Packer Again

[New Waterloo]

Lots of thought. I agree with Herlock that it would be a strange thing for Packer to make up a fictitious description and story and then attempt to claim some sort of reward money with the help of Le Grand and Batchelor. Seems like a non starter to me. They would have to provide the whole story and description to Packer for him to digest and then present to the press etc.

More likely perhaps that Le Grand and Batchelor (hired by the WVC I think and I guess for a fee) spoke with Packer who told them the story about the couple and gave them the description. To test Packers evidence they took him to view the wrong body which he of course did not identify. Then later correctly identifying Stride.

Le Grand and Batchelor probably jumped for joy at such witness, a face to face description of the suspect and only a few feet from the murder scene. Bingo!!

The fact they were fraudsters and after making a quick buck embellished Packers tale stating that not only he had seen the suspect with Stride that he had also sold the man grapes for his shortly to be murdered lady friend and a stalk was discovered in the yard. You can see the headline 'JTR the evil fiend buys grapes for his lady friend before slitting her throat'

The police more than likely got very suspicious of all this and because of the reputation of Le Grand and Batchelor became cautious and didnt really follow up.

So an idea of what may have happened was an embellished story for greater effect but based on what Packer actually saw. I think I will stick to my opinion that Packer was not all lies. He saw something. In fact he could be a very important witness indeed.

NW

[DJA]

Not hired by WVC.

[Wickerman]

Stride was killed in the early hours of 30th September, and at 9 am later that morning, Packer and his household told Sgt White that no one was seen standing around Berner Street late the previous evening when he was closing up his shop.

In addition to the rewards already on offer, on the first of October Jas Fraser Commissioner of the City of London Police offered a reward of £500, and the lord mayor of London added another £500.

Le Grand and Batchelor were then all over the East End like a rash, providing the press with stories about blood-stained grape stalks, flower petals, grape stalks retrieved from the drains, the sisters Harstein and Rosenfeld, Packer selling the grapes, and then shielding Packer from the police so that they did everything, taking him to identify the body, alleging that they tested him by showing him Eddowes first, and then taking him to Scotland Yard to tell his story.

Just before leaving in the cab for Scotland Yard with Le Grand and Batchelor on October 4th, Packer told White the totally new story that he had sold grapes to Stride and a man at twelve, and had watched the couple till about 12. 30, completely changing his original story. A short cab journey later he told the same story, except that it became 11 to 11. 30 pm.

Some people think that this might be grounds for doubts as to reliability.

"Some people"?
Let me guess - at the top of the list may be the one who came up with the idea?

For the slow-minded here, would you mind explaining how finding grape stalks in the drain would lead to an arrest?
I hope we agree, the reward is only payable if the evidence leads to an arrest?
Wouldn't common sense dictate the discovery of a random grape stalk could lead anywhere?

How would the evidence you identify lead to the arrest of anyone, even Packer?

[Wickerman]

Lots of thought. I agree with Herlock that it would be a strange thing for Packer to make up a fictitious description and story and then attempt to claim some sort of reward money with the help of Le Grand and Batchelor. Seems like a non starter to me. They would have to provide the whole story and description to Packer for him to digest and then present to the press etc.

The description given by PC Smith was published on Monday 1st Oct.
Packer's description was given on Thurs. 4th Oct.

NW - The suspect description given by Packer differs on the coat and hat, outward details obvious to the eye.
If Packer was inventing a false story, why wouldn't he remember "no whiskers" or "collar & tie", but add "broad shoulders", when he should have said his build was "slight"?
If he is making up a story, he needs to use the same description that the police are looking for.

Packer's suspect:
...a young man from 25-30 about 5.7. with long black coat buttoned up – soft felt hat, kind of Yankee hat rather broad shoulders –
...I put the man down as a young clerk.
...He had a frock coat on – no gloves.
...He was about 1 ½ inch or 2 or 3 inches – a little higher than she was.

PC Smith's suspect (Parcel-man).
'' Age 28. Slight. Height 5ft. 8in. Complexion dark. No whiskers. Black diagonal coat. Hard felt hat. Collar and tie. Carried newspaper parcel. Respectable appearance.''

The differences between the two descriptions is either, they were different men - but as both would have been carrying a package, and both were with Stride around 12:30, that seem unlikely. Or, the differences were due to Packer's eyesight. We always assume the witness has 20-20 vision, Packer was in his 50's, he may have been near-sighted, so had trouble with distance vision.

So an idea of what may have happened was an embellished story for greater effect but based on what Packer actually saw. I think I will stick to my opinion that Packer was not all lies. He saw something. In fact he could be a very important witness indeed.

NW

Agreed.

[Doctored Whatsit]

"Some people"?
Let me guess - at the top of the list may be the one who came up with the idea?

For the slow-minded here, would you mind explaining how finding grape stalks in the drain would lead to an arrest?
I hope we agree, the reward is only payable if the evidence leads to an arrest?
Wouldn't common sense dictate the discovery of a random grape stalk could lead anywhere?

How would the evidence you identify lead to the arrest of anyone, even Packer?

Doubting Packer's reliability is fairly common. His follow-up stories hardly help him - about the man who looked like his suspect staring at him menacingly, and then fleeing, then the story of the men at his shop telling him they believed the suspect was their cousin, and then the murderer lived not far from Batty Street, and then two men knocked him down and put him in hospital for three weeks because he said he knew where JtR lived. He hardly helped himself appear credible.

The alleged finding of the grapestalks provided a direct link to the story about selling grapes, which meant that Packer's description could be regarded as relevant and considered helpful in the event of an arrest. Without the grapestalks his story had little to back it up.

One point I would be genuinely interested in developing if anyone has any knowledge about it, is the sisters Harstein and Rosenfeld's story. The detectives told it, and presumably they gave it to the newspapers, but despite its potential importance, I haven't found any reference of it in the police reports. The idea that the sisters saw a blood-stained grapestalk lying about in the open ground and which none of the police had noticed, is absolutely mind-boggling, and yet I see no reference to it in police reports. Surely the police must have interviewed the sisters. Does anyone have any more information about this?