Hanbury Street to Blackheath in 6 hours?

[Chris]

It's been suggested on another thread by Ben that the timing would be "very tight" for Druitt to have murdered Annie Chapman at about 5.30am in Hanbury Street and returned to Blackheath in time for a cricket match at 11.30 later the same morning.

Specifically, Ben agreed that his objection was that "it would have been difficult for Druitt to do all that he would have had to do between the time of the murder and the time of the cricket match".

So I thought it might be useful to look at a possible itinerary in detail. I should make it clear that I don't have information about train times in 1888, so I have simply based the timings on the rail services that are available in 2008. If there's any objection to that procedure, it may be that someone can provide more information about the railway timetable in 1888.

I'll take as my basis the list of tasks that Ben suggested would have to be accomplished by the murderer:

When we take into account the time required to murder, eviscerate, escape, conceal any trophies, compose onesself (presumably),

I hope we can agree that all this had been done by 6am, when the body was discovered.

walk a not inconsiderable distance,

If Druitt walked to London Bridge, that would be perhaps one and a quarter miles as the crow flies. So allowing for the fact that he couldn't walk in a straight line, let's up that to one and three quarter miles. And assuming that he walked at only 2 miles an hour, that would take 52.5 minutes or - being generous, an hour. So Druitt would reach London Bridge station at about 7am.

wait for train,

Currently there are 4 trains an hour from London Bridge to Blackheath at that time on a Saturday morning. Let's assume only 2 an hour, and that Druitt had to wait the maximum possible time between trains - 30 minutes. That takes us to 7.30am.

return home on the train,

Currently the journey from London Bridge to Blackheath takes between 11 and 13 minutes. Lets up that to 20 minutes to be on the safe side. That takes us to 7.50am.

walk to his home from the station,

Probably a five-minute walk, but let's be generous and allow 10, taking us to 8.00am.

And there I think I'll leave the detailed timings. Having bent over backwards to allow Druitt to dawdle back from the murder scene, he is home by 8am, and has another three and a half hours to get ready for his cricket match.

By no stretch of the imagination can this timing be described as "tight". Let alone "very tight".

[Brenda]

He would have had time to clean up, plus catch a short nap!

[Ben]

Thanks for that, Chris.

Thing is, he would also have needed to wash, change, stash away his organs and knife, don his whites and head for the pitch preparatory to playing cricket, and the match started when? He was certainly there by 11:30am, but was that when the game started? Highly doubtful in my view. I'd urge some caution when using train times for 2008, at a time when trains are more frequent and certainly faster. I'm also inclined to allow more time for consideration of his next move. The above is based on a perceived shedule that I suggested, but whether "Druitt the Ripper" had the inclination of the wherewithal to map it all out in his mind beforehand and carry it out to the letter is more doubtful.

There's no physical obstacle to his being able to commit the crime as far as we're aware, but "tight" is the word I'd use to describe it in terms of plausibility. Or as Sugden would have it, "distinctly unlikely". As Gareth astutely observed on the podcast, a debate over semantics and whether people like or dislike my application of the word "tight" run the risk of allowing the "distinctly unlikely but possible" to mutate into the probable.

Thanks again,

Ben

[Ben]

He was certainly there by 11:30am, but was that when the game started?

Addendum to the above, it's also worth pointing out that cricketers invariably congregate some considerable time prior to the start of the match.

[White-Knight]

Ben,

It simply isn't 'tight' at all! , as Chris has demonstrated , more than adequately, or except by the most incredibly harsh interpretation..what would you call 'loose' or comfortable? a couple of days , a week..exactly how long do you think he would have planned in, if he was working around the cricket matches?

As for arriving before the match...'invariably' is great! I think it might just be mutating into 'usually' as we speak, having begun life as 'occasionally' ,'sometimes' or even 'now and again'..the last being the phrase my cricket playing friend used to describe how often his team congregate 'some considerable time prior to the start of the match'!

I don't think the risk of mutation you and Sam are worried about is really worth distorting the facts over, do you?

you can't pull out the semantics card and win every time!
nice try!

