The Absence Of Evidence

[Herlock Sholmes]

.
Im still a little surprised at how many people want to challenge multiple corroborating statements with ones that are uniquely singular and without any second hand verification

Because this is a manipulation. You can have 50 witnesses all saying the same thing but if evidence exists to show that they were mistaken then they were mistaken.

The 4 witnesses are the weakest of the week and yet they keep getting quoting uncritically.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Fiver
When asked "Did you see anyone about in Berner-street?', Eagle replied "I dare say I did, but I do not remember them." That directly contradicts your idea that "Eagle said it was empty as he returned at 12:40", he said he did see people.

Michael
See my response above, he didnt say he saw anyone. Strike 2

.....

Another glaringly, bafflingly dishonest post!!

Eagle said “ I DARE SAY I DID, but I do not remember them.”

Michael called this strike 2!!

Eagle his clearly saying that he has no doubt that he did see people in the street but he didn’t recall anyone specifically.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Interesting perspective, but you of course realize that there is a difference here between a fixed distance and precise timing. He doesnt say how long he looked before finding the constable. Your scenario of people running to a point and then running back helps understand the distance they were away from the club, but it doesnt and cant tell you how long they took before finding a constable, Particularly when they dont estimate it themselves. Like in Spooners case...had he estimated how long his saunter with his date took to get to the Beehive instead of estimating how long they stood there before the running men were seen, we wouldnt have needed so much discussion on how off his estimates must have been about when he was alerted. Perhaps you and others wish that Eagle said he saw Lave when he returned, and vice versa, but they didnt...even though they gave the exact same time period for being in place right there. Pity. Maybe you wish that Fanny had seen who was on the cart and horse after 1, which way it was going....again, so much the pity. Maybe you wish that Fanny heard "Lipski" being yelled from inside her house, because she stated she heard bootsteps while inside...and of course the cart and horse. Wouldnt leave so much doubt that Israel had anything factual in his statement. As it is, everything he said is reliant on belief...not substantiated by any other evidence and witness. As is Eagle. And Lave.

You did fail to address my remark that Issak K meets up with Eagle on the way back to the passageway, and thats good, Issak K's own remarks on what he did when and whom he went with or met are illuminating, and do not validate Louis's statement.

Im still a little surprised at how many people want to challenge multiple corroborating statements with ones that are uniquely singular and without any second hand verification. The pull of the Canonical Dark Side when looking at these murders is strong indeed,...I said that out loud using James Earl Jones voice.

You allude to a plot....clearly something that is created on the spot in heightened emotional state would have weak plot points....like the fact that Louis and Morris apparently didnt tell even Issac K to say that Louis arrived at 1. Issac however said that when he arrived back at the club, at half past 12, that about 10 minutes elapsed before he was summoned to the passageway...finding Louis and other members already standing around the body. Contradicting a friends statement, not validating it.

You would think in a broad "conspiracy" Issac and other club members would have been advised to say what Louis and Eagle said...but they didnt, did they? Does that means that the 3 men I mentioned did not try and manipulate the truth by falsifying their own remarks, not as a certainty...but it is interesting that they dont directly contradict each other. Sure, Eagle and Lave screwed up by saying they were in the same place at the same time and didnt see each other...and sure, Louis screwed up unknowingly because we can prove he didnt arrive "precisely" at 1, not was he in his final approach at 1. We have a witness who saw that street at that time, not club affiliated.

So we have a group of men who say they saw Louis was by the body around 12:40...Eagle says he came into the passageway at that time..Lave says he was at the gates at that time...and Louis says he didnt even arrive to discover the body until precisely 15-20 minutes later.
And you, and others dont have problems with these issues?

Makes me wonder what you hope to gain from being here then...if evidence and fact and contradictions and provable lies dont influence your perceptions of what has been historically told.

White noise.

[Abby Normal]

White noise.

not only true, but great name for a punk band

[Fiver]

Ergo...the person who killed her was someone out of sight by the street view witnesses, and someone with access to Liz in the passageway. That can only be attendees still at the club.

This statement of yours is still wrong, no matter how many times you say it. Even we take the broader range of time that Fanny Mortimer viewed that street, that still means someone could have entered Dutfield's Yard from Berner Street before 12:35 or after 12:55.

And the Club was not the only building that could reach Dutfield's Yard directly. As has been repeatedly pointed out, this was made clear at the Inquest -"On the left side of the yard is a house, which is divided into three tenements, and occupied, I believe, by that number of families. At the end is a store or workshop belonging to Messrs. Hindley and Co., sack manufacturers."

[Fiver]

Before someone points out that I believe the witnesses that state Louis was there at 12:40-12:45 with other men standing around the fallen Liz, we have ONLY Louis's word for when he arrived.

This statement of yours is still wrong, no matter how many times you say it. Fanny Mortimer's account supports Diemschitz's timeing -"Locking the door, she prepared to retire to bed, in the front room on the ground floor, and it so happened that in about four minutes' time she heard Diemschitz's pony cart pass the house, and remarked upon the circumstance to her husband."

