saving Liz Stride

[perrymason]

Any scenerio presented for anyone being the killer of any of these women ( except Brown's wife, obviously), is speculation, for the only conclusion still has to be what the inquests came up with- " killed by person or persons unknown".

I believe the original thread was looking for a plausible reason to include the perpetrator of the other unsolved murder that night with that of Stride. I am willing to admit that there are other scenarios that are being discussed on other threads that are cause for speculation as well.

Best Wishes and Happy New Year,
Hunter

Youre quite right about the thread focus Hunter.....plausible and reasonable and rational and with the known evidence in hand.....even the contradictory sources.

I started a similar thread a few years back when I asked for the compelling reason to include Liz Stride as a Canonical, as the vast majority of the contemporary officers seemed to believe she belonged to that Group.

When you boil it down to usable data that excludes interruption opinions and suggestions that the abdominal mutilator may not choose to do so when he standing over a woman whose throat he cuts in an empty yard, or suggestions that Eddowes murder is extra nasty because he flubbed his earlier attempt...

...and all thats really left is that she was killed in the district that the Whitechapel Murderer chose during the period the crimes were being committed..from Easter of 1888 on till November,... that she engaged in prostitution at times which it seems all the Canonicals and some thousands of other women did in that area, and that she was killed within 45 minutes to an hour of a woman who is killed in Mitre Square, who is abdominally mutilated just like the 2 prior victims of the killer who starts being called Jack the Ripper over the next few days. And its a short walking distance between crime scenes.

Since we have what is Macnaghtens final primary suspect based simply upon some rumor he heard and his suicide shortly after the last likely Ripper crime........I can see how Liz was placed in the Group with that kind of burden of proof. I dont see why we should follow their lead based on the actual proof that is available.

A reasonable and sustainable position in the case of Liz Stride I feel would be that she should not be considered as a probable Ripper victim as the CG contends, but rather a possible victim pending more convincing evidence.

I think there is a very small chance that she was killed by Jack himself...but a decent chance that her death was useful in some aspects in terms of illustrating the potential source of violence that may have been present within a few different social movements.

After all, if she isnt a Ripper victim she is still a victim thought to have been killed by many senior investigators by Jack, who many believed was an Immigrant socialist Jew....and she was found on the private property of said segment of society.

Best regards Hunter

[Hunter]

Hi Michael,

Yes, I've been following the other thread on the club in Berner St. and it is very reveiling.

I have little faith in Macnaghten's thesis for the same reasons you do as I believe it to be mostly conjecture and full of errors. His C5 reasoning seems to relate to a compressed timeline(fall 1888) when there is a sudden flurry of specific murders, whereas, before and after these types were more sporatic... and I must admit that on the surface it would be logical to place these on one individual since no one was apprehended for any of them. Then, they seemed to end suddenly with no explanation. That's why Macnaghten chose Druitt as a prime suspect because it offered closure for him. We'll never know what friends or family information he may have had that he hinted to but I believe it is probably conjecture as well.

Stride's murder is certainly a caveat in the sequence of events.

Best Wishes,
Hunter