Continuation of “Possibility for the Seaside Home”

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Well, the prospect of Kosminski being fair is pretty slim.

Not much in the whole case adds up, probably a mixture of missing documents and witnesses being economical with the truth.

I'm not convinced with Schwartz. The only witnesses I place faith in are PC Smith and Lawende/associates, but then I'm not convinced Lawende saw Catherine and her murderer.

Pc Smith saw Stride with a man about 30 minutes before she was murdered.

Lawende saw Eddowes with a man about 3 minutes before she was murdered.

Not much of a contest.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Pc Smith saw Stride with a man about 30 minutes before she was murdered.

Lawende saw Eddowes with a man about 3 minutes before she was murdered.

Not much of a contest.

Well, again, something doesn't add up here.

PC Smith stated his beat took him 25 to 30 minutes and he returned to Berner Street at 1am.

Diemschutz claims to have timed his arrival by the baker's clock at 1am.

Yet PC Smith did not see nor hear all of the running around in the street upon Diemschutz discovering Liz's body.

At least one of them has their time out.

It is possible that PC Smith returned to Berner Street later than 1am, which would have him passing Liz and the man around 12:40 to 12:45.

On the other hand, it's possible that Diemschutz had his time out.

[Pontius2000]

You're splitting hairs.

Lawende said the man had a fair moustache and the appearance of a sailor.

Blond sailors have fair hair and the appearance of sailors.

If someone has the appearance of a sailor, then someone saying so is giving a description of a sailor.

No-one has claimed that Lawende said the man was a sailor.
.

it is amazing that you are sticking with this blonde sailor nonsense and ignoring the description in which the suspect was stated to have BROWN HAIR.


And again, why not you offer up an explanation to your statement that the lead officer in the case is no more than someone who wasn’t even working in the police department at the time of the murders?

[The Baron]

Pc Smith saw Stride with a man about 30 minutes before she was murdered.

Lawende saw Eddowes with a man about 3 minutes before she was murdered.

Not much of a contest.

The 25 minutes turned to 30 minutes

The 10 minutes turned to 3 minutes

How about you start by reading the basic information of the case first?


TB

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Well, again, something doesn't add up here.

PC Smith stated his beat took him 25 to 30 minutes and he returned to Berner Street at 1am.

Diemschutz claims to have timed his arrival by the baker's clock at 1am.

Yet PC Smith did not see nor hear all of the running around in the street upon Diemschutz discovering Liz's body.

At least one of them has their time out.

It is possible that PC Smith returned to Berner Street later than 1am, which would have him passing Liz and the man around 12:40 to 12:45.

On the other hand, it's possible that Diemschutz had his time out.

I was in Berner-street about half-past twelve or twenty-five minutes to one o'clock, and having gone round my beat, was at the Commercial-road corner of Berner-street again at one o'clock. I was not called. I saw a crowd outside the gates of No. 40, Berner-street. I heard no cries of "Police." ... I do not remember that I passed any person on my way down.

(From Pc Smith's testimony)


The Commercial Road corner of Berner Street was at the further end of Berner Street relative to the murder site, meaning presumably that Smith's beat took him southwards on Berner Street.

That suggests that the murderer did not escape northwards, and possibly that he knew Smith was on his way.


How the murderer escaped:

A Juror; Was it possible for anybody to leave the yard between the discovery of the body and the arrival of the police?
Pc Smith: Oh, yes - or, rather, it would have been possible before I informed the members of the club, not afterwards.
[Coroner] When you entered the yard, if any person had run out you would have seen them in the dark? - Oh, yes, it was light enough for that. It was dark in the gateway, but not so dark further in the yard.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

it is amazing that you are sticking with this blonde sailor nonsense and ignoring the description in which the suspect was stated to have BROWN HAIR.


And again, why not you offer up an explanation to your statement that the lead officer in the case is no more than someone who wasn’t even working in the police department at the time of the murders?

You can split hairs about the difference between the words 'description' and 'appearance', but I am the one writing 'nonsense' when I cite the witness evidence?

Lawende said the man had a fair moustache and the appearance of a sailor.

Whenever I mention the word sailor, all hell lets loose, as if the witness had never mentioned a sailor!

I have never come across any version of Lawende's description of the suspect in which the suspect had brown hair.

The person who according to you 'wasn't even working in the Police Department' claimed he knew what happened to the murderer.

He didn't claim that he just heard it on the grapevine in his local pub.

