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

[Garry Wroe]

I think Watkins skiving of is the most likely scenario .

I consider it far more likely that Harvey was sheltering and possibly having a warming cup of tea at the time he was supposedly at the periphery of Mitre Square. Remove Harvey from the equation and the killer had the best part of ten minutes alone and undisturbed with Eddowes. It would certainly be interesting if we knew why Harvey was dismissed from the City force the following year.

[pinkmoon]

I consider it far more likely that Harvey was sheltering and possibly having a warming cup of tea at the time he was supposedly at the periphery of Mitre Square. Remove Harvey from the equation and the killer had the best part of ten minutes alone and undisturbed with Eddowes. It would certainly be interesting if we knew why Harvey was dismissed from the City force the following year.

Poor Catherine must have known they would have been left unhindered in the square the last thing she would have wanted is another run in with the police perhaps it was common knowledge that the police never bothered patrolling it regularly.

[Natasha]

Hello Natasha,

But if he considered it too risksy to kill and mutilate Eddowes at his own residence, applying the same logic, wouldn't he also consider it risky too risky to leave the body in Mitre Square, I.e. in the immediate vicinity? Isn't it more likely that he would seek to target victims a reasonable distance away from the locality where he lived? Or, at the very least, like the Torso Murderer he would have chosen a dump site some distance away from his residence?

Hi John,

Not if he was trying to send a message to the police. Is it not strange that Eddowes was found pretty much directly below PC Pearcy's window?
Is it just a coincidence?

I would also like to point out in regards to the timing of finding the body. Did Watkins, Harvey etc take for granted that a copper living within the vicinity of Mitre Square would deter criminal activity? And therefore wouldn't be as diligent with their checks of the area.

Another thing to consider. If the killer was residing there, I wouldn't think he was doing so as a permanent arrangement. He may have been squatting.

[Natasha]

hello Scott,

Can this policeman and his story be verified at all? If not it is just another newspaper comment that flies in the face of official comment.

The only connection I can see quite this is the comment by ? Macnaughten? About a policeman having seen the killer pre the murder. If the pair me were seen wandering around Aldham High Street..then that puts the Lawende story to bed.

Hello Natasha,

Watkins can never have seen Lawende nor Levy. Both were at the other end of Church passage on the other side of the road when observing the couple talking. I think you might mean the other policeman on duty at that end of the vicinity.

Phil

Hi Phil,

Yes, I would have thought someone would have seen them.

[Natasha]

Hi Nats.

The man may have been wanted by police on other charges, or he could have been married, or he might have had a responsible position in life and not wished this liaison been made public.
No shortage of reasons.

We do not even know if that woman was a prostitute, and so those same reason's given above could equally apply to the woman.
What if her husband, or boyfriend, or employer, found out?
Some women who had responsible factory jobs by day took to the streets by night to make up their pay.

Hi Jon,

I wonder if you could help me. I remember there was mention of a man in a peaked cap seen on his own near Church passage, trying to conceal his face. Do you know what time this was at and by whom he was seen by?

[Natasha]

But the doctors said she was killed where she was found !

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I never said she was mutilated prior to being found in Mitre Square. Is there any indication that a murder can ascertained right down to exact minute? I wouldn't have thought so even by today's standards.
So I'm wondering weather it would be easier to render Eddowes unconscious at least before getting to Mitre Square. Especially if the killer had knowledge that a policeman lived there. Wouldn't the square magnify more noise if Eddowes screamed out, that could perhaps wake him up?

There's anatomical knowledge, and surgical skill.

Prosector thought he displayed a bit of both.

Yes he said that the Drs at the time seemed very careful not to say who could have inflicted the wounds.

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.

Aint that funny, seeing as there was mention that the light outside Kelly's room was also playing up.

I consider it far more likely that Harvey was sheltering and possibly having a warming cup of tea at the time he was supposedly at the periphery of Mitre Square. Remove Harvey from the equation and the killer had the best part of ten minutes alone and undisturbed with Eddowes. It would certainly be interesting if we knew why Harvey was dismissed from the City force the following year.

