Questioning PC Harveys testimony.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Fleetwood, you're right, Jack was in a dark corner. Do you think like I do that he was hiding whilst trying to make an escape when the police were entering the square? I also agree with you about Kate, that if she reckoned she knew the killer, she would not go into a dark place with him. Jack definitely knew the Whitechaple area like the back of his hand, and after reading a couple of dissertations and threads, I think it could be reasonable to say Jack studied the policeman's beat routine as well. What better way to escape the police? I can't remember if there is a map of the Mitre Square area with everyone marked on the map with times- It would be very useful- anyone feel free to create one! There is one of PC Harvey's beat.

Busy Beaver

Beaver....he wouldn't have needed to have known the beats in advance. All he needed to do was stand with the victim for 20 minutes or so and watch the coppers go past to work out how long he had......or just ask the victims who had probably worked it out themselves.

Hiding in the square? Looking at the times I don't see why he couldn't get in and out before Eddowes was discovered...but I do think it's a stretch to say he timed it within a minute of perfection by sheer coincidence. Mind you...the law of averages suggests he will have been close to being caught on at least one occasion.

I don't see a great mystery at all....just a street wise bloke who was well versed in the local streets/prostitution/the way the police worked....and was daring enough and murderous enough to take a few risks and get away with it.

[The Good Michael]

1.

2. The beats were reversed that very night, meaning Harvey and Watkins would arrive at the various relevant sites sooner than the previous nights. Any obs of their beats would have been done the same evening.

Monty,

Thanks for that. I would imagine Watkins and Harvey would have been on either their 3rd or 4th round. What do you estimate? If so, it would have been extremely difficult for the murderer to plan such a thing out well enough in advance so that he could observe one or two patrols on order to catch the timing. I also imagine that there would be periodic spelling of the patrolmen so that they might have a quick break, such as for a meal or to go to the privy. I don't think someone attempting to gauge the timing of a patrol, on a variant night, coupled with calls of nature and breaks, could do so reliably. That means he was lucky. Or...?

Cheers,

Mike

[Monty]

Good Michael,

Those that think these murders were planned must take these factors in.

Of course, one person (or persons) who would be aware of the beat change from early on are prostitutes. They would have been very aware.

It may have been another reason Eddowes, if the woman Lawende saw was Eddowes, was at the Duke st end of the passage. That and the Imperial club.

Monty

[Fleetwood Mac]

If the killer knew the beats etc surely he would have operated in an area not patrolled so regularly.

He wouldn't know the beats in advance unless he was privy to police plans. But he didn't need to know them in advance. He could have worked it out for himself half an hour before the murders - simply through observation - or just asked one of the victims who surely would have worked it out for themselves.

He wouldnt have said to himself [/B]"Oh i have excatly 9 mins to take Eddowes into Mitre Square, kill her and remove the organs before Pc Watkins beat brings him back into the square"

To me your logic is contradictory.

In the first quote...you're effectively saying that JTR weighed up the risk and managed it.

In the second quote.....you're saying JTR would not have weighed up the risk and managed it.

I think you have to go with one or the other...and the answer is probably that the bloke was street wise....and it follows thus he was prepared to take on a fair amount of risk in the knowledge he could manage it through a quick kill......which I suppose is being street wise.....i.e. observing how long he had and being able to slip under the radar when surely he must have been seen close to the murder sites in the immediate aftermath of the murders.

I think it was a case of the prostitutes who knew the areas and knew excatly where they could take the punters.

Quite possibly...so all it would have took was JTR to say..."you been watching the police beats?"....victim: "yeah.....he'll be back in 10 minutes"...."ok...let's go".....simple....and therefore he would have known how long he had to get out of that square before the bobby returned.

That is also important in trying to establish if the man Lawende saw was the killer or just one of a number of males walking about at that time of the morning and were accosted by Eddowes

If the couple Lawende saw....included Eddowes.....then in all probability Lawende saw the killer. The big question for me is whether or not that was Eddowes....and the fact he identified her by her clothing has to lead to doubt. Yes...JTR could have been in the square when Lawende walked past....I suppose you'd need to believe that a killer would take the risk of killing and mutiliating with a couple not too far away.

On balance.....I'd say Lawende did see Eddowes....and the bloke with her was her killer.

In reality the witness testimony is unreliable and unsafe to rely on

Hmmm....the tesimonies aren't unreliable.....there's nothing to suggest that Lawende is unreliable....the issue is one of the conclusions you draw.

[Trevor Marriott]

He wouldn't know the beats in advance unless he was privy to police plans. But he didn't need to know them in advance. He could have worked it out for himself half an hour before the murders - simply through observation - or just asked one of the victims who surely would have worked it out for themselves.



