Was Millers court being watched by the police

[Damaso Marte]

Hi Guys,
Just suppose the London police had knowledge of the 14. Dorset street letter sent to Yarmouth police a week previous.
It could then be conceivable that the address, which was opposite Millers court might have triggered alarm bells, especially if they had figured out the killers pattern of dates.
Regards Richard.

If they were following up on every letter, there would have been no PC left to send to Dorset street.

Also, what pattern?

[richardnunweek]

Hi Nicole,
It was not me that claims that this actual happened, I simply passed on a article in a paper some 42 years after the murders.
It may be pure invention , but it is not unreasonable to at least suggest that it may be true.
Dorset street did indeed have a reputation , and uniformed police officers would indeed be wary of patrolling the area, however we are talking about a plain clothes officer who would have blended in with the residents of that area.
Regards Richard.

[richardnunweek]

Hi DM,
Two points.
The letter I referred to was allegedly penned from the address right opposite Millers court, in the very hard of the area where the other victims perished ..How many other letters sent recent to that date had a local address ?
Also when referring to the pattern of dates, I was making a observation that the other murders had taken place on the last day of a month , and the 8th of a month. making it at least a possibility that the killer may have struck on the 8th October, the 31st October, or the 8th of November.
I am sure the police even then, applied some logic ..and I would speculate that many possible sites were being observed that night..
Regards Richard.

[Jason]

Van goghs cuffs would have had paint on them so it couldn't have been him .....

[pinkmoon]

If the police did keep Miller's court under observation all they would have seen is Mary Kelly taking men back to her room.Would they have had real reason to stop her or her clients coming or going?Also if our killer was able to leave without the police stopping him surely the police would keep this to themselves to save huge embarrassment.

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
Indeed if a plain clothes officer was watching Millers court the night of the 8th, for whatever reason, then he would have acted upon anything suspicious, all he would have seen were people coming and going throughout his watch, without knowing who they were.
I do find that it is a near certainty that there was no Mr A escorting a female into the court, as surely the appearance of such a description would have made him a tad suspicious.
So we have the Daily Mails 1930 account v George Hutchinson's ..
The majority of Casebook disbelief the latter, so they should therefore belief the former..should they not?
In the papers article we have a new snippet of information, and it could well be we have misinterpreted the actual events during that evening.
If the report is true, then it means nothing apparently happened in the court during that officers shift..of course we do not know its duration. that being the case, and the alleged sightings of Kelly in the morning surely give a boost to the daylight theory..
Regards Richard.

[pinkmoon]

Hi,
Indeed if a plain clothes officer was watching Millers court the night of the 8th, for whatever reason, then he would have acted upon anything suspicious, all he would have seen were people coming and going throughout his watch, without knowing who they were.
I do find that it is a near certainty that there was no Mr A escorting a female into the court, as surely the appearance of such a description would have made him a tad suspicious.
So we have the Daily Mails 1930 account v George Hutchinson's ..
The majority of Casebook disbelief the latter, so they should therefore belief the former..should they not?
In the papers article we have a new snippet of information, and it could well be we have misinterpreted the actual events during that evening.
If the report is true, then it means nothing apparently happened in the court during that officers shift..of course we do not know its duration. that being the case, and the alleged sightings of Kelly in the morning surely give a boost to the daylight theory..
Regards Richard.

Hi Richard,If story is true then surely police would keep quite about this to save huge uproar from general public.

[nicole]

Hi all,

Hi Nicole,
It was not me that claims that this actual happened, I simply passed on a article in a paper some 42 years after the murders

Richard, I wasn't trying to 'shoot the messenger' as you clearly suggest. My comment was not directed towards anybody, as evidenced by the opening "Hi all".
So, if any personal offense was taken by you, it was not my intention.

Nicky

[richardnunweek]

Hi Nicky
It never entered my head to take offence..heaven forbid, I was merely making it clear to any readers that it was not my invention, in case of misunderstanding, and I have no founded evidence that it ever happened, apart from a press report.
Regards Richard.

[Bridewell]

I've long suspected that Edward Watkins, the City PC who discovered Eddowes' body in Mitre Square, came upon the Ripper in the act of carving her up and fled to the warehouse for help rather than risk tangling with a knife-wielding killer. The times given for Jack and Eddowes entering the square and Watkins entering off Mitre Street at least strongly suggest such a scenerio. Whether Watkins lied about the encounter or his superiors covered for him to avoid embarrassment is debatable. No proof this happened, of course, unless you believe the Commissioner's later comment referring to the "City PC" as being the only reliable witness who saw the Ripper. Was this a mere slip of the tongue - or did the truth slip out?

