Sergeant Stephen White

[mariab]

I presume you mean White's alleged sighting and not Smith's.
Whether the alleged sighting took place is a debatable point. The whole article should be treated with caution. My opinion is something happened on one of the nights of the murders but was exaggerated quite a bit in the Peoples Journal article. That's just a gut feeling by me and not based on any solid evidence.
The most common setting for the alleged sighting is Mitre Square (I favour one of the entrances into the Square myself). Some authors have suggested Castle Alley where others think it relates to Berner Street, unfortunately it's all guesswork.

Somehow this reminds me of the story about a police officer (Robert Sagar?) observing a man of Jewish appearance coming out of a court in Mitre Square (as reported in The Daily News of January 9, 1905, The Morning Leader of January 9, 1905, and The Seattle Daily Times of February 4, 1905). In two of the reports the officer is said to have discovered Eddowes' body immediately afterwards. The Jewish man is described as "well-known" in The Daily News and "well dressed" in The Seattle Daily Times. It's been suggested that this may be the same suspect mentioned in the memoirs of Sagar's colleague, Henry Cox?
If the incident refers to Berner Street, this reminds me of Edward Spooner meeting "Mr. Harris“ on Fairclough Street shortly after Stride's body had been discovered – but no PC was involved in that incident.

[Luke111]

I meant white of course.
I guess yor right about treating this story carefully.
(even though I`d love to belive it)
This probablly does not fit in this thread, but anyway,
does anyone here know where and if the ripper washed his hands on the night of the double event?
Since I`m currently making a timeline of it that information would be of some help.

greetings Lukas

[Rob Clack]

I meant white of course.
I guess yor right about treating this story carefully.
(even though I`d love to belive it)
This probablly does not fit in this thread, but anyway,
does anyone here know where and if the ripper washed his hands on the night of the double event?
Since I`m currently making a timeline of it that information would be of some help.

greetings Lukas

Hi Lukas,

I'd love to believe it to, who knows one day we might find out for sure.

The Ripper washing his hands on the night of the double event is a myth and didn't happen. It started in Major Smith's book 'From Constable to Commissioner'. The place it was suppose to have happened was in Dorset Street, the exact location is unknown.

Regards

Rob

[Luke111]

Hi Lukas,

I'd love to believe it to, who knows one day we might find out for sure.

The Ripper washing his hands on the night of the double event is a myth and didn't happen. It started in Major Smith's book 'From Constable to Commissioner'. The place it was suppose to have happened was in Dorset Street, the exact location is unknown.

Regards

Rob

Thanks
Glad I got that figured out.
The first draft of the timeline is ready now,

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=5646

I`d be glad if youd check it out and told me what you think,
maybe you have something to add/correct

Lukas

[Luke111]

Sorry wrong link
heres a direct download link:

http://d2.myfreefilehosting.com/d1/double%20event.png

[Bridewell]

The file on the Ripper murders was never closed. These are undetected murders and the file remains open until that situation changes which, to the standard of proof which a criminal court would require, seems unlikely!

[Fleetwood Mac]

His hands were snow white, and fingers long and tapering.

If this episode did happen, then this fella didn't have blood on his hands.

[Scott Nelson]

The blood was on the side of the fingers away from White's view.

[Fleetwood Mac]

The blood was on the side of the fingers away from White's view.

Evidently.

And, he had long, tapering fingers built expressly for negotiating the insides of a deceased woman. A short, stout fellow with stumpy fingers would not have been able to get into the nooks and crannies.

[Scott Nelson]

He could if he cut them open wide enough. But White's suspect was very adept at hiding suspicious blots on his person.

[Jason]

I have always believed that the murderer may have had an accomplice, a look out so to speak. Perhaps the man White saw was this man, and therefore he had no blood on his person because he didnt actually touch the victim. The Hanbury street, Mitre Square and millers court murders all lend themselves to the thought that someone could carry out such attrocities in the safe knowledge that someone was acting in support, allowing them to do their work. This idea does not necessarily mean "conspiracy, it just means "had an accomplice". Just an idea !

[Rubyretro]

[QUOTE=Jason;246353]

I have always believed that the murderer may have had an accomplice

Whilst I have never believed that the Ripper had a witting accomplice (because in the main this type of murder & mutilation is carried out by someone acting alone, and none of the evidence points to more than one person being involved), I certainly do believe that he must have had at least one unwitting accomplice.

The reason is that the Ripper was living in an overcrowded part of the city, teeming with people, and given his most likely station in life, could have been living in a lodging house, with his family, or (even if he lived alone) in a room in a house with other people.

He also surely had to go to work.

I don't think that the Ripper could have been a 'weird loner' type, or else he would have attracted the suspicion of his neighbours & work mates. In the midst of some hysteria, he probably would have been denounced.

I think that he must have interacted normally with those that he lived with and worked with.

The people around him on a daily basis must have noticed little things that weren't quite right, and they must have known that he was absent at the times of the murders. They may even have seen blood on him. They just simply didn't believe that he could be the Ripper, and so they, at the least, ignored the clues. At most, they provided unwitting false alibis or acted as a lookout.

[Jason]

like Sonia Sutcliffe perhaps ? possibly. When it comes to the whole witnesses/suspects malarkey, we have lots of individuals who gave testimony and statements to say they saw " this man " or "that man". At least one of these must be true, not a chance in hell that these murders took place in public places without at least one of these alleged sightings being the actual killer. i know we cannot prove one or another as being more credible. Could the Eddowes killer already have been in the square, and did not actually accompany her to the scene. Did his accomplice know she was in the police station ? did he meet her upon her release and take her to Mitre Square to meet her maker ? i know this may sound like lots of tosh but if we understood the motive for the killings then this reasoning may not be so far fetched as it appears. Unfortunately motive is one thing we are lacking, suspects are plenty.....

[Robert]

Hi Jason

I have never understood how the accomplice/lookout idea is supposed to have worked. Could you give a rundown of how it would have worked in Hanbury St? For example, was the accomplice standing at the back door looking up the passage, ready to give a warning whisper of "Man just entered passage. Over the fence, quick!"?

In Miller's Court, the only way I can see it working would be if the accomplice hung around inside the court ready to bash on the head anyone who tried to enter Kelly's room.

In Mitre Square, the accomplice would need to be positioned to notice all three entrances.

In Berner Street, was he supposed to give a low whistle if he noticed anybody at all walking down the street?

I suppose an accomplice might have worked in Buck's Row.

[Jason]

A person could have been stood across the road from 29......he could have diverted their attention should anyone have chosen to enter the premises....

Berner Street - dont believe it was a jack crime so havent really considered the requirement of a lookout.....

Mitre Square- if the beat of the bobby was regular and always followed a pattern then i suppose it could have been quite easy to station oneself at the point of the next expected patrol.....thats if they did it as regularly as they said they did.....one thing i have always believed is that the bobbys will have,lets say, over exaggerated their vigilance when it came to covering their turf. I dont believe for one minute that they did, and wouldnt be surprised to find out that they skipped a couple of patrols during an evening...

Millers Court - dont believe it was particularly well lit so surely wouldnt have been too difficult to hide oneself in there.....the right turn after Marys door would have been a nice little place to hide....quick tap on the window to give warning to the man inside.....not beyond the realms of possibility surely.

Like all theories it has flaws, but like all other theories, it is and will remain just that.