Who was the best witness to have seen Jack the Ripper?

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Tom,thanks for agreeing with me I have been saying this for years and people have rubbished me about it.It is quite possible that our killer was seen or even possible disturbed by some one who didn't come forward.I might stick my neck out a bit more could the "private information " have come from somebody who saw druitt in the east end and obviously could not come forward in a conventional way.I'm not saying that they saw druitt attacking anyone but maybe they could have sited him in the east end in an unsavoury area or venue

Hi Pink. You're in good company with your opinion as Inspector Reid and his H Division men felt there were people around George Street who knew more than they were telling about the Tabram murder:

‘ It is said that the police are of opinion that more than one person belonging to the miserable class of "Pearly Poll," could give very important information, but so great is the terror inspired by the scoundrels of the locality, it would most probably cost them their lives were they to "split."’

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[pinkmoon]

Hi Pink. You're in good company with your opinion as Inspector Reid and his H Division men felt there were people around George Street who knew more than they were telling about the Tabram murder:

‘ It is said that the police are of opinion that more than one person belonging to the miserable class of "Pearly Poll," could give very important information, but so great is the terror inspired by the scoundrels of the locality, it would most probably cost them their lives were they to "split."’

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hi Tom,over the years our killer has almost taken on superhuman powers to explain why he wasn't seen.The most logical explanation was that he was seen but it was never reported not to far fetched when you consider the area.

[Tom_Wescott]

I agree that the Ripper did not possess superhuman powers, but I also believe he was quite careful and prepared. A person might get away with one murder based on luck, but not multiple. I think it's possible he had an accomplice. So did the police of 1888. This would increase his chances of success dramatically. However, there's not a shred of irrefutable evidence in any of the murders of an accomplice, not even Emma Smiths'. However, there are multiple suggestions of that possibility. The idea of two or more people being involved together is poo-pooed these days because of the opinions of professional profilers (none of whom have actually caught any serial killers, by the way) who gathered their evidence solely from those perps who HAD been caught. But this overlooks the fact that in the Victorian age, criminal conspiracies (i.e. crooks working together towards a common end) were the rule rather than the exception. So that remains an overlooked possibility.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Fisherman]

I agree that the Ripper did not possess superhuman powers, but I also believe he was quite careful and prepared. A person might get away with one murder based on luck, but not multiple. I think it's possible he had an accomplice. So did the police of 1888. This would increase his chances of success dramatically. However, there's not a shred of irrefutable evidence in any of the murders of an accomplice, not even Emma Smiths'. However, there are multiple suggestions of that possibility. The idea of two or more people being involved together is poo-pooed these days because of the opinions of professional profilers (none of whom have actually caught any serial killers, by the way) who gathered their evidence solely from those perps who HAD been caught. But this overlooks the fact that in the Victorian age, criminal conspiracies (i.e. crooks working together towards a common end) were the rule rather than the exception. So that remains an overlooked possibility.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Is that two people ripping away or one keeping watch?

The best,
Fisherman

[Bridewell]

I really want to believe in the Smith sighting. I do. It would be extremely convenient for those of us who believe that Stride was a Ripper victim. But it's a tad early and it makes no sense why the killer would be carrying a parcel.

Even though the man seen by Hutchinson was also described as carrying one?

[Bridewell]

If Stride was a Ripper murder - Israel Schwartz.

[pinkmoon]

I agree that the Ripper did not possess superhuman powers, but I also believe he was quite careful and prepared. A person might get away with one murder based on luck, but not multiple. I think it's possible he had an accomplice. So did the police of 1888. This would increase his chances of success dramatically. However, there's not a shred of irrefutable evidence in any of the murders of an accomplice, not even Emma Smiths'. However, there are multiple suggestions of that possibility. The idea of two or more people being involved together is poo-pooed these days because of the opinions of professional profilers (none of whom have actually caught any serial killers, by the way) who gathered their evidence solely from those perps who HAD been caught. But this overlooks the fact that in the Victorian age, criminal conspiracies (i.e. crooks working together towards a common end) were the rule rather than the exception. So that remains an overlooked possibility.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Would explain a lot also was not a reward offerd after Kelly's murder granting immunity from prosecution for any accomplice that will keep our conspiracy theorist happy.

[pinkmoon]

Even though the man seen by Hutchinson was also described as carrying one?

I think our killer would keep his knife in his pocket out of sight but ready for immediate use rather than carry it in a parcel.

[Damaso Marte]

Even though the man seen by Hutchinson was also described as carrying one?

