The Double Event and the 'break': what was he doing?

[Fisherman]

Monty writes:

"I dont think he knew about Strides death and I think he was purely Aldgate way because the getting would have been good there."

...which goes to prove that my stance ot the matter can be worded in more than one way. I´m with you, Monty!

The best,
Fisherman

[DarkPassenger]

I have doubts about Stride. She was killed with a different knife for a start. Die hard Ripperologists will probably hate the idea of knocking one victim off the canonical five, but if you're serious about even trying to find the Ripper or the truth behind him, sacrifices must be made.

[perrymason]

Excuse me for perambulatin' into this thread...but I cannot understand why Ripperologists use the line of demarcation between the City turf and the Met turf as if the Ripper did.

Nemo & Sammy....good points and nicely done.

I believe one reason Howard is that there were different procedures being used by the Met vs City...for example Met detainees stayed the night, City D & D's get released when they can show they are fit to be.

The night he supposedly crosses the line, his city victims availability is because of that procedure, and therefore it diminishes the possibility that she was specifically sought out. No-one but the police would know that Kate was released.

Cheers Howard.

[c.d.]

I have doubts about Stride. She was killed with a different knife for a start. Die hard Ripperologists will probably hate the idea of knocking one victim off the canonical five, but if you're serious about even trying to find the Ripper or the truth behind him, sacrifices must be made.

Hi DP,

Why do we have to limit Jack to only one knife? Tools of the trade need a backup.

c.d.

[Fisherman]

Dark Passenger writes:

"I have doubts about Stride. She was killed with a different knife for a start. "

I don´t wish to be a party-killer, DP, especially not since I am a fervent believer in Stride as a non-Ripper victim...

...but the notion that Stride was killed with another knife than the other victims is something that cannot be proven, I´m afraid. There was much discussion regarding a round-pointed knife that was found in the vicinity afterwards, and much speculation over what kind of weapon that cut her neck. But the truth of the matter is that the wound in itself does not give away anything that can tell us that another blade was used in the Stride case.

The best,
Fisherman

[caz]

Die hard Ripperologists will probably hate the idea of knocking one victim off the canonical five, but if you're serious about even trying to find the Ripper or the truth behind him, sacrifices must be made.

Hi DP,

Not sure how 'sacrificing' the Stride murder would help anyone find the ripper. It can only reduce the number of potential clues about him.

All,

I'm with Monty on the 'shift to City or abort' front (in the event that the ripper heard about Stride before killing Eddowes). But even an 'abort' scenario assumes the coincidence that the ripper was independently preparing to kill again that night, and would wisely have aborted his plans if he heard that someone had beaten him to it.

I say 'wisely' because I can't see the ripper learning (at some point between 1am and 1.30) about 'another murder' in Berner Street, and gaily continuing with his plans, albeit in slightly smoother waters, let alone immediately deciding it was high time he went fishing again himself. It was the same general pond that had been on high alert all month, and it had just now gone up another notch with the Stride outrage. He arguably took bigger risks in Mitre Square than he had in Hanbury St (going ahead despite being seen with Kate by three witnesses, just for starters); gave himself greater challenges than before (experimenting with facial mutilations and leaving the scene in the nick of time with a large, 100% incriminating piece of his victim's clothing); and even included a scenic trip - if not a necessary one - down Goulston Street before turning in for the night, while the pond buzzed on both sides with frustrated coppers like swarms of angry wasps.

He certainly didn't make it easy on himself, if he could simply have said to himself: "Not tonight, some other night. I'm not going out on the 'pull' with my knife now I know they'll be out in force for hours looking for this Berner Street cut-throat".

However, if he was that cut-throat, twice as frustrated as any copper because he had miscalculated the suitability of Dutfield's Yard, or this victim's willingness to accompany him elsewhere, then in keeping with other known double-eventers, the tight timing and all the additional risks would have melted into nothing by comparison with his surging adrenaline levels immediately after 1am.

I do think it's an odd coincidence, if someone else killed Liz, and the ripper not only independently sought and found his next victim that very night, but he did so in the City this time, and managed to complete the task at a much earlier hour than previously, only to find that another unfortunate's throat had been cut not an hour before, and within fifteen minutes' walk.

Love,

Caz
X

[The Grave Maurice]

Die hard Ripperologists will probably hate the idea of knocking one victim off the canonical five....

“Die hard” is, perhaps, an unfortunate term to use in connection with this subject.

I think most of us would be willing to jettison Stride if a compelling argument against her inclusion as a JtR victim ever surfaces. I’ve listened to all the arguments of Fisherman et al., and while they are very ably put, I still don’t find them persuasive. On the other hand, several years ago I began to believe that Tabram was very likely the first victim in the JtR series after years of excluding her from the “canon”---so it’s not as though some of us “die hards” aren’t willing to make adjustments in our thinking. For the moment, Caz nicely sums up my view, but I’m always ready to listen to new evidence.

[perrymason]

Hi all,

I dont think its unfair to suggest that the most compelling evidence that Liz was killed by Jack is that she was known to solicit, there was a killer working that night who slits throats, and that the contemporary investigators added her to the Canonicals.

Not going to send anyone to the noose with that as the case foundation. Even if they caught Jack, they couldnt prove he killed Elizabeth unless they found a witness to the actual murder, or he confessed. There is no evidence of guilt by any one man, known or unknown, at that crime scene.

Now,... if a guy was found in room in a hovel with organs in jars and a grape stalk....

Cheers all.

[Jay Batsford]

I agree that the Ripper was in the warehouse at the time Eddowes body was found the time between her last being seen and when her body was found is only about 5-7 mins at the most which gives very little time to make a low key exit from the area! And would explain why the apron was not found till later on ! If he had dropped it straight after the murder and it would have been found then it might have prompted the police to search the premises on a hunch and being only yards away from the murder scene and being found with such incriminating evidence would have resulted in his arrest and conviction for the murders! Hard to imagine that at the time the police where at Mitre square the Ripper was only Yards away watching everything! What was going through his mind? was he worried or did it just highten the rush he got?

[Jay Batsford]

What was he doing?

I agree that the Ripper was in the warehouse at the time Eddowes body was found the time between her last being seen and when her body was found is only about 5-7 mins at the most which gives very little time to make a low key exit from the area! And would explain why the apron was not found till later on ! If he had dropped it straight after the murder and it would have been found then it might have prompted the police to search the premises on a hunch and being only yards away from the murder scene and being found with such incriminating evidence would have resulted in his arrest and conviction for the murders! Hard to imagine that at the time the police where at Mitre square the Ripper was only Yards away watching everything! What was going through his mind? was he worried or did it just highten the rush he got?

[perrymason]

duplicate posting...deleted

[protohistorian]

Hi all,

I dont think its unfair to suggest that the most compelling evidence that Liz was killed by Jack is that she was known to solicit, there was a killer working that night who slits throats, and that the contemporary investigators added her to the Canonicals.

Not going to send anyone to the noose with that as the case foundation. Even if they caught Jack, they couldnt prove he killed Elizabeth unless they found a witness to the actual murder, or he confessed. There is no evidence of guilt by any one man, known or unknown, at that crime scene.

Now,... if a guy was found in room in a hovel with organs in jars and a grape stalk....

Cheers all.

If that is the state of evidence behind the assertion she was "ripperized", then I think we have to seriously reevaluate her status.