Between Liz and Eddowes...

[Mrs Darrell]

Interesting, Mrs D. If he had "the horn" for a victim, what betook him to a narrow back-street in St George's East in the first place?

Hi Sam.

Maybe he had followed her from the pub on the Commercial Road. Plus Berner Street had both a pub and the club so it wasn't that quiet. Maybe Liz wasn't a Ripper victim anyway shock horror. All speculation on my part I'm afraid.

Darrell

[Malcolm X]

Hello Everyone, Im a newbie to the casebook and found this thread most interesting. I have a couple of ideas Id like to share and would value your opinion very much. Could JTR have been in service? The victim dates seem to fall into a two week or so pattern which might suggest his days off , and as these coincide with some 'High days and Holidays' when servants were likley to be let off, could he be in Whitechapel visiting home? Also , October was (and still is ) the height of the Game season,Red deer especially, so might his absence be explaind by his being required eslewhere ,in the country for example for hunting, by his employer.

servants/ cooks/ hotel staff etc .....tend to have to work the weekends and especially bank holidays etc, it's the busiest times of the month, it's very hard to get time off.

my guess is that the ripper worked during the week only and took a break because he was waiting for the streets to quieten down / searching for a ``special`` final victim.

[Eastender]

That is certainly the case nowdays, but my grandfather and his sisters were in service and one day off a fortnight was what they got, they also got most high days and holidays as there were no annual holidays at all at that time. Do you have any ideas about JTRs occupation?

[caz]

Let's say he did kill Liz and go along with the theory that he was interuppted. He makes his exit quickly when he's left alone in the yard then flees west instead of east, where he thinks the police activity will be less. Maybe thats why he went south of the Whitechapel Road in the first place.

The city is like a ghost town even now at weekends. Perhaps he went into that area to take stock of the near miss he'd had...

Maybe he had followed her from the pub on the Commercial Road...

Hi "Mrs D",

I'm afraid your approach shows far too much common sense and plausibility - you won't be popular on double event threads.

As you suggest, both murders happened in directions that Jack might well have thought police activity would be less. So the argument often made that Jack was unlikely to have strayed south of the Whitechapel Rd is not particularly logical, considering that the same people (apart from the odd one or two who see a separate hand at work with Kate too - and another for Mary ) have to concede that he strayed west of the city border on this one occasion, before returning to the heart of Spitalfields in November.

It may not seem the most likely scenario to others, but I don't see how anyone could reasonably rule out Jack meeting Liz earlier that evening, in a pub or on a main road, propositioning her and being told "sorry, I'm not working tonight, deary, maybe some other night" and then blow me down he's sauntering down Berner (or even following her down Berner to check up on her story because it doesn't ring true) when he sees this same woman hanging around the busy club and he's spitting blood to think she lied to him. No chance of getting her to go quietly with him somewhere less like Clapham Junction after that, but he's not a man to be trifled with so whack, take that, and he's off west with his blood up.

Works for me. But it's by no means the only scenario that works.

Love,

Caz
X

[perrymason]

Hi all,

In reality....the only things connecting Liz Stride's murder to Jack the Ripper are the night she is killed on, the weapon used to kill her with, and the opinions of authorities. There is not one tiny infinitesimal piece of evidence in the Dutfield Yard murder that is indicative of Jack the Ripper specifically.

This is a death assigned by opinion only....and since they all are unsolved, they were not opinions proven in any way or shape by the evidence alone.

The night becomes much more logical when you eliminate Liz Stride as a Ripper victim. Including the GSG.

Best regards all.

[caz]

Hi Perry,

As you say, there's no proof, just opinion.

And yet you state it as if it's proven fact that the night 'becomes much more logical when you eliminate Liz Stride as a Ripper victim'.

I actually think, when I look at the bigger picture, that the events of that night are 100% logical when I don't eliminate Liz as a ripper victim.

But just because I've offered it as my opinion, and you state it as a fact, that doesn't add a jot of authority to what you say.

There is nothing to indicate that Liz had her throat cut - just the once - by anyone known to her with some personal motive for doing her in. If you insist that the ripper would have had plenty of time to indulge in overkill, then how do you explain a single cut by a first-time killer who presumably had no idea when he left the scene if his victim would be able to identify him to the very next person to see her?

Love,

Caz
X

[smezenen]

Jack was a hunter, he planned his hunts in advance. thats not to say he had a peticular person in mind just an area and a time. he has staked out his hunting grounds and learned the paterns. When was a prostitute likly to be there, what where the police patrol times, where could he take the victim, probbaly a lot of other details.

30 SEP he has staked out the Dutfield's Yard and around 1 am has Elizabeth Stride's under his knife but he hears someone approaching and must take flight or risk discovery. As he flees the area he finds himself on Duke Street, he has planned a hunt for this area and realizes the window of opurtunity will open soon so he begins stalking Catherine Eddowes'. Her body is discovered at 1:45.

OK i know thats assuming Stride was one of his.

[perrymason]

Hi Perry,

As you say, there's no proof, just opinion.

And yet you state it as if it's proven fact that the night 'becomes much more logical when you eliminate Liz Stride as a Ripper victim'.

I actually think, when I look at the bigger picture, that the events of that night are 100% logical when I don't eliminate Liz as a ripper victim.

But just because I've offered it as my opinion, and you state it as a fact, that doesn't add a jot of authority to what you say.

