The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL

[lynn cates]

that's the life

Hello Batman. Thanks.

"Like your special man can attack a woman and have her still holding sweets in her hand, but BSman can't right?"

More of your nonsense? I have corrected you REPEATEDLY on this but, for some some reason you fail to grasp the difference between:

1. being thrown to the pavement

and

2. being lain on the ground.

Now, go the the board and write 100 times, "I will not continue to spout nonsense."

And have it done before sunrise, else . . . (heh-heh)

Hail Caesar.
LC

[Wickerman]

Why reject Swanson who with White is more than capable of exposing faux witnesses like Packard. Would still love to hear why Schwartz didn't get investigated just as rigourly as Packard.

Packer was not really investigated, he did it to himself, by first saying he saw no-one, and nothing of interest, to then claiming he saw the grape-man with Stride, and them standing around.
The fact he changed the times this occurred also didn't help his claims either.

Swanson only claimed he was an unreliable witness, that is from a legal perspective. Swanson's opinion does not mean Packer did not see anyone, he likely did, and probably the same man seen by PC Smith, at the same spot, at the same time.
But, due to the inconsistent story line, Swanson justifiably admitted, the police cannot use him.

Schwartz was a whole different case, the police had to actually investigate his story.

[c.d.]

Hello Abby.

"the only "Problem" is with people like yourself (and the onus is on you and the other cashou crowd BTW) who use the inane idea that because they were found in her hand, BS man could not have been her killer."

Inane ONLY to those who cannot follow a simple forensic recreation. John has no problem on that head.

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

I will just mention in passing that I fell off my bike last week. Landed on my hands with my palms outstretched. Didn't think about it, it just happened that way, so it was a natural reaction. Nice couple of bruises on my hand to show for it. And when I got up? Well, I put my weight on my hands with palms outstretched again not thinking about it.

To be fair, I don't think anybody putting forth the cachous argument has ever stated that it would be absolutely impossible for Stride to have held on to the cachous throughout her encounter with the B.S. man only that it seems quite improbable.

As Lynn has stated, if you think it through it is hardly an inane argument.

c.d.

[Wyatt Earp]

think like a killer

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.

Again, as a man who had been seen assaulting a prostitute on the streets of Whitechapel during the wee hours of the morning, he would have been a person of interest to the police.

Why would Jack willingly submit to a police investigation—which would put him on their radar, which among other things would involve their looking into his background and previous movements, which could involve their sticking him in front of Elizabeth Long, and which could involve their keeping close tabs on his future movements—why would he willingly submit to all of that, not knowing how the investigation would play out, when all he had to do was knife her and get out of there? A murder meant nothing to this guy.

Perhaps you can provide a satisfactory answer to that question.

[Wyatt Earp]

To my mind, with his shouts of "Lipski", across the street to Schwartz, the press report of him stumbling around drunk, and his assault on Stride, and failed attempt to drag her into the street in front of two witnesses, all combine to create the impression of a somewhat unsubtle and unsophisticated, if not to say completely stupid, individual.

John, I think you should drop the “drunken fool” objection. As we know, many serial killers have been under the influence when they committed their crimes. If Jack was drunk that night, it’s not hard to see how he could have lost his temper with Stride, particularly if she had said something smart to him in rebuffing him—again, it’s possible he hadn’t yet noticed Schwartz, who was just coming onto the scene, and it’s possible that Pipeman was a friend or accomplice of his. The actual murder was not conducted in the street, it was conducted later, in the yard, in the blitzkrieg style typical of the Ripper.

I don’t see any “cachous dilemma” at all. At some point after Stride had picked herself up, he either gave her the cachous as part of his effort to gain her cooperation, or she took them out on her own.

There is nothing about Schwartz’s statement that should cause us to rule out the possibility that BSM was the Ripper. In this I agree with what the police seem to have thought at the time.

[Batman]

As you've noted yourself, citing Ted Bundy, successful serial killers don't have to be highly intelligent and organised. However, even Bundy wasn't stupid enough to launch direct assaults against victims, in public places and in front of witnesses.

