Robert Paul Time Issues

[David Orsam]

No, I havenīt, have I? Could that perhaps be because I do not think that it can be extrapolated to go for the Nichols murder, no matter if it true or not? Yes, it could.
If I had tried such a ploy, I would have been pooh-poohed off the boards. Itīs rather reckless, and should not be used.
Swanson had access to the earlier report. He was aware what the PC:s said about the timings. Unless there was a practical reason to overturn Abberlines report in this respect, it would not have been done. And sloppiness would be the last reason for doing it.

It's not a question of extrapolating anything and it's not a "ploy" (why do you think I need one?). It's simply a demonstration of Swanson's working methods. He didn't pay the kind of close attention to the evidence on timings that one might expect from a modern researcher but that's because he didn't need to. The Home Office didn't care if the body was found at 3.40 or 3.41 or 3.45, nor did Swanson, and 3.45 was a perfectly sufficient approximation for the purposes of Swanson's report.

[David Orsam]

It is not a question of being able to nail down timings to the minute, David - it is a question of how the police would have regarded it as very important to get as close as they could to the actual timings. That is why it is of relevance that Swanson made the change - because the police had reached the stnce that 3.45 was reasonably and probably closer to the truth than 3.40. Whether it was 3.41 or 3.44 is not very important in this context - what is important is that the final weighing - as far as we can tell - prioritized 3.45 over 3.40.

But he didn't make any "change" Fisherman. Unless you think he also changed the witness timings in the Chapman case. He just gave an approximate time of the discovery, like he did for all the timings in his reports.

Abberline is the only person who appears to have noticed that both Cross and Neil couldn't both have discovered the body at 3.45 so he (correctly in my view) adjusted the first discovery down to 3.40, consistent with the evidence of P.C. Mizen at the inquest.

[David Orsam]

And? What eartshattering conclusions do you draw from this fact?

Well given that, as you say, other witnesses noted hearing church bells to guide them on timings, the earthshattering conclusion I would draw is that none of the participants in Bucks Row heard any church bells.

[Fisherman]

Finished, David?

Good. Then I can give a short answer.

1. The ones who made the docu are the ones responsible for it. I have told you before that I would have done it differently in some respects, although I think it is overall quite good.

2. Even if the police sometimes will "paint with a broad brush", they will try and see to it that it is nevertheless the CORRECT brush. Is is not as if they could not care less, and as if they reason that it does not matter what they put in their reports, as long as they do put SOMETHING there. We rely on these reports for a reason.

3. If one report says 3.40 and if an ensuing report says 3.45, then the first time given HAS actually been changed inbetween the reports, believe it or not.

4. The fact that somebody gives a timing without saying that he or she got that timing from the chiming of a clock is not equivalent to that somebody not possibly having gotten the timing that way.

5. Donald Swanson WAS involved in the Ripper investigation - all murders included - at the time he wrote the October 20 report.

Thatīs about it, I think!

[Fisherman]

Correction to my former post - it should be the October 19, not 20, report.

[David Orsam]

1. The ones who made the docu are the ones responsible for it. I have told you before that I would have done it differently in some respects, although I think it is overall quite good.

Seriously? The ones who made the documentary are responsible for you saying "Then we've got a discrepancy of about 9 minutes or something like that."?* I could have sworn I saw your lips move. Was this an overdub of someone else's voice added to your lips?

2. Even if the police sometimes will "paint with a broad brush", they will try and see to it that it is nevertheless the CORRECT brush. Is is not as if they could not care less, and as if they reason that it does not matter what they put in their reports, as long as they do put SOMETHING there. We rely on these reports for a reason.

The Swanson reports were written for the Home Office in 1888, not members of the public or researchers in 2017. It is clear from reading all his reports that Swanson was interested in approximate times only.

3. If one report says 3.40 and if an ensuing report says 3.45, then the first time given HAS actually been changed inbetween the reports, believe it or not.

