Oh, murder!

[David Orsam]

Both had the same approximate time.

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.

[David Orsam]

...cue Diddles...

I appreciate that you have a long held theory that the cat was disturbed and thus woke Prater but I can't see that it has much to recommend it.

What awoke Prater was the cat rubbing her face and trying to get into her bed. There is nothing to suggest it had been alarmed or disturbed. Most importantly, Prater did not make any such suggestion.

Did Prater's cat wake her every single time it heard a noise of someone tapping on a door or window in the busy court? That seems unlikely. Mary Ann Cox said she heard several men going in and out that night alone.

[Michael W Richards]

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.

From Elizabeth at the Inquest" A kitten disturbed me about half-past three o'clock or a quarter to four. As I was turning round I heard a suppressed cry of "Oh - murder!" in a faint voice. It seemed to proceed from the court."

So she heard it around 3:45.

From Sarah at the Inquest:"I sat awake until nearly four, when I heard a female's voice shouting "Murder" loudly. It seemed like the voice of a young woman. It sounded at our door."

Not inconsistent with Elizabeth at all.

Your suggestion that they heard different cries is interesting but contrary to the accepted evidence. There were not 2 separate cries of murder that night around 3:45.

[John G]

From Elizabeth at the Inquest" A kitten disturbed me about half-past three o'clock or a quarter to four. As I was turning round I heard a suppressed cry of "Oh - murder!" in a faint voice. It seemed to proceed from the court."

So she heard it around 3:45.

From Sarah at the Inquest:"I sat awake until nearly four, when I heard a female's voice shouting "Murder" loudly. It seemed like the voice of a young woman. It sounded at our door."

Not inconsistent with Elizabeth at all.

Your suggestion that they heard different cries is interesting but contrary to the accepted evidence. There were not 2 separate cries of murder that night around 3:45.

"Faint cry" and "seemed to proceed from the court" is all a bit vague, don't you think?

[David Orsam]

So she heard it around 3:45.

But if you are referring to her deposition, Prater is recorded as saying "I noticed the lodging house was out, so it was after 4 probably". That's not 3.45 is it?

[Michael W Richards]

But if you are referring to her deposition, Prater is recorded as saying "I noticed the lodging house was out, so it was after 4 probably". That's not 3.45 is it?

From The Inquest transcripts in the Telegraph on Nov 13th..."A kitten disturbed me about half-past three o'clock or a quarter to four."

[Michael W Richards]

"Faint cry" and "seemed to proceed from the court" is all a bit vague, don't you think?

Not if she heard it through an open window and if the voice was directing the sound waves back into the court. The bouncing waves would be faint by the time they reached her.

The faint cry is also indicative of what I suggested earlier...she wasn't crying out for help.

[David Orsam]

From The Inquest transcripts in the Telegraph on Nov 13th..."A kitten disturbed me about half-past three o'clock or a quarter to four."

But we see from her deposition that she then corrected herself:

"I slept soundly until a kitten disturbed me about 3.30 to 4. I noticed the lodging house light was out, so it was after 4 probably - I heard a cry of oh! Murder!"

And, as I asked you earlier, "after 4" is not 3.45 is it?

[David Orsam]

The faint cry is also indicative of what I suggested earlier...she wasn't crying out for help.

Oh it was a "faint cry" was it?

That's odd because according to the deposition of Sarah Lewis:

"a little before 4 I heard a female voice shout loudly one Murder!"

The sound is then described as a "scream".

[John G]

Not if she heard it through an open window and if the voice was directing the sound waves back into the court. The bouncing waves would be faint by the time they reached her.

The faint cry is also indicative of what I suggested earlier...she wasn't crying out for help.

Well, there are all sorts of possibilities. However, the fact is she couldn't even be sure that the sound emanated from the court, let alone a specific room.

[Abby Normal]

But if you are referring to her deposition, Prater is recorded as saying "I noticed the lodging house was out, so it was after 4 probably". That's not 3.45 is it?

but she said "probably"! ; )

[Abby Normal]

to me given that both women were asleep or recently asleep-ie perhaps groggy-and the ambiguousness of time keeping through hearing a clock chime-I would conclude that they probably heard the same scream, from the same woman around 4:00 am at the same location-at least from somewhere in the court.

and given that a women was in fact found murdered later in the morning in a room in the court I would say that in all probability it was mary Kelly who made the scream.

But... but that being said I recently saw a true crime docu in which a woman was found murdered in the woods near her apartment by gunshot-two neighbors heard gunshots in the middle of the night and the police used that as time of death and were convinced that she was shot at the time the neighbors heard it. turns out she was shot by a friend much later in the morning and the shots the neighbors heard had nothing to do with it.

so....you never know.

[David Orsam]

but she said "probably"! ; )

Exactly! That's her evidence.

As far as I can tell, Michael reads it as the direct opposite, namely: probably not after 4am!!!

[Pierre]

As we know from many of your previous posts, my dear boy, you don't understand the difference between newspaper articles in general and newspaper reports of court proceedings. You never have understood it, you still don't understand it and I'm guessing you never will. But the fact of the matter, whether you like it or not, is that there was no sensationalism (i.e. fabrication) in reporting of court proceedings in the newspapers, nor was it even possible for there to be any, and, indeed, newspaper reports of court proceedings had their own special status in English law which recognised this. Ask a historian.

David,

What is your opinion on differences between newpaper reports from the Whitechapel murder inquests in 1888?

How do you explain different types of variations?

Pierre

[David Orsam]

David,

What is your opinion on differences between newpaper reports from the Whitechapel murder inquests in 1888?

How do you explain different types of variations?

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.