Pub or Street?

[DJA]

I do find it interesting that when asked at the inquest if the killer would be covered in blood from carrying out the mutilations on Catherine Eddowes he responds with, 'Not necessarily.' Not possibly, or hard to say, but 'Not necessarily.' Is that because he knew? A knowing nod to himself that no-one else would get?

Sequiera was LSA at London Hospital and was "well acquainted with the locality and the position of the lamps in the square".

Given the timing of the murder,Jack seems to be well aware of the police beat.

Seriously doubt he was standing around the square.

Anyone else reckon he had medical knowledge and lived in Mitre Square!

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Curious Cat, I'll admit, your post #7 didn't make much sense to me, but your follow up in #15 is a revelation. Dr Sequiera as a suspect?! Can you link him into any of the other crime scenes? Surgical knowledge.....

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Sequiera was LSA at London Hospital and was "well acquainted with the locality and the position of the lamps in the square".

Given the timing of the murder,Jack seems to be well aware of the police beat.

Seriously doubt he was standing around the square.

Anyone else reckon he had medical knowledge and lived in Mitre Square!

I do like the way Sutton keeps fitting in to varied aspects of the case. It's almost like he's a viable suspect. It's a wonder no one has gone to the History Channel with a new suspect premise. He's a better fit than some of the shoe horns.

[DJA]

Thank you Dr Shoe ..... I think?

The whole case reeks to high heaven of a cover up.

Reckon the medical profession and top police had a pretty good idea what was going on.

Look at who turned up at Mitre Square that morning. Especially Major Henry Smith.

[Curious Cat]

Curious Cat, I'll admit, your post #7 didn't make much sense to me, but your follow up in #15 is a revelation. Dr Sequiera as a suspect?! Can you link him into any of the other crime scenes? Surgical knowledge.....

Pure speculation on my part. At the moment this is only in connection with Catherine Eddowes. I wasn't actually aware of Dr Sequiera until after I had inexplicably been drawn to where his house once stood in Jewry Street last year. Since then it's been a case of joining the dots, whether I'm joining them in the right order, though, is another thing. Not sure how it would be possible to track back over his movements in regard to the other victims, though I would say that as a suspect for Catherine this, for me, rules him out for Elizabeth Stride. The observance of the patrol patterns would've taken priority, only leaving the house when sure of the police positions. He was, by his own evidence, very familiar with the locality.

There was also a post (which naturally I can't find right now) about the package containing the kidney sent to Lusk. The post office it was deposited at was just round the corner from Fenchurch Street Station, which in turn was a short walk from Jewry Street where Dr Sequiera lived.

Again, pure speculation.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Interesting idea, Curious Cat.

Of course I mean undetected in terms of watching police patrol patterns. The killer wouldn't want to be caught loitering or draw attention to themselves as a suspect.

To work within a patrol beat, one would have to know 2 general things:

• Average beat duration (Ex: Watkins, 14 minutes)
• Min and max time, above and below (Ex: Watkins, +/- 1 minute)

Plus two specific things for a particular night:

• Clock time when crossing a specific point
• Direction (clockwise or anti-clockwise)

The first question for this case would be; Could Sequiera have learnt these 4 points from his surgery at 34 Jewry Street, for either Watkins beat, Harvey's beat, or preferably both?

The second question is; Assuming yes for at least Watkins, how then does Sequiera then come across Eddowes, without loitering around the square?

Third question: How does Sequiera keep a track of the beat timings, if he has to go searching for a prostitute? With a timepiece, perhaps?

PC Holland was patrolling along Aldgate High Street when the alarm was raised. He initially went to Mitre Square with PC Harvey to see the body. This would be between about 1:45am and 1:48am. PC Holland then goes to call Dr Sequiera, living just round the corner at Jewry Street. He's clearly well known for PC Holland to know exactly where to go to fetch him to the scene. So add another minute or two for PC Holland to arrive, knock on Dr Sequiera's door and for Sequiera to respond. This takes us to about 1:50am. By 1:55am Dr Sequiera is dressed and at the scene.

Fully dressed? Or just partially dressed? Unfortunately we'll never know as no-one describes his attire, but he has the total sum of about 3 minutes to get ready before leaving his house and going with PC Holland to Mitre Square.