Aren't you trying a little too hard here to close down Druitt's candidature, which is lousy enough without any reference to trains and cricket matches, though I know that is a popular way to go about it!


Chris..why don't you politely message Andy Spallek!?? ..he's your man!


regards and respect to you both!

WK.

[Chris]

I'd urge some caution when using train times for 2008, at a time when trains are more frequent and certainly faster.

Didn't you read what I wrote? I halved the train frequency and nearly doubled the journey time (which is currently only 11-13 minutes!). Not that I'm convinced suburban services like this would have been either slower or less frequent in 1888.

In fact I bent over backwards to allow generous margins at every stage of the journey - in reality I don't believe the murderer tarried at the scene of the crime for half an hour, I don't believe for a moment it would have taken Druitt anything like an hour to walk from Hanbury Street to London Bridge, and I think he would have been very unlucky if he had had to wait for half an hour for a train.

There is no sense in which any of this would have had to be "planned out" in advance - it is simply a matter of walking to the station and catching a train.

Even on this leisurely schedule, there would be three and a half hours to wash, dress, have breakfast and walk to the Rectory Field. There would be plenty of time even if you wanted everyone to meet up and hang around for an hour before the match!

[Mike Covell]

Has anyone taken the time to look through a trade directory for the period?
I know that the Hull Trade Directories have rail, coach, and water going time tables contained within, as well as the locations of stations and coaching houses.

It would also be adventageous to try and locate a Blackheath or surrounding districts Trade Directory, which again should list the aforementioned details.

Another possible source of information is "Google Maps" which will help ascertain the distance between London Bridge and Hanbury Street, and also include the time allowed for travelling such distance. You can toggle between walking and travelling in car.

[Chris]

Has anyone taken the time to look through a trade directory for the period?
I know that the Hull Trade Directories have rail, coach, and water going time tables contained within, as well as the locations of stations and coaching houses.

I think the question is whether anyone would have thought it worthwhile to spend time looking up the exact details of trains, given the fact that Druitt would have had several hours to make a journey that took only a few minutes.

[anna]

Hi guys,

Just for a bit of extra info....

Blackheath is on the normal service to London..as part of the South London timetable.....but...

Blackheath is at the centre of many branch lines.They use it as the only stop in South London before they travel on to London Bridge...coastal services do this too...so there will be random stops on other timetables that will include Blackheath also.

Another point to consider is the fact that you have Jamaica Road in the London Bridge area,serving many bus routes that come down to Lewisham, New Cross,and Blackheath.This route is possible on foot also...have done it myself in times of rail disputes,but takes a hour and a half to 2 hours.

ANNA.

[Ben]

It simply isn't 'tight' at all! , as Chris has demonstrated , more than adequately, or except by the most incredibly harsh interpretation

"Tight" in terms of the suggestion being physically possible - yes.

In terms of it being considered "plausible" - no, not really, it's pretty tight. People don't always have a precise and linear idea of what it is they're planning to do in the immediate aftermath of a murder, which naturally allows for the possibility that we're not being as generous as we imagine we're being.

you can't pull out the semantics card and win every time!
nice try!

The only semantics-game being played here is people obsessing over a word I used on the podcast to describe the plausibility of Druitt murdering Chapman, a suggestion ajudged "distinctly unlikely" by one reputable historian, and there's no question that timing must have played a part in prompting him to describe it as such. I would have liked to elaborate it further detail, obviously, but since it was Sickert primarily under discussion, I considered it advisable not to derail the discussion.

Yes, WK, from my experience, people usually congregate early for cricket matches to ensure even numbers. That's nothing to do with "semantics".

Best regards,
Ben

[Carrotty Nell]

usually[/U] congregate early for cricket matches to ensure even numbers. That's nothing to do with "semantics".

