The Berner Street Con(spiracy)

[Cap'n Jack]

And you, Tom, are selling grapes right here and now.
At least Packer's were fresh, and not sour.

[Jeff Leahy]

And you, Tom, are selling grapes right here and now.
At least Packer's were fresh, and not sour.

or perhaps Tom just thought Packer was selling Kentucky Fried Chicken?

[perrymason]

Some good thoughts being put forth...but I wanted to quickly note something for my own behalf based on an earlier post by Tom. Tom did inform me of the ages of the relevant Club witnesses back when he said, he and I had some lengthy discussions about the Stride murder, and he did enable some thinking about just how upright these citizens might have been...but the story that I have proposed and how the cover-up might of worked is my own. Whether its a good idea, a bad idea, or one similar to a theory Tom has been working on his own,..which I believe inserts Le Grand and Co. into the mix that night....the seeds were all I was provided. I dont believe Packer, I am doubting Schwartz's viability, and I can see ample cause for them to do what Ive suggested, and an anti establishment stance that makes it likely they would if the situation arose.

I usually go out of my way to credit those due if I use their comments, Im sure Tom has noticed anytime I mention the ages of the people involved I have mentioned him as the source, and I dont want to accept less than that for myself.

Whether you like what Ive proposed or disagree completely, you have only me to blame.

Best regards all.

[Stephen Thomas]

Which man was that? Because he described a lot of them. A 28 year old, a 30 year old, a 35 year old, short coat, long coat, English, American. And then there's the matter of his giant invisible umbrella.

Yes, I know all that, Tom. Except the giant umbrella bit.

I didn't just fall out of a tree, you know.

And Saint Philip of Sugden has similar views on Packer's veracity.

You're in good company.

You really didn't read what I said, did you?

By all means elaborate on your theories but don't get sarcastic with me.

[Simon Wood]

The Grapes of Wrath

Hi Tom,

The Star, 4th October 1888—

"The police most emphatically deny the truth of the story that has been published as to the discovery of a shopkeeper who had talked with the murderer and his Berner-street victim, had sold them grapes, and had seen them at the entrance to the fatal alley ten minutes before the deed was done. The fact is, that the alleged informant contradicts himself, and there is no evidence that there were any grapes in the possession of the woman."

As far as the press and public were concerned that was an end to the matter. But . . .

On 4th October 1888 Inspector Henry Moore wrote in his report—

"I beg to report that as soon as the above [Evening News 4th October grape-selling story] came under my notice I at once . . . directed PS White, "H", to see Mr Packer, the shopkeeper referred to, and take him to the mortuary with a view to the identification of the woman Elizabeth Stride; who it is stated was with a man who purchased grapes at his shop on night of 29th Inst."

Sergeant White wrote—

"On 4th Inst. I was directed by Insp. Moore to make further inquiry & if necessary see Packer and take him to the mortuary."

Further inquiry? Let's go back four days.

On Sunday 30th September, "Acting under the instructions of Inspector Abberline", White made enquiries at every house in Berner Street. He had been given a book in which to note any information he obtained. At about 9.00 am—eight hours after the discovery of Stride and eight hours before Israel Schwartz would tell his story—White called on Matthew Packer at 44 Berner Street.

Sergeant White—

"I asked him what time he closed his shop on the previous night. He replied half past twelve. . . I asked him if he saw anything of a man or woman going into Dutfields Yard, or saw anyone standing about the street about the time he was closing his shop. He replied, 'No I saw no one standing about neither did I see anyone go up the yard. I never saw anything suspicious or heard the slightest noise, and know nothing about the murder until I heard of it in the morning.'"

Although on 30th September White reported that Packer denied seeing anyone standing about, the police now acknowledged that he had in fact seen Stride before her murder and wanted him to identify her at the mortuary.

Matthew Packer [Evening News, 4th October]—

"The police? No. They haven't asked me a word about it yet!!! A young man [White was 34 years old, Packer 57] in plain clothes came in here on Monday and asked if he might look at the yard at the back of our house, so as to see if anybody had climbed over. My missus lent him some steps. But he didn't put any questions to us about the man and the woman."

Someone wasn't telling the truth about 30th September. Conventional wisdom says it's Packer, but a closer look at White's 4th October report reveals otherwise.

On October 4th when White reached 44 Berner Street in order to take Packer to the mortuary, Mrs Packer told him that he had already gone there with two detectives.

