A night walk around Mitre Square (PC Watkin's route)

[richardh]

I've uploaded a video of a walk around Mitre Square to try to demonstrate the available light and conditions in the square on the night of the murder. And the view that Watkins (and others) might have had when walking the vicinity of the square.

https://youtu.be/WutzuO2ssP0

[BooksbyBJThompson]

I've uploaded a video of a walk around Mitre Square to try to demonstrate the available light and conditions in the square on the night of the murder. And the view that Watkins (and others) might have had when walking the vicinity of the square.
https://youtu.be/WutzuO2ssP0

Fannnntastic!

I started a new threat in this as I couldn't find your original post here. Your vid is a mic drop moment. The mystery of which PC was where, seeing what, is NOT a mystery. You practically had to trip over bodies to see them.

Great video!!!! Love it.

[Yabs]

Amazing stuff, Rich.

[Curious Cat]

It's a very good video but in terms of light it maybe doesn't quite take into account how eyes adjust to the dark. Looking into certain areas of the square the darkness remains on the same level whereas the human eye would naturally filter through this over a couple of minutes, quicker if in similar low levels of light for a while already.

Dr Sequeria said the square was dark but not so much that killer could not see what they were doing. This assessment was done after the door at Kearley & Tonge had been opened by George Morris, providing an extra source of light. If you are able to, is it possible to add this feature to see how far the extra light reaches into the square?

[Christian]

I've uploaded a video of a walk around Mitre Square to try to demonstrate the available light and conditions in the square on the night of the murder. And the view that Watkins (and others) might have had when walking the vicinity of the square.
https://youtu.be/WutzuO2ssP0

Brilliant thanks for sharing

[richardh]

It's a very good video but in terms of light it maybe doesn't quite take into account how eyes adjust to the dark. Looking into certain areas of the square the darkness remains on the same level whereas the human eye would naturally filter through this over a couple of minutes, quicker if in similar low levels of light for a while already.

Dr Sequeria said the square was dark but not so much that killer could not see what they were doing. This assessment was done after the door at Kearley & Tonge had been opened by George Morris, providing an extra source of light. If you are able to, is it possible to add this feature to see how far the extra light reaches into the square?

Agreed.
However, for those people walking from a dark area to a light area (walking up Church passage toward the square), you would get a light flare (blowout) from the gas lamp which would pretty much blot out anything behind the lamp (the view into the square and toward ripper corner). The same would apply to the lampost in the square.
The 'extra light' provided when Morris opened the K&T door would, IMO, do little to help. The Door was near the vicinity of the lampost quite far away from ripper corner. If the lampost light didn't reach ripper corner then the door light wouldn't.

You are right too in that watching a video is very different from actually being IN a real-life situation which WOULD allow your eyes to get accustomed to the different levels of light available. Also, even though I was walking the area in real-time, I was using a VR headset that doesn't possess the same resolution as the human eye. The blacks are not true black and the pixel resolution is just not on the same level as the human eye so there are definite and probably unresolvable limitations to these kinds of demonstrations.

I will fiddle with the scene and try to get it better. The scene was created as a VR environment of Mitre Square and I didn;t really put any effort into getting real-life lighting conditions. I'll revisit the model and give it an update to see if I can get closer.

thanks

[Joshua Rogan]

Superbly atmospheric, Richard.

I tend to agree that in reality the viewers eyes would adjust to the darkness and give better vision, at least when a light source isn't shining directly into them. Is it possible to model shading your eyes?
Other than that, the only (minor) criticism I have is that in the commentary you kept referring to your "bulldog" lantern, rather than bullseye.
Although, having just googled it, they do seem to be a thing!

[richardh]

Superbly atmospheric, Richard.

I tend to agree that in reality the viewers eyes would adjust to the darkness and give better vision, at least when a light source isn't shining directly into them. Is it possible to model shading your eyes?
Other than that, the only (minor) criticism I have is that in the commentary you kept referring to your "bulldog" lantern, rather than bullseye.
Although, having just googled it, they do seem to be a thing!

Yep. I put a 'disclaimer/apology' on the video description about me referring to it as a 'bulldog'!

[Joshua Rogan]

Yep. I put a 'disclaimer/apology' on the video description about me referring to it as a 'bulldog'!

No worries

[Scott Nelson]

Dr Sequeria said the square was dark but not so much that killer could not see what they were doing. This assessment was done after the door at Kearley & Tonge had been opened by George Morris, providing an extra source of light.

Is there a source for this statement? I don't recall it in the inquest testimony. It seems to me that Sequeria would have made the lighting assessment at the time of the murder with the warehouse door closed.

[Curious Cat]

Is there a source for this statement? I don't recall it in the inquest testimony. It seems to me that Sequeria would have made the lighting assessment at the time of the murder with the warehouse door closed.

In bold...


