Leaving one's beat

[Elamarna]

I feel Mizen would be better acquainted with the street names and layout of the streets, plus, while working and performing a specific chore, I'd expect him to know better where he was precisely when they met, which is why I give him a little more credit when it comes to the location of the meeting, Steve.
I agree that it was a house near the end of Hanbury Street, so that one sounds good to me, as well.
Agreed again, Steve.

All the best,
Frank

Playing devils advocate surely where he says he is depends on any motive he may or may not have.

And it seems all used different names anyway for roads. Paul refers to Church Row, while
In one report of Mizen it says " at end of Campbell Street".
If the Carmen were on the Eastern side of Bakers Row until just before the junction they would be able to see both versions. Mizen coming out of old Montague or him at the second house in Hanbury.
Indeed they could have seen him coming out of Montague AND going to the house. He may not see them until they reach him. All options covered.

It's fascinating is it not Frank, so many possabilties.


Cheers

Steve

[FrankO]

He says Hanbury street, the Carmen say nearer the entrance of old Montague when they see him.

I feel Mizen would be better acquainted with the street names and layout of the streets, plus, while working and performing a specific chore, I'd expect him to know better where he was precisely when they met, which is why I give him a little more credit when it comes to the location of the meeting, Steve.

Maybe he is knocking up the pub. But more probable he is about to do the house next to the Northern corner of Hanbury.

I agree that it was a house near the end of Hanbury Street, so that one sounds good to me, as well.

I think we can assume he is within a short distance of the junction but that is about it I feel.

Agreed again, Steve.

All the best,
Frank

[Elamarna]

Thanks, Dusty.

Also, according to Mizen’s statement he was in the act of knocking up when the carmen approached and addressed him, almost in passing by. To me that means that he had to be somewhere where there were houses and this, therefore, couldn’t have been in the blue marked area on the picture I posted yesterday.

However Frank, Mizen's testimony is not exactly in line with the Carmen and we must surely be careful in taking eithersides views as gospel.
He says Hanbury street, the Carmen say nearer the entrance of old Montague when they see him.
Maybe he is knocking up the pub. But more probable he is about to do the house next to the Northern corner of Hanbury.

I think we can assume he is within a short distance of the junction but that is about it I feel.

Steve

[FrankO]

That's something I hadn't consider before, good thinking, Frank.

Thanks, Dusty.

Also, according to Mizen’s statement he was in the act of knocking up when the carmen approached and addressed him, almost in passing by. To me that means that he had to be somewhere where there were houses and this, therefore, couldn’t have been in the blue marked area on the picture I posted yesterday.

[FrankO]

But surely if he was told that another officer wanted him then, by necessary implication, he has to assume it's an emergency, i.e. on the basis that the other officer must have known that he could only summon his assistance in an emergency situation.

This, I feel, is an important point, John.

If the other officer could only call him away in case of an emergency, then why wouldn’t this other officer clearly pass on the emergency? Because, as you suggest, the other officer must have known he could only summon Mizen’s assistance in an emergency situation. Why would he want to run the risk that Mizen wouldn’t come as a result of not having clearly passed on what the emergency was? And how could this have made sense to Mizen?

[drstrange169]

>> ... the carmen would not have been able to see Mizen ..<<

That's something I hadn't consider before, good thinking, Frank.

[drstrange169]

>>... can we be sure no one was living on these premise.<<

Alas, we can't be sure of anything, but won't stop us speculating;-)

[John G]

You think Emma Green, Walter Purkis, Patrick Mulshaw and Henry Tomkins all lied at the inquest?

Now Patrick Mulshaw's an interesting character. He admitted to dozing off throughout the night but not, of course, during the important time frame of 3:00 to 4:00 am. Perish the thought. That said, it wasn't apparently until twenty to five before he became aware of what at happened, despite his erstwhile fanatical devotion to his duties!

[John G]

Hi John G,

Plenty.

The whole thing is one great swirling whirlpool of lies.

Regards,

Simon

Hullo Simon,

That's a bit of a generalization to say the least.

What lies? Why do the lies infer a conspiracy? How are the lies connected?

You know I'm tempted at this point to paraphrase the great Samuel Johnson by saying: Conspiracy theory. The last refuge of the hopelessly confused.

[David Orsam]

The whole thing is one great swirling whirlpool of lies.

You think Emma Green, Walter Purkis, Patrick Mulshaw and Henry Tomkins all lied at the inquest?

[Simon Wood]

Hi John G,

Plenty.

The whole thing is one great swirling whirlpool of lies.

Regards,

Simon

[David Orsam]

Hi David,

What do you mean, I "love the idea of police lying"?

It's not a case of loving or even liking the idea.

It's a fact. The police lied from beginning to end, from Emma Smith to "Mary Kelly" and beyond.

That's why the Whitechapel murders are a mystery and you're all running around in ever-decreasing circles.

A fact that, unfortunately, you haven't been able to prove, or even get close to demonstrating.

And I haven't been running around in any circles at all Simon. I've never even tried to solve "the mystery". You, on the other hand, are clearly running around like a headless chicken trying to work out who these five different murderers were for the five different victims.

And you haven't got a clue! You can't even tell us one of them. I know, coz I've read your book.

[John G]

Hi David,

What do you mean, I "love the idea of police lying"?

It's not a case of loving or even liking the idea.

It's a fact. The police lied from beginning to end, from Emma Smith to "Mary Kelly" and beyond.

That's why the Whitechapel murders are a mystery and you're all running around in ever-decreasing circles.

Regards,

Simon

The Truth is Out There!

Just out of interest, do you have any solid evidence for the police lying? And just for clarification, I don't mean on the basis of how, say, Fox Mulder would define "solid evidence."

[Simon Wood]

Hi David,

What do you mean, I "love the idea of police lying"?

It's not a case of loving or even liking the idea.

It's a fact. The police lied from beginning to end, from Emma Smith to "Mary Kelly" and beyond.

That's why the Whitechapel murders are a mystery and you're all running around in ever-decreasing circles.

Regards,

Simon

[Herlock Sholmes]

But what is significant about it even if it is true?

Why do you "prefer" it?

I can't help feeling that if the official version was that Neil took the body to the mortuary with the scavengers but one newspaper published a story about how Thain fetched the doctor and Mizen fetched the ambulance you would prefer the newspaper story.

You just prefer the East London Observer story because it's different to the "official" version don't you? You love the idea of police lying, isn't that right?

Anything familiar here David?

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=viz+grassy+knollington&rlz=1C9BKJA_enGB704GB704&oq=viz+grassy+knollington&aqs=chrome..69i57.13036j0j8&hl=en-GB&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8#imgrc=xnHbyS5rmcarFM: