If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
An important difference between the two suspects is that all resources and the lead investigators worked on the Schwartz lead while they divide on Hutchinson, with Abberline taking charge of it while Swanson and Cox report on stakeouts and house to house searches.
It is simply more likely than not that someone seen assaulting someone who dies soon after is responsible. In this case the person who was assaulted is dead which doesn't make it a common assault.
I think you missed my point here, Batman. If the B.S. man left the scene immediately after Schwartz fled without any further harm done to Liz he would only be guilty of pushing a woman to the ground and nothing else. So to kill her to cover up that simple assault by committing a hanging offense makes no sense. Especially after having been seen by Schwartz.
I think you missed my point here, Batman. If the B.S. man left the scene immediately after Schwartz fled without any further harm done to Liz he would only be guilty of pushing a woman to the ground and nothing else. So to kill her to cover up that simple assault by committing a hanging offense makes no sense. Especially after having been seen by Schwartz.
c.d.
People got mobbed and nearly lynched for less at that time.
He would also be a JtR suspect given they where looking for someone behaving like him.
If he was JtR then he would want to avoid that, especially if he was already interviewed at another earlier time.
She can ID him.
Could have ID him, but not anymore. She is dead.
I think your argument CD is more appropriate for the conspiracy theory. Why murder a prostitute during the ripper murders for soliciting outside a club?
JtR was seen by people other than Schwartz. He isn't very stealthy at all, but maybe his getaways are.
I don't have a problem with this skepticism, the problem is though your entire books thesis drops your own line of criticism and you make connections that aren't just a few feet between an assault and the assaulted persons body found, but across thousands of miles of Atlantic ocean for your suspect. You even connect him to the person being seen just like BSman but in even less suspicious circumstances.
I don't have a problem with this skepticism, the problem is though your entire books thesis drops your own line of criticism and you make connections that aren't just a few feet between an assault and the assaulted persons body found, but across thousands of miles of Atlantic ocean for your suspect. You even connect him to the person being seen just like BSman but in even less suspicious circumstances.
You can't have your cake and not eat it.
Its not skepticism its fact, and accepting facts seem to be a bit short on your menu
Trevor you cant even demonstrate Carl Feigenbaum was in Whitechapel.
This is what I mean. Your are skeptical of Schwartz but then claim Brown was strangled and then mutilated in the East River Hotel by a man who was listed in the hotel’s register as C. Kniclo and who was actually Feigenbaum.
You are using different standards here on cb compared to your book.
Trevor you cant even demonstrate Carl Feigenbaum was in Whitechapel.
This is what I mean. Your are skeptical of Schwartz but then claim Brown was strangled and then mutilated in the East River Hotel by a man who was listed in the hotel’s register as C. Kniclo and who was actually Feigenbaum.
You are using different standards here on cb compared to your book.
This thread is not about Feigenbaum.
Getting back to this thread which has also gone way off track. Just because a person was present at a crime scene it doesn't mean they were involved in the crime.
Well your signature always points to him so I don't see how you can say your position on him is absent here.
Overarching theories are normal, that incorporate several lines of investigations. Hence why SKs get linked. Impossible to avoid, especially on the topic on the whitechapel murders.
We have lots of witness testimony seeing the victims with someone or even hearing them being assaulted, so yes, he even attacked during a double beat of mitre sq.
Its in escape that he is stealthy, not attacks.
I see no reason given why you discounted Stride at all.
We have lots of witness testimony seeing the victims with someone or even hearing them being assaulted, so yes, he even attacked during a double beat of mitre sq.
Its in escape that he is stealthy, not attacks.
I see no reason given why you discounted Stride at all.
"It might have been given to her by an aspiring suitor and therefore had nothing to do with the cost of her services."
Very well. But I have difficulty with that kind of behaviour amongst the British. Surely--if Liz was a prostitute--one need not "make up to her" with favours? (But in France, this was not uncommon, especially with the better classes.)
Comment