Jack's Escape Route?

[Herlock Sholmes]

As far as the timings are concerned the only thing we can be sure of is that if the couple seen standing talking were the killer and Eddowes then we have no time to show what time they moved off into the square, so all the timings that you and others keep juggling with are irrelevant in the attempt to prove the old accepted theory that the killer had the time to do all that he is alleged to have done, becasue the later they moved of the less time for the killer to do all that he is alleged to have done

I don’t know why you persist with this point Trevor? Unless you can prove that they stood around for any length of time it gets you nowhere. Can it be proven that the couple went immediately into Mitre Square as soon as the three witnesses passed? Of course it can’t. Neither an earlier nor a later move can be proven, so the point doesn’t favour either side of the debate. All that we are left with is an estimation of how long the killer might have had in Mitre Square. Add this to the obvious point that we can’t be certain of the exact time that Lawende and co moved on and we have have a fairly wide range of possible time periods. And so from this we can say that the killer might have had 10 minutes or so in Mitre Square and unless this can be challenged with solid facts we can get no further.

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor, Watkins left the square about 1:30, and returned about 1:44.
Harvey tells us he was in Aldgate about 1:28/9, and might have been at the end of Church Passage about 1:41/2.

So, it looks to me like our time window is from Watkins leaving the square about 1:30, to Harvey arriving at the end of Church Passage about 1:41 - which gives the killer 11 minutes.
Eddowes was murdered & mutilated sometime within those 11 minutes.

Now, on top of this we must add the report by the Star that Blenkingsop, who was in St. James Place, that some people passed him about 1:30, presumably on their way to the square, otherwise, the report has no value.

The Blenkingsop report takes advantage of the full 11 minutes, whereas if we use the Lawende sighting at 1:35 we must reduce the 11 minutes to less than 6 minutes (1:35-1:41), presumably no-one suggests the murder & mutilation could have been performed in 3 minutes? (1:41-1:44).
Therefore, to assume Lawende saw the killer with Eddowes we must accept the killer walked Eddowes down Church Passage and across the square after 1:35, then murdered & mutilated her and leaving the square by 1:41.
6 minutes is not impossible.

It could also be argued that although Harvey did reach the end of the passage about 1:41/2, he could not see across the square. The killer simply stopped what he was doing and did not move while Harvey stood momentarily at the end of the passage. Which would extend the 6 minutes to 9 minutes (1:35-1:44).
Against this we must ask how the killer knew Harvey would not enter the square?

It could also be argued that Eddowes was only murdered in the square, and that some mutilations were done elsewhere. In which case the time required is irrelevant, 1 or 2 minutes is all that would be necessary.
Against this we have clear testimony that some internal organs were clearly visible outside the body as it lay in the square.

One thing to keep in mind is, the only reason we have Lawende's testimony is because the police interviewed him as a result of their door-to-door inquiry, not because he came forward to police. Had Lawende lived outside the area then quite possibly we wouldn't know anything about him or what he saw. Other witnesses, including Blenkingsop do not seem to have bothered to come forward either.

It has to be borne in mind that all the times given by all the witnesses are purely estimates and should not be relied on as being accurate

As far as the timings are concerned the only thing we can be sure of is that if the couple seen standing talking were the killer and Eddowes then we have no time to show what time they moved off into the square, so all the timings that you and others keep juggling with are irrelevant in the attempt to prove the old accepted theory that the killer had the time to do all that he is alleged to have done, becasue the later they moved of the less time for the killer to do all that he is alleged to have done

As to Harvey if the killer was still with Eddowes when Harvey started his walk down Church Passage he would have been visible to the killer by reason of the two lights in Church passage one at the entrance, and one oustide Kearley and Tonges, But Harvey would not have at any point been able to see the killer by reason of the light in his eyes from the lamps and even when he got to the square it would have taken time for his eyes to have ajusted to the darkness.

Now if you were the killer in that same situation and you saw and heard a policeman coming down the path in your direction a persons natural instict and the fear of being detected would kick in and you would make good your escape hastily which is clearly what the killer must have done

If as is being suggested the Eddowes was not the woman seen then I have to ask how come she was not seen by any of the police officers who were on duty in and around the square, Harvey,Watkins and the Detectives who were also in the immediate area.

If she was prostituting herself then a drinking club would be the ideal spot to look for a punter, we saw that with the Stride murder and the dar corner of Mitre Square and ideal spot to take a punter

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[FISHY1118]

"Yes officer, that was me with that prostitute, but don't tell my wife".

Really?, does a seasoned police officer like yourself really expect the man to come forward in those circumstances?
1 - The police clearly think the man is a suspect in a murder inquiry.
2 - The man risks ruining his personal life, or even his marriage, if he came forward.

