Jack the Ripper: The Secret Police Files Read Online Free PDF Page A

descriptions.
    For far too long now researchers have placed too much importance to the descriptions of persons allegedly seen with Stride and also with Catherine Eddowes the next victim. To put these descriptions in the right perspective and to judge if they can be totally relied upon as being accurate we have to look at the current law regarding witness identification. The stated case I will refer to is R v. Turnbull 1976, from this case certain identification guidelines were then adopted. A pneumonic used to remember the various points is ADVOKATE:

    A mount of time under observation: How long did the witness have the person/incident in view?
    D istance: What was the distance between the witness and the person/incident?
    V isibility: What was the visibility at the time? Factors include time of day/night, street lighting, etc.
    O bstruction: Were there any obstructions to the view of the witness?
    K nown or seen before: Did the witness know, or had the witness ever seen, the person before? If so where and when?
    A ny reason to remember: Did the witness have any special reason for remembering the person/incident? Was there something specific that made the person/incident memorable?
    T ime lapse: How long has elapsed since the witness saw the person/incident?
    E rror or material discrepancy: Are there any errors or material discrepancies between descriptions in the first and subsequent accounts of the witness?
    I know these guidelines were adopted for use in connection with the identification of modern-day offenders and suspects however, they can still safely be applied to the various witnesses and the description they give from 1888. Taking all that into account I would reiterate that in any event the various witness descriptions are unsafe and should not be relied upon.
    No one was ever arrested in connection with her murder, although I would suggest her long-term boyfriend Michael Kidney must be a prime suspect, as it was documented that they had a torrid and often violent relationship. During the inquest there was conflicting evidence given by witnesses and by Michael Kidney himself, relating to when he stated he had last seen her alive. Despite this he was never arrested and interviewed by the police and her murder remained unsolved, but even today her murder is still regarded by some as having been committed by Jack the Ripper, despite overwhelming evidence to suggest otherwise.
    CATHERINE EDDOWES
    The second victim of the bloody night of September 30th, was Catherine Eddowes, known as Kate, a prostitute aged forty-six. At 1.44 am she was found brutally murdered by a police officer in the darkest corner of Mitre Square, an area of London policed by the City of London Police adjoining Whitechapel. Her face and her abdominal area had been subjected to extensive brutal mutilations. There was no doubt she had been the victim of the most frenzied attack to date.
    She was last seen alive at 1.00am when she was released from Bishopsgate Police Station having been arrested for being drunk earlier in the day. She was apparently seen by the police officer who released her, to turn left out of the doorway, which took her in the opposite direction of what would have been the fastest way back to Flower and Dean Street in Whitechapel, her home ground. However, this is contentious as the officer in the police station told her to close the door on her way out. Yet he was apparently able to see which direction she turned on leaving the station.
    According to that officer she was heading back toward Aldgate High Street where she had earlier been found drunk. On going down Houndsditch she would have passed the entrance to Duke Street, at the end of which was Church Passage, which led into Mitre Square. It is estimated that it would have taken less than ten minutes to reach Mitre Square from Bishopsgate Police Station. This leaves a thirty minute gap from the time she leaves the police station to the time witnesses’ state a female vaguely