[Elamarna]

The person who according to you 'wasn't even working in the Police Department' claimed he knew what happened to the murderer.

He didn't claim that he just heard it on the grapevine in his local pub.

I do hope you are not questioning the fact that Macnaghten was not in the police during the investigation, and that you have written that reply not intending that?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

The 25 minutes turned to 30 minutes

The 10 minutes turned to 3 minutes

How about you start by reading the basic information of the case first?


TB

Yet another example of the condescension to which I've become accustomed since I started posting here!

I shan't complain about it because when I do, I get told that I'm playing the victim.

By all means, let us discuss the basic information of the case.


I cited the figure of 30 minutes based on reports that Smith's sighting of Stride took place at 12:30.

In his testimony, Smith was ambiguous about the timing and indicated that it could have been 25 minutes or 30 minutes.

Once again, you're splitting hairs.



The 10 minutes turned to 3 minutes

How about you start by reading the basic information of the case first?



I really do not know how you could make such a basic mistake about the evidence.

Having made such a bad mistake, you then say that I am the one of us two who doesn't know what he's talking about.


Lawende's sighting took place at 1.35.

Pc Watkins found the body at 1.44.

I assumed that the murderer started to leave the square at 1.42.

It is difficult to believe that he murdered the woman, mutilated her, nicked her face with his knife, cut off part of her apron, wiped his knife on the apron, put the knife away, and put the apron somewhere in his clothing, in less than four minutes.

That gives a time of death of about 1.38.

1.38 a.m. minus 1.35 a.m. equals three minutes, which is what I wrote.

Your figure of 10 minutes is plainly impossible, as it would mean that Eddowes was murdered after Watkins found her body - a logical impossibility.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I do hope you are not questioning the fact that Macnaghten was not in the police during the investigation, and that you have written that reply not intending that?

I wouldn't dream of suggesting that the man who was appointed Assistant Chief Constable in June 1889 and Chief Constable in 1890 had any connection with the Metropolitan Police or Scotland Yard.

[Elamarna]

Yet another example of the condescension to which I've become accustomed since I started posting here!

I shan't complain about it because when I do, I get told that I'm playing the victim.

By all means, let us discuss the basic information of the case.


I cited the figure of 30 minutes based on reports that Smith's sighting of Stride took place at 12:30.

In his testimony, Smith was ambiguous about the timing and indicated that it could have been 25 minutes or 30 minutes.

Once again, you're splitting hairs.



The 10 minutes turned to 3 minutes

How about you start by reading the basic information of the case first?



I really do not know how you could make such a basic mistake about the evidence.

Having made such a bad mistake, you then say that I am the one of us two who doesn't know what he's talking about.


Lawende's sighting took place at 1.35.

Pc Watkins found the body at 1.44.

I assumed that the murderer started to leave the square at 1.42.

It is difficult to believe that he murdered the woman, mutilated her, nicked her face with his knife, cut off part of her apron, wiped his knife on the apron, put the knife away, and put the apron somewhere in his clothing, in less than four minutes.

That gives a time of death of about 1.38.

1.38 a.m. minus 1.35 a.m. equals three minutes, which is what I wrote.

Your figure of 10 minutes is plainly impossible, as it would mean that Eddowes was murdered after Watkins found her body - a logical impossibility.

I am not intending to be condesnding here, but why are you still using these timings, set to the minute?
Timing simply was not that syncronizied in 1888.
In the whole of the C5 murders only TWO times are Syncronizied, those of Lawende and Levy( they used the same clock in the Imperial Club). And their timing CANNOT be synchronised to the Time stated by Watkins.
What looks like a 3 minute gap, could easily be at least double that.

Be more flexible, that's all I am asking here.

[The Baron]

Pc Watkins found the body at 1.44

Wrong, he found the body at 1.45

And smith after saying half past twelve he qualified it and said 25 minutes to one o'clock.

Subtracting minutes there and adding minutes there to make it looks dramatically different, in an era where we know all those timings were not as exact as we imagine them today, is not a good scholarship, we don't know how much it took the killer to do what he did.

Stick to the facts.


TB

[Pontius2000]

You can split hairs about the difference between the words 'description' and 'appearance', but I am the one writing 'nonsense' when I cite the witness evidence?

Lawende said the man had a fair moustache and the appearance of a sailor.

