|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 371
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 2:51 am: | 
|
There must be someone still alive who saw the files prior to 1940 and could tell what was in there or a deceased person who took down some of the information in personal writings or who conveyed it to a second party.
So far as I am aware, there was not a lot of interest in the Ripper crimes before the war (Matters book in 1929 was the only major publication) and if the Ripper files - on the ONE case which occured in the City area - had been archived, then it might have been quite difficult for anyone to gain casual access.
Registries in those days (I remember my early years in the Civil Service) were often supervised by daunting clerks who would want to know who wanted a file and why. I doubt there would have been free and easy access.
I may well be wrong, of course.
Phil |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1609
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 3:23 am: |
|
Poorhoney,
Firstly the square was inhabited. PC Peace lived there. Also NWM Morris spent most of the evening at the Kearley and Tonge Warehouse. Infact he states that he smokes his pipe between 1 till 2 am every night bar one. I'll let you guess which night he didnt have a puff and chat to PC on beat.
The beat times vary. The speed in which a PC has to conduct his beat is 2 and a half miles per hour.
Taken from
www.victorianlondon.org/menu-police.htm
Click on Metropolitan Police and then beats.
" The beats are all numbered and entered in a register, which can be referred to at any time. This register shows the streets, roads, squares, &c., in each beat, and the time required to pass over it at the rate of two and-a-half miles an hour."
Hope it helps,
Monty
PS Guys, anyone who want to view Watkins beat, which was around 12 - 14 mins (Sorry to be a picky b'stard Paul) check this out...
http://casebook.org/police_officials/po-edward_watkins.html
(Message edited by monty on April 27, 2005)
Doc-tor? The Doc-tor??? - Dalek
|
Stanley D. Reid
Detective Sergeant
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 66
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 8:28 am: |
|
Hi Phil
Regarding the interest factor prewar, there were all those films loosely based on the case as well as others who mentioned JTR. Also, do you have any idea when all that stuff was purloined from the files at the Met?
Regards,
Stan |
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 376
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 9:05 am: |
|
I know there were a couple of versions of The Lodger filmed, but I am not aware of great interest pre-1939.
Pilfering from the Met files seems to have gone on right up to date, even in the PRO/National Archives as I understand it.
Some of the stuff returned in 1988 and more recently could have been taken years earlier.
Maybe others know more?
Phil |
Stanley D. Reid
Detective Sergeant
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 67
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 9:54 am: |
|
Hi Phil
Thanks for the expeditious reply.
In addition to the two prewar "Lodger" films and movies that mention JTR like "Farmer Spudd and His Missus Take a Trip to Town", other releases in that era with a Ripper theme were "The Threepenny Opera" (1931) as well as the G. W. Pabst German Expressionist work "Die Buchse der Pandora" (1928). There are also at least three other older films that may be about JTR but for which there is not enough, as far as can be discerned, information extant to know for sure. They are "Berlin Jack the Ripper" (1909), Spring Heeled Jack" (1909) and the Mexican two-reeler "El Destripador" (1914). Those are all the ones I know of at least.
Stan |
Poorhoney
Sergeant
Username: Poorhoney
Post Number: 28
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 11:31 am: |
|
Hi Monty,
Thanks for the links. Faux pas on my part regarding uninhabited. What I should have said was that there was no one about on the street level. (If there was someone there, they kept quite a secret!)
Poorhoney
Punxsutawney Phil is a groundhog!
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2006
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 1:08 pm: |
|
PH
I tried to repost Robert's post here but failed, perhaps someone else understands how to do that?
Anyways it is on the 'Cutbush in the 1881 Census' thread, Feb 6th 2005. |
Joan Taylor
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 4:39 am: |
|
Sorry about last night Chris and company- I overdid the sherry!
Mega surprise, Phil. ( re your last post.)
 ( Were you overdoing the sherry as well?)
There was a vast, multinational amount of interest in the ripper crimes before the first world war. Observe the wide variety of newspaper followups, some of them very detailed, demonstrating pepetuated interest. Journalists followed suspects such as Tumblety in America, Ireland and France.
Government fouls were suspected and investigation made for trail-blaze journalism. Mr Ryder and Chris have accuratley submitted a number of focused articles on this site.
|
John Carey
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 8:20 am: |
|
Monty
Thanks for your interesting post about PC Watkins
I have found some more details about him: Edward Watkins was born in London in 1843. His father John Watkins was a butler, born Windsor which curiously was where Annie.Chapman lived for a time before she went to the East End.
