Suspect Witnesses?

[Sunny Delight]

Hi Sunny,

Serving someone near where a murder is then committed would indeed not be forgettable...if you had foreknowledge of what was about to happen. Packer was asked if he saw anyone standing about OR anyone suspicious. What he was being asked was did he see anyone lurking about in a suspicious manner. One couple among many in the street that night could not have aroused his suspicions. He was not seeing anything unusual, anything that he hadn't seen on countless previous occasions.

Cheers, George

No he was asked did he see anyone standing about or anyone acting suspiciously. So he was asked explicitly did he see anyone standing about. He told Sgt White he hadn't. Yet he had seen someone standing about- a man and a woman no less, for a half an hour almost directly beside the murder scene.

Then once approach by Le Grande, a known fraudster and confidence trickster he suddenly remembers this couple standing about and that he had sold the grapes and even commented upon them. I think it is fair to say and easy to come to the conclusion that Packer was used by Le Grande for whatever purpose, whether that was to show the Vigilance Committee he was really good at his job, or he wanted the reward, as he was sure Parcel Man was the killer so best to put a description as close to PC Smith's as possible through Packer.

But be honest, do you think Parcel Man killed Stride and if so, as Wickerman does, do you think it is clouding your judgement.

[Doctored Whatsit]

To be honest Doc, I doubt there ever was an official police opinion. The 'no-one ever saw the Ripper' is just the opinion of one official, and the rest of that quote refers to 'except the PC in Mitre Sq.', which is more likely an erroneous reference to the PC in Berner St. (PC Smith), because that official did confuse details of the Mitre Sq. murder with Berner Street.

I don't know if anyone else has noticed, but the memo by Insp. Moore is not at all clear, and unfortunately I don't have a copy of the original, this is the modern typed version below.

Metropolitan Police.
CID Scotland Yard.
4^th October 1888.

Referring to attached Extract from 2^nd Edition “Evening News”, of this date.

I beg to report that as soon as above came under my notice I at once (in the absence of Inspr. Abberline at C.O.) directed P.S. White, “H”, to see Mr. Packer, the shopkeeper referred to, and take him to the mortuary with a view to the identification of the woman Elizabeth Stride; who it is stated was with a man who purchased grapes at his shop on night of 29^th Ins.
The P.S. returned at noon and acquainted me as in report attached; in consequence of which Telegram No. 1 was forwarded to Chief Inspr Swanson and the P.S. Sent to C.O. to fully explain the facts.

Telegram No. 2. was received at 12.55pm from Assistant Commissioner re same subject; in reply to which Telegram No. 3 was forwarded.

Henry Moore, Inspector.

What is unclear about this is the date of the memo is 4th Oct., but reference is then made to the 2nd edition of the Evening News, of the same date.

The Evening News is, as stated, an evening publication. In general evening publications hit the presses between 3:00-5:00 pm. A 2nd edition would follow about 5:00-6:00 pm, I don't have specific times for the Evening news but if Insp. Moore read, or was given the article then it must have been in the evening of the 4th.
So, if he directed Sgt. White to go see Packer that must have been the same evening.
But, the second paragraph tells us that the P.S. (Sgt. White) returned at noon, but it is already evening when Moore first became aware of the story.

Then, on Sg.t White's report he says "on the 4th" he was directed to go find Packer, and that about 4:00 pm he found Packer at his shop (house), so how could he have returned "at noon"?
And yet, it seems inconceivable that Moore would let this wait until the morning of the 5th, in such a high profile case.

All these activities cannot have happened on the same day, if they are both reacting to the Evening News story of the 4th Oct.

I have to wonder if Scotland Yard had not received a story about Packer before the 4th, perhaps on the 3rd. Insp. Moore only realized Abberline had not taken up the investigation due to him being 'absent', so the police were late in responding. The task was assigned to Sgt. White on the morning of the 4th.
So, why do both memos (1st by Moore, 2nd by White) refer to the Evening News dated 4th Oct.?
Which is why I would like to see the original, if those lines of reference appear to have been added later in a different hand as a means of explaining what these memos are with reference to.

If this is the case, then what was the original source that brought Packer's story to the attention of police?

Hi Jon,

You are right to be confused! It seems that the Evening News journalist saw Packer on the 3rd, and it published the article on the 4th, but Sgt White and AC Bruce also date their reports on the 4th!

The Evening News must have had a morning edition, I suppose, or Inspector Moore was a time-traveller.

[Wickerman]

Hi Jon,

You are right to be confused! It seems that the Evening News journalist saw Packer on the 3rd, and it published the article on the 4th, but Sgt White and AC Bruce also date their reports on the 4th!

The Evening News must have had a morning edition, I suppose, or Inspector Moore was a time-traveller.

I have researched the history of the Evening News and it doesn't seem they ever ran a morning paper in 1888 or any other period.

Yet, the first line of their story, as I have previously referred to, was written in the morning, but by whom?

"We are enabled to present our readers this morning in the columns of the Evening News with the most startling information . ."

https://www.casebook.org/press_reports/evening_news/18881004.html

The article does say Packer has been interviewed twice before this report is committed to paper, but the writer is not Grand or Batchelor. Someone else perhaps at the paper, is the author.

Alternately, I wondered if this story originated at a News Agency, and the Evening News bought the story?