What was said and what does it mean?

[JTRSickert]

Hello. As we know, there are a number of witneses who came forward and reported not only seeign the victime with the alleged murderer, but also overheard snippets of conversation that was going on at the time. What I wanted to do was get everyone's opinion on analyzing the parts of the conversation that was heard and possibly interpret it's meaning. Some may be fairly easy to understand; others may not. But anyway:

1. Polly Nichols- no eyewitnesses present during the murder

2. Annie Chapman-

A. Elizabeth Long: Man(looks/sounds foreign): "Will you?"
Annie: "Yes."

B. Albert Cadosch- Voice (unsure if man or woman): "No." (followed a few minutes later by something heavy hitting the fence)

3. Elizabeth Stride-

A. William Marshall: Man:"You'd say anything but your prayers."

B. James Brown: Stride: "Not tonight. SOme other night."

C. P.C. William Smith: Man and Stride speaking but conversation not heard

D. Israel Schwartz: Man (to Schwartz or Pipeman?): "Lipski!! (If that is what was said)

4. Catherine Eddowes:

A. joseph Lawende (and 2 other Jews): Sees Cathy and man (very likely the murderer) speaking, but didn't overhear.

5. Mary Kelly:

A. George Hutchinson: Man whispers something to Kelly.
Kelly: "Alright."
Man: "You will be alright for what I have told you."

Man says something to Kelly.
Kelly:"alright, my dear. Come on. You will be comfortable.
Kelly says she lost her handkerchief.
Man provides her with replacement.

[Maggyann]

On the handkerchief bit with MJK I wondered if a handkerchief may have been some form of 'birth control appliance' back then?
If this chap was going back to her room for sex on a bed etc as opposed to a quickie up an alley where the act may have not involved actual vaginal intercourse perhaps this would be why MJK referred to the handkerchief?

[lynn cates]

speech pattern

Hello JTR. A splendid suggestion. I wonder if something about speech pattern/s or inflection might betray socio-economic class?

One witness described one of Liz's companions as sounding "educated" like a clerk. The chap with Kelly sounds almost like a toff. And it is altogether possible that Long's sighting indicates a foreigner, perhaps not terribly educated; perhaps not fully bilingual.

Any conclusions from this?

The best.
LC

[JTRSickert]

It's hard to say. Some snippets of dialogue could suggest a possible prostituition solicitation, such as "Will You?" followed by "Yes." Or, "Come along dear. You will be comfortable."

Others seem to be very ambiguous and little meaning can be drawn from them like"You would say anything but your prayers." Or, "Not tonight .Some other night."

And we have no idea what was said from the witnesses who couldn't overhear any conversation.

But, I am open to speculation and interpretation.

[Ben]

Hi all,

It's worth nothing that Mrs. Long never stated that the suspect's accent sounded foreign, only that he seemd to look like a foreigner, although even this invites caution considering that, by her own admission, she only got a rear view of the man. I consider it unlikely that the man seen by Marshall was Stride's eventual killer, let alone the ripper, and as for Hutchinson's account, I consider the handkerchief detail to be a red herring, almost literally! My view is that he borrowed from earlier witness sightings, including that of Joseph Lawende, who had described a man with a red neckerchief. Since Lawende was more likely to have been the ripper than the other suspects mentioned (in terms of time of death, location, and the fact that it was "used" later by the police), I'd argue that his evidence offers us the best clue, at least in terms of eyewitness evidence, to the socio-economic class of the ripper.

All the best,
Ben

[Ben]

Hi all,

It's worth nothing that Mrs. Long never stated that the suspect's accent sounded foreign, only that he seemed to look like a foreigner, although even this invites caution considering that, by her own admission, she only got a rear view of the man. I consider it unlikely that the man seen by Marshall was Stride's eventual killer, let alone the ripper, and as for Hutchinson's account, I consider the handkerchief detail to be a red herring, almost literally! My view is that he borrowed from earlier witness sightings, including that of Joseph Lawende, who had described a man with a red neckerchief. Since Lawende was more likely to have been the ripper than the other suspects mentioned (in terms of time of death, location, and the fact that it was "used" later by the police), I'd argue that his evidence offers us the best clue, at least in terms of eyewitness evidence, to the socio-economic class of the ripper.

All the best,
Ben

[perrymason]

Hi all,

It's worth nothing that Mrs. Long never stated that the suspect's accent sounded foreign, only that he seemed to look like a foreigner, although even this invites caution considering that, by her own admission, she only got a rear view of the man. I consider it unlikely that the man seen by Marshall was Stride's eventual killer, let alone the ripper, and as for Hutchinson's account, I consider the handkerchief detail to be a red herring, almost literally! My view is that he borrowed from earlier witness sightings, including that of Joseph Lawende, who had described a man with a red neckerchief. Since Lawende was more likely to have been the ripper than the other suspects mentioned (in terms of time of death, location, and the fact that it was "used" later by the police), I'd argue that his evidence offers us the best clue, at least in terms of eyewitness evidence, to the socio-economic class of the ripper.

All the best,
Ben

Although in practical terms Ben, we cannot be sure that any witness sighting of a suspect was indeed the Ripper or the killer, and we have a Senior Man on the cases state that no-one ever got a look at him other than a PC near Mitre Square. He may have been confusing some witnesses and locations, or maybe not.

Lawende is suspected of being their ace in the hole based on the reason you suggest and his possible subsequent visits to ID suspects in the coming years, but he himself did not state within weeks that he could ever identify the man..he did say he simply did not get a good look at him. And he did ID Kate by her clothing, something that would take a second or 2 from his glance at Sailor Man to take in and absorb. And he had maybe a few seconds total to look at them.

