The word JUWES

[Joshua Rogan]

Well it's the fact they didn't mention each other which is the reason to think they didn't see each other.

Long said that he had heard of a murder in Mitre Square "Before proceeding to the station". Before proceeding to the station he had spoken to at least one other constable (number 190 who he asked to guard the dwelling houses). So there is a simple explanation for him hearing about the Mitre Square murder if one is needed.

But it is true that Halse could easily have seen Long. He probably wouldn't have mentioned seeing a constable on his beat when walking along the street. Why would he? He might not even have remembered doing so. I assume Halse was plain clothes so Long might not have realised who he was.

It's all a complete non-point of course and matters not one jot.

Well, Long might have heard of Eddowes' murder from PC 190H, but if so it must have been on a previous round, as his actions and this question from a juror make clear he knew of the murder before finding the apron piece;

"A Juror - Having heard of a murder, and subsequently found a piece of apron with blood upon it, did it not appear to you that it might be as well to examine some of the rooms of the building? - No, sir. I did not expect the man had committed the murder in the passage, but I though the body might have been hidden there."

But if he thought the body of Eddowes was hidden in one of the stairwells, he obviously hadn't heard all the details!

Then again, the Telegraph report has him saying "I heard of the murder in the City. There were rumours of another, but not certain". So perhaps he was expecting to find this second body.

[Phil Carter]

I don't know why you say that Phil. There's no magic in 6 minutes. It could have been 5 minutes, 4 minutes, 3 minutes, 2 minutes. Or more than 6 minutes. That's the problem with approximate (estimated) timings. There's no reason to think they saw each other if they didn't say they did in their evidence. They only had to miss each other by a few seconds and that in itself would explain it.

Because it is you..and only you..That introduced the mythical 6 minutes.

And as I wrote previously
It would take far longer than one minute to walk the length of Goulston Street when inspecting each entrance to each building.
And THAT is why the minutes are important.
What makes it even more important is from which direction Long entered the Street. THAT is where his lamp comes into play..and the sound of his boots.

You can keep on ignoring this. .but it won't go away.

Now. My point is this. I see nothing sinister in it. But I do see deliberately keeping it quiet..IF Halse saw Long..met Long or vice versa. For what reason? No..I don't know.

What I do know is that there is a fair chance they saw each other. On a Ripperologist article a few years ago questions as to Long's honesty came into play. (I didn't write it)

There is also a fair chance they didn't see each other.

But it cannot just be dismissed and ignored.

And if anyone starts harping on about how I can question a policeman's honesty.. hard luck. Policemen were "bent" even then. I don't believe in protecting the honour or name of the force. Dishonesty is rife in that group too. Always had been.

Sorry if that offends some. The great majority are or were fantastic public servants. There are always wrong-uns. Sadly.

Special Branch has a tradition of saying nothing about any action they take. Plain clothes policemen have been known to take liberties as well. It is nothing new.

That doesn't make me..or anyone thinking likewise, "conspiratorial". It means we are open to the nasty bits no one wants to approach.



Phil

[Michael W Richards]

This "not seeing each other" discussion reminds me that there are other instances on this same night when we can see very clearly that someone was lying. At Berner Street, Joseph Lave was interviewed and Morris Eagle was interviewed shortly after the murder was committed. Morris says he returned to the front door of the club around 12:35, then went around to the yard entrance. Lave says he was at the gates at around 12:40, and was there for about a half an hour and saw no-one come into the yard, or on the street. Issac Kozebrodski says that he was called down to the passage by Louis at around 10 minutes after her arrived back at the club..at 12:30. Edward Spooner says the he saw 2 men hurrying in the street back to the club and he followed them, around 12:40. Israel Schwartz saw 3 people on the street at around 12:45, and he witnesses an altercation that has a small scream and someone yelling what seems to be a warning to someone else. Mrs Mortimer, Fanny to her friends, is at her door to the street off and on from 12:30 until 12:50, where she remains until 1am. She sees no-one but the young couple.

Clearly not all the witnesses were truthful. The way to sift through may be to consider who had reasons to create an impression with their stories to the police. An impression of innocence.