There is nothing to indicate that Liz had her throat cut - just the once - by anyone known to her with some personal motive for doing her in. If you insist that the ripper would have had plenty of time to indulge in overkill, then how do you explain a single cut by a first-time killer who presumably had no idea when he left the scene if his victim would be able to identify him to the very next person to see her?

Love,

Caz
X

How long did Jack take to do all he did to Kate Eddowes...in a place easily as dark as Dutfields Yard was? Lets use that as a baseline for what he can do. What is the estimated time of the fatal wound by the attending physician onsite at 1:16am? Is the throat cut as severe as former Ripper victims? Can we say she was on her back on the ground semi-conscious when he first uses a knife? What time did Diemshutz state he pulled in at? What was the status of the yard just before the altercation Schwartz describes? Was the deceased on her back with her knees bent, pointed outwards? Was the dress that covered her ankles lifted at the hem? Did anyone see someone hurry from the yard into the street around that time? What is the Inquest version and time of the last sighting of Liz Stride? How much time from that sighting to her discovery? Did Fanny Mortimer see anyone outside or near the gates, coming from the yard, or hanging about the area...aside from Goldstein walking past "hurriedly" at 12:55am that is.

The answers to the above and many more questions do not suggest a similar murderer to Annie Chapman, the previous victim.

Which would mean someone else may have merely killed the woman, which the evidence does suggest...there is nothing to indicate further intent on the killers part.

What this offers in terms of a Ripper scenario would be an intentional single artery throat cut mere kill....lacking any evidence to suggest what he "wanted" was to do more than kill.

I dont personally believe Jack the Ripper killed just for killing...I believe he killed to mutilate womens midsections. At least in the deaths attributed to him, there are 3 victims of 5 that fit that supposition very well.

Best regards

[Sam Flynn]

I dont personally believe Jack the Ripper killed just for killing...I believe he killed to mutilate womens midsections. At least in the deaths attributed to him, there are 3 victims of 5 that fit that supposition very well.

Four. Unless you think that Kelly's midsection always looked like that.

[perrymason]

Four. Unless you think that Kelly's midsection always looked like that.

Somewhat reluctantly, ...4 women.

All the best G.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Seeing this in the list of threads 'From the Archives', I was reminded that someone did suggest several months ago, on another thread, that the murderer may have returned to his lodgings before setting out to look for another victim.

Perhaps he would be so good as to identify himself.

[Lewis C]

Seeing this in the list of threads 'From the Archives', I was reminded that someone did suggest several months ago, on another thread, that the murderer may have returned to his lodgings before setting out to look for another victim.

Perhaps he would be so good as to identify himself.

I might have mentioned that as a possibility.

[Michael W Richards]

Seeing this in the list of threads 'From the Archives', I was reminded that someone did suggest several months ago, on another thread, that the murderer may have returned to his lodgings before setting out to look for another victim.

Perhaps he would be so good as to identify himself.

Interesting that one would suggest that on the Double Event night, the killer of Stride would return to his lodgings before going out again to find another victim. I could easily understand a premise that has the killer of Eddowes popping into his digs to drop organs off before heading out to Gouslton to leave an apron section, along with a message. There is quite a bit of time between the killers departure from Mitre Square, approx 1:43am, and the discovery time of the apron and writing by Constable Long. That discovery time, 2:55am, doesnt necessarily mean it wasnt there on the 2:20am pass-by made by the same Constable Long, but he did say that "the apron was not there at the time" at the Inquest.

If, as many believe, the killer of Stride kept looking for victims after killing her because he was frustrated being unable to complete all he wanted to with Liz, I wonder why he would return to his lodgings before going back out. Nothing to drop off. And Im not sure, if the aforementioned premise is indeed why he continued to look for a second victim, he would seek a cooling off period in his bolt hole. If he was frustrated and angered or disappointed, it seems probable he would have just headed out from Berner still seeking the gratification he missed out on.

The time between the murders, the first about 12:46-12:56pm and the second around 1:35am, leaves plenty of time to get from the first site to the second site, but too much time if he went there directly from Berner Street. I also wonder about the time gap between Kate being released, 1am, and her alledged sighting at around 1:35am. Since she had only about 400yds to walk from the station to Mitre Square, estimated by Hutt at the Inquest, how does that take about 35 minutes? Seems Kate might have made a stop of her own somewhere on the way to Mitre Square.

The problem is not whether one man could have killed both women, its certainly a possibility well within the known available time. The problems are why those events are around 35 minutes apart when the walk from Berner to Mitre wasnt much more than a 10 minute stroll, and where Kate was between her release from the station at 1am and her alledged sighting at around 1:35am, when the walk from the station to the location is only 400 yds. Maybe not so much of a problem if it wasnt the same man who did both.

And without any definitive evidence that Strides killer did not have ample time or privacy to do to Liz what is later done to Kate, you are left with the real possibility that what was done to Liz was all that was intended. Which would likely negate the idea we have an unsatisfied killer seeking a second victim to fulfill his desires.

[c.d.]

Welcome back, Michael. Nice to see you posting again.

c.d.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I could easily understand a premise that has the killer of Eddowes popping into his digs to drop organs off before heading out to Gouslton to leave an apron section, along with a message. There is quite a bit of time between the killers departure from Mitre Square, approx 1:43am, and the discovery time of the apron and writing by Constable Long. That discovery time, 2:55am, doesnt necessarily mean it wasnt there on the 2:20am pass-by made by the same Constable Long, but he did say that "the apron was not there at the time" at the Inquest.

That is exactly what I have consistently been arguing.