Evidence to prove a suspect valid

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi TomTomKent. I agree with your words. The list of suspects that actually interests me is very short, because I need a good reason to entertain the thought of their guilt. The cases for many have gotten much weaker over the years. However, in a few cases, the argument has become stronger. So I believe such research should be encouraged and it's a shame that cynicism in recent years has led to a trend of maligning the suspect researcher. Obviously, outright fraud and lies should not be tolerated in the field. And fanaticism should be kept in check. But it seems to me that Ripperologists by and large are not as collectively open-minded as they once were and that's a shame. I would hope it's only a passing fad.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[TomTomKent]

G'Day Tom

Well put about the "ifs".

I should have noted that not all ifs weigh the same and some crush the life out of the "reasonable" suspicion rather quickly.

"If Kosminski was not the suspect Swanson remembered after the date then Cohen is a better fit for his description", for example is less damaging to stacked on a theory than: "If other people lied about where Robert Louis Stephenson was because he was famous and a Scotsman he might have done it."

This is by no means limited to the Whitechapel murders. Over on JREF I have wasted too much of my life arguing with JFK conspiracy theorists and 9/11 CT advocates because their "reasonable" suspicions hold true IF there was a Conspiracy and IF the film footage was altered and IF somebody might have been bullied into giving false evidence and IF such or such a person was part of a criminal group... There is a very strange tendency in historical mysteries to assume that an "if" repeated often enough can be assumed to be true for the sake of a coherent narrative.

Responsible speculation at least identifies the "if" and does not then claim proof to be built on such a foundation, only suspicion and speculation.

[GUT]

G'Day Tom

Well put about the "ifs".

[TomTomKent]

By asking what makes a suspect valid I assume the thread asks what would be required to show a reasonable grounds for suspicion beyond "They had a pulse and were in London around the time of the murder".

For me it is simple. Evidence that objectively and with out speculation or a game of stacking "ifs" ties a person to the crimes, or the police investigation. Unfortunately because of the time lapsed since the crimes this is likely to be all we will ever have. We can no longer ask Swanson if he was sure he meant Kosminski or Anderson for more details than his memoirs hold. All we can reasonably hope to do is identify suspects and grade them by how reasonable their suspicion is based upon the available facts and evidence.

In recent years there have been a lot of books that have done a very good job of describing why a "suspect" is exactly the kind of person the author thinks Jack might have been, but that have failed to tie those suspects to the crimes with any evidence that withstands scrutiny.

[Michael W Richards]

I dont believe that there was an official closing time for the club, at least not on Saturdays after meetings, and to errata's point, we have the cottages in the passageway for one, and likely some accommodations inside the club.

And responding to Caz's point...."On the question of witness timings on and around Berner St that night, I never cease to be amazed by all the piffle talked (not by you I hasten to add). Firstly, it was nigh on impossible to think back and pinpoint a time exactly, when one was just minding one's own business and not expecting to be asked later when they were doing it. Secondly, most witnesses seem to have approximated to the nearest five minutes when estimating the time; others to the nearest quarter of an hour; some to the nearest half hour, depending on their individual circumstances.".....I can state that 2 witnesses from inside the club, where one used a clock to determine his arrival time back at the club (Kozebrodski), stated within 1 hour of the murder that "at approximately 12:40", and "about 10 minutes after half past twelve" respectively, that they were alerted to the body by Louis. Louis says he used a clock on the way home, thats why he could be sure he arrived at 1am. Yet Fanny Mortimer was at her door at 1am and saw or heard no-one, no cart...no Louis, arrive at that time. The street was empty, except for the young couple.

Oddly enough the members timings correspond almost exactly to the timing provided by Spooner...who by his account of his activities since leaving the pub, was by the body before 12:45am.

Seems to me the witnesses who gave times and had no timepiece to use just before doing so were club witnesses and Israel Schwartz, and funny enough, none of them have any corroberation. Eagle says he was inside the passage at 12:40, Lave says he was there at 12:40...and they apparently didnt see each other. No-one saw Louis arrive. No-one saw or heard a BSM or a Pipeman. We do have witnesses who can be corroborated...its just that Caz prefers to question everyones ability to tell time and accepts the uncorroborated accounts as the ones that are actually valid.

Piffle indeed.

Cheers

[Errata]

G'Day Michael



I've never seen it, but do we know when the club closed?

Was it like other Victorian clubs where they had temporary residences for members?

[caz]

I wonder how the neighbors would recognize an unfortunate from any other couple?

Much the same way we would do so today, I reckon, GUT.

Maybe not so much by the clothes back then, but the body language, loitering late at night and general behaviour would have been suggestive. Probably more so back then, when people were more concerned with being seen to conduct themselves respectably when in public.

One of the three Jewish men who saw Eddowes with the man near Mitre Square said he felt uneasy when he saw those 'types' about, which suggests he didn't consider them to be a 'respectable' couple, going about their business at 1.30am.