I would like to know also why he was dismissed.

[Natasha]

So Watkins checked his watch against the post office clock. Was that the same post office that was robbed?

I wonder if this robbery is connected. Did Eddowes know anything about it, I wonder.

[Monty]

So Watkins checked his watch against the post office clock. Was that the same post office that was robbed?

I wonder if this robbery is connected. Did Eddowes know anything about it, I wonder.

No Harvey did.

And the robbery occured prior to the murder.

Monty

[Natasha]

No Harvey did.

And the robbery occured prior to the murder.

Monty

Sorry my mistake about Harvey.

I thought the robbery occurred after. According to a news article, it said the the area was cordoned off, and as no one was patrolling properly they had a chance to break into the post office.

[Monty]

And I apologise for my mistake Natasha,

You are correct, twas after.

Monty

[Observer]

She had her hand on his chest could she be trying to calm the gentleman down?could they have already been into the court for a spot of "let's try and stay dry "and seen something rather nasty or maybe due to the lighting something they were not to sure about.

The body wasn't there at 1:30 a.m. So if this couple, other than Eddowes and her killer, were seen at 1:35 a.m. by Lawende and co, at the entrance to Church Passage, and they had already been into the Square. How could they have saw the body? Are you implying that Watkins did not enter the Square at 1:30 a.m. and the TOD was earlier?

The more logical option is based on the assumption that it was indeed Eddowes and her killer who were sighted by Lawende and co.

[Wickerman]

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?

Hi John.
Given that Neil is by far best equipped to answer these queries, I'll hazard a guess that the constable could have given chase if the victim was clearly dead (ie; Eddowes), all the while being cognisant that the constable is not well enough equipped to determine if a body bleeding from a single wound is dead or alive, in which case he should stay with the body.

As far as making an arrest, we do read of many night-crawlers brought in to the Police Station at night, under arrest, and only released when they had established their identity.
There doesn't appear to be any concern about wrongful arrest here.

On the other hand, if you are running away from a crime scene and a constable gives chase and arrests you. This is 'reasonable suspicion', even though you may have only stepped out of your house, and are running because you are late for work.

[Wickerman]

Originally Posted by Natasha View Post
So Watkins checked his watch against the post office clock. Was that the same post office that was robbed?

I wonder if this robbery is connected. Did Eddowes know anything about it, I wonder.

No Harvey did.

And the robbery occured prior to the murder.

Monty

C'mon you guy's, Harvey didn't have a watch.

[Wickerman]

Hi Jon,

I wonder if you could help me. I remember there was mention of a man in a peaked cap seen on his own near Church passage, trying to conceal his face. Do you know what time this was at and by whom he was seen by?

Hi Natasha.
The time was about 1:30 am, if I recall, and it was Church Lane, just a little north or N/W of Berner St.
The press report gave no source.

OK, found it.
"A man says he saw an individual sitting on some steps in Church lane at half past one this morning, wiping his hands, concealing his face meanwhile."
North Eastern Daily Gazette, 1 Oct. 1888.

[Pcdunn]

Man on steps not Jack?

Hi Natasha.
The time was about 1:30 am, if I recall, and it was Church Lane, just a little north or N/W of Berner St.
The press report gave no source.

OK, found it.
"A man says he saw an individual sitting on some steps in Church lane at half past one this morning, wiping his hands, concealing his face meanwhile."
North Eastern Daily Gazette, 1 Oct. 1888.

That sounds as if it might clear him from suspicion of being the Ripper, if it is true as stated by another poster in this thread, that "the body was not there at 1:30 am"-- but I think many of these timings seem to be approximate ones. If people in Whitechapel rarely owned watches, they would estimate the time and I think would probably round to the closest hour or closest hour. I think the most accurate timings would be by those who noted they had looked at a watch or a clock.