tell us who are the most credible witnesses

[Rubyretro]

That is certainly interesting Richard ! It did make Me think twice..

..but then again, if Hutch made up his story, he may have woven the 'red handkerchief' into his story because he knew that Lawende had given a
description to the Police of the Suspect taken as 'Jack' as wearing a red handkerchief...and he wanted to establish the thought in peoples minds that
A Man and Lawende's suspect could be one and the same.

We are in England, in November, with people living cold draughty conditions
and in overcrowded rooms and lodging houses..so having a cold would be common.

Furthermore, the woman seen by Maxwell had just been vomiting..which may have made her eyes bulge and 'water' (I know mine do if I vomit).

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
My two witnesses that hold the most credibility, are Hutchinson and Mrs Maxwell. Why?
Around 1974, I read the following, 'Her eyes looked queer, as if suffering from a heavy cold'
This was part of Mrs Maxwells statement, which I had never come across before or since, it appears to have been lost, and I have to be honest I have no idea where I read it , but I did, and I mentioned it to Colin Wilson, who I was corresponding with at that time, I also mentioned to him, the reason why I believed that phrase to have been signifcant , and he responded with intrest.
Why of intrest?
Shortly after 2am, Hutchinson gives an account of a hankerchief being handed to Kelly, indicating that she required the use of one, although other uses have been mentioned in the past on Casebook ie contraception, I prefer the obvious nose wiping...ie COLD
According to the doctors Mary is killed in the few hours that followed.
If this is the case how did Maxwell possibly spot the signs of a cold at 815am, she would not have known about Hutchinsons account[ unless she could see in the future] but she believed, she may have had a heavy cold.
She saw her the day before many will say, but the day is definate, as her plate returning was confirmed by police, so it would only be mistaken identity, and I believed that[missing] comment by the much distrusted Maxwell, goes a long way ito substanciate both witnesses integreity.
Donald Mccormack has a similiar reference to that statement in his book, but he has it as 'All muffled up as if in cold'.
I am afraid its a bit like that elusive Radio broadcast of mine, I cant get the proof[ as yet] but you have my word, that wording is accurate, for I have never forgotten it.
Regards Richard.

[The Good Michael]

How is credible defined here? If it is simply a question of witnesses seeing the murderer, I agree with Rob House. If it is perfect suspect descriptions and all details accurate, there ain't no such animal. There is only perspective.

Mike

[Fleetwood Mac]

Seems to me that Lawende's statement rests on whether or not JTR could have appeared after Lawende's sighting and carried out the murder.....that and was it Stride they saw.

On balance.....yes......he would appear to be one of the better witnesses.....

[Adam Went]

Lawende has the benefit of having had two companions with him at the time, even if both of their testimonies (or lack of), especially Joseph Hyam Levy's, would appear to some as being a little dodgy.

He sees Kate close to an entrance to Mitre Square at 1.32 AM, she gets found dead at 1.44 AM, which means it is extremely probable that the man Lawende saw and her killer, therefore JTR, are one and the same - the only possible exception to that would be if Lawende's man and Kate parted company virtually immediately after the sighting, Kate walked into Mitre Square for some reason by herself, and Jack was already lurking in there - though that's highly unlikely and requires a lot of assumption - and, in any case, why would Lawende's man not then come forward and try to clear his name, as Leon Goldstein did following the Liz Stride murder?

So he has companions to back him up (virtually all the other major witnesses in all the murders were solo), and sees the couple literally minutes before the body is found, so surely that combination should tip him over the line as being the "best" witness - if there is such a thing. That's not to say that any less credibility should be given to the likes of Schwartz, Smith, Hutchinson, Long, etc though.

Cheers,
Adam.

[Fleetwood Mac]

He will have been seen.....undoubtedly.....the bloke wasn't invisible.....he'll be in at least one of the witness statements.

If I had to say one....I'd go with PC Smith.....as I think his time was out and Liz was murdered closer to 12.45 than 1....placing his sighting 5 minutes max before the murder.

I did like Lawende. But I'd like to pose this question: why?

It seems a fairly innocuous statement which adds credibility....10 minutes before the murder.......and the police appear to have considered him to be a serious suspect.....is that enough?

Oh and I think that City PC Witness meant a policeman at Mitre Square......pretty much as it is stated......I'm not convinced someone could not produce 4 words in line with their intended meaning....if you meant witness in the City PC area could you not state that? Would you lack the capacity to state that? Really?

