Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who do you credit as the most reliable witnesses?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by GUT View Post
    In that case none.

    I'm far from persuaded that any of them saw Jack.
    agreed
    Is it progress when a cannibal uses a fork?
    - Stanislaw Jerzy Lee

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Damaso Marte View Post
      Well I can tell you who I don't find credible at all, which is Schwartz and Hutchinson.
      I concur with the apprehension; however, I personally find my doubts strange considering, should you believe that Mary Jane was murdered around 3am, that:

      1. Schwartz and Hutchinson may have been the last witnesses to see Eliz and Mary Jane alive; and,
      2. They are the only witnesses in any of these cases (*see above) who see the victims at their location of death.

      None see Annie enter No. 29. None know how Catherine made it to Mitre Square, and none know how Polly made it under that Baker's Row lamp.

      - - - - - - - - - -

      He might not be the best witness, but I still like J Best(o'all) simply because he may have verbally spat on Jack the Ripper.
      there,s nothing new, only the unexplored

      Comment


      • #18
        And there's the possibility that there was more than one killer... so there might be several reliable witnesses whose descriptions don't tally.

        I've always thought Hutchinson was a bit odd. Both in his behaviour, and his account.

        Comment


        • #19
          The witnesses in the JTR case are quite frustrating for us, but really, how many modern murder victims are seen with the perp only a few minutes before they are killed and near the location where their bodies were found? And how many witnesses can give an accurate description of the suspected murderer in these cases?

          People really aren't very observant of what others are doing and what they look like, unless there is something unusual that causes them to be so. Lawende and his friends for example seeing a couple on a rather rainy night standing near a deserted square in the early hours of the morning, Schwartz unwillingly witnessing an attack on a woman, a well dressed man (if you believe Hutch) going off with a woman Hutch apparently rather fancied himself.

          I think we're rather lucky to have the witness statements about possible Jacks that we do have, and they are testimony to how anxious people were that this monster be caught.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by John Wheat View Post
            No, I am serious,

            Regards, Pierre

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Pierre View Post
              No, I am serious,

              Regards, Pierre
              Obvious answer really

              Given that a large part of the argument around Lechmere is: did he or did he not tell mizen another police officer wanted him in bucks row.
              Such a statement backs Pierre and his theory, so of course he see Lechmere as a great witness.

              Steve

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
                Hello RN. Try Mrs. Long.

                Cheers.
                LC
                I think yours is the right approach. The witnesses aren't around any more, but we know that her evidence particularly impressed the coroner.
                "It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins twisting facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts." Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (as Sherlock Holmes).

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Damaso Marte View Post
                  Well I can tell you who I don't find credible at all, which is Schwartz and Hutchinson.

                  With Schwartz and Hutchinson, we have those standard reasons, and others on top of them: the implausibility of Hutch's story (applicable to Schwartz too to a lesser extent), and the fact that Schwartz is contradicted by others.
                  The only people Schwartz claims to have seen are Stride herself, BS Man & Pipe Man. He mentions nobody else as being in view. Stride is dead and either or both the other two may have been responsible for her murder. Who are the others who contradict him? You may find his evidence implausible but it is not contradicted as nobody else that I know of claims to have seen an attack on Stride in circumstances other than those he describes. No other witness claim to have seen the attack, so nobody contradicts him.
                  Last edited by Bridewell; 06-03-2016, 10:52 AM.
                  "It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins twisting facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts." Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (as Sherlock Holmes).

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X