Did a police officer see a ripper suspect, right after the 2nd of the double murders?

[jerryd]

Do we know if Castle Alley was a throughway to Old Castle Street in 1888?

Yes, it was.

[Billiou]

But then again, I suppose the most telling part of the "report" is:

"The mystery, however, that baffled the police more than anything was how the murderer and the victim managed to get into the alley under the eyes of the watching police. It was clear that the couple had not been in any of the houses, and they were not known to any of the residents. Therefore they must have passed into the alley from the Whitechapel Road, and the two police officers were positive that in the four hours of their vigil not a soul had entered the alley. White had his own suspicions regarding the truth of this declaration, and his suspicions were shared by Sir Robert Anderson, who afterwards in comparing notes with White, expressed the opinion that the murderer and his victim had entered the close during the temporary absence of the two watching policeman. The men afterwards admitted that they had gone away for not more than a minute. It was a very short absence undoubtedly, but it was long enough to give the murderer time to walk into the alley with his victim".

This, I think, can only be Castle Alley.....

And as there were houses in the alley, someone coming out of the alley wouldn't have been immediately suspicious, not until McKenzie was found. It wasn't until after they questioned residents did they realise that the couple must have entered from Whitechapel.

I'm wondering, the map I've been referring to is the 1894 Ordinance map of Whitechapel. Do we know if Castle Alley was a throughway to Old Castle Street in 1888?

[Billiou]

Hi Billou!



You might be interested in:

July 1888 (!)

http://www.ukweatherworld.co.uk/foru...now-in-london/

http://www.casebook.org/forum/messages/4920/22806.html

http://booty.org.uk/booty.weather/climate/1850_1899.htm

July 1889:

Temperature July 1889: Lowest values occurred between the 8th and 11th over the western parts of the kingdom and between the 17th and 19th in the most other places...

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/c/c/Jul1889.pdf

It is quite possible that there were some "bitter cold nights" in July 1888 and 1889.

Best Regards,

Karsten.

It also says the mean was lower than the average for July... by one or two degrees over the greater part of England..... most other places but at several of the eastern and southern stations the lowest readings were observed on the 23rd or 24th....

Yes, quite possibly there were some cold nights in July 1889 and without actual known temperatures in London at the time it will remain debatable.

[Fleetwood Mac]

I agree with that.

By definition a through road for a pedestrian means it isn't a cul-de-sac.

The other possibility is that Castle Alley was termed a cul-de-sac because they had people blocking one of the entries.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Mitre Square doesn't fit my definition of a cul-de-sac and, as a matter of English (which is ironic considering the Frenchness of the term) I don't think it is. Here's how the Oxford English Dictionary describes a cul-de-sac:

"A street, lane, or passage closed at one end, a blind alley; a place having no outlet except by the entrance."

A square, however, is something different:

"An open space or area (approximately quadrilateral and rectangular) in a town or city, enclosed by buildings or dwelling-houses, esp. of a superior or residential kind, freq. containing a garden or laid out with trees, etc.; more generally, any open space resembling this, esp. one formed at the meeting or intersection of streets; (also) the group of houses surrounding an area of this kind."

Also, defining a square as a cul-de-sac because vehicles can't exit seems rather arbitrary to me. An open square with multiple exits for pedestrians but a cul-de-sac for vehicles? I don't think so really.

I agree with that.

By definition a through road for a pedestrian means it isn't a cul-de-sac.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Although there were two entries into the place where McKenzie was killed it does seem to be the best bet, considering it was "just behind the Whitechapel Road" and Stephen White saw someone with illuminous eyes.

I would say though it would only take someone to not know the scene very well to be mistaken, or they may have a certain idea of what a cul-de-sac is that doesn't tally with a dictionary.

McKenzie is problematic if you think he was tucked away in an asylum by that point, but I tend to think that he killed more than 5.

[Elamarna]

Mitre Square doesn't fit my definition of a cul-de-sac and, as a matter of English (which is ironic considering the Frenchness of the term) I don't think it is. Here's how the Oxford English Dictionary describes a cul-de-sac:

"A street, lane, or passage closed at one end, a blind alley; a place having no outlet except by the entrance."

A square, however, is something different:

"An open space or area (approximately quadrilateral and rectangular) in a town or city, enclosed by buildings or dwelling-houses, esp. of a superior or residential kind, freq. containing a garden or laid out with trees, etc.; more generally, any open space resembling this, esp. one formed at the meeting or intersection of streets; (also) the group of houses surrounding an area of this kind."

Also, defining a square as a cul-de-sac because vehicles can't exit seems rather arbitrary to me. An open square with multiple exits for pedestrians but a cul-de-sac for vehicles? I don't think so really.

David

you may recall a while back I had a debate if Mitre Square was a yard or a square.

I agree with you, it is very hard to call it a cul-de.sac.

The report being discussed is not first hand , there is much debate over the authenticity if any of said report.
None of the sites fit the description.

However it is not impossible that there is a kernel of truth at the bottom of the report, that is someone saw someone close to a murder site a matter of seconds before a body was discovered. in such a case the description of the site, as well as the action may be greatly changed from what was originally said, if anything was that is.