Edward Watkins, City police constable, and his elderly father were living at 6 Eldon Street, London at the time of the 1881 census. Eldon Street is just at the back of Liverpool Street station and Finsbury Circus. His wife is not listed in the census page, although Edward had three daughters: Emily 14, a confectioner's assistant,, Sophy 11, both born in the City of London, and Annie 9 born Bishopsgate (not, I trust, actually in Bishopsgate police station itself). (RG11 0384 folio 64 page 5). They were assisted by a Housekeeper,Jessie Augusta Fowler,31 born Hull.
After he retired in 1896, Edward Watkins went to live in Romford, The 1901 census shows Edward Watkins, retired police constable, at Pottery Cottages, 3 Beacontree Heath Road, Rush Green Romford. His daughters had married and left home but Jessie Fowler the housekeeper was still there. (RG 13 piece 1646 folio 48 page 24). He appears to have lived beyond 1910.
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2399
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 5:55 pm: |
|
Gosh Nats you've got a fan!
He he !
Mitre Square unlike it's bleak but still compelling facade today is still a seriously evocative place to be! The thought that it was relatively populated on 30th Sept is a difficult concept but the watchman /pc cuppa isn't!
A thought occurs here as to the fire engine (great image!) according to the A-Z the ref to this wonderful occurence was Tom Cullen,'When London walked in Terror'
Have just checked that and what it says is......
"What is known is that eight o clock that evening she was arrested by two City policemen for being drunk and disorderley.She had been standing in the middle of the road imitating a fire engine."
Again a great image but maybe Kate had just been lurching about in and out of the road and one(fire engine ,horses bells ding a ling etc) had just thundered past leaving Kate spinning about and doing her impression of what she'd just seen.. .Would make a lot of sense!.. More than just lying there outside No 29 and doing one impromptu!.Can see her now in the road spinning about arms out going ding a ling a ling!
Suzi |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1824
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 5:56 pm: |
|
Thankyou David for your complimentary words!
I must admit Kate does lighten the whole sorry saga up for me.Just the idea of her giving poor old John the slip and making off with the remainder of his shoe money to blow the lot
on drink makes me smile----a bit like Toad in the Wind in the Willows!
I doubt it was chance! I do think she was set up---- but how and by whom ?I am unconvinced that all that happened to her that day was pure coincidence but the pieces of the jigsaw dont yet quite fit.
I often think of the statement by one of her friends that she was seen talking to a stranger,a well dressed man,in a pub, days before her murder.She told her friend that he had tried to discourage her from her way of life and said he would meet her again and give her more money if she altered her ways.
Well there were a few of this type about and he could have been just a teetotal trying to convert Kate.
But he could have had a sinister motive too.
And ofcourse Kate could have been taking money from him for various reasons that she wouldnt let on about to her friend.He could have been asking her about who she suspected the ripper might be-
He could even have been paying her hush money!
Natalie
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2400
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 5:58 pm: |
|
OK this wondrous scene may have been sort of opposite No 29 and so that's what the two City boys put in their records not just 'somewhere in Aldgate High St'
hmmm musing.but seems likely!
Suzi x
  |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2401
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 6:02 pm: |
|
Joan
 keep going it's what keeps most (some) of us up (or down ) to speed!!!!
Suzi xx |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1836
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 3:44 am: |
|
Hi Suzi,
Some of the claims Tom Cullen made were later found not to be 100% accurate.
What I meant in my post above was that she could have looked as though she was imitating a fire engine which probably did a lot of huffing and puffing,whistling and dingalinging but in actual fact she may have been joining in the outcry from the public and the press about the ripper still being at large.
If you think about it her antics when drunk easily conjure up an image of the police hunting
out the ripper ---rushing about with whistles, huffing and puffing ---but getting nowhere fast.She hadnt long been back from hoppicking
and the whole business probably WAS in the forefront of her mind-as it was everyones especially those living in Whitechapel.
I am still wondering about where she got that money from and where she was between 2pm and 8pm.
Maybe she had been there all along just circling St Botolph"s church with her mates in the sex industry and had just got giddy on an empty stomach!
|
Joan Taylor
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 6:50 pm: |
|
Hi Nats and Suzi,
I expect by the time this gets through you'll have all concluded , bowed, and received three rounds of applause (!) but here's my penniworth thrown in.
I really enjoy your posts Nats, they are very astute and informative. It's indeed tempting to think Kate Eddowes was seduced into meeting Jack, i.e. set up somehow. There's the poignant image of her standing alone in Mitre square in the eery silence, looking cautiously about, carefully waiting for someone.. and I believe it has often been suggested that she had fixed a meeting with a man who turned out to be Jack.
