Summing Up And Verdict

[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]

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]

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

[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.

[c.d.]

Hello Wick,

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

c.d.

[The Rookie Detective]

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.

That's very close to how I envisaged what happened too Jon.

Very much agree with your view on this.

But where we differ...


Stride wasn't soliciting that night; there's no evidence of that.
Rather, she was either on a date, or had arranged to meet someone.

Hence why the man who she told "No, not tonight, some other night" seems to have not taken "No" for an answer.

[c.d.]

Well then I will ask you the same question, Rookie. Was she having sex with the B.S. man?

c.d.

[The Rookie Detective]

Well then I will ask you the same question, Rookie. Was she having sex with the B.S. man?

c.d.

No.

She wasn't having sex with anyone.

She may have been engaged in an amorous exchange with the man who was seen with her outside the Bricklayers Arms earlier.

Whether she was facing the wall, the gate, or the club door, the killer at some point positioned behind her to commence the initial attack by attempting to strangle her.

Unless of course, he was facing her when he incapacitated her.

[c.d.]

Stride wasn't soliciting that night; there's no evidence of that.
Rather, she was either on a date, or had arranged to meet someone.

I am not sure that we can conclude that with any degree of certainty. And even if it can be shown that she was not actively soliciting we have no way of knowing her response if approached and offered a tempting amount of money for her services.

c.d.

[Wickerman]

Hello Wick,

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

c.d.

I don't see the actions of B.S. Man fitting this scenario.

[Wickerman]

That's very close to how I envisaged what happened too Jon.

Very much agree with your view on this.

But where we differ...


Stride wasn't soliciting that night; there's no evidence of that.
Rather, she was either on a date, or had arranged to meet someone.

Hence why the man who she told "No, not tonight, some other night" seems to have not taken "No" for an answer.

Hi Chris.

Stride got those bruises on her upper chest from someone. And that someone was behind her for some reason, but he doesn't have to follow through with the sex act, he only needs her to turn to face the wall in expectation.

The words "Not tonight . ." were not from Stride, that's where we differ.
That was the 'Sweetheart' couple standing on the corner.

[The Rookie Detective]

Stride wasn't soliciting that night; there's no evidence of that.
Rather, she was either on a date, or had arranged to meet someone.

I am not sure that we can conclude that with any degree of certainty. And even if it can be shown that she was not actively soliciting we have no way of knowing her response if approached and offered a tempting amount of money for her services.

c.d.

That's a fair point indeed.


If the couple seen by Brown were Stride and her killer, then the comment made by Stride is perhaps indicative of the idea that she knew her killer in some capacity.

"No, not tonight, some other night."

That suggests a future encounter.


If the speech was simply...

"No, not tonight"

...then that is fairly ambiguous.


but the specific phrase that includes...
"...some other night."

suggests that Stride not only knew the man (if it was Stride) but that he was also a punter that she attempted to fob off to engage with at a later date.

Was this man so disgruntled that he merely followed her into the yard, and then killed her for refusing his advances?

What would that do for Stride's inclusion as a Ripper victim?

[Wickerman]

No.

She wasn't having sex with anyone.

She may have been engaged in an amorous exchange with the man who was seen with her outside the Bricklayers Arms earlier.

Whether she was facing the wall, the gate, or the club door, the killer at some point positioned behind her to commence the initial attack by attempting to strangle her.

Unless of course, he was facing her when he incapacitated her.

Stride had to be facing the wall she was facing when found. Her face and knees were close to the wall, not the door, and not the gate.

[Wickerman]

Stride wasn't soliciting that night; there's no evidence of that.
Rather, she was either on a date, or had arranged to meet someone.

I am not sure that we can conclude that with any degree of certainty. And even if it can be shown that she was not actively soliciting we have no way of knowing her response if approached and offered a tempting amount of money for her services.

c.d.

Agreed, how many dates fall through for some reason, then the girl goes on to find someone else, anyone, to end her night with a bang!

[c.d.]

Agreed, how many dates fall through for some reason, then the girl goes on to find someone else, anyone, to end her night with a bang!

Yes, exactly. When posters point to her dress and other indications of a date they are only talking about the start of the evening not how it may have ended up. Her date may not have shown up, became ill or they had an argument. Now she finds herself alone late at night. We don't no what options she would consider at that point.

c.d.