Summing Up And Verdict

[Lewis C]

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?

Hi RD,

If you start by assuming that he killed her for refusing his advances, that would suggest that he wasn't the Ripper. Presumably, the Ripper would have killed her if she had accepted his advances, if "his advances" is even the right way to describe them.

[The Rookie Detective]

Hi RD,

If you start by assuming that he killed her for refusing his advances, that would suggest that he wasn't the Ripper. Presumably, the Ripper would have killed her if she had accepted his advances, if "his advances" is even the right way to describe them.

Good point.


But Chapman was also heard telling her killer "No!"


I suspect it was the victims rebuttal of his advances that spurred him on.

Rejection being the catalyst to reveal his "Dr Hyde."

[Wickerman]

Good point.


But Chapman was also heard telling her killer "No!"


I suspect it was the victims rebuttal of his advances that spurred him on.

Rejection being the catalyst to reveal his "Dr Hyde."

I've always viewed the "No!" as her verbal response to the physical attack, not any sexual advances.
They were in the backyard, somewhere quiet, so she can work with his advances. What she would resist is a physical attack unrelated to the sex act.

[Herlock Sholmes]

The “no” might have been a “no, we’ll be ok,” in response to the killer asking if they were likely to be disturbed at that location. As Cadosch was re-entering number 27 at the time it might explain why he didn’t hear the rest of the sentence. Also people can often emphasise a “no” in that kind of context and so say it slightly louder.