A photograph of Joseph Lawende in 1899

[Fiver]

Why would I suggest that you had omitted to say something unless I had indeed read all your posts?

So you're claiming to have read all 14 thousand plus posts by Herlock?

[DJA]

Crikey! Some people who survive lightning go permanently grey

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Again, no one has ever described a man in an actual sailor's uniform anywhere in this case. Anyone could have worn a necktie.

Merchant sailors did not wear a uniform!


Like a lot of people on here, you're being a tad inflexible in your analysis in wanting every aspect of every murder and possible suspect sighting to be exactly the same.

On the contrary!

I pointed to three differences in terms of clothing and also the different build of the two suspects.

The two are far from being the same.


Bear in mind that when Lawende saw the man with Eddowes, who was undoubtedly the ripper IMO,

Agreed.

no crime had been committed, he had no reason to be suspicious and was observing by gaslight from a distance. He and Levy and no real reason to be paying special attention.

Lawende gave a good description nonetheless.


Now compare that to what is an ideal case with Farmer's man. The assailant is observed up close by many people, in daylight, and although the descriptions clearly converge on a common theme, there are a fair few clear differences. Things like build are going to vary depending on angle of observation or clothing (e.g. a short man with broad shoulders wearing a loose jacket or cape would appear stocky), complexion and colouring by degree of light shade.


In that case, why do you accept Lawende's evidence that the man had a fair moustache?

Why not say, well, he could have had a dark moustache?

Someone said that the lightning could have made his moustache look lighter than it was.

What do you think of that?

If he had a dark moustache, then he cannot have been your fair-haired suspect in the Farmer case.



You are getting a bit too hung up factors that can clearly vary by observer. You sailor theory isn't backed up at all by any meaningful evidence.


I think it is.

If Lawende had said nothing about the suspect having the appearance of a sailor, then that would be different.

Please see my answers above.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Again, no one has ever described a man in an actual sailor's uniform anywhere in this case. Anyone could have worn a necktie.

Like a lot of people on here, you're being a tad inflexible in your analysis in wanting every aspect of every murder and possible suspect sighting to be exactly the same. Bear in mind that when Lawende saw the man with Eddowes, who was undoubtedly the ripper IMO, no crime had been committed, he had no reason to be suspicious and was observing by gaslight from a distance. He and Levy and no real reason to be paying special attention. Now compare that to what is an ideal case with Farmer's man. The assailant is observed up close by many people, in daylight, and although the descriptions clearly converge on a common theme, there are a fair few clear differences. Things like build are going to vary depending on angle of observation or clothing (e.g. a short man with broad shoulders wearing a loose jacket or cape would appear stocky), complexion and colouring by degree of light shade. You are getting a bit too hung up factors that can clearly vary by observer. You sailor theory isn't backed up at all by any meaningful evidence.

We should check the papers Wulf in case there’s mention of a man with one leg and a parrot on his shoulder.

[Aethelwulf]

Sailors did wear them as part of their uniform.
No one has ever described a sailor's unifrom in any of the murders.


It isn't just that sailors wore neckerchiefs as part of their uniform in the national navy, but they commonly wore them in the merchant navy.

I pointed out that Farmer's attacker wore a different hat, different-coloured neckerchief, different kind of jacket or coat, and had a heavier build.

You say Lawende's suspect could have changed his hat, neckerchief and jacket, and seemed of lighter build to Lawende.

I would suggest Lawende was an entirely-reliable witness and described a different man.

Again, no one has ever described a man in an actual sailor's uniform anywhere in this case. Anyone could have worn a necktie.

Like a lot of people on here, you're being a tad inflexible in your analysis in wanting every aspect of every murder and possible suspect sighting to be exactly the same. Bear in mind that when Lawende saw the man with Eddowes, who was undoubtedly the ripper IMO, no crime had been committed, he had no reason to be suspicious and was observing by gaslight from a distance. He and Levy and no real reason to be paying special attention. Now compare that to what is an ideal case with Farmer's man. The assailant is observed up close by many people, in daylight, and although the descriptions clearly converge on a common theme, there are a fair few clear differences. Things like build are going to vary depending on angle of observation or clothing (e.g. a short man with broad shoulders wearing a loose jacket or cape would appear stocky), complexion and colouring by degree of light shade. You are getting a bit too hung up factors that can clearly vary by observer. You sailor theory isn't backed up at all by any meaningful evidence.

[Herlock Sholmes]

As has so often happened on this forum, when I make a statement, someone starts splitting hairs.