Dr. G. W. Sequeira, surgeon, of No. 34, Jewry-street, Aldgate, deposed: On the morning of Sept. 30 I was called to Mitre-square, and I arrived at five minutes to two o'clock, being the first medical man on the scene of the murder. I saw the position of the body, and I entirely agree with the evidence of Dr. Gordon Brown in that respect.
By Mr. Crawford: I am well acquainted with the locality and the position of the lamps in the square. Where the murder was committed was probably the darkest part of the square, but there was sufficient light to enable the miscreant to perpetrate the deed. I think that the murderer had no design on any particular organ of the body. He was not possessed of any great anatomical skill.
[Coroner] Can you account for the absence of noise? - The death must have been instantaneous after the severance of the windpipe and the blood-vessels.
[Coroner] Would you have expected the murderer to be bespattered with blood? - Not necessarily.
[Coroner] How long do you believe life had been extinct when you arrived? - Very few minutes - probably not more than a quarter of an hour.


I'm saying Dr Sequeira would have made the assessment of the available light in the square while that door was open. George Morris says he opened it slightly before the discovery of the body. The question is what difference the light from the door made to the darkness of the square? Would it have reflected around or was it a single line one of light on one direction?

[richardh]

"but there was sufficient light to enable the miscreant to perpetrate the deed"
This is a non-statement.
The deed was committed. The perp might have been totally blind (literally or due to lack of light) but the deed was still committed. The light has no bearing on the perp committing the act. If he'd had a bag on his head he still committed the act. Hack and slash is the same whether it's done in broad daylight or pitch dark.

[Curious Cat]

"but there was sufficient light to enable the miscreant to perpetrate the deed"
This is a non-statement.
The deed was committed. The perp might have been totally blind (literally or due to lack of light) but the deed was still committed. The light has no bearing on the perp committing the act. If he'd had a bag on his head he still committed the act. Hack and slash is the same whether it's done in broad daylight or pitch dark.

Well that's not entirely true, is it? The killer did not carry out the murder and mutilations in absolute darkness. Yes the act was done but the square, even that corner, was not pitch black to point of zero visibility. How much light from the door George Morris opened brought into the square and in which direction the light fell could be important in determining if it was enough to disturb the killer in that corner or even aid the killer in seeing what they were doing.

[richardh]

Well that's not entirely true, is it? The killer did not carry out the murder and mutilations in absolute darkness. Yes the act was done but the square, even that corner, was not pitch black to point of zero visibility. How much light from the door George Morris opened brought into the square and in which direction the light fell could be important in determining if it was enough to disturb the killer in that corner or even aid the killer in seeing what they were doing.

I fancy that corner of the square (ripper corner) was in almost complete darkness (Pitch dak IMO) during the murder. The lights from the lampost and the George Morris doorway would not have reached into that corner. Without a source of light on his person, the ripper would have been working (slashing) in total darkness. Also, while carrying out the deed, he would be taking fleeting glances into the light (the bright lamp at Duke street passage and the brightness of the lampost. this would mean he would be glancing from light to pitch black dozens of times during the attack. His eyes would constantly have to get acclimatized from light to dark as he worked. the darkness of that corner would be 95% - 97% dark.

I live in an area that has almost zero light pollution at night (live in the countryside). We have a single lamp in the area and that throws enough light to see a bit. But if I move 20 feet from the lamp and look at my feet I cannot see them. I can see my hands because the skin colour reflects a bit of the lamplight. but dark colours, clothes etc are not visible. If I look at the light of the lamp and then back down at my hands it takes a few seconds at least for my eyes to acclimatize and see the vague outline of my hands.

I think he was working almost entirely blind.

[Curious Cat]

I fancy that corner of the square (ripper corner) was in almost complete darkness (Pitch dak IMO) during the murder. The lights from the lampost and the George Morris doorway would not have reached into that corner. Without a source of light on his person, the ripper would have been working (slashing) in total darkness. Also, while carrying out the deed, he would be taking fleeting glances into the light (the bright lamp at Duke street passage and the brightness of the lampost. this would mean he would be glancing from light to pitch black dozens of times during the attack. His eyes would constantly have to get acclimatized from light to dark as he worked. the darkness of that corner would be 95% - 97% dark.

I live in an area that has almost zero light pollution at night (live in the countryside). We have a single lamp in the area and that throws enough light to see a bit. But if I move 20 feet from the lamp and look at my feet I cannot see them. I can see my hands because the skin colour reflects a bit of the lamplight. but dark colours, clothes etc are not visible. If I look at the light of the lamp and then back down at my hands it takes a few seconds at least for my eyes to acclimatize and see the vague outline of my hands.

I think he was working almost entirely blind.

In which case, what is the argument for the killer's need to fuel the fire at 13 Miller's Court in order to see what they doing when carrying out the murder and mutilations there?

Another point about the light from the door is that it's a shifting feature. In that, the lamps and their reach are fixed throughout but the light from the door is an addition that occurs within the situation. It's not there at the start but is there at the end. The scene of the crime, however small, changes within the space of time the murder happens. Not before or after the discovery of the body, but in between.