Time to Kill?

[Fiver]

To be honest, that wasn't my observation but rather was pointed out by someone else in a previous post a while ago (can't remember who to credit, sorry). I'm not confident enough in my knowledge of the Alice McKenzie case to answer your question.

PC Andrews found Mackenzie's body at about 12:50am.

Inspector Reid arrived at about 1:10am and said the blood was still flowing, but began to clot when Dr Phillips arrived shortly afterwards. dr Phillips said he arrived around 1:10am.

Dr Phillips did not think that Mackenzie was killed by the Ripper. Dr Bond, who IIRC only read the reports, thought she was a Ripper victim.

[The Rookie Detective]

PC Andrews must have missed he killer by no more than a minute or so. The latest that the killer cleared the scene would be 12.49am.

How sure can we be regards the rain starting at 12.45am?

Alice's body was dry underneath her body meaning she was laying in that position before the rain wet the ground. If it started raining at 12.45am then the latest the killer could have got her to the ground is 12.45am.

Getting her to the floor and causing the injuries sustained would have taken the killer no more than 2 minutes to inflict.

When you add to the fact that her blood was still coming out at 1.10am (i'm sure that Andrews said in his report that Reid arrived between 1.05am - 1.10am) and the maximium bleed out time for her injury is around 20 minutes, maybe 25 at a push, then the fatal attack on her neck had to of been no earlier than 12.40am.

So i hypothesize that the killer and Alice arrive at 12.38am just after the pub closes, and that after a couple of minutes to check the coast is clear, the killer attacks her at 12.40am, incapacitates her and gets her to the floor and then he attacks her throat at 12.42am. As he's about to inflict more injuries and decimate her body, it starts to rain at 12.45am. The rain impedes his ritual because the blood isn't going what it should and so he leaves at 12.47am...3 minutes later Andrews arrives and discovers the body.
He is at the murder location for less than 10 minutes

For me, he is clearly unfinished with her and the only 2 things that can disturb him would have been him hearing Andrews approaching or the weather affecting his ritual.

The injury to her neck was running up until 1.10am, but it could have been 1.05am.

That kind of injury that she suffered would take anywhere between 15 seconds to 20 minutes to bleed out.

If her blood is still running at 1.05am, then the earliest she was attacked was 12.45. That only gives the killer a window of 3 minutes to escape before Andrews arrives on the scene.

[FrankO]

B) A Policeman passes by the murder site, Lechmere arrives with Nichols, he kills her, he hears Paul but can't run because he knows a Policeman has recently passed by, Paul arrives and sees Lechnmere

Hi RD,

If a policeman had passed the crime spot shortly before Nichols was slain and the killer had seen him minutes before he launched his attack and if he knew something about police beats and Neil's in particular, then he would have known that the beat officer wasn't due back for a while. Plus, as Jeff Hamm indicated, Neil's beat was in the opposite direction of Lechmere's.

So, running away from the murder spot and Paul wouldn't take him to the policeman who had recently passed the spot. The policeman would have been in Winthrop Street, but more probably on the first stretch of Whitechapel between Brady Street and Baker's Row at that point. But in actual reality he was quite likely north of Buck's Row in Thomas Street or Queen Ann Street at that point, only 4 or 5 minutes before he would re-pass the crime spot.

[Fiver]

Buck's Row was PC Neil's beat, and he testifies he last patrolled it at 3:15. I believe there is a report of another more senior officer passing through Buck's Row as well. I forget the exact time, but I think it is either around 3:15 as well, or sufficiently close that it makes no real difference.

Here's a video that says s Police Sergeant Henry Kirby went down Bucks Row at around 3:15am.

It's at around 7:15 to 7:30 on the video.

This thread quotes an entry on Kirby in The Complete Jack The Ripper A To Z and mentions an article Bernard Brown, ‘The Rise and Fall of Sergeant Kirby’, Ripperologist, May 2003

Moreover, both were travelling east, so in the opposite direction that is proposed for the direction of flight if JtR were interrupted by the approach of Cross/Lechmere or Paul.

PC Neill testified that "I went across and found deceased lying outside a gateway, her head towards the east."

