Was Elizabeth Long A Reliable Witness?

[Fleetwood Mac]

Elizabeth Long said: I live in Church-row, Whitechapel, and my husband, James Long, is a cart minder. On Saturday, Sept. 8, about half past five o'clock in the morning, I was passing down Hanbury-street, from home, on my way to Spitalfields Market. I knew the time, because I heard the brewer's clock strike half-past five just before I got to the street. I passed 29, Hanbury-street. On the right-hand side, the same side as the house, I saw a man and a woman standing on the pavement talking. The man's back was turned towards Brick-lane, and the woman's was towards the market. They were standing only a few yards nearer Brick-lane from 29, Hanbury-street. I saw the woman's face. Have seen the deceased in the mortuary, and I am sure the woman that I saw in Hanbury-street was the deceased. I did not see the man's face, but I noticed that he was dark. He was wearing a brown low-crowned felt hat. I think he had on a dark coat, though I am not certain. By the look of him he seemed to me a man over forty years of age. He appeared to me to be a little taller than the deceased.
[Coroner] Did he look like a working man, or what? - He looked like a foreigner.
[Coroner] Did he look like a dock labourer, or a workman, or what? - I should say he looked like what I should call shabby-genteel.
[Coroner] Were they talking loudly? - They were talking pretty loudly. I overheard him say to her "Will you?" and she replied, "Yes." That is all I heard, and I heard this as I passed. I left them standing there, and I did not look back, so I cannot say where they went to.
[Coroner] Did they appear to be sober? - I saw nothing to indicate that either of them was the worse for drink.
Was it not an unusual thing to see a man and a woman standing there talking? - Oh no. I see lots of them standing there in the morning.
[Coroner] At that hour of the day? - Yes; that is why I did not take much notice of them.
[Coroner] You are certain about the time? - Quite.
[Coroner] What time did you leave home? - I got out about five o'clock, and I reached the Spitalfields Market a few minutes after half-past five.
The Foreman of the jury: What brewer's clock did you hear strike half-past five? - The brewer's in Brick-lane.

On balance, I would say no.

We know that eye-witness sightings are often flawed and should be treated with caution.

We know from Long's account that she did not take much notice of the couple, in her own words.

The number of murder cases where eye-witnesses claimed to have seen 'a man resembling' but later could not pick out that man in a line up, is staggering.

[DJA]

Elizabeth Long said: I live in Church-row, Whitechapel, and my husband, James Long, is a cart minder. On Saturday, Sept. 8, about half past five o'clock in the morning, I was passing down Hanbury-street, from home, on my way to Spitalfields Market. I knew the time, because I heard the brewer's clock strike half-past five just before I got to the street. I passed 29, Hanbury-street. On the right-hand side, the same side as the house, I saw a man and a woman standing on the pavement talking. The man's back was turned towards Brick-lane, and the woman's was towards the market. They were standing only a few yards nearer Brick-lane from 29, Hanbury-street. I saw the woman's face. Have seen the deceased in the mortuary, and I am sure the woman that I saw in Hanbury-street was the deceased. I did not see the man's face, but I noticed that he was dark. He was wearing a brown low-crowned felt hat. I think he had on a dark coat, though I am not certain. By the look of him he seemed to me a man over forty years of age. He appeared to me to be a little taller than the deceased.
[Coroner] Did he look like a working man, or what? - He looked like a foreigner.
[Coroner] Did he look like a dock labourer, or a workman, or what? - I should say he looked like what I should call shabby-genteel.
[Coroner] Were they talking loudly? - They were talking pretty loudly. I overheard him say to her "Will you?" and she replied, "Yes." That is all I heard, and I heard this as I passed. I left them standing there, and I did not look back, so I cannot say where they went to.
[Coroner] Did they appear to be sober? - I saw nothing to indicate that either of them was the worse for drink.
Was it not an unusual thing to see a man and a woman standing there talking? - Oh no. I see lots of them standing there in the morning.
[Coroner] At that hour of the day? - Yes; that is why I did not take much notice of them.
[Coroner] You are certain about the time? - Quite.
[Coroner] What time did you leave home? - I got out about five o'clock, and I reached the Spitalfields Market a few minutes after half-past five.
The Foreman of the jury: What brewer's clock did you hear strike half-past five? - The brewer's in Brick-lane.

