Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jack's Escape from Mitre Square

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

    Hi Jeff.

    My point still remains. The Lawende couple are at the Duke street end of Church Passage, which is a good 85 feet from the Mitre Square end.
    How could they see anyone in the square?

    There was a gas lamp at the Mitre Square end of the passage, that would illuminate PC Watkins as he walked passed. Also, they might just have been waiting for the rain to pass, which it did around 1:33 to 1:35, the times given by Levy and Lawende for the time they spotted the Church Passage Couple. If that was Eddowes and JtR, waiting for the rain to stop, then they would have headed in about that time.

    - Jeff

    Comment


    • 1.33 or 137 ill agree to that jeff.
      'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

      Comment


      • Hi Fishy,

        Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post
        1.33 or 137 ill agree to that jeff.
        Yes, anytime in that range of times seems like when the murder started. I would suggest that prior to the rain stopping Eddowes isn't going to be taking a presumed customer to the presumed transaction location. Levy and Lawende give us a range of times for when the rain stopped (1:33-1:35). Even without allowing for clock sync issues, if we assume all the clocks read exactly the same time, then that means the Church Passage Couple, even at the latest of those sightings, still have 2 minutes to get to that location which is 30 seconds away at an average walking speed, and still fall within the required time window for the murder to have happened. And, I would argue, that where ever Eddowes and JtR were, waiting out the rain, they would have moved into position once the rain stopped, which means they too had to be close enough to get there in the same 2 minute time window, which we know the Church Passage Couple could do (because again, they would be sheltering from the rain somewhere, just like the Church Passage Couple seem to have been doing).

        So, if the Church Passage Couple isn't Eddowes and JtR, then Eddowes and JtR are just outside either the St. James Passage or just outside the Mitre Street entrance. But PC Watkins doesn't see them, reducing the probability they are outside in Mitre Street (police were to look out for couples after all), and nobody reports a couple hanging out in St. James Place (but people were about, so there might have been a couple there but nobody noticed). Or, the couple we do know about, who are acting like a couple sheltering from the rain, who weren't there a few minutes before when PC Harvey made his previous round (an earlier post by someone else makes that point), and who aren't there when PC Harvey patrols Church Passage at 1:41-1;:42, and who are tentatively identified as Eddowes and JtR, and who have ample time to get to the location within the required time window (which could be as short as 2 minutes between end of rain and required start of murder), was in fact Eddowes and JtR.

        It's not solid proof, but the odds of there being a second couple within 2 minutes of the crime scene who were unnoticed and this being a false identification of a couple who fit all the other aspects of the evidence (right place, right times, appropriate behaviours, similar appearance), seem low to me. As such, I think the hypothesis that this is an actual sighting must be seriously considered, it is certainly valid, so anyone who claims this definately is not Eddowes and JtR is making an overly strong claim. At the same time, one cannot be 100% sure it is them either, as many people would be sheltering, and so those observing might likewise be "out of the weather" and so not notice others despite them being nearby.

        - Jeff
        Last edited by JeffHamm; 06-01-2019, 01:41 AM.

        Comment


        • Hi jeff . If were in agreement that Eddows and here killer were the couple that walked through church passage and got to the spot of the murder at 1.37. Whats your view on the following .....''To work in such an intricate manner and to remove the kidney carefully and the uterus without damaging the surrounding tissue with a six inch knife would be very difficult.In the time the perpetrator had with their heightened levels of awareness and the prospect of being caught makes this even more difficult. The emphasis is on ''CAREFULLY'' because only a person with an expert knowledge of anatomy would be able to remove the organs in the manner described and would find it very difficult if not IMPOSSIBLE in almost total darkness'' . Phillip Harrison , Bedford Hospital Mortuary 6000 post mortems. on Eddows murder and mutilations. Now were talking 6 mins remember. and theres at least 3 more medical experts in trevor marriots book who say the same thing .... Mitre street looks more like where was she was bought in from. however even from 1.33 to 1.43 still with the above statement looks questionable. Thoughts? For me i just dont see anyway possible that eddows came down church passage with her killer based on what we know and more importantly what we dont know what witnesses saw or didnt see. 6 mins ... sorry not for me
          'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

          Comment


          • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post
            Hi jeff . If were in agreement that Eddows and here killer were the couple that walked through church passage and got to the spot of the murder at 1.37. Whats your view on the following .....''To work in such an intricate manner and to remove the kidney carefully and the uterus without damaging the surrounding tissue with a six inch knife would be very difficult.In the time the perpetrator had with their heightened levels of awareness and the prospect of being caught makes this even more difficult. The emphasis is on ''CAREFULLY'' because only a person with an expert knowledge of anatomy would be able to remove the organs in the manner described and would find it very difficult if not IMPOSSIBLE in almost total darkness'' . Phillip Harrison , Bedford Hospital Mortuary 6000 post mortems. on Eddows murder and mutilations. Now were talking 6 mins remember. and theres at least 3 more medical experts in trevor marriots book who say the same thing .... Mitre street looks more like where was she was bought in from. however even from 1.33 to 1.43 still with the above statement looks questionable. Thoughts? For me i just dont see anyway possible that eddows came down church passage with her killer based on what we know and more importantly what we dont know what witnesses saw or didnt see. 6 mins ... sorry not for me
            Hi Fishy,

            No worries. As I say, the evidence we have does not prove the Church Passage Couple was definitely Eddowes and JtR. I do think, when looked at altogether though, it points in that direction, but the most we can say for sure is that nothing in the evidence we have refutes it.

