Did Lawende see Kate Eddowes?

[Fleetwood Mac]

Thanks so much, FM.

As I suspected, Lawende meant that he looked at his pocket watch at 1.30 a.m.

It seems that his timing of 1.35 was an estimate, which means it is no more reliable than Levy's estimate of 1.33 or 1.34.

The fact that Lawende checked his watch and its time matched that of the club clock does suggest that clocks and watches did not disagree to the extent some have suggested.

If Lawende had set his watch to agree with the club clock, why would he have bothered to look at it?

It certainly is an estimate, PI.

Joseph Lawende was confident it was 1.30am when he rose to leave.

The time it took the two Josephs to get near Church Passage is another matter. You could quite easily mistake five minutes for something less or something more.

The problem is, there's nothing concrete to hang onto except their estimate of the time it took to get near Church Passage. Arguing anything else, is unsupported speculation driven by an inconvenient time and I don't think that's of much value (outside of speculating that is).

[Fleetwood Mac]

Hi Scott,

I was thinking that encountering the man in the Orange Market square after 7 minutes doesn't leave much time to finish the beat, but Langdon states "Presently - exactly seven minutes after he had been in the square previously - the policeman entered it again, and started to walk round it. Suddenly he came upon a human form huddled up in a corner. It was a woman lying dead", so this adds up to the 14 minute beat. It also fits quite well with the watchboy story.

There is a similarity with the Stephen White story, in that White said that he "stood aside to let the man pass", and it fits with "at the end of the cul-de-sac, huddled against the wall, there was the body of a woman" and being "just behind the Whitechapel Road". However, "a certain alley just behind the Whitechapel Road" also fits Castle Alley and McKenzie, although that was not a cul-de-sac. White's description of the man puts me in mind of Francis Thompson. In the end, neither locations fit the description of "could only be entered from where we had two men posted in hiding".

Cheers, George

I cannot for the life of me reconcile the Stephen White story with Mitre Square.

At a push, you could argue that White meant that they were watching a passage (translated into an alley at some point) and the only entry into that passage from where they were watching, was the entrance near where they were. Aye, a bit of artistic licence there, but it's the only part of the story that you could make an outside chance case for.

Clearly, it wasn't just off the Whitechapel Road and nor could Mitre Square be mistaken for a cul-de-sac.

On the other hand, Castle Alley was in fact an alley and it was just off the WR. You could make a case that over time it was translated into a cul-de-sac because cul-de-sacs were widely associated with poverty and crime, i.e. the exact details of the alley had not been written down and it was imagined it was a cul-de-sac due to the reputation of such places.

Then again, July wouldn't include 'a bitter cold night'. Would any of the nights of the murders constitute 'a bitter cold night'?

Frances Coles' murder was the coldest night. Swallow Gardens was an alley.

And, White's man had snow white hands and long tapering fingers. 'No blood to be seen and that would suggest it was one of the murders without significant mutilation.

Either way, we only know the author as: "A Scotland Yard Man", there's no corroboration of the report and it doesn't tally with any of the murders.

Unfortunately, you'd have to say this article has little value.

[Sunny Delight]

Given that Schwartz does not say he was in hearing distance, sufficient to hear slurred speech - for example.
How else would someone get the impression the person walking ahead of them was "partially intoxicated", if not by the way they are walking?

As we can't examine Schwartz on this point it is impossible to say how he reached the conclusion the man was partially intoxicated. It must be seen as significant that as far as we know he did not furnish the Police with the information, but rather the newspapers.

Hyperbolic language like 'staggering around' does illicit a view that this man was as they say here in Ireland 'well oiled'. We don't know why Schwartz felt he was just partially intoxicated. Maybe he was walking with a shuffle with his hands in his pockets and head down like someone who has had a few drinks. I don't know. Only Schwartz knew why he felt that way and more importantly only he knows why he didn't tell the Police such information.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Maybe he was walking with a shuffle with his hands in his pockets and head down ...

That does not seem like the gait of someone like Stride's assailant, who was behaving violently both physically and verbally.

It seems more like the way Kosminski would have behaved.

[Sunny Delight]

That does not seem like the gait of someone like Stride's assailant, who was behaving violently both physically and verbally.

It seems more like the way Kosminski would have behaved.

