Joseph Lawende & Israel Schwartz - Gross Police Neglicence?

[Malcolm X]

Very unlikely in Hutchinson's case, Ichabod. In 1888, the "checking" potential was extremely limited, and Hutchinson claimed to have been "walking around all night" at the presumed time of Kelly's death, which is nigh on impossibe to verify or contradict. As for the other murders, Hutchinson could have claimed (falsely or truthfully, it doesn't matter) that he was asleep in the Victoria Home on the previous nights, in the full and certain knowledge that it couldn't be confirmed or denied. The chances of anyone having an alibi at such an ungodly hour - especially a single lodger - was effectively nil.

Best regards,
Ben

Ben you're way off topic mate, i've done the same today too...but you do it more often than me

Hutch would've been in serious trouble if he matched the Lawende suspect description that's for sure, because unlike the other weak suspects that we have, HUTCH actually admitted that he was at a murder site for way too long, now this looks very suspicious and back then too! . ..the 2nd LAWENDE suspect description came out on the 6th november from Swanson, so they obviously considered this suspect sighting as very strong indeed.

common sense tells you...`` does this Hutchinson match the Lawende suspect?``..........`` no sir``.....``damn it``

[halomanuk]

The police had to keep an open mind as best they could regarding Lawende's suspect,it just wasn't concrete enough in many ways.

[Ben]

I meant more along the lines of that he was routinely checked against the description given by Lawende

Extremely unlikely, Ichabod, especially when we know that individuals who most assuredly did not match Lawende's suspect in terms of age and other attributes (Ostrong, Klosowski) were still suspected in spite their physical mismatch. If they were really using Lawende's suspect as some sort of major barometer of suspect merit, those individuals would have fizzled out long ago. Barnett mentioned the extent of his (somewhat inevitable) treatment as a suspect in his statement at the inquest, which contained nothing concerning any witness ID attempts.

Ben

[IchabodCrane]

Hi Ben,
I meant more along the lines of that he was routinely checked against the description given by Lawende, and produced an obvious mismatch, maybe because he was very stout, and was thus cleared of suspicion, because it was obvious to the police at the time that the same person was responsible for both murders,
IchabodCrane

[Ben]

A possibility is that he was checked and cleared of suspicion, and the police files were later destroyed.

Very unlikely in Hutchinson's case, Ichabod. In 1888, the "checking" potential was extremely limited, and Hutchinson claimed to have been "walking around all night" at the presumed time of Kelly's death, which is nigh on impossibe to verify or contradict. As for the other murders, Hutchinson could have claimed (falsely or truthfully, it doesn't matter) that he was asleep in the Victoria Home on the previous nights, in the full and certain knowledge that it couldn't be confirmed or denied. The chances of anyone having an alibi at such an ungodly hour - especially a single lodger - was effectively nil.

Best regards,
Ben

[Ben]

Hi David,

For what it's worth, I agree entirely that Millwood and Wilson make for viable early "ripper" victims. I'm personally disinclined to attach much blame for the police for ruling out a possible connection, if that's what happened. Victim-linkage remains a grey area to this day, despite a century's worth of serial killers elapsing since the Whitechapel murders. We've now accrued sufficient evidence to suggest a serial killer's early offences will often be unplanned and haphazard in nature, often bearing little resemblance to later crimes. Both Millwood and Wilson would fit the bill rather well in this regard.

I agree that Ada Wilson's version of events is heavily off-set by the account attributed to Rose Bierman. It's quite possible that she wished to conceal the fact that she soliciting.

Best regards,
Ben

P.S. Yes, sorry everyone, back to the orginal premise of the thread!

[IchabodCrane]

I think the thread has drifted away a lot from the original intention, namely to clarify the question whether there were any contemporary police procedures in place that would make it likely that Tumblety and Hutchinson were identified by eyewitnesses and cleared. Although we don't have any files surviving to document the individual proceedings, we might be able to judge from then common police practice whether a) they were routinely checked against witness descriptions and/or b) they were routinely identified by available eyewitnesses

[Stewart P Evans]

No One Knows

...
...doesn't mean that the offender did not intend to kill, or did not become an actual murderer afterwards.
When you stab a woman twice in the throat, you certainly try to kill her. Ada fainted in the yard blooding profusely, and newpapers report that it seemed almost a miracle that she recovered.
David

No one knows what any offender in such circumstances intends - that has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. In the case of Wilson, she was first suggested as a possible Ripper victim in 1987 by Martin Fido.

It amazes me how modern authors, researchers, enthusiasts, armchair detectives, call them what you will, purport to know more than the police of the time - and that by using the minimum of facts that have come down to us. Believe it or not, such robberies, where the offender knocks on the door and then attacks the person who answers it, do, and did, happen; the offender often having watched the address prior to making his attack to see who lived there and their circumstances. Despite bleeding profusely, the neck wounds were not life threatening and she soon recovered.

I dare say the possibility that it was a domestic situation, where she did not wish, or was afraid, to identify the man existed.

[Stewart P Evans]

Assuming

...
The fact that they were not murders (though it's not that much clear in the case of Millwood) doesn't mean that the offender did not intend to kill, or did not become an actual murderer afterwards...

You are again assuming too much here. There was an indication in the press report that there was only Millwood's word for the fact that she had been attacked.

The cause of death, which occurred over 4 weeks later, was given as rupture of the left pulmonary artery and consequent internal loss of blood, which rupture had been caused by ulceration, and was nothing to do with the 'stabs in the legs and lower part of the body' as a result of the alleged attack. Naturally the coroner's court returned a verdict of death from natural causes, which it was.

However, whether it was an attempted murder or not (and I don't think it was) makes no matter for, as I have explained,

(a) The cause of death was officially pronounced to be from natural causes which means that the police did not have to pursue a murder enquiry (even if they had wanted to).

(b) If it was a genuine attack resulting in bodily harm, as alleged by Millwood, the police could still not pursue any enquiry as the injured party was dead (so the complaint died with her) and she could not identify her alleged attacker.

[Stewart P Evans]

Do Not Know

To be back to the thread, I repeat it's about being "wise after the event", and simply, it would not have been a stupid idea to take into account, at the time of the Ripper scare, cases of women assaulted by knife in or not far from Whitechapel.
Of course, the fact that Millwood and Wilson haven't been taken in consideration can't be called a mistake. I think it's just something that could have been, perhaps, of interest.David

As I have already indicated, we do not know whether or not the police did consider these two earlier alleged attacks as being connected with the murders, and then dismissed them as irrelevant.

Obviously all attacks on women, especially knife attacks, around that time would have been of interest to the police who seemed to be pursuing every avenue of enquiry. You simply cannot assume that they didn't do so.

[Stewart P Evans]

Rather

...
I rather go with Paul Begg than Sugden, in this case.
David

I'd rather go with Phil Sugden - if I had to go with anyone.

[Stewart P Evans]

Favourite

...
As for Bow, well, it's not exactly Tombouctou, and incidentally, Maidman Steet was very near to the place where one Fleming used to live at the time.
I mention this, of course, because Fleming is my favorite suspect, and I'm well aware that it's very personal.

No, but it's quite a way removed from the focus of the murders. I thought that you might have a 'favourite' suspect.

[Stewart P Evans]

Specious Argument

Sorry Stewart,
but Rose Bierman, her neighbor, clearly tells us that she was a casual prostitute, and that she brang the man home. The story of the thief knocking at her door is, even without Bierman's evidence, frankly incredible.
I rather go with Paul Begg than Sugden, in this case.

You know, I knew there was a reason that I didn't like to get involved in protracted, specious, argument on the boards.

Rose Bierman 'clearly tells us' no such thing. This is not sworn testimony, it is a newspaper report that may have been instigated by anything, including animus between the two women. For all we know she may have had two or three men friends. But that is irrelevant, for, as I said, there is no evidence that she was a casual, derelict, street prostitute of the nature of the other victims.

I thought that you were 'going' with someone, it rather shows.

[DVV]

The cases of Millwood and Wilson were not even murders.

Hi again Stewart,
The fact that they were not murders (though it's not that much clear in the case of Millwood) doesn't mean that the offender did not intend to kill, or did not become an actual murderer afterwards.
When you stab a woman twice in the throat, you certainly try to kill her. Ada fainted in the yard blooding profusely, and newpapers report that it seemed almost a miracle that she recovered.

Amitiés,
David

[DVV]

In the case of Wilson she was attacked at Bow, well east of the Ripper murder sites, and it appeared to have been a case of bungled robbery. There is no firm evidence to show that she was a casual street prostitute as were the Ripper victims and, as Phil Sugden states, 'it is best discounted.'

Sorry Stewart,
but Rose Bierman, her neighbor, clearly tells us that she was a casual prostitute, and that she brang the man home. The story of the thief knocking at her door is, even without Bierman's evidence, frankly incredible.
I rather go with Paul Begg than Sugden, in this case.
As for Bow, well, it's not exactly Tombouctou, and incidentally, Maidman Steet was very near to the place where one Fleming used to live at the time.
I mention this, of course, because Fleming is my favorite suspect, and I'm well aware that it's very personal.
To be back to the thread, I repeat it's about being "wise after the event", and simply, it would not have been a stupid idea to take into account, at the time of the Ripper scare, cases of women assaulted by knife in or not far from Whitechapel.
Of course, the fact that Millwood and Wilson haven't been taken in consideration can't be called a mistake. I think it's just something that could have been, perhaps, of interest. More than chasing insane medical students, for example.
Treat me gently, Stewart, I'm a genuine newbie!
Amitiés,
David