[John Wheat]

Well, if she saw the murderer and her description of him was accurate, then Scotland Yard should have been looking for a Jewish man in his forties, about twice the age of Cohen, Kaminski and Kosminski.

Could someone please get this information to Anderson and Swanson on the other side?

I'm not saying she did or didn't see the Ripper.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

We don't know who or who didn't actually see the Ripper. So wether Elizabeth Long was a reliable witness or not must be secondary as to whether she saw the Ripper or not?

Well, if she saw the murderer and her description of him was accurate, then Scotland Yard should have been looking for a Jewish man in his forties, about twice the age of Cohen, Kaminski and Kosminski.

Could someone please get this information to Anderson and Swanson on the other side?

[John Wheat]

We don't know who or who didn't actually see the Ripper. So wether Elizabeth Long was a reliable witness or not must be secondary as to whether she saw the Ripper or not?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

He was holding her up waiting for Cadoche to return so he could drop her against the fence for him to hear . ....

She was killed way earlier than 5.30 am . see ''John Richardson'' thread its all explained there p.i.

Thanks for referring me to that thread and I have been reading many of the comments there this evening.

It seems to me that the pro-coroner posters are relying on the kind of arguments with which I am all too familiar.

Unlikely possibilities are being accorded greater respect than the evidence.

The fact that it is possible for rigor mortis to set in after an hour is cited as evidence that Phillips was wrong, and he is dismissed as someone who didn't know what he was talking about as medical science was rather backward in his day.

If you look up rigor mortis online, you will see the same estimate of two hours that Phillips gave, which suggests that medical science has not moved on as far as Phillips' critics think.

The question which seems hardly ever to be asked of them is this: why was Eddowes' body still warm, with no signs of rigor mortis, some 42 minutes after death, but Chapman's quite cold with signs of rigor mortis, less than an hour after her death - if Long really saw Chapman?

The conditions were similar in the two cases.

I have never seen a satisfactory explanation other than that Chapman was killed hours before her body was discovered.

[Abby Normal]

IMHO
yes she was, but maybe off on her time a bit.

[FISHY1118]

The question is not so much whether she was a reliable witness as whether her testimony is relevant.

It seems that the man and woman whom she saw were standing in front of number 31 rather than number 29, and since Cadoche turned leftwards upon leaving number 27, it is by no means certain that he would have noticed them.

Even if Cadoche really heard the murder taking place, it must have been before Long saw the couple.

In my opinion, both Long's evidence and Cadoche's are irrelevant, because Chapman must have been dead for hours.

If Cadoche heard Chapman say no and then, about five minutes later, her falling against the fence, one is entitled to ask what the Whitechapel Murderer was doing during the intervening five minutes.

He must have realised that people were getting up and going to work.

From what we know of his Modus Operandi, is it believable that he would have taken five minutes to strike his victim, when the risk at that hour of the day was multiplied and he was in a confined space?

He was holding her up waiting for Cadoche to return so he could drop her against the fence for him to hear . ....

She was killed way earlier than 5.30 am . see ''John Richardson'' thread its all explained there p.i.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

The question is not so much whether she was a reliable witness as whether her testimony is relevant.

It seems that the man and woman whom she saw were standing in front of number 31 rather than number 29, and since Cadoche turned leftwards upon leaving number 27, it is by no means certain that he would have noticed them.

Even if Cadoche really heard the murder taking place, it must have been before Long saw the couple.

In my opinion, both Long's evidence and Cadoche's are irrelevant, because Chapman must have been dead for hours.

If Cadoche heard Chapman say no and then, about five minutes later, her falling against the fence, one is entitled to ask what the Whitechapel Murderer was doing during the intervening five minutes.

He must have realised that people were getting up and going to work.

From what we know of his Modus Operandi, is it believable that he would have taken five minutes to strike his victim, when the risk at that hour of the day was multiplied and he was in a confined space?

[Bridewell]

The coroner was impressed with her as a witness.

[JeffHamm]

The part of her statement which seems to be the most uncontested,is Long's claim she arrived at Smithfield market just after 5,30 am.That being so,she could have been where she claimed to be when the chimes signalled 5.30.Had the chime s struck 5.15, and had she arrived without interruption,at the market,the time should have been just after 5.15.So to me the most significant part,is her time of arrival at the market.She claims just after 5.30 am,and there is no reason to doubt that.So on a question of belief,there is no evidence except her word,Long saw a couple ouside no 29,just after 5.30 am.

