Did Schwartz and Lawende Describe the Same Man?

[John Wheat]

Considering we don't know who did and didn't see Jack and that witness reports are notoriously unreliable. How useful is it to keep going over witness statements?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I agree that these suspect descriptions are not the same man, but neither of these suspects were the killer either, in my opinion.

The man and woman seen by Lawende had disappeared by the time Harvey arrived about five minutes later and another four minutes later, Watkins found nearby the body of a woman whose clothes, according to Lawende, matched those of the woman he had seen.

That makes a strong case for the man described by Lawende having been the murderer.

[FrankO]

That makes a strong case for the man described by Lawende having been the murderer.

While I agree with this, that doesn't tell us how accurate his description was. I'm inclined to put some stock, at least, in the impression the man gave him: that of a shabbily dressed sailor type man.

[Wickerman]

The man and woman seen by Lawende had disappeared by the time Harvey arrived about five minutes later and another four minutes later, Watkins found nearby the body of a woman whose clothes, according to Lawende, matched those of the woman he had seen.

That makes a strong case for the man described by Lawende having been the murderer.

All these women dressed the same, in dark clothes. The police would not allow Lawende to identify the body because he claimed to not see her face, which makes the case for him seeing Eddowes much weaker.
More likely to my mind are the people (couple?) seen passing through St. James Place (Orange Market) about 1:30 by a watchman named Blenkingsop.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

All these women dressed the same, in dark clothes. The police would not allow Lawende to identify the body because he claimed to not see her face, which makes the case for him seeing Eddowes much weaker.
More likely to my mind are the people (couple?) seen passing through St. James Place (Orange Market) about 1:30 by a watchman named Blenkingsop.

We do not know whether the woman seen by Blenkinsop wore clothes similar to Eddowes'.

We do not know who the man following her was.

If he was a policeman, why did he not pass on his information to his superiors?

If he was not a policeman, why would he have been following the couple?

Whoever he was, why did he not come forward following the murder?

I do not know how Blenkinsop's story first came to light, but if it was important, why is there no record of the police having been interested in it, and why did he not appear as a witness at the inquest?

[DJA]

James Blenkinsop gave his story to The Star,1st October.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

James Blenkingsop, who was on duty as a watchman in St. James's-place (leading to the square), where some street improvements are taking place, states that about half-past one a respectably-dressed man came up to him and said, "Have you seen a man and a woman go through here?" "I didn't take any notice," returned Blenkingsop. "I have seen some people pass."

(The Star, 1 October 1888)


According to The Star, Blenkinsop did not say that he had seen a man and woman pass by together.

The police evidently decided that the story had nothing to do with the murder.

[Wickerman]

We do not know whether the woman seen by Blenkinsop wore clothes similar to Eddowes'.

We do not know who the man following her was.

If he was a policeman, why did he not pass on his information to his superiors?

If he was not a policeman, why would he have been following the couple?

Whoever he was, why did he not come forward following the murder?

I do not know how Blenkinsop's story first came to light, but if it was important, why is there no record of the police having been interested in it, and why did he not appear as a witness at the inquest?

To ask, "Why, why, why" does not invalidate a story.
Any policeman today will tell you people do not automatically come forward, that most witnesses have to be sought out.
You apparently put faith in Lawende's story, yet he was another witness who, like Blenkingsop's suspect, never came forward. Lawende was discovered after door-to-door enquiries.
So perhaps you think only honest witnesses come forward - was Lawende dishonest?

City Police records were destroyed in WWII, so we cannot say the policeman following the couple through St. James Place did not make a report.

Major Smith, City Commissioner, wrote that his constables were instructed to follow couples, not men, not groups of women, but couples. Which is why Blenkingsop's "people" are likely to have been a "couple". The police were only instructed to follow couples out late at night.