The fact remains Lawende was not permitted to view the corpse because he never saw the face of the victim. Which means the possibility that Lawende saw Eddowes is purely an assumption. Women of the night all wore similar clothes, it's just that we don't know what 'similar' means in that circumstance.

Exactly,Thank Goodness someone gets it . . its the simplest explanation as to why it might not of been Eddowes, most dont see it tho .

[Wickerman]

But you appear to have not factored in Pc Watkins times, he enters the square at 1.30am he walks around the square checking the properties before leaving, and then returns at 1.44am if he is to be believed the couple were not in the square the first time time. You then need to factor in Pc Harveys time and after that you arrive at the conclusion that the killer did not have the time to do all that he is alleged to have done even working on a start time of 1.35am which cannot be deemed to be an accurate start time

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Trevor, Watkins left the square about 1:30, and returned about 1:44.
Harvey tells us he was in Aldgate about 1:28/9, and might have been at the end of Church Passage about 1:41/2.

So, it looks to me like our time window is from Watkins leaving the square about 1:30, to Harvey arriving at the end of Church Passage about 1:41 - which gives the killer 11 minutes.
Eddowes was murdered & mutilated sometime within those 11 minutes.

Now, on top of this we must add the report by the Star that Blenkingsop, who was in St. James Place, that some people passed him about 1:30, presumably on their way to the square, otherwise, the report has no value.

The Blenkingsop report takes advantage of the full 11 minutes, whereas if we use the Lawende sighting at 1:35 we must reduce the 11 minutes to less than 6 minutes (1:35-1:41), presumably no-one suggests the murder & mutilation could have been performed in 3 minutes? (1:41-1:44).
Therefore, to assume Lawende saw the killer with Eddowes we must accept the killer walked Eddowes down Church Passage and across the square after 1:35, then murdered & mutilated her and leaving the square by 1:41.
6 minutes is not impossible.

It could also be argued that although Harvey did reach the end of the passage about 1:41/2, he could not see across the square. The killer simply stopped what he was doing and did not move while Harvey stood momentarily at the end of the passage. Which would extend the 6 minutes to 9 minutes (1:35-1:44).
Against this we must ask how the killer knew Harvey would not enter the square?

It could also be argued that Eddowes was only murdered in the square, and that some mutilations were done elsewhere. In which case the time required is irrelevant, 1 or 2 minutes is all that would be necessary.
Against this we have clear testimony that some internal organs were clearly visible outside the body as it lay in the square.

One thing to keep in mind is, the only reason we have Lawende's testimony is because the police interviewed him as a result of their door-to-door inquiry, not because he came forward to police. Had Lawende lived outside the area then quite possibly we wouldn't know anything about him or what he saw. Other witnesses, including Blenkingsop do not seem to have bothered to come forward either.

[FISHY1118]

Infer: making decisions based on evidence or facts, usually based on a logical process

Speculate: making assumptions without reference to facts

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Feel free to explain exactly how identifying a bonnet and a jacket that looked similar to that which the women was wearing infers or proves that they belong to eddowes ,? and that she was wearing them on that night .

[Wickerman]

Well seeing as the police who were in the area did not see any other couple and as no other couple came forward. I think it is right that we can draw a proper inference that the couple see were Eddowes and the killer, as a previous poster posted the description of the female which appeared to coincide with the decsription of Eddowes

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

"Yes officer, that was me with that prostitute, but don't tell my wife".

Really?, does a seasoned police officer like yourself really expect the man to come forward in those circumstances?
1 - The police clearly think the man is a suspect in a murder inquiry.
2 - The man risks ruining his personal life, or even his marriage, if he came forward.

The fact remains Lawende was not permitted to view the corpse because he never saw the face of the victim. Which means the possibility that Lawende saw Eddowes is purely an assumption. Women of the night all wore similar clothes, it's just that we don't know what 'similar' means in that circumstance.

[Trevor Marriott]

That may very well be the case, however we can't speculate as to what another couple if it were them would or wouldn't do , the only description from lawende was of a black jacket and black bonnet,

Infer: making decisions based on evidence or facts, usually based on a logical process

Speculate: making assumptions without reference to facts

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[FISHY1118]

Well seeing as the police who were in the area did not see any other couple and as no other couple came forward. I think it is right that we can draw a proper inference that the couple see were Eddowes and the killer, as a previous poster posted the description of the female which appeared to coincide with the decsription of Eddowes

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

That may very well be the case, however we can't speculate as to what another couple if it were them would or wouldn't do , the only description from lawende was of a black jacket and black bonnet,

[Trevor Marriott]

Only if they were the couple of Eddowes and JtR. Which no one can give a definitive answer either.

