Leaving one's beat

[David Orsam]

I agree with people who have said leaving one's beat would have been allowed in case of emergency. That sounds like part of the purpose, not just to watch for trouble but to be easy to find by people to intervene in emergencies nearby.

Can someone point me to the source(s) for Mizen continuing knocking up even after he was called? I can't find that, only his claims that he didn't continue doing that.

Here's what I posted in another thread:

As for what Mizen did do, Reporter G seems to carry the fullest account of his evidence on this point, namely: "In reply to a juryman, witness said that when the carman spoke to him he was engaged in knocking people up, and he finished knocking people up at the one place where he was at the time, giving two or three knocks, and then went directly to Buck’s-row, not wanting to knock up anyone else".

Reporter B corroborates this: "The witness was at the time in the act of knocking a man up….It is not true that before he went to Buck’s-row, witness continued “knocking people up”. He went there immediately".

Reporter C also carries a shorter version of this: "A juryman: Did you continue knocking people up after Cross told you were wanted? Witness – No. I only finished knocking up one person".

Reporter G is Daily Chronicle, B is the Star and C is the Daily News.

In short, Mizen admitted that he did continue to knock up after speaking to Paul and Cross but only at one residence.
__________________

[David Orsam]

The question to which I responded was:

Yes, I know, and my question was in response to this statement:

"If, in fact, Lechmere & Paul simply told him of a woman either dead or drunk on Bucks Row (as was claimed) he would have failed in the first duty of a police officer - the protection of life."

And your answer didn't actually meet the point. You said "A drunk woman sparked out on the pavement might need help". That's different from the protection of life.

You also said a dead body would need to be officially dealt with. That, again, is different from the protection of life.

So perhaps I should repeat the question:

How would attending to a drunk woman in Bucks Row involve the protection of life? Or a dead woman for that matter!

[Flower and Dean]

I agree with people who have said leaving one's beat would have been allowed in case of emergency. That sounds like part of the purpose, not just to watch for trouble but to be easy to find by people to intervene in emergencies nearby.

Can someone point me to the source(s) for Mizen continuing knocking up even after he was called? I can't find that, only his claims that he didn't continue doing that.

[Sam Flynn]

Yes and he didn't ignore the situation. He went round to Bucks Row. The question was whether it was his "first duty".

The question to which I responded was:

How would attending to a drunk woman in Bucks Row involve the protection of life? Or a dead woman for that matter!

[David Orsam]

A drunk woman sparked out on the pavement might need help, and a dead body would need to be officially dealt with. He could hardly have ignored the situation, especially given that two men (Cross & Paul) had gone out of their way to find a police officer. Clearly something was up.

Yes and he didn't ignore the situation. He went round to Bucks Row. The question was whether it was his "first duty".

[Sam Flynn]

How would attending to a drunk woman in Bucks Row involve the protection of life? Or a dead woman for that matter!

A drunk woman sparked out on the pavement might need help, and a dead body would need to be officially dealt with. He could hardly have ignored the situation, especially given that two men (Cross & Paul) had gone out of their way to find a police officer. Clearly something was up.

[Pierre]

But he wasn't simply saying that "an officer was already present". The quote Mizen attributed to Cross (according to the press reports) was: "You are wanted in Buck’s row by a policeman. A woman is lying there". If the quote was "You had better go to Buck's Row. There is a policeman there, and a woman is lying there" what you say would make sense. But why claim he had been summoned to Bucks Row if he wasn't going to immediately answer that summons?

How would attending to a drunk woman in Bucks Row involve the protection of life? Or a dead woman for that matter!

I guess we may soon have the answers to these questions from Steve.

Pierre

[David Orsam]

He would be helping himself by such an invention because he would be creating a scenario wherein a "J" Division officer was already present and dealing with the problem.

But he wasn't simply saying that "an officer was already present". The quote Mizen attributed to Cross (according to the press reports) was: "You are wanted in Buck’s row by a policeman. A woman is lying there". If the quote was "You had better go to Buck's Row. There is a policeman there, and a woman is lying there" what you say would make sense. But why claim he had been summoned to Bucks Row if he wasn't going to immediately answer that summons?

If, in fact, Lechmere & Paul simply told him of a woman either dead or drunk on Bucks Row (as was claimed) he would have failed in the first duty of a police officer - the protection of life.

How would attending to a drunk woman in Bucks Row involve the protection of life? Or a dead woman for that matter!

[Monty]

What a clear cut world you live in Simon.

Monty

[Bridewell]

I'm not sure you have grasped the point I was making which was that if Mizen had been summoned to Bucks Row by a policeman (because a body was lying there) he was, presumably, duty bound to attend "at once". So he has not actually helped himself in any way if he invented the claim that he was called to the scene by an officer.

He would be helping himself by such an invention because he would be creating a scenario wherein a "J" Division officer was already present and dealing with the problem.

If, in fact, Lechmere & Paul simply told him of a woman either dead or drunk on Bucks Row (as was claimed) he would have failed in the first duty of a police officer - the protection of life.

[David Orsam]

Hi All,

So, misunderstanding is the key to the Whitechapel murders?

Nobody lied. Everyone told the truth.

Small wonder we've got absolutely nowhere over the past 126 years.

Although the notion that Cross might have lied doesn't seem to have played well with you. (irony?)

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

So, misunderstanding is the key to the Whitechapel murders?

Nobody lied. Everyone told the truth.

Small wonder we've got absolutely nowhere over the past 126 years.

Regards,

Simon

[David Orsam]

Mizen should have acted with more immediacy than he did, probably not wanting to get involved in a 'J' Division problem. My suspicion is that he invented Lechmere & Paul's claim that there was already an officer present in anticipation of criticism of his tardiness. (Fisherman will disagree ).

I'm not sure you have grasped the point I was making which was that if Mizen had been summoned to Bucks Row by a policeman (because a body was lying there) he was, presumably, duty bound to attend "at once". So he has not actually helped himself in any way if he invented the claim that he was called to the scene by an officer.

[Bridewell]

Monty is the expert here but the following is from Dickens's Dictionary of London 1888:-

"Fixed Points (Police):

The undermentioned places are appointed as fixed points where a police constable is to be permanently stationed from 9pm to 1am.

In the event of any person springing a rattle, or persistently ringing a bell in the street or in an area, the police will at once proceed to the spot and render assistance."

Fixed Points were more restrictive than Beat Patrols but even an officer on a Fixed Point was expected, in case of need "at once to proceed to the spot and render assistance". Mizen should have acted with more immediacy than he did, probably not wanting to get involved in a 'J' Division problem. My suspicion is that he invented Lechmere & Paul's claim that there was already an officer present in anticipation of criticism of his tardiness. (Fisherman will disagree ).

[David Orsam]

He may have misunderstood "you are wanted".

Certainly a possibility. Thanks Monty - btw your earlier plug worked, and I ordered your book from Amazon this morning.