PC Neil's Hearing

[Geddy2112]

I concur, I would suggest estimating someone's distance via sound is much more difficult than visually. I may add Neil might have known where Thain was supposed to be be so made his assessment on that knowledge. Reporters at the time probably did not record every detail and certainly would not have expected us to be going over their work with a fine tooth comb some 130 odd years later.

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve,

Small thing perhaps, but I don't think the carmen were already talking to Mizen when Neil turned into Buck's Row. If they would have, Mizen would be too close on Neil's tail for Thain to have come & gone before Mizen would arrive. Of course, it would depend on whether Neil surfaced from Queen Ann Street or the northern end of Thomas Street, but I don't think the carmen had reached Mizen yet.

Cheers,
Frank

I tend to prefer they were either just about to leave or had just left The Row.
However, you know me, and I don't want to totally exclude the possibility that the conversation with Mizen had begun.
But I agree it is the least likely of the options.
I just like to cover all bases Frank.


Steve

[FrankO]

I tend to prefer they were either just about to leave or had just left The Row.
However, you know me, and I don't want to totally exclude the possibility that the conversation with Mizen had begun.
But I agree it is the least likely of the options.
I just like to cover all bases Frank.


Steve

Thanks for your reply, Steve. I see where you're coming from and, from the perspective of your book, it's good to want to cover all bases.

Like you, my guess would be that the carmen had almost reached the corner of Buck's Row and Baker's Row or had just turned it when Neil turned left into Buck's Row. Probably rather the latter than the former.

Cheers,
Frank

[FrankO]

And as we can’t take the inquest testimonies as being verbatim I still think it at least possible that Cross might actually have said something like “I heard footsteps approaching then I saw the man when he was 30 or 40 yards away.” Then this got condensed by reporters to Cross ‘hearing’ the man 30 or 40 yards away. How would anyone predict a distance from hearing only? When someone describes someone as being 30-40 yards away isn’t it more likely that this was a conclusion made visually?

So I think it at least possible and plausible that Cross heard the footsteps, then waited a few seconds before seeing Paul 30-40 yards away. After all, to Cross giving his testimony, I can’t see any short delays appearing worth mentioning. If he’d heard Paul then seen him 10 seconds later then what difference could that have made to his testimony at the time?

I totally agree with you, Mike. I think it would be perfectly feasible and logical that there was some time between Lechmere first hearing Paul's footsteps, then turning around to see if he could see him and then actually discerning Paul from the gloom. I don't believe it would have been something like 10 seconds, but rather something less than 5, but that's just my personal view.

I reckon that a percentage of what we know in this case and others that we get from inquest testimony could be incorrect due to a slight difference between what was reported and what was actually said.

I think this is the very reason why we're all on these boards, not to mention the contradictions and variations in some of the evidence left to us.

Cheers,
Frank

[Scott Nelson]

I reckon that a percentage of what we know in this case and others that we get from inquest testimony could be incorrect due to a slight difference between what was reported and what was actually said.

Yes, as in MJK's inquest where Barnett is describing how he entered the room without a key and the drainpipe he held onto while reaching through the broken window somehow getting transcribed into 'a pipe was there and smoked by him' (inquest version) instead of 'a pipe was there and used by him' (press version).

[Herlock Sholmes]

Yes, as in MJK's inquest where Barnett is describing how he entered the room without a key and the drainpipe he held onto while reaching through the broken window somehow getting transcribed into 'a pipe was there and smoked by him' (inquest version) instead of 'a pipe was there and used by him' (press version).

Good example Scott. It doesn’t take a lot. It could be a word or two which can change the meaning of a sentence.