Which would mean Nichols' killer would have been facing east when he killed and mutilated her. If Lechmere was the killer, I'd have expected Nichols head to be pointing west.

[JeffHamm]

Here's a video that says s Police Sergeant Henry Kirby went down Bucks Row at around 3:15am,

It's at around 7:15 to 7:30 on the video.

This thread quotes an entry on Kirby in The Complete Jack The Ripper A To Z and mentions an article Bernard Brown, ‘The Rise and Fall of Sergeant Kirby’, Ripperologist, May 2003



PC Neill testified that "I went across and found deceased lying outside a gateway, her head towards the east."

Which would mean Nichols' killer would have been facing east when he killed and mutilated her. If Lechmere was the killer, I'd have expected Nichols head to be pointing west.

Thanks Fiver. That's it, PS Kirby, and he appears to have traversed Buck's Row around 3:15, which is similar to the time that PC Neil would have been making his circuit as well. It may be that PS Kirby was checking on the beat constables to ensure they were doing their rounds and not slacking off, or of course, his being there could be for completed unrelated reasons. Either way, from what we know, there's no real impact with regards to the time window being considered.

I'm not sure the direction of travel by JtR would necessarily be indicated by the orientation of the body though. Presumably Nichols and JtR engage in some initial conversation, at which point their relative positions and facings are going to change. And if he's strangled her initially, which would account for her lack of calling out, etc, then her body orientation when he puts her to the ground will probably reflect how he wishes to position her rather than the direction he was walking in Buck's Row.

Just to speculate a bit, perhaps he wanted to be able to face east along Buck's Row because they entered from the West, and so he was already able to ascertain that it was "clear" to the west (he had just been there), and so danger was more apt to arise from the east? That is probably over thinking things though. It may just have been easier to lay her down in that direction due to some idiosyncratic aspect of the attack itself.

- Jeff

[Fiver]

I'm not sure the direction of travel by JtR would necessarily be indicated by the orientation of the body though. Presumably Nichols and JtR engage in some initial conversation, at which point their relative positions and facings are going to change. And if he's strangled her initially, which would account for her lack of calling out, etc, then her body orientation when he puts her to the ground will probably reflect how he wishes to position her rather than the direction he was walking in Buck's Row.

Nichols body was not just found with the head pointing east, it was found on the south side of the road. Cross, Paul, and PC Neil had all walked down the right side of the road. For Neil, that was the south side as he was walking east. Thus, it seems probable that Nichols and her killer were walking east before he attacked her.

[jerryd]

If it wasn't Andrews, then the murder had to have taken place between 12.40am - 12.45am.


The rain starting at 12.45am i believe is the real reason why the killer fled. It changed the parameters and gave him less control of his environment.

And so...


Before 12.40am is impossible if she was still bleeding out at 1am
After 12,45am is impossible if it dry under her body and it started raining.

a 5 minutes time window that exonerates Andrews..or does it?

Hi RD.

I wanted to address portions of an earlier post you made. I've separated them on the quote above from your original post.

Here are a couple of press reports I find interesting. Keep in mind while reading these, PC Andrews and Sgt. Badham met 60 yards or so from the murder site, less than 5 minutes before Alice was discovered. PC Andrews was able to hear the footsteps of Isaac Jacobs at a far greater distance than the 60 yards, so if a murder was in progress while PC Andrews was meeting with Sgt. Badham, I am confident they would have heard or seen something. I also doubt a killer would be that stupid. Plus, from the picture from the Three Crowns, it appears they would have had a visual to the murder site. Remember, Sgt. Badham testified he met with PC Andrews at 12:48 and the body was discovered at 12:50. (Again, I realize the exact times may not appeal to some, but then again, the same that hold that standard of policing time also hold fast to the rain beginning at exactly 12:45. It could have started later.


According to this report, PC Andrews passed the murder site at 12:45, met Badham at 12:48 and then returned to discover the body at 12:50. If Alice were dead at 12:45, wouldn't PC Andrews say so when he met Sgt. Badham a couple minutes later?


So, this second report states, if we go absolute on the stated timings, the foul deed was committed within the time PC Andrews left Sgt Badham at 12:48 and when he blew his whistle at 12:50. I have shown on another thread the whistle was not blown until much later, but I'll leave that for now.

And last, from the inquest testimony of DI Reid in the Times: Two constables are continually passing through the alley all night. It is hardly ever left alone for more than five minutes.

[FrankO]

And if he's strangled her initially, which would account for her lack of calling out, etc, then her body orientation when he puts her to the ground will probably reflect how he wishes to position her rather than the direction he was walking in Buck's Row.

Hi Jeff,

Seeing that all the "outdoor victims" were found in a position where he had their heads to his left if he was kneeling at the one side where he would have had the space to do so, I think you're quite right.

Cheers,
Frank

[The Rookie Detective]

Hi RD.

I wanted to address portions of an earlier post you made. I've separated them on the quote above from your original post.

Here are a couple of press reports I find interesting. Keep in mind while reading these, PC Andrews and Sgt. Badham met 60 yards or so from the murder site, less than 5 minutes before Alice was discovered. PC Andrews was able to hear the footsteps of Isaac Jacobs at a far greater distance than the 60 yards, so if a murder was in progress while PC Andrews was meeting with Sgt. Badham, I am confident they would have heard or seen something. I also doubt a killer would be that stupid. Plus, from the picture from the Three Crowns, it appears they would have had a visual to the murder site. Remember, Sgt. Badham testified he met with PC Andrews at 12:48 and the body was discovered at 12:50. (Again, I realize the exact times may not appeal to some, but then again, the same that hold that standard of policing time also hold fast to the rain beginning at exactly 12:45. It could have started later.


According to this report, PC Andrews passed the murder site at 12:45, met Badham at 12:48 and then returned to discover the body at 12:50. If Alice were dead at 12:45, wouldn't PC Andrews say so when he met Sgt. Badham a couple minutes later?


So, this second report states, if we go absolute on the stated timings, the foul deed was committed within the time PC Andrews left Sgt Badham at 12:48 and when he blew his whistle at 12:50. I have shown on another thread the whistle was not blown until much later, but I'll leave that for now.

And last, from the inquest testimony of DI Reid in the Times: Two constables are continually passing through the alley all night. It is hardly ever left alone for more than five minutes.

Absolutely exceptional work and just highlights that something here is very wrong and doesn't sit right.

In terms of the timings, they are one of our most reliable assets in trying to gain the truth, because as long a the timings are accurate, then they are a given mathematical constant.
For example, the killer needed time to kill AND escape WITHOUT being seen. It would appear that the longest possible time he had was no more than 2 to 3 minutes.

For me, that's impossible.

This may be explained by there being an error with the official timings somewhere.

The killer was a real man who still lived by the principles of physics.

He needed time and he needed physical space to escape.

The question is, NOBODY saw anyone or anything, and it would seem that her body just appeared out of nowhere. That IS impossible.

So what are the possible explanations?


Logic would determine that the killer and the victim arriving at the site, killing and then disappearing, in under 3 minutes just isn't realistic.

It would be statistically more likely that Jacobs or one of the policemen were the killer.
Or she was murdered elsewhere shortly before and concealed in one of the carts.
Or someone isn't telling the truth

Something doesn't ring true

It's not just the time it takes to kill, it's the time it takes to leave and escape unnoticed. The killer would NEED 5 minutes, not 6 or 7, but not 2 or 3 either.

It could be done in 5 minutes
1 minute to arrive unnoticed/pick spot/interact
1 minute to attack/strangle/subdue/drag to floor
1 minute to cut and mutilate
1 minute to stop, position her for display/check his work/check for blood on himself
1 minute to leave and CLEAR the area

There's no way that he could have come, killed and gone in under 5 minutes.


What are we missing?

[FrankO]

It could be done in 5 minutes
1 minute to arrive unnoticed/pick spot/interact
1 minute to attack/strangle/subdue/drag to floor
1 minute to cut and mutilate
1 minute to stop, position her for display/check his work/check for blood on himself
1 minute to leave and CLEAR the area

There's no way that he could have come, killed and gone in under 5 minutes.

Hi RD,

I'm not going to say a thing about the first and the last minute, but I certainly don't think you're right about the 3 in the middle.

I think it's possible to choke a person into unconsciousness within some 15 seconds, so your 2nd minute needn't have been more than half a minute.

