Originally posted by Fisherman
View Post
Yes, Frank, but we both know that the "murder scream" was quite an amusement park - the other woman (Prater) in fact claimed with some vigour in her police interview that she had heard two or thee screams like that - but at the inquest, she was very adamant that no second scream was there.
Oh, the ladies of the court - how they have us twisting and turning!
Oh, the ladies of the court - how they have us twisting and turning!
The one thing that may have had Sarah Lewis upset would have been the argument she had had with her husband, and as such, if it still affected her piece of mind, it may have helped to miss out on registering any details of the "loiterer".
It is indeed close! And it may well BE spot on - for we don´t know in what context Lewis may have picked up on the details, do we? She had had two days open to listen to the rumours that did the rounds, and we know what happened to the "murder cry" rumour and the "Bethnal Green road bogey man" rumour, don´t we? Those stories got wings, and were related in seemingly quite similar fashions, but with small deviations. Could well be the same here, Frank, what Lewis related may have ben what she heard from Cox - or from somebody inbetween who in her (or his) turn had heard Cox.
...and an intent staring up a court, as if in wait for somebody, do not arise from nothingness. The latter observation contains a registering of a rather complex set of actions, involving the fixing of the gaze of the man, his posture and a few more things, God knows what, though, since I cannot say how one mimics waiting for somebody to come out of a court. Can you?
Having said all this, let’s just assume for a moment that you’re right (because there is something in what you say), i.e. that Lewis actually never saw those added looks of ‘her’ man, never saw him looking up the court as if waiting for someone to come out.
What would we have? We would still have Lewis’ police statement saying that she saw a man standing over against the lodging house. We would still have her state at the inquest that she saw a man standing opposite the court, looking up the court as if waiting for someone to come out. We would still have Hutchinson’s account, stating that he did exactly this last bit of Lewis’ inquest testimony. This account would still contain oddities, unlikelyhoods and conveniences, would still lack a natural flow. And we would still have Hutchinson coming forward directly after the inquest was closed.
All the best, Fish!
Frank
Comment