On the question of witness timings on and around Berner St that night, I never cease to be amazed by all the piffle talked (not by you I hasten to add). Firstly, it was nigh on impossible to think back and pinpoint a time exactly, when one was just minding one's own business and not expecting to be asked later when they were doing it. Secondly, most witnesses seem to have approximated to the nearest five minutes when estimating the time; others to the nearest quarter of an hour; some to the nearest half hour, depending on their individual circumstances.

Thirdly, if they had cctv by the yard entrance it would all now be painfully clear just how many 'witnesses' (club members, passers-by, murder suspects and murder victim) could have come and gone and totally missed one another within the space of a minute or two, never mind five or ten.

Love,

Caz
X

[GUT]

Another side point, Ive re-read some press clippings and Wess was quoted as saying that he rarely if ever saw Prostitutes on Berner Street near to the club.

I can't say I've ever noticed that, but an interesting point.

I wonder how the neighbors would recognize an unfortunate from any other couple?

[GUT]

G'Day Michael

I mentioned the smoking GUT because some neighbors... when asked about the goings on in the club passageway after Saturday meetings suggested that "low men" could be seen and heard while smoking and talking ...often, after 1am.

I've never seen it, but do we know when the club closed?

[Michael W Richards]

I would have thought that if you're in a room full of people who are all smoking, possibly with a nice little coal fire contributing a "breath of fresh air" might be exactly why you'd step outside.

I mentioned the smoking GUT because some neighbors... when asked about the goings on in the club passageway after Saturday meetings suggested that "low men" could be seen and heard while smoking and talking ...often, after 1am.

Another side point, Ive re-read some press clippings and Wess was quoted as saying that he rarely if ever saw Prostitutes on Berner Street near to the club.

Cheers

[lynn cates]

generic

Hello Mike. Thanks.

Yes, could be generic.

Cheers.
LC

[GUT]

I would have thought that if you're in a room full of people who are all smoking, possibly with a nice little coal fire contributing a "breath of fresh air" might be exactly why you'd step outside.

[Michael W Richards]

Hello Mike. I thought Lave remarked that he sought fresh air?

Cheers.
LC

I would say the same thing Lynn... when I step outside to smoke a cigarette, or walk my dog.

I dont think Lave structured his remarks to reflect the specific reason for his being there, just that he was outside getting air at the time. Not a verbatim issue I think.

Cheers Lynn

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Mike. Lave came in before Eagle returned home.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Tom,

From the Evening News on Oct 1st,.... from Eagle..."I frequent the club. I went into it about 12.40 on this night that you are asking me about, which was about 20 minutes before the body was discovered."

From Lave, "I was in the yard of the club this morning about twenty minutes to one. At half-past twelve I had come out into the street to get a breath of fresh air. There was nothing unusual in the street."

As I said before, seems to me they state they were both in the yard at the same time, yet neither sees each other, and Eagle couldnt remember seeing anyone.

Fact is these 2 witnesses statements are missing one very vital bit of information from their testimony, and coupled with Fanny Mortimer's statements about what she saw when she was at her door intermittently between 12:30 and 12:50am, its a question that I believe could be quite revealing when, or IF, its solved. Where was Stride at 12:40?

If Liz Stride is not seen on the street by Eagle arriving back at the club, or Lave or Fanny Mortimer after 12:35am, then its quite likely its because she wasnt on it during that period....at least from 12:35 until 12:40. Since she may have been cut as early as 12:46, its possible that she was already in the passageway that she dies in, just after PC Smith left. Which of course raises the question....if Eagle and Lave didnt see her in the passageway or on the street, and Fanny didnt see her one the street, then where does Liz Stride go after PC Smith left? Some might say she then is seen by Brown at 12:45, or some might say she is seen just outside the gates at 12:45 by Schwartz,...but anyone can understand that Liz Stride didnt just vanish and then simply reappear, dead. And she wasnt seen by both Brown and Schwartz...perhaps, by neither.

2 witnesses walk on or past the spot Liz is killed at 12:40 and claim to have seen nothing...not even each other... and Liz is cut sometime between 12:46 and 12:56 on that same spot. Which brings the 3rd club witness account into play.....what did Leon Goldstein see when he glanced into the open gates between 12:55 and 12:56? Liz Strides murderer would likely have been there then.

I suggest that its possible all 3 witnesses played dumb...hear no evil, see no evil...rather than state what they may have actually seen. And of the 3...Morris Eagles inability to remember IF he saw anyone makes his account questionable....particularly when it is his remarks that go a long way in substantiating the time Louis says he arrived...something that is specifically contradicted by the times given in the early accounts of at least 2 onsite members and one outside witness.

Cheers

[lynn cates]

interview

Hello Tom. Thanks.

"What was Lave's "complicity with the paper"?"

I meant in granting an interview. He seems not to have refused.

Cheers.
LC