Summing Up And Verdict

[c.d.]

Hello Wick,

Are you describing her having sex with the B.S. man?

c.d.

[Wickerman]

I think Blackwell's use of the word "knotted" has perhaps misled many readers.
Try wearing a knotted scarf around your own neck, you wont wear it for long, too uncomfortable.
You can knot a scarf loosely around your neck, but then it isn't tight enough to choke you if someone pulls on it.
And, if it is only loosely tied (under & over, one time), then if someone pulls on one end it will only come loose, if they pull on both ends, as if to lift the head, it will not tighten up at all.
Each scenario has its faults.

I suspect there are certain given circumstances that most likely are applicable.
- As there was no blood spatter on the wall in front of her, her throat was cut while she was on the ground.
- As she was most likely on the ground when her throat was cut, then she was also most likely unconscious at that time.
- As she was most likely unconscious when the throat was cut, with no obvious signs of a struggle, then she was rendered unconscious while on her feet.
- As she was therefore most likely rendered unconscious while standing, the tightened scarf is the only visible means to accomplish this.
- As her scarf was noted as pulled tight, then her scarf was most likely pulled tight from behind using both ends as she faced the wall. Her client/attacker is behind her, anal sex being the most common 'safe-sex' method of the time.

Stride was with a male in Dutfields yard, she turned to face the house wall intending to service her client, he pressed himself up close behind her, placing both hands on her shoulders leaving finger pressure marks (bruise) on the front of her chest (near clavicle, as with Chapman).
Whether he actually began engaging in sex or not, he quickly grasped the ends of her scarf and pulled both ends tight, and held that position until she slumped down unconscious.
At which point he pulled out his knife . . .

The cachous fell to the ground at some point, they may have been in her hand throughout the assault. We have all? read stories about victims of assault grasping things tightly, when we expect them to drop whatever was in their hand.
I don't think the fallen cachous are a significant clue to how this assault played out.

[Tom_Wescott]

Ah I see


So he lifted her with one hand (his left) by her scarf, and used his right hand to slice her throat at the same time.

So he pulls the scarf tight twice.

The first time, when he renders her unconscious by pulling her scarf tight from behind, and the second time only because the stones physically impede his ability to cut her throat.

He did not use the scarf to render her unconscious. He used his arm. That's why there was no sign of a struggle and no (known) cries or noise made. Had he used the scarf to render her unconscious, it likely wouldn't have worked and certainly would have led to her dropping the cachous to grab at the scarf. We'd seen marks on her neck from her fingernails tugging at it. The scarf was used by the killer only once when he pulled it tight on her right side, causing the knot on her left side to push tightly into her flesh. As her neck was pulled up and suspended, he drew his knife across one time. Seeing the blood flow, he knew he got the carotid and left.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[The Rookie Detective]

Rookie, read what I posted. Did I mention anything about strangulation? In my previous post I stated she was rendered unconscious while standing and then laid down. He went to cut her throat (as he was wont to do) and found the jagged stones impeded him. He grabbed her scarf and lifted her neck above the stones and slid his knife under. The fact that her scarf was pulled tight at the moment the knife blade ran across it bears all this out. It's not a complicated crime scene.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Ah I see


So he lifted her with one hand (his left) by her scarf, and used his right hand to slice her throat at the same time.

So he pulls the scarf tight twice.

The first time, when he renders her unconscious by pulling her scarf tight from behind, and the second time only because the stones physically impede his ability to cut her throat.

[Tom_Wescott]

Rookie, read what I posted. Did I mention anything about strangulation? In my previous post I stated she was rendered unconscious while standing and then laid down. He went to cut her throat (as he was wont to do) and found the jagged stones impeded him. He grabbed her scarf and lifted her neck above the stones and slid his knife under. The fact that her scarf was pulled tight at the moment the knife blade ran across it bears all this out. It's not a complicated crime scene.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[The Rookie Detective]

You still haven't read Ripper Confidential? Then I'll quote from it:

Dr. Blackwell told the inquest jury about Stride’s scarf. In comparing Blackwell’s testimony on this point I found all the papers to be in agreement on the details. The Daily Telegraph reported that ‘the deceased had round her neck a check silk scarf, the bow of which was turned to the left and pulled very tight. In the neck there was a long incision which exactly corresponded the lower border of the scarf. The border was slightly frayed, as if by a sharp knife.’

It is important to pause here and consider Blackwell’s words. He is not saying, as has sometimes been reported, that the scarf was pulled from the left, but instead that the bow or knot was turned to Stride’s left side and was pulled in tightly to her flesh. For this to happen the killer had to pull with force inward to himself while Stride’s weight shifted the oppo- site direction. In short, as Stride lay on her left side, her killer stood to her right and above her as he pulled the scarf tight.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Interesting indeed.

To get the leverage to strangle her with her own scarf as she lay on the floor, the killer would have needed 2 hands.

Difficult when he's carrying a large sharp knife in his right hand.

He therefore either needed to have put the knife down before he pulled her up by her scarf with both hands to strangle her, or he took the knife out and cut her throat after he had strangled her with both hands.
Or perhaps, he knelt on her face with his knee to give him leverage to pull her upwards and strangle her with his left hand, whilst cutting her throat with his right hand at the same time. This may explain the muddied left side of her face.