The Hutchinson sighting is of course extremely suspect for reasons independent of the parcel.

[Damaso Marte]

Hi Tom,over the years our killer has almost taken on superhuman powers to explain why he wasn't seen.The most logical explanation was that he was seen but it was never reported not to far fetched when you consider the area.

There's a difference between seeing something you know is wrong (interrupting the killer, coming across Chapman's body before it was officially discovered, etc.) and not reporting it, and seeing something without realizing you saw something.

Dozens of people saw the Ripper on his way home from each murder. I'm willing to bet that most of them had no idea there was a uterus under that coat.

[pinkmoon]

There's a difference between seeing something you know is wrong (interrupting the killer, coming across Chapman's body before it was officially discovered, etc.) and not reporting it, and seeing something without realizing you saw something.

Dozens of people saw the Ripper on his way home from each murder. I'm willing to bet that most of them had no idea there was a uterus under that coat.

A law abiding person might however how many of those were about at the time of the murders .

[Wickerman]

How do you define ' Best ' Wickerman?.
Is it a question of reliability ?.

I assume you mean 'best' as intended in the title of the thread?
Reliability is certainly a factor, though even two contesting statements can be classed as both coming from reliable sources.
A witness who gives detail that can be, or has been, verified by external sources is naturally superior to one who's detail cannot, or was not able to, be verified.

For instance, PC Smith should be classed as a reliable source, sadly the victim could quite easily have met up with another man in the intervening 25 minutes after Smith saw Stride with 'Parcel man'.
We have no reason to suggest that either Lawende, Schwartz or Mrs Long were unreliable, but equally there is no firm indication that Lawende or Long saw the correct couple. Schwartz appears to have seen Stride but not necessarily with her killer.

Hutchinson is certainly deemed reliable and part of his claim is consistent with what we know from another witness. He just may have embellished the look of the man because he has seen this same man elsewhere in other attire, and was just being over helpful.
Sadly Sarah Lewis did not know Kelly well enough to recognise her walking up the passage, but we have no cause to suggest she was not a reliable witness.

So the most reliable witnesses in the list offered, in my opinion, were PC Smith, Sarah Lewis, and Geo. Hutchinson. Lawende, Schwartz & Mrs Long were no less reliable but may not have seen who they thought they saw.

[pinkmoon]

I assume you mean 'best' as intended in the title of the thread?
Reliability is certainly a factor, though even two contesting statements can be classed as both coming from reliable sources.
A witness who gives detail that can be, or has been, verified by external sources is naturally superior to one who's detail cannot, or was not able to, be verified.

For instance, PC Smith should be classed as a reliable source, sadly the victim could quite easily have met up with another man in the intervening 25 minutes after Smith saw Stride with 'Parcel man'.
We have no reason to suggest that either Lawende, Schwartz or Mrs Long were unreliable, but equally there is no firm indication that Lawende or Long saw the correct couple. Schwartz appears to have seen Stride but not necessarily with her killer.

Hutchinson is certainly deemed reliable and part of his claim is consistent with what we know from another witness. He just may have embellished the look of the man because he has seen this same man elsewhere in other attire, and was just being over helpful.
Sadly Sarah Lewis did not know Kelly well enough to recognise her walking up the passage, but we have no cause to suggest she was not a reliable witness.

So the most reliable witnesses in the list offered, in my opinion, were PC Smith, Sarah Lewis, and Geo. Hutchinson. Lawende, Schwartz & Mrs Long were no less reliable but may not have seen who they thought they saw.

Eye witnesses can be very unreliable and in some cases purely fraudulent attention seekers.I personally don't take any of the so called reported sightings of our killer seriously when you consider the light and distances and time spent observing our killer.

[Ben]

Oops, I forgot to mention Long.

Given the time of the sighting in relation to the probable time of death, it is likely that the man she saw with Chapman was the killer.

In fact, of the witnesses named in the poll, the only two who I would say with some confidence did not see the killer are Smith and Hutchinson. Smith because Schwartz's evidence of a different individual arriving on the scene ten minutes later and assaulting a solo Stride indicates that the man with the parcel had gone elsewhere. And Hutchinson because his three-day-late evidence was apparently ditched shortly after it emerged, and is extremely suspect for various reasons, as others have pointed out.

All the best,
Ben

[Tom_Wescott]

Regarding Hutch and Smith, I do not recall Hutch saying his man carried a paper parcel. If I'm mistaken, please provide the source for this.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott