Different Killers

[Batman]

Hi Batman,

How would that work when we know for a fact that Stride had only lain on her left side?

All the best,
Frank

She has mud on both sides.

Examining her jacket I found that although there was a slight amount of mud on the right side, the left was well plastered with mud. - Mr. George Baxter Phillips


So we have evidence she was on her back. Mud on the ground isn't uniform.

Also we can dismiss the 'shallow' cut claim and the claim of a second cut, since requests for referencing have not been forthcoming by the parties responsible for that statement. It's a deep gash, not a 'cut throat', not a 'shallow' cut either.

[Batman]

Mad butcher delusion hypothesis = Suspend history

Probably the single most obvious problem with the mad butcher delusion hypothesis is that it asks people to completely suspend belief in a historical record for lust killers that operated in similar ways and even goes as far to suggest that there is no such thing as a lust killer despite victim evidence to the contrary and experts in criminal psychology who have used these findings to catch countless other individuals who would literally have gotten away with more murders if criminologists hadn't developed their understanding of these types of crimes.

The rebuttal has been something along the lines of - we don't have to show precedence for the mad butcher delusion hypothesis. However even this doesn't negate the fact that the stronger alternative explanation is in the historical record which has its dark shadow looming over erronious guesses that JtR never existed and the canonical five are not a series of sexual murders.

[FrankO]

She has mud on both sides.

Examining her jacket I found that although there was a slight amount of mud on the right side, the left was well plastered with mud. - Mr. George Baxter Phillips


So we have evidence she was on her back. Mud on the ground isn't uniform.

I don't agree, Batman. As you've shown, she had a slight amount of mud on the right side while her left side was well plastered with mud. There's no mention of mud on her back. So, my point still stands. If she was seized by the shoulders and then placed on the ground, it's odd that she ended up on her left side, with her right collarbone area showing bluer than the left.

All the best,
Frank

[Batman]

I don't agree, Batman. As you've shown, she had a slight amount of mud on the right side while her left side was well plastered with mud. There's no mention of mud on her back. So, my point still stands. If she was seized by the shoulders and then placed on the ground, it's odd that she ended up on her left side, with her right collarbone area showing bluer than the left.

All the best,
Frank

Over both shoulders, especially the right, and under the collarbone and in front of the chest there was a bluish discoloration.

How did they get on the front if it was a rear attack? I don't do coincidences so I think its pretty much clear she was attacked from the front.

As for the side and back. Its depends on how you interpret it. I take it he is describing her left side including the left side of the back and the right side including the right side of her back. If the back is omitted are we to draw the conclusion it could possibly be dry given the conditions of the yard after it having rained earlier. It was very muddy and from the way people messed up the crime scene the killers footprints where mashed out and also any signs of dragging.

[Harry D]

Hi Harry
I find it hard it to believe-but its not crackpot-at least not like the royal conspiracy, Van Gogh, Maybrick etc.


At least Issenschmidt was considered a suspect at the time and has strong ties to the case.

I think Lynn is sincere in his ideas and has published and done a lot of research. Don't think hes trolling or trying to pull a fast one.

Am I being too subtle?

[Wickerman]

Over both shoulders, especially the right, and under the collarbone and in front of the chest there was a bluish discoloration.

How did they get on the front if it was a rear attack? I don't do coincidences so I think its pretty much clear she was attacked from the front.

Frank is correct, Lynn and I discussed this very same remark by Phillips, and that she had no mud on her back to substantiate that comment.

Ok, here is the reason why pressure marks around the collarbone are not indicative of a frontal assault.
Street Prostitutes typically offered their services to the client by turning their back, flipping up their clothes to allow rear-entry access.
Is that clear enough?

The man typically holds on to the woman by grasping her shoulders, the pressure of his fingers dig in to her collarbone. Can you picture this?

These pressure marks are the clue she was prostituting herself. Chapman had the same marks.

[lynn cates]

thanks

Hello Abby. Thanks.

The only thing of which I am more confident than Isenschmid, is that Kate was not killed by the same hand.

But thanks for the kind and sincere remarks.

Cheers.
LC

[BTCG]

I tend to agree on the last killing: the burning of the clothes is key, to me. Her significant other got away with one.

[lynn cates]

P M

Hello John. Thanks.

Well, PM me your email and I might have a spare copy.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

bingo

Hello Frank.

"I would say that Dr. Phillips’ opinion that she was seized by the shoulders and placed on the ground doesn’t seem a very credible one. How would that work when we know for a fact that Stride had only lain on her left side? How would she end up on her left side if her attacker used more force on her right shoulder?"

Bingo!

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

cachous

Hello (again) Frank.

''I don't agree, Batman. As you've shown, she had a slight amount of mud on the right side while her left side was well plastered with mud. There's no mention of mud on her back. So, my point still stands. If she was seized by the shoulders and then placed on the ground, it's odd that she ended up on her left side, with her right collarbone area showing bluer than the left."

Right again--not to mention she could NOT have held the cachous. Our friend BM is pulling your leg.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

refreshing

Hello Jon. Refreshing to see your and Frank's intelligent thinking interspersed with the rot on this thread.

Cheers.
LC

[Batman]

Frank is correct, Lynn and I discussed this very same remark by Phillips, and that she had no mud on her back to substantiate that comment.

Ok, here is the reason why pressure marks around the collarbone are not indicative of a frontal assault.
Street Prostitutes typically offered their services to the client by turning their back, flipping up their clothes to allow rear-entry access.
Is that clear enough?

The man typically holds on to the woman by grasping her shoulders, the pressure of his fingers dig in to her collarbone. Can you picture this?

These pressure marks are the clue she was prostituting herself. Chapman had the same marks.

You are, of course, welcome to second guess Dr. Phillips, who was there performing the pathological examination. I however think this was a man ahead of time, dealing with something new, who got it right. So I give him credit where credit is due and find the current modern view not really realistic, given there is a witness describing a frontal assault and especially given the way the multiple killer guess distorts facts.

Yes distorts them.

Look -> Dr. Phillips cleary told the inquest that in additional to bruising on her shoulders, there was bruising on the front.

The body was fairly nourished. Over both shoulders, especially the right, AND under the collarbone AND in front of the chest there was a bluish discoloration, which I have watched and have seen on two occasions since.

So please, let's get the facts right before trying to discuss them, otherwise people are just presenting an alternative Jack the Ripper universe and I am not interested in doing a Star Trek TOS episode here, thanks.

[Wickerman]

Dr. Phillips was a surgeon, he can tell us what a bruise is, and maybe even how old the bruise is, but in no way can he, or any equivalent surgeon, pathologist or anatomist today tell us how the bruise got there.
And, I doubt Dr. Phillips had any street experience of the coupling practices of the prostitute.

Now, if you see any evidence in that quote that no-one else has seen, then by all means, enlighten us.

[Batman]

Dr. Phillips was a surgeon, he can tell us what a bruise is, and maybe even how old the bruise is, but in no way can he, or any equivalent surgeon, pathologist or anatomist today tell us how the bruise got there.
And, I doubt Dr. Phillips had any street experience of the coupling practices of the prostitute.

Now, if you see any evidence in that quote that no-one else has seen, then by all means, enlighten us.

Strongly disagree with your limiting of what a pathologist can do and should do, which is also to give reasons for injuries. A cause. It is called wound analysis with peer-review galore and is accepted in most western courts as it was accepted in that inquest.