Who do you credit as the most reliable witnesses?

[Bridewell]

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.

[Bridewell]

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.

[Elamarna]

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

[Pierre]

No, I am serious,

Regards, Pierre

[Rosella]

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.

[Ausgirl]

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.

[Robert St Devil]

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.

[SirJohnFalstaff]

In that case none.

I'm far from persuaded that any of them saw Jack.

agreed

[John G]

Well I can tell you who I don't find credible at all, which is Schwartz and Hutchinson.

There are standard reasons for doubt that can be applied to all witnesses in the Whitechapel murders: these reasons include the fact that witnesses in general are notoriously inaccurate, the fact that we can't be 100% sure who is fabricating and who isn't, and the fact that we can't be 100% sure that what anyone saw was actually relevant to the murder. 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.

I find Lawende credible because of the circumstances: we know that Eddowes died shortly after his sighting (we have her time of death down to a smaller window of time than Chapman, Kelly, or even Stride). He really is the best witness in my book, even though he says he didn't get a good look.

I would agree with this. I also consider Morris Lewis and Matthew Packer unreliable and, to say lesser extent, Caroline Maxwell.

[Damaso Marte]

Well I can tell you who I don't find credible at all, which is Schwartz and Hutchinson.

There are standard reasons for doubt that can be applied to all witnesses in the Whitechapel murders: these reasons include the fact that witnesses in general are notoriously inaccurate, the fact that we can't be 100% sure who is fabricating and who isn't, and the fact that we can't be 100% sure that what anyone saw was actually relevant to the murder. 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.

I find Lawende credible because of the circumstances: we know that Eddowes died shortly after his sighting (we have her time of death down to a smaller window of time than Chapman, Kelly, or even Stride). He really is the best witness in my book, even though he says he didn't get a good look.

[Rosella]

I think PC Smith, whose suspect has often been ignored IMO. Witness identification is so very unreliable but I think a policeman's description is better than most. I do think Jack was probably shortish, sturdy, strong, and able to blend in with the general population.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Rippernoob,

Good “back to basics” thread.

I found the summary below on another site and have grouped it using Abby’s post.

While we all know witnesses are often wrong, the consistent theme from witnesses appears to be about 5’7’ tall; English, educated, 30 y.o (so bn 1858), moustache

PEAK CAP

William Marshall (Elizabeth Stride) 11:45 P.M.
Small, black coat, dark trousers, middle aged, round cap with a small sailor-like peak. 5’6″, stout, appearance of a clerk. No moustache, no gloves, with a cutaway coat.
“You would say anything but your prayers.” Spoken mildly, with an English accent, and in an educated manner.

P.C. William Smith (Elizabeth Stride) 12:30 A.M.
Aged 28, cleanshaven and respectable appearance, 5’7″, hard dark felt deerstalker hat, dark clothes. Carrying a newspaper parcel 18 x 7 inches.

Israel Schwartz (Elizabeth Stride) 12:45 A.M.
First man: Aged 30, 5’5″, brown haired, fair complexion, small brown moustache, full face, broad shoulders, dark jacket and trousers, black cap with peak. “Lipski!”

Joseph Lawende (Catharine Eddowes) 1:30 A.M.
Aged 30, 5’7″, fair complexion, brown moustache, salt-and-pepper coat, red neckerchief, grey peaked cloth cap. Sailor-like.

OTHER



Patrick Mulshaw (Polly Nichols) 4:00 A.M.
“Watchman, old man, I believe somebody is murdered down the street.”
Emily (Annie Chapman) 2:00 A.M.
Foreigner aged 37, dark beard and moustache. Wearing short dark jacket, dark vest and trousers, black scarf and black felt hat. Asked witness to enter the back-yard of 29 Hanbury Street.

Elizabeth Long (Annie Chapman) 5:30 A.M.
Dark complexion, brown deerstalker hat, possibly a dark overcoat. Aged over 40, somewhat taller than Chapman. A foreigner of “shabby genteel.” “Will you?”

J. Best and John Gardner (Elizabeth Stride) 11:00 P.M.
5’5″ tall, English, black moustache, sandy eyelashes, weak, wearing a morning suit and a billycock hat.

Matthew Packer (Elizabeth Stride) 12:00 – 12:30 P.M.
Aged 25-30, 5’7″, long black coat buttoned up, soft felt hawker hat, broad shoulders. Maybe a young clerk, frock coat, no gloves. Quiet in speaking, with a rough voice.

James Brown (Elizabeth Stride) 12:45 A.M.
5’7″, stout, long black diagonal coat which reached almost to his heels.

James Blenkinsop (Catharine Eddowes) 1:30 A.M.
Well-dressed. “Have you seen a man and a woman go through here?”

Mary Ann Cox (Mary Kelly) 11:45 P.M.
Short, stout man, shabbily dressed. Billycock hat, blotchy face, carroty moustache, holding quart can of beer

George Hutchinson (Mary Kelly) 2:00 A.M.
Aged 34-35, 5’6″, pale complexion, dark hair, slight moustached curled at each end, long dark coat, collar cuffs of astrakhan, dark jacket underneath. Light waistcoat, thick gold chain with a red stone seal, dark trousers and button boots, gaiters, white buttons. White shirt, black tie fastened with a horseshoe pin. Dark hat, turned down in middle. Red kerchief. Jewish and respectable in appear

Hi Craig
Thanks!!

While we all know witnesses are often wrong, the consistent theme from witnesses appears to be about 5’7’ tall; English, educated, 30 y.o (so bn 1858), moustache

I agree with this and would add below avg height, stout (powerfully built) and not dressed extremely wealthy or poor-somewhere inbetween.


Just minor points in regards to smith and marshall:

Marshall didn't get a clear view of the mans face-not the man had no mustache and PC smith (I beleive) just didn't describe the mans face/facial hair in his statement.

[Kattrup]

Hutchinson

[lynn cates]

Long

Hello RN. Try Mrs. Long.

Cheers.
LC

[John Wheat]

Lechmere.