Does he use that time to get dressed or clean himself up? Was he in bed when called or was he awake? If he was woken that would add to the response time and shorten the time he has to get ready. If he was still awake - and therefore already dressed - what is he doing in those 3 minutes rather than just putting on a coat and leaving straight away?

The problem with this is that you're not taking into account the time from returning from the square to the surgery.
Watkins entered the square at 1:44.
If Sequiera cuts it very fine, and leaves the body at 1:42, he is back by 1:44.
That gives him 6 minutes to get out of clothes, wash hands and, and put on fresh clothes - the approximate murder + mutilation timespan.
If he leaves at a more reasonable 1:40, he has 8 minutes to do the above - even I could do it in that time.

Very likely that Sequiera was asleep when Holland called. Otherwise, Holland would have realized Sequiera had changed from one set of outside clothes, to another, and become suspicious.

In the case of the Berner St murder, assistant to Dr Blackwell, Ed Johnston, tells us that he arrived at the scene 3 or 4 minutes before the doctor, who, unlike Johnston, was asleep when the PC arrives at the surgery/house. So that 5 minute gap from Holland arriving at Sequiera's surgery, to Sequiera being in the square, looks about right.

I do find it interesting that when asked at the inquest if the killer would be covered in blood from carrying out the mutilations on Catherine Eddowes he responds with, 'Not necessarily.' Not possibly, or hard to say, but 'Not necessarily.' Is that because he knew? A knowing nod to himself that no-one else would get?

If he knew, why not give a more definite answer?

If only PC Holland had been at the inquest. May have had some extra information to work with.

Sequiera appeared on day 2, as did Lawende and Levy.
Do you suppose either or both of the later two, saw anyone there that looked a bit familiar?

Are you a bit suspicious of this:

Mr. Crawford: Unless the jury wish it, I do not think further particulars should be given as to the appearance of this man.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Seriously doubt he was standing around the square.

I seriously doubt Catherine knocked on his door, so did he come by her?

Thank you Dr Shoe ..... I think?

The whole case reeks to high heaven of a cover up.

Reckon the medical profession and top police had a pretty good idea what was going on.

Look at who turned up at Mitre Square that morning. Especially Major Henry Smith.

Conspiracy theorist.

[DJA]

I actually reckon she knocked on his door and was in 6 Mitre Street for some time,before he decided to murder her.

Eddowes has told him she was in the clink and could not attend Berner Street with Stride and Carter (BS man).

That's four down, one to go.


Yep.

Conspiracy not to up hold the Law.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Dr Sequiera	Mr Hyde

[DJA]

Henry G Kill , Mr Hyde, Edward Hyde, Inspector Newcomen.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

A parcel is spotted by a witness, for 3 consecutive murders - Stride, Eddowes, Kelly.

On the first occasion, by PC Smith, who, on his previous tramp through Berner St, spots a man with a woman - the later subsequently being identified at the mortuary, by the constable.
At the inquest:

[Coroner] What did you notice about him?
[Smith] He had a parcel wrapped in a newspaper in his hand. The parcel was about 18in. long and 6in. to 8in. broad.
[Coroner] Did you notice his height?
[Smith] He was about 5ft. 7in.
[Coroner] His hat?
[Smith] He wore a dark felt deerstalker's hat.
[Coroner] Clothes?
[Smith] His clothes were dark. The coat was a cutaway coat.

Then we get this from The Star, Oct 1 '88:

Mrs. Lindsay, who occupies the two front rooms of 11, Duke-street - almost opposite Church-passage, leading to the court - records a strange circumstance, which may or may not have a direct bearing upon the murder. She says that she is a very light sleeper, and is easily awakened by hearing any unusual noise. Early on Sunday morning she says - at what hour she could not specify - she heard the sound of one or two voices in the street below. Prompted by curiosity she looked out of the window just in time to hear a man's voice say, "I am not the murderer", uttered apparently in a tone of anger. Surprised on hearing the words, she called her husband, who, with her, saw a man disappearing down the street towards Aldgate. As he passed beneath a lamp she was able to discern that he was a man of average height, dressed in dark clothes, and carrying in his hand an umbrella and a small parcel.