Best regards,
Ben

Hello Ben
Personally I think the reference to congregating before the match, and the diminishing time this permits Druitt, is quite irrelevant in the circumstances. Such gathering might be traditional but it's not compulsory. For all we know Druitt could have dashed onto the playing field at 11.30 still pulling his whites on and doing up his flies, and said 'sorry I'm late chaps, overslept'. No-one would have thought anything of it. The only thing that is relevant here is as Chris points out he had ample time to get home, wash, change and read some pornography before the match.

Slightly off topic (but it's rare you get a Druitt thread that you can get stuck into like this one). There was an incident on the morning of Hanbury Street which does not get much of an airing on these boards. It is mentioned in Sugden, but I'm not sad enough to carry my copy of Sugden around in my handbag to work so I cannot page reference it. A man was seen changing his clothes in a public lavatory in Oxford Circus around 7am. He then discarded his own clothes and the lavatory attendant sadly disposed of them. However, the description of this man has always intrigued me. Aged thirty, dark hair, moustache, respectable... it's Druitt!! Oxford Circus... not an unreasonable location for someone who had committed a murder in Hanbury Street and who was on his way to London Bridge station to catch a train to south London.

[Ben]

Hi Nell,

Personally I think the reference to congregating before the match, and the diminishing time this permits Druitt, is quite irrelevant in the circumstances. Such gathering might be traditional but it's not compulsory.

I'd imagine it being markedly more so among genteel Victorians, though. Not compulsory in the strictest sense, perhaps, but it would almost certainly be less common for players to arrive only when needed. More likely, they congregated prior to the game to change, meet the other team etc. He certainly could have murdered Chapman, but the timing of events make it less plausible, in my view.

Oxford Circus... not an unreasonable location for someone who had committed a murder in Hanbury Street and who was on his way to London Bridge station to catch a train to south London.

'Ang on.

Oxford Circus is to the North and West of London Bridge. That's a long way in the wrong direction from anyone heading from Hanbury Street to London Bridge.

[Chris]

Ben

You agreed that what you meant was that "it would have been difficult for Druitt to do all that he would have had to do between the time of the murder and the time of the cricket match".

That is simply not the case. It's just a shame you can't bring yourself to admit it.

By the way, for the record, this is what Sugden actually wrote about this:
"Druitt could have killed Annie Chapman. It would have been possible for him to have murdered her in Spitalfields at 5.30 and then to have caught a train to Blackheath and to have washed, changed and breakfasted in time to turn out on the Rectory Field by 11.30. Nevertheless, it must be conceded that bearing in mind the probability that Annie's killer had been prowling the East End streets for most of the night such a scenario does seem distinctly unlikely."
[my emphasis]

[Ben]

Hi Chris,

Yes, that is what Sugden says.

You'll notice that the factors he mentioned as being contributory to the distinct unlikelihood of the Druitt-killing-Chapman premise are allied to the issue of timing, so yes, I cheerfully stand my earlier remaks (well, yours actually): "it would have been difficult for Druitt to do all that he would have had to do between the time of the murder and the time of the cricket match"...bearing in mind the factors mentioned by Sugden.

Best regards,
Ben

[Chris]

You'll notice that the factors he mentioned as being contributory to the distinct unlikelihood of the Druitt-killing-Chapman premise are allied to the issue of timing, so yes, I cheerfully stand my earlier remaks (well, yours actually): "it would have been difficult for Druitt to do all that he would have had to do between the time of the murder and the time of the cricket match"...bearing in mind the factors mentioned by Sugden.

But as you explicitly agreed on the other thread last night, the issue of Druitt having been up all night is not linked to the question of the "tightness" of the timing, which is what we are discussing.

I asked you that question precisely because I was afraid that - once the timings had been laid out and it was obvious Druitt would have had plenty of time - you would try to blur the issue yet again by raising these other factors.

So - the most leisurely journey I could reasonably arrange for him, leaving him (say) an hour to wash and put on his cricket kit, an hour to have breakfast, another hour to walk to the ground (a distance of around a mile) and half an hour to hang around doing nothing before the game. How can you possibly pretend that he would have found that difficult to fit into the available time?