Whenever I mention the word sailor, all hell lets loose, as if the witness had never mentioned a sailor!

he described the suspect’s clothes, which were not the uniform of a sailor, and he described the suspect as “rough and shabby”. Common sense would say that perhaps when he saw sailors on leave in the city, they’d often dress rough and shabby so he would describe this suspect’s appearance as sailors that he often sees. He certainly did not say that the suspect WAS a sailor nor did he describe anything about the suspect that coincides with him being a sailor.

I have never come across any version of Lawende's description of the suspect in which the suspect had brown hair.

Then perhaps you should go to the front page of this very website, click on the “witnesses” tab to the left, then click on the link to Lawende. There, you will find the description of the suspect having brown hair, which I quoted word for word. It was from a newspaper and the description was credited to Lawende. If you argue that it was only from a newspaper and not directly from Lawende’ mouth, the response will be that “appearance of a sailor” was also not from Lawende’s mouth.

The person who according to you 'wasn't even working in the Police Department' claimed he knew what happened to the murderer.

He didn't claim that he just heard it on the grapevine in his local pub.

What do you mean “according to me” he wasn’t working in the Police Department??? It is a 100% FACT that Melville Macnaghten was not working in the police department during the Whitechapel Murders. Are you now attempting to argue against known fact?

here’s some more fact: Anderson was in absentia until the double event. Warren, aside from being incompetent, resigned the day of the Kelly murder. Abberline didn’t enter the picture until, I believe, the Nichols murder. Reid and Helson were in and out of the picture as they worked other cases and had other duties. The one and only constant from the beginning to the end was Donald Swanson. It can be safely said that aside from Jack the Ripper himself, probably no other human who ever lived knew more about this case than Donald Swanson. So it would be interesting to hear how you, 130+ years removed, find Swanson’s notes to be less reliable than someone who wasn’t even working in the police at the time. Because 22+ years later, he confused which and what order asylums/work houses the suspect was admitted to, or that someone had told him wrongly that the suspect died? Those things are understandable. What he would likely NOT forget or misremember, even up to the day he died, was that in the biggest case he ever worked, a process took place in which a suspect was identified by a witness who refused to swear further, and that no other JtR murders ever took place once this particular suspect was put away for good.

[Elamarna]

Pc Watkins found the body at 1.44

Wrong, he found the body at 1.45

And smith after saying half past twelve he qualified it and said 25 minutes to one o'clock.

Subtracting minutes there and adding minutes there to make it looks dramatically different, in an era where we know all those timings were not as exact as we imagine them today, is not a good scholarship, we don't know how much it took the killer to do what he did.

Stick to the facts.


TB

The important point is that NONE of these times should be seen as anything more than estimates.
True Watkins had watch, but was it for a start syncronizied to GMT?
Perhaps more important was it syncronizied to the times given by Lawende and Levy? Or even to the estimate given by Harvey, who estimated by using the nearby post office clock, and then attempting to work his timings backwards.

[The Baron]

The important point is that NONE of these times should be seen as anything more than estimates.
True Watkins had watch, but was it for a start syncronizied to GMT?
Perhaps more important was it syncronizied to the times given by Lawende and Levy? Or even to the estimate given by Harvey, who estimated by using the nearby post office clock, and then attempting to work his timings backwards.

Completely agree, and we still cannot be 100% sure the couple seen by the three were Eddowes and her killer.


TB

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I am not intending to be condesnding here, but why are you still using these timings, set to the minute?
Timing simply was not that syncronizied in 1888.
In the whole of the C5 murders only TWO times are Syncronizied, those of Lawende and Levy( they used the same clock in the Imperial Club). And their timing CANNOT be synchronised to the Time stated by Watkins.
What looks like a 3 minute gap, could easily be at least double that.

Be more flexible, that's all I am asking here.

I agree with you about the reliability of timings, but I am going by the evidence.

We do not have anything else to go by.

I think I said 'about three minutes'.

I didn't say 'exactly three minutes'.

But there is a big difference between three minutes and ten minutes.

Even if Watkins was out by a minute or two relative to the clock seen by Lawende, what difference would that make?

If it was 1.46 and not 1.44, then the murder could have taken place five minutes later instead of three minutes, but I think that's unlikely.

If it was 1.42 rather than 1.44, then the murder could not have happened - or to put it another way, Watkins would have seen the murderer escaping.

Or it could be that the murderer left at 1.43 (by the clock) and that Watkins arrived at 1.45.

In that case, my estimate of 3 minutes becomes 4 minutes.

I don't see how 3 minutes can be out by much.