Mary Ann Nichols

[paul emmett]

But, Tom, that's what I referred to above. The DAILY TELEGRAPH has the same "long-bladed" quote as the TIMES.

And upon reflection, Llewellyn's incompetence that you documented above only makes me doubt his assertion of one weapon.
Paul

[Tom_Wescott]

Paul,

It could be as simple a matter as that he was misquoted by the Times.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[paul emmett]

I know all of that is true, Tom. But I still struggle to understand Llewellyn's inconsistency with the knife. I think with the left-handed and gutted first, just like with not seeing her abdominal wounds, he screwed up and went back to cover his "tracks." So she did have abdomnal wounds, the killer was not necessarily left-handed, and the neck wounds were first. But which knife was it?

[Tom_Wescott]

Paul,

Be careful there. Llewellyn changed his mind about a lot of things, including which hand the killer used and whether or not he gutted her or cut her throat first. However, at no point did anyone in authority suggest that two different weapons were used on Nichols.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[paul emmett]

Hmm - Well what if it was plural - killer(s) - could they later have changed up a bit during the next murders so that it wouldn't appear like two?

Hi, Blackkat.

Tom has already provided a good list. I'd just like to add one thing that I noticed this week rereading the Nichols material. It's the cotroversy over the weapon used. In a 9/1 TIMES article Llewellyn says, "it was not an espescially long-bladed weapon." In his inquest deposition, he says, on two occassions, "long-bladed knife, modreately sharp." Sugden tries to resolve this issue by saying that the inquest quote, also reported(later) in the TIMES is an error. But the DAILY TELEGRAPH said "long-bladed" too.

I have no easy solution, and I would like to hear what others think, but for me the differences in the "knives" was enhanced by the differences in the wounds. Deep neck and vertical cuts; superficial horizontal and vaginal cuts.

So, despite the fact that Llewellyn does say one weapon was used, all this just seemed to tie in with Tabram, Lilley and your question.

[Tom_Wescott]

Rose Mylett was seen arguing with two sailors, is that who you meant ?

Not sure. Only working from vague memory here, but it could be. Thanks Jon.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Jon Guy]

* Alice Mackenzie (or was it Coles?) seen talking with two men, ala Pipeman and BS Man, prior to her murder.

Rose Mylett was seen arguing with two sailors, is that who you meant ?

[Tom_Wescott]

Hmm - Well what if it was plural - killer(s) - could they later have changed up a bit during the next murders so that it wouldn't appear like two?

It's not impossible that it was two killers working in tandem. Not impossible at all. I'm not saying I support that conclusion but I don't rule it out. Consider:

* Dr. Killeen's belief that two weapons were used in the murder of Tabram.
* Harriett Lilley hearing two people whispering over Nichols' corpse.
* Schwartz's testimony of two men he felt (but wasn't sure) were known to each other.
* The man near Mitre Square who asked James Blenkinsop if he'd seen a couple come through right before the murder of Eddowes.
* A man standing just outside Millers Court and staring up the court, possibly keeping look out.
* Alice Mackenzie (or was it Coles?) seen talking with two men, ala Pipeman and BS Man, prior to her murder.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Blackkat]

Hmm - Well what if it was plural - killer(s) - could they later have changed up a bit during the next murders so that it wouldn't appear like two?

[paul emmett]

Ya gotta ask Rees Ralph about the 4-5 minutes. But remember he never even gave Jack's time in the 220.

[sdreid]

The mutilations took 4-5 minutes? I don't see why they couldn't have been done in less than a minute? People can run a mile in 4 minutes.

[Tom_Wescott]

Thank you for the kind compliment, Paul. And I'd never considered that it might have been Schwartz and Tabram whispering over Nichols' corpse. Sounds perfectly workable to me. Just kidding, I know what you mean, and I did consider that, although in both of those cases the whispering occured prior to the murder and not after.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[paul emmett]

The whispers followed the gasping or moaning, and Cross and Paul were likely on the scene immediately following the murder (I'm of the opinion Cross unknowingly chased the Ripper away). I find this scenario far easier to believe than that the Ripper was actually two people whispering over their kill.

I am sure most folks do, but there's always Scwartz and Tabram.

I, too, think Cross scared off JTR--espescially since I just read your fine article.

Have a good evening.

[Tom_Wescott]

The whispers followed the gasping or moaning, and Cross and Paul were likely on the scene immediately following the murder (I'm of the opinion Cross unknowingly chased the Ripper away). I find this scenario far easier to believe than that the Ripper was actually two people whispering over their kill.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[paul emmett]

On that Thursday night I[Harriet Lilley] was somehow very restless. Well, I heard something I mentioned to my husband in the morning. It was a painful moan - two or three faint gasps - and then it passed away. It was dark, but a luggage train went by as I heard the sounds. There was, too, a sound as of whispers underneath the window. I distinctly heard voices, but cannot say what was said - it was too faint. I then woke my husband, and said to him, "I don't know what possesses me, but I cannot sleep to-night." Mrs. Lilley added that as soon as she heard of the murder she came to the conclusion that the voices she heard were in some way connected with it. The cries were very different from those of an ordinary street brawl.
It has been ascertained that on the morning of the date of the murder a goods train passed on the East London railway at about half-past three - the 3.7 out from New-cross - which was probably the time when Mary Ann Nicholls was either killed or placed in Buck's-row THE ECHO

Hi, Tom.

IF the moan and gasps are Polly's, some things speak against the whisperers being Cross and Paul. Timing: Paul says he left his house at 3:45, so his whispering can't be before 3:50. Lilley's statement implies that the moans, gasps and whispers were at the "same" time, sequential most likely. If the train comes at 3:30?

Even if it didn't come exactly on time, Llewellyn says the mutilations took 4-5 minutes, so there has to be a significant time gap between Polly's dying gasps and Cross and Paul. Also would they whisper so that Mrs, L could hear a moan, but not what they said? I ain't sure.