            Also, I've noticed a lot of modern medical experts seem to be given information in a way that is a bit biased. Remember, the uterus was damaged, JtR cut off 1/3 of it. He busted open the intestines and got faeces spreading around, he damaged organs, and so forth. Basically, it looks like he worked very fast, made lots of mistakes, and so forth. Even if the last thing he did was to carefully remove the kidney, the rest of it was done in haste. I'm not a medical experts, but the doctors at the time estimated 5 minutes, and I've seen another modern doctor also with lots of post-mortems under their belt, suggest it would take 2 or 3 minutes. Not to dispute him, I've still gone with the 5 minute estimate here as it's longer.

            And Harrison's opinion aside, we know JtR did all those things in a very short space of time in the darkness of Mitre Square. It appears it was difficult (they damaged the uterus, they made a mess, etc), but clearly not impossible.

            Anyway, I'm not trying to convince people that the Church Passage Couple was Eddowes and JtR, only to convince them that they cannot rule them out based upon the evidence we have. Not believing the medical opinion that it required 5 minutes is your choice, but make sure you're not just dismissing evidence because it conflicts with an idea you have. That conflict is usually a signal that the idea needs modifying.

            - Jeff

            Comment


            • Very good Jeff . Yes agree, we could find medical experts that give their opinion definitely yes or no whether or it could be done , and thats the annoying part, either you can or you cant, someone has to wrong im at a loss in this day an age that it hasn't been proven one way or the other . Sure would open up some interesting theories if it couldn't.
              'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

              Comment


              • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post
                Having said that ,for the same reason Harvey is wrong i think Lawende is also possible wrong as he could not 100% identify the women he saw as Eddows ,and no one reportedly saw a man and a women walk down church passage or st James passage for that matter and into mitre square from 1.35 onwards. There for in my view Enddows entered the square from mitre street at no earlier than 1.33AM , after Watkins had finished his inspection to continue his route again .
                But if that were correct then they had a 50% chance of being seen by him, depending on whether he turned left or right out of the square into Mitre Street, very risky for a killer to put himself in a situation where he might be seen with a victim

                www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                Comment


                • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post
                  Very good Jeff . Yes agree, we could find medical experts that give their opinion definitely yes or no whether or it could be done , and thats the annoying part, either you can or you cant, someone has to wrong im at a loss in this day an age that it hasn't been proven one way or the other . Sure would open up some interesting theories if it couldn't.
                  An interesting point made by one of my medical experts Edmond Neale a consultant gynecologist

                  "In both the removals of the uterus and the kidney Mr Neal says that in his opinion it would not be the skill, but the level of anatomical knowledge that would determine the time needed at the crime scene to effect these removals. Mr Neal also believes that if the killer did remove the organs then he must have had sufficient anatomical knowledge, otherwise he would not have had the time to search for the organs, and work out how to remove them within that “at least five minute window”

                  But thats of course if there was even a 5 minute windowto do all that he is purported to have done

                  www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                  Comment


                  • For him to continue on his route would have turn right out of the square to king st, turned up to st james palace . Eddows could have entered from Leadenhall st, id say 1 min would have been all that was necessary to to get to there spots without seeing each other..
                    'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

                    Comment


                    • So do you concur with mr neale that ''the five minute window it could not have been done, yes or no ?
                      'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post
                        So do you concur with mr neale that ''the five minute window it could not have been done, yes or no ?
                        Mr Neale is commenting on the 5 minute window as mentioned by Dr Brown. I personally dont believe the killer had sufficient time to do all that he is purported to have done

                        Dr Brown used the term at least 5 mins or perhaps more, by that he is I believe referring to the murder and mutilations only, because in his Star interview he uses the term 5 mins, and in the same article Sequeria states 3 mins.This interview was I believe given before the post mortem was conducted. and before organs were found to be missing.

                        His expert took 3 mins to just remove the uterus and still damage the bladder, something the killer did not do. So extra time must be added to that to find and remove the kidney, for arguments sake, let say 2 more mins so we have a victorian medical expert on the female anatomy potentially taking 5 mins just to find locate and remove the organs alone.

                        So to be able to be on a par with the Victorian expert the killer would have to have had the same medical expertise and knowledge to be able to effect those removals as has been described.

                        Added to that we have to take into account the extra time needed to walk into the square, go to the murder location, carry out the murder and mutilations, cut or tear a piece of apron, rifle her pockets and remove the organs and make good his escape.