Actually he did. Was even stupid enough to give people his real name. See the lake incident.

[lynn cates]

ouch

Hello CD. Thanks.

So sorry for the miscue. When I was younger, such abrasions were very painful. (But, at my advanced age, I have many such and am unaware of them. My ability to feel pain has rapidly decreased.)

Yes, what you identify is instinctive. It is highly unlikely that Liz held them GIVEN the veracity of Schwartz.

Cheers.
LC

[Batman]

Of course, we also have the statement of PC Smith and James Brown, that appear to contradict Schwartz. I wonder if all of these factors lead the police to question Schwartz's evidence and loose faith in him.

As Begg rightly points out, its the opposite. They go from doubting him to accepting him and say clearly they no longer have any reason to doubt him. In fact that's probably Swanson correcting those press reports because he uses the same language.

[Batman]

Packer was not really investigated...

Yeah he was. The investigators name was White.

[lynn cates]

before

Hello Wyatt.

"Again, as a man who had been seen assaulting a prostitute on the streets of Whitechapel during the wee hours of the morning, he would have been a person of interest to the police."

Please be aware that the purported incident happened BEFORE the "JTR" business was widespread.

Cheers.
LC

[John G]

As Begg rightly points out, its the opposite. They go from doubting him to accepting him and say clearly they no longer have any reason to doubt him. In fact that's probably Swanson correcting those press reports because he uses the same language.

But Abberline initially had total confidence in George Hutchinson. The fact is the police were desperate for witnesses. However, as soon as someone more reliable came along, Lawende, Schwartz seems to have been quietly discarded.

[John G]

Actually he did. Was even stupid enough to give people his real name. See the lake incident.

Who did Bundy assault in front of witnesses? Even Robert Napper wasn't that disorganized, and he was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia!

[c.d.]

Again, as a man who had been seen assaulting a prostitute on the streets of Whitechapel during the wee hours of the morning, he would have been a person of interest to the police.

Why would Jack willingly submit to a police investigation—which would put him on their radar, which among other things would involve their looking into his background and previous movements, which could involve their sticking him in front of Elizabeth Long, and which could involve their keeping close tabs on his future movements—why would he willingly submit to all of that, not knowing how the investigation would play out, when all he had to do was knife her and get out of there? A murder meant nothing to this guy.

Perhaps you can provide a satisfactory answer to that question.

Hello Wyatt,

Whitechapel was a rough place filled with working class men. I don't think that harassment of women by men, drunk or otherwise, simply stopped during the time when the Ripper was active. I can't see the police saying aha, that's got to be our man every time a woman was shoved, cussed at or given a black eye.

I agree that given a choice the B.S. man would have preferred not to have been questioned by the police at all but a simple and believable story should have been quite easy to concoct. "I was on my way home from the pub, guess I had a bit too much to drink. Anyway, this here woman asks me if I wanted to (fill in the proper Victorian expression) and grabs my arm. I told her to piss off and she said I looked like the type that didn't like women so I gave her a shove. Maybe I pushed a little harder than I should have. Sorry about that."

We know that hundreds of men were questioned but nobody was arrested so it would seem that there was only so much the police could do unless they caught the killer in the act. Were all of those hundreds of men brought before witnesses? Were all those men's backgrounds thoroughly checked out? Did all of them have their movements tracked as a result? Unless the B.S. man had possessions from previous victims I think he would be off the hook.

You also left out the key element in your argument. The B.S. man had been seen by Schwartz and the Pipe Man. Murder is a hanging offense. Being arrested for pushing a woman to the ground would probably get you a don't do it again. Finally, how likely is it that Stride would have wanted to file charges if she were in fact soliciting?

Seems to me that just walking away was his best course of action.

c.d.

[John G]

John, I think you should drop the “drunken fool” objection. As we know, many serial killers have been under the influence when they committed their crimes. If Jack was drunk that night, it’s not hard to see how he could have lost his temper with Stride, particularly if she had said something smart to him in rebuffing him—again, it’s possible he hadn’t yet noticed Schwartz, who was just coming onto the scene, and it’s possible that Pipeman was a friend or accomplice of his. The actual murder was not conducted in the street, it was conducted later, in the yard, in the blitzkrieg style typical of the Ripper.

