Team Jack

[lynn cates]

Phillips and Mortimer

Hello Jon. Thanks.

"Phillips was quite naturally only commenting on what the physical evidence suggests to him with this one particular murder."

And rightly so.

"Mrs Mortimer should have heard something leading up to 1 o'clock."

I get the impression that she was not an attentive soul. She did not catch Eygle or Lave.

Cheers.
LC

[Cogidubnus]

I get the impression that she was not an attentive soul. She did not catch Eygle or Lave.

I'm inclined to agree Lynn...mind you, it depends what time she was actually (as opposed to perceptibly) looking...All timings in the LVP, (unless within easy reach of either Big Ben or a railway company electric telegraph), just have to be suspect...or at least subject to a filter of some kind...

All the best

Dave

[lynn cates]

Goldstein

Hello Dave. Thanks.

To be fair, she DID catch Goldstein.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

"Mrs Mortimer should have heard something leading up to 1 o'clock."

I get the impression that she was not an attentive soul. She did not catch Eygle or Lave.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn.

The issue I have with her is the two different stories from the press, which may, or may not be her fault.

The Daily News has her coming to the door likely just after both Eygle & Lave had passed.

"It appears that shortly before a quarter to one o'clock she heard the measured, heavy tramp of a policeman passing the house on his beat. Immediately afterwards she went to the street-door, with the intention of shooting the bolts, though she remained standing there for ten minutes before she did so. During the ten minutes she saw no one enter or leave the neighbouring yard, and she feels sure that had any one done so she could not have overlooked the fact."

That account fits better with what we read from other witnesses (Eygle & Lave) in the street. This suggests Mortimer was at the door for about 10 minutes between 12:40-45 until 12:50-55, and then we read:

"...Locking the door, she prepared to retire to bed, in the front room on the ground floor, and it so happened that in about four minutes' time she heard the pony cart pass the house, and remarked upon the circumstance to her husband."

She then hears Diemschitz on his cart, at about 1:00 am?

The only contention is with the story handed to us by Schwartz. But, was the 'heavy tramp' really a policeman?

The more often quoted Press Association? release does not easily fit with anything we read elsewhere.

[lynn cates]

food for thought

Hello Jon. Thanks.

Yes, that version offers food for thought.

Cheers.
LC

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Question.

To return to topic a bit more, how would've two people been able to make it any easier? If one individual can't stop a woman from screaming, why should two do any better?

[Errata]

To return to topic a bit more, how would've two people been able to make it any easier? If one individual can't stop a woman from screaming, why should two do any better?

Because one man can clap his hand over her mouth while putting her in a choke hold and the other can grab her legs, lift her, and when she's out lay her on the ground.

That way if she struggles, she is not interacting with her environment in any way. So there are no signs of a struggle.

There are a bunch of way two men can put a woman on the ground without letting her scream, use her arms, or kick out. With one man, you are sort of limited to a hit to the head, or possibly a strong hit to the solar plexus and hope she doesn't vomit. Neither of which happened.

Can we make a case for them being punched in the throat?

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Errata

Would the victims have gone off with two men? If not, might that be suggestive of the killers picking the locations then? Planning?

[Michael W Richards]

In the Whitechapel murder file there are murders that have evidence that more than 1 assailant was involved....with Emma Smith, and if indeed Killeen was correct about 2 weapons, we likely have 2 assailants with Martha.

In the Canonical Group there are a few murders where an accomplice would have been most helpful, but I dont believe any evidence suggests one was used. Perhaps in the case of the loitering Wideawake at Millers Court...which lead to a Pardon for Accomplices to be issued, and if you believe Israel Schwartz, there are 2 men that may or may not be working together there, and they are with the victim near the time she is murdered.

Interestingly I believe the usual "Murder by Person or Persons unknown" declaration made at the Inquests' completion was not made at Kate Eddowes Inquest, rather it was determined that the medical evidence demonstrated conclusively that only one person was responsible for her murder.

So, there is an answer to the thread question...sort of...it appears only Kates murder was determined to have been a solo effort based on evidence, the other verdicts allowed for more than one assailant.

Best regards

[lynn cates]

solo

Hello Mike. Yes, it seems Crawford offered that observation and so the jury seems to have agreed.

Cheers.
LC

[RivkahChaya]

Interestingly I believe the usual "Murder by Person or Persons unknown" declaration made at the Inquests' completion was not made at Kate Eddowes Inquest

I thought that was standard phrasing, so that if someone was convicted of a crime, and then later another person was also charged with the crime, he couldn't use "Someone else was already convicted" as a defense.

[Errata]

Interestingly I believe the usual "Murder by Person or Persons unknown" declaration made at the Inquests' completion was not made at Kate Eddowes Inquest, rather it was determined that the medical evidence demonstrated conclusively that only one person was responsible for her murder.

So, there is an answer to the thread question...sort of...it appears only Kates murder was determined to have been a solo effort based on evidence, the other verdicts allowed for more than one assailant.

Best regards

Doesn't some of that have to do with timing? At the Nichols inquest, they had no idea. At the Chapman inquest, they thought the two might be related, but still didn't know. By Eddowes, "Jack The Ripper" singular letter writing madman was firmly established. If Jack the Ripper killed all these women, and Jack the Ripper was a singular person, Eddowes could not have murdered by "persons unknown". Logical thinking, assuming that the supporting statements that the previous women were murdered by the same guy, and that same guy was a single guy are true. But if no one had come up with "Jack the Ripper", how much evidence would there be that Eddowes had a murder singular? I wouldn't think there was more evidence for a single killer for Eddowes than for Chapman.

There also aren't any drag marks, which given the Chapman scene is really remarkable. Her head is right in the middle of like a foot and a half space between concrete steps and the fence. The odds of dropping her into that spot without crushing her skull on the stairs or bouncing her off the fence and THEN crushing her skull on the stairs are pretty slim. But she wasn't dragged there. Which in a way makes sense because that's really the one place in the yard you don't want to try and hack through her neck. So why drag her there? But then again that's the one place you don't want to hack through her neck so why drop her that direction? Why kill here there at all?

The whole thing is weird.

[Wickerman]

I have to wonder what use an accomplice would have been in say, Hanbury St.

If an accomplice was out in Hanbury St. how was he supposed to communicate with a killer in the backyard?
Rush down the passage and be caught in the same trap?

With Stride, he obviously needed another accomplice as this one was deaf.

With Eddowes, three exits to the square, and no accomplice?
(was he fired after the near miss in Berner St?)

If the loiterer in Dorset St. was the new accomplice, how was he expected to communicate with the killer inside room 13?
Rush down the passage and draw attention to himself?

Is the accomplice theory really a sound argument?

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Errata

I was discussing this just earlier. So possibly, the killer grabbed her from behind once down the steps? I was just commenting on the tight space where her body was found. It doesn't make it impossible, but wow, maybe this murderer WAS good??? Which may seem consistant with the other murders?

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Or...

Maybe it is just as simple as that's where she went? Down the steps, turn around, let's get this over with.