Was Elizabeth Long A Reliable Witness?

[Joshua Rogan]

House numbers don't line up (though I think some streets have been renumbered since 1888, are you comparing to a list of 1888 street numbers? I don't have access to any of those kinds of information so I can't check on them).

Yes, I've been scouring the Goad insurance maps from the time of the murders, which show the house numbers. Very handy.
I can confirm that the road to the south of the blank patch (Old Nicol, mentioned in a post above) is indeed a Church Street.

[Joshua Rogan]

Presumably her start time was based upon either a clock in the home, or perhaps on being knocked up by the police, etc. Again, these are the sorts of details I wish were recorded.

Could be. Other witnesses, eg I think Davis, say they were woken by chimes and estimated the time they left home from them.
Myself, I swear I sat on my bed for only a moment this morning as I was getting up, but apparently it was 20 minutes. It was a Sunday, mind, so I didn't have to be anywhere.

[JeffHamm]

[QUOTE=Joshua Rogan;n726198]

Yes, that's of course possible too. If we think one of her times is out, we need to consider the possibility her start time is the one in error. That would go towards her seeing 2 unrelated people I think.

As for her confidence, she's probably confident she heard the chimes, mis-recalling which set had just wrong wouldn't change that sense of confidence./QUOTE]

Yes, if she didn't look at a clock when she arrived at work, she may have just assumed the arriival time from the chimes she (thought she) heard a few minutes before. The earlier start time is harder to account for in that case though.

Presumably her start time was based upon either a clock in the home, or perhaps on being knocked up by the police, etc. Again, these are the sorts of details I wish were recorded.

- Jeff

[JeffHamm]

I find it hard to believe all the papers misreported Mrs Long's words at the inquest on the 19th, so tend to believe she said Church Row. The reports on the 27th are quoting Baxter when he says she lived in Church Street. Did he misremember her address? Or did he get this from her police statement, which he would doubtless have seen before calling her to give evidence.

Either way, there's half a dozen possible places she might have lived, but none seem to be half an hour's walking distance from the market. There could be any number of reasons for her taking longer than expected to walk the distance though, eg she simply walked slowly, or she did some shopping or errands or stopped for breakfast on the way.

Given that any detours or delays are unknowable, the Bethnal Green Church Row makes the most sense from the little we do know. The thing that gets me though is that she was reported as saying Church Row, Whitechapel. And with the best will in the world, St Matthew's isn't in Whitechapel. Also, I can't find a no.32, nor a 198. There.is a no.3 though.
Number 32, Church Street could be the one right next to the Ten Bells, in what is now Fournier St. But that's only 50 yards from the market so would require a substantial detour!

Yes, there's clearly something wrong with her addresses as stated. The one in Church Row/Fournier Street doesn't make going north to Hanbury Street a sensible route. House numbers don't line up (though I think some streets have been renumbered since 1888, are you comparing to a list of 1888 street numbers? I don't have access to any of those kinds of information so I can't check on them). The difference between the Press and Swanson's report is disconcerting, and as only one press report seems to have the house number, that probably could be viewed as suspect.

And of course, if she had other things to do on her way to the market, taking longer than the estimated time of a direct walk is entirely explainable. There seems to be other oddities around her, as her name is reported as Darrell or Durrell in some other reports. I suppose she could be trying to keep her identity out of the papers, maybe out of fear, etc, or maybe we should consider the possibility that she was making it all up more seriously (out of some morbid curiosity to view the body perhaps, and now she gets caught up in the consequences?).

In the end, as with most things, nothing will be definitive, but I think on the whole it does suggest that serious consideration of her sighting (presuming it happened of course), was at 5:15 and not 5:30. I think that competes with the two alternatives of "her start time was wrong, or she had other things on the way, and her 5:30 time is correct, suggesting she saw 2 other people), and the least probable in my view, she's making it up. I think that the least likely as I think the police would have worked that out.

To me, a misremembering of which chimes she heard seems the most probable given how memory works. Also, her testimony implies she went straight to the market. Exactly where her residence was is not clear, and some sort of miscommunication seems to have occurred. The two most likely locations, which are not in Whitechapel despite that being how it is reported, result in a very plausible route to the market that would put her in the vicinity of the Brewer's clock and also pass #29, both are close enough that a 30 minute travel time looks wrong.

- Jeff

[Joshua Rogan]

[QUOTE=JeffHamm;n726196]

Yes, that's of course possible too. If we think one of her times is out, we need to consider the possibility her start time is the one in error. That would go towards her seeing 2 unrelated people I think.

As for her confidence, she's probably confident she heard the chimes, mis-recalling which set had just wrong wouldn't change that sense of confidence./QUOTE]

Yes, if she didn't look at a clock when she arrived at work, she may have just assumed the arriival time from the chimes she (thought she) heard a few minutes before. The earlier start time is harder to account for in that case though.

[Joshua Rogan]

Ok, so while there's conflicting reports (Press reporting Church Row, Swanson's report listing Church Street), both of those possibilities result in a 10-13 minute walk to Hanbury Street, so with a departure time of about 5:00 am, either starting point suggests the chimes she heard were the 5:15 chimes.

I find it hard to believe all the papers misreported Mrs Long's words at the inquest on the 19th, so tend to believe she said Church Row. The reports on the 27th are quoting Baxter when he says she lived in Church Street. Did he misremember her address? Or did he get this from her police statement, which he would doubtless have seen before calling her to give evidence.

Either way, there's half a dozen possible places she might have lived, but none seem to be half an hour's walking distance from the market. There could be any number of reasons for her taking longer than expected to walk the distance though, eg she simply walked slowly, or she did some shopping or errands or stopped for breakfast on the way.

Given that any detours or delays are unknowable, the Bethnal Green Church Row makes the most sense from the little we do know. The thing that gets me though is that she was reported as saying Church Row, Whitechapel. And with the best will in the world, St Matthew's isn't in Whitechapel. Also, I can't find a no.32, nor a 198. There.is a no.3 though.
Number 32, Church Street could be the one right next to the Ten Bells, in what is now Fournier St. But that's only 50 yards from the market so would require a substantial detour!

[JeffHamm]

The Royston St route gives a good idea of how far away she would need to start to pass the brewery at half past. But, Long states that she is confident of her times. We're accepting 5am for the start. By doing that, Long's movements actually fit well, regardless of whether she starts from Church Row or St, and allow for a few minutes either way.
What if we accept her hearing the half five chime? She sets off nearer quarter past, hears the brewery clock and arrives at work as stated.
Why was she so sure of her times, when it appears that one of them must be wrong? And more importantly, why did no one ask at the time!

Yes, that's of course possible too. If we think one of her times is out, we need to consider the possibility her start time is the one in error. That would go towards her seeing 2 unrelated people I think.

As for her confidence, she's probably confident she heard the chimes, mis-recalling which set had just wrong wouldn't change that sense of confidence. People can be very confident in memories despite the errors in details. And, people can be highly unsure of things they actually recall properly. We tend to interpret confidence as an indicator of accuracy, and that is a poor relationship.

But I agree, it seems odd that her testified walking time and the apparent distance she had to travel don't line up and yet this discrepancy doesn't appear to have been explored, or if it was, the details of those follow ups are lost to us now.

- Jeff

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

I don't think she ever actually says that she passed the brewery, only that she heard it's clock chime shortly before turning into Hanbury street. So it's theoretically possible she was walking north up Brick Lane, not South.

It looks as though if someone was heading to Smithfield Market from the south of Brick Lane, they would walk past it to reach Hanbury St. It's an odd choice of route. Likewise, if she set off half an hour earlier from somewhere south of the market, it's not a particularly direct route. Fifteen minutes, makes more sense but it's still hard to see how she would end up on Hanbury St having walked past the market?

[JeffHamm]

I don't think she ever actually says that she passed the brewery, only that she heard it's clock chime shortly before turning into Hanbury street. So it's theoretically possible she was walking north up Brick Lane, not South.

