Different Killers

[c.d.]

"The evidence points to Schwartz and the Lipski comment to scare Schwartz off (which worked). Not chancing that Schwartz hasn't gone for the police or help, he drags her a few feet (mud caked on one side of her jacket - pathology report) kills her (so he can't be identified) and gets out of there."

Kills her so that she can't identify him as the man who simply pushed her to the ground?

What about being identified by Schwartz and the Pipe Man?

c.d.

[c.d.]

"I really feel that Lynn has raised an important point about the cachous. For me, what does seemed to have happened is that she was attacked from behind whilst eating the cachous.

The problem is that this raises significant issues for the argument that this was a domestic murder, such as a crime passionnel. Thus, Stride seems to have been taken completely by surprise, totally oblivious of the danger that she was in. She even seemed confident, and relaxed enough to turn her back on her killer and to take out and eat the cachous.

But, as I've argued before, if this was just a common domestic murder, "wouldn't you have expected that some sort of heated exchange, or argument, such as with a frustrated lover, would have proceeded the assault? And, if so, why was she apparently so relaxed and unconcerned afterwards, that she turned her back on her killer and started eating the cachous?

In fact, on a note of controversy, isn't slitting the throat of a victim from behind, taking them unawares, oblivious of the dangers, typical of the MO of whoever killed Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes?

Of course, this type of assault would tend to rule out BS man, as he had clearly shown himself to be a possible threat."

Good post there, John. And of course, there is also the problem of the three small screams as reported by Schwartz. That would seem more indicative of surprise than fear. But I think you are right in that Liz seems to be relaxed which I can't imagine would be the case if the B.S. man were still present.

c.d.

[Batman]

Kills her so that she can't identify him as the man who simply pushed her to the ground?

What about being identified by Schwartz and the Pipe Man?

c.d.

A refusal by someone who he thinks is a prostitute would be a catalyst/trigger for an attack. It's a hallmark of the power hunger within this type of offender (lust killer). They need the control.

People where aware of a killer trying to follow women down dark alleys. If he offered the advance and she acted suspicious of him it is unlikely he wouldn't attack her if he thought he could get away with it... and that's what happened.

JtR takes massive risks like he is oblivious to being caught.

[Wickerman]

Transferred from another thread.


Peaked caps were common among the working class, and most men wore dark clothing. Schwartz's man was broad shouldered, full face and 5ft 5in, whereas Lawende's man was 5ft 9in with no stated build but a red neckerchief.

There are similarities yes, but also differences, though even if they are the same, this man was not seen with the other victims, Chapman or Kelly.

Talking of which, does the above sound like Blotchy? - a short, stout man, billycock hat, full carroty moustache, shabbily dressed?
Not exactly "sailor" looking.

If we are still interested in one killer, the suspect must be compatible with suspect sightings at the other murders.



Question:
If Kelly did not go out again after her liaison with Blotchy, how did she meet "Sailor boy" from Mitre Square fame?

[Batman]

Blotchy is closer to the points witnesses agree on than Astrakhan man for example.

I see no reason why JtR would avoid dressing like a sailor with red neckerchief given the description of one by Lawende. That would be a bit silly to go out at night looking like one. It would be a red flag walking about the place.

[GUT]

But did any of these witnesses actually see him????

[lynn cates]

good

Hello John. Your post #467 incorporates some of the observations I have been making--and yelling about--for the past several years.

Well done.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

quick aside

Hello BM.

"he drags her a few feet (mud caked on one side of her jacket - pathology report)"

1. If he had "dragged" her, it would have shown on the dress--possibly in tears.

2. When X drags Y, it is usually done with Y prone on back. Try dragging someone on the side and you'll see what I mean.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

right

Hello CD.

"Kills her so that she can't identify him as the man who simply pushed her to the ground?

What about being identified by Schwartz and the Pipe Man?"

ALL precisely correct.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

no hand waving

Hello (again) CD.

"But I think you are right in that Liz seems to be relaxed which I can't imagine would be the case if the B.S. man were still present."

Again, I must agree.

I think we both see that the old hand waving arguments are no longer sufficient to explain the facts.

Cheers.
LC

[Batman]

Partials

Hello BM.

"he drags her a few feet (mud caked on one side of her jacket - pathology report)"

1. If he had "dragged" her, it would have shown on the dress--possibly in tears.

2. When X drags Y, it is usually done with Y prone on back. Try dragging someone on the side and you'll see what I mean.

Cheers.
LC

The mud caking is consistent with what Schwartz saw when he described the frontal blitz.

Who says mud is always evenly dispersed on the ground? Maybe from people walking from the gate to the door they created a muddy path which only covered one side of the back of her jacket.

Partial finger prints, partial tire tracks, partial foot prints can all be caused by uneven dispersal of substances that can capture them.

[Wickerman]

Blotchy is closer to the points witnesses agree on than Astrakhan man for example.

Astrachan wasn't a killer though, so is not in the running for a comparison.

I see no reason why JtR would avoid dressing like a sailor with red neckerchief given the description of one by Lawende. That would be a bit silly to go out at night looking like one. It would be a red flag walking about the place.

What do all the hundreds of genuine sailors do, walk about in a disguise from now on?

[John G]

Hello John. Your post #467 incorporates some of the observations I have been making--and yelling about--for the past several years.

Well done.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

Thank you for your kind, supportive reply. You didn't even point out that I should, of course, have written "preceded the assault", not "proceeded the assault". I think I'll blame that on the predictive text!

For me, your argument regarding the cachous is logically sound; I cannot see a flaw in it. It has, in fact, seriously undermined, if not shattered, my long held belief that Stride was probably murdered by BS man.

I do feel that arguments as to whether Stride was a Ripper victim are finally balanced, and I suppose I'm pretty much on the fence on this issue.

What I do find strange is why those who believe Stride was a Ripper victim continue to persist with the BS man argument. I mean, it may not have escaped your notice that, ironically, your argument doesn't undermine Stride being a Ripper victim; if anything it strengthens it!

I mean, regarding a common domestic murder, it does seem somewhat incongruous that Stride would be standing, perfectly relaxed, eating the cachous, whilst all the while her killer is looming behind her, knife in hand, and with murderous intent.

Of course, such a scenario is reasonably consistent with what seems to have happened in respect of Nichols, Chapman, and Eddowes, i.e. victims who were attacked from behind, whilst blissfully unaware of the fate that was about to befall them.

And, of course, regarding BS man, if you're going to argue that he was JtR there are serious timing issues. Thus, if it is postulated that her killer was disturbed by Diemshutz at around 1:00am, and as Edward Spooner said that there was still blood gushing from her neck some minutes later, this is clearly a possibility, then how is this consistent with Stride meeting her killer, very close to where her body was found, at 12:45, as Schwartz's evidence indicates? Whoever, killed Nichols and Chapman clearly acted rapidly and decisively; such a killer is therefore hardly likely to be quietly hanging around in the dark with his victim, i.e Stride, for 15 minutes whilst he debates what to do! This is an even more preposterous scenario if you consider the presence of the noisy club.

The real problem for me, regarding Stride as a possible Ripper victim is the knife. I mean, why would her killer be equipped with a weapon that seems manifestly unsuited to the purpose of abdominal mutilations, let alone organ removal?

And, of course, you can't argue change of MO if you then accept Eddowes as a Ripper victim, because the knife used there is much similar to the weapon used on Nichols and Chapman.

That is why I felt forced to postulate that Stride was an impulsive kill, and that her killer was equipped with the wrong type of knife. However I don't find this explanation entirely satisfactory, particularly as all the other C5 murders do seem to have been pre-planned, or at least well-thought out.

I think, in conclusion, it is time to finally reject the notion of BS man as Stride's killer. And, as I've pointed out, this surely even makes sense, perhaps more so, from the perspective of those who believe in the possibility of Stride as a Ripper victim.

[chrismasonic]

I've never been murdered but I have fallen over whilst drunk and my clothing caked with mud before...

another curious fact...

[Wickerman]

Welcome to "the fence" John.

I wouldn't worry too much about the knife issue. The length of the knife in other cases was estimated due to the abdominal mutilations (specific organs being stabbed). As there was none in Stride's case there was no means for the doctors to estimate the blade length.
Regardless how long the blade was the depth of the cut in the throat would be the same, the best that could be estimated is a minimum length, hence the suggestion by Phillips that a shoemakers knife could have done it.