But the arguement against her being set-up is very strong. She would have had her wits about her far too much to fall for it. All the girls knew about the Ripper. There's no reason for her to have risked her life or failed to be on her guard- I believe Eddowes was a bright little thing, personally, I don't think of her as a drunkard atall. She's very unlikely to have been tricked into some set-up. She'd have to be inane.
Here's a thought: if Eddowes was cautious about being followed or stopped by the Ripper on leaving the Police Station, could this have been the simple reason she took the long way home, ( via Mitre Square), taking an alternative route, fearing being stalked by a killer who might be trying to predict her movements?
Modern Police advise people to alter their movements and not take their usual route when they are counselling people about avoiding being followed.
Perhaps Eddowes was simply being far more sensible than we've given her credit for!
The women probably behaved in such a way when they were avoiding gangs such as Nicholl's gang who used to beat them for money. I believe it looks as if she was avoiding being followed home.
Yet perhaps she was followed as soon as she left the Police station?
Just a penniworth.
|
David Cartwright
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 7:29 pm: |
|
Hi Natalie.
Well, that is interesting. I confess that I knew nothing of this mysterious stranger, as told by one of her friends. But we have to be careful of stories that appear from friends, after the event, especially when it's a crime that brings international headlines. You know, attention-seekers grabbing their moment in the spotlight, to light up their otherwise dull & uneventful lives.
Having said that, there are indeed the righteous do-gooders, who believe that they can influence what they see as fallen women, back on to the straight and narrow. Kate seems to have been a very likeable woman, the kind that would appeal to this type of person. Kelly appears to have been very fond of her, and she may have taken advantage of that. If this well-dressed stranger existed, she may well have seen the opportunity of having a sugar-daddy.
All of this of course is unproven, and would seem to rest solely on the friend's statement.
But there's no doubt that she DID get money from somewhere, after making excuses to part company with Kelly in the afternoon, and there seems to be no sensible reason for her to go in the direction that she did, after leaving the police station at 1 o'clock in the morning.
I don't see the Ripper as the type to try and reform such women, but there have been many ploys used by killers to get their intended victim's trust. So if this statement by Kate's friend WAS true, then the idea that she willingly walked into her killer's hands, is not totally impossible.
It's all very intriguing speculation on our part, but there ARE questions about her activities and movements that day, and night, that do need answers. Until we get those answers (if ever), our minds will continue to run amok about the many possibilities. But keep the ideas coming Natalie. I'm open-minded to anything.
All the best.
DAVID C. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1842
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 5:04 pm: |
|
Hi Joan,
I liked that idea of yours.Its possible she took that route in a sort of instinctive way to avoid being mugged by the ripper gang thugs,but I dont share your confidence in Kate being able to take care of herself that night.The evidence that day shows she drank away all her money- and early on most of it was John"s pawned shoe money-all they had to their name!Later she was so drunk she got herself arrested and locked up and after that, destitute and still hung over she got herself murdered by Jack the Ripper!
No I think Kate had reached rock bottom that night-there was nothing smart about anything she did-certainly from 8pm onwards.
whether she had a few tricks up her sleeve or not was of no use anyway given her condition.
I"m not saying she wasnt bright,it sounds like she was when sober but she had reached the road of no return and she probably knew it deep down and may not have given a damn whether she lived or died.And alcohol soothed away fears that night-IMHO
David,
I think you are right about hearsay and the story of a well dressed stranger.
If I think of any more ideas about Kate I"ll post them
good to talk!
Natalie |
Joan Taylor
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 5:39 pm: |
|
Nats,
Indeed, whilst street-wise, she also had happy go lucky back-street habits and neglected middle class caution as a matter of course, that's true. We can't expect anything else. Liz had a long record of getting into avoidable scrapes aswell.
Yet tawdry , down to earth and on occasion reckless, she relied almost wholly on her wits at night in Whitechapel.
'Good luck to you old c*ck' incidentally is a standard response to magistrates' incarceration orders 1888( see Fisher's book on the East End.)Her saying 'Goodnight old c*ck' on being let out of the cells would tend to suggest she regarded the incarceration as fairly mundane.
I do think that when it came to the law of the back street, the girls were probably sharper than you or I would have been. Avoiding the gangs was something they did every night, and I expect they knew routes and local habits like the backs of their hands- i.e. very well indeed.
Perhaps she felt herself being followed, took a circuitous route, got across Mitre square, collided with her follower who'd had the wit to run round the square and confront her at the other end of it outside Church lane, and then appeased him and set off in the other direction, back across Mitre square. In this way the officers didn't see her killer on their various routes.
