Surgical expertise, anatomical knowledge. So on and so forth..

[Michael W Richards]

IF....Harvey actually did do his due diligence at 1:43-:44, his view across the square would not be a clear view, and it would be extremely dark The killer could have still been there, technically. Then he has one of three exits, one which will be used by Watkins as he re-enters the square.

But the overall timing suggests that its far more reasonable to assume that Lawende did not see Kate at all, which means the killer could have left before Harvey came through the passage.

[Wickerman]

However, since he is the only witness that has immediate corroboration with his two partners

Hi Abby.
I think Harris & Levy can only confirm that Lawende saw the couple, not who this couple were. Levy could not describe the woman, not even the dress she was wearing - he said it was too dark to do that.

...and mainly because of there suspect was wearing a peaked cap, same as the Berner street suspect(s)I lean toward lawende seeing the ripper and eddowes.

In Berner St. do you think that BS-man and the Marshall suspect, both wearing peaked caps, were the same man?

[Sam Flynn]

don't know if you read it in another thread, but I suggested to you that the difference of level of skill between Chapman and Eddowes could be explained by the former being done after sunrise, while Eddowes was made in a very shadowy corner.

Paradoxically, the way in which Eddowes' abdomen was opened - a [single?] cut down the midline from breastbone to navel, then jagging right toward the pelvis - seems to have been far neater than in Chapman's case, where three separate "flaps" of flesh were cut, primarily from the victim's right side.

[Wickerman]

I've just had a lousy nights sleep and couldn't help mulling it all over and I came up with a couple of things.
Mitre Square was Watkins responsibility,the passage was Harveys.Harvey didn't need to go to the square as he could just look down it so I think that is what he did.

Yes, Harvey's beat concluded at the end of Church Passage, he would check the lamp, then turn back up the passage. It is doubtful he could even see across the square, but the killer might not know he wouldn't enter the square.

I think the couple was Kate and Jack.

Traditionally, that is what we have all thought.

If Harvey walked to the square he would have caught him in the act.

More likely the heavy slow tramp of a beat constable coming down the passage would have echoed across the square long before Harvey came into view. Anyone in the square should have heard Harvey's footsteps, and ran off.

[Michael W Richards]

don't know if you read it in another thread, but I suggested to you that the difference of level of skill between Chapman and Eddowes could be explained by the former being done after sunrise, while Eddowes was made in a very shadowy corner.

What do you think?

I think its fair to factor the available light into this equation, but in fact the darkness was just lifting in the backyard at Hanbury, and sometimes dusk or dawn make visibility difficult too. The kill in Mitre Square seems like it was done in almost complete darkness, that might explain the sloppiness...however, if you consider that the objective in the murder of Annie Chapman was evident by the knowledgeable way the organ was located and the skill with which it was excised. In Kates case, no medical expert suggested that the wounds themselves indicated a desire to extract the kidney, and the kidney wasn't excised completely, 3/4 of it was....and there was also a partial uterus taken. Plus the 2 ft colon section, the marks on the face, the almost amputated nose.....the attack on Kate Eddowes body post mortem seems pointless in many respects.

The Motive for killing Annie seems to be to obtain her uterus, in the eyes of the medical examiner. The Motive for Kate has never been suggested as the acquisition of a part of her kidney, or a partial uterus.

[SirJohnFalstaff]

don't know if you read it in another thread, but I suggested to you that the difference of level of skill between Chapman and Eddowes could be explained by the former being done after sunrise, while Eddowes was made in a very shadowy corner.

What do you think?

[Michael W Richards]

Most of the estimates of the times for the mutilations of all of the victim's have been exaggerated. Sequiera was probably the closest with three minutes when it came to Catherine Eddowes. Chapman... probably no longer or even less. Obviously, whoever killed all of these women -- even Stride for that matter -- knew his way around a knife and knew where things were.

What has been perpetually confusing is the reliance on so-called medical experts who can't even conceive someone working that fast or that effective. Such is not even in their realm. Battlefield surgery would be the only thing that comes close, but even then the motive was to be careful and save the patient's life...which is not what these murders were about.

Simply accomplishing the tasks isn't the only barometer here Hunter, we have evidence in the case of Annie Chapman that not only was the organ skillfully excised and complete, but everything that was done to the abdomen was to facilitate that action. If you think the mutilations could be done that swiftly, then I suppose you have an alternate theory about why Liz Stride wasn't mutilated....the estimate of her cut time was 12:46-12:56, and Diemshitz said he arrived at 1, so why is Liz untouched after a single cut? Seems like the window you suggest was available.

Since Kate Eddowes wounds were though to be less skillful and less knowledgably executed than Annie Chapmans, by the physician who examined 4 of 5 Canonicals, it would be prudent to state which victims showed signs of skill and knowledge and which didn't before suggesting they are all alike in such categories. They aren't.

Annie certainly and to some extent Pollys wounds showed these characteristics, Strides just showed the killer understood a jugular vein, and Kate and Marys wounds could have been committed by someone without any skill or knowledge.

[Hunter]

Most of the estimates of the times for the mutilations of all of the victim's have been exaggerated. Sequiera was probably the closest with three minutes when it came to Catherine Eddowes. Chapman... probably no longer or even less. Obviously, whoever killed all of these women -- even Stride for that matter -- knew his way around a knife and knew where things were.

