Tweet
Brad,
How can the witnesses know for sure it was Mary crying out "Oh Murder"?
BW
How can the witnesses know for sure it was Mary crying out "Oh Murder"?
BW
-
"A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.”
Albert Einstein -
Elizabeth Prater heard a "faintish cry, as from the courtyard" just after being woken by Diddles, and Sarah Lewis heard a loud cry, "as if at the door", which is the door to the Keylers place that faced Mary Kellys door in the courtyard.
They do corroborate each other, both about quarter to four, the volume does lend itself to a cry nearer to Sarah, and it is a fact that no-one came forward to claim to be the owner of that cry after the story was published.
I believe the only local resident who likely wasnt asked about what they heard was the victim....so she is logical in that context as the source.
Best regards.Comment
-
Two different people heard a cry of 'murder' c. 3.30 am - 4.00 am, believed from area of Kelly's room, body found in room in morning...chances are...Originally posted by BLUE WIZZARD View PostComment
-
Michael,
Even if two people heard the cry of "Oh Murder", with so many people walking around at that hour, one of the witnesses said she has heard people cry out "Oh Murder" many times so she ignored the cry. Apparently it was not important enough for her to investigate it. So "Oh Murder" that night meant it was Mary's cry for help. Then the cops say OK that is good enough for me. Then marks the time of death according to the "Oh Murder" cry.
This is way too incredibly to be believed?
BW
This my last post tonight as I have an appointment."A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.”
Albert EinsteinComment
-
Hi All,
According to George Hutchinson, Kelly was in her room with Mister Astrakhan at around 2.10 - 2.15 am.
If the cry of murder was from Kelly at 3.30 — 4.00 am and Mister A was the murderer why did he wait between 1¼ and 1¾ hours before making his move?
Regards,
SimonNever believe anything until it has been officially denied.Comment
-
Mine too....though only cause Im tired...Originally posted by BLUE WIZZARD View Post
I highlighted what I believe is a pivotal point,....since Liz did hear the phrase cried out often, then listened after it for any sounds following it...she is evidently attempting to convince herself whether or not this is a serious call for help. She hears nothing more, and falls back asleep.
I think that suggests she believed it to be as much concern as it usually is, and remember....the attack that kills Mary started on her bed, with her being awake or woken. She defended herself. These things are only not heard if everyone else is sleeping...and at 3:45 at least 2 witnesses werent....and if Mary called out she was awake too.
In 10-15 minutes, Im sure sounds might get missed....and Mary might be only semi-awake.
Cheers.Comment
-
Gideon Fell,
One last post and I have to go, thanks a bunch for the input.
I have seen the picture of the arch door way to Mary’s place, a small ally before her door, I would bet you and again there is no way of telling unless some one could try it at an entrance way similar to Mary's place, just yell something and I bet you would hear an amplified sound of the word yelled. So it may have been possible that someone may have been having a conversation walking by and said "Oh Murder" causing an amplified sound through the place.
What amazes me, is with the Ripper on the loose why would anyone take the "Oh murder" cry and just ignore it, not even call a cop to check up on it.
BW"A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.”
Albert EinsteinComment
-
A couple of pretty unjustifiably bold statements there, Brad.Hutchinson was telling the truth. Abberline believed him.
Unless Hutchinson had superhuman powers of observation and recollection, and the entire seniority of the Metropolitan Police Force suffered from collective and simultaneous amnesia, the corollary is that Hutchinson did not tell the truth, and that the lack of interest in Hutchinson as a witness (and the failure to use him in any subsequent ID attempts) points fairly conclusively towards his evidence being discarded. Remember that an assumption that "Astrakhan existed but he wasn't the ripper because maybe someone else arrived afterwards" was no justification for ruling him out as a credible witness to the extent that he apparently was.
Best regards,
BenLast edited by Ben; 01-27-2009, 03:56 AM.Comment
-
BW,
I would take you up on that bet.I was born and spent some years in a court,with an entrance and a tunnel almost exactly like millers court.While in the tunnel sound made there might carry as you say,sounds from the street outside did not carry through,and vice versa.I believe we can safely say,because none were reported,there were only the two cries heard that night,and were made from within the court proper.That would include Kelly's room.Comment
-
Hi Ben,Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
always good to read your comments. I think the police dismissed Hutchinsons man as being the Ripper. You can still believe Hutchinson's story but not believe the guy he saw with Kelly was her Killer. I think that I remember that you believe as I do that Kelly was murdered around 3:45 as Simon points out the time frame does not fit.
Hi Simon,
Thats the rub, I do not believe the Ripper would have waited an an hour and half before killing Kelly. I think he would have killed her straight off. So Hutchinson's man does not fit the time fram. I believe the police felt the same way.
Your friend, BradComment
-
-
Nice to see you here too, Brad!
Absolutely, but what you can't do as an investigating officer is essentially discard a witness account purely on that assumption. It was still absolutely imperative for the police to track down the Astrakhan man in order to interview him and "eliminate him from their inquiries", and to do that meant keeping Hutchinson's statement in the frame and using it for potential identity parades etc. As of the 15th November, we learn that the account was "discredited" and subsequent police memoirs, interviews and reports would tend to bear this out, but you don't discredit a witness account on the assumption that the suspect mentioned might not be the killer. Ergo, the evidence was seemingly discarded for a "better" reason.You can still believe Hutchinson's story but not believe the guy he saw with Kelly was her Killer.
Best regards,
BenComment
-
Hi Harry,Originally posted by harry View Post
I would have bet that was the case myself, (the part in bold), thanks for confirming that bit. It's relevant when considering how Elizabeth Prater came to her conclusion that the sound was "as from the court".
All the best HarryComment
-
I am not so sure that Jack killed Mary that is because I'm a firm believer that Joe did it.
But did any of the woman that Jack killed on the streets were able to scream out "Oh murder" or any cry out, that someone would have heard it?
If people can hear through doors and floors a cry from Mary, then surely people living near the other victims could have heard a cry from the victims on the street.
If you do not agree with that, then why would you not agree with that?
BW"A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.”
Albert EinsteinComment
-
My response to that Wizzard is that in the outdoor venues we dont know that the victims made no sounds, only that none were heard beyond a "no" in the backyard at Hanbury, and Liz's squeal during her encounter with BSM. Even if we had however, there is evidence that has broad acceptance about this killer regarding his methodology, in that he subdues his women so they cannot resist first. Then lowers them. Only then does he cut them at all.Originally posted by BLUE WIZZARD View Post
Mary Kelly displays knife wounds that are most probably defensive in nature, leading to a supposition that she, unlike the others, was alert enough to resist somewhat when the killer had his knife out.
I think in her case we can safely assume that a struggle would cause some noise on a squeaky bed and sprung floorboards.
I dont think its wise to use noise or lack of it at the other venues, as I pointed out, there was reports of some noise from a few of the women near the time of their death. One perhaps at the commencement of the actual kill. And unlike all other prior Jack attributed murders, the killer in Millers Court uses his knife while his victim is apparently able to, and is actively, resisting. That to me necessitates some noise being made, and I believe that if the court witnesses are asleep when that occurs, the premise works out fine.
2 are not asleep at 3:45, and maybe a third if Mary called out...which I believe she did.....I think only possible inflection on those two words can determine what kind of urgency existed...and whatever inflection was used, it wasnt enough in and of itself to convince either woman something like mortal danger might be the cause of it.
Best regards.Comment
Comment