                        So to work on the time of 5 mins fro the killer to do all is really pushing it, especially Brown stated it could have taken longer, but of course the burning question is how much time did the killer really have with Eddowes from start to finish, and was that time sufficient time to do all that he is purported to have done.

                        If we work on the times we have to work with the answer has to be no.

                        www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                        Comment


                        • Thank you Trevor ,my answer is No as well . There for in my opinion i believe Eddows was wrongly identified by Lawende a at 1.35 at church passage, and she must have entered Mitre square VERY SHORLY after p.c Watkins left at 1.32/3 from Mitre street . Remembering the last positive eye witness of Eddows was P.C. Hutt the jailer at Bishopsgate police station at 1.00 . NO PERSON came forward to say if she was spotted walking to Mitre square , and thats where she ended up at 1.44 . so from 1.00 to 1.44 truth is no one can testify to her whereabouts not even Lawende . if people want to go by her similar clothing statement Lawende made as fact thats their right. But im not buying it, not for one minute.
                          'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

                          Comment


                          • Hi Trevor,

                            Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                            Mr Neale is commenting on the 5 minute window as mentioned by Dr Brown. I personally dont believe the killer had sufficient time to do all that he is purported to have done
                            What do you think is erroneous in the medical information we have? Or have I misunderstood the above? It sounds like you think the reported injuries and mutilations overstate their extent?


                            Dr Brown used the term at least 5 mins or perhaps more, by that he is I believe referring to the murder and mutilations only, because in his Star interview he uses the term 5 mins, and in the same article Sequeria states 3 mins.This interview was I believe given before the post mortem was conducted. and before organs were found to be missing.

                            His expert took 3 mins to just remove the uterus and still damage the bladder, something the killer did not do. So extra time must be added to that to find and remove the kidney, for arguments sake, let say 2 more mins so we have a victorian medical expert on the female anatomy potentially taking 5 mins just to find locate and remove the organs alone.
                            I think this might be why there was so much talk of slaughtermen and butchers. Those who would have anatomical knowledge of where the organs are, and how to kill with a knife, and also who's job would require them to be able to remove the internals quickly and don't have to worry about harmi, while medical professionals work slowly and are trying cure the patient. Someone whose job is to gut an animal would have the experience of having to do it quickly. I don't have any favored suspect or solution, so I'm not pushing a personal view here. Just making an observation.


                            So to be able to be on a par with the Victorian expert the killer would have to have had the same medical expertise and knowledge to be able to effect those removals as has been described.

                            Added to that we have to take into account the extra time needed to walk into the square, go to the murder location, carry out the murder and mutilations, cut or tear a piece of apron, rifle her pockets and remove the organs and make good his escape.

                            So to work on the time of 5 mins fro the killer to do all is really pushing it, especially Brown stated it could have taken longer, but of course the burning question is how much time did the killer really have with Eddowes from start to finish, and was that time sufficient time to do all that he is purported to have done.

                            If we work on the times we have to work with the answer has to be no.

                            www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                            Well, there's not much more time he could have than what he gets based upon Levy's estimate of when the rain stopped, given that PC Watkins patrol was at 1:30 and it would take him until 1:31:30 to clear the square. That's only 2 more minutes than the Levy based time estimate, but it was pouring rain during those minutes, which is why Lawende and Levy were waiting it out.

                            - Jeff

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post
                              Thank you Trevor ,my answer is No as well . There for in my opinion i believe Eddows was wrongly identified by Lawende a at 1.35 at church passage, and she must have entered Mitre square VERY SHORLY after p.c Watkins left at 1.32/3 from Mitre street . Remembering the last positive eye witness of Eddows was P.C. Hutt the jailer at Bishopsgate police station at 1.00 . NO PERSON came forward to say if she was spotted walking to Mitre square , and thats where she ended up at 1.44 . so from 1.00 to 1.44 truth is no one can testify to her whereabouts not even Lawende . if people want to go by her similar clothing statement Lawende made as fact thats their right. But im not buying it, not for one minute.
                              Hi Fishy,

                              I'm curious, why don't you consider Levy's time of 1:33 and only consider Lawende's 1:35? And remember, no matter which one you pick, it was bucketing with rain at that time, which is why Lawende and Levy waited until then to leave. Are you thinking that Eddowes took her potential customer to complete their transaction in the square while the rain was pouring down?

                              - Jeff

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by JeffHamm View Post

                                Hi Fishy,

                                I'm curious, why don't you consider Levy's time of 1:33 and only consider Lawende's 1:35? And remember, no matter which one you pick, it was bucketing with rain at that time, which is why Lawende and Levy waited until then to leave. Are you thinking that Eddowes took her potential customer to complete their transaction in the square while the rain was pouring down?
                                That is a very relevant point, Jeff, which got me thinking... If Eddowes had been killed when the shower was in full spate, or even before it started, then surely her clothing would have been thoroughly soaked with rain as her dead body lay motionless. Furthermore, the heavy rain would have dissolved and dissipated a lot of her blood. Given that neither of these seem to have occured, then Eddowes must have been killled after the rain had ceased.
                                Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                                "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X