Well I don't believe it at all because they are BOTH approximate times and they are BOTH in effect saying the same thing: about 3.45 and about 3.40 were effectively the same time, especially in a pre-digital age. But as I've said, it looks like Abberline just took a bit more care with the detail, having realised that Cross and Paul couldn't have found the body AND spoken to Mizen at 3.45, so he adjusted accordingly.

4. The fact that somebody gives a timing without saying that he or she got that timing from the chiming of a clock is not equivalent to that somebody not possibly having gotten the timing that way.

I didn’t say it wasn't possible but my point was that, while a number of witnesses positively identified hearing a clock chime in other cases, not a single witness did in the Nichols case. The natural conclusion is that these witnesses didn’t hear a clock chime. You asked me for the conclusion and I gave it to you.

5. Donald Swanson WAS involved in the Ripper investigation - all murders included - at the time he wrote the October 20 report.

I didn't say he wasn't involved in the Ripper investigation. I said he did not investigate the murder of Mary Ann Nichols. That was done by Detective Inspector Abberline. By the time Swanson was brought on board the investigation into that particular murder was effectively concluded. He had no role to play in it. All he could have done was read the documents. Abberline was the investigating officer on the ground in early September who would have spoken to the witnesses and followed any leads.


p.s. So much for "I realize that this is the first of twenty-odd posts from you. What you donīt realize is that the rest will go unanswered for the usual reason - you are bickering about unimportant and uninteresting matters.". Why do you keep posting these types of statements when you don't have the self-control to stick to what you say?

[David Orsam]

footnote to previous post

*The discrepancy of "9 minutes" (i.e. "Then we've got a discrepancy of about 9 minutes or something like that." per Christer Holmgren) is based on Cross leaving his house at exactly 3.30am (for which there is no evidence) and taking 7 minutes and 7 seconds to reach Bucks Row (which is the time it supposedly took Christer Holmgren and Andy Griffiths to walk along a modern route which did not exist in 1888 from Doveton Street to Durward Street), arriving at 3.37:07am, and on Robert Paul walking into Bucks Row at exactly 3.45am (for which there was no evidence presented at the inquest). To most people, 3.45 less 3.37 is 8 minutes (and should strictly be 7 minutes and 53 seconds) but Christer seems to have added on a whole extra minute, as you do, just for jolly, presumably because the documentary stated that "Robert Paul was in Bucks Row for a full minute before he noticed Lechmere." However, when I asked Fisherman to explain this statement he told me: "I cannot say what the documentary meant by stating that Robert Paul was in Bucks Rof (sic) for a full minute before he noticed Lechmere." Hence, the extra minute added to the so called timing "discrepancy" by Christer Holmgren must remain a mystery.

[Fisherman]

Seriously? The ones who made the documentary are responsible for you saying "Then we've got a discrepancy of about 9 minutes or something like that."?* I could have sworn I saw your lips move. Was this an overdub of someone else's voice added to your lips?



The Swanson reports were written for the Home Office in 1888, not members of the public or researchers in 2017. It is clear from reading all his reports that Swanson was interested in approximate times only.



Well I don't believe it at all because they are BOTH approximate times and they are BOTH in effect saying the same thing: about 3.45 and about 3.40 were effectively the same time, especially in a pre-digital age. But as I've said, it looks like Abberline just took a bit more care with the detail, having realised that Cross and Paul couldn't have found the body AND spoken to Mizen at 3.45, so he adjusted accordingly.



I didn’t say it wasn't possible but my point was that, while a number of witnesses positively identified hearing a clock chime in other cases, not a single witness did in the Nichols case. The natural conclusion is that these witnesses didn’t hear a clock chime. You asked me for the conclusion and I gave it to you.



I didn't say he wasn't involved in the Ripper investigation. I said he did not investigate the murder of Mary Ann Nichols. That was done by Detective Inspector Abberline. By the time Swanson was brought on board the investigation into that particular murder was effectively concluded. He had no role to play in it. All he could have done was read the documents. Abberline was the investigating officer on the ground in early September who would have spoken to the witnesses and followed any leads.


p.s. So much for "I realize that this is the first of twenty-odd posts from you. What you donīt realize is that the rest will go unanswered for the usual reason - you are bickering about unimportant and uninteresting matters.". Why do you keep posting these types of statements when you don't have the self-control to stick to what you say?

Uninteresting twaddle.

See? I answered AGAIN! Silly me.

[David Orsam]

Uninteresting twaddle.

See? I answered AGAIN! Silly me.

You certainly did. And the absence of any substance in your answer - especially to the "9 minutes" criticism - is very teling.

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Steve,
Any clock needn't have been on his direct route, only within earshot. Mrs Long said she fixed the time she saw Annie Chapman by the chiming of the brewery clock - there was a big brewery just south of Bath Street. There was also the station which might have had a clock.

And if Cadosche is accurate with his story, then Annie is already being mutilated when Mrs Long makes her sighting.

[Newbie]

This was a good discussion from years ago. Got to agree with David Orsam on this one: the body was most likely discovered around 3:40 am.
When three PCs basically agree on this; and they were on their beats for some time and only wanted accuracy: Neil conferring with Thain to get it right, and Mizen coming up with his time independently .... then you tend to accept their statements over someone who just woke up, and might have glanced at an errant house clock before leaving home. Paul's recollection came at the end of a long work day and the memory of the quarter to four bells (as Christer suggests) might have been imagined by him .... memory is a funny thing. The PCs were probably jotting down the time soon after the discovery and they had a routine where they had to be at a precise location at a precise time cyclically throughout the night.

When Lech left home doesn't really interest me .... however, if he left home at 3:30 am, he'd have to walk at a very fast pace to make it to work on time ...3:33 am and he'd have to jog to make it on time.

I wouldn't completely disregard Paul's time however; Dr. LLewylln testified to Thain arriving around 3:55 am .... so, if Thain left the body and Neil around 3:51 am, he'd arrive at Llewylin's White Chapel road residence at maybe 3:55 am.

I have always hated the 3:50 am discovery time of the body by Neil and have no idea why Christer is so fetched with it. Lechmere could have headed out at any time anyone wants him to in order to match their theory.

The 3:40 am time works for me.

[Newbie]

One thread that is sorely lacking here is whether Jack the Ripper wandered White Chapel all night, or killed after waking up in the early morning.

And if he killed after waking up, was he heading to work or to do some routine?

Personally, I can't see him wandering all night .... the pubs closed in London by law at 11:30 pm on weekdays.
Why wait until after 3:30 am?

He most probably woke up, and had something to do early morning, and some place to go to.
The question is what and where.

[Geddy2112]

This was a good discussion from years ago. Got to agree with David Orsam on this one: the body was most likely discovered around 3:40 am.
When three PCs basically agree on this; and they were on their beats for some time and only wanted accuracy: Neil conferring with Thain to get it right, and Mizen coming up with his time independently .... then you tend to accept their statements over someone who just woke up, and might have glanced at an errant house clock before leaving home. Paul's recollection came at the end of a long work day and the memory of the quarter to four bells (as Christer suggests) might have been imagined by him .... memory is a funny thing. The PCs were probably jotting down the time soon after the discovery and they had a routine where they had to be at a precise location at a precise time cyclically throughout the night.

If Cross (and Paul technically) discovered the body at 3:40am then Cross could not have been the killer unless he lied under oath and since his timings match the other players then it's fairly certain he did not. He had a golden opportunity to give himself a solid alibi if he had read Paul's Remarkable Statement and pushed his timings closer to 3:45am but he did not, this suggests innocence.

When Lech left home doesn't really interest me .... however, if he left home at 3:30 am, he'd have to walk at a very fast pace to make it to work on time ...3:33 am and he'd have to jog to make it on time.

The two shortest routes from Doveton Street to Broad Street are both close to 30 mins at a steady 3.1mph. Of course we do not know which route he used, how fast he walked or exactly what time he left home any morning but his 'about 3:30am' fits nicely and could easily make work in time for 4am.

I have always hated the 3:50 am discovery time of the body by Neil and have no idea why Christer is so fetched with it. Lechmere could have headed out at any time anyone wants him to in order to match their theory.

Of course it's far fetched. He needs it to invent the time gap, which basic maths proves did not exist. Even a page back here Holmgren added in a minute for the hell of it.

The 3:40 am time works for me.

It does likewise but then you have to really disregard Cross as the killer unless you fabricate evidence. The other thing I've noticed from this thread is the 'kill' time. For me it's always been the 'cutting' that is timed, especially in the [still] Missing Evidence. It's quoted as a couple of minutes to do the cutting but what they always seem to fail to mention is the time it would have taken to kill Polly via manual strangulation. Yes she could have been rendered unconscious in a matter of seconds but her heart would still have been pumping, to 'kill' her and effectively stop the heart (which the theory needs for lack of blood) it would have taken at least 5 minutes. That is 5 minutes Cross certainly did not have and has never been factored into the 'time gap.'

[Fiver]

One thread that is sorely lacking here is whether Jack the Ripper wandered White Chapel all night, or killed after waking up in the early morning.

And if he killed after waking up, was he heading to work or to do some routine?

Personally, I can't see him wandering all night .... the pubs closed in London by law at 11:30 pm on weekdays.
Why wait until after 3:30 am?

He most probably woke up, and had something to do early morning, and some place to go to.
The question is what and where.

That theory meshes poorly with several times of death.

Martha Tabram was killed between 1:40am and 3:30am.
Annie Chapman was killed 5:30am and 6am.
Elizabeth Stride was killed between 12:45am and 1am.
Catherine Eddowes was killed between 1:30am and 1:45am.
Alice McKenie was killed between 12:30am and 12:50am.

There is no routine between the times of death, which makes it rather unlikely the Ripper had a regular job. If he did, it was a job that had him away and on the streets from midnight to 6am.

[Newbie]

That theory meshes poorly with several times of death.

Martha Tabram was killed between 1:40am and 3:30am.
Annie Chapman was killed 5:30am and 6am.
Elizabeth Stride was killed between 12:45am and 1am.
Catherine Eddowes was killed between 1:30am and 1:45am.
Alice McKenie was killed between 12:30am and 12:50am.

There is no routine between the times of death, which makes it rather unlikely the Ripper had a regular job. If he did, it was a job that had him away and on the streets from midnight to 6am.

Nichols was murdered at 3:40 am and Chapman at lets say 5:30 am fits with someone who had woke up in the morning and went out to eventually kill. Those murders were not committed by someone who hung out all night, with really nothing to do but wander and be seen.
Why wait until 5:30 am? And if you are idle, and can commit the murders whenever you want, why get up at 3 am to do it?

Catherine Eddowes and Elizabeth Stride were killed early Sunday morning ..... it being committed near midnight fits with someone who had the following day off, and could stay out past midnight. it is this pair of murders that strongly reinforces my notion.


Mary Kelly was murderd on the morning of the Lord mayor's day procession of James Whitehead .... anywhere from 1:30 am to 4 am.
Most probably someone hanging out late, feeding off of the electricity of that idiotic event .... again, a workman out on the pretext of celebrating and carousing with mates could accomodate any one of these times.

If Martha Tabram was killed at 1:40 am ... then one would expect a night reveler; if 3:30 am, one would favor a person who just woke up.

Alice Mckenie was a Ripper murder? There are two things of clear distinction from the others:

#1.During each of the previous murders, the moonlight was in a very low phase of the cycle: it was a new moon for Martha Tabram's murder. With Mary Kelly, it was 45 %, but that murder happened in doors. With Alice Mckenie, it was a much brighter night. The moon rise was anywhere between 9pm and midnight.

#2. It happened early Wednesday morning

If Alice Mckenie was a Ripper victim, than that would be the exception to a otherwise consistent rule (excluding the unclear time of Martha Tabrum's death) implying that the Ripper was someone with a morning routine other than hunting victims, and with Sunday or holidays off.