Purely technically, I believe the raising of the skirts & cutting could have been done in less than a minute, in say 45 seconds.

The way I see it, your 3rd minute is far too long. The stopping and positiong would only amount to stopping, as the body in which the body lay was simply the best position in which he could work on her. So, he would have laid her down like that after subdueing her, leaving her like that when he got away. And I doubt the killer would have done much, if any checking on the spot. In this respect 15 seconds seem already way too long. Go check your stopwatch and see how long 15 seconds are in this respect.

So, I'm thinking some 3 minutes would be nearer to the mark than 5.

[The Rookie Detective]

Hi RD,

I'm not going to say a thing about the first and the last minute, but I certainly don't think you're right about the 3 in the middle.

I think it's possible to choke a person into unconsciousness within some 15 seconds, so your 2nd minute needn't have been more than half a minute.

Purely technically, I believe the raising of the skirts & cutting could have been done in less than a minute, in say 45 seconds.

The way I see it, your 3rd minute is far too long. The stopping and positiong would only amount to stopping, as the body in which the body lay was simply the best position in which he could work on her. So, he would have laid her down like that after subdueing her, leaving her like that when he got away. And I doubt the killer would have done much, if any checking on the spot. In this respect 15 seconds seem already way too long. Go check your stopwatch and see how long 15 seconds are in this respect.

So, I'm thinking some 3 minutes would be nearer to the mark than 5.

On reflection, i'm inclined to agree with you.


But i feel that time is saved by the arrival time. For example, if he watched his victim and then followed her, and then quickly attacked her and fled, then the 3 minutes is acceptable. It only works for me if he randomly followed her and sprung a frenzied impulsive quick attack. If the entire killing was done in under 3 minutes, then there's no time for the killer to have been with her and having interacted with her before he attacked. He was scoping the area for a victim, saw her, followed her, killed her and then left in under 3 minutes, otherwise he would have been seeing arriving with her.

This random attack would also fit with the Nichols murder...

What if the killer is walking in Bucks Row, spots Nichols sitting slumped on the pavement, she's drunk, sleeping and worse for wear. He spots her and then launches a frenzied attack on her, strangling her as shes already sitting on the floor. It not a planned attack, but more an impulsive kill.

Impulsive kills would take 2 to 3 minutes

But planned premeditated kills, involving arriving with a victim, interacting and then killing them and making a quick escape, for me can't be done in under 4 minutes.

For the killer to have killed and escaped in under 3 minutes...it strongly indicates that he randomly chose his victims whilst walking around the street with a concealed knife.
More an impulsive spree killer than a methodically planned killer.


But that in itself also doesn't sit right either.


How could a killer not be seen arriving with their victim or leaving a murder site with a heavy police presence, and carrying out strangling, cutting and mutilations in complete silence in under 3 minutes?

If he was a policeman then that's problem solved.


Are there any policemen who were on the beat for MORE than one murder?

If there were any policemen who were on duty for more than one murder, then that may suggest a policeman.

Unlikely, but nobody would have ever suspected a policeman.

[Fiver]

Unlikely, but nobody would have ever suspected a policeman.

Virtually everybody even remotely connected with the case has been suspected, including the police.

For example, Sgt William Thick was accused in 1889.

[The Rookie Detective]

Here's a video that says s Police Sergeant Henry Kirby went down Bucks Row at around 3:15am.

It's at around 7:15 to 7:30 on the video.

This thread quotes an entry on Kirby in The Complete Jack The Ripper A To Z and mentions an article Bernard Brown, ‘The Rise and Fall of Sergeant Kirby’, Ripperologist, May 2003



PC Neill testified that "I went across and found deceased lying outside a gateway, her head towards the east."

Which would mean Nichols' killer would have been facing east when he killed and mutilated her. If Lechmere was the killer, I'd have expected Nichols head to be pointing west.

Very fascinating video indeed...but why is PC Mizen not mentioned in Nichol's murder?

It mentions Neil, Thain, Kirby but no mention of Mizen?

And what do we know about Kirby?

He was said to have passed by around the same time as Neil?... but why did he not appear at the inquest? Why the mystery?

Something doesn't add up