Sergeant Stephen White

[Michael W Richards]

I doubt if there was any accomplice. The only way I can see an accomplice being the slightest use to him, would be if it was a woman, to help gain the trust of the victims. But this is so far-fetched, it's really wandering into the realms of fantasy.

That may be so Robert, by to my recollection only Kate Eddowes Inquest ended with a verdict of Murder by Person unknown, the rest were all by Person or Persons unknown.

I can imagine how a lookout on some of the crimes may have been invaluable to the killer, for example watching the entrance to the courtyard off Dorset, or one or 2 of the alleys leading into Mitre Square.

Cheers

[Bridewell]

I doubt if there was any accomplice. The only way I can see an accomplice being the slightest use to him, would be if it was a woman, to help gain the trust of the victims. But this is so far-fetched, it's really wandering into the realms of fantasy.

It may be far-fetched where the Whitechapel Murders are concerned, but it's far from unheard of in the world of serial-killers as a whole, Myra Hindley and Rose West being obvious examples.

Just for the record, having reactivated this thread, I don't contend that there was an accomplice, female or otherwise. I just think the description of the body - cul-de-sac - against the wall - blood flowing along gutter - sounds more like the Stride murder than that of Kate Eddowes.

Disturbed killer? - Quick! Back to the Anderson Shelter!

[Robert]

I doubt if there was any accomplice. The only way I can see an accomplice being the slightest use to him, would be if it was a woman, to help gain the trust of the victims. But this is so far-fetched, it's really wandering into the realms of fantasy.

[jmenges]

In the case of a theoretical non-participatory accomplice, why would the accomplice stay perfectly silent and how could JtR be certain they would?

Maybe they remained silent because they were never identified, detained and threatened with serious charges by the police. The only case of a non-participatory accomplice to a serial killer I can think of entrapped the actual murderer into confessing their crimes in exchange for their own immunity, and in all likelihood they would have kept their mouth shut were it not for this threat of imprisonment.

JM

[Penhalion]

Its difficult to speculate on negative/unknowns. We can really only base our theories on known quantities otherwise I'm convinced that uncaught serial killers are aided by Martians but we don't know because they are never caught. In known serial killer pairs there's usually one who is dominant/in control and one who is submissive/follows. In pretty much all those cases the submissive half was the weak link. In the case of a theoretical non-participatory accomplice, why would the accomplice stay perfectly silent and how could JtR be certain they would?

[Tom_Wescott]

Is the idea of a non-participatory accomplice really practical? I can't think of any known instances of serial killers using them. All the accomplices I'm aware of participated in the events even if they were directed by or secondary to the lead killer. Teams of serial killers are rare enough to begin with.

Yes, but you base that only on captured serial killers. Serial killers operating with accomplices would be less likely to be caught. And I imagine only about 33% of serial killers are ever caught.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Penhalion]

Is the idea of a non-participatory accomplice really practical? I can't think of any known instances of serial killers using them. All the accomplices I'm aware of participated in the events even if they were directed by or secondary to the lead killer. Teams of serial killers are rare enough to begin with.

[Bridewell]

The Location of he White Sighting

I've just been having another read through White's encounter. I've always supposed that Castle Alley was the best fit for the location:
"a certain alley just behind the Whitechapel Road".

For whatever reason the police had been watching this 'alley' for five nights. That's a lot of time to devote to an operation of that nature and brought me back to the IWMEC on Berner Street. None of the murders really fits but, if White's "Whitechapel Road" reference is an error, wouldn't Dutfields Yard be a better fit than most? This is what he says about the discovery of the body, the part of the incident which (to my mind) is most likely to stick in the memory:

"At the end of the cul-de-sac, huddled against the wall, there was the body of a woman, and a pool of blood was streaming along the gutter from her body".

Someone suggested, near the beginning of this thread and in jocular fashion, that White might have been 'Pipeman'. I don't necessarily go along with that, but should the possibility that White was alluding to the Stride murder be lightly dismissed?

Before I retire to my Anderson Shelter to await the inevitable bombardment, can I point out that I am only suggesting that the matter is worthy of discussion, not that it was necessarily the fact of the matter?

[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.

[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]

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.....

[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]

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 !

[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.

[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.