Disregarded evidence

[Fisherman]

In what manner, David? Iīm a newspaper man myself, and to think that it has all been in vain visavi myself sounds depressing...

But I take it you are being a bit too clever again, perhaps? Let me know, and I will give my view - but not until tomorrow. Bonne nuit!

The best,
Fisherman

[DVV]

Ok Fish, but why do you categorically discard/ignore the possible influence of the papers ?

[Fisherman]

David:

"what she said on the subject (age, foreigner) is more a guess than a genuine description."

It is a guess to a larger or lesser degree, yes, but not only a guess. She noticed the dark skin, opening for her foreigner suggestion, and she would have noticed something that made her think that the man was above forty, skin texture, posture ... you name it.
Could have been right, could have been wrong, but thatīs how she read the man, and she would have had some sort of substantiation behind it.

The best,
Fisherman

[DVV]

David:
"Mrs Long, once she heard of the murder, thought she had seen Leather Apron. And got a long retrospective shudder."

Hold it, David! Are you saying that Long fabricated her story?
Fisherman

Hi Fish
I'm not saying she fabricated her story. She saw Chapman and her murderer, in all likehood.
But as she only had a glimpse of the man from behind, what she said on the subject (age, foreigner) is more a guess than a genuine description. This guess strangely tallying Leather Apron.
Too bad she added "foreigner", I know.

[DVV]

Dvv was persisting in claiming that Emma green hadn't claimed to be a light sleeper.

Hilarious, Lechmere, although a bit difficult to quote.

But more hilarious is the "self-styled-light-sleepers-do-not-sleep-when-they-say-they-sleep"-theory.

[Lechmere]

Dvv was persisting in claiming that Emma green hadn't claimed to be a light sleeper.
Green and purkess lived closest to the murder scene. Neither claimed to be fast asleep all night and so had something to say about the noise levels in bucks row. Both gave evidence about what was going on in the crime scene very soon after Neil 'discovered' polly. Green gave evidence about what sort of street bucks row was.
Their inclusion was entirely logical. That they didn't give evidence to the effect that they heard a loud commotion may disappoint some people, but there you go.

Why werent Lilley or colville called? I presume they were not believed or were believed to be mistaken or their accounts related to something else. I haven't had time to spell out my detailed and separate views on their accounts as I've been too busy this week!

[Fisherman]

David:

"Mrs Long, once she heard of the murder, thought she had seen Leather Apron. And got a long retrospective shudder."

Hold it, David! Are you saying that Long fabricated her story? Or are you saying that it would have been better for the Jews if she did not state what she believed she had seen?

Or are you saying something else altogether? Listening to you somewtimes resembles sticking your head down a barrel full of eels. What makes me uneasy about that is that you seem to voluntarily choose that methodology.

The best,
Fisherman

[Simon Wood]

Hi Lechmere,

DVV poses a good question.

Charlotte Colville heard a scuffling and bumping against her shutters and cries of Police! Murder!

Harriet Lilley heard a moan, two or three faint gasps, and whispers beneath her window.

Neither attended the Nichols inquest.

Mrs Green [adjacent] and Mr Purkess [opposite] heard absolutely nothing.

Both attended the Nichols inquest.

For all they contributed, they might just as well have been in Lyme Regis at the time of the murder.

But they weren't subpoenaed for nothing.

Their testimony helped reinforce the concept of a swift, silent killer, plus the idea that Polly Nichols had been attacked and murdered where she was found, something which Dr. Llewellyn did not believe until someone read him his fortune, deciding him to discard his contrary opinion at the inquest.

Regards,

Simon

[DVV]

Do you think the police would have been better served by her withholding that they were probably looking for a dark man in his forties or so, with a probable foreign descent?
Fisherman

Yes, Fish. Because Mrs Long, once she heard of the murder, thought she had seen Leather Apron. And got a long retrospective shudder.

[DVV]

DVV
If you don't mind me saying you are starting to suffer from adversarial contradiction syndrome - where you are compelled to tie yourself in knots opposing everything said by those you are against.

Well, I do not mind.
Especially when I'm saying nothing more than : Mrs Green, having confessed that she had slept all through, is hardly an evidence that Mrs Lilley had fabricated her story.
Not to say, of course, that Mrs Lilley's statement (to a journalist) had not been "disregarded" by the police with good reason. That's something else.

Seems that it is good common sense I'm suffering from.

[Lechmere]

DVV
If you don't mind me saying you are starting to suffer from adversarial contradiction syndrome - where you are compelled to tie yourself in knots opposing everything said by those you are against.

[Fisherman]

David:

"Fish, would you tell us the reason of Mrs Green's presence at the inquest, please ?"

Absolutely! You see, Emma Green lived in New Cottage, and that made her the person closest to the crime. It was thought that she could have heard something, therefore, having been physically close to the murder site. She also professed to being a light sleeper, and therefore, no matter if she had fallen asleep at the relevant hour, she could arguably have been awakened if there were sounds to be heard.

We may actually see that she was asked about this specific thing, since it says in the inquest report that: "Emma Green, who lives in the cottage next to the scene of the murder in Buck's- row, stated that she had heard no unusual sound during the night."

"Should Baxter have asked her : "Did your hear a train, or people talking under your window, while you was sleeping ?""

Oh no - it would have been better if he asked whether Mrs Green was awakened by anything tat night, light sleeper as she was. You donīt hear things when you are asleep - at least you donīt register them the same way as when youīre awake - but you may wake up if there are sounds. I suspect that this was what the inquest was eager to find out about.

"let's say he did (after all, he had just visited Scandinavia)"

Expand, please - I donīt see what you are after.

"let's say Mrs Green had answered "Yes" to this already surrealist question.
What would be the value of such "Yes" ?"

None. The value would only arise when/if she stated that she awoke from it, David.

"The same applies to Mrs Long in the Chapman's case."

She slept too...?

"She said that she saw the man from behind.
But could tell he was over 40, and a foreigner."

No, David, she could not. She got the IMPRESSION that this was so, and that is not a strange thing at all. The texture of the skin (she noticed that the man was dark, and that would not allude to the hair but to the skin) will give away if you are not a young person, and the posture, the hands - many things may SUGGEST a higher age, and that is all Long is saying. Here you are:

"I did not see the man's face, but I noticed that he was dark. He was wearing a brown low-crowned felt hat. I think he had on a dark coat, though I am not certain. By the look of him he seemed to me a man over forty years of age."

He SEEMED a man over forty years, nothing else. The same goes for the foreign descent - he was dark, remember, and dark coloration in skin and hair would suggest a foreigner.

"I rather think she talked too much."

Not at all - she would have been obliged to divulge all her impressions, David. This was not petty theft, it was a high-profile murder case, and the police were eager to get to know everything there was to know. It was quite, quite probably the work of a killer that had struck before, and it was the first time they had a suspect (or so they thought, woefully forgetting about Lechmere). How could they NOT have asked, and how could Long NOT have given all the information she had, including things about which she could not be a hundred per cent sure?

Do you think the police would have been better served by her withholding that they were probably looking for a dark man in his forties or so, with a probable foreign descent?

I think not.

The best,
Fisherman

[DVV]

Fish, would you tell us the reason of Mrs Green's presence at the inquest, please ?

Was she a friend of the victim ? Did she go to the police with a story ?

No. She lived close to the spot, so the coroner wanted to make clear whether she had heard anything or not.
It turned out that she was sleeping.
Means she didn't heard anything. Nor her daughter, btw.

Should Baxter have asked her : "Did your hear a train, or people talking under your window, while you was sleeping ?"
What a dunderhead he would have been.

But let's say he did (after all, he had just visited Scandinavia), and let's say Mrs Green had answered "Yes" to this already surrealist question.
What would be the value of such "Yes" ?

The same applies to Mrs Long in the Chapman's case.
She said that she saw the man from behind.
But could tell he was over 40, and a foreigner.

With all due respect to Mrs Long, I must say I'm not ready to look for a 45 year old Jewish ripper. Not on my top-list yet.

I rather think she talked too much.

[Fisherman]

There you are then, David - wrong again!

Fisherman

[Lechmere]

But I've never met the woman!