Lawende did not need to specify the material from which the neckerchief was made.

They were commonly made from silk.

Neckerchiefs weren’t then and aren’t now solely made from silk. They can be made from cotton too. If sailors only wore silk ones how can we know that the one seen by Lawende was silk? It might have been cotton. It might have been a neck scarf for all that we know. Lawende saw him from feet away, in passing. He wasn’t inspecting troops.

He described the jacket as loose.

Waist-length open jackets were loose.

That makes no sense at all. Underpants can be loose. Full length coats can be loose. Most people in that area were permanently skint and didn’t buy made to measure clothing. Cast-offs were commonplace.

Sailors wore waist-length, loose jackets which were open at the front, and silk neckerchiefs.

Strange then that I’ve looked at around 100 photographs to date of Victorian sailors and not one of them was wearing a loose jacket.



Lawende described the man as wearing a loose jacket, a neckerchief, and the appearance of a sailor.

Which, as everyone but you realise, in absolutely no way means that the man was a sailor.

Could the man have been a sailor?

Yes, for all that we know.

We can say no more than that.

[DJA]

Sailors wore waist-length, loose jackets which were open at the front, and silk neckerchiefs.

IN THE NAVY---VILLAGE PEOPLE, Official Music Video (1979) HD - YouTube

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Joseph Lawende did not say that the jacket was waist length. Or that it was worn open at the front. Or that the handkerchief was silk.

As has so often happened on this forum, when I make a statement, someone starts splitting hairs.

Lawende did not need to specify the material from which the neckerchief was made.

They were commonly made from silk.

He described the jacket as loose.

Waist-length open jackets were loose.

Sailors wore waist-length, loose jackets which were open at the front, and silk neckerchiefs.

Lawende described the man as wearing a loose jacket, a neckerchief, and the appearance of a sailor.

[Herlock Sholmes]

What do we mean by a neckerchief?

https://www.google.com/search?q=victorian+man+neckerchief&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwiB7MLDtdv7AhUB44UKHd2dDdEQ2-cCegQIABAC&oq=victorian+man+neckerchief&gs_lcp=ChJtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1pbWcQAzIFCAAQogQyBQgAEKIEMgUIABCiBDIFCAAQogQ6BAgjECc6CAgAEAgQHhANOgYIABAIEB46BQgAEIAEOgQIIRAKUPUHWIU-YM1FaABwAHgAgAGGAogBlBOSAQYyNS40LjGYAQCgAQHAAQE&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-img&ei=XDCKY4HOI4HGlwTdu7aIDQ&bih=1247&biw=1024&prmd=isvn&rlz=1C9BKJA_enGB704GB704&hl=en-GB#imgrc=iarhFBK9NuBN4M

https://www.google.com/search?q=victorian+man+neckerchief&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwiB7MLDtdv7AhUB44UKHd2dDdEQ2-cCegQIABAC&oq=victorian+man+neckerchief&gs_lcp=ChJtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1pbWcQAzIFCAAQogQyBQgAEKIEMgUIABCiBDIFCAAQogQ6BAgjECc6CAgAEAgQHhANOgYIABAIEB46BQgAEIAEOgQIIRAKUPUHWIU-YM1FaABwAHgAgAGGAogBlBOSAQYyNS40LjGYAQCgAQHAAQE&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-img&ei=XDCKY4HOI4HGlwTdu7aIDQ&bih=1247&biw=1024&prmd=isvn&rlz=1C9BKJA_enGB704GB704&hl=en-GB#imgrc=iarhFBK9NuBN4M&imgdii=hrvVJaEUQF2z1M

https://www.google.com/search?q=victorian+man+neckerchief&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwiB7MLDtdv7AhUB44UKHd2dDdEQ2-cCegQIABAC&oq=victorian+man+neckerchief&gs_lcp=ChJtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1pbWcQAzIFCAAQogQyBQgAEKIEMgUIABCiBDIFCAAQogQ6BAgjECc6CAgAEAgQHhANOgYIABAIEB46BQgAEIAEOgQIIRAKUPUHWIU-YM1FaABwAHgAgAGGAogBlBOSAQYyNS40LjGYAQCgAQHAAQE&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-img&ei=XDCKY4HOI4HGlwTdu7aIDQ&bih=1247&biw=1024&prmd=isvn&rlz=1C9BKJA_enGB704GB704&hl=en-GB#imgrc=lpXQSUGBPXw7IM

All of these are Victorian men but none of them were sailors.


These men were Victorian sailors though.

https://www.google.com/search?q=victorian+sailors&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwi98uvRtdv7AhXGg84BHcydChIQ2-cCegQIABAC&oq=victorian+sailors&gs_lcp=ChJtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1pbWcQAzIFCAAQgAQyBQgAEKIEMgUIABCiBDIFCAAQogQ6BAgjECc6CAgAEAgQHhANOgYIABAIEB5QnwhY0ipg6S5oAHAAeACAAU6IAeQKkgECMjSYAQCgAQHAAQE&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-img&ei=ejCKY73NJcaHur4PzLuqkAE&bih=1247&biw=1024&prmd=isvn&rlz=1C9BKJA_enGB704GB704&hl=en-GB#imgrc=2kwj5GH5L_S2pM

https://www.google.com/search?q=victorian+sailors&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwi98uvRtdv7AhXGg84BHcydChIQ2-cCegQIABAC&oq=victorian+sailors&gs_lcp=ChJtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1pbWcQAzIFCAAQgAQyBQgAEKIEMgUIABCiBDIFCAAQogQ6BAgjECc6CAgAEAgQHhANOgYIABAIEB5QnwhY0ipg6S5oAHAAeACAAU6IAeQKkgECMjSYAQCgAQHAAQE&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-img&ei=ejCKY73NJcaHur4PzLuqkAE&bih=1247&biw=1024&prmd=isvn&rlz=1C9BKJA_enGB704GB704&hl=en-GB#imgrc=QTNb1CeHccJNoM

https://www.google.com/search?q=victorian+sailors&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwi98uvRtdv7AhXGg84BHcydChIQ2-cCegQIABAC&oq=victorian+sailors&gs_lcp=ChJtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1pbWcQAzIFCAAQgAQyBQgAEKIEMgUIABCiBDIFCAAQogQ6BAgjECc6CAgAEAgQHhANOgYIABAIEB5QnwhY0ipg6S5oAHAAeACAAU6IAeQKkgECMjSYAQCgAQHAAQE&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-img&ei=ejCKY73NJcaHur4PzLuqkAE&bih=1247&biw=1024&prmd=isvn&rlz=1C9BKJA_enGB704GB704&hl=en-GB#imgrc=hD24CT5W20bYJM

In the sailor photos the neckerchief they were wearing weren’t worn around the throat. They hung down over their clothes. The man that Lawende saw clearly wasn’t wearing a sailors uniform or he would have said so therefore it’s difficult to see why an off duty sailor, wearing civilian clothes, would wear a neckerchief in this unusual way and not wrapped around his neck against the cold. If he had worn it that way then he would have looked no different from the men in the top three linked photos.

As we know that there is no link between the coat that he wore, which was only described in terms of the pattern/fabric and how loose fitting it was, it’s difficult to conclude much more that it was mainly the peaked cap that led Lawende to say that the man had the appearance of a sailor. Either way, to claim that he was a sailor, or even that he was likely to have been a sailor is a leap that makes absolutely no sense when we consider the childishly obvious fact that many men wore neckerchiefs, anyone could (and did) wear a peaked cap, and no one has to date found a photograph (amongst the numerous available) of a sailor wearing a ‘salt and pepper’ jacket. Lawende’s description tells us nothing useful about this man (unless we use it in comparison to various named suspects - but even then we shouldn’t place too much weight in a description given by a man who was hardly paying close attention.) He was just as likely to have been a carpenter, a market porter, a butcher.

[Fiver]

Sailors commonly wore waist-length jackets, open at the front, and a silk handkerchief round the neck.

Joseph Lawende did not say that the jacket was waist length. Or that it was worn open at the front. Or that the handkerchief was silk.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

IMO: Man seen by Schwartz (BS), Lawende's Man, Farmer's Man = one and the same

Sailors did wear them as part of their uniform.
No one has ever described a sailor's unifrom in any of the murders.


It isn't just that sailors wore neckerchiefs as part of their uniform in the national navy, but they commonly wore them in the merchant navy.

I pointed out that Farmer's attacker wore a different hat, different-coloured neckerchief, different kind of jacket or coat, and had a heavier build.

You say Lawende's suspect could have changed his hat, neckerchief and jacket, and seemed of lighter build to Lawende.

I would suggest Lawende was an entirely-reliable witness and described a different man.

[Aethelwulf]

I don't know what you mean by:

All it means is no one else got a good view of his neck.


Both men were wearing neckerchiefs and Farmer's attacker had a visible scar on his neck, but Lawende's suspect did not.

