Different Killers

[lynn cates]

interruptus

Hello John. Thanks.

"Isn't that what the majority of posters are attempting to do?"

Difficult to say--hard to ascertain the motive of another.

Perhaps they WOULD have had a different motivation but were interrupted? (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

evidence

Hello Trevor. And "evidence" was your specialty.

Thanks.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

vox clamantis . . . in Berner

Hello Colin. Thanks.

"Might he not kill simply because he could, knowing that he could probably still get clean away, provided that he didn't waste further time by going on to mutilate?'

If that were his raison d'etre. But then, one must look at all kinds of murders, not just knife killings.

"We know that she did manage to hold on to them when she was killed. Cadaveric spasm seems as good an explanation as any."

I'm happy with that. But this would preclude such a final spasm?

"Because they were upstairs singing and thus themselves making enough noise to drown out any others?"

Yet, more than one averred that they would have heard any crying out.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Ah! distinctly I remember, it was in the bleak December . . .

Hello BM. Actually, their holiday was in December. They all planned October killings, but in each case there was an interruption.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

ze little grey cells

Hello CD.

"Cadaveric spasm only accounts for her holding them in death. It does not account for them not being spilled when she was thrown to the ground, spreading her hands out to push herself back up or fighting off the B.S. man if she was somehow dragged."

Bingo.

"Eagle and Mrs. Diemschitz made it a point to say that they believed they would have heard an argument despite the noise from the club because they had a door open. I have to take them at their word."

You are acute as ever, mon ami.

Cheers.
LC

[John G]

Hi Ausgirl,

Excellent post, you've obviously done a great deal of research. First let me focus on Stride, although she is clearly the least likely of the C5 victims to have been killed by JtR.

As your research reveals, the vast majority of throat cuttings were as a consequence of domestic incidents, perpetrated in the home. For me, the Stride murder just doesn't feel like a common domestic incident, it somehow lacks the right charactersitics. For example, she was killed in the open, and there were no obvious suspects, as you would expect with a domestic crime. It was at the very least a highly unusual crime.

And considering the forensic evidence. Stride's throat was clearly very severely cut, as Batman points out. Dr Philips stated: "The carotid artery on the left side, and other vessels contained in the sheath were all cut through save the posterior portion of the carotid." And don't forget, it does appear that a small bladed knife was used; it makes you wonder just how much more severe, or extensive, the wound would have been if a longer-bladed knife was used.

Dr Philips also thought that the killer had "a knowledge of were to cut the throat." Again, is this more suggestive of an experienced killer than a more common domestic incident?

What I find even more significant is evidence of a strategy being used to avoid blood staining. Thus, cutting the carotid would normally result in blood spraying out under pressure. However, in this case that clearly didn't happen. Dr Philips hypothesised that her throat was cut whilst she was lying on the ground, and this would have avoided arterial spray (gravity). There is also evidence that the killer cut her throat away from himself, allowing the blood to flow into the drain.

Once again, this suggests to me an experienced killer, maybe learning from past mistakes, an not a domestic incident. And isn't there a connection with the other C5 victims? Weren't there throats cut when they were on the ground, or when they were lying down? And wouldn't this also have reduced the risks of arterial spray?

Of course, Dr Blackwell thought the scarf had been used to pull the head back and then pulled tight. But wouldn't using the scarf as a kind of ligature have also had the effect of stemming the flow of blood?

Nonetheless, Stride was clearly the least likely of the C5 to have been killed by the same hand. As your statistics reveal, postmortem mutilations were practically unheard of. And yet in 1888, over a few just a few short months, there are no less than 4 separate incidents, and all within a small geographical area. And yet, some posters are now advocating that Kelly and Eddowes were killed by a different hand.

Even if you provisionally accept this argument, surely whichever maniac killed Eddowes and Kelly would be highly likely to strike again, just like whoever killed Nichols and Chapman. I mean, if a Kelly-like murder happened today, I hardly think the police would be reassuring the public by saying: "This was clearly a one of incident. It is very unlikely the killer will strike again."

So why did these type of mutilation murders stop in 1888. Is it really likely that at least 3 mutilators decided to give up killing at the end of 1888? And, I mean, they surely couldn't have all ended up drowned in the Thames or caged in an asylum!

[John G]

Hi Bridewell,

Yes, I accept that "full-frontal assault" was a poor choice of words which did not properly convey the point I was trying to make. What I should have said was "direct assault".

Now, not wishing to be too pedantic but, if we accept Scwartz's account, he clearly did witness an assault on Stride, albeit a not very serious one. In fact, English law if you throw a bottle of wine at someone, and miss, that still constitutes an assault.

My point was that, if Stride was killed by BS man, and BS man was JtR, then may her killer have acted out of frustration, i.e. because of Stride's lack of cooperation?

Thus, Nichols and Chapman most likely went with their killer to a relatively secluded place and then, ignorant of the dangers, turned their back on him. This enabled their killer to take them by surprise when quickly cutting their throat.

But let us suppose that Stride wasn't soliciting that night, as the evidence of James Brown might indicate. Is it possible that, frustrated, her killer may have taken a much more direct approach, eventually pushing her into the blackness of Dutfiled's Yard? Of course, she would now be alerted to the dangers and therefore might cry out, attempt resistance, or try and escape. Either way her killer had lost the element of surprise and, what's more, the initial, albeit not serious, assault was witnessed by Pipeman and Scwartz..

I would speculate that it is at least possible that some, or all, of these factors contributed to the killer's ultimate decision to look for an easier victim.

For completeness, I would emphasise that in no way am I suggesting that Stride was definitely killed by JtR or BS man. I am merely proposing what I consider at least a plausible theory.

Regards,

John

[lynn cates]

cachous

Hello John.

"Is it possible that, frustrated, her killer may have taken a much more direct approach, eventually pushing her into the blackness of Dutfield's Yard?"

Yes, indeed. This is a nice forensic reconstruction.

I think the big issue is, When did she go for the cachous?

1. Before the assault?

If so, she surely would have dropped them.

2. Whilst being assaulted?

Obviously not.

Looks like she was caught off guard.

Cheers.
LC

[Batman]

If everyone living in Whitechapel dropped whatever they had the moment they where assaulted, thieves would be very rich indeed.

I think Long Liz may have just had more gusto than you think... But lost, obviously.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hello Trevor. And "evidence" was your specialty.

Thanks.

Cheers.
LC

Yes Lynn, but you know as well as I do that researchers will only accept evidence if it suits their own theory

[Harry D]

This is all hinging on the assumption that Schwartz was telling the truth, no?

The whole thing makes a lot more sense if we take PC Smith as the only credible witness that night.

[Batman]

Read the thread pipeman cleared.

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=8520&highlight=pipeman+cleared

Paul Begg gives reasons why many people where arrested and one of them likely pipeman. They hauled in a lot over this one.

[John G]

Hello John.

"Is it possible that, frustrated, her killer may have taken a much more direct approach, eventually pushing her into the blackness of Dutfield's Yard?"

Yes, indeed. This is a nice forensic reconstruction.

I think the big issue is, When did she go for the cachous?

1. Before the assault?

If so, she surely would have dropped them.

2. Whilst being assaulted?

Obviously not.

Looks like she was caught off guard.

Cheers.
LC

Ah, yes, the problem of the cachous. Of course, Dr Philips believed that Stride was seized by the shoulders and then forced to the ground but then, of course, this explanation is problematic, i.e. because it doesn't seem to take into account the blood stained hand and wrist.

Prior to the assault is it possible that she tightened her hand around the cachous instinctively, i.e. out of fear as she saw her assailant menacingly advancing toward her? Although clearly it would have been more likely she would have just dropped them.

The difficulty I have with Stride being taken completely by surprise is why would she voluntarily go with anyone into a dark, narrow passageway? I realize her body was discovered towards the front of the passageway it must still have been pretty dark: upon discovering her body Diemshitz initially thought it was a bundle of rags. This is particularly the case if she was killed by BS man, who had previously shown himself to be a pretty unpleasant character.

Of course, she could have been caught by surprise , such as in a blitz attack, but unless she was facing the passageway at the time- and why would she be staring into pitch-black darkness- then she must have been subjected to a frontal assault, and surely in these circumstances she would not have been taken completely off guard.

She could have been caught from behind by someone exiting the club, but the evidence suggests that no one did exit the club at the relevant time.

I'm not sure any explanation is entirely satisfactory.

[lynn cates]

song

Hello Harry.

"This is all hinging on the assumption that Schwartz was telling the truth, no?

The whole thing makes a lot more sense if we take PC Smith as the only credible witness that night."

Ah! You are singing my song!

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

why and when

Hello John.

Thanks.

I think that your post may represent the first time ANYONE (besides me) has worried over directions.

My problem is why and when Liz took them out.

Regarding a frontal assault, position is all wrong for it.

Could she have gone up the passage to meet someone at the side door?

Cheers.
LC