Well seeing as the police who were in the area did not see any other couple and as no other couple came forward. I think it is right that we can draw a proper inference that the couple see were Eddowes and the killer, as a previous poster posted the description of the female which appeared to coincide with the decsription of Eddowes

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[FISHY1118]

Well again its open to individual interpretation, I guess if you want to try to show the killer had more time with the victim than he may have had then you will stick to that theory, but not you nor anyone can give a definitive answer as to what time the couple left the spot where they were seen standing talking to go into the Square, and thats where the theory that the killer did have enough time to murder mutilate and remove organs if flawed.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Only if they were the couple of Eddowes and JtR. Which no one can give a definitive answer either.

[Trevor Marriott]

Watkins said he passed through mitre square at 1.30am, i take that as he already checked the square and passages so when he left the square it was 1.30am .

Well again its open to individual interpretation, I guess if you want to try to show the killer had more time with the victim than he may have had then you will stick to that theory, but not you nor anyone can give a definitive answer as to what time the couple left the spot where they were seen standing talking to go into the Square, and thats where the theory that the killer did have enough time to murder mutilate and remove organs if flawed.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[DJA]

Edward Watkin, No. 881 of the City Police, said: I was on duty at Mitre-square on Saturday night. I have been in the force seventeen years. I went on duty at 9.45 upon my regular beat. That extends from Duke-street, Aldgate, through Heneage-lane, a portion of Bury-street, through Cree-lane, into Leadenhall-street, along eastward into Mitre-street, then into Mitre-square, round the square again into Mitre-street, then into King-street to St. James's-place, round the place, then into Duke-street, where I started from. That beat takes twelve or fourteen minutes. I had been patrolling the beat continually from ten o'clock at night until one o'clock on Sunday morning.
[Coroner] Had anything excited your attention during those hours? - No.
[Coroner] Or any person? - No. I passed through Mitre-square at 1.30 on the Sunday morning. I had my lantern alight and on - fixed to my belt. According to my usual practice, I looked at the different passages and corners.
[Coroner] At half-past one did anything excite your attention? - No.
[Coroner] Did you see anyone about? - No.
[Coroner] Could any people have been about that portion of the square without your seeing them? - No. I next came into Mitre-square at 1.44, when I discovered the body lying on the right as I entered the square.

[FISHY1118]

But you appear to have not factored in Pc Watkins times, he enters the square at 1.30am he walks around the square checking the properties before leaving, and then returns at 1.44am if he is to be believed the couple were not in the square the first time time. You then need to factor in Pc Harveys time and after that you arrive at the conclusion that the killer did not have the time to do all that he is alleged to have done even working on a start time of 1.35am which cannot be deemed to be an accurate start time

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Watkins said he passed through mitre square at 1.30am, i take that as he already checked the square and passages so when he left the square it was 1.30am .

[FISHY1118]

That's exactly what I suggested you had possibly meant.



Assuming your timings, but there's a huge amount of dubiety in your scenario already.



It certainly makes sense for them to wait until PC Harvey had walked back out of Church Passage (assuming he even went down it). I'm sure Jeff's video would tell us more or less what time that would have been. Either way, I wouldn't get too hung up on Lawende's 1.35am (if it was he who cited it, I don't recall) as I can't imagine clocks and watches were on radio signals back then.

Hold on, I'm getting confused - weren't you arguing that they entered via Mitre Street and therefore knew nothing of the couple, Lawende, or PC Harvey?

So, you're saying entering via Mitre Street gives Jack 12-14 minutes. Entering via Church Passage gives him 8 minutes? (I can be very slow in the mornings.)

I think your first premise is probably reasonable (given PC Watkins' beat), but I don't think we can rule out:

1) Entry via Church Passage;
2) Jack having a great deal more than 8 minutes as a result; and
3) Eight minutes potentially being sufficient time to do what he did.

Ike

My apoligies Ike . I meant P.C Watkins ,not Harvey. Watkins who left the square via mitre street at 1.30 , and returned at 1.44 thats when i believe eddowes and the killer entered.

[Trevor Marriott]

No. I ment this , 1.35am when Lawende said they passed the couple , allowing for the senario they left right after that , 2 mins to get into kill position 1.37am ,1.45am when the body is discovered = 8 mins for mutlilation organ removal . My thoery is if they entred the square as soon as Harvey left till he returned then there is possible 12/14 mins to complete the deed .

But you appear to have not factored in Pc Watkins times, he enters the square at 1.30am he walks around the square checking the properties before leaving, and then returns at 1.44am if he is to be believed the couple were not in the square the first time time. You then need to factor in Pc Harveys time and after that you arrive at the conclusion that the killer did not have the time to do all that he is alleged to have done even working on a start time of 1.35am which cannot be deemed to be an accurate start time

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk