Mrs Long

[robhouse]

I think before people go around saying Long's description (40ish, foreigner) should be discounted entirely, they should test this out empirically on the street. Next time you are walking down the street, and see someone facing the opposite direction, see how much or how little you can tell about that person (age, complexion) etc.

I do not think the conclusion is so black and white, for a number of reasons. First, although a person is facing the other direction, this does not mean they are EXACTLY turned 180 degrees with their back to you. And secondly, Long was moving, so presumably her perspective changed. Also, the person may have had his head turned slightly, or moved somewhat... etc. AND, even if the man was EXACTLY turned 180 degrees in the opposite direction, I think you might be able to guess a person's age or complexion, or ethnicity.

I am just saying dont jump to conclusions, and try it out.

RH

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

Rationalise Mrs Long all you like, but there's something very Billingsgate going on when a coroner prefers her casual glance to Doc Phillips' informed medical opinion. Even more so when said medico finally eats his words and admits to possibly being over two hours out in his estimation of Chapman's TOD.

Regards,

Simon

[Malcolm X]

I think before people go around saying Long's description (40ish, foreigner) should be discounted entirely, they should test this out empirically on the street. Next time you are walking down the street, and see someone facing the opposite direction, see how much or how little you can tell about that person (age, complexion) etc.

I do not think the conclusion is so black and white, for a number of reasons. First, although a person is facing the other direction, this does not mean they are EXACTLY turned 180 degrees with their back to you. And secondly, Long was moving, so presumably her perspective changed. Also, the person may have had his head turned slightly, or moved somewhat... etc. AND, even if the man was EXACTLY turned 180 degrees in the opposite direction, I think you might be able to guess a person's age or complexion, or ethnicity.

I am just saying dont jump to conclusions, and try it out.

RH

but 40 can easily be mistaken for only 35, especially with a semi-back view only, suspect descriptions can easily be 50% inaccurate, especially a week later

[robhouse]

"but 40 can easily be mistaken for only 35, especially with a semi-back view only, suspect descriptions can easily be 50% inaccurate, especially a week later"

Malcolm X,

Yes, of course this is true. I m not remarking on the general accuracy of witness descriptions. I was only remarking on the tendency to discount Long's because she saw the man from the back. She could of course have been wrong.

RH

[Mitch Rowe]

Hi All,

Rationalise Mrs Long all you like, but there's something very Billingsgate going on when a coroner prefers her casual glance to Doc Phillips' informed medical opinion. Even more so when said medico finally eats his words and admits to possibly being over two hours out in his estimation of Chapman's TOD.

Regards,

Simon

I wouldnt give Long that much credit. Cadosch puts himself only feet from the murder scene and hearing something odd. When asked if she usually saw couples talking she says lots of them. Thats bad. Very bad.

But.. I will say she helped to steer the TOD towards the after 5:00 am timeline. I wonder how much credit she would have been given had Cadosch never showed up?

What we are left with is a mess where we can never be sure when Annie died. So she dies anytime from the time it takes her to walk to 29 Hanbury from where she is last seen. And that is Little Paternoster Row.

EDIT>> I need to explain that clearer. Annie was last seen on Little Paternoster Row. So if she walks straight to 29 Hanbury and meets the Ripper thats the earliest time she can be killed. What??? You say! Explain that! You say!

Easy.. JTR kills Annie at 2:30-3:00 AM. JTR throws a blanket over Annies body. JTR returns some hours later to retrieve the blanket.

[Ben]

Hi all,

I'd agree that Long shouldn't be discounted, certainly. Her evidence offers us a height, headgear and clothing description, which are aspects that she could have noticed from a rear view. Age and ethnicity are significantly more problematic, however, from her alleged vantage point.

Best regards,
Ben

[robhouse]

I am sitting in a cafe right now, and I just looked up and there is a guy who just stood up from a table about 15 feet away. I had not noticed him before.

He is facing almost exactly away from me. I can see he has a beard, wears glasses, he is thin, caucasian, and looks to be in his late 20s. Now how can I see all this if he is facing away from me?

