Mitre Square: Take Two?

[Trevor Marriott]

How long had it been raining for? According to the above it was raining at 1.30 but had stopped before 1.35 - so when had it started to rain? How do you know that it hadn’t started at 1.28.

Was it heavy rain or a light shower? We don’t know but it could have been a light shower of 5 or 6 minutes. So she and her killer could have sheltered and then entered Mitre Square just at the time that Lawende, Levy and Harris left the club. Alternatively shouldn’t we consider Eddowes lying in a corner, fence on one side, buildings on the other, a man leaning over her, in a short shower of light rain?

Im not pushing these as facts Trevor. I’m looking at what might have been possible however unlikely some may see them.

….

The fact that his watch was in sync with the club clock couldn’t really be more irrelevant Trevor. Basically he was in sync with himself. What would be relevant would be how was his watch synced with the clock in Bishopsgate Station and the clocks used by Harvey and Watkins. There could have a 10 minute or more difference between those clocks making any attempt at gauging accurate times futile. When the three men believed that it was 1.30 by another clock it could have been 1.25 or 1.35.

So the time from when the three men saw the couple to the time that Watkins found the body could have been 19 minutes.

No, it couldn't because we have no idea how long the couple stood at the entrance to the square before entering the square.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

No, it couldn't because we have no idea how long the couple stood at the entrance to the square before entering the square.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

So many times on discussions about Mitre Square you have repeated this statement Trevor and I’ve told you every time why it makes no sense. When will it sink in?

You cannot say that something couldn’t have happened based on an event which you only think might have occurred. That’s not logical. In fact I find it little short of remarkable that you can keep repeating it.

There are two options..

Option A - That after the three men passed, the couple stood around for an unspecified length of time (perhaps minutes) before they entered Mitre Square.

or,

Option B - That after the three men passed, the couple went into Mitre Square straight away or after a few seconds or even a minute.

I accept 100% that both option A and option B are possibles.

BUT, your statement:

”No, it couldn't because we have no idea how long the couple stood at the entrance to the square before entering the square”

…is only correct if option A is definitely what occurred.

As option B is equally possible your statement is provably wrong.


I know expect a response of almost superhuman level wriggling.

[GBinOz]

I’ve an alternative for the delay, she went via Aldgate where she was earlier arrested and met her killer there (perhaps even having arranged to meet up earlier - who was she late for?)

Eddowes reportedly claimed that she knew who the Ripper was, so was she engaged in blackmailing him, and returning to Aldgate to conclude a deal? This would fit the report in the NY Times of "a watchboy who saw a man and a woman leave Aldgate station, going towards Mitre-square. The man returned shortly afterward alone". Jack tells her he has the money stashed and he will take her to get it....via Mitre Sq.

So did Watkins take shelter from the rain just before 1:30, and then, to make up time on his beat, he skipped Mitre Square. Did he (or White) step aside for the ripper in St James's Place when the latter was on his way back to Aldgate Station to be seen by the watchboy. This would mean Lawende's sighting was of different couple. All conjecture, of course, but that's what we're doing here.

[Trevor Marriott]

So many times on discussions about Mitre Square you have repeated this statement Trevor and I’ve told you every time why it makes no sense. When will it sink in?

You cannot say that something couldn’t have happened based on an event which you only think might have occurred. That’s not logical. In fact I find it little short of remarkable that you can keep repeating it.

There are two options..

Option A - That after the three men passed, the couple stood around for an unspecified length of time (perhaps minutes) before they entered Mitre Square.

or,

Option B - That after the three men passed, the couple went into Mitre Square straight away or after a few seconds or even a minute.

I accept 100% that both option A and option B are possibles.

BUT, your statement:

”No, it couldn't because we have no idea how long the couple stood at the entrance to the square before entering the square”

…is only correct if option A is definitely what occurred.

As option B is equally possible your statement is provably wrong.


I know expect a response of almost superhuman level wriggling.

You clearly are missing the obvious, my point being that the longer the couple stood talking before entering the square then the less time the killer had with the victim to do all that he is alleged to have done i.e. murder, mutilate and remove organs, at best the killer had less than 9 mins to do all of that and that time decreases if they didn't enter the square soon after being seen by Lawende at 1.35am.

What don't you understand about that?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Tom_Wescott]

A point I'm curious about is the farinaceous matter found partly digested in her stomach. Assuming this was meal or grain of some kind, when did she eat it? Not at the police station, so it must have been prior to that (around 29 Aldgate?) or after leaving the jail. I suppose the answer to this would be in answering the question 'How long does it take a person to fully digest farinaceous matter?' I've only thought of the question today so do not have an answer. But the fact that it was sporadically raining and yet Eddowes was dry and the presence of food in her belly might indicate how she spent part of her time after leaving the jail. Just thinking out loud.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Herlock Sholmes]

You clearly are missing the obvious, my point being that the longer the couple stood talking before entering the square then the less time the killer had with the victim to do all that he is alleged to have done i.e. murder, mutilate and remove organs, at best the killer had less than 9 mins to do all of that and that time decreases if they didn't enter the square soon after being seen by Lawende at 1.35am.

What don't you understand about that?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I’ve just written 184 words explaining the point to you and you appear either to have a) not read it properly, b) somehow not understood it or c) ignored it. I haven’t a clue which one.

Please READ….

I totally understand that you have said numerous times that if there was a delay between Lawende and co passing and the couple entering Mitre Square it reduces the time available to the killer by however long the delay was. So that if they waited a minute then we have to deduct a minute from the time available to the killer. If they waited 2 minutes then we have to deduct 2 minutes and so on.

Now Trevor, do you understand that I understand your point? How could you think that anyone couldn’t understand that point?

Ok, now my very obvious point…

I’m not suggesting how much time the killer definitely had (because none of us can know this) I’m suggesting how much time he might have had. I’m talking about what is possible. And it’s possible and reasonable that the couple entered Mitre Square just after Lawende passed. So when we are discussing how much time the killer might have had we have to try and estimate the maximum and the minimum times. If the woman was Eddowes then the maximum time is calculated by them entering Mitre Square straight away.

Please tell me that you get it Trevor.