Berner Street: No Plot, No Mystery

[FrankO]

Ah Jeff, I immediately see what's causing the differences in measurements: you have Dutfield's Yard further north on Berner Street than it actually was. It was actually at the level of the second E in "BERNER".

So, that would be here (where I've indicated almost the whole length of the yard):


Cheers,
Frank

[Michael W Richards]

Im impressed with the amount of time people have put into estimating if the club time assertions are within reason. Since we cant know exactly what time sources provided clues to them, or how much various time sources might differ, the way to assess many of these issues is by secondary sources. What did other witnessses see. The times are very relevant when assessing what actually could have happened, but not necessarily what did happen. If one source says they were somewhere at X oclock, and another source claims the same location at the same time and saw nothing, well....self explanatory issues there.

As for Louis's arrival time, there are witnesses that can assist us when it comes to whether he actually arrived just before 1am or not.

"I was standing at the door of my house nearly the whole time between half-past twelve and one o'clock this (Sunday) morning, and did not notice anything unusual. I had just gone indoors, and was preparing to go to bed, when I heard a commotion outside, and immediately ran out, thinking that there was another row at the Socialists' Club close by. I went to see what was the matter, and was informed that another dreadful murder had been committed in the yard adjoining the club-house, and on going inside I saw the body of a woman lying huddled up just inside the yard with her throat cut from ear to ear. A man touched her face, and said it was quite warm, so that the deed must have been done while I was standing at the door of my house. There was certainly no noise made, and I did not observe any one enter the gates. It was soon after one o'clock when I went out, and the only man whom I had seen pass through the street previously was a young man carrying a black shiny bag, who walked very fast down the street from the Commercial-road. He looked up at the club, and then went round the corner by the Board School. I was told that the manager or steward of the club had discovered the woman on his return home in his pony cart. He drove through the gates, and my opinion is that he interrupted the murderer, who must have made his escape immediately under cover of the cart. If a man had come out of the yard before one o'clock I must have seen him. It was almost incredible to me that the thing could have been done without the steward's wife hearing a noise, for she was sitting in the kitchen, from which a window opens four yards from the spot where the woman was found. The body was lying slightly on one side, with the legs a little drawn up as if in pain, the clothes being slightly disarranged, so that the legs were partly visible. The woman appeared to me to be respectable, judging by her clothes, and in her hand were found a bunch of grapes and some sweets. A young man and his sweetheart were standing at the corner of the street, about twenty yards away, before and after the time the woman must have been murdered, but they told me they did not hear a sound."


That quote from Fanny as told to a reporter that evening is illuminating, if of course you allow her the possibility of being accurate with her recollections of events and times. She was in and out of her home during that half hour, but "nearly the whole time" suggests that these were not long durations spent indoors. Then you have the fact that she spoke with the young couple about what they saw during that time. They corroborate her story.

So, based on witnesses to that street scene, and the gates, and the houses and shops lining the street, we have no record of anyone being seen arriving or departing through the gates, via the street, during the most critical period....12:45 to 1am.

No Israel. No Pipeman. No Liz Stride on the street after 12:35. No Eagle using the gate entrance at around 12:40. And no Louis, cart and horse, arriving. Logic dictates that if Louis did not arrive until after 1am, then all the subsequent times and events given by all the witnesses become incorrect.

And by using eyewitness statements, Louis did not arrive before 1.

We know that Liz may have been cut between 12:46 and 12:56 at the earliest estimate by Blackwell, but Phillips stated at 1:30 that he believed it was "within the past hour". So its feasible that she was cut earlier than that, and then you have to wonder why Lave and Eagle, who both said they were there at the gates at the exact same time, didnt see Liz standing or lying on the ground....or each other.

But Eagle hedged....he "couldnt be sure" Liz was not there at 12:40. Couldnt be sure. Even though he would have to had stepped over her to get close to the wall, as he said he did. One would think he should be able to be sure if things transpired as he said they did. But he "couldnt be sure".

[JeffHamm]

Ah Jeff, I immediately see what's causing the differences in measurements: you have Dutfield's Yard further north on Berner Street than it actually was. It was actually at the level of the second E in "BERNER".

