Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by Spitfire 29 minutes ago.
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by Spitfire 57 minutes ago.
General Discussion: Do you think it will be solved? - by Mayerling 2 hours ago.
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by Sherlock Houses 3 hours ago.
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by OneRound 5 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Sam Flynn 6 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (27 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (7 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: JtR was Law Enforcement Hypothesis - (6 posts)
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - (4 posts)
Non-Fiction: The Whitechapel Murders of 1888: Another Dead End? - (3 posts)
General Discussion: Do you think it will be solved? - (3 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Social Chat > Other Mysteries > A6 Murders

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #3401  
Old 10-01-2016, 08:24 AM
Derrick Derrick is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 589
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickB View Post
...I canít believe Swanwick simply announced this information. It must have been given in evidence - from the guest book or the witnesses or both...
Sorry to appear sarcastic Nick but where did you get this information from?

We need to get to prima facie records don't you think?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3402  
Old 10-01-2016, 11:03 AM
NickB NickB is online now
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 915
Default

Yes but for that we need the trial transcripts.

All we have are abbreviated newspaper reports (I presume your latest excerpt was from the Guardian) which show a conflict about Jim and Joe being in Room 4. Foot and Woffinden could have enlightened us on this point, but chose not to.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3403  
Old 10-01-2016, 02:48 PM
Spitfire Spitfire is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 628
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickB View Post
Yes but for that we need the trial transcripts.

All we have are abbreviated newspaper reports (I presume your latest excerpt was from the Guardian) which show a conflict about Jim and Joe being in Room 4. Foot and Woffinden could have enlightened us on this point, but chose not to.
The Court of Appeal would have had the trial transcripts. The defence team in 2002 would have had the transcript. It is clear that Woffinden and Foot each had access to the trial transcript when writing their respective books.

All of the foregoing accept that it was proved at the trial that Joe Sayle stayed in Room 4 for the nights of 21,22 and 23 August 1961.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3404  
Old 10-01-2016, 04:29 PM
OneRound OneRound is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 504
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spitfire View Post
The Court of Appeal would have had the trial transcripts. The defence team in 2002 would have had the transcript. It is clear that Woffinden and Foot each had access to the trial transcript when writing their respective books.

All of the foregoing accept that it was proved at the trial that Joe Sayle stayed in Room 4 for the nights of 21,22 and 23 August 1961.
The Court of Appeal were certainly clear and satisfied.

From para 72 of their 2002 judgement:
''The prosecution also relied on evidence to the effect that there were eight adults and at least five children staying at the guesthouse during the week of 19 - 26 August 1961 suggesting that there was no room for James Hanratty in addition.''
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3405  
Old 10-02-2016, 12:46 AM
NickB NickB is online now
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 915
Default

The Room 4 clash was reported in the newspapers as a key event but in Woffinden’s long account of Jones testimony it is omitted. Although he mentions Sayle being in Room 4, he does not reveal that Jones claimed Hanratty stayed in Room 4 at the trial and on Panorama years later.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3406  
Old 10-02-2016, 12:41 PM
moste moste is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Vancouver Island British Columbia.
Posts: 486
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRound View Post
Hi Moste - given Mrs Dinwoodie said the sweetshop incident occurred on Monday 21st August, that rock doesn't seem too solid to me. I do though take your point about the prosecution witnesses (a major reason why I have always maintained that Hanratty should not have been convicted even though I have very considerable doubts as to his innocence).

I'll repeat here a question I've asked before but which has never been fully answered to my anorak satisfaction.

Hanratty's supporters state that as Hanratty was demonstrably in London on Monday 21st August and as no one else could have invented such a unique story, then it has to have happened on Tuesday 22nd August.

My question is - why did the incident have to occur on one of those two dates? I appreciate that Mrs Dinwoodie was not around later that week but why did the incident have to occur that actual week? Could it not have occurred in an earlier or later week? If Mrs Dinwoodie was wrong about Monday 21st August (as Hanratty's supporters claim), does it really follow that Tuesday 22nd August is the only alternate date?

Apologies if I'm missing something obvious here (suspect I am - not helped by no longer having the Foot and Woffinden books) but would much appreciate someone, regardless of their side of the fence, clarifying this.

Best regards and many thanks,

OneRound
Well, I have always considered the occasion of 21/22 Aug , traceable ,in much the same way as Carol France visiting the dentist.
Mrs Dinwoodie related the incident of this young man coming into her shop asking directions ,with the occasion of her becoming unwell.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3407  
Old 10-02-2016, 03:04 PM
OneRound OneRound is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 504
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by moste View Post
Well, I have always considered the occasion of 21/22 Aug , traceable ,in much the same way as Carol France visiting the dentist.
Mrs Dinwoodie related the incident of this young man coming into her shop asking directions ,with the occasion of her becoming unwell.
Hokey doke, Moste. Thank you.

OneRound
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3408  
Old 10-03-2016, 03:33 AM
NickB NickB is online now
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 915
Default

Jim seemed to have a thing about Scotland Road.

On 9-Oct-61 he visited the flower shop on Scotland Road. Two days later he was arrested and told police officers he lived in Scotland Road. Two days after that he told Kleinman about the sweetshop alibi in Scotland Road. Then he said his friends flat was (variably) in or just off Scotland Road.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3409  
Old 10-03-2016, 12:01 PM
OneRound OneRound is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 504
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickB View Post
Jim seemed to have a thing about Scotland Road.

On 9-Oct-61 he visited the flower shop on Scotland Road. Two days later he was arrested and told police officers he lived in Scotland Road. Two days after that he told Kleinman about the sweetshop alibi in Scotland Road. Then he said his friends flat was (variably) in or just off Scotland Road.
Staying with or around Scotland Road, Hanratty stated he got off the bus late afternoon on 22nd August near the much discussed sweetshop following an unproductive conversation with the conductor as to the road he was seeking.

If the conductor could have been traced to verify this conversation, Hanratty would almost certainly have been in the clear. I would have thought all parties at the time and subsequently would have wanted to follow this up. Did the police, defence, Foot, Woffinden etc do so and, if so, did they get anywhere at all?

Many thanks,

OneRound
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3410  
Old 10-03-2016, 01:53 PM
Graham Graham is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Midlands
Posts: 3,360
Default

Quote:
If the conductor could have been traced to verify this conversation, Hanratty would almost certainly have been in the clear. I would have thought all parties at the time and subsequently would have wanted to follow this up. Did the police, defence, Foot, Woffinden etc do so and, if so, did they get anywhere at all?
Hi OR,

When discussing JH's fictitious journey from Paddington to Euston stations on the morning of 22 August, Woffinden confidently states that he took a cab - indeed, what other mode of transport would JH consider, says Bob? Yet he makes no mention of JH's claimed use of a bus when he got off the train at Lime Street Station in Liverpool, when a cab was his 'usual' mode of transport in cities. All he had to do was ask a cab driver to take him to Tarleton Street (or wherever), and job done. Mind, it would have been difficult seeing as he was nowhere near Liverpool at the time......

Graham
__________________
We are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver Blaze
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.