Schwartz did not give a description of the man's gait. He merely told the newspaper that the man appeared to be 'partially intoxicated'. None of us know why Schwartz felt the need to use that description. What Schwartz did not do was say the man was 'staggering around'. That is hyperbolic language designed to push a theory that BS man couldn't have been capable of the mutilations later carried out on Catherine Eddowes.

[Sunny Delight]

It certainly is an estimate, PI.

Joseph Lawende was confident it was 1.30am when he rose to leave.

The time it took the two Josephs to get near Church Passage is another matter. You could quite easily mistake five minutes for something less or something more.

The problem is, there's nothing concrete to hang onto except their estimate of the time it took to get near Church Passage. Arguing anything else, is unsupported speculation driven by an inconvenient time and I don't think that's of much value (outside of speculating that is).

Indeed. The only thing we can say with certainty is that when PC Watkins entered Mitre Square at 1:30am no one was there. When he came back at 1:44am, Catherine Eddowes was there mutilated.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Indeed. The only thing we can say with certainty is that when PC Watkins entered Mitre Square at 1:30am no one was there. When he came back at 1:44am, Catherine Eddowes was there mutilated.

We can also be fairly sure that no-one was in Mitre Square when he left it, nor in Mitre Street when he left it at about 1.33 a.m.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Indeed. The only thing we can say with certainty is that when PC Watkins entered Mitre Square at 1:30am no one was there. When he came back at 1:44am, Catherine Eddowes was there mutilated.

Some people would disagree with it being certain that PC Watkins didn't skip a beat.

Personally, I agree with you. I think it's highly likely that PC Watkins was where he said he was at 1.30am.

I think we can be pretty much certain that Joseph and associates walked past Church Passage at some point after PC Watkins entered the square at 1.30am also.

The only thing we have to go on is Joseph's watch, the club clock and his grasp of five minutes. I'm inclined to go with him in the absence of any evidence to the contrary.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I think we can be pretty much certain that Joseph and associates walked past Church Passage at some point after PC Watkins entered the square at 1.30am also.

Is it likely that the couple would have been standing at the end of Church Passage while Watkins was checking the entrances to Mitre Square from 1.30 until about 1.32 a.m., at which point he returned to the entrance roughly opposite Church Passage?

If not, then if the couple had been chatting for a couple of minutes by the time Lawende saw them at 1.35 a.m., the timings fit rather well.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Is it likely that the couple would have been standing at the end of Church Passage while Watkins was checking the entrances to Mitre Square from 1.30 until about 1.32 a.m., at which point he returned to the entrance roughly opposite Church Passage?

If not, then if the couple had been chatting for a couple of minutes by the time Lawende saw them at 1.35 a.m., the timings fit rather well.

PC Harvey claimed to have passed the Aldgate Post Office at 1.28am. The post office was on the corner of Duke Street, so maybe what, say the length of 15/20 properties from Church Passage, not far at all. His beat took him up Aldgate, as far as the corner of Mitre Street and back down Aldgate passing the corner of Duke Street; and so he may have spotted any couple at the Duke Street/Church Passage corner at say 1.30am/1.31am as he passed by the end of Duke Street.

I don't see any problem with the couple turning up not long after PC Harvey disappeared down Aldgate towards Houndsditch, which I think is what you're suggesting.

I reckon that whichever you look at it, whichever entrance he went in from, the timings are tight. I don't think there's much time difference between Lawende's couple going in and the WM leaving at say 1.43am, and Catherine and the WM entering from Mitre Street after PC Watkins left the square and the WM departing as PC Harvey walked down Church Passage.

I would say though that in the event you believe Lawende did see Catherine, then you have to believe that the WM decided to stay put when PC Harvey walked down Church Passage, you have to believe that the WM chose not to leave by the nearest exit otherwise PC Watkins would have seen him; you have to believe the WM wasn't phased by a door opening, with somebody clearly active in the square. Or, you have to believe that Joseph and associates passed Church Passage about 3 or 4 minutes before they thought they did.

In addition, that darkest part of the square where Catherine was murdered was a known spot for prostitution. Catherine was known to some city policemen. It's a fair bet that Catherine knew the area and the square. That would mean knowing where the darkest part of the square was, knowing where the lamps were in the square (and they were at the northern part of the square), knowing the shortest route to the spot where she was murdered and knowing that on the shortest route the buildings were unoccupied. That route is from Mitre Street into the square. It was by far the safest bet to get in and out of there unseen.