John

John, you make an interesting point but I believe it was Sir Melville MacNaghten (not the Commissioner) who introduced the "City PC" idea (in the Aberconway version of the Memoranda which bear his name). The fact that it's in one version, but not the other, to my mind anyway, suggests one of two possibilities:

(1) The reference to a "City PC" was an error or
(2) The reference to a "City PC" was embarrassing.

The favoured explanations seem to be that MacNaghten was referring to Pc Smith (who wasn't a City PC, and wasn't anywhere near Mitre Square), or to Lawende (who wasn't a PC at all, but a City witness). I'm not convinced by either. If MacNaghten's comment is taken as accurate - it referred to "the City PC that was (on) a beat near Mitre Square" - we have Watkins who was on a beat which included Mitre Square and Harvey, whose beat took him up to, but not into, the Square itself.

Getting back to the thread topic, I think the reference to Millers Court being watched is a later interpretation of the People's Journal account published shortly after White's death.

[Robert]

I doubt if Watkins funked taking on the Ripper, but even if he did, would he not at least have used his rattle? No one reported hearing a rattle.

[Wickerman]

I doubt if Watkins funked taking on the Ripper, but even if he did, would he not at least have used his rattle? No one reported hearing a rattle.

Quite so, there would have been too much to be gained from Watkins if he had seen the killer. Given the climate, it is unreasonable to suppose a policeman could have seen the killer and kept it to himself.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Was the court being watched by the police?

Here is something I've been rolling about in my head for a little while. The possibility that Blotchy was an undercover. I recall, haven't the time to hunt it down presently, a news paper article about a blotchy man being followed by a citizen and when the citizen lost track he spoke to a pc who said "We are looking for someone fitting a different description". Now in this article it was stated that the blotchy fella was actually an undercover. So it appears there WAS a blotchy undercover officer of some sort by the authorities own admission. If I remembered all that correctly then we just might know who was watching the court that evening. Not sure what all that would mean though. Kinda makes it even more complicated.

[Wickerman]

Here is something I've been rolling about in my head for a little while. The possibility that Blotchy was an undercover. I recall, haven't the time to hunt it down presently, a news paper article about a blotchy man being followed by a citizen and when the citizen lost track he spoke to a pc who said "We are looking for someone fitting a different description". Now in this article it was stated that the blotchy fella was actually an undercover. So it appears there WAS a blotchy undercover officer of some sort by the authorities own admission. If I remembered all that correctly then we just might know who was watching the court that evening. Not sure what all that would mean though. Kinda makes it even more complicated.

A SUSPECTED INDIVIDUAL

Mr. Galloway, a clerk employed in the City and living at Stepney, has made the following statement: "As I was going down the Whitechapel-road in the early hours of Wednesday morning, on my way home, I saw a man coming in the opposite direction, about fifty yards away. We both crossed the road simultaneously, and came face to face. The man had a very frightened appearance, and glared at me as he passed. I was very much struck with his appearance, especially as he corresponded, in almost every particular, with the man described by Mary Ann Cox. He was short, stout, about 35 to 40 years of age. His moustache, not a particular heavy one, was of a carroty colour, and his face was blotchy through drink and dissipation. He wore a long, dirty, brown overcoat, and altogether presented a most villainous Appearance. I stood still and watched him. He darted back almost immediately to the other side of the road, and then, apparently to avoid a group of women a little further on, crossed the road again. I determined to follow him, and just before reaching the coffee-stall past the church he again crossed the road. On nearing George-yard he crossed over and entered a small court. He reappeared in a couple of minutes, crossed Whitechapel-road for the sixth time, and preceeded up Commercial-street. Up to this point he had walked along briskly, but directly he got into Commercial-street he slackened speed and accosted the first woman whom he met alone, but was repulsed. On approaching Thrawl-street, a policeman on point duty suddenly appeared. The man was evidently startled, and for a moment it looked as though he would turn back or cross the road. He recovered himself, however, and went on. I then informed the constable of what I had seen, and pointed out the man's extraordinary resemblance to the individual described by Cox. The constable declined to arrest the man, saying that he was looking for a man of a very different appearance.
Evening News, 16 Nov. 1888.

The policeman was apparently referring to the Hutchinson suspect.


The police state that the man who aroused the suspicion of Mr. Galloway by frequently crossing and recrossing the road, is a respectable citizen, and that he was, as a matter of fact, acting in concert with them in his "mysterious movements."
Evening News, 17 Nov. 1888.

"Acting in concert" in legal terminology means "complicity", though there is no reason to think this character had anything to do with the recent murder in Millers Court.

[Ben]

Yes.

And the policeman, not wishing to blow the cover of the man "acting in concert" with the police, evidently fobbed Galloway off with an excuse not to follow him. Nothing to do with "Hutchinson's suspect".