Oh, murder!

[Pierre]

My dear boy, as usual I'm very happy to answer all your questions and on this occasion my answer to your question, which I see you have asked twice in two charmingly different ways, is this: poor acoustics, poor hearing, witnesses speaking very softly, witnesses mumbling or speaking otherwise incoherently, poorly written or illegible notes, miscommunication between reporter and editor etc.

David,

what evidence do you have for "miscommuniation between reporter and editor"?

[David Orsam]

David,

what evidence do you have for "miscommuniation between reporter and editor"?

I don't have evidence for any of those reasons my dear boy, they are all inferred, but what I was really thinking of there when I said "miscommunication between reporter and editor etc." was a reporter who telephones in his report to his editorial office and the person taking the report (be it editor, subeditor or clerk or whomsoever) mishears what the reporter says.

[Pinkerton]

Why the term "Murder!" was used

I still find it weird that someone's response would be "Oh, murder!" in that situation. Not "Help!" or even a sudden scream but a literal cry of murder. It still could've come from MJK's room, but maybe the cause was Blotchy clumsily spilling some of his beer over her linens.

I think I can explain this. While reading through hundreds of newspaper accounts and court documents related to crime in the LVP I remember hearing witnesses during crimes during the period say that when someone needed help because they were being robbed, assaulted, etc. they would often yell "Murder!" because it was the surest way to get help to come. "Help!", "I'm being robbed!", "Police!", etc. were often thought to be ineffective. You will find many crimes where a victim yells out "Murder!" even when they are NOT being "murdered". I came across this numerous times when reading through criminal reports. So I believe it became "folk wisdom" for a person during this period (at least in London) who needed assistance to automatically yell out "Murder!" to get bystanders or police to render assistance regardless of the actual reason they needed help.

[Abby Normal]

I think I can explain this. While reading through hundreds of newspaper accounts and court documents related to crime in the LVP I remember hearing witnesses during crimes during the period say that when someone needed help because they were being robbed, assaulted, etc. they would often yell "Murder!" because it was the surest way to get help to come. "Help!", "I'm being robbed!", "Police!", etc. were often thought to be ineffective. You will find many crimes where a victim yells out "Murder!" even when they are NOT being "murdered". I came across this numerous times when reading through criminal reports. So I believe it became "folk wisdom" for a person during this period (at least in London) who needed assistance to automatically yell out "Murder!" to get bystanders or police to render assistance regardless of the actual reason they needed help.

And maybe because they're being murdered? ; )

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=David Orsam;412932]

I don't have evidence for any of those reasons my dear boy, they are all inferred,

David,

that seems very strange. If you infer, you must have something to infer from. Do you infer from imagination - and if you do - how come you draw your specific conclusions?

but what I was really thinking of there when I said "miscommunication between reporter and editor etc." was a reporter who telephones in his report to his editorial office and the person taking the report (be it editor, subeditor or clerk or whomsoever) mishears what the reporter says.

That may be an hypothesis. Have you any source for this type of event at all?

Pierre

[Pierre]

But did they?

According to the Echo's report of the inquest, Prater said:

"A black kitten, of which I am very fond, came to my bed, and rubbed itself against my face....it tried to get into the bed, and awoke me. That must have been about half-past four, as I heard the clock chiming. I pushed the kitten away...And, just as I pushed the kitten away I heard, "Oh! Murder!" It was as if it was a nightmare. It was just "Oh! Oh! (in a faint, gasping way) - Murder!"

So Prater is very clear, she heard the cry literally immediately after she heard "the clock" (which can only be the Spitalfields clock) chime (which she thought was the chime at 4.30).

But then according to the same report of the inquest, Lewis said:

"I woke at about half-past three. I heard Spitalfields clock strike...I could not sleep. I sat awake from then until a little before four o'clock, when I heard a female voice. It was a scream."

So, even allowing for the fact that Prater might have meant 3.30 or 4.00 rather than 4.30, the two accounts are completely different because Lewis said she heard the cry before 4am, and thus BEFORE the strike of the clock at that time, whereas Prater said she heard the cry AFTER the strike of the clock.

If their evidence is accurate they cannot have heard the same cry.

Do note that Prater, in the deposition written down by Abberline on the 9th, said that she was awakened "about 3.30 or 4 a.m." and "just then heard screams of murder..." - and that Lewis on the same day stated that she heard a scream "shortly before 4 oīclock" in the same police investigation.

This is the first source on the issue and much more important than any later newspaper.

And there are important questions we should ask about this source like:

Did Abberline take their depositions one by one or all, or some, together?

Pierre

[David Orsam]

David,

that seems very strange. If you infer, you must have something to infer from. Do you infer from imagination - and if you do - how come you draw your specific conclusions?

That may be an hypothesis. Have you any source for this type of event at all?

Oh my dear boy, how adorably inquisitive of you, but perhaps you have forgotten that you asked me for my opinion as to the differences between the newspaper reports and that is what I gave you. I've never been a newspaper reporter my dear boy but I do have personal experience of transcribing court testimony, and correcting transcripts prepared by professional transcribers, so I do know how mistakes are easily made. I also have personal experience of organisations and of human beings communicating with each other.

Now my dear boy, in all this delightful discussion we have been having, you seem to have quite overlooked a question John G asked you back in post #203. Do you remember it my dear boy? He said to you: "Are you suggesting that newspapers speculated as to what was said at inquests, rather than report the proceedings verbatim? What's your evidence for this?"

I suspect I speak for many others when I say that I have simply been unable to sleep during the past 48 hours waiting for your answer.

[David Orsam]

Do note that Prater, in the deposition written down by Abberline on the 9th, said that she was awakened "about 3.30 or 4 a.m." and "just then heard screams of murder..." - and that Lewis on the same day stated that she heard a scream "shortly before 4 oīclock" in the same police investigation.

This is the first source on the issue and much more important than any later newspaper.

And there are important questions we should ask about this source like:

Did Abberline take their depositions one by one or all, or some, together?

Oh my dear boy, I fear you are confusing the very core of the English language when you speak of depositions, rather than written statements taken by a police officer. In her actual deposition, taken on oath in court, Prater concluded that it was probably after 4am when she heard the cry of murder.

[Pierre]

Oh my dear boy, how adorably inquisitive of you, but perhaps you have forgotten that you asked me for my opinion as to the differences between the newspaper reports and that is what I gave you. I've never been a newspaper reporter my dear boy but I do have personal experience of transcribing court testimony, and correcting transcripts prepared by professional transcribers, so I do know how mistakes are easily made. I also have personal experience of organisations and of human beings communicating with each other.

Now my dear boy, in all this delightful discussion we have been having, you seem to have quite overlooked a question John G asked you back in post #203. Do you remember it my dear boy? He said to you: "Are you suggesting that newspapers speculated as to what was said at inquests, rather than report the proceedings verbatim? What's your evidence for this?"

I suspect I speak for many others when I say that I have simply been unable to sleep during the past 48 hours waiting for your answer.

So now you have started to try and decide which posts I should answer. I understand that the idea of getting a chance to show everyone that you are right is the reason you canīt sleep.

[Pierre]

Oh my dear boy, I fear you are confusing the very core of the English language when you speak of depositions, rather than written statements taken by a police officer. In her actual deposition, taken on oath in court, Prater concluded that it was probably after 4am when she heard the cry of murder.

Statements is what I mean. Thank you David.

But you did not answer the question.

And also, the police investigation is the earliest source. What do you have to say about that?

[David Orsam]

So now you have started to try and decide which posts I should answer. I understand that the idea of getting a chance to show everyone that you are right is the reason you canīt sleep.

Oh my dear boy, how absolutely captivating of you that think I am deciding which questions you should answer by reminding you that haven't answered John's question.

[David Orsam]

But you did not answer the question.

Oh my dear boy I'm so dreadfully sorry if I've upset you. Now, my dear boy, tell me what question I didn't answer. Is it that beautifully phrased one in which you asked "Did Abberline take their depositions one by one or all, or some, together?"

Now my dear boy, assuming, if I may, that this is the question I did not answer, do tell me if you asking me for my opinion on this or if you are asking me for my actual recollection of events on that gloomy afternoon of Friday, 9 November 1888.

[David Orsam]

And also, the police investigation is the earliest source. What do you have to say about that?

Oh my dear boy, I agree entirely with you that the taking of witness statements by the police, chronologically speaking, occurred before the coroner's inquest so that what you mesmerizingly describe as "the police investigation" is, indeed, the earliest source. You have really nailed it with your summary of the situation my dear boy. I'm so proud.

[Pierre]

Oh my dear boy I'm so dreadfully sorry if I've upset you. Now, my dear boy, tell me what question I didn't answer. Is it that beautifully phrased one in which you asked "Did Abberline take their depositions one by one or all, or some, together?"

Now my dear boy, assuming, if I may, that this is the question I did not answer, do tell me if you asking me for my opinion on this or if you are asking me for my actual recollection of events on that gloomy afternoon of Friday, 9 November 1888.

Both.

[David Orsam]

Both.

My dear boy, in which case I can happily tell you that I have neither an opinion on the matter nor an actual recollection.