Descriptions.

[Herlock Sholmes]

We don’t have to move her timing by 15 minutes though because we have two times, hers and Cadosch’s. Allow them both 5 or 6 minutes and they match up.

[The Rookie Detective]

Has anyone ever considered that if Long misidentified Chapman, then she may have instead seen the murderers?


There always seems to be a random couple standing around.


Long's alleged sighting
The couple on the corner of Berner Street
Lawrende's alleged sighting
The alleged sighting of Kelly talking to a couple outside the pub


A killer couple is not beyond the realms of possibility.

[Tom_Wescott]

We don’t have to move her timing by 15 minutes though because we have two times, hers and Cadosch’s. Allow them both 5 or 6 minutes and they match up.

Except Cadosch had reason to be looking at time pieces that day and was anxious about being late to his work. I see no reason to move his timing at all.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[The Rookie Detective]

Except Cadosch had reason to be looking at time pieces that day and was anxious about being late to his work. I see no reason to move his timing at all.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

I think Cadosch heard Chapman hitting the fence and his timing is correct.

He visited the outside toilet twice in close sucession and the killer probably wasn't expecting it; yet still felt confident enough to kill Chapman.

The fence stood at no higher than 5ft 7"

That means the killer needed to have been shorter than 5ft 8"

Unless he was good at crouching down.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Except Cadosch had reason to be looking at time pieces that day and was anxious about being late to his work. I see no reason to move his timing at all.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

But it’s not a case of ‘moving’ times as we can’t just assume that all times were synchronised Tom. In fact we know from evidence how poorly synchronised clocks were and we also know how poorly people often estimate periods of time. If we take X as the actual time then if Cadosch’s clock was 5 minutes slow (X - 5) then when he said that he got up at 5.15 it would actually have been 5.20. He then estimated that he went into the yard 5 minutes later; so according to him 5.20 but according to X it was actually 5.25. He went to the loo and heard the “no” as he reached his back door, so let’s estimate 3 minutes later. So by X that would have made it 5.28 when he first heard the killer or Annie.

Mrs Long said that she’d passed at about 5.30. It would only have needed the brewer’s clock to have been 3 minutes or so fast and we would have her passing number 29 at 5.27 and seeing the couple, who enter the yard just after she passes, then a minute or so later Cadosch hears them at 5.28 (which, in his mind, was around 5.23)

If we accept Lawende as seeing Eddowes and that it would be unlikely that she was with anyone but her killer I can’t see why we don’t think the same of Long? She was much closer to the couple that Lawende and co were to their couple plus she saw them in daylight.

[Tom_Wescott]

But it’s not a case of ‘moving’ times as we can’t just assume that all times were synchronised Tom. In fact we know from evidence how poorly synchronised clocks were and we also know how poorly people often estimate periods of time. If we take X as the actual time then if Cadosch’s clock was 5 minutes slow (X - 5) then when he said that he got up at 5.15 it would actually have been 5.20. He then estimated that he went into the yard 5 minutes later; so according to him 5.20 but according to X it was actually 5.25. He went to the loo and heard the “no” as he reached his back door, so let’s estimate 3 minutes later. So by X that would have made it 5.28 when he first heard the killer or Annie.

Mrs Long said that she’d passed at about 5.30. It would only have needed the brewer’s clock to have been 3 minutes or so fast and we would have her passing number 29 at 5.27 and seeing the couple, who enter the yard just after she passes, then a minute or so later Cadosch hears them at 5.28 (which, in his mind, was around 5.23)

If we accept Lawende as seeing Eddowes and that it would be unlikely that she was with anyone but her killer I can’t see why we don’t think the same of Long? She was much closer to the couple that Lawende and co were to their couple plus she saw them in daylight.

I've already said it's very possible that Long saw Chapman and her killer, but she also said she didn't take notice of them and that she wouldn't recognize them again so her evidence is valueless. It's that simple. It's not a question of if she saw Chapman or not it's a question of does her evidence have any value, and all it tells us is that at some point before they entered the yard, Chapman and her killer were on the street, which we already know. It's just bones with no meat.

Although I see your point about Lawende and Long, and it does make sense, the two are quite different. In the case of Eddowes, we know she was found immediately after death and we have witnesses who were in the square just a short time before. So, the scenario starts with a very narrow timeline in place. Without this, Lawende's evidence would be worthless. In the case of Chapman, we have medical evidence and witness evidence placing the murder inside of a window that is more than an hour in length. As I'm sure you're aware, the police and a number of modern investigators side with Phillips on his timing. In turn, they discount Long. I'm more swayed by Cadosch and so more open to the idea that Long may have seen Chapman and her killer. But with the possible exception of the man's clothes, her description is worthless.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

I think Cadosch heard Chapman hitting the fence and his timing is correct.

He visited the outside toilet twice in close sucession and the killer probably wasn't expecting it; yet still felt confident enough to kill Chapman.

The fence stood at no higher than 5ft 7"

That means the killer needed to have been shorter than 5ft 8"

Unless he was good at crouching down.

None of this is correct, but I don't suppose that matters.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Lewis C]

None of this is correct, but I don't suppose that matters.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

None of it? I think everything in his 2nd paragraph/sentence is either correct or a reasonable inference.

[Tom_Wescott]

None of it? I think everything in his 2nd paragraph/sentence is either correct or a reasonable inference.

I'll do one better and give him his first two sentences.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Abby Normal]

IMHO long saw the ripper and cadosh heard him. As herlock said the timing probably just a bit off. Eyewitness times are notorious for being inaccurate and back then clocks were not synchronized very well.
Its no big mystery.

[Tom_Wescott]

IMHO long saw the ripper and cadosh heard him. As herlock said the timing probably just a bit off. Eyewitness times are notorious for being inaccurate and back then clocks were not synchronized very well.
Its no big mystery.

You're probably right. In which case it follows that the man Long saw was the man Lawende saw. But they described two different men. I propose this is because Long remembered nothing of the man she saw and was attempting to be helpful. Any direction you go with Long, her evidence is useless for our purposes. That's all I'm saying.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott