'Couple seen nearby'

[Maggyann]

Hi all

I am still reading lots and thinking even more.

One point which has been on my mind recently is that with Stride, Chapman, Eddowes and MJK there is talk of another couple seen nearby or a couple spotted talking nearby. In some cases it has been said that the female was the victim (Chapman etc) but what if the lady in each case was not the victim. Could the 'murderer' actually be a couple?

I know e.g. with Mitre Sq one of the witnesses said he recognised the victim's clothes as being those worn by the woman he saw but how much variance really was there in clothing then? It was dark, they wore longish skirts, little jackets perhaps a bonnet. It was not like today when ladies(?) wear everything from silver, sequinned boob tubes and cut off denim shorts to long skirts and knitted polo necks. Surely in a dusky setting with darkish clothing everyone would look pretty much the same?

Well at least it shows I am thinking eh?

Maggyann

[Phil Carter]

Hello Maggyan,

I must say I've heard of far worse ideas than that one. Man and woman couple...hmmm
I'll have a little think on it too. Nice one.

best wishes

Phil

[lynn cates]

thinking

Hello Maggy. What a refreshing post! Yes, you are thinking indeed. I have long been troubled by "positive identifications" based on clothing. As an old person myself, I hardly notice anothers clothing (perhaps the young have not this difficulty?).

At any rate, I think all our speculation on identifications needs to proceed on an IF-THEN basis. So, for example, it seems that Lawende may have been the best witness. So, I can say "If he saw Jack and Kate, then . . . "

Now, to your point. Of course there could have been a couple involved. The logistics would have been involved and the motivation perhaps complex. Still, it cannot be ruled out a priori.

The best.
LC

[perrymason]

Interesting thought to be sure.

In Catharines case I believe from memory that her jacket and bonnet were black and she had a dark green skirt on....oh hell, why dont I just get the details ........ok...she was wearing dark clothing from head to toe, and the hat and jacket were black.....since we are talking about a 2 second look at 1:35am on LVP streets....meaning very poorly lit.....I can see why he claimed he wouldnt be able to recognize the man after just a few weeks....

There are pre-existing reports of Unfortunates being robbed by both female and male "gang" types, often lured by some pretense that includes another woman being present.... making the set-up seem less potentially dangerous. And we have as yet unknown or positively unidentified couples seen in Hanbury, in Berner, and at Mitre.

In all those cases though, the witness claimed to have seen the soon to be victim with a man, not a "couple" completely unknown.

A couple of men is also fair supposition, one hands off the victim off to the waiting killer....

Best regards all.

[The Grave Maurice]

It's an interesting, but not new, idea. Robert Bloch explored this theme in his 1984 novel The Night of the Ripper.

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
I had that murderous duo theory back in 1974, sent it off to the News of the world, also informed Colin Wilson of it shortly after, but alas as Colin wrote to me 'Great minds obviously think alike, my publisher has informed me that a new book which has a similar theme has been released entitled 'The Michaelmas girls' by John Brookes Barry.
But no sour grapes, incidently my duo was none other then Barnett and Kelly, impossible of course, but this was the 1970s, and many a theory ran wild.
Regards Richard.

[The Grave Maurice]

And, strangely, if you take the number of letters in The Michaelmas Girls, double it, and add three (1 for each word) you get, ta-da, 39. Oh, sorry, wrong thread.

[Observer]

Hi Maggyann

Hi all

I am still reading lots and thinking even more.

One point which has been on my mind recently is that with Stride, Chapman, Eddowes and MJK there is talk of another couple seen nearby or a couple spotted talking nearby. In some cases it has been said that the female was the victim (Chapman etc) but what if the lady in each case was not the victim. Could the 'murderer' actually be a couple?

I know e.g. with Mitre Sq one of the witnesses said he recognised the victim's clothes as being those worn by the woman he saw but how much variance really was there in clothing then? It was dark, they wore longish skirts, little jackets perhaps a bonnet. It was not like today when ladies(?) wear everything from silver, sequinned boob tubes and cut off denim shorts to long skirts and knitted polo necks. Surely in a dusky setting with darkish clothing everyone would look pretty much the same?

Well at least it shows I am thinking eh?

Maggyann

Are you implying that the couple seen by Lawende and friends were in actual fact this murdering couple you refer to? When does Eddowes enter the scenario? Ten minutes after Lawende Harris, and Levy, saw that couple Eddowes was found dead. Also the mutilations took at least 5 minutes to perform, this implies that Eddowes was dead, 5 minutes after their sighting. Not a lot of time for manouvere is there?

Regarding whether Lawende Harris, and Levys saw Catherine Eddowes that night hinges not so much on the fact that Lawende identified Eddowes by her clothing, but more on the fact that 10 minutes later no more than fifty yards away she was found dead.

In all probability, Lawende and freinds saw Catherine Eddowes with her killer that morning.


all the best

Observer

[Maggyann]

Well the other thing that constantly 'bothers' me (well niggles at me anyway) is this time thing.

I keep reading such and such at ten minutes past the hour then this and that at fifteen minutes past the hour etc etc but...how reliable are these times?

Were these people all walking around with late twentieth century watches automatically tuned into Greenwich? Were all the church clocks so fine tuned that they were exactly correct? (It is quite rare even today to get an actual turret clock to be that precise without constant regulation of the pendulum)

I can remember reading somewhere that walking in London you could leave your club as a nearby clock struck the hour, walk a goodly ten or fifteeen minutes and be home in time to hear your own nearby clock also strike the hour, or some such. (that may be from a poem I will try and find it).

I appreciate that time and its regulation was a Victorian thing brought in with the necessity of decent timekeeping for the railways but I am not so convinced that everyone was working to the same time, all the time.

So to be honest I think some of the times given and timescales used in considering things are at best not quite precise.

[lynn cates]

it's about time

Hello Maggy. Funny you should mention that. I think it was Thomas Hardy in "The Return of the Native" that had 3 or 4 opposing factions in Egdon Heath, each group following a different preferred timepiece.

Your observation about time keeping in the LVP is dead on.

The best.
LC

[Observer]

Differing time keeping in the LVP? Cant see it having much bearing in the case of the Lawende sighting, and the finding of the body, non whatsoever. Whatever the times observed by the two different factions, there is still very little time for manouvre. Lawende saw Catherine Eddowes and her killer, I'd gamble on it.

all the best

Observer

[lynn cates]

Lawende

Hello Observer. I was thinking about the LVP time issue separately from the Lawende sighting.

I think he is likely the most reliable of all the witnesses in the ripper case.

To put it another way, if ANYONE saw the ripper, it was he.

The best.
LC

[Observer]

I'd agree Lynn. Levy appraised the sighting thus.

"Look there. I don't like going home by myself when I see those characters about."

He realsised what was going down.

all the best

Observer

[lynn cates]

clue

Hello Observer. Yes! And that is one of the enduring ripper mysteries. What, precisely, tipped him off? Dress? Demeanour? What?

Surely a punter and a prostitute were not so uncommon? What was the clue?

The best.
LC

[curious]

Hello Observer. Yes! And that is one of the enduring ripper mysteries. What, precisely, tipped him off? Dress? Demeanour? What?

Surely a punter and a prostitute were not so uncommon? What was the clue?

The best.
LC

Perhaps Levy saw someone he knew was strange (even a relative) and perhaps even a married family man?

curious