Sergeant White—

"I then went towards the mortuary [St George's in the East, Cannon Street Road] when I met Packer with a man. I asked where he had been. He said, 'this detective asked me to go to see if I could identify the woman [which he had].' Shortly afterwards they were joined by another man. I asked the men what they were doing with Packer and they both said they were detectives. [When] I asked for their authority one of the men produced a card from a pocket book, but would not allow me to touch it. They then said they were private detectives. They then induced Packer to go away with them."

Inspector Henry Moore [4th October report]—

"The PS [White] returned at noon and acquainted me as in report attached; in consequence of which Telegram No. 1 [missing] was forwarded to Chief Inspr. Swanson and the PS [White] sent to C.O. [Central Office at Scotland Yard] to fully explain the facts."

From these two police reports we can deduce that Packer's visit to the mortuary and White's encounter with the two PIs took place before noon on the morning of Sunday 30th September.

EVENING NEWS, 4th October—

"This afternoon Matthew Packer, the fruiterer, of 44 Berner street, referred to in the above narrative, visited the mortuary of St. George's in the East, and identified the body of Elizabeth Stride as that of the woman for whom the grapes were purchased on the night of the murder."

Sergeant White's report continued—

"About 4.00 pm I saw Packer at his shop and while talking to him the two men drove up in a Hansom Cab, and after going into the shop they induced Packer into the Cab stating that they would take him to Scotland Yard to see Sir Charles Warren."

Where had Packer been between being "induced" by the two PIs "to go away with them" and 4.00 pm? He had already been to the mortuary, and Packer had yet to be taken "to see Sir Charles Warren".

Sergeant White's report concluded—

"From inquiry I have made there is no doubt that these are the two men referred to in the attached Newspaper cutting, who examined the drain in Dutfields Yard on 2nd Inst. One of the men had a letter in his hand addressed to Le Grand & Co., Strand."

Some ID! On two occasions Sergeant White had been an easy touch. Why didn't he pull rank? Why didn't he tell the two PIs that Warren would be wasting his time; that he had Packer's 30th September statement in the book issued to him especially for the purpose; that the fruiterer saw nobody and heard nothing; that the Evening News story was a lie?

The most probable reason is that Packer's story wasn't a lie and that the two detectives were from Scotland Yard and outranked White.

A two-page summary of Packer's original grape-selling story dated 4th October 1888 and initialed ACB [Alexander Carmichael Bruce, Senior Assistant Commissioner], suggests that the fruiterer was taken to Scotland Yard. Yet Swanson didn't mention this pivotal event in his 19th October 1888 report. According to Swanson, Packer's involvement with the two PIs "acting conjointly with the Vigilance Comtee. and the press" ended with his being taken to identify Stride at the mortuary.

This is odd, because the section of Swanson's report dealing with Packer contains unique word-for-word extracts from ACB's two-page summary.

EVENING NEWS, 4th October—

The reporter asked Packer, "Do you actually mean to say that no detective or policeman came to inquire whether you had sold grapes to any one that night? Now, please be very careful in your answer, for this may prove a serious business for the London police."

"I've only got one answer," said the man, "because it's the truth. Except a gentleman who is a private detective, no detective or policeman has ever asked me a single question nor come near my shop to find out if I knew anything about the grapes the murdered woman had been eating before her throat was cut."

It takes an extremely brave or foolhardy man to invent such a damning indictment. Also, private detectives do not waste their time searching drains for grape stalks unless there's a valid reason for one being found, and Diemschitz, Kozebrodski and a press agency reporter had seen grapes in Stride's right hand. Even Mrs Mortimer repeated the story on 1st October.

Once again the police denied the story, this time backed by medical evidence from Doctor Phillips who had been recalled to the inquest following Packer's story in the Evening News.

The Star, 5th October 1888—

"The grape story is effectually disposed of by the statement of the authorities at Leman-street to a Star reporter. In the first place the police have no evidence that any grapes were found on the site of the Berners-street murder, and, moreover, Dr. Phillip's post mortem disclosed no trace of grapes or grapestones in Elizabeth Stride's stomach."

Swanson wrote in his 19th October report—

"Packer who is an elderly man has unfortunately made different statements so that apart from the fact of the hour at which he saw the woman . . . any statement he made would be rendered almost valueless as evidence."

Different statements? Packer made one to the Evening News and another at Scotland Yard, recorded by none other than the Senior Assistant Commissioner. Both were substantially the same. How could Swanson report that self-contradicting fact?

For good measure the police denied Packer for a third time in the press.

