How did JtR see in the dark?

[Batman]

I'm so sorry for this omission. Neil Bell and Rob Clack provide a much more detailed background of PC Harvey in the Ripperologist no. 104 (July 2009)

That's a good reference also. Thanks.

[Scott Nelson]

I'm so sorry for this omission. Neil Bell and Rob Clack provide a much more detailed background of PC Harvey in the Ripperologist no. 104 (July 2009)

[Batman]

No, but Gavin Bromley provides some background on Harvey and Watkins in addition to an analysis of the Mitre Square Murder in Ripperologist no. 75 (January 2007).

Thanks. City Beat (Part II).

[Scott Nelson]

No, but Gavin Bromley provides some background on Harvey and Watkins in addition to an analysis of the Mitre Square Murder in Ripperologist no. 75 (January 2007).

[Batman]

Was it ever ascertained why PC Harvey was fired 9 months later?

[Monty]

I think the distance across the square at that point, from the end of Church Passage, where Harvey stopped, was about 70+ ft.
There was a lamp at the end of Church Passage but it will not cast any light far enough across the square.
Also, as is often the case, if you stand under a lamp the glow will limit the ability of your eyes to see into the surrounding darkness.
It's the same effect as the surrounding city lights limit your ability to see stars at night. You need to get away from ambient city lights to see any details of the night sky.
So in effect, that lamp at the end of Church Passage would blind Harvey from seeing anyone across the square.

This is exactly as I state in Jake and my 2006 Rip article, and during the 2007 Conf.

Jake did some recons to help explain this. I shall see if I can find them.

Monty

[Scott Nelson]

So what exit did the killer use to leave the Square?

[Trevor Marriott]

Yes, but realistically, would a killer wait in silence on the opposite side of the square?
Anyone in the square would hear the slow tread of PC Harvey as he approached down Church Passage. Footsteps did echo down that passage, I tested that theory myself back in the early 70's.
So if the killer was in the square I suspect he would leave on hearing footsteps approach, shortly before Harvey came into sight.

For once I totally agree with you, and would add that the killer would have been able to see the outline of Harvey coming down the passage as there was another lamp I believe at the entrance to the Passage in Duke Street.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Batman]

Yes, but realistically, would a killer wait in silence on the opposite side of the square?
Anyone in the square would hear the slow tread of PC Harvey as he approached down Church Passage. Footsteps did echo down that passage, I tested that theory myself back in the early 70's.
So if the killer was in the square I suspect he would leave on hearing footsteps approach, shortly before Harvey came into sight.

JtR could see him coming all the way down the passage, stopping, looking around, turning, and going back the way he came.

I wonder why Harvey was fired from the force within 9 months after this.

[Varqm]

The circumstances surrounding how Polly Nichols was found says it all. Here, we have two men testifying to how it was too dark to see any blood, although they both were crouching over the body of Nichols and feeling her for warmth, touching her chest, etcetera. They will have been inches away from the blood, no more than so.
This has given rise to a belief that it was pitch dark in the street. But what is forgotten is that if the blood and wounds were hidden and no blood had pooled or streamed in such a manner as to allow for it being seen from the vantage point of the carmen, then regardless of how bright it was, they could not have seen the blood anyway!
But wasn´t it pitch dark, then?
No, it was decidedly not. Charles Lechmere could see the shape of the body of Nichols lying outside the stable door from across the street, some 20-25 feet away. Admittedly, he could not specify what he was looking at (or so he says) from that distance, but it only took his steeping into the middle of the street to decide that he was looking at a woman lying on the pavement.
It wasn´t any darker than that.
As for feeling your way along the walls, that never happened - Robert Paul was hurrying along the street since he was in a rush.

All in all, if it had been as dark as some will have it, there would have been no prostitution at all. Why would the unfortunates go out onto the streets if the punters could not even make them out in that complete darkness?

Good point.Approximation,the light was closer to pitch darkness than not,enough to do what he did.The slightly more important thing was he had hands-on experience enough,dealing with entrails inside the abdomen,to do it under those conditions.And he had to have or must have had 3-5 "anatomical knowledge",experience-wise or observed/studied.Although in the Nichols case,the first time he showed he was somehow trained,the things he did with the abdomen was not really purposeful in extracting organs.As Prosector said there was some kind of progression.

----

[Wickerman]

But of course conversely it would allow the killer to see but not be seen.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Yes, but realistically, would a killer wait in silence on the opposite side of the square?
Anyone in the square would hear the slow tread of PC Harvey as he approached down Church Passage. Footsteps did echo down that passage, I tested that theory myself back in the early 70's.
So if the killer was in the square I suspect he would leave on hearing footsteps approach, shortly before Harvey came into sight.

[Trevor Marriott]

I think the distance across the square at that point, from the end of Church Passage, where Harvey stopped, was about 70+ ft.
There was a lamp at the end of Church Passage but it will not cast any light far enough across the square.
Also, as is often the case, if you stand under a lamp the glow will limit the ability of your eyes to see into the surrounding darkness.
It's the same effect as the surrounding city lights limit your ability to see stars at night. You need to get away from ambient city lights to see any details of the night sky.
So in effect, that lamp at the end of Church Passage would blind Harvey from seeing anyone across the square.

But of course conversely it would allow the killer to see but not be seen.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Wickerman]

What Watkins was doing has no influence on Harvey. I would expect him to be shining his lamp into dark corners and checking all the doors as per this reconstruction -> https://www.casebook.org/witnesses/w...d_Watkins.html

PC James Harvey went down Church passage when the murderer and Eddowes were likely in the corner next to him in Mitre Square. He did not see them.

I think the distance across the square at that point, from the end of Church Passage, where Harvey stopped, was about 70+ ft.
There was a lamp at the end of Church Passage but it will not cast any light far enough across the square.
Also, as is often the case, if you stand under a lamp the glow will limit the ability of your eyes to see into the surrounding darkness.
It's the same effect as the surrounding city lights limit your ability to see stars at night. You need to get away from ambient city lights to see any details of the night sky.
So in effect, that lamp at the end of Church Passage would blind Harvey from seeing anyone across the square.

[Busy Beaver]

Eye sight also deteriorates with age. Some of the younger witnesses would be able to see things better than say someone over 40, when sight does start to let you down. And probably only the rich could afford testing if it was available in 1888. Don't know if eye testing was carried out in the Police Force- Monty may be the expert here.

[Batman]

What Watkins was doing has no influence on Harvey. I would expect him to be shining his lamp into dark corners and checking all the doors as per this reconstruction -> https://www.casebook.org/witnesses/w...d_Watkins.html

PC James Harvey went down Church passage when the murderer and Eddowes were likely in the corner next to him in Mitre Square. He did not see them.