"City PC"

[lynn cates]

inactive

Hello Michael. Thanks.

Of course, at that time, there was NO JTR--only the previous "Leather Apron" legend and who was currently inactive.

Cheers.
LC

[The Good Michael]

Lynn,

True, but a murder had just been committed in Berner Street. It is possible that City Policemen were unaware of this however. This brings up another idea that I need to bring up on the other thread I am going to start... soon... after a beer.

Mike

[Jon Guy]

Hi Lynn

Of course, at that time, there was NO JTR--only the previous "Leather Apron" legend and who was currently inactive.

Jack the Ripper was the name given to the killer of the previous victims. The nick name hadn`t yet being invented but the women died all the same.

John Pizer was Leather Apron and he was certainly out and about before and after the Double Event.

Just because two girls were winding up Isenschmid in North London by calling him Leather Apron (because he sometimes wore his butchers clothing when he was working as a butcher) and he, in turn, chaffed them, doesn`t make him Leather Apron or anything to do with the legend of Leather Apron.

[Jonathan H]

To Lynn

No, none whatsoever.

[lynn cates]

awaiting

Hello Michael. Thanks. I look forward to it.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

punctus contra punctum

Hello Jon. Thanks.

"Jack the Ripper was the name given to the killer of the previous victims."

Eventually. Yes, quite true.

"The nick name hadn`t yet being invented but the women died all the same."

Agreed. And many women have died at some point.

"John Pizer was Leather Apron . . . "

Well, perhaps he went into the legend, but was certainly NOT the only inspiration for it.

" . . . and he was certainly out and about before and after the Double Event."

Just so. And he killed NO ONE.

"Just because two girls were winding up Isenschmid in North London . . . "

North London? Try Google maps. 5 miles NW of Whitechapel.

" . . . by calling him Leather Apron (because he sometimes wore his butcher's clothing when he was working as a butcher) . . . "

But don't forget "The Echo," 10 September, 1888.

" . . . and he, in turn, chaffed them, doesn`t make him Leather Apron . . . "

Indeed. Legends usually require more than one of a kind.

" . . . or anything to do with the legend of Leather Apron."

And here, we must agree to disagree.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

thanks

Hello Jonathan. Thanks. Very well.

Cheers.
LC

[Monty]

All,

Two points.

Harveys sacking may have been for a number of misdemeanors or they decided to make an example of him.

From his position at the end of Church Passage, a Bulls eye lamp would have had no effect whatsoever. So to simply state all Harvey had to do was shine a lamp upon the spot is not taking this into account. I have a Bulls eye lamp, and use it. If anyone is attending the York conference I will gladly bring it to show you just how ineffective it is at lighting up at distance.

I attach the July 1889 Bishopsgate Order book return noting Haveys dismissal, plus something that would get the Druittests drooling.

Monty

[lynn cates]

address

Hello Neil. Thanks for posting these. Very interesting.

You refer to the address?

Cheers.
LC

[Scott Nelson]

The key point in Bromleys article is that the killer had left by the time Harvey had reached the end of Church Passage. Whilst I'm not completely sold on that I am willing to sway with it.

My conclusion, some years before, is that if it was Harvey, he likely encountered a suspect coming out of St. James Place when he was patrolling on Little Duke Street, or he encountered the suspect walking north on Duke Street after the suspect had emerged from Church Passage.

[Wickerman]

From his position at the end of Church Passage, a Bulls eye lamp would have had no effect whatsoever. So to simply state all Harvey had to do was shine a lamp upon the spot is not taking this into account.

Quite so, there was a thread covering this lantern and its range, I can't remember exactly but 5ft comes to mind.


Lanterns were intended for close up scrutiny; peoples faces at night, picking up evidence on the footpath, or checking doorlocks or window clasps, etc. not assisting longrange vision at night, for this they were totally hopeless.

"Jack" could have been waving to Harvey across the square but because Harvey was stood under a wall lamp he wouldn't have seen a blessed thing.

Regards, Jon S.

[The Good Michael]

So to simply state all Harvey had to do was shine a lamp upon the spot is not taking this into account.

I don't think anyone is suggesting this lamp was like a modern flashlight. I do suggest that I personally would go into the passage and look around because I'd want to know what was lurking in there, regardless if my light shone 5 inches or 5 meters.

Mike

[Bridewell]

Bull's Eye

From his position at the end of Church Passage, a Bulls eye lamp would have had no effect whatsoever. So to simply state all Harvey had to do was shine a lamp upon the spot is not taking this into account.

Thanks, Monty. I hadn't realised that they were quite that feeble. So, unless JtR himself had a lamp of some kind - which seems unlikely - he would have gone unseen from the end of Church Passage. Assuming he was about his business when Harvey arrived, Harvey wouldn't have seen the Ripper - but the Ripper would (or at least could) have seen him, if only in silhouette?

Regards, Bridewell.

[Monty]

Horner and Co had delvery bays along that wall which required removable steps, these are clearly seen in Whiffins 1920s shots.

If the same was occuring in 88 then we have further obstructions to Harveys view. Add the shadows, breaking cloud covers and other issues then Harveys view isn't as straight forward as thought.

However, this would be something he was used to. I suspect he would have noted movement and if suspicious, investigated.

Obviously he didn't feel the need.

Monty

[Tom_Wescott]

City PC fantasies

I thought it was agreed by all that there was no City PC witness and a simple mistake had been made? But if we're putting out fantasy theories for fun, I too have one....there was a police investigator at the time named Frederick Blenkisop (middle name James?), so WHAT IF he was the guy who spoke to the 'second man' near Mitre Square, and was referred to in the press under a different profession as to protect his identity, and perhaps some undercover work he was doing?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott