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:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by Fisherman 1 hour and 18 minutes ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by Fisherman 1 hour and 20 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Kansas Physician Confirms Howard Report - by TradeName 4 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Kansas Physician Confirms Howard Report - by TradeName 4 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Kansas Physician Confirms Howard Report - by TradeName 5 hours ago.
Rippercast: Donald Rumbelow at the Cloak & Dagger Club 1999- The Siege of Sidney Street - by jmenges 6 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - (43 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Kansas Physician Confirms Howard Report - (3 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Lawrence - (2 posts)
Rippercast: Donald Rumbelow at the Cloak & Dagger Club 1999- The Siege of Sidney Street - (1 posts)
Letters and Communications: I'm not a butcher, I'm not a Yid...... - (1 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 > Ripper Discussions > Suspects > General Suspect Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #781  
Old 06-07-2018, 01:13 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,287
Default

There are also things like this one, from the Daily News:

"Police constable Mizen said that about a quarter to four o'clock on Friday morning he was at the corner of Hanbury street and Baker's row, when a carman passing by in company with another man said..."

Why did Baxter ask about Paul? He already would have been told of him, right?

Bacause, of course, the passage "a carman passing in company with another man" is ALSO derived from the question Baxter asked Mizen.

The wording of this article is based on that - and it has been frequently used to assure us all that the two were in close company!

All we know is that Mizen answered the question "There was another man with Cross?", when asked that by the coroner.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #782  
Old 06-07-2018, 01:14 AM
Robert Robert is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,895
Default

I know, Fish, but it says something about the Morning Advertiser's thoroughness, no?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #783  
Old 06-07-2018, 01:23 AM
Robert Robert is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,895
Default

He was 'passing in company with,' Fish. The two men were together. And what the carman said, was said at the same time as he was 'passing.' Therefore Paul was present when Crossmere spoke.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #784  
Old 06-07-2018, 01:23 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,287
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
I'm not referring to the Star specifically. More than one source includes the important clause that Paul accompanied Cross when, or as, the latter spoke with Mizen.
Looked this up. Yes, more than one source has the information. Two do, as far as I can see, both evening newspapers:

Echo: By the Coroner - There was another man in company of Cross when the latter spoke to witness. The other man, who went down Hanbury-street, appeared to be working with Cross.

Star: Cross, when he spoke to witness about the affair, was accompanied by another man. Both went down Hanbury-street.

In the Echo version, we can see that Mizen WAS of the meaning that the two appeared to be co-workers.

We can also see that the Echo has Paul going down Hanbury Street, while the Star have them both going down the street - but not necessarily together!

So this is it, and we may very well have the same original source for the reports, since they both follow the same schedule.

It is not exactly an overwhelming collection of sources, is it, Gareth?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #785  
Old 06-07-2018, 01:26 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,287
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert View Post
He was 'passing in company with,' Fish. The two men were together. And what the carman said, was said at the same time as he was 'passing.' Therefore Paul was present when Crossmere spoke.
You are missing the point. The papers were only able to write "passing in company with" since Baxter asked Mizen "There was another man in company with Cross?" Before that, Paul was not mentioned at all.

Mizen did no offer that information. And therefore, it becomes information derived from a question asked by a person who was not there and answered in a very generalistic manner by Mizen with a yes.

Once again, what would you have Mizen do? Say that there was no man in company with Cross?

It must be an eerie feeling, to have your whole linguistic case slipping through your fingers like this.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #786  
Old 06-07-2018, 01:27 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 11,173
Default

My question about how you were getting on with your "large flaps" was in response to your having a misguided pop at me for apparently setting a five yard limit on "accompanied". If you can decide that "large" means "really large", then I'm perfectly at liberty to suggest that "accompanied when Mizen spoke to Cross" likely meant that Paul was less than five yards away.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #787  
Old 06-07-2018, 01:29 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,287
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert View Post
I know, Fish, but it says something about the Morning Advertiser's thoroughness, no?
Yes, they were thankfully thorough enough to disclose that Baxter was the person going on about "in company with".

But it is enough if ONE paper is thorough. After that, we can easily see how the others were not equally thorough on this all important matter.

So thank you, Morning Advertiser, for clearing this up!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #788  
Old 06-07-2018, 01:30 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,287
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
My question about how you were getting on with your "large flaps" was in response to your having a misguided pop at me for apparently setting a five yard limit on "accompanied". If you can decide that "large" means "really large", then I'm perfectly at liberty to suggest that "accompanied when Mizen spoke to Cross" likely meant that Paul was less than five yards away.
Representing the lower abdomen or the abomen means being really large when we are dealing with two flaps only.

But the point I was making is that you are picking and chosing when to rely on journalistw and when not to

And yes, you are at liberty to suggest anything, no matter how bonkers it is. And I am at liberty to reveal the truth behind it.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #789  
Old 06-07-2018, 01:33 AM
Robert Robert is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,895
Default

I would not expect Mizen to say that there was no man in company with Crossmere, since there obviously was.

Now to Hanbury St : of course the two men didn't go down it together. How could they? You see, what actually happened was that Crossmere stood there chatting with Mizen, talking about the weather, and football, and the previous year's Jubilee, and by the time he remembered that he was in a great hurry to get to work on time, Paul had long gone.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #790  
Old 06-07-2018, 01:33 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,287
Default

It´s always like this when a large building is torn down: lots of dust and noise.

Once the dust settles, silence takes over and the air clears.
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 12:37 AM.


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