Finally, from George Hutchinson's statement:

A man coming in the opposite direction to Kelly tapped her on the shoulder and said something to her. They both burst out laughing. I heard her say alright to him. And the man said you will be alright for what I have told you. He then placed his right hand around her shoulders. He also had a kind of a small parcel in his left hand with a kind of strap round it. I stood against the lamp of the Queen’s Head Public House and watched him. They both then came past me and the man hid down his head with his hat over his eyes. I stooped down and looked him in the face. He looked at me stern. They both went into Dorset Street I followed them. They both stood at the corner of the Court for about 3 minutes. He said something to her. She said alright my dear come along you will be comfortable He then placed his arm on her shoulder and gave her a kiss. She said she had lost her handkercheif he then pulled his handkercheif a red one out and gave it to her. They both then went up the court together.

Description: age about 34 or 35. height 5 ft 6, complexion pale, dark eyes and eye lashes, slight moustache curled up each end and hair dark, very surley looking; dress, long dark coat, collar and cuffs trimmed astracan and a dark jacket under, light waistcoat, dark trousers, dark felt hat turned down in the middle, button boots and gaiters with white buttons, wore a very thick gold chain, white linen collar, black tie with horse shoe pin, respectable appearance, walked very sharp, Jewish appearance. Can be identified.

This photo of an Arbeter Fraint edition, has a length to height ratio of 2.54:1



Using PC Smith's estimate of 18" for the parcel length, the above ratio would give 7.1" for the height - Smith estimated 6-8".

The modus operandi seems clear; walk around near the intended murder location, while handing out and/or selling copies of Arbeter Fraint (to avoid arousing suspicion, due to loitering). Observe the police beats (time, duration, direction). Wait for prostitutes to approach, or speak to those nearby, in a friendly manner. When the time is right, head off to the murder location, with the intended victim.

[Abby Normal]

A parcel is spotted by a witness, for 3 consecutive murders - Stride, Eddowes, Kelly.

On the first occasion, by PC Smith, who, on his previous tramp through Berner St, spots a man with a woman - the later subsequently being identified at the mortuary, by the constable.
At the inquest:



Then we get this from The Star, Oct 1 '88:



Finally, from George Hutchinson's statement:



This photo of an Arbeter Fraint edition, has a length to height ratio of 2.54:1



Using PC Smith's estimate of 18" for the parcel length, the above ratio would give 7.1" for the height - Smith estimated 6-8".

The modus operandi seems clear; walk around near the intended murder location, while handing out and/or selling copies of Arbeter Fraint (to avoid arousing suspicion, due to loitering). Observe the police beats (time, duration, direction). Wait for prostitutes to approach, or speak to those nearby, in a friendly manner. When the time is right, head off to the murder location, with the intended victim.

thats very clever. but why would someone affilated with the club and or handing out there paper kill at there own location?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

thats very clever. but why would someone affilated with the club and or handing out there paper kill at there own location?

How well do we know who is affiliated with the club?
Is Elizabeth Stride affiliated?

[JeffHamm]

They could well have done. If that was the case did they approach him in the street or in a pub I wonder?

Tristan

Hi Tristan,

The only possible sightings of victims with JtR are all in the street. Eddowes appears to have had no money at the time she was released for being drunk, Chapman and Nichols both went out with the stated intention of obtaining money, and Kelly was also known to be behind in her rent and lacked ready money, and Stride's last sighting was of her on the street. There are no cases where the victims were potentially spotted in pubs, however. So, of the two options, it appears the most likely place for them coming into contact was on the street.

Now, Nichols, at least, was sighted after she went out to get money and said she had earned her doss money a few times and spent it on drink that night, so she must have been in a pub at some point, so the lack of reports of the victims being spotted in a pub is just absence of evidence for that possibility, and so the same must be considered for the other cases as well. If so, it may be that JtR spotted potential victims in a pub, and followed them out, approaching suitably intoxicated women.

- Jeff

[DJA]

Stride and Kelly both exited pubs with male company in the hours before their murders.

Eddowes was locked up for being drunk.