A present for Scotland Yard

[Pierre]

Did Pierre just admit to being misleading and contradictory?

Before the crash on this site there was a poster going by the name John Drake. He did almost the exact same thing Pierre is doing now. Strangely, his imaginary suspect was also a police officer, PC James Harvey.

Maybe this is the re-birth of our friend, Mr. Drake. I can't remember his real name, but he was into firewalking.

Hi,

Well, I am not John Drake either. Or maybe I am? Who knows, misleading as I am. But one thing is certain. The person I think was Jack the Ripper was not PC James Harvey. So what could Harvey possibly tell us about Jack the Ripper, if anything?

"HARVEY, P.C. James...

Testified to having heard nothing on the night of Catherine Eddowes' murder, although his beat took him throughout the area of Mitre Square that morning."

He could tell us that the murderer was very silent.

And how could we possibly interpret this?

We could interpret this as the murderer being able to be silent when he wanted to be silent and that he understood the value of silence. Silence was a useful tool for the murderer, giving him the possibility to murder and mutilate his victim. This silence must have been his companion throughout the whole murder process, from when he was walking in silent shoes to when he chose his victim, when he murdered and mutilated her, and when he walked away from the crime scene. Silence must have been his best friend. And he must have known how to perform a silent murder, since he managed to be absolutely silent. But in this silence - could it be that he spoke? Could it be that he communicated with the police? Did he want to say anything to them? And can we distinguish the silence in Mitre Square from his message on the face of Eddowes? Or will we believe that everything he did was ruled by silence?

And by the way, I am not into firewalking. I am into putting out fires.

Regards Pierre

[Varqm]

Silence or hang.

[GUT]

Silence or hang.

Pierre or Jacky Boy?.?.?

[Mister Whitechapel]

I seem to find references to a letter to Sir Charles Warren about the results of the trialling of silent boots for Police Officers, but I can't find any that I can read nor who the correspondent was.

(There were also, apparently, six suggestions from the public regarding the same as suggestions as to how to catch the 'Ripper'.)

Can't quite believe I'm entertaining the idea based on such minimal and 'clickbait' snippets from the OP, but could this be part of the 'evidence', if 'silence' is an aspect important to the identity of the suspect?

Of course, it's more likely I've been suckered-in like I promised I wouldn't be and have been manipulated into developing apophenia...!

Yours,
Mister Whitechapel

[Elamarna]

Good Afternoon

I see OP takes 13 lines to say he is not a certain ex poster, and PC Harvey was not the killer. Well I knew the first already! and the 2nd was not really a starter I think.

We then get a little group of harmless lines, which repeat the word silent or Silence 12 times in 6 lines of writing.- got it the the killer was THE DOCTOR*

I would say this was a post which said little

but it said lots.

*( if you don't get it, don't worry tv Dr WHO)

[Mister Whitechapel]

Good Afternoon

I see OP takes 13 lines to say he is not a certain ex poster, and PC Harvey was not the killer. Well I knew the first already! and the 2nd was not really a starter I think.

We then get a little group of harmless lines, which repeat the word silent or Silence 12 times in 6 lines of writing.- got it the the killer was THE DOCTOR*

I would say this was a post which said little

but it said lots.

*( if you don't get it, don't worry tv Dr WHO)

"Ssssilence will faaaall...."

[Elamarna]

[B]


"HARVEY, P.C. James...

Testified to having heard nothing on the night of Catherine Eddowes' murder, although his beat took him throughout the area of Mitre Square that morning."

He could tell us that the murderer was very silent.

Sorry, thats give a misleading impression, given it appears to be a quote it is not you fault. has you have told us many times that you only read reports from the time and nothing else so how, could you know!


Ripperologist Magazine #74 and 75 has a very in depth paper by Gavin Bromley discussing the beats and timings of both Harvey and Watkins.
given that you believe the killer knew the police beats,you really should read it.

Harvey, as I am sure most know never actually entered Mitre Square, his beat included the length of Church Passage, on reaching the junction with Mitre Square he would look into the square then go back the way he came.
He would have been in that position for only a few seconds.

The killer, could have heard Harvey approaching down church passage and stopped working for the few seconds required.
Bromley argues that he had already left the scene when Harvey arrived.

There is also the view held by some that Harvey never checked Church passage that night.

There was no need for the Killer to be super silent, and thus the post on what silence could mean is redundant

Elamarna

[Pierre]

Sorry, thats give a misleading impression, given it appears to be a quote it is not you fault. has you have told us many times that you only read reports from the time and nothing else so how, could you know!

I don´t regards this website as "secondary literature". With literature I mean books containing ripperology.

Ripperologist Magazine #74 and 75 has a very in depth paper by Gavin Bromley discussing the beats and timings of both Harvey and Watkins.
given that you believe the killer knew the police beats,you really should read it.

I´d love to if I would first get to know who this Bromley is.

Harvey, as I am sure most know never actually entered Mitre Square, his beat included the length of Church Passage, on reaching the junction with Mitre Square he would look into the square then go back the way he came.
He would have been in that position for only a few seconds.

I admire your knowledge of details.

The killer, could have heard Harvey approaching down church passage and stopped working for the few seconds required.
Bromley argues that he had already left the scene when Harvey arrived.

There is also the view held by some that Harvey never checked Church passage that night.

I dont´t like radical postmodernistic ideas about "views".

There was no need for the Killer to be super silent, and thus the post on what silence could mean is redundant

Naturally there was a need to be silent, but I don´t know what you mean when you say "super silent".

Are you making an ordinal scale (a little silent, silent, super silent) and trying to correlate it with the distance of the nearest police beat or what?

And are you suggesting that the killer would then have made rational calculations as "Let´s see...there is x meters to the PC:s beat, how silent must I be here?"

As for my post being redundant, OK.

But knowledge of how the police worked would have been a good help if you wanted to commit several serial murders in Spitalfields in a short time.

Regards Pierre

[Michael W Richards]

There was no need for the Killer to be super silent, and thus the post on what silence could mean is redundant

Elamarna

Actually there was, George Morris. The night watchman.

[Elamarna]

What has your view on this site got to do with the comment I made Pierre?

it was a misleading quote: it gave the impression that Harvey was so in contact with the murder site he would have heard something, unless there was an attempt to suppress the sound , which is what the bulk of your post was about.


It does not matter who Gavin is, stop judging research on who writes it, read the research and if you can find fault with it do so.

Post modern views as you call them are not automatically wrong; anyway this view is very old indeed, it is not post modern, Pierre if you had, with all due respect, more knowledge of the murders you would know that!

However I do not agree with it, gave it as an example of why special degree of silence above normal was not needed.

Simply as there was no one in the square for more than a few seconds, and Morris had his door closed, had it been open the killer would have seen it on his way to the corner, indeed Morris said he was often at the door at that time of night but not that night, there was no need to be any more silent in his work, than while I eat a meal or type as I write this.

No calculations, I believe , in the lack of any evidence to the contrary, that the killer was just lucky.

"But knowledge of how the police worked would have been a good help if you wanted to commit several serial murders in Spitalfields in a short time."

yes it would have been, however there is much to suggest that Stride was killed by a different hand, not my view, but there are strong arguments in that viewpoint.

There is no evidence that the double event was planned as such in advance.

You claim you have such evidence, however until such evidence is available for inspection by others, it is with all due respect heresay.

[Elamarna]

Actually there was, George Morris. The night watchman.

Michael,,

see my follow up post, morris said his door was closed, therefore the killer would not need to be more silent than I suggest, if the door opened he would I am sure have heard such, and then he would have gone into "silent running mode" so to speak, indeed he would probably have stopped and attempted to leave into Mitre Street, closest exit and away from Morris.
indeed given the Injuries, once the throat was cut, would there be any need for any sound other than the cutting of clothing and skin.

steve

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Elamarna;365993]

"But knowledge of how the police worked would have been a good help if you wanted to commit several serial murders in Spitalfields in a short time."

yes it would have been,...QUOTE]

OK, Steve. You are smart and you know a lot of details. If you would point out the most important things, in what ways would it have been a good help for Jack the Ripper to have knowledge of how the police worked?

[Elamarna]

don t cut quotes to give a false impression.

"yes it would have been, however there is much to suggest that Stride was killed by a different hand, not my view, but there are strong arguments in that viewpoint.

There is no evidence that the double event was planned as such in advance.

You claim you have such evidence, however until such evidence is available for inspection by others, it is with all due respect heresay."

IF IT WERE PLANNED FROM START TO FINISH, WITH A TIMETABLE, KNOWING BEATS WOULD HELP. BUT SUCH A SUGGESTION AS NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT IT.

as you so often say, this is NOT A GAME, I am not play yours

[Monty]

I agree with all you state Steve,

However Morris does state his door was ajar at 1.45 am

Monty

[Elamarna]

Monty

Yes, I am assuming the killer was gone by then.

Probably back down Church passage, but possibly out via mitre street which was closer. I found Gavin's work very persuasive, I am not aware of anything new to change my view.

steve