[Observer]

This "not seeing each other" discussion reminds me that there are other instances on this same night when we can see very clearly that someone was lying. At Berner Street, Joseph Lave was interviewed and Morris Eagle was interviewed shortly after the murder was committed. Morris says he returned to the front door of the club around 12:35, then went around to the yard entrance. Lave says he was at the gates at around 12:40, and was there for about a half an hour and saw no-one come into the yard, or on the street. Issac Kozebrodski says that he was called down to the passage by Louis at around 10 minutes after her arrived back at the club..at 12:30. Edward Spooner says the he saw 2 men hurrying in the street back to the club and he followed them, around 12:40. Israel Schwartz saw 3 people on the street at around 12:45, and he witnesses an altercation that has a small scream and someone yelling what seems to be a warning to someone else. Mrs Mortimer, Fanny to her friends, is at her door to the street off and on from 12:30 until 12:50, where she remains until 1am. She sees no-one but the young couple.

Clearly not all the witnesses were truthful. The way to sift through may be to consider who had reasons to create an impression with their stories to the police. An impression of innocence.

Micheal, it's been pointed out to you a thousand times that the inconsistencies regarding timings of events by the various witnesses are down to genuine mistakes in timings as perceived by those witnesses. They did not lie.

Also, why do you persist in moving the goal posts when it comes to said timings? I see that you have Spooner arriving at the yard at 12:40 a.m. This is what he said at inquest

"[Coroner] Could any one have left without your observing it? - I cannot say, but I think there were too many people about. I believe it was twenty-five minutes to one o'clock when I arrived in the yard."

As we know Liz Stride was alive, and well at this time.

"William Smith, 452 H Division: On Saturday last I went on duty at ten p.m. My beat was past Berner- street, and would take me twenty-five minutes or half an hour to go round. I was in Berner-street about half-past twelve or twenty-five minutes to one o'clock"

Or is PC Smith telling lies also?

[John G]

I think that PC Smith could well have seen Stride alive as late as 12:45: see Post 105 on the following thread: http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=9642&page=11

[Michael W Richards]

Hello Observer,

1.Micheal, it's been pointed out to you a thousand times that the inconsistencies regarding timings of events by the various witnesses are down to genuine mistakes in timings as perceived by those witnesses. They did not lie.

2.Also, why do you persist in moving the goal posts when it comes to said timings? I see that you have Spooner arriving at the yard at 12:40 a.m. This is what he said at inquest

"[Coroner] Could any one have left without your observing it? - I cannot say, but I think there were too many people about. I believe it was twenty-five minutes to one o'clock when I arrived in the yard."

3. As we know Liz Stride was alive, and well at this time.

"William Smith, 452 H Division: On Saturday last I went on duty at ten p.m. My beat was past Berner- street, and would take me twenty-five minutes or half an hour to go round. I was in Berner-street about half-past twelve or twenty-five minutes to one o'clock"

Or is PC Smith telling lies also?

As for the above;

1. If you wish to assume that all contradictory times can be explained by assuming that at least 50% of the witnesses were simply incorrect with their estimates, that's your call.

2. At the Inquest Spooner said: "We had left a public- house in Commercial-road at closing time, midnight, and walked quietly to the point named." That puts him, with a slow gait, at the Beehive around 12:15-12:20. Add 20-25 minutes. Plus re-read what you posted..."I believe it was twenty-five minutes to one o'clock when I arrived in the yard."

3. We know Liz Stride was alive at 12:35 when PC Smith saw her. He is the last witness to see her out and about, since its clear by the witnesses that at least 2 witnesses had views of the street, off and on for one, from 12:40ish until 1am. They didn't see or hear Israels Alledged Altercation. That leaves the immediate street "desolate" after 12:35.

[David Orsam]

Because it is you..and only you..That introduced the mythical 6 minutes.

It's not a "mythical" 6 minutes, Phil, it's a possible six minutes. I know it frustrates you that there could have been such a gap – for some reason you want the two men to have literally bumped into each other – but the fact remains that if each of them were only 3 minutes out in their time estimates on either side of 2.20 then they would have been six minutes apart.

[David Orsam]

And as I wrote previously
It would take far longer than one minute to walk the length of Goulston Street when inspecting each entrance to each building.

But like I said, and you are not in a position to contradict, they could have been six minutes, five minutes, four minutes, three minutes etc apart, all of which are longer than one minute.

Even if they did see each other, so what? All Long would have seen was a man walking down the street. All Halse would have seen was a police officer on his beat. What would have been remarkable or memorable about that?

[David Orsam]

And if anyone starts harping on about how I can question a policeman's honesty.. hard luck. Policemen were "bent" even then. I don't believe in protecting the honour or name of the force. Dishonesty is rife in that group too. Always had been.

Sorry if that offends some. The great majority are or were fantastic public servants. There are always wrong-uns. Sadly.