Getting the chronology and physics correct are crucial in determining the most likely picture of what actually happened.

[Tom_Wescott]

If she was laying on her left side facing the wall, how did he pull her up from the stones of the gutter from her left side?
If he used the scarf to pull her neck up, then the scarf would have been positioned differently, with the right hand side of her neck being exposed to the grip of the killer's grasp.

At some point the killer was positioned behind her, on her left side. Which was only possible before she is placed down onto the ground on her left side.

You still haven't read Ripper Confidential? Then I'll quote from it:

Dr. Blackwell told the inquest jury about Stride’s scarf. In comparing Blackwell’s testimony on this point I found all the papers to be in agreement on the details. The Daily Telegraph reported that ‘the deceased had round her neck a check silk scarf, the bow of which was turned to the left and pulled very tight. In the neck there was a long incision which exactly corresponded the lower border of the scarf. The border was slightly frayed, as if by a sharp knife.’

It is important to pause here and consider Blackwell’s words. He is not saying, as has sometimes been reported, that the scarf was pulled from the left, but instead that the bow or knot was turned to Stride’s left side and was pulled in tightly to her flesh. For this to happen the killer had to pull with force inward to himself while Stride’s weight shifted the oppo- site direction. In short, as Stride lay on her left side, her killer stood to her right and above her as he pulled the scarf tight.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

"He didn't pull her backwards by her scarf, he used the scarf to pull her neck up from the jagged stones of the gutter so he could work his knife under."

Now, there's a debate that takes me back to '90's, early 2000's.

I wouldn't call it a debate. More a case of some not understanding the evidence. Not your good self, of course!

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[The Rookie Detective]

He didn't pull her backwards by her scarf, he used the scarf to pull her neck up from the jagged stones of the gutter so he could work his knife under. That's obvious by the blood evidence. And it means she was unconscious before she was on the ground.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

If she was laying on her left side facing the wall, how did he pull her up from the stones of the gutter from her left side?
If he used the scarf to pull her neck up, then the scarf would have been positioned differently, with the right hand side of her neck being exposed to the grip of the killer's grasp.

At some point the killer was positioned behind her, on her left side. Which was only possible before she is placed down onto the ground on her left side.

[drstrange169]

"He didn't pull her backwards by her scarf, he used the scarf to pull her neck up from the jagged stones of the gutter so he could work his knife under."

Now, there's a debate that takes me back to '90's, early 2000's.

[Tom_Wescott]

He didn't pull her backwards by her scarf, he used the scarf to pull her neck up from the jagged stones of the gutter so he could work his knife under. That's obvious by the blood evidence. And it means she was unconscious before she was on the ground.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[The Rookie Detective]

I agree with the first part of what you write, Abby. Quite possibly he pulled her backwards by her scarf and then cut her throat without first rendering her unconscious. I also agree with you that he left as soon as he'd cut her throat. There's also every chance that she didn't die immediately, but I don't think she moved much after that.

Scarf pulled tight from behind
One deep cut
Cachous in hand
Laying on left side (in a fetal type position)
No mutilations.

The evidence suggests the attack was quick, clean, decisive, and deliberate.

The entire murder, from initial grab by her scarf, to the point the killer walked off, could have been done in under a minute.

If the murder occurred today, it could fall into the realms of a professional hit.

Considering the Ripper's record with post mutilation, it would seem likely that the killer was either interrupted and had to flee quickly; thus he wasn't able to inflict any of the desired post mortem cuts, or he wasn't the Ripper anyway.

[FrankO]

hi rd
my theory why stride wasnt on her back displayed and exposed but in the fetal position is because the ripper didnt render her unconscious before he cut her throat. she was still alive after he cut her throat. He bolted right after and she was trying to make her way toward the voices and percieved help at the club when she expired.

I agree with the first part of what you write, Abby. Quite possibly he pulled her backwards by her scarf and then cut her throat without first rendering her unconscious. I also agree with you that he left as soon as he'd cut her throat. There's also every chance that she didn't die immediately, but I don't think she moved much after that.

[FrankO]

Movement? Maybe, but no blood trail and if crawling on hands and knees the cachous (just wrapped in tissue) remained intact. So seems unlikely.

c.d.

I agree with you, c.d.. The evidence we have tells us that it was a quick affair in the sense that she ended up lying on her left side and stayed that way. There was mud mostly on her left side, little on her right side and none mentioned on her back. Your point about the cachous further supports this view. So, if she did move after receiving the cut to her throat, it's likely to have been very little.

[New Waterloo]

Hello cd. I agree crawling on hands and knees very unlikely. I think movement of some sorts very likely. Lets assume the victims once strangled/choked or throats cut were unable to move themselves the killer would need to move the victims into a desired position for him to do his work. Shall we say some positioning of the body. They are unlikely to fall exactly as he wants them and I would imagine its not easy to position a body and some dragging or turning over would have taken place. Maybe any dragging would be mere inches (or more). This is one of the things that makes the case so interesting. If the victim for instance ended face down after having their throat cut it would take some doing to not get blood all over the place. If the killer was able to pre determine the rough position of the body as it reached the ground that takes some considerable skill. Bearing in mind most people would resist strongly. I have only just thought of this but this is not the work of a physically weaker person.
The evidence is there we all just have to look deeper. The problem is I am discounting my own theories as I go along
NW