Evening News, 1st November 1888—

"The police authorities do not attach any importance to the statement attributed to Matthew Packer, the fruiterer, who says he sold grapes to the deceased woman Stride on the night of the murder."

Matthew Packer was now completely discredited. His grape-selling story didn't stand a chance.

Regards,

Simon

[Jeff Leahy]

The Star, 5th October 1888—

"The grape story is effectually disposed of by the statement of the authorities at Leman-street to a Star reporter. In the first place the police have no evidence that any grapes were found on the site of the Berners-street murder, and, moreover, Dr. Phillip's post mortem disclosed no trace of grapes or grapestones in Elizabeth Stride's stomach."

Simon

Hi Simon

Interesting information. But doesnt the simple fact that no traces of grapes were found in Strides stomach suggest that she didnt eat any grapes?

Pirate

[Simon Wood]

Hi Pirate,

It depends on whether or not you believe that particular piece of information. Given the sheer unlikeliness of White's story coupled with the equally unlikely "Ripper was interrupted" scenario being heavily punted by the cops I would say it was untrue.

Regards,

Simon

[Cap'n Jack]

Of course most Victorians actually peeled their grapes and then delicately spat out the pips into a hanky... obviously leaving fruit stains on the hanky; and equally obviously being then undetectable in the stomach content.

If Le Bland paid Packer to lie about the grapes, did he also continue to pay him to lie in the months to come when further stories were published in the press?
Or did he lie just because he liked lying?
Or even simpler was he just telling the plain old truth?

[Tom_Wescott]

Stephen,

I wasn't meaning to be disrespectful. I just don't understand how anyone could see Packer's story as anything but a lie at this point.
Regarding my comment about the 'giant invisible umbrella' held by Packer's imaginary man, I'm referring to the emphatic statement made by Packer about how he watched Stride and her man stand in the pouring rain. He said he even remarked to his wife what fools they were to stand in the rain. Of course, the problem with this is the fact that when Stride was found a short time later, her clothes were absolutely dry. If nothing else, this puts the lie to his story.

Simon,

You say it's obvious that two Scotland Yard detectives were driving Packer around? Why would you say this when we know for a fact it was Le Grand and Batchelor? It was they who took Packer to see Eddowes and then Stride's body. Your theory seems to suggest that the police would willingly dispose of a viable witness in order to save face. That just doesn't make any sense.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[DVV]

Damned cachous and grapes of wrath.
Fortunately, Liz had only two hands.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Tom,

How do we know for a fact it was Le Grand and Batchelor who ferried Packer around?

We don't.

All we know is that Sergeant White thought they were the two private detectives mentioned in the Evening News. Swanson simply repeated this definite maybe in his 19th October report.

To make Stride a JtR victim, Packer and his evidence had to be discredited.

Regards,

Simon

[Tom_Wescott]

Simon,

We have it from two sources. The Evening News which published Le Grand's report where it's stated very clearly that they showed Packer Eddowes' body to try to throw him off and then Stride's. We also have it from Sgt White. Now, unless you want to suggest that Le Grand and/or the Evening News was in on this vast and pointless conspiracy, you must accept that there were no Scotland Yard Detectives involved. They well and truly saw Packer for the liar he was.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Simon Wood]

Hi Tom,

Detail from the Evening News, 4th October 1888—

Packer was interviewed by the Evening News on the evening of Wednesday 3rd October.

Earlier the same day he had been taken to Golden Lane mortuary—

"With a view of testing the accuracy and honesty of Packer's testimony, the detectives obtained an order to view the body of the woman murdered in Mitre square, and took Packer to see it, leaving him under the impression that they were taking him to see the Berner street victim. On seeing the body he at once declared that it was not the woman for whom the grapes had been bought, and not a bit like her."

I am willing to concede that these detectives were Le Grand and Batchelor.

However, this does not automatically make them the same two detectives encountered twice the following day by Sergeant Stephen White [and without a mention in the Evening News].

Regards,

Simon

[Cap'n Jack]

'I am willing to concede that these detectives were Le Grand and Batchelor.'

Why is that, Simon?
A piece of paper with the name Le Grand scrawled on it?

[Simon Wood]

Hi Cap'n Jack,

Think of it as a gesture of goodwill.

"One of the men had a letter in his hand addressed to Le Grand & Co., Strand."

That was from Stephen White's report of the following day.

I've got an envelope on my desk addressed to the local power company, but it does not make me its CEO.

It's the police reports which defy belief.

Regards,

Simon