Yes, that's a fair point, but nothing sensible with regards to a Church Row/Street seems to exist that would get her to Hanbury Street as part of her route while the one's to the north make some sense. But you are correct, she doesn't state she actually passed the Brewery.

- Jeff

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Also, it looks to be about a 2 minute walk from the Brewery to #29, which would fit with her testimony of having just heard the chimes slightly before passing #29 (whether she started in Church Street or Church Row is immaterial in this case).

- Jeff

The Royston St route gives a good idea of how far away she would need to start to pass the brewery at half past. But, Long states that she is confident of her times. We're accepting 5am for the start. By doing that, Long's movements actually fit well, regardless of whether she starts from Church Row or St, and allow for a few minutes either way.
What if we accept her hearing the half five chime? She sets off nearer quarter past, hears the brewery clock and arrives at work as stated.
Why was she so sure of her times, when it appears that one of them must be wrong? And more importantly, why did no one ask at the time!

[Joshua Rogan]

Also, it looks to be about a 2 minute walk from the Brewery to #29, which would fit with her testimony of having just heard the chimes slightly before passing #29 (whether she started in Church Street or Church Row is immaterial in this case).

I don't think she ever actually says that she passed the brewery, only that she heard it's clock chime shortly before turning into Hanbury street. So it's theoretically possible she was walking north up Brick Lane, not South.

[JeffHamm]

Also, it looks to be about a 2 minute walk from the Brewery to #29, which would fit with her testimony of having just heard the chimes slightly before passing #29 (whether she started in Church Street or Church Row is immaterial in this case).

- Jeff

[JeffHamm]

That blank space was the Old Nichol. The southern boundary was Church Street, now Redchurch St. The Old Nichol was still there in 1888, it's always referred to as Shoreditch.

Ok, so while there's conflicting reports (Press reporting Church Row, Swanson's report listing Church Street), both of those possibilities result in a 10-13 minute walk to Hanbury Street, so with a departure time of about 5:00 am, either starting point suggests the chimes she heard were the 5:15 chimes.

In the 2004 thread, they searched the 1881 and 1891 Census reports, and found in 1881 a possible match on Blythe and in 1891 on Royston (maps below). From the far end of Blythe it would be about 18 minutes, and Royston is around 30 minutes. Problem is, of course, neither of these get a mention anywhere in the 1888 reports, but I'm including them for completeness (Royston measured out to 1.55 miles).

- Jeff

Blythe:

Royston:

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

That blank space was the Old Nichol. The southern boundary was Church Street, now Redchurch St. The Old Nichol was still there in 1888, it's always referred to as Shoreditch.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Using the information from the 2004 thread, they've identified Church Street as being the street running along the southern border of that big empty area in the NW corner of the map I posted. So, if I have her start from the far west side of that street and over to Brick Lane, etc, it still works out to be a 10 minute walk. I just don't see any name for that street on the map I'm looking at, so can't verify that. I think also that Fournier Street (2 south of Hanbury) was called Church Street, but as they discussed ages ago, she wouldn't be on Hanbury Street if she lived there and was going to the market, which is only a minute or two away as it were.

I haven't been able to work out the building numbers, or even independently confirm that the street along the park (blank space) was called Church Street, but taking even the furthest end as her starting point does not correspond to a 30 minute walk, but one of about 10 minutes at 3.1 mph (average walking speed). If I slow her down to 2.5 mph, which was a patrolman's beat speed, it's more like 13 minutes. All of these, coupled with her starting her journey "about 5:00", seems to point to her mis-remembering the quarter hour chime as the half hour chime, or perhaps I should say is consistent with that idea.

- Jeff

The 1894 map appears to be the same as you've posted, it can be viewed in high resolution. The streets under the big blank space are Ebor St, Little York St and Club At. The main thoroughfare is Bethnal Green Road. There's only a handful of buildings on these small streets, so number 32 might be too high?