So, that would be here (where I've indicated almost the whole length of the yard):


Cheers,
Frank

Really! Oh, I have always thought it was the ally uo by the first E in Berner. Yes, that would make a difference in all our measurements

Thanks for that.

- Jeff

[JeffHamm]

Oh dear. Just got a PM alerting me to the fact my "new improved" version hasn't updated the hours in the table correctly, so when the times roll from 1 to 12, it still says 1. It should be clear, but I will sort it out. Fortunately, it should update the one I've linked to when I fix the formulas. Not sure how I missed that, but I think I was focusing on the value of the minutes only.

- Jeff

[JeffHamm]

Ok, never give up they say! Found the typo in the formula for the hours, so now, fingers crossed, it's working. The version the link goes to should also now be working properly.

And so, given I had the club a bit north, I'll just repost the 3 timelines based upon Frank's distances, and when the hour rolls from 1 back to 12, the times in the tables should reflect that now!

Eagle Walks: (3.1 mph)
Time Event
1:10:30 Eagle Arrives at Leman Street Police Station
1:04:18 Eagle departs to Station/PC Lamb's Arrival
1:03:24 PC Lamb Alerted
1:02:30 Eagle departs to find PC Lamb/Fairclough runners return/Spooner's arrival
1:00:11 Fairclough Run Starts
12:59:01 Diemschutz time for alerting (after his pony cart stuff)
12:57:11 Diemschutz Arrival

Eagle Runs: (6.1 mph)
Time Event
1:10:30 Eagle Arrives at Leman Street Police Station
1:07:21 Eagle departs to Station/PC Lamb's Arrival
1:06:27 PC Lamb Alerted
1:05:32 Eagle departs to find PC Lamb/Fairclough runners return/Spooner's arrival
1:03:13 Fairclough Run Starts
1:02:03 Diemschutz time for alerting (after his pony cart stuff)
1:00:13 Diemschutz Arrival

Eagle "Hurries": (4.11 mph)
Time Event
1:10:30 Eagle Arrives at Leman Street Police Station
1:05:50 Eagle departs to Station/PC Lamb's Arrival
1:04:55 PC Lamb Alerted
1:04:01 Eagle departs to find PC Lamb/Fairclough runners return/Spooner's arrival
1:01:42 Fairclough Run Starts
1:00:32 Diemschutz time for alerting (after his pony cart stuff)
12:58:42 Diemschutz Arrival

And there, barring any more idiot behaviour by my brain, that should be it.

- Jeff

[FrankO]

And there, barring any more idiot behaviour by my brain, that should be it.

Great job (the 2.0 version ), and thanks for sharing, Jeff!

[JeffHamm]

Im impressed with the amount of time people have put into estimating if the club time assertions are within reason. Since we cant know exactly what time sources provided clues to them, or how much various time sources might differ, the way to assess many of these issues is by secondary sources. What did other witnessses see. The times are very relevant when assessing what actually could have happened, but not necessarily what did happen. If one source says they were somewhere at X oclock, and another source claims the same location at the same time and saw nothing, well....self explanatory issues there.

As for Louis's arrival time, there are witnesses that can assist us when it comes to whether he actually arrived just before 1am or not.

"I was standing at the door of my house nearly the whole time between half-past twelve and one o'clock this (Sunday) morning, and did not notice anything unusual. I had just gone indoors, and was preparing to go to bed, when I heard a commotion outside, and immediately ran out, thinking that there was another row at the Socialists' Club close by. I went to see what was the matter, and was informed that another dreadful murder had been committed in the yard adjoining the club-house, and on going inside I saw the body of a woman lying huddled up just inside the yard with her throat cut from ear to ear. A man touched her face, and said it was quite warm, so that the deed must have been done while I was standing at the door of my house. There was certainly no noise made, and I did not observe any one enter the gates. It was soon after one o'clock when I went out, and the only man whom I had seen pass through the street previously was a young man carrying a black shiny bag, who walked very fast down the street from the Commercial-road. He looked up at the club, and then went round the corner by the Board School. I was told that the manager or steward of the club had discovered the woman on his return home in his pony cart. He drove through the gates, and my opinion is that he interrupted the murderer, who must have made his escape immediately under cover of the cart. If a man had come out of the yard before one o'clock I must have seen him. It was almost incredible to me that the thing could have been done without the steward's wife hearing a noise, for she was sitting in the kitchen, from which a window opens four yards from the spot where the woman was found. The body was lying slightly on one side, with the legs a little drawn up as if in pain, the clothes being slightly disarranged, so that the legs were partly visible. The woman appeared to me to be respectable, judging by her clothes, and in her hand were found a bunch of grapes and some sweets. A young man and his sweetheart were standing at the corner of the street, about twenty yards away, before and after the time the woman must have been murdered, but they told me they did not hear a sound."


That quote from Fanny as told to a reporter that evening is illuminating, if of course you allow her the possibility of being accurate with her recollections of events and times. She was in and out of her home during that half hour, but "nearly the whole time" suggests that these were not long durations spent indoors. Then you have the fact that she spoke with the young couple about what they saw during that time. They corroborate her story.

So, based on witnesses to that street scene, and the gates, and the houses and shops lining the street, we have no record of anyone being seen arriving or departing through the gates, via the street, during the most critical period....12:45 to 1am.

No Israel. No Pipeman. No Liz Stride on the street after 12:35. No Eagle using the gate entrance at around 12:40. And no Louis, cart and horse, arriving. Logic dictates that if Louis did not arrive until after 1am, then all the subsequent times and events given by all the witnesses become incorrect.

And by using eyewitness statements, Louis did not arrive before 1.

We know that Liz may have been cut between 12:46 and 12:56 at the earliest estimate by Blackwell, but Phillips stated at 1:30 that he believed it was "within the past hour". So its feasible that she was cut earlier than that, and then you have to wonder why Lave and Eagle, who both said they were there at the gates at the exact same time, didnt see Liz standing or lying on the ground....or each other.

But Eagle hedged....he "couldnt be sure" Liz was not there at 12:40. Couldnt be sure. Even though he would have to had stepped over her to get close to the wall, as he said he did. One would think he should be able to be sure if things transpired as he said they did. But he "couldnt be sure".

Hi Michael,

So, are you now saying Louis arrived after 1 o'clock? I always thought you were arguing that he arrived well before 1 o'clock. But above you say "And by using eyewitness statements, Louis did not arrive before 1.", so have you changed your mind on his arrival time then?


Also, in most accounts, Fanny says she was only on her doorstep for 10 minutes (time isn't really clear, but she goes out shortly after hearing PC Smith go by, or at least hears footsteps she presumes were those of a police officer on beat). That sort of puts her on her stoop for 10 minutes, spanning 12:45 type thing. There is one news report where she's saying "nearly the whole time", but that can't be the case as the only person she sees walk down the street is Goldstein (and a young couple at the corner), and as you say, there were quite a few others going about. I think it is safe to set the "nearly the whole time" statement aside as overstating things.

I am still planning on going through all the news reports for Fanny to try and create a clock diagram for her statements. Hopefully that will help shed some light on the probable time window she was on her doorstep.

- Jeff

[JeffHamm]

Great job (the 2.0 version ), and thanks for sharing, Jeff!

Thanks. Seriously, I swear I double checked things and it all looked good. It is amazing how easy it is to overlook something though. I was focusing on the changes in the minutes and completely blanked on the lack of changes to the hours.

Anyway, I take it the ally to the club, with the gates, etc, just isn't shown on that map? It just looks like a big parking lot to me, and I can't work out where the gates were, or the ally to the side door of the club is? That's why I always thought it was up between the B and E of Berner Street, as there's the ally, which opens into a bit of a yard area (where Lave was strolling, etc). I just can't see anything around the 2nd E that looks like the description of the scene.

- Jeff

[FrankO]

Thanks. Seriously, I swear I double checked things and it all looked good. It is amazing how easy it is to overlook something though. I was focusing on the changes in the minutes and completely blanked on the lack of changes to the hours.

Anyway, I take it the ally to the club, with the gates, etc, just isn't shown on that map? It just looks like a big parking lot to me, and I can't work out where the gates were, or the ally to the side door of the club is? That's why I always thought it was up between the B and E of Berner Street, as there's the ally, which opens into a bit of a yard area (where Lave was strolling, etc). I just can't see anything around the 2nd E that looks like the description of the scene.

- Jeff

Hi Jeff,

The situation as it was in 1888, at least as far as the western side of Berner Street, can be seen in the "OS 1:1,056-1:2,640 Towns, 1840s-1860s" map: Georeferenced Maps - Map images - National Library of Scotland (nls.uk). Dutfield's Yard is just below the "R" in Berner. Of course, by the time of the murder there was a board school opposite the yard, which isn't there yet on this map, but it is there on the map that you used. That may have caused the confusion.

Cheers,
Frank

[Herlock Sholmes]

Im impressed with the amount of time people have put into estimating if the club time assertions are within reason. Since we cant know exactly what time sources provided clues to them, or how much various time sources might differ, the way to assess many of these issues is by secondary sources. What did other witnessses see. The times are very relevant when assessing what actually could have happened, but not necessarily what did happen. If one source says they were somewhere at X oclock, and another source claims the same location at the same time and saw nothing, well....self explanatory issues there.

But you omit to mention that we also can’t know what time sources ‘other witnesses’ used or how accurate those sources where or even at what point they last saw them. Therefore we would be using estimates to corroborate estimates. The rest of us don’t have the get out clause that you use to dismiss unfriendly witnesses either (that they were ‘in on it’)


As for Louis's arrival time, there are witnesses that can assist us when it comes to whether he actually arrived just before 1am or not.

"I was standing at the door of my house nearly the whole time between half-past twelve and one o'clock this (Sunday) morning, and did not notice anything unusual. I had just gone indoors, and was preparing to go to bed, when I heard a commotion outside, and immediately ran out, thinking that there was another row at the Socialists' Club close by. I went to see what was the matter, and was informed that another dreadful murder had been committed in the yard adjoining the club-house, and on going inside I saw the body of a woman lying huddled up just inside the yard with her throat cut from ear to ear. A man touched her face, and said it was quite warm, so that the deed must have been done while I was standing at the door of my house. There was certainly no noise made, and I did not observe any one enter the gates. It was soon after one o'clock when I went out, and the only man whom I had seen pass through the street previously was a young man carrying a black shiny bag, who walked very fast down the street from the Commercial-road. He looked up at the club, and then went round the corner by the Board School. I was told that the manager or steward of the club had discovered the woman on his return home in his pony cart. He drove through the gates, and my opinion is that he interrupted the murderer, who must have made his escape immediately under cover of the cart. If a man had come out of the yard before one o'clock I must have seen him. It was almost incredible to me that the thing could have been done without the steward's wife hearing a noise, for she was sitting in the kitchen, from which a window opens four yards from the spot where the woman was found. The body was lying slightly on one side, with the legs a little drawn up as if in pain, the clothes being slightly disarranged, so that the legs were partly visible. The woman appeared to me to be respectable, judging by her clothes, and in her hand were found a bunch of grapes and some sweets. A young man and his sweetheart were standing at the corner of the street, about twenty yards away, before and after the time the woman must have been murdered, but they told me they did not hear a sound."


That quote from Fanny as told to a reporter that evening is illuminating, if of course you allow her the possibility of being accurate with her recollections of events and times. She was in and out of her home during that half hour, but "nearly the whole time" suggests that these were not long durations spent indoors. Then you have the fact that she spoke with the young couple about what they saw during that time. They corroborate her story.

Firstly, Fanny doesn’t mention being ‘in and out.’ You seem to have little regard for accuracy in what witnesses actually did or didn’t say Michael. She only mentions going onto her doorstep one (after she heard the footsteps) and we don’t know how long she was on here doorstep for. Great witness! Then she came onto her doorstep after hearing the commotion (just after 1.00 when the body was discovered) Just before that she’s heard a horse and cart pass (I wonder who that was passing down a backstreet at 1.00am)

I find it remarkable that a man who will not allow that Eagle corroborates Diemschitz. Or that Mrs Diemschitz or Mila or Julius Minsky corroborate him purely because they were ‘from the club’ and therefore ‘in on it,’ but you are perfectly prepared to allow as corroboration an almost mythical couple that no one ever heard from again. A couple that never, as far as we know, contact the police. How trustworthy were they? Who were they? But no, you allow these two as corroborating witnesses. Points like this just can’t be justified Michael. It’s cherrypicking pure and simple.

So, based on witnesses to that street scene, and the gates, and the houses and shops lining the street, we have no record of anyone being seen arriving or departing through the gates, via the street, during the most critical period....12:45 to 1am.

No Israel. No Pipeman. No Liz Stride on the street after 12:35. No Eagle using the gate entrance at around 12:40. And no Louis, cart and horse, arriving. Logic dictates that if Louis did not arrive until after 1am, then all the subsequent times and events given by all the witnesses become incorrect.

Where do you get this kind of reasoning from?? If something wasn’t seen it means that it wasn’t seen; not that it didn’t occur. This wasn’t Oxford Circus. It was a dingy, poorly lit, almost deserted backstreet.

And by using eyewitness statements, Louis did not arrive before 1.

We know that Liz may have been cut between 12:46 and 12:56 at the earliest estimate by Blackwell, but Phillips stated at 1:30 that he believed it was "within the past hour". So its feasible that she was cut earlier than that, and then you have to wonder why Lave and Eagle, who both said they were there at the gates at the exact same time, didnt see Liz standing or lying on the ground....or each other.

More invention. Please try reading the evidence without your ‘plot goggles’ on Michael, it might help your understanding better. In the Press reports we get around 3 or 4 versions of how long Lave was in the yard so how do you manage to decide to tie it down to a specific? Plus he didn’t stand sentry at the gate, he moved around. He’d only have had to have been away from the back door, inside the yard, for three seconds and Eagle returns and is back inside without Lave seeing him. And as he said that he returned at 12.40

But Eagle hedged....he "couldnt be sure" Liz was not there at 12:40. Couldnt be sure. Even though he would have to had stepped over her to get close to the wall, as he said he did. One would think he should be able to be sure if things transpired as he said they did. But he "couldnt be sure".

Try reading the lines instead of between the Michael. It’s the best place to start.

Doesn’t everyone find it more than a little strange that the man who is so confident in his plot theory (despite standing entirely alone) is so dead set against providing his own timeline events? Everyone else have ‘put their money where their mouth is’ by producing potential timelines. What are you afraid of Michael? Or is it that you know very well that your version won’t stand up to scrutiny.

[JeffHamm]

Hi Jeff,

The situation as it was in 1888, at least as far as the western side of Berner Street, can be seen in the "OS 1:1,056-1:2,640 Towns, 1840s-1860s" map: Georeferenced Maps - Map images - National Library of Scotland (nls.uk). Dutfield's Yard is just below the "R" in Berner. Of course, by the time of the murder there was a board school opposite the yard, which isn't there yet on this map, but it is there on the map that you used. That may have caused the confusion.

Cheers,
Frank

Ah, that looks more like what I would expect to see. Thanks heaps. Now, just have to make sure I remember that. Not easy when you have a hole for a head you know.

- Jeff

[Lewis C]

So, based on witnesses to that street scene, and the gates, and the houses and shops lining the street, we have no record of anyone being seen arriving or departing through the gates, via the street, during the most critical period....12:45 to 1am.

No Israel. No Pipeman. No Liz Stride on the street after 12:35.[/COLOR] [COLOR=#000000]No Eagle using the gate entrance at around 12:40. And no Louis, cart and horse, arriving. Logic dictates that if Louis did not arrive until after 1am, then all the subsequent times and events given by all the witnesses become incorrect.

Hi Michael,

There are 2 witnesses that said they saw Stride alive in the area after 12:35: Israel Schwartz and James Brown. You might think that they were both mistaken, but you can't say that there's no record of anyone seeing her after 12:35.

[JeffHamm]

Ok, using Frank's measurements, and the new improved space age version of the time line calculator, I thought I would further test how well the estimated values fit with some witness statements. I'll work with the "Eagle Hurries" version, as that neither selects towards him strolling or running the whole way.