Steve

[David Orsam]

I have read that some people discount Mitre Square as they think it is not a cul-de-sac. If it is not a cul-de-sac, then what is? A cul-de-sac is a road that ends in a dead-end, a "no through road". A dead-end for traffic. Any pedestrian alley or passage does not make a dead-end not a dead-end for traffic.

Mitre Square doesn't fit my definition of a cul-de-sac and, as a matter of English (which is ironic considering the Frenchness of the term) I don't think it is. Here's how the Oxford English Dictionary describes a cul-de-sac:

"A street, lane, or passage closed at one end, a blind alley; a place having no outlet except by the entrance."

A square, however, is something different:

"An open space or area (approximately quadrilateral and rectangular) in a town or city, enclosed by buildings or dwelling-houses, esp. of a superior or residential kind, freq. containing a garden or laid out with trees, etc.; more generally, any open space resembling this, esp. one formed at the meeting or intersection of streets; (also) the group of houses surrounding an area of this kind."

Also, defining a square as a cul-de-sac because vehicles can't exit seems rather arbitrary to me. An open square with multiple exits for pedestrians but a cul-de-sac for vehicles? I don't think so really.

[jerryd]

I've always discounted the site being Castle Alley for various reasons. However, there are reports in the press that an ex-metropolitan police officer was standing about 50 yards from the murder scene at the time of the crime and also an officer stationed very near the Whitechapel Street entrance to Castle Alley. It is stated he would have been within 10 yards of the murderer if he left via that entrance/exit. Neither names are mentioned.

[S.Brett]

Hi Billou!

a "bitter cold night", I doubt that this could be the site as Alice McKenzie's murder took place in July 1889, in the middle of the summer

You might be interested in:

July 1888 (!)

http://www.ukweatherworld.co.uk/foru...now-in-london/

http://www.casebook.org/forum/messages/4920/22806.html

http://booty.org.uk/booty.weather/climate/1850_1899.htm

July 1889:

Temperature July 1889: Lowest values occurred between the 8th and 11th over the western parts of the kingdom and between the 17th and 19th in the most other places...

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/c/c/Jul1889.pdf

It is quite possible that there were some "bitter cold nights" in July 1888 and 1889.

Best Regards,

Karsten.

[wigngown]

Hello Richard,
Very interesting. Thanks for posting. I've often wondered if the man the Officer saw on that early morning was indeed the killer.
Best regards.

[Richard Patterson]

Hi Billiou,

Very interesting observations. Your point about Mitre Square being a cul-de-sac only to vehicular traffic is valuable. I will be incorporating it into future updates to my book. Thank you very much for the insights.

All the best,
Richard

[Billiou]

The Site of Detective White's "Report"

I have been reading various posts re which murder would be the likeliest to correspond to the situation described in The People's Journal article in 1919 of Detective Steve White's "report" (which the Journal writes as: "One of White's reports on his nightly vigils contains the following passages").

I will not go into the validity of the report as that is probably left to people who know more than I do.

What I have been considering is whether White was at a) Dutfields Yard, Berner St , b) Castle Alley or c) Mitre Square. These seem to be the valid candidates in relation to the murders in Whitechapel around that time.

a) Berner St.
While people have had doubts about the sites because of the mention of the site being a "cul-de'sac", Dutfields Yard in Berner St seems to be to some to be the only one that resembles a cul-de-sac. While the Yard probably does, but where is the alley?
And more importantly, the alley was supposed to be "just behind Whitechapel Road". That for me eliminates Dutfields Yard as it is nowhere near Whitechapel Rd or Whitechapel High St. The nearest major road at the end of Berner St is Commercial Rd.

b) Castle Alley.
While Castle Alley does run north from Whitechapel High St, it once again is not a cul-de-sac. It is a through-way and runs north and becomes Old Castle St and goes through to Wentworth St. Also, more importantly, as the report mentions the night being a "bitter cold night", I doubt that this could be the site as Alice McKenzie's murder took place in July 1889, in the middle of the summer.

c) Mitre Square.
I have read that some people discount Mitre Square as they think it is not a cul-de-sac. If it is not a cul-de-sac, then what is? A cul-de-sac is a road that ends in a dead-end, a "no through road". A dead-end for traffic. Any pedestrian alley or passage does not make a dead-end not a dead-end for traffic. Mitre Square has only one entrance for traffic on the Mitre Street side. Any traffic entering would have to leave through that same entrance. Therefore Mitre Square is a cul-de-sac. Please note other placenames: Jeffrey's Square off St Mary's Axe, Haydon Square off Haydon St, Devonshire Square near Liverpool St Station seem to be all cul-de-sacs, and some also have pedestrian alleys running off them. So maybe "Square" means "cul-de-sac"?
One thing that may eliminate Mitre Square is that technically it is not "just behind Whitechapel Road". Technically it is just behind Aldgate St (for a very small distance). But Aldgate St becomes Aldgate High St which becomes Whitechapel High St which becomes Whitechapel Rd. It is the same road that changes name as you move along it. So you could easily call it Whitechapel Rd and mean the same road.
The night of Catherine Eddowes murder on 30 September 1888 was cold (dropping to around 43F or 6C).

So I lean toward c) Mitre Square as the site of White's "report".

[Paddy]

No I think it was Dutfields

The Truth about the Whitechapel Mysteries told by Harry CoxEx-Detective Inspector, London City Police. Specially written for "Thomson's Weekly News"

Henry was explaining being on undercover work after Mary Kelly's death. They were watching a man who lived amoung Jewish tailors. And around their workshops

The least slip and another brutal crime might have been perpetrated under our very noses. It was not easy to forget that already one of them had taken place at the very moment when one of our smartest colleagues was passing the top of the dimly lit street.


When Henry wrote colleagues I take this he meant it was of his own professional group, the detectives.
I have always thought it was Dutfields being watched.
The only thing I cant reconcile is how one of the undercovers walked in and discovered the body. Did he just walk away again?
Also to see the entrance to Dutfields yard they would have had to have been within eyesight of it. More likely on the opposite side of the road from Dutfields and the Nelson.

Pat.............................

[Richard Patterson]

But a dissecting scalpel was not used to inflict the injuries, a knife with a blade of at least 6 inches was suggested.

How many people write books about murder but never commit one ?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Because Thompson carried a dissecting scalpel, instead of a knife, I would be surprised if we should dismiss him as a likely if not prime suspect. You ask me how many people write books about murder but never commit one? I ask how many strictly non-fiction writers, like Thompson, who write that they’ve killed women, haven’t?

I suspect that you are playing devil’s advocate by indicating that you reject Thompson as likely suspect? I understand that you were once were detective on a murder squad and were in the CID. Your good book “Jack the Ripper – The Secret Police Files” states that a likely suspect might be someone, reported by the manger of a lodging-house, who is loner who is secretive and is out late at night and who carries a parcel. You could have been describing Thompson. He was a secretive loner, who told that he walked the streets late at night. When he did, he would go out carrying his dissecting scalpel, from his hospital days. Thompson said he was seeking out his prostitute friend who disappeared immediately after an argument with him.

Your well-researched book, says that a prime suspect would live in Whitechapel, fit a description of the offender, and carry a knife. He would have had convictions for assaults on women and associated with prostitutes. Thompson fits the description given by George Hutchinson, the last person to see Mary Kelly. Both Francis Thompson and Hutchinson’s man carried a parcel with a strap around it; were near the same height, were pale, had very dark hair, had a moustache, wore a dark coat and sported chains. Thompson lived in Whitechapel.

As to assaults on women, how many after committing one, write books about it? Thompson sure wrote a short “story”. Funnily, for a prodigious writer, the only one he ever wrote. I know people would immediately think, its just a story so what, but Thompson a devout Catholic, would have told you it was his confession. He would have known the full meaning of that word.

Thompson publisher, who first released Thompson’s works in a Catholic literary journal. In a private letter, written to his publisher, just after completing his story, Thompson told him how his writing was never fiction. In mid-November of 1888, he was placed in a country monastery. From there, in January 1890, he confided,

‘I am painfully conscious that they display me, in every respect, at my morally weakest...often verse written as I write it is nothing less than a confessional, a confessional far more intimate than the sacerdotal one. That touches only your sins.’

Thompson short ‘story’ (if we are gullible enough to call it that) was about a man who sacrifices a woman, by stabbing her to death with a knife.

His ‘story’ was written in the autumn of 1889. He wrote it in his small room, situated on the top floor of the walled in, attack dog patrolled, isolated monastery. Called “The End Crowining Work” and written by, an ex-Catholic seminary, Thompson story goes something like this,

‘If confession indeed give ease, I who am deprived of all other confession, may yet find some appeasement in confessing to this paper. With the scourge of inexorable recollection, I will tear open my scars. With the cuts of pitiless analysis, I make the post-mortem examine of my crime.’

My suspect then wrote how he killed her,

‘At that moment, with a deadly voice the accomplice-hour gave forth its sinister command. I swear I struck not the first blow. Some violence seized my hand and drove the poniard down. Whereat she cried; and I, frenzied, dreading detection, dreading above all her awakening, - I struck again and again.’

He told of his lack of remorse a year later.

• ‘I know you and myself. I have what I have. I work for the present. Now, relief unspeakable! that vindictive sleuth-hound of my sin has at last lagged from the trail; I have had a year of respite,’.. What crime can be interred so cunningly, but it will toss in its grave, and tumble the sleeked earth above it?... Nothing happened; absolutely nothing.... I do not repent, it is a thing for inconsequent weaklings...’

I find it hard that any professional investigator would not bother questioning this man, just because we only knew he wrote about harming women. Given everything I’ve said comes from reliable and respected sources, what good officer would do any less then investigate Thompson? Considering that sensible, reasonable people have investigated everyone from prince to pauper, I am bewildered that we are, after a century, still quibbling over Thompson’s merit, due to his choice of knife.