To me your logic is contradictory.

In the first quote...you're effectively saying that JTR weighed up the risk and managed it.

In the second quote.....you're saying JTR would not have weighed up the risk and managed it.

I think you have to go with one or the other...and the answer is probably that the bloke was street wise....and it follows thus he was prepared to take on a fair amount of risk in the knowledge he could manage it through a quick kill......which I suppose is being street wise.....i.e. observing how long he had and being able to slip under the radar when surely he must have been seen close to the murder sites in the immediate aftermath of the murders.

A quick kill and then performing major surgery !


Quite possibly...so all it would have took was JTR to say..."you been watching the police beats?"....victim: "yeah.....he'll be back in 10 minutes"...."ok...let's go".....simple....and therefore he would have known how long he had to get out of that square before the bobby returned.

yes he also might have taken time out from trainspotting


If the couple Lawende saw....included Eddowes.....then in all probability Lawende saw the killer. The big question for me is whether or not that was Eddowes....and the fact he identified her by her clothing has to lead to doubt. Yes...JTR could have been in the square when Lawende walked past....I suppose you'd need to believe that a killer would take the risk of killing and mutiliating with a couple not too far away.

On balance.....I'd say Lawende did see Eddowes....and the bloke with her was her killer.

Balance doesnt come into it the point is that if there were many people walking about then Eddowes could have propositioned several people in a very short space of time. the man Lawende saw may have been the killer but on the other hand perhaps just someone she was propositioning. After all Lawende didnt say he stood watching them and saw them walk off into the square did he. ? In fact Lawende never saw Eddowes face and only identifed her by her clothes. Now that must create a doubt as to wether It was Eddowes he actualy saw. We have to get back to reality with these important issues. We have a similar situation with Kelly where Hutchinson says the man he saw had a red pendent on his waistcoat or some part of his clothing. You cant see specific colours or identify specific types of clothing in the dark unless you are close up. Thats why it is unsafe to rely on these issues


Hmmm....the tesimonies aren't unreliable.....there's nothing to suggest that Lawende is unreliable....the issue is one of the conclusions you draw.

[B][B]I am not suggesting he is unreliable as i have stated above[/B

]Your logic is illogical

[Fleetwood Mac]

A quick kill and then performing major surgery !

Yes....what's incompatible with the idea that JTR assessed how long he had to complete the task? As I say...would have been very easy to understand when the bobby will have been back next time round on his beat.

Out of curiosity Trevor....are you suggesting that JTR put everything down to chance? If so....I can't agree with it..as I'm yet to meet a single individual who is averse to weighing up the risks and managing them based on their predisposition toward risk taking. It is done as a matter of instinct....in the saw way a hunter gatherer would have weighed up the risks before choosing a course of action...in terms of food and shelter.

yes he also might have taken time out from trainspotting

You'll have to explain Trevor....I imagine there's a hint of sarcasm in there somewhere.....and I'd be the first to hold my hands up and acknowledge that a battle of wits with you is simply one I couldn't possibly win......so please elaborate for the simple minded to get to grips with it......

Balance doesnt come into it the point is that if there were many people walking about then Eddowes could have propositioned several people in a very short space of time. the man Lawende saw may have been the killer but on the other hand perhaps just someone she was propositioning. After all Lawende didnt say he stood watching them and saw them walk off into the square did he. ? In fact Lawende never saw Eddowes face and only identifed her by her clothes. Now that must create a doubt as to wether It was Eddowes he actualy saw. We have to get back to reality with these important issues. We have a similar situation with Kelly where Hutchinson says the man he saw had a red pendent on his waistcoat or some part of his clothing. You cant see specific colours or identify specific types of clothing in the dark unless you are close up. Thats why it is unsafe to rely on these issues

There is of course an element of doubt by virtue of JTR not being caught in the act. It is unlikely however....that Lawende's man at 1.35am is not the killer considering she was found at 1.45am.....that is if you believe it was Eddowes with him.

In terms of ID by clothing......yeah....I would say there's serious doubt because the clothing described was not unusual at all...my understanding is that there was nothing about her clothing that stood out and could lead to the conclusion that Lawende couldn't have mistaken her clothes for someone else's.

But as said....you would have to believe that JTR killed with another couple in the vicinity....if you believe the estimated time of death....and presumably the noise would have travelled to within ear shot of the other couple (correct me if wrong here - as it's an assumption).

So there are a few things which go together to suggest that Lawende did see Eddowes.....and his ID/memory was canny.

[The Good Michael]

Of course, one person (or persons) who would be aware of the beat change from early on are prostitutes.

Thanks. That is where I was steering. It seems Trevor agrees that it's likely the victims took JTR to what they thought would be a secure place to do business, and it looks as if, by what you suggest, the girls could have been intimately familiar with the beats and popped in for a quickie when they knew the coast was clear. The other argument is that by allowing the girls to plan where to go, JTR was actually doing the planning, if you know what I mean. They feel secure because they are in control, but the murderer knows that they know their business and so, he is secure.

Cheers,

Mike

[Monty]

Good Michael,

If I remember correctly, there are news reports where locals referred to prostitutes constantly using the murder sites, apart from Dutfields yard.

Yards are prominant in this case. You have Browns in Bucks row, 29 Hanbury st yard, Haydemanns in Mitre square and even Dutfields yard. I could also cite Clarks Yard with regards Mylett.

Its possibily the reason why Brown stable yard and Haydemanns were locked.

I suspect he was a regular user of prositutes and was savvy to how the scene worked.

Monty

[Hunter]

According to contemporary reports, that corner in Mitre Suare was known to be a street prosses workplace; even after the murder, as Monty suggested. The beat cops probably knew where the spots for these women were too and just went on their way and let the women do their business. Some of them learned the hard way not to bring these women in just for soliciting. They pretty much had to be creating a nuisance- i.e. Eddowes earlier that night. Harvey may have heard Kate and her murderer in the square talking and went the other way. Once the murder was found, what would you say you were doing if it was you on that beat on that fatal night?

Streetwalkers could never expect complete privacy in a Metropolis but were savvy enough to know where the cops and pedestrians would leave them alone long enough for them to work. These women were actually quite bold in their activities and desperation made them even more so. Didn't want to get 'a hiding' you know. That's probably why Kate insisted on being let out so she'd have time to get some money before dawn. All the killer had to do was play along. He didn't have to be a cunning bloke to do that.

I know this seems too simple compared to all of the convoluted conspiracy theories I've heard, but I've learned that the simple answer is usually the correct one. The more complicated something is, the more it defies the law of averages... and of common sense.

[The Good Michael]

That's probably why Kate insisted on being let out so she'd have time to get some money before dawn. All the killer had to do was play along. He didn't have to be a cunning bloke to do that.

But knowing that the prostitutes would ensure his safety, WAS cunning enough.

Mike

[Monty]

Good Michael,

I dont know about ensuring but even though their objectives differ, the requirements, secludedness, to conduct their business remained identical.

You see this is where victimology comes into play. Its not an analysis of the killer, a pyschological breakdown of Jack, but more the practicalities, such as availability and yes, you are right, the victims own local knowledge which gives us a better insight into how Jack operated.

The victim aided the killer.

Monty

[Hunter]

But knowing that the prostitutes would ensure his safety, WAS cunning enough.

Maybe, Michael. but he could have learned it out of repitition of habit. Kind of like 'Pavlov's Theory'. I guess you could still say he had to develop a plan but the choice of victims alone points toward an opportunist, and all of the locations, including Miller's Court, were high risk; in which he was obviously willing to take... and interruption didn't seem to deter him from trying again...if one believes that is what happened in Bucks Row and even Dutfield's Yard.

[Marc]

Good day all,

A few questions arose from my reading of this thread as well as others :

1° From what is known of both PC's beat length, how long could have it taken for them to complete theirs, i.e passing by the same location again ?

2° Did PC's carry their lantern always alighted by night (thus hinting about their coming to onlookers ?)

3° In E.Stride's murder, some witness apparently mentioned hearing footsteps in the street which sounded like those of a police officer because of their "mesured" rythme, if I remember well.

Could it be that PC's wore shoes with nailed soles that sounded in a peculiar, quite recognizable way, when walking, particularly in empty streets in the dead of the night, and could thus be aknowledged at some distance away ?

[Monty]

Marc,

Watkins beat took 12 to 14 minutes. Beats on average, from my research, took bewteen that time and around 30 minutes. The PCs were require to patrol at 2 1/2 miles per hour.

Bulls Eye lamps were use and equiped with a shutter which enabled the lamp to be lit but didnt show any light. Watkins stated his lamp was lit and open, meaning it was burning and he didnt have his shutter on. Therefore he was using its beam.

Monty

[jason_c]

But knowing that the prostitutes would ensure his safety, WAS cunning enough.

Mike

As did Kelly.

Not to go off topic but some have suggested Millers Court was a bigger risk. Kelly's wish not to be caught or disturbed during encounters with clients suggests her killer was very safe indeed during his visit to No 13.