From Mitre Square to Goulston Street - Some thoughts.

[Curious Cat]

Please see my replies below.

If you mean that the murderer may have been about to write the message when he saw Pc Long approaching, he could have hidden on the stairs out of view and waited until Long had passed.

You posted just as I was typing my reply to Trevor so I've pretty much said the very same thing. But I would add, it's possible PC Long was walking north up Goulston Street as the killer walked south, spotted the constable first - maybe seeing his torch - and ducked into the doorway. Obviously we don't know whether DC Halse entered the street before or after PC Long.

[Curious Cat]

You have a vivid sense of imagination Which way did he run Pc Long was coming up Goulston St in one direction Dc Halse was at the other end?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Seeing as PC Long and DC Halse didn't see each other when they were on Goulston Street at the same time then neither of them seeing the killer while he slipped into the shadows of a staircase is rather basic. In fact, we know they did not see the killer due to their testimonies. Or rather, they were unaware if they had. But we do know all three were present in that street over a similar time and the only one seemingly aware of at least one of the others at any point was the killer.

If PC Long momentarily stopped on the pavement at 2:20am and casually circled his torch around the outside of the doorway before moving on he would not be aware of someone further inside and up a few steps in the stairwell. He also wouldn't necessarily notice any specific graffiti being there or not, so whether the killer wrote it will always be inconclusive. However, a bloody piece of apron would be a notable difference in being there if it wasn't before. PC Long occasionally stopping along his new beat may also account for the length of time it took him to complete a circuit. The killer would've known the constable was the one person who was due to return to that spot. As the bodies were supposed to be found in good time, so was the apron piece. It's completely in keeping with the killer's apparent thought process.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Please see my replies below.

Is PC Long's adamant testimony that the apron piece wasn't there before 2:55am due to him actually checking the doorway on each pass through?


[Coroner] Had you been past that spot previously to your discovering the apron? - I passed about twenty minutes past two o'clock.

[Coroner] Are you able to say whether the apron was there then? - It was not.


He could not have been more definite.

He did not say, 'I cannot say because I did not look'.


It's not explicitly indicated whether he did this as a matter of course as part of his beat but if PC Long did a cursory sweep of open doorways along his beat then he would be very clear in his mind that the apron piece wasn't there previously. A bloody piece of cloth on the floor that was not there last time he passed by would certainly catch his attention.


Exactly!

If he was as unobservant as his critics suggest, why did he find the apron at all?


In contrast, some writing on the wall at an angle to his view would be easily missed or ignored until he looked much closer which he did on finding the apron piece. If it was there before that point, of course.


Correct.

The best evidence we have is that the writing was on the inside of the jamb, i.e. roughly perpendicular to the street.

Upon finding the apron piece and walking back out, the writing would have been on his immediate left, almost at eye level.


If the killer was spooked by an approaching constable then that could only be PC Long. Does the killer then deliberately leave the apron piece for PC Long to find on his next circuit? A tease to say, 'Just missed me, ha ha,'?


If you mean that the murderer may have been about to write the message when he saw Pc Long approaching, he could have hidden on the stairs out of view and waited until Long had passed.

[Darryl Kenyon]

Spicer's man can certainly be entered into a suspect pool and there is always a chance he was the ripper. With that said Spicer seems to have been driven purely by emotion when he decided that this man was the ripper. We see this in his own words:

"As soon as I saw the man in that dark alley-way in the early hours of the morning I felt sure he was the Ripper."

And again here.

"What is a respectable doctor doing with a notorious woman at a quarter to two in the morning?"

Spicer mentions that his suspect gave a Brixton address. Is that a street or a neighborhood? It would be interesting to look through census data for a Brixton doctor.

Brixton is an area south of the Thames

Regards Darryl

[Indian Harry]

Yes, but what is the reason for you not believing the story?

"An average John" is just your interpretation, and there is no evidence to suggest that.
There must have been plenty of "I was there..." type stories, and "I would have caught him, if it wasn't for.....etc."
So, it's just another one of those stories, but is there a grain of truth to it?

I don't think our JtR was a super-sleuth, we might have made him look like one, but in reality he was just an ordinary man with a twisted mentality.
The Yorkshire Ripper had been interviewed on nine separate occasions before he was finally arrested, so Spicer's story may be an example of JtR being discovered and then let go - just like Peter Sutcliffe had been.

Spicer's man can certainly be entered into a suspect pool and there is always a chance he was the ripper. With that said Spicer seems to have been driven purely by emotion when he decided that this man was the ripper. We see this in his own words:

"As soon as I saw the man in that dark alley-way in the early hours of the morning I felt sure he was the Ripper."

And again here.

"What is a respectable doctor doing with a notorious woman at a quarter to two in the morning?"

Spicer mentions that his suspect gave a Brixton address. Is that a street or a neighborhood? It would be interesting to look through census data for a Brixton doctor.