[FrankO]

If any of them DID see Jack -which witnesses do you believe ? Why do you think that ?

Hi Rubyretro,

Due to the timing, I think that Lawende & Co did see the Ripper and probably Elizabeth Long too. I don't see any reason to think they are not credible, but whether they were accurate in their description, is another question.

All the best,
Frank

[Rubyretro]

my answer was saved with tons of 'code' will try later

[mariab]

Packer's Stem,
I really dig your moniker!

[packers stem]

Schwartz for me i think,and yes i still think pipeman's an accomplice and not someone who happened to run after schwarts for no apparent reason.
Caroline Maxwell as a different type of witness(obviously no jack involved there).
Hutchinson possibly but why watch the court for the best part of an hour?
If he was that concerened about kellys welbeing you'd have thought he might have crept up millers court,had a listen,maybe tried to look through the window.His standing there all that time sems quite bizarre but...someone was seen standing there.Or was Hutchinson an invention as a cover for an accomplice look out?
If Hutchinson was for real he witnessed a really strange blind date type meet.
'You'll be allright for what i've told you' What's all that about.
'Oh i've lost my handkerchief' then the calling card red handkerchief appears.
It's like 'i'll be the one near the bar carrying flowers'

[Adam Went]

There are those who believe PC Smith is the most credible witness. I don't agree with this - at least, not entirely. No doubt because he is a police officer, his description is important, and probably accurate, but too much time elapsed between his sighting and the discovery of the body, not to mention the James Brown/Israel Schwartz sightings after that, to place too much emphasis on his testimony, as it might well have not been the same man.

Most credible witness? Probably Joseph Lawende.

Cheers,
Adam.

[mariab]

I totally agree with The Grave Maurice about Lawende, Levy and co. and the time frame for them having indeed seen the Ripper with Eddowes.
I know that Schwartz has his own 2 threads, but I'd be very interested to hear Rob House, if possible, elaborate on why he's convinced that Schwartz saw the Ripper (in BS or in Pipeman). There are reports in The Echo and in The Scottsman that corroborate Schwartz's testimony. Both these papers stated that the secretary of the International Working Men Club (and that would be William Wess) claimed that two men were observed running down Fairclough Street, and the man running at the back (Pipeman?) was recognized as not a club member, implying that the observer of these two men was a clubsman, and that the first man running down Fairclough Street might have been Schwartz. But there are theories of conspiracy circulating about the IMWC having fabricated Schwartz's story. Any informed opinions on this?

[robhouse]

Rubyretro,

What exactly in those two descriptions needs reconciling? The only real difference is the age, and Long saw the guy from the back. Also, people are notoriously bad at giving information like this, estimating age and height and so forth.

My point is that given the circumstances, it is most likely that the person seen by these witnesses was the Ripper.

RH

[The Grave Maurice]

I believe that only Lawende & Co. saw JtR. I base that belief on the short amount of time between their sighting of Eddowes and her companion at the corner of Duke Street and Church Passage and the discovery of the body in Mitre Square by PC Watkins.

[Rubyretro]

I believe Schwartz saw the Ripper. I also believe Lawende, Levy and Harris saw the Ripper. And I believe Elizabeth Long saw the Ripper.

Rob H

Elizabeth Long :
"she did not see the man's, except to notice that he was dark. She described him as wearing a brown deer-stalker hat, and she thought he had on a dark coat, but was not quite certain of that. She could not say what the age of the man was, but he looked to be over 40, and appeared to be a little taller than deceased. He appeared to be a foreigner, and had a 'shabby genteel' appearance. Witness could hear them talking loudly, and she overheard him say to the woman, "Will you?" to which she replied, "Yes." They remained there there as Mrs Long passed, and she continued on her way without looking back."

And now Lawende and co.:
He described the man as being of average build and looking rather like a sailor, wearing a pepper-and-salt coloured loose fitting jacket, a grey cloth cap with a matching peak, and a reddish neckerchief. Lawende said that the man was aged about 30, with a fair complexion and moustache, being about 5ft 7-8 inches tall. He did not believe he would be able to identify the man again. The Times newspaper claimed that Lawende had said that the man was about 5ft 9 inches and was of a shabby appearance.

Rob lease reconcile these witnesses for me (we'll leave Schwartz aside, as he has two threads..). Why do you believe both of them ?