Swanson's notes on Stride's murder

[Robert]

OK, wild guess :

'by that token he would have the best sight of something murderer'

[Pandora]

OK, wild guess :

'by that token he would have the best sight of something murderer'

The more I look at it, the more I think the final word could be "murderer" as you suggest.

[Pandora]

On reflection, I think the first paragraph could read something like this...

"Thus it’s said to have been at 1:35 : by that time the victim had been already murdered."

[Robert]

It could be 'victim' or 'woman' and 'already' looks good, but what is the word before 'already'? It doesn't look like 'been.'

[Pandora]

It could be 'victim' or 'woman' and 'already' looks good, but what is the word before 'already'? It doesn't look like 'been.'

Hi Robert, I left a couple of the circle loops of Swanson's scribble on that word, I've had another go and erased them, so you can better see the word. So I think "been" could fit.

[Robert]

Thanks Pandora, yes it's clearer now.

[Hamrammr]

Hi,

Not sure if this is going to help much. I've tried scanning/photographing the scribble again but the document I have isn't the best scan even though I'm sure it was the best that could be done at the time (2002). Anyway, below are links to another shot, plus the page of the report before the scribble and the page the scribble is on. At this point in the report Swanson is trying to draw a comparison between the descriptions of the murderer in Berner Street and at Mitre Square given by witnesses. I've had a go at taking away the scribble myself (below), but haven't really got any further than anyone else.

Previous page:

http://i410.photobucket.com/albums/pp190/Dean_Carter/JtR/Swanson20Report20-20Elizabeth20Stride20Prev20Page_zpsb0dlu5aa.jpg

Scribble page: http://i410.photobucket.com/albums/p...psr8wecd8h.jpg

Margin notes with scribble: http://i410.photobucket.com/albums/p...psllsfvt7t.jpg

With some scribble removed: http://i410.photobucket.com/albums/p...psg6x4n9jj.jpg

[Errata]

"This is said to have been at 1.35, by that time the woman had definitely been murdered."

[GUT]

"This is said to have been at 1.35, by that time the woman had definitely been murdered."

Looks close, maybe even exact.

[Pandora]

"This is said to have been at 1.35, by that time the woman had definitely been murdered."

Agreed, just the "definitely" and "been" need to be the other way around.

"This is said to have been at 1.35 : by that time the woman had been definitely murdered"

[Pandora]

I had another go at it with the new image Hamrammr attached, and I think there's actually an "&" in the gap between the "1.35" and "by" because the gap is too wide otherwise. And the main body of the text uses the squiggle symbol for "&" rather than spelling it out, so it matches.

So my final go at the first paragraph is this.

"This is said to have been at 1.35 & by that time the woman had been definitely murdered"



As for the second paragraph, apart from the first word being "If" and the time "1.35" showing up again, it is largely indecipherable. The second word looks suspiciously like ripper, but that might just be wishful thinking, and doesn't really make sense in context.

[Robert]

1.35 account?

[Pandora]

1.35 account?

Yes, that looks possible.

The only witness accounts from that night, that are at 1:35am are from Lawende & co, so he might be commenting on them. If he's saying that Stride is already dead at that point, we already know that to be well documented, so it seems strange to mention it as a side note.

IF however he is suggesting that Eddowes is already dead by that time, then that would be very interesting, considering Lawende & co say they see her very much alive at that time.

[Errata]

Well, in all things context is king, so I suppose if we knew what the hell happened at 1:35, we might be able to tease out the second paragraph.

Watch it be something completely erroneous, and that's why it was crossed out. Because it was nonsensical. Thanks Swanson.

[Pandora]

Well, in all things context is king, so I suppose if we knew what the hell happened at 1:35, we might be able to tease out the second paragraph.

Watch it be something completely erroneous, and that's why it was crossed out. Because it was nonsensical. Thanks Swanson.

Agreed, in that he did scribble it out, so changed his mind about it in some way. But it is alongside the Lawende & co accounts for the Eddowes sighting, the mention of Stride is further down the page.

Probably making a mountain out of a molehill, but intriguing nonetheless.