Abberline solved the GSG

[Bridewell]

The problem with that scenario is that ..IF..he went on to kill her, after being seen by Schwartz and the Pipe Man, he was careless in the extreme. Not at all in the character we have formed of the image of the Whitechapel murderer.

Maybe our image is false.

Good point, Jon. How do we know that the killer was as careful as we suppose? Perhaps he wasn't careful, just lucky and always attacked in the same reckless manner - but was seen to do so on this one occasion only. This is where I have difficulty with the whole "Murderer can't have been interrupted" scenario. If what Schwartz saw was not a mere assault but the initial stage of a Ripper murder then, by definition, there was an interruption, but by Schwartz, not Dimshits. (I concede the magnitude of the 'if' there btw, to save anyone the need for pointing it out!)

[DVV]

The problem with that scenario is that ..IF..he went on to kill her, after being seen by Schwartz and the Pipe Man, he was careless in the extreme.

Hi Jon

How can you say he was "careless in the extreme" ?
In that scenario, having also been seen by Stride, he dispatched her and fled (in case Schwartz or Pipo would bump into a policeman).

That said, I've never thought JtR was careful in the extreme.

I'd like also to point out again that if BSM was JtR, he obviously fled because of Schwartz and Pipo. Diemshutz has nothing to do here.

It's a serious flaw (that you can find even in excellent books, for example, Begg The Facts), to consider at the same time that BSM was the killer and have been disturbed by Diemshutz.

In other terms : if the killer has been disturbed by Diemshutz, BSM is innocent.

[Cogidubnus]

Nice one David...I think you've established your fork in the flow chart.

All the best

Dave

[Ben]

I'd like also to point out again that if BSM was JtR, he obviously fled because of Schwartz and Pipo.

Absolutely, David.

When something is the same, there is no doubt. When you 'think', or 'believe' something to be the same, then you express an element of doubt.

That's true, Jon, but note the crucial distinction between the two sentences:

I believe they were the same.

I believe they were similar.

Lawende stated the former, which carries considerably more weight towards cementing an identification than an observation that they were merely "similar", and goes some way to accounting for the police interest in Lawende as a witness.

Yes. But she died about 5 feet west of where she would have met BSM. I'm sure you're not suggesting he came at her as she backed into the yard?

No, Lynn, I think it's far more likely that BS pulled out a knife after Schwartz and pipeman fled the scene and used this as a means of both silencing her and coaxing her into the darkness of the yard, possibly with false assurances that he wasn't going to hurt her; that he just wanted to use her services for free. Once it became apparent that he did intend further violence, it is likely that a brief struggle occurred before BS killed her.

Well, if both are walking out of the yard, yes, perfectly natural.

Not really. If Stride's killer took her completely by surprise, blind instinct would cause her to release the cachous. This reality, coupled with Schwartz's evidence points squarely away from Stride being taken by surprise by her killer.

All the best,
Ben

[Wickerman]

Hi Dave.

Hi Jon

How can you say he was "careless in the extreme" ?
In that scenario, having also been seen by Stride, he dispatched her and fled (in case Schwartz or Pipo would bump into a policeman).

Haven't we had this exchange before?
The question arose, why kill her?

BSman is seen assaulting Stride, you don't hang for pushing a streetwalker down on her ass, so Schwartz only witnesses an assault.

Now (in your view) BSman turns around and sliced her throat?, which elevates the importance of what Schwartz saw. There was no need to do this, ie; "careless in the extreme".

I'd like also to point out again that if BSM was JtR, he obviously fled because of Schwartz and Pipo. Diemshutz has nothing to do here.

I'm flexible on her time of death, but I'm saying he had no reason to flee due to Schwartz, she wasn't dead when Schwartz passed the scene.
I'm not seeing a good enough reason for BSman to carry on and murder a woman after being seen by two men roughing her up.

It's a serious flaw (that you can find even in excellent books, for example, Begg The Facts), to consider at the same time that BSM was the killer and have been disturbed by Diemshutz.

I don't disagree, but equally your own hypothesis also has a serious flaw.

In other terms : if the killer has been disturbed by Diemshutz, BSM is innocent.

BSman was clearly not disturbed by Schwartz, he proceeded to kill her. (Your view?)

[Ben]

On BS killing Stride despite being seen by witnesses; I suppose it depends on whether BS was a one-off killer or the the actual ripper. If the latter, it can be argued very persuasively that he was already too far mentally committed to the deed to abort at the last moment. An additional consideration is the perceived necessity to dispatch the most important and most incriminating witness of all, i.e. Stride herself had he allowed her to live, thereafter to inform the police, press and public.