Rob H

[Ben]

Perhaps because the lighting conditions are infinitely better than they would have been at the Hanbury Street location at that time, Rob?

All the best,
Ben

[robhouse]

Correct me if I am wrong, but the apparent sunrise on that date was 5:23 AM. But anyways, thats not the point. I was merely responded to an earlier post that said Long's description was worthless because the man was facing the other direction.

Rob

[Ben]

I wouldn't say it's completely worthless, but her self-confessed rear view significantly diminishes the value of some of her observations; particularly the age and ethnicity.

[perrymason]

Correct me if I am wrong, but the apparent sunrise on that date was 5:23 AM. But anyways, thats not the point. I was merely responded to an earlier post that said Long's description was worthless because the man was facing the other direction.

Rob

I would agree that from a suspect point of view it is almost worthless, clothing isnt going to help catch the guy unless it was the top hat and gladstone man of legend. The difference here is that she saw Annies face.

Although an audible thud and voice from the other side of the fence to me sounds like Cadosche heard actual people, its hard to discount Elizabeth when she could ID Annie by her face.

For me, they both were likely accurate events, what they werent accurate on is the time they occurred.

Best regards

[gary]

Yeah, I always wonder when reading about Mrs Long why no-one asked about the accent the man she saw spoke in. Whether she was influenced in terms of description or not, she is one of the most likely people to have seen Jack, and asking her what accent the man spoke in would've at least gone some way to knowing whether he was local or not.

On the same point from a different angle, is there a chance the reason she described him as foreign was because she heard him speak in a foreign accent, and the references to this have been lost over the course of time?

Just to broaden out the 'foreigner' issue.
a) At what point of someone's residence in a place, do they stop being foreign and become a local?
b) I know several people who speak with a 'foreign' accent who were not just born here, but their parents were too. You tend to speak in the dialect that is used at home, or that of your particular circle of friends.
c) I myself have lived in Wales for twenty-two years, but I am told that I still sound completely cockney.
d) So Long's brief overheard conversation may have been of someone from generations of Whitechapel existence, regardless of the fact he did not sound as if he was from the East End.

[Supe]

Subjective an observation as it obviously was, the description of someone as being "foreign appearing" or just "foreign" occurs again and again in older investigations. I particularly remember reading the testimony in the Sacco-Vanzetti trial where a witness said someone "ran like a foreigner." Clearly, all these people knew what they meant by the description and while a sharp defense counsel might ridicule the witness about the statement, the fact remains that the majority of people knew, or at least thought they knew, exactly how a foreign person appeared or even ran.

Off course, when dealing with the Ripper case there is a certain amount of evidence to suggest "foreign looking" was a euphemism for "Jewish." This would certainly seem the case with George Huschinson who described the man with Kelly as looking Jewish. The British (but not American) press changed that to "foreign in appearance."

Thus, in analyzing Long's statement we must consider whether she meant generically foreign in appearance (a description many on both sides of the Atlantic felt they understood intuitively if inaccurately ro be sure) or if she actually meant Jewish.

Don.

[Mitch Rowe]

I am sitting in a cafe right now, and I just looked up and there is a guy who just stood up from a table about 15 feet away. I had not noticed him before.

He is facing almost exactly away from me. I can see he has a beard, wears glasses, he is thin, caucasian, and looks to be in his late 20s. Now how can I see all this if he is facing away from me?

Rob H

Im sure Long was telling the truth as she knew it. But she admits she didnt pay much attention because. It was normal to see couples standing there.
And thats why anything Long says is not much good. The chances she saw Annie and the Ripper are very slim. If she did she probably cant remember much of anything.

[Ben]

Hi Mitch,

I'd agree that Long "saw the truth as she knew it", but I wouldn't agree that the chances of her having seen Annie and the Ripper were "slim". On the contrary, unless you opt for the earlier time of death suggested by Dr. Phillips, the chances that Liz Long saw Chapman with her assailant are very high indeed. It's perhaps worth clarifying that there's no evidence that Long's "foreinger" observation had anything to do with the man's accent. That was a mistake Euan Macpherson made in his otherwise very informative book on William Henry Bury,

Best regards,
Ben