On balance, I find the entry from Mitre Street more likely and I'd go back to the principle of least effort which is instinctive and governs any and every human action when accomplishing a task.

[Wickerman]

PC Harvey claimed to have passed the Aldgate Post Office at 1.28am. The post office was on the corner of Duke Street, so maybe what, say the length of 15/20 properties from Church Passage, not far at all. His beat took him up Aldgate, as far as the corner of Mitre Street and back down Aldgate passing the corner of Duke Street; and so he may have spotted any couple at the Duke Street/Church Passage corner at say 1.30am/1.31am as he passed by the end of Duke Street.

But surely the critical time is his estimate of arriving at the end of Church Passage by about 1:41/42.
Granted it is an estimate, but he does the same beat every night, so he knows where he is every night.
It might be an estimate, but it is an informed estimate due to the fact he knows where he is on his beat at practically every minute.

I reckon that whichever you look at it, whichever entrance he went in from, the timings are tight. I don't think there's much time difference between Lawende's couple going in and the WM leaving at say 1.43am, and Catherine and the WM entering from Mitre Street after PC Watkins left the square and the WM departing as PC Harvey walked down Church Passage.

The two time windows look like:
Lawende seeing the couple at the top end of Church Passage at 1:35.
PC Harvey arriving at the bottom end of Church Passage at about 1:41/2.
So about 6-7 minutes for the whole scene to play out, which must include the time to walk down the passage and across to the far corner of the square, subdue her, kill her, mutilate the body, and leave, before Harvey reached the end of the passage.

As opposed to:
PC Harvey leaving the bottom end of Church Passage about 1:41/2, and
PC Watkins arriving back at Mitre Sq. by the Mitre street. exit at 1:44.
Not enough time to do anything.

It seems to me the first time window allows considerably more time for the killer to act out his murder, but it only suggests 4-5 minutes of actual contact time with the victim.
It's so tight as to be unlikely without being rehearsed.

[Trevor Marriott]

I would say though that in the event you believe Lawende did see Catherine, then you have to believe that the WM decided to stay put when PC Harvey walked down Church Passage, you have to believe that the WM chose not to leave by the nearest exit otherwise PC Watkins would have seen him; you have to believe the WM wasn't phased by a door opening, with somebody clearly active in the square. Or, you have to believe that Joseph and associates passed Church Passage about 3 or 4 minutes before they thought they did.- or later!

The point I keep making regarding timings is that we have only approximate timings surrounding this murder. But what we don't know is at what point and at what time the couple seen standing talking at the entrance to Church passage and if that couple was Eddowes and the killer actually moved from where they stood and made their way into the square. The longer they stood talking the less time the killer would have had to do all that he is alleged to have done !!!!!!!!!!!!!

On balance, I find the entry from Mitre Street more likely and I'd go back to the principle of least effort which is instinctive and governs any and every human action when accomplishing a task.

But the club premises where Lawende came from was a more likely place for a prostitute to pick someone up from than Mitre Sreet where that street was off the beaten track

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

But surely the critical time is his estimate of arriving at the end of Church Passage by about 1:41/42.
Granted it is an estimate, but he does the same beat every night, so he knows where he is every night.
It might be an estimate, but it is an informed estimate due to the fact he knows where he is on his beat at practically every minute.



The two time windows look like:
Lawende seeing the couple at the top end of Church Passage at 1:35.
PC Harvey arriving at the bottom end of Church Passage at about 1:41/2.
So about 6-7 minutes for the whole scene to play out, which must include the time to walk down the passage and across to the far corner of the square, subdue her, kill her, mutilate the body, and leave, before Harvey reached the end of the passage.

As opposed to:
PC Harvey leaving the bottom end of Church Passage about 1:41/2, and
PC Watkins arriving back at Mitre Sq. by the Mitre street. exit at 1:44.
Not enough time to do anything.

It seems to me the first time window allows considerably more time for the killer to act out his murder, but it only suggests 4-5 minutes of actual contact time with the victim.
It's so tight as to be unlikely without being rehearsed.

