The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL

[lynn cates]

clue

Hello Batman.

". . . only you and Lynn seem to have any clue what is going on . . ."

Actually, CD should be included. But I agree, you and some others HAVEN'T a clue.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

yes

Hello John.

"That's even more fatal to your argument! Now we have Stride holding on to the cachous during a tug of war match!"

Precisely. Some of these lads post before thinking.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

soon?

Hello Batman.

"The rest of us can do it."

Yes, indeed. So when will you do that?

Cheers.
LC

[Batman]

Well giving them a chance to explain the levitation argument has gone unexplained and remains as ambiguous as it originally was, we are back to the old idea that hitting the deck always equals fumble.

The rest of us simply give Stride more credit than that. So I'll move on from this point.

Now as for attacks involving the rear. These are undone by the lack of any blood on the scarf and lack of arterial spray. As the medics correctly said, she was killed while on the ground. As the inquest concluded, addressing issues of copy cats etc., that the killer of Stride demonstrated.

1) the same method of killing Nichols and Chapman.
2) the same method of forensic awareness.

Since we get no objections to this in the contemporary, anything less is just a modern view.

[John G]

Well giving them a chance to explain the levitation argument has gone unexplained and remains as ambiguous as it originally was, we are back to the old idea that hitting the deck always equals fumble.

The rest of us simply give Stride more credit than that. So I'll move on from this point.

Now as for attacks involving the rear. These are undone by the lack of any blood on the scarf and lack of arterial spray. As the medics correctly said, she was killed while on the ground. As the inquest concluded, addressing issues of copy cats etc., that the killer of Stride demonstrated.

1) the same method of killing Nichols and Chapman.
2) the same method of forensic awareness.

Since we get no objections to this in the contemporary, anything less is just a modern view.

I don't see why she couldn't have been attacked from the rear. Dr Phillips was clearly of the opinion that arterial spray could of been avoided by cutting the throat whilst the victim was on the ground.

You say there was no blood on the scarf, but there was no blood on any of the clothing. Dr Phillips seemed to think that the stream of blood was directed toward the gutter in the yard.

[John G]

Hello John.

"That's even more fatal to your argument! Now we have Stride holding on to the cachous during a tug of war match!"

Precisely. Some of these lads post before thinking.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

Yes, and the fact that he "tried" to pull Stride into the street, and didn't succeed, clearly implies that she was resisting. And wouldn't it be a reasonable assumption that she would utilise both arms, and therefore hands, in this attempt to resit being pulled into the street?

[lynn cates]

do it

Hello Batman. Thanks.

"The rest of us simply give Stride more credit than that."

Please speak for yourself. MANY posters understand forensics. You CLEARLY do not.

"Now as for attacks involving the rear. These are undone by the lack of any blood on the scarf and lack of arterial spray."

Nonsense. Her scarf was cut--just as in my reconstruction. Why not do one yourself? What are you afraid of, mate?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

forensics

Hello John.

"You say there was no blood on the scarf, but there was no blood on any of the clothing. Dr Phillips seemed to think that the stream of blood was directed toward the gutter in the yard."

Absolutely. As I said, SOME of us can do simply forensics; others can't--even if they DO take a super hero's name. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

I don't see why she couldn't have been attacked from the rear. Dr Phillips was clearly of the opinion that arterial spray could of been avoided by cutting the throat whilst the victim was on the ground.

You say there was no blood on the scarf, but there was no blood on any of the clothing. Dr Phillips seemed to think that the stream of blood was directed toward the gutter in the yard.

That is just how I see it John.
Stride's throat was cut, apparently, when she was more or less horizontal, as no blood was apparent on the clothes around her neck or shoulders.
Which tends to beg the question, why wasn't she resisting?

Was she unconscious at this point?

[c.d.]

Hello CD. Thanks.

"A very simple and reasonable explanation would be that the B.S. man was not her killer."

Agreed. But if he existed, AND Israel spoke truly, he was.

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

You keep stating this as though it were an undeniable fact when in reality it is merely your opinion. Stating it over and over again doesn't turn it into a fact. Surely you have told your students the same thing.

c.d.

[c.d.]

Leaving the cachous aside for a moment, what do people think about the chances of Stride being killed by another man other than BS? It's remarkable that Liz would be assaulted by one man only to fall prey to a different murderer mere moments later, but there are documented cases where women have escaped one attacker only to run into someone else who attacks/rapes them. If Schwartz's account is trustworthy, that means the only known suspect we have other than BS man & Schwartz himself, is Pipeman. I know it's a stretch, but if the Ripper was opportunistic this makes sense. Pipeman didn't go looking for a copper or save the damsel in distress, he just watches and waits for the outcome. Then Schwartz comes walking by, and it's only then that Pipeman decides to move out, pursuing Schwartz away from the crime-scene. When he returns, BS Man has gone and Stride is in a state, allowing him to offer a 'helping hand'.

That's IF we believe Schwartz, which I'm not sure I do.

Hello Harry,

Assault is a very heavily loaded word as is attack. Schwartz simply said that he saw a man push a woman to the ground. Assault implies a malicious intention and we have no way of knowing if that was the case. The whole thing could have been started by Stride herself for all we know. The B.S. man might have simply wanted to give her a shove for mouthing off to him. Nothing more. Consider that Whitechapel was a rough place inhabited by hard drinking working men. A lone woman on the street late at night right after the pubs have closed being hassled a bit doesn't really seem that remarkable to me.

B.S. man shoving Liz and then going on his way solves a number of problems:

1. Why the B.S. man would go on to kill Liz after being seen by Schwartz and Pipeman - simple answer, he didn't.

2. The cachous question - spilling the cachous becomes moot if she took them out after the B.S. man left.

3. No sound of an argument after the B.S. man left like one might expect in a domestic - No argument because he had left before she was killed.

c.d.

[c.d.]

Hi Jon

I appreciate you are going with your own experiences regarding the above.

But did you know that it`s quite easy to make a fist around something held in your hand, it will even bolster the strength of your fist. Some naughty, aggressive people actually hold things in their fist when fighting.

Also, as Batman has repeatedly posted, it`s very easy to use the heel of your palm to break a fall. In fact, some contact sports like judo or aikido encourage this, as it`s very easy to break a wrist falling on an open hand.

But the bottom line is that if you don`t want to drop something, you don`t.
Which is obviously what Stride did.

Hello Jon,

But that implies a conscious intention to do so knowing that you are going to be thrown to the ground. I doubt that Liz had time to make that decision. And even if she did, why would she do so? They were cheap breath mints not a family heirloom made of spun glass. Why take a chance on breaking your wrist as you yourself mention?

c.d.

[c.d.]

Anyway, who saw Stride get up?

You don't need to open your palm to push yourself up.

You can use.
1. Base of a close fist.
2. Same, with elbows.
3. Knuckles.

The other hand is also free to support 1, 2, 3.

Hello Batman,

You are correct. You don't need to use you palm to push yourself up but I would suggest that it is the most natural way of doing it and the one that most people would use.

c.d.

[John G]

That is just how I see it John.
Stride's throat was cut, apparently, when she was more or less horizontal, as no blood was apparent on the clothes around her neck or shoulders.
Which tends to beg the question, why wasn't she resisting?

Was she unconscious at this point?

Hi Jon,

That's a good question. Of course, JtR's MO was to suffocate the victim prior to cutting their throat, however, there doesn't seem to be any obvious signs of suffocation in Stride's case. I believe it has been argued that the killer attempted to strangle her with the scarf, but I'm not sure what evidence there is for that proposition, either.

Interestingly, Dr Blackwell was asked if the scarf was pulled tight enough to prevent her calling out. He replied, "I could not say". Might that suggest an attempted strangulation?The Coroner also asked Dr Blackwell if "a hand might have been put on her nose and mouth". He replied, " Yes, and the cut on the throat was probably instantaneous". Does this suggest an attempt to suffocate the victim and render her unconscious?

I do think that Stride was subjected to a rapid and unexpected attack from behind, during which Stride was quickly forced to the ground. In such a situation her natural inclination may have been to clench her hand into a fist, rather than in a direct assault, where her natural inclination would be to put both hands up to defend herself and ward off her attacker.

I've also speculated that Stride entered the Yard with her assailant whilst in a relaxed state but that something occurred to make her feel uneasy. As a consequence she turns around and heads for the exit. Of course, as she would be tense at this moment it would also be natural for her to clench her fingers.

[lynn cates]

re-enactment

Hello Jon.

"Stride's throat was cut, apparently, when she was more or less horizontal . . ."

Well put. This approximates her position in my re-enactment.

"Which tends to bring up the question, why wasn't she resisting?"

I think that, again, my re-enactment shows why.

Cheers.
LC