Add to the above that there was time enough for Sailor Man to leave Kates company and still see the results we saw. Its clear that the murderer took time in addition to the attack, murder and mutilations of her abdomen to do acts that were time consuming...the tearing and cutting of the apron, the cutting of the 2ft colon section, and of course her face. Meaning...he had ample time within that small window of minutes to complete his desired actions.

All the best

[curious]

In light of the "No" from the Hanbury yard where Annie was killed and the bruise on the back of her hand, I think she was grabbed from someone in the shadows she didn't know was there.

It could, of course mean, that the man she was seen with grabbed her unexpectedly and she uttered the "No" before he could begin to strangle her.

It could also mean that she had serviced the man she was seen with and had remained to "compose" herself prior to returning to the street or even was considering "bedding down" in the yard for a little respite and was grabbed from someone who was waiting in the shadows.

The "no" was followed by the sound of someone falling against the fence -- or perhaps being pushed as she was suffocated.

I know the time difficulties on this . . . .

Curious

[JTRSickert]

Curious,

that's assuming the "No" was coming fro mChapman; whereas, in Cadosch's testimony, he was unable to discern if the voice that said was a man or a woman. So, quite possibly, for some unknown reaso, it was the man who said it.

[ghoulstonstreet]

You would say anything but your prayers.

I have always felt that this phrase may have been invented because the phrasing is so stilted, dramatic and unusual. It would never be uttered in today's English speaking countries. It is convoluted, as (I admit) only the Victorians were wont to do. If the witness did accurately hear it I interpret it to be a smarmy, catty way of saying to the woman "You are so smooth talking. You would promise me anything, you would say anything to get what you want. But prayers would be the very last thing on your mind. Prayers are not in your repertoire"

[curious]

Curious,

that's assuming the "No" was coming fro mChapman; whereas, in Cadosch's testimony, he was unable to discern if the voice that said was a man or a woman. So, quite possibly, for some unknown reaso, it was the man who said it.

I took my supposition from the victims' section of Casebook: The only word he can make out is a woman saying "No!" He then heard something falling against the fence.


However, I have found the following in a dissertation:

These reports leave ambiguities and have inaccuracies so we have no definitive account of what happened and exactly when. However more details were given in the following account:

On visiting the house next door to the tragedy, 27, our representative saw Mr. Albert Cadosen [sic], a carpenter, who resides there and works in Shoe-lane, Fleet-street. He says: I was not very well in the night and I went out into the back yard about 25 minutes past five. It was just getting daylight, and as I passed to the back of the yard I heard a sound as of two people up in the corner of the next yard. On coming back I heard some words which I did not catch, but I heard a woman say “No.” Then I heard a kind of scuffle going on, and someone seemed to fall heavily on to the ground against the wooden partition which divided the yard, at the spot where the body was afterwards found. As I thought it was some of the people belonging to the house, I passed into my own room, and took no further notice.19

Inquest testimony & Police Report

The account of Cadosch’s testimony is given in The Times as follows:

Albert Cadosch, a carpenter, stated that he resided at No. 27, Hanbury-street. That was next door to No. 29. On Saturday, the 8th inst. he got up at about 5:15 and went out into the yard of his house. As he returned across the yard, to the back door of his house, he heard a voice say quite close to him, “No.”

So there are discrepancies about who said "no." However, his hearing of voices definitely rules out that she was grabbed in the dark without any idea who was grabbing her. Thanks for pointing this out so I'd look further into this.

curious

[Stewart P Evans]

Daylight

...
So there are discrepancies about who said "no." However, his hearing of voices definitely rules out that she was grabbed in the dark without any idea who was grabbing her. Thanks for pointing this out so I'd look further into this.
curious

Hardly in the dark, it was daylight at that time.

[JTRSickert]

Perhaps what happened is that maybe Annie and her killer actually heard Cadosch as he went into the yard to use the lavatory. Upon hearing this, the Ripper might have decided to wait until it was quiet again before proceeding with his kill. He might have asked Annie, "Did you hear something?" and Annie replied, "No." When the Ripper hears Cadosch go back in, he begins his attack. Then, surprisingly, Cadosch comes back out into the yard again and hears the body hit the fence. And, perhaps, the Ripper also hears him again and pauses before commencing his attack; this may explain why Cadosch didn't hear much of a struggle coming from the other side.

[kensei]

"You would say anything but your prayers"- surely the most suave and charming thing anyone ever heard the Ripper say (if in fact Liz Stride was a Ripper victim, which I believe she was). It seems the kind of thing one would only say to someone only after having spent some considerable time with them and getting to know them a bit, meaning Jack strolled around with Liz for some time chatting her up while trying to maneuver her into a suitable place to kill her.

[JTRSickert]

Yes, Kensei. It is an interesting comment. However, I have doubts that it was the Ripper who said since Marshall says he saw and heard it at around 11:45, which about an hour before Stride is killed. I have doubts about Stride being a Ripper victim, but I don't rule it out and also think it is a possibility. Also, we don't know the tone and context the comment was made. Perhaps Stride and the man we're just jesting and the man humorously said" "You would say anything but your prayers." But, if maybe Stride was arguing with the man (who might have been Michael Kidney). THe man said something along the lines like, in a harsh tone, "If you don't watch your tongue, sweetheart, you better say your prayers because you might force me to kill ya!" Stride says something like, "Oh, bugger off! You bloody <blankety-blank>." The man says, "You'd say anything but your prayers."