No one seems to appreciate these policemen were not robots just because a beat was given a specific time to complete it does not mean that they stuck rigidly to those times. Those timings could be affected by a number of situations or occurrences on a beat, i.e stopping and talking to someone/Taking longer to check property/finding and insecure property/any other occurrence.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fleetwood Mac]

But surely the critical time is his estimate of arriving at the end of Church Passage by about 1:41/42.
Granted it is an estimate, but he does the same beat every night, so he knows where he is every night.
It might be an estimate, but it is an informed estimate due to the fact he knows where he is on his beat at practically every minute.

Agreed in that I reckon the 'unreliability of estimates' could do with qualifying.

Clearly, there are degrees of reliability. For example, where we do not know when a character looked at a clock or watch and there is nothing to corroborate the estimate, then that is at one end of the reliability spectrum.

I do not think it is sufficient to say they're all estimates and that's that and I don't think we can use that to bend the times one way to fit, without corroboration that is. In the event we do that, then we open up any situation to manipulation and personal preference in order to fit a theory, and in quite a few instances I can think of it could equally be argued that the times were out the other way, the inconvenient way, just as easily as the way that is put forward to explain a theory: the convenient way.

Interestingly, we know that witness testimony is often unreliable also, but witness testimony doesn't appear to be afforded the same scrutiny and level of doubt as the times given.

The idea that the times can't be relied upon suits me because in general I don't think the witnesses leave us the most important information, but in the interests of a reasonable discussion I'd like a bit more than simply: "we cannot rely upon the times".

Back to PC Harvey. I agree. This is a good example of why it's not a good idea to apply the sweeping statement: "they're all estimates". PC Watkins looked at his watch at 1.45am. According to ex-police officers who have posted on this board, it would have been important for police officers to keep good time. Most people suggest that this means PC Watkins discovered Catherine's body at 1.44am, personally I'd say it's likely to be a little bit earlier, say 1.43am, but small margins.

It follows that PC Harvey's estimate has some foundation in PC Watkins' checking of his watch. This isn't a case of people pulling rabbits out of hats when deducing at what time PC Harvey was at Church Passage. He tells us that he was in Aldgate returning towards Duke Street. We know his beat; we know he hasn't gone very far after leaving Church Passage. 'Round the corner, up a pretty short street, and a few paces back down the street.

That's a pretty solid basis for claiming that PC Harvey's estimate of when he was at Church Passage, is not going to be far out at all.

I wouldn't disagree with 1.41/1.42 region.

Then again, I think we're discussing something which isn't central to deducing what happened that night. Debating whether it was 1.40am or 1.42am is a case of the tail wagging the dog in my view.

As opposed to:
PC Harvey leaving the bottom end of Church Passage about 1:41/2, and
PC Watkins arriving back at Mitre Sq. by the Mitre street. exit at 1:44.
Not enough time to do anything.

It seems to me the first time window allows considerably more time for the killer to act out his murder, but it only suggests 4-5 minutes of actual contact time with the victim.
It's so tight as to be unlikely without being rehearsed.

This isn't what I was suggesting. I was suggesting that Catherine and the WM entered Mitre Square, via Mitre Street, when PC Watkins left the square, approximately 1.32am; and the WM left the square, via Mitre Street, when PC Harvey walked down Church Passage, somewhere between 1.40am and 1.43am.

[Wickerman]

No one seems to appreciate these policemen were not robots just because a beat was given a specific time to complete it does not mean that they stuck rigidly to those times. Those timings could be affected by a number of situations or occurrences on a beat, i.e stopping and talking to someone/Taking longer to check property/finding and insecure property/any other occurrence.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Yes, on occasion there will be the odd occurrence that will delay the constable, more so during the day than at night. Who wants to stop and chat at 1:00 in the morning, most people want to get where they are going. My point is his beat has to be so regulated that he knows when he has to make up time. We know inspectors did patrol the beats to make sure constables were keeping to their schedule. The inspector didn't do this because he was short of something to do.
Sometimes two beats will intersect, Harvey may meet PC Plod on an adjacent beat at the corner of Aldgate on every circuit of his beat, so if he doesn't on one occasion, it's a clue something could be wrong.
We're not suggesting they were robots, but a schedule is to be followed, or what is the point of having one?

Look at it another way, if the murder could only have been committed if the constables were slack on their schedule, then the murder didn't happen. The killer can't possibly plan his murder, or expect sufficient privacy, on the off chance that the beat constable will be late.
That's no argument at all.