So, the version would be this one:

Eagle "Hurries": (4.11 mph)
Time Event
1:10:30 Eagle Arrives at Leman Street Police Station
1:05:50 Eagle departs to Station/PC Lamb's Arrival
1:04:55 PC Lamb Alerted
1:04:01 Eagle departs to find PC Lamb/Fairclough runners return/Spooner's arrival
1:01:42 Fairclough Run Starts
1:00:32 Diemschutz time for alerting (after his pony cart stuff)
12:58:42 Diemschutz Arrival

Keeping in mind the times listed are estimates of what the clock at the Leman Street Police station would read and not the clock a witness would be referencing, there are two statements we could note.
First, PC Lamb says he was alerted around 1 o'clock (there is one paper that says something like shortly before 1 o'clock, but 6 or 7 other papers just say "around"). Regardless, the estimated time is 1:04:55, and that is easily a time that one might describe as "around 1 o'clock", and so is consistent with the 6 or 7 papers that use that phrasing. Furthermore, given I consider it reasonable that two clocks in Victorian London could easily differ by 10 minutes but have cut that down to 5 for these tests to be on the conservative side, then there is a case that PC Lamb could very well have thought it was slightly before 1 o'clock even though the Leman Police Station clock reads slightly before 1:05. It's a difference at the edge of the conservative range, of course, but as my personal view is that the proper range we need to consider is 10 minutes, I am of the opinion that even the "shortly before 1 o'clock" version, if that even was what he said, is not at odds with the recreated times of the Leman Police Station clock. Obviously, without actual clock readings from the Victorian era, my estimate of the error range is based upon descriptions of the problem of the lack of proper syncronization of the public clocks at that time. London did pass a law requiring clocks to be properly synced to Greenwich Mean Time, but even the London council failed to actually adhere to it.

The other thing I wanted to look at was Spooner's estimate that PC Lamb arrived about 5 minutes after him. I've posted the table before with regards to how good people are at estimating durations; short story - not good at all! When people report a duration as being 5 minutes, the range of true intervals that would be considered "consistent" with their testimony ranges from a 1m 38s to 15m 6s! The average true range is 3m 37s. Given the min->average is a much smaller difference than the ave->max, that means the distribution is not normal, but skewed, in which case the median value will be smaller than the mean.

Spooner is estimated to arrive at 1:04:01. Therefore, as long as PC Lamb arrives after 1:05:39 and before 1:19:10, Spooner's estimate of the duration being about 5 minutes cannot be said to conflict with the calculation. I told you, we're rubbish at this sort of thing.

The estimate for PC Lamb's arrival is 1:05:50, which is after the minimal acceptable arrival time of 1:05:39. So again, the reconstruction values, which are estimates of course, are fitting within the error ranges we would expect. That means our reconstruction is probably a good estimation of the actual events. I'm not saying it is exactly those times, but we're getting an idea of "roughly" what time the events occurred. One could play around with the various speed parameters and so forth, and probably create probability distributions and do all sorts of fancy stuff like that (yes, I'm tempted ), but that might be a bit over the top.

In short, the estimated time of PC Lamb being alerted fits his testimony. And the estimated difference in times of arrival between Spooner and PC Lamb, fits Spooner's 5 minute estimate of that interval.

- Jeff

[JeffHamm]

I'm getting close, I think, to finding scientific literature with regards to time perception as it may apply to witnesses estimates of durations. This is something I've been looking for on occasion, but a lot of the research gets into issues not as easily applicable to witness statements about time as I would like. (Still good work, just a few steps removed).

However, I've found an interesting, and fairly recent, article that reviews literature that appears to be of the sort I want to dig into.

Below are some quotes from that article, summarizing findings in the literature, although be aware that sometimes the relationship between a summary and the actual study can be ... disappointing? Anyway, below are the quotes that caught my eye as they seem to have implications with regards to witness statements about durations:

From
Weardon, J.H. (2015). Passage of time judgements, Consciousness & Cognition, 38, 165-171.

Q1: “The experience of waiting, particularly when the wait is unexpected, or we are under time pressure, seems particularly prone to provoking the feeling that the time interval lasts longer than it really does, or that we know it does (see Larson, 2004, for discussion).”


Q2: “Turning next to the concept of ‘‘arousal’’ and passage of time, a literature going back at least to Treisman (1963) argues that increasing arousal is associated with longer duration judgements.”

Q3: “Anecdotes about changes in time experience in emergency situations, such as when climbers experience falls, or people are involved in car crashes or other life-threatening situations, are common. Arstila (2012) provides a review and discussion of these. The most common report derived from this ‘‘emergency time’’ is that external events seem to slow down, that is, events seem to last much longer than they do in reality, and may even appear perceptually in a sort of slow motion.”

If we consider the wait for PC Lamb to arrive at the scene, those present will be waiting under some sense of time pressure (they want the police here now!), which Q1 suggests we should expect the witness to over-estimate the actual time duration. Moreover, being at a murder scene, particularly given the climate of fear that was present after Annie Chapman's murder, would result in emotional arousal, which Q2 also tells us that the perceived duration will be greater than the actual duration. (This could be an underlying explanation for why unexpected waits, or time pressure, results in longer estimates of durations, because those conditions induce arousal which in turn dilates time, etc). Similarly, Q3 (and our situation is of course an emergency), also would advise us to expect a witness is more prone to overestimate the actual duration.

So, taking on board that information, perhaps Spooner's estimate being close to the shorter end is not, in fact, at all surprising. He is in the exact type of situation where one would expect him to overestimate how long they had to wait for the police to arrive.

- Jeff

[JeffHamm]

And one other thing. I have just heard back from George with regards to his recreation of Deimschutz's actions (1m 50s). In all of the "tables" above, I have been working under the assumption that 1m 50s only covered his actions at the gate when he arrived, and did not include the part where he goes inside, finds a candle, and eventually comes back to the body to look at it. That turns out to be incorrect, and the 1m 50s for his recreation covered the whole series of events from stopping the cart until Deimschutz gets back to the body.

What that means, is that the additional 70s I've added to George's 1m 50s is, in fact, not correct as the 1m 50s already covers the events my additional 70s was meant to cover. So, I've removed that time from the sequence. Giving us the following based upon Frank's measurements. I will do all three versions given there's been a number of updates as new and improved information comes in:

Eagle Walks: (3.1 mph)
Time Event
1:10:30 Eagle Arrives at Leman Street Police Station
1:04:18 Eagle departs to Station/PC Lamb's Arrival
1:03:24 PC Lamb Alerted
1:02:30 Eagle departs to find PC Lamb/Fairclough runners return/Spooner's arrival
1:00:11 Fairclough Run Starts
12:58:21 Diemschutz Arrival

Eagle Runs: (6.1 mph)
Time Event
1:10:30 Eagle Arrives at Leman Street Police Station
1:07:21 Eagle departs to Station/PC Lamb's Arrival
1:06:27 PC Lamb Alerted
1:05:32 Eagle departs to find PC Lamb/Fairclough runners return/Spooner's arrival
1:03:13 Fairclough Run Starts
1:01:23 Diemschutz Arrival

Eagle "Hurries": (4.11 mph)
Time Event
1:10:30 Eagle Arrives at Leman Street Police Station
1:05:50 Eagle departs to Station/PC Lamb's Arrival
1:04:55 PC Lamb Alerted
1:04:01 Eagle departs to find PC Lamb/Fairclough runners return/Spooner's arrival
1:01:42 Fairclough Run Starts
12:59:52 Diemschutz Arrival

Obviously, George's recreation is, like any recreation, simply a working estimate of the actual time involved, but his estimated duration is better than a simple guess and is probably in the right ball park. For those who think George's estimate is "too short", you would just adjust Diemschutz's arrival earlier by whatever amount, but if you think his estimate is "too long", then shift his arrival a bit later (i.e. if you think George is too long by 8 seconds, then that would result in Diemschutz arriving at 1:00:00).

Anyway, I think the take home message is that there is absolutely nothing in the statements covering these events that at all points to the information being unreliable, or that Diemschutz arriving at 1:00 makes it impossible for the other events to occur.

I'm feeling fairly confident that the above reconstruction is using correct information in terms of the estimated distances and that I now have a proper understanding of George's reconstruction. Given that, and my new handy dandy timeline book, I'm thinking it will be possible to build upon this. I think that combined with Wickerman's clock diagram method for evaluating some of the testimonies, it might be possible to build a very good, and data driven, estimated reconstruction of the events. We can never expect to get things exactly right, but I think it may be possible to get something that is close enough to be good enough.

Time will tell!

Finally, I would like to give a big Thanks and shout out to both Frank and George for correcting my mistakes with regards to the distances and the Deimschutz recreation. Also, a big thanks to Belloc, who PM'd me to alert me to the rather embarrassing error I initially had in the calculation of the hour value.

- Jeff