What has been perpetually confusing is the reliance on so-called medical experts who can't even conceive someone working that fast or that effective. Such is not even in their realm. Battlefield surgery would be the only thing that comes close, but even then the motive was to be careful and save the patient's life...which is not what these murders were about.

[Abby Normal]

The only reason for this 5 minutes is Lawende's testimony, if he didn't see Kate, as I believe, then we are not limited to the 5 minutes (about 9 actually - from 1:35 to 1:44).
Lawende's suspect wasn't 'Jack' and the woman was not Kate - in my view. There's no need to make this crime more mysterious than it already is.

Hi Wick
I used to lean toward this also-also because of the time frame and the fact that lawende never saw the body.

However, since he is the only witness that has immediate corroboration with his two partners and mainly because of there suspect was wearing a peaked cap, same as the Berner street suspect(s)I lean toward lawende seeing the ripper and eddowes.

[elmore 77]

I've just had a lousy nights sleep and couldn't help mulling it all over and I came up with a couple of things.
Mitre Square was Watkins responsibility,the passage was Harveys.Harvey didn't need to go to the square as he could just look down it so I think that is what he did.I think the couple was Kate and Jack.If Harvey walked to the square he would have caught him in the act.
I was really starting to doubt the double event and had almost dismissed Liz Strides killing as a coincedence and the GSG as a red herring but I changed my mind.
I don't doubt this has been suggested before but it's new to me.I think the meaning of the GSG is 'I am responsible for the Berner Steet murder don't blame anyone else',and he drops the piece of apron to make the link.
Imagine having the presence of mind to cut the apron with the intention of leaving a clue in order to claim a murder that might not be attributed to him.
Also,the GSG has the spelling mistake and grammatical error.If I'm right what does that say for the Lusk letter.Is he semi-literate or is he playing a game?

[curious4]

Which leaves us with Watkins.
Pure speculation: He did miss his 1:30 beat.
Reasons:
a) was drinking. He did it in the past, but for 12 years, he seemed to have corrected himself
b) overlooked Mitre Square.
c) was discussing Berner Street murder with colleagues.

Reasons for hiding this: fear of losing his job due to his former track record.

But like I said, pure speculation.

Not drinking, I think. That would have been noticed.

Best wishes
C4

[jerryd]

Which leaves us with Watkins.
Pure speculation: He did miss his 1:30 beat.
Reasons:
a) was drinking. He did it in the past, but for 12 years, he seemed to have corrected himself
b) overlooked Mitre Square.
c) was discussing Berner Street murder with colleagues.

Reasons for hiding this: fear of losing his job due to his former track record.

But like I said, pure speculation.

I think you're on the right track. But look at Clay-pipe for the answer.

[SirJohnFalstaff]

I don't know why you are arguing with me Trevor, my post suggested the killer had more time than the traditionally assumed 9 minutes (not 5 as you implied).
My view is the killer was already engaged in the mutilations in the square when Lawende came out of the club.

Which leaves us with Watkins.
Pure speculation: He did miss his 1:30 beat.
Reasons:
a) was drinking. He did it in the past, but for 12 years, he seemed to have corrected himself
b) overlooked Mitre Square.
c) was discussing Berner Street murder with colleagues.

Reasons for hiding this: fear of losing his job due to his former track record.

But like I said, pure speculation.

[Ginger]

We're perhaps looking at this from an improper perspective. I have no reason at all to doubt the judgement of the various medical types, who all seem to agree that it would take them a good deal of time, in a well-lighted theatre, to reproduce these particular injuries. That being said, I don't think it tells us much about the time the killer took to produce those injuries to begin with.

Let us suppose that I had suffered a catastrophic miscarriage of taste and judgement, and decided that I wanted a copy of a Jackson Pollock painting on my wall. Not a giclee print, not a photographic copy, but an actual paint and canvas reproduction, meant to be visually indistinguishable from the original. I could hire an artist to do this, but would his work go at the same pace, or employ the same techniques, as Pollock's? More to the point, could we judge how long it had taken Pollock to produce a painting by how long it took a painter to copy it?

For those unfamiliar with him, Pollock made his name by basically splattering or drizzling paint onto a canvas. While his process was more or less random, it produced individual paintings with particular, recognizable characterics. To produce a painting in the Pollock style is the work of an hour or less. To actually copy a Pollock painting, and reproduce every feature, would undoubtedly require days, if not weeks.

I think it's a valid analogy. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't think the killer would have needed any anatomical knowledge beyond what could be learned from books or in a museum. The envagination of the colon is an interesting feature, but wouldn't a hunter or slaughterman be familiar with the practice for the exact same reason?

[Wickerman]

Do you think the three men saw the ripper at work and decided to make haste and not get involved? I've often wondered (as i think pink moon frequently suggested) how many witnesses heard/saw something and yet decided to remain quiet

Generally speaking Rocky, I do think there were more witnesses than we have come to know about.
I also think that some of these known witnesses may have seen more than they chose to talk about, or more than time permitted them to talk about at the inquest.
But, I don't think Lawende & Co. saw the Ripper at work, they didn't pass through the square.