Was Eddowes Already Dead, When Seen By Lawende & Levy?

[pinkmoon]

Excuse me, "not working correctly", I should have said.

"This (Sunday) morning the lamps were burning brightly, but a curious little circumstance was mentioned by the wife of a caretaker living directly opposite the spot where the murdered woman was found. As she went home with her little girl on Friday night she noticed that the lamp in the north-west corner of the square was so dull that she could scarcely see her way. This must have thrown the pavement on which the body was found into comparative darkness, and may thus have in some way contributed to the selection of the spot by the murderer."
Lloyds Weekly News, 30 Sept. 1888.

Thank you most interesting our killer certainly had some lucky breaks didn't he.

[Wickerman]

Thank you most interesting our killer certainly had some lucky breaks didn't he.

Indeed, and Harvey was stood under or in the immediate vicinity of the wall lamp at the bottom end of Church Passage.
The square, according to Foster's Plan, was 72' 6'' wide, plus the wall lamp was another 8-10 ft up the passage, so approx. 80 ft from lamp to body, across the darkness.
With one standing lamp in the square about 60ft off to his right and only dimly lit, Harvey isn't going to see anything over in the far corner.

It may not have mattered, if the assumption is correct that it was the prostitutes who knew the beats of the constables on their 'patch', Eddowes probably convinced the killer that Watkins was the only copper who patrolled the square.
The other copper who comes down the passage never comes into the square.

The killer could have known he was not about to be challenged so long as he kept still.

[Rosella]

Jack had the devil's own luck, IMO ! I suppose Watkins couldn't have been sitting with Morris having a leisurely cuppa in the warmth of Kearley and Tonges while the Ripper was doing a bit of work outside, and then he went out and found Eddowes?

I can just imagine Watkins's thoughts as he guarded the body in that very dark and quiet Square while Morris was away whistling up help in Aldgate!

[Wickerman]

Jack had the devil's own luck, IMO ! I suppose Watkins couldn't have been sitting with Morris having a leisurely cuppa in the warmth of Kearley and Tonges while the Ripper was doing a bit of work outside, and then he went out and found Eddowes?

A point raised by Lynn just recently, but it may not have mattered if the prostitutes knew the beats of the constables. They would perform their services in less than fifteen minutes, regardless of what the constable was actually doing.

I can just imagine Watkins's thoughts as he guarded the body in that very dark and quiet Square while Morris was away whistling up help in Aldgate!

What do you mean, like, "....how am I gonna explain this?"

[DJA]

Ever considered the garrotte?

Might have scared some of the customers away.

Don't know if the hotel licensee would have approved.
Meh.Two or three clients perhaps.Also happened to spend a lot though.

Re JtR,garrottes do leave marks.

[Rosella]

Well maybe, but more like " God, I hope he's not hanging around here in the darkness somewhere!" Even adult males get scared sometimes, and it's clear from his statement to Morris that he was extremely shocked at finding this mutilated corpse. No wonder, I might add!

[Wickerman]

Well maybe, but more like " God, I hope he's not hanging around here in the darkness somewhere!" Even adult males get scared sometimes, and it's clear from his statement to Morris that he was extremely shocked at finding this mutilated corpse. No wonder, I might add!

I'm sure they were scared, even with a truncheon, if someone comes up on you from behind with a knife a truncheon isn't a bit of good.

[pinkmoon]

Jack had the devil's own luck, IMO ! I suppose Watkins couldn't have been sitting with Morris having a leisurely cuppa in the warmth of Kearley and Tonges while the Ripper was doing a bit of work outside, and then he went out and found Eddowes?

I can just imagine Watkins's thoughts as he guarded the body in that very dark and quiet Square while Morris was away whistling up help in Aldgate!

I think Watkins skiving of is the most likely scenario .I asked the question before if anyone had tried to contact Watkins ancestors and when they were contacted they had no idea he was involved with Jack the ripper surely if there ever was a story to dine out on it was this might mean he had something to hide .

[Pcdunn]

Link to primary sources re "thugs" and garrottes in London

[QUOTE=Wickerman;342334]
The garrott was a popular weapon in the 1860's and reports of its use continued for decades.[QUOTE]

http://www.victorianlondon.org/crime/representations.htm

Some of these illustrations are humorous, but apparently the spiked collar protective wear for gents was really offered for sale!

[Monty]

Early issue metallic stock as used by the police for prevention of garoting.

The spikes were to hold it in place inside the collar.

Monty

[Rosella]

I'm sure I read somewhere that the public wrote in some numbers suggesting that some detective police officers should dress up in women's clothing as bait for the Ripper and wear protective spiked collars under the dress collar in case he got he got his knife out!

[John G]

Dr. Thomas Ind didn't think the Ripper showed anatomical skill. Dr. Mike Villa did.

The medical experts engaged by Trevor Marriott are also deeply divided on the issue. I think the problem is that the contemporary reports are insufficiently detailed to draw any definitive conclusions.

[John G]

I'm sure they were scared, even with a truncheon, if someone comes up on you from behind with a knife a truncheon isn't a bit of good.

Further to Monty's post concerning an officer's responsibilities. If a PC was required to pursue suspects only if it was safe to do so, and prioritise checking the body, I.e to determine whether the victim was still alive, would it be fair to say that the police force played a less active role than today, and existed largely for deterrent purposes?

Monty also mentioned that officers' would normally have to witness a crime before making an arrest, I.e because of the risk of being charged with wrongful arrest/ false imprisonment. Does this mean their powers of arrest were more limited than today? In other words, could they make an arrest based upon reasonable suspicion, or only if an arrestable offence had taken place?

[Harry D]

Who mentioned a theft and who mentioned a dog. Your imagination is running wild again. Don't try to be a smart with me.

My mistake. It was a rat, wasn't it?

With all due respect, Trevor, these are tired old theories of yours that have been debunked many times over.

Let's apply a little Occam's razor, shall we? Women are being ripped open and innards are missing. The simplest and most rational explanation is that the killer was eviscerating them for the express purpose of obtaining an organ.

[Trevor Marriott]

My mistake. It was a rat, wasn't it?

With all due respect, Trevor, these are tired old theories of yours that have been debunked many times over.

Let's apply a little Occam's razor, shall we? Women are being ripped open and innards are missing. The simplest and most rational explanation is that the killer was eviscerating them for the express purpose of obtaining an organ.

Thats the old tried and trusted theory, but like many aspects of this mystery many things nave now changed, which has now put many of those previously accepted facts which researchers have relied upon into question. But sadly as can be seen regularly on these boards some don't want change, and cannot accept change, because to do so would go against what they have come to believe happened in 1888. Those are ones that have tried to debunk what you refer to and without success I would add.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk