Hi Christer.
I'm glad you mentioned your quote was from the Scotsman, I've been trying to locate that version (and any others), just to verify.
I did mention it in my original post, Jon - just as I mentioned that the article had itīs origin in an Echo article from the day before (2:nd and 1:st of October, respectively).
Hypothetically, if two men are running down the street, why would any witness seeing them assume a murderer is being chased?, unless one of them indeed was shouting, "stop", "police", "murder", or something like that.
Two men running in silence would be extraordinary, would it not?
In fact, wouldn't two men running in silence suggest they were actually fleeing together as accomplices, from some criminal act?
I think a lot hinges on the people who saw the two men running. They could have noticed the scene, only to later get information of what had happened in Dutfieldīs Yard, and then they started drawing conclusions. Actually, if they had known about the murder as they saw the men, would they not have participated in the hunt - for the Ripper?
Like everything else in this business, it works both ways ...

Why did this unnamed witness think a murderer was being chased unless one of the men was indeed shouting something while he ran?
See the above - and I think it was more than one witness; the Scotsman mentions that, I believe.
I took that as being written by the journalist by way of clarification to his reader.
Iīm not protesting, Jon - could well be the case. I just find it a bit elaborate.
The best,
Fisherman
Leave a comment: