Broad Shoulders, Elizabeth's Killer ?

[Sunny Delight]

There isn't anything that is indisputable, but then again, I'm obviously not a serious student of the case.

Apologies for that, it should have said other serious students of the case. I did not mean to be derogatory as I know you have spent many years trying to piece things together.

I just think you are badly misguided when it comes to Packer and I think the Police had it right from the beginning with him.

[The Rookie Detective]

The couple seen by Marshall walked down Berner St. - "They went away down the street, towards Ellen-street."
This sighting was between 11:30 - 12:00, but Stride was at the Bricklayers Arms in Settles St. about 11:00 pm.

Jon, did the couple seen by Marshall take the same route that Schwartz ran when he fled from the scene of the assault?

Am I correct when I say.that Schwartz stated 22 Ellen Street as an address?

[Wickerman]

Apologies for that, it should have said other serious students of the case. I did not mean to be derogatory as I know you have spent many years trying to piece things together.

I just think you are badly misguided when it comes to Packer and I think the Police had it right from the beginning with him.

Oh heck no, I was only teasing, no need to apologize.
I often take a contrary view if I think we are throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
I think this is one of those cases, certainly Packer was confused but we know his 11:00-11:30 was wrong, Stride was seen elsewhere at 11:00 pm, which means the 11:45-12:30 window must have been the correct version, which matches up with P.C. Smith's statement.

It can't be dismissed that Packer handing a package to a man who was with Stride, who stood in the street about 12:30, is confirmed by P.C. Smith who also saw a man accompanying Stride, carrying a package, about 12:30.
Which means something of what Packer say's is true.

The description Packer gave of Parcel-man is different enough to what P.C. Smith said to show he was not trying to copy Smith's statement. If that is all it was then obviously Packer would have repeated Smith's published description, which he didn't.
I think Packer was trying to be honest.

I feel there's too many theories in this case that involve 'plotting' or conspiracy. Packer was just a poor witness who tried to resist getting involved at first. Nothing what he told Sgt. White was untrue, he really did not see anyone go up the yard, and he had not seen anything suspicious. All he saw were various people moving around the street, there's nothing suspicious about that.

[Herlock Sholmes]

What are the chances that when White went around doing a door to door the Packers weren’t home? He intended to go back but maybe he forgot? Maybe they weren’t in a second time? Packer did say that the police hadn’t spoken to him. Maybe he was telling the truth on that point at least?

[Wickerman]

Are you able to add a dot to where Packer said he saw the couple who bought grapes standing for over half an hour?

I had used all the colours in the edit program, so I would have to use the red dot to show where Packer served Stride, who then crossed over to stand a while, before crossing back to stand by the yard, or the club, as he said.

[Wickerman]

What are the chances that when White went around doing a door to door the Packers weren’t home? He intended to go back but maybe he forgot? Maybe they weren’t in a second time? Packer did say that the police hadn’t spoken to him. Maybe he was telling the truth on that point at least?

There will have been journalists and detectives going door to door early that morning. I can see Packer being confused over who he spoke to, possibly thought the Det. was another journalist?

If we look at the timing, it appears Sgt. White called early that morning (30th), as he described, but then a journalist from the Evening News interviewed Packer on the 4th. The police cut the story from the evening edition and clipped it to the internal report, they returned to clarify things with Packer on the evening of the 4th.
Sgt. White's report must have been written later that day.
There are three police memo's all dated the 4th Oct.

Sgt. White asked Packer if he saw anyone standing about in the street, if Packer was thinking he meant the killer, then no, he didn't see anyone standing around. Even though there were people about, none of them looked suspicious to him, none of them looked like they were loitering around with intentions of killing someone.

Rather than accuse Packer of lying, I prefer to try understand the interaction and the possible miscommunication which can often happen with witnesses.

[Wickerman]

Jon, did the couple seen by Marshall take the same route that Schwartz ran when he fled from the scene of the assault?

Am I correct when I say.that Schwartz stated 22 Ellen Street as an address?

The direction Schwartz ran is open to debate, no-one is really sure, but it was Swanson who gave 22 Ellen St. as Schwartz's address. Whether that was his old address or the new one is another question.
The couple seen by Marshall walked south towards Ellen St.

[DJA]

Prolly his new address.

[Herlock Sholmes]

There will have been journalists and detectives going door to door early that morning. I can see Packer being confused over who he spoke to, possibly thought the Det. was another journalist?

If we look at the timing, it appears Sgt. White called early that morning (30th), as he described, but then a journalist from the Evening News interviewed Packer on the 4th. The police cut the story from the evening edition and clipped it to the internal report, they returned to clarify things with Packer on the evening of the 4th.
Sgt. White's report must have been written later that day.
There are three police memo's all dated the 4th Oct.

Sgt. White asked Packer if he saw anyone standing about in the street, if Packer was thinking he meant the killer, then no, he didn't see anyone standing around. Even though there were people about, none of them looked suspicious to him, none of them looked like they were loitering around with intentions of killing someone.

Rather than accuse Packer of lying, I prefer to try understand the interaction and the possible miscommunication which can often happen with witnesses.

I think it’s time I had a Packer re-read over the weekend. It’s been a while.