Hi harry,

the problem is she doesn't state where that "arrived at the market shortly after 5:30" comes from, but in all likelihood it may just be a continuation of her time based upon the brewer's clock (and if she's misremembered the 5:15 chime as the 5:30, she's carried the same error forward). It does, however indicate she went straight to the market from #29 as it is only a few minutes away.

Basically, if she heard the 5:15, then she arrived at the market a few minutes after 5:15, and that seems to fit with her departing around 5:00. If she did hear the 5:30, then she arrived a few minutes after 5:30, but those times don't make sense with a departure time of 5:00.

So one of her times, either 5:00 or 5:30, seems like it's incorrect. We don't know upon what basis her knowing it was 5:00 am for her departure time, so we could question that. We do know she based passing #29 at 5:30 by remembering hearing the Brewer's clock chime (which appears to be the same time stamp used for her estimation of her arrival at the market). Misremembering the chime, easy enough to do, would point to her 5:30 based times being out by 15 minutes.

If the 5:30 is incorrect, her testimony fits in exceptionally well with Richardson and Cadosche, to the point her description of JtR is worth noting (with caution of course). If the 5:00 is correct, and she left around 5:15, then it seems likely she spotted 2 unrelated people, so her description should be ignored.

In the end, though, Long's testimony is not critical as Richardson and Cadosche's testimonies provide pointers to the time of the murder. Long is important primarily with respect to the description she gives of the man seen with Annie. It is secondary, in some ways, important with respect to estimates of when the murder took place, but if the time was 5:15ish, really points to a ToD of around 5:20-5:30 ish type thing.

Anyway, I'm not sure her arrival at the market at shortly after 5:30 is anything more than just a repatition of the recalled chimes, plus her noting it was only a few more minutes to the market.

- Jeff

[harry]

The part of her statement which seems to be the most uncontested,is Long's claim she arrived at Smithfield market just after 5,30 am.That being so,she could have been where she claimed to be when the chimes signalled 5.30.Had the chime s struck 5.15, and had she arrived without interruption,at the market,the time should have been just after 5.15.So to me the most significant part,is her time of arrival at the market.She claims just after 5.30 am,and there is no reason to doubt that.So on a question of belief,there is no evidence except her word,Long saw a couple ouside no 29,just after 5.30 am.

[Joshua Rogan]

Oh that's good to hear. Or those maps online and freely accessible? I take it none of the reported house numbers line up though?

- Jeff

Yes, somewhere, although I've managed to lose the direct link I had to the list of map sheets (since installing a free app called Old Maps, which has them). I'm sure I and several others have posted a link to them over the years, but if a search here can't find it I'll have a hunt around for them.

[JeffHamm]

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.

Oh that's good to hear. Or those maps online and freely accessible? I take it none of the reported house numbers line up though?

- Jeff

[JeffHamm]

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.

Yes, we don't know upon what basis she made her "about 5:00 am" departure time statement, nor with what precision we should consider "about 5:00" to mean? Slightly before, slightly after, a fair bit before/after? etc. Most coverage of her statement read to me as if she's going to the market for her shopping, though apparently at least one paper reports her as saying she was going to work. A daily, or whatever - let's say a common, shopping trip in the morning, maybe to avoid crowds or get the best selections, or pick up things for the morning meal, etc, is not something that would be critical to leave exactly at the same point in time each day. Work, however, has a critical start time, and which of those changes how we should view things. Shopping might allow for stops along the way, work suggests such things are less likely.

I think we can make some informed inferences, but also recognize that our information is not solid enough to draw any overly firm conclusions at the same time.

And yes, your "was it really that long" experience is very common with time estimations. Our awareness of time varies a lot, pending on mood (exiciting activities can go by quickly, boring activities take forever, but doing nothing, so no activity, can chew up a lot more time than one realizes as time seems to stand still - the latter sounds like your morning). I do think many of the times have to be viewed with wider margins of error than many consider, and often when suggesting them I've been accused of "speculating beyond acceptable levels of tolerance" though I view it as trying to explore all of the possibilities. To each their own, I suppose.

- Jeff