I've never seen anyone "harp on" about such a thing in the whole time I've been posting on this forum. You seem to have created an imaginary person in your head who thinks all policemen were entirely honest.

And I don't even know what "honesty" has to do with this issue. Neither of them were asked if they had seen the other, so honesty doesn't even come into play.

[David Orsam]

There is also a fair chance they didn't see each other.

But it cannot just be dismissed and ignored.

This is another notion existing only in your imagination. No-one has been dismissing or ignoring the possibility that they saw each other.

The reason I posted in this thread was to say that it's not correct to say that they passed the spot at "at approximately the same moment". That's like saying they passed it at "at approximately the exact same time".

In response, you told me that only one of the two officers said it was an approximate timing but that turned out to be wrong.

As you now accept that there is "a fair chance" they didn't see each other – in contrast to your earlier claim that "Ipso facto. They must have been in the same street at thr (sic) same time" - there's nothing more to say.

[John G]

Hello Observer,



As for the above;

1. If you wish to assume that all contradictory times can be explained by assuming that at least 50% of the witnesses were simply incorrect with their estimates, that's your call.

2. At the Inquest Spooner said: "We had left a public- house in Commercial-road at closing time, midnight, and walked quietly to the point named." That puts him, with a slow gait, at the Beehive around 12:15-12:20. Add 20-25 minutes. Plus re-read what you posted..."I believe it was twenty-five minutes to one o'clock when I arrived in the yard."

3. We know Liz Stride was alive at 12:35 when PC Smith saw her. He is the last witness to see her out and about, since its clear by the witnesses that at least 2 witnesses had views of the street, off and on for one, from 12:40ish until 1am. They didn't see or hear Israels Alledged Altercation. That leaves the immediate street "desolate" after 12:35.

Stride was probably alive after 12:35: see my earlier post.

[Abby Normal]

Hello Observer,



As for the above;

1. If you wish to assume that all contradictory times can be explained by assuming that at least 50% of the witnesses were simply incorrect with their estimates, that's your call.

2. At the Inquest Spooner said: "We had left a public- house in Commercial-road at closing time, midnight, and walked quietly to the point named." That puts him, with a slow gait, at the Beehive around 12:15-12:20. Add 20-25 minutes. Plus re-read what you posted..."I believe it was twenty-five minutes to one o'clock when I arrived in the yard."

3. We know Liz Stride was alive at 12:35 when PC Smith saw her. He is the last witness to see her out and about, since its clear by the witnesses that at least 2 witnesses had views of the street, off and on for one, from 12:40ish until 1am. They didn't see or hear Israels Alledged Altercation. That leaves the immediate street "desolate" after 12:35.

if that's the case what happened to stride? did she vanish in thin air too?

[Joshua Rogan]

2. At the Inquest Spooner said: "We had left a public- house in Commercial-road at closing time, midnight, and walked quietly to the point named." That puts him, with a slow gait, at the Beehive around 12:15-12:20. Add 20-25 minutes. Plus re-read what you posted..."I believe it was twenty-five minutes to one o'clock when I arrived in the yard."

He also starts off his evidence by saying"On Sunday morning between 12.30 and 1 o'clock, I was standing outside the Beehive Tavern", contradicting his later estimate. How come you never take that into account?

[Observer]

Hello Observer,



As for the above;

1. If you wish to assume that all contradictory times can be explained by assuming that at least 50% of the witnesses were simply incorrect with their estimates, that's your call.

2. At the Inquest Spooner said: "We had left a public- house in Commercial-road at closing time, midnight, and walked quietly to the point named." That puts him, with a slow gait, at the Beehive around 12:15-12:20. Add 20-25 minutes. Plus re-read what you posted..."I believe it was twenty-five minutes to one o'clock when I arrived in the yard."

3. We know Liz Stride was alive at 12:35 when PC Smith saw her. He is the last witness to see her out and about, since its clear by the witnesses that at least 2 witnesses had views of the street, off and on for one, from 12:40ish until 1am. They didn't see or hear Israels Alledged Altercation. That leaves the immediate street "desolate" after 12:35.

Hi Michael

You're using estimates to determine Spooner's movements. Spooner himself used estimates to describe his movements that night. Only once did he refer to a specific time, that is 12:35 a.m. consequently that is the only time which is relevant in his testimony. In my opinion he was miles out in his estimation of the timing of events that night.

[Pierre]

if that's the case what happened to stride? did she vanish in thin air too?

She was in another street.

Pierre