[Fiver]

Funny how the police not only searched all the men still there but also the club itself, which suggests they entertained an idea that this murder looked to have been committed by someone already there.

That is not all that the police searched.

"A thorough search was made by the police of the yard and the houses in it, but no trace could be found of any person who might have committed the murder. As soon as the search was over the whole of the persons who had come into the yard and the members of the club were interrogated, their names and addresses taken, their pockets searched by the police, and their clothes and hands examined by the doctors. The people were twenty-eight in number. Each was dealt with separately, and they properly accounted for themselves. The houses were inspected a second time and the occupants examined and their rooms searched. A loft close by was searched, but no trace could be found of the murderer." - Detective-Inspector Reid

[Fiver]

You mean by cutting a throat? Thats a sort of signature for you?

The method used by the Ripper to kill was a key part of his signature. He strangled his victims and while they were prone and dead or dying he slit their throats, thus the relatively small amount of blood spray.

Knives appear to have been the most common period murder method, but they were more often used to stab the victim, not cut their throats. Beating was the next most common, using fists, feet, or blunt instruments; followed by suffocation by strangling or smothering; then poisoning, drowning, burning, pushing (from a height or in front of a moving vehicle), and firearms.

Strangulation followed by throat cutting was and is an extremely rare method of killing people.

[MrBarnett]

not only true, but great name for a punk band

Long before the punk era:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CO9LS3A9iB8&list=OLAK5uy_m4KFOuBTMJoQKWfn1wF3JBY1RUyMNt3hc

[Wickerman]

The method used by the Ripper to kill was a key part of his signature. He strangled his victims and while they were prone and dead or dying he slit their throats, thus the relatively small amount of blood spray.

Knives appear to have been the most common period murder method, but they were more often used to stab the victim, not cut their throats. Beating was the next most common, using fists, feet, or blunt instruments; followed by suffocation by strangling or smothering; then poisoning, drowning, burning, pushing (from a height or in front of a moving vehicle), and firearms.

Strangulation followed by throat cutting was and is an extremely rare method of killing people.

I appreciate you sharing that with us.
For years I've maintained the Ripper was not a 'knife-man', he was a strangler. None of the victims were stabbed to death (I've always discounted Tabram), if a killer carries a knife and intent on murder, then typically he uses the knife to kill his victims, not this one.

The knife is purely for mutilations. This one likes to see, feel & hear the last gasps of life gurgling from his victim as he compresses their throat. This is what he enjoys.
Mutilations, in my view are more for display to shock the press, public and those finding the bodies. All the bodies are displayed in one way or another.
This is one reason I suspect the Whitechapel Murderer was, or had been a garroter at some point in time.
Strangling is what excited him, mutilations made him famous (or infamous).

[Astatine211]

This is one reason I suspect the Whitechapel Murderer was, or had been a garroter at some point in time.
Strangling is what excited him, mutilations made him famous (or infamous).

If only we could place Bartholomew Binns in Whitechapel during 1888.

[drstrange169]

White Noise, one of the favourite albums from my youth! Still have my vinyl copy.

[FrankO]

Interesting perspective, but you of course realize that there is a difference here between a fixed distance and precise timing. He doesnt say how long he looked before finding the constable. Your scenario of people running to a point and then running back helps understand the distance they were away from the club, but it doesnt and cant tell you how long they took before finding a constable, Particularly when they dont estimate it themselves.

You’ve missed the point, Michael. Do you know how long it took for Eagle to run out of the yard, eventually find Lamb and then return to the yard?

If so, then please let us know how you know this for a fact. If not, then there’s no proof, good or otherwise, that Eagle is returning to that passageway at that same time” (i.e. when Diemshutz is arriving in the yard to discover Stride’s body just after 1 am). If you don’t answer this simple question, I will take it as a “no”.

Like in Spooners case...had he estimated how long his saunter with his date took to get to the Beehive instead of estimating how long they stood there before the running men were seen, we wouldnt have needed so much discussion on how off his estimates must have been about when he was alerted.

We only need to because you deny that Spooner said he stood beside the body for 4 or 5 minutes before Lamb arrived in the yard.

Perhaps you and others wish that Eagle said he saw Lave when he returned, and vice versa, but they didnt...even though they gave the exact same time period for being in place right there. Pity.

I think it’s a pity that the press, collectively, didn’t quote Lave correctly, because it’s obvious to me that they didn’t. But, in general, yes, I wish the timings & actions of all people involved would have been represented clearly. It would have saved us a lot of time and frustration. Yourself included.

Maybe you wish that Fanny had seen who was on the cart and horse after 1, which way it was going....again, so much the pity.

Of course I wish she had been clear about her timings. Apart from the fact that it doesn't change anything, but why wouldn’t I? Again, that would have saved us a lot of time and frustration, including yourself. Maybe then we could have been sure about whether it was or wasn’t after one am. Although, of course, there’s nothing in the evidence we are left with to suggest that she did go inside after one am. The closest we have is her saying that she “was standing at the door of my house nearly the whole time between half-past twelve and one o'clock”. But that still doesn’t tell us if she went back inside at 12:56, 12:57, 12:58 or 12:59 or even 1 am, which, technically, isn’t between 12:30 and one o’clock, obviously.