[lynn cates]

interruption

Hello Ben.

"it can be argued very persuasively that he was already too far mentally committed to the deed to abort at the last moment."

Which makes an excellent argument against interruption.

Cheers.
LC

[DVV]

Hi Jon

Haven't we had this exchange before?

Could be, my youth. Don't you know I'm much older than Lynn ?

The question arose, why kill her?

Fact is that in all probability, he did.
And why kill Nichols and Chapman ?

BSman is seen assaulting Stride, you don't hang for pushing a streetwalker down on her ass, so Schwartz only witnesses an assault.

First, as I've pointed out, because Stride was also a witness. And his target. (Let me call BSM the Marschwartz Man.)
Second, because in September 30, what Schwartz had seen could be enough to call a policeman.

Think about this : if there was nothing frightful, why did Schwartz ran away ? So quickly and so far ? And why going to the police on the morrow ?

There was no need to do this, ie; "careless in the extreme".

No, Jon. If you're "careless in the extreme", you don't kill people in the street.

[Wickerman]

On BS killing Stride despite being seen by witnesses; I suppose it depends on whether BS was a one-off killer or the the actual ripper. If the latter, it can be argued very persuasively that he was already too far mentally committed to the deed to abort at the last moment.

Well, it can be argued, but I'm not so sure about the "persuasive" bit.
I mean, if he was the same killer who mutilates, he did abort, didn't he.
So if Schwartz didn't cause him to abort (apparently not you say?), then who did?

An additional consideration is the perceived necessity to dispatch the most important and most incriminating witness of all, i.e. Stride herself had he allowed her to live, thereafter to inform the police, press and public.

Incriminating?
He pushed and pulled her, and knocked her to the ground. This was not an uncommon occurrence in the rough East End. As is indicated by one reporter describing the fracas as looking like a marital dispute.

He could hardly have confessed to her he was Jack the Ripper, she'd have asked, "who the hell is that?".

All indications are that Stride was taken completely by surprise, no threats, no warnings, she had no idea what was about to happen.
This is consistent with the killer being someone else other than BSman.

[c.d.]

On BS killing Stride despite being seen by witnesses; I suppose it depends on whether BS was a one-off killer or the the actual ripper. If the latter, it can be argued very persuasively that he was already too far mentally committed to the deed to abort at the last moment. An additional consideration is the perceived necessity to dispatch the most important and most incriminating witness of all, i.e. Stride herself had he allowed her to live, thereafter to inform the police, press and public.

Hello Ben,

It wasn't just that he was seen by witnesses, it was that one of those witnesses ran off presumably to get the nearest policeman. He would have had to have been pretty far gone indeed not to take that into consideration.

Inform them of what? That he was the one who pushed her to the ground? It makes absolutely no sense that he would kill her ( and thus risk hanging) to prevent her from informing on him for something that was probably not even punishable.

Even if he had told her that he was the Ripper, he could always say that he was just trying to scare her.

I just don't see the BS man as her killer.

c.d.

[Wickerman]

Hi Dave.
My memory sucks too, so you're not alone.

First, as I've pointed out, because Stride was also a witness. And his target.

Witness to what though Dave?
(as to his target, maybe, maybe not)

(Let me call BSM the Marschwartz Man.)
Second, because in September 30, what Schwartz had seen could be enough to call a policeman.

So he kills her to avoid being accused of knocking her down?

Think about this : if there was nothing frightful, why did Schwartz ran away ? So quickly and so far ? And why going to the police on the morrow ?

Schwartz only claimed to run from Pipeman, not BSman.
He only stepped off the curb away from BSman to avoid the ensuing struggle, but the appearance of Pipeman, for whatever reason, caused him to run.

Wouldn't he go to the police once he heard about a murder occurring at the same spot he saw the aggravation?

[c.d.]

Sorry, Wickerman. Looks like our posts crossed.

c.d.

[Wickerman]

Sorry, Wickerman. Looks like our posts crossed.

c.d.

Thats ok C.D., Ben is likely used to getting caught in the crossfire

[c.d.]

Hello Ben.

"it can be argued very persuasively that he was already too far mentally committed to the deed to abort at the last moment."

Which makes an excellent argument against interruption.

Cheers.
LC

If he was that committed to the deed and was just too far gone to stop, wouldn't we expect Liz's body to be found on the exact same spot where Schwartz saw her being pushed to the ground?

c.d.

[c.d.]

Thats ok C.D., Ben is likely used to getting caught in the crossfire

Problem is he fires back.

c.d.