I don’t see any “cachous dilemma” at all. At some point after Stride had picked herself up, he either gave her the cachous as part of his effort to gain her cooperation, or she took them out on her own.

There is nothing about Schwartz’s statement that should cause us to rule out the possibility that BSM was the Ripper. In this I agree with what the police seem to have thought at the time.

So, despite resisting BS man's attempts to drag her into the street-and as a consequence, being spun around and thrown to the ground-Stride quickly relaxes, regains her composure, and calmly takes out the cachous? Not only that, but she then agrees to walk down a pitch black dark passage with the same man whose just assaulted her and whom she was valiantly resisting? Somehow, I don't think so!

And what about BS man. One minute he's trying to drag Stride into the street and, when she resists, he spins her around and throws her to the ground in front of two witnesses; the next, he's controlled enough to quickly calm her down, and then manages to successfully charm her into entering a pitch black dark passage with him? Maybe he sweetened the deal by offering her a couple of tickets to the opera as well as the cachous! Anyway, not only that, this same bungling fool then rapidly overpowers Stride, without warning, and successfully slits her throat, whilst avoiding arterial spray. And he does all of this without attracting the attention of Mrs D, who's sat a few feet away, in the kitchen with the window open. Or Morris Eagle, whose convinced he would have heard any cries for help. Somehow I don't think so!

Oh, and what of Schwartz? He charges off as far as the railway arches and, in doing so, he runs past his own house! Somehow I don't think so. And what of James Brown whose evidence directly contradicts Schwartz's? And what of the lack of press interest, apart from the sensationalist Star? Who in any event stated that Schwartz's story was "not wholly accepted". And the following day pointed out that "The Leman Street Police have reason to doubt the Story." I bet they did!

[Wyatt Earp]

Whitechapel was a rough place filled with working class men. I don't think that harassment of women by men, drunk or otherwise, simply stopped during the time when the Ripper was active. I can't see the police saying aha, that's got to be our man every time a woman was shoved, cussed at or given a black eye.

No, but things were different now. The police were looking for a serial killer or multiple killer and BSM had been seen assaulting a prostitute on the streets of Whitechapel in the early hours. He would have been of interest to them, c.d.

I agree that given a choice the B.S. man would have preferred not to have been questioned by the police at all but a simple and believable story should have been quite easy to concoct. "I was on my way home from the pub, guess I had a bit too much to drink. Anyway, this here woman asks me if I wanted to (fill in the proper Victorian expression) and grabs my arm. I told her to piss off and she said I looked like the type that didn't like women so I gave her a shove. Maybe I pushed a little harder than I should have. Sorry about that."

And if the police didn’t buy his story, or simply chose to continue their interest in him, he’d possibly be looking at an investigation. Why take that risk when he didn’t need to?

Unless the B.S. man had possessions from previous victims I think he would be off the hook.

Easy enough to say, but who knows how such an investigation would have played out? At minimum he would now be on the radar of the police, and it’s possible they would be monitoring his movements in the future.

You also left out the key element in your argument. The B.S. man had been seen by Schwartz and the Pipe Man. Murder is a hanging offense. Being arrested for pushing a woman to the ground would probably get you a don't do it again.

But if neither could ID him, or if Schwartz couldn’t ID him and Pipeman was his friend, then why should he care if it was a hanging offense? He couldn’t be found, and he wasn’t. Also, he had committed this “hanging offense” before, he doesn't seem to have been too concerned about committing this particular crime.

Finally, how likely is it that Stride would have wanted to file charges if she were in fact soliciting?

Why would Stride have needed to file charges? The police could have found their way to her, Schwartz knew what she looked like, and if she could have simply named her assailant, that would have been extremely helpful to them.

Seems to me that just walking away was his best course of action.

I disagree. If Stride could ID him, walking away was fraught with risks. By quickly murdering her and getting out of there, he chose an efficient and effective solution.