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1858
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 5:58 pm: |
|
Joan,
thanks for that info on Kate"s memorable words!
Yes I"m sure Kate was canny and could have bought and sold me as far as street lore.But the truth is
that she ended up a victim of Jack that night.
I love the way you picture her last movements
-all possible I admit-
Natalie |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2438
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, May 07, 2005 - 1:31 pm: |
|
Nats and Joan!
The fact is that most of us think sooooooo much of Kate and in 'some ways' can almost relate to her!!
Kate (without any real knowledge here) seems to have been a bright and cheerful woman with always a "line" as in 'Goodnight old C***' she comes over as a jolly soul who had a hard but in some ways joyful life....I'm sure that she and John were a happy couple......the business with the boots is evidence here I think....there is a ghastly "happiness" and what passes for a 'love' about these two that is so touching......
Sorry I have SO much time for Kate....and at the end of the day I believe that she did know something.................what that was of course we'll never know (sadly!)
Suzi x
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2439
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, May 07, 2005 - 1:34 pm: |
|
Joan!
Hey you'd better think about registering!!
Suzi |
Stanley D. Reid
Detective Sergeant
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 88
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, May 07, 2005 - 2:10 pm: |
|
Hi all
There's also the possibility that Eddowes could have had ties with some of the private detectives hired by the newspapers and the Vigilance Committee to look into the case, such as, Messrs. Batchelor and Grand. Just bsing; brain storming, that is.
Goodies,
Stan |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2446
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, May 07, 2005 - 4:53 pm: |
|
Stan-
Much as I'd like to believe that ....I hate to say
it..... I don't think that was the case!... Poor old Kate and John walked back from Kent (with the odd pawn ticket or two) and arrived back in London with not a lot between em!
Then there was that tragic moment re pawning boots etc and splitting up for the night etc etc
The Kate story always does it for me....there's lovely 'charm' here that is lacking in some of the other poor things
Maybe thats just me
Suzi |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2447
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, May 07, 2005 - 4:56 pm: |
|
BUT.............. the fact that she allegedly said she'd come back to get the reward money etc etc MUST I guess be taken into the whole (desparately sad) story
Suzi |
Stanley D. Reid
Detective Sergeant
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 89
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, May 07, 2005 - 6:23 pm: |
|
Hi Suzi
Just holding open the chance that she may have had some contacts with those who were close to the case not that she was on any regular sort of payroll. By all I've read, she seemed to be the victim who had the most interest in the crimes beyond just fear. Of course, I'd exclude Nichols and Chapman here because they couldn't have yet known that there was a pattern to the murders.
Stan |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2450
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, May 08, 2005 - 8:37 am: |
|
Good point Stan!
There is of course every chance that she 'knew' (in some way or another!) the 'others'!.
It's the fact that when she and John came back early (allegedly through the fact there wasn't enough work, and Emily Burrell (God the shirt and pawn ticket is still SOOOOo sad) etc etc I can't get it out of my head that she knew (OR THOUGHT SHE KNEW) something.......or someone!
Talking of 'interest' in the crimes there's always of course that tantaising thing about Mary having Joe read to her about the latest!....Hmmmm odd for a supposedly educated woman!
Suzi
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2451
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, May 08, 2005 - 8:39 am: |
|
Tantalising even!!!!!!!!! eeeeeeek sorry about that!!!
Suzi |
Neil K. MacMillan
Detective Sergeant
Username: Wordsmith
Post Number: 138
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 29, 2005 - 4:34 pm: |
|
Just got on this thread. Been away tendding to other business. Hi to you all!!
If I might make a few observations;
1-the term "Old C&*k" would not have necesarilly been considered obscene I believe she was using it in the same context one might say "Old Boy"
2- I have to believe that if Kate Eddows was a police informant even casually that she would have been very rapidly identified.
3- Acting like a fire engine doesn't mean she wasn't an informer but it tends in my opinion to count against it. If she tended to get tha drunk, her information would likely have been considered unreliable.
4-I believe as well that her boast about knowing who the ripper was was just that. A boast. If she actually did know who he was, then she wopuld have went to the police. She knew as well as anyone that he was stalking prostitutes and I would surmise that he wasn't making a distinction between a girl having a casual tumble for a quid couiple of pense and someone selling herself on a regualr basis.
Mind you these are only ideas and I'm interested in hearing your theories on Ms. Eddows. Kindest regards, Neil PS Suzy, how's the weather in Portsmouth? |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page