The reason this vague record is important is because it better suits the time window. The couple seen by Lawende are not seen to enter the square, this is only an assumption based on a vague acknowledgement of some dark clothing. Whereas Blenkingsop's story identifies someone entering the square at roughly the same time Watkins was supposed to leave by the Mitre St. exit.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

City Police records were destroyed in WWII, so we cannot say the policeman following the couple through St. James Place did not make a report...

Blenkingsop's story identifies someone entering the square at roughly the same time Watkins was supposed to leave by the Mitre St. exit.

We cannot say for certain that the man who was reported to have claimed to have been following a couple was a policeman, nor that he saw a couple entering Mitre Square, nor that he meant that he saw them entering Mitre Square.

We can say for certain that whoever he was, he did not testify at the inquest, even though it did not conclude until 11 days later.

If he was an important witness, why did he not testify?

[Abby Normal]

Schwartz, Lawende and co, Marshall (and possibly PC smith) all saw the same man. He fits the general description of all of them and was wearing a peaked cap. There was also an anon sighting of peaked cap man inbetween time and place of the stride and eddowes murders in Church road who was acting suspiciosly.
Factor in the circs that he was interupted during the stride attack and couldnt finish his true desire of mutilation and organ removal which he was shortly thereafter able to accomplish with Eddowes and it is undoubtedly the same man.
There are alot of sub mysteries to this case but this aint one of them.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Pc Smith saw a man with no moustache, wearing a long coat, and of respectable appearance.

Schwartz saw a man with a brown moustache, wearing a dark jacket, and showing signs of being both violent and inebriated.

Lawende saw a man with a fair moustache, wearing a loose pepper-and-salt jacket, and having the appearance of a sailor.

They obviously saw three different men.

[FrankO]

Pc Smith saw a man with no moustache, wearing a long coat, and of respectable appearance.

Schwartz saw a man with a brown moustache, wearing a dark jacket, and showing signs of being both violent and inebriated.

Lawende saw a man with a fair moustache, wearing a loose pepper-and-salt jacket, and having the appearance of a sailor.

They obviously saw three different men.

It certainly isn't obvious that they all saw a different man, PI. At best, we can say that the descriptions suggest different men rather than one and the same. When witness despriptions include things like "appearance of" and behaviour..., I'd go with that without putting much stock in any of the details.

[FrankO]

Schwartz, Lawende and co, Marshall (and possibly PC smith) all saw the same man. He fits the general description of all of them and was wearing a peaked cap. There was also an anon sighting of peaked cap man inbetween time and place of the stride and eddowes murders in Church road who was acting suspiciosly.

Considering that, perhaps, some two thirds of all men back in those days and in those parts wore a peaked cap, I wouldn't consider the peaked cap any sort of clincher, Abby. Furthermore, Marshall's man and Smith's man were described as 'respectably dressed' and as quietly talking to a woman or similar. While the latter clearly can't be said of Schwartz's man, the former clearly can't be said of Lawende's man.

Factor in the circs that he was interupted during the stride attack and couldnt finish his true desire of mutilation and organ removal which he was shortly thereafter able to accomplish with Eddowes and it is undoubtedly the same man.
There are alot of sub mysteries to this case but this aint one of them.

While I don't disagree with the possibility that Stride and Eddowes were killed by the same man, the evidence to support a claim that the women were seen with the same man is, at best, not strong. It's no sub mystery either way.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

It certainly isn't obvious that they all saw a different man, PI. At best, we can say that the descriptions suggest different men rather than one and the same. When witness despriptions include things like "appearance of" and behaviour..., I'd go with that without putting much stock in any of the details.

For one and the same man to have grown a moustache in about ten minutes and then dyed it fair during the following 50 minutes seems farfetched to me.

[FrankO]

For one and the same man to have grown a moustache in about ten minutes and then dyed it fair during the following 50 minutes seems farfetched to me.

Such differences come with witness descriptions. They are generally not all that reliable when it comes to details like moustaches, whiskers, hair color, etcetera. That's why I added the "without putting much stock in any of the details" in my post above.