As it is, everything he said is reliant on belief...not substantiated by any other evidence and witness. As is Eagle. And Lave.

As, among other things, is your claim that Mortimer went back inside after 1 am.

You did fail to address my remark that Issak K meets up with Eagle on the way back to the passageway, and thats good, Issak K's own remarks on what he did when and whom he went with or met are illuminating, and do not validate Louis's statement.

Perhaps that’s because I already addressed those points on earlier occasions. For instance, Isaac Kozebrodski didn’t meet up with Eagle on the way back to the yard, he met up with him before seeing Lamb. Kozebrodski: “I afterwards went into the Commercial-road, along with Eagle, and found two officers.” Lamb: “I was on duty in Commercial-road, between Christian-street and Batty-street, when two men came running towards me and shouting.”

Im still a little surprised at how many people want to challenge multiple corroborating statements with ones that are uniquely singular and without any second hand verification. The pull of the Canonical Dark Side when looking at these murders is strong indeed,...I said that out loud using James Earl Jones voice.

Even though I like a good impersonation, I’m still a little surprised about how you ignore evidence that doesn’t fit your view.

You allude to a plot....clearly something that is created on the spot in heightened emotional state would have weak plot points....like the fact that Louis and Morris apparently didnt tell even Issac K to say that Louis arrived at 1.

That’s a weakness as it is, indeed. But it was even worse to immediately send him for a PC to begin with, if he wanted to feign a discovery at 1 am.

Issac however said that when he arrived back at the club, at half past 12, that about 10 minutes elapsed before he was summoned to the passageway...finding Louis and other members already standing around the body. Contradicting a friends statement, not validating it.

That’s true, but Kozebrodski is the only one who mentions Diemshutz being there at or around 12:40. None of the other 2 do.

Does that means that the 3 men I mentioned did not try and manipulate the truth by falsifying their own remarks, not as a certainty...but it is interesting that they dont directly contradict each other.

If there would have been “very good proof that Eagle is returning to that passageway at that same time”, as you claim, then Diemshutz & Eagle would have been contradicting each other.

Sure, Eagle and Lave screwed up by saying they were in the same place at the same time and didnt see each other...

Indeed they did, and big time too. Especially seeing that it would have been very simple for them not to screw up.

By the way, you forgot to include how Diemshutz screwed up by cutting & pasting from Spooner’s story the part about going in search for a PC, not finding one, but instead returning with a man, who then lifted Stride’s chin.

Eagle says he came into the passageway at that time..Lave says he was at the gates at that time...and Louis says he didnt even arrive to discover the body until precisely 15-20 minutes later.
And you, and others dont have problems with these issues?

Exactly, Michael. There are a bit too many screw-ups by that group of yours causing me not to have problems with these issues.

Makes me wonder what you hope to gain from being here then...if evidence and fact and contradictions and provable lies dont influence your perceptions of what has been historically told.

As long as you keep saying things like “there’s very good proof that Eagle, etc.” and that “Fanny is PROVABLY at her door at exactly 1 am” and that “Issak K meets up with Eagle on the way back to the passageway”, then I can’t help but pop in every now & then to try and get you to provide that proof or I deliver (the) evidence against your claims. To no avail, obviously, but there you go.

And what do you hope to gain, Michael?

[Herlock Sholmes]

by Michael W Richards View Post
Interesting perspective, but you of course realize that there is a difference here between a fixed distance and precise timing. He doesnt say how long he looked before finding the constable. Your scenario of people running to a point and then running back helps understand the distance they were away from the club, but it doesnt and cant tell you how long they took before finding a constable, Particularly when they dont estimate it themselves.

How long could this search have taken?

. and I then went to the Commercial-road, all the time shouting “Police!” On getting to the corner of Grove-street I saw two constables, and told them that a woman had been murdered in Berner-street.

He wasn’t ducking up side-streets and searching alleys. He turned into Commercial Road and ran toward Grove Street shouting ‘Police.’ So we don’t need to add on any ‘search’ time.

[Herlock Sholmes]

. Like in Spooners case...had he estimated how long his saunter with his date took to get to the Beehive instead of estimating how long they stood there before the running men were seen, we wouldnt have needed so much discussion on how off his estimates must have been about when he was alerted

Frank has already pointed it out but I can’t see how anyone looking at the case fairly can make a post like this? You continue in your attempt to airbrush away a chunk of his statement. Why can’t you see how this does you, or your argument, no credit? Spooner, as we all know, said that he’d been in the yard for around 5 minutes before PC Lamb arrived. We know for an absolute certainty that Lamb arrived after 1.00. Spooner specifically identified Lamb as the officer that he saw and although everyone, apart from you, accepts that we have to allow some leeway on timings, we should all be able to agree on the extreme unlikeliness of someone misjudging 30 minutes as 5 minutes. So a fair assessment of Spooner’s statement overwhelmingly shows that he arrived just after 1.00.