Lawende's man was not seen by multiple people at very close quarters (e.g. hit someone with a whip, stopped to punch someone else). Farmer's man's clothes would have been disarranged after the scuffle.

Lawende described a man of lighter build than Farmer's attacker.

We're talking about highly variable eye witness statements. This is a non issue. Just look at how variable the accounts of this attacker are and it is a perfect test case for checking their consistency. We have the lodging house man saying Farmer and her attacker were 'dark' and witnesses saying he was fair. We have fair man and sallow complexion (i.e. swarthy/yellow or brown in tone), fair mustache versus dark. And most of this related to broad daylight. Importantly for you, only one of the many people that saw the attacker said he looked like a sailor. How do we know in the case of Eddowes that Lawende wasn't that one man. You have gone all in for sailor based on one description.

I don't think the wearing of neckerchiefs had to do with vanity.

You don't, I do

Sailors did wear them as part of their uniform.
No one has ever described a sailor's unifrom in any of the murders.

IMO: Man seen by Schwartz (BS), Lawende's Man, Farmer's Man = one and the same

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Broadly speaking, this man fits the physical Bill and and was trying to slit a woman's throat.

I don't know what you mean by:

All it means is no one else got a good view of his neck.


Both men were wearing neckerchiefs and Farmer's attacker had a visible scar on his neck, but Lawende's suspect did not.

Lawende described a man of lighter build than Farmer's attacker.

I don't think the wearing of neckerchiefs had to do with vanity.

Sailors did wear them as part of their uniform.

[Aethelwulf]

Ellen Marks said:

... he said, 'Look at what she has done.' There was blood on his mouth and a scratch, and his hands had blood upon them. He was about 5ft 7in in height, with a fair moustache, and of very sallow complexion. There was a scar of an abscess on the left side of the neck. I should call him a fair man. He wore a blue-black diagonal overcoat, speckled grey trousers, and a hard black felt hat. There was a white handkerchief round the throat.

That does suggest that the woman did not tell the whole truth about what had happened between her and the man - assuming the man running away was the same man.

I suspect once Farmer realized what had nearly happened to her she flailed about and probably land a blow on him, hence the scratches. Understandable really.

I would point out that the man wore a different-coloured neckerchief, a different jacket or coat, and a different hat from the ones described by Lawende.

That's not an issue - we can't think the ripper only had one set of clothes.

Lawende, moreover, did not describe the scar, although one cannot know how old it was, and described a man of lighter build.

All it means is no one else got a good view of his neck. I suspect the neck tie wearing, as per Lawende's man, was a vanity issue. Related to this, also note the FBI profile which suggests the killer might have had a physical abnormality which although slight, could have been physiologically crushing. Fits the bill.

Broadly speaking, this man fits the physical Bill and and was trying to slit a woman's throat.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Ellen Marks: He was about 5ft 7in in height, with a fair moustache, and of very sallow complexion. There was a scar of an abscess on the left side of the neck. I should call him a fair man. He wore a blue-black diagonal overcoat, speckled grey trousers, and a hard black felt hat. There was a white handkerchief round the throat. There was nothing in his hands. He seemed excited, and was panting, and as he went off it struck me that he was a sturdily-built man.

Frank Ruffle: I should say the man was thirty-five years of age. He was clean shaven, with the exception of a slight fair moustache.

Several other persons who were present gave particulars of the man, corroborating in almost every detail the account of his appearance given by the woman herself, viz.: age, 30; height, 5ft 6in; fair moustache; wearing a black diagonal coat and a hard felt hat.

Farmer and one witness give the man as having a dark mustache. Makes me think fair in this instance was probably something like brown/sandy and could have appeared darker depending on light/shade etc.

Ellen Marks said:

... he said, 'Look at what she has done.' There was blood on his mouth and a scratch, and his hands had blood upon them. He was about 5ft 7in in height, with a fair moustache, and of very sallow complexion. There was a scar of an abscess on the left side of the neck. I should call him a fair man. He wore a blue-black diagonal overcoat, speckled grey trousers, and a hard black felt hat. There was a white handkerchief round the throat.


That does suggest that the woman did not tell the whole truth about what had happened between her and the man - assuming the man running away was the same man.

I would point out that the man wore a different-coloured neckerchief, a different jacket or coat, and a different hat from the ones described by Lawende.

Lawende, moreover, did not describe the scar, although one cannot know how old it was, and described a man of lighter build.

You are certainly right about the discrepancy between those two witnesses' descriptions and the one given by Farmer.