would be a reliable person as to time,and second that Church clocks usually chimed the quarters.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-27-2017, 01:07 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is online now
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,649
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
I have always thought that the best suggestion we have for the wording "exactly 3.45" is indeed that Paul heard a nearby clock chime the quarter stroke.

At the inquest, Paul said "I am a carman, and on the morning of the murder I left home just before a quarter to four." That is totally consistent with him having had knowledge that he was in Bucks Row as the clock chimed.

That leaves us with the four minute estimation: "Not more than four minutes had elapsed from the time he first saw the woman."
To begin with, I would say that I do not think that Pauls word were grounded in a second reading of a clock. The reason for this is that if this had been the case, then he could have been sure of the time, and he would reasonably have said something like "Four minutes had passed" - he would have the exact knowledge (or think he had - if he had looked at two different clocks, they could have been unsynchronized), and not "Not more than...", which is clearly an estimation.
So how could he estimate it? Well, I myself had the same route to work for twentyfive years. And I knew exactly how long time it would take for me to get home from different observation points along the road; Passing the Landskrona crossroads, I had fifteen minutes home, from the restaurant at Glumslöv, I had ten minutes to home, from the place where I left the highway, I had a little less than four minutes to home, and so on.
If Paul knew these timings after having walked to work for a number of years, then he may have judged the distance, thinking that it normally took a certain time to cover, and then he concluded how long it would have taken given the circumstances of the murder night.

That, at least, is my five cents.
Hi Christer,
Thanks for the input.
My only issue on the estimation is 4 minutes. If he had said less than 5 I would be perfectly happy. I agree with you on repeated journeys, but it's that use of 4 which just grates with me.

I notice no-one has commented on his possible use of a watch. Apart from the cost is there any reason to exclude the possibility.

Thanks to all so far.

Stev
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-27-2017, 05:29 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 15,406
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
Hi Christer,
Thanks for the input.
My only issue on the estimation is 4 minutes. If he had said less than 5 I would be perfectly happy. I agree with you on repeated journeys, but it's that use of 4 which just grates with me.

I notice no-one has commented on his possible use of a watch. Apart from the cost is there any reason to exclude the possibility.

Thanks to all so far.

Stev
If he had had a clock, then why would he say "no more than four minutes"? To me, that is an estimation. With a clock, he could have said "It took three and a half minutes" - he would know, and would not have to estimate.

As I said, the more aquainted with a stretch you are, the more precisely you will be able to judge how long it takes to cover. If Paul knew that it was a question of no more than four minutes, saying "no more than five minutes" would take away from the exactness the lower offer would provide.

Last edited by Fisherman : 03-27-2017 at 05:40 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-27-2017, 05:59 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is online now
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,649
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
If he had had a clock, then why would he say "no more than four minutes"? To me, that is an estimation. With a clock, he could have said "It took three and a half minutes" - he would know, and would not have to estimate.

As I said, the more aquainted with a stretch you are, the more precisely you will be able to judge how long it takes to cover. If Paul knew that it was a question of no more than four minutes, saying "no more than five minutes" would take away from the exactness the lower offer would provide.
Your points are fair, am just looking for all the arguments on possible reasons for what was claimed, my particular interest is the clash of timings with Neil.,


I see one possible issue with the 4 minutes estimate, if we assume that Paul was indeed late and he was hurrying, would he not be walking faster than normal?
If so, would that not mean that his estimates are wrong, as they are based on his normal walking speed? Or was he in reality walking at his normal pace?

All questions Christer which I think we cannot answer with any degree of certainty.

Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-27-2017, 07:25 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 15,406
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
Your points are fair, am just looking for all the arguments on possible reasons for what was claimed, my particular interest is the clash of timings with Neil.,


I see one possible issue with the 4 minutes estimate, if we assume that Paul was indeed late and he was hurrying, would he not be walking faster than normal?
If so, would that not mean that his estimates are wrong, as they are based on his normal walking speed? Or was he in reality walking at his normal pace?

All questions Christer which I think we cannot answer with any degree of certainty.

Steve
The estimates need not be wrong, I think; if he knew that he covered a stretch in four minutes of normal walking, then he could easily say that it was no more than four minutes if he knew that he had hurried.

Just as you say, we are left with guesswork, though.
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 03:08 AM.


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