If Jack had been cornered

[kensei]

I don't think I was considering "fight or flight" when I posed the question so much as "get away at any cost" as opposed to the Ripper dropping his knife, putting up his hands and just saying, "All right, you got me." I wonder if he would have had that minor level of civility, or if he would have just been like a cornered animal.

[Nothing to see]

OK. Take Stride. Many don't count her as one of the canon. I do. That's JMO. Jack was in Dutfield's Yard when Diemschutz entered. Blood was running, she was a fresh kill. Diemschutz sees a person, he thinks a woman, on the ground. He thinks it's his wife, passed out. He doesn't go poking around, he goes inside the club to look for his wife.

Jack isn't threatened. He leaves and meets up with Eddowes.

If Diemschutz had gone looking around I think it would have been a different story. I believe Jack would have fought to save himself. He wasn't finished yet.

[kensei]

With Diemshutz I think it would have been fairly easy for Jack to just yell at him, flash his knife, or maybe hit him once or throw him to the ground, and then run. Diemshutz was freaked out. He wasn't about to go making a solo civilian take-down.

[Nothing to see]

You think Diemschutz was freaked out when he saw the the person on the ground? He knew something was wrong, he thought it was his wife, he went inside. But after all the commotion had settled down he was inside taking care of paper work. Doesn't seem a very excitable type to me.

If Diemschutz had gone poking around in corners I agree he would probably have found a nasty surprise. But he didn't.

[kensei]

Nothing To See, I'm glad we seem to agree that Liz was a Ripper victim and that Jack ducked into the darkness of Dutfield's Yard to hide when Diemschutz appeared. A lot of people don't buy that.

[Fisherman]

"A lot of people don't buy that."

Moreover, some would not accept it if it was handed free gratis to them

The best,
Fisherman

[Nothing to see]

Nothing To See, I'm glad we seem to agree that Liz was a Ripper victim and that Jack ducked into the darkness of Dutfield's Yard to hide when Diemschutz appeared. A lot of people don't buy that.

Take Nicholls. He could have gone, no problem. Chapman? What a chance.
Stride? In the shadows. Diemschutz wasn't looking. Eddowes? Many places to go. Kelly? He was in a room.
JMO.

[Mascara & Paranoia]

There's nothing wrong with the theory that Jack was interrupted with his killing of Stride at all, or that he hid in the shadows of the yard. I think the problem with Stride's murder is mostly down to the actual throat wound and the supposedly different type of knife used to kill her. Even the absence of mutilation isn't the thing that casts doubt over her candidacy as a Ripper victim.

[Fisherman]

M&P writes:

"Even the absence of mutilation isn't the thing that casts doubt over her (Strides, my remark) candidacy as a Ripper victim."

You are right here, M&P - but you ought not to have been!

This is where the differences between Tabram and Stride come into play. For some reason, people are married to the idea that the Ripper needed to cut necks. I think that is wrong; I only think he did this to ensure death and, foremost, silence.
Though he DID cut the necks of Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly, that may very well owe to a gained insight into the practicalities of such a measure.
The abdomen, though, is something we KNOW he took an active interest in. He opened up, and he eviscerated, and that is not something you do beacause it has practical implications!!

In conclusion: If the cut neck is there, it is of interest. But that is of subordinate interest to the occasions where we find a cut to the abdomen! Therefore, throughout the years, Stride and Tabram have both achieved wrong amounts of recognition as being Jack´s - in Strides case, she has been overrated, and as for Tabram, she has been too much overlooked.

The best,
Fisherman

[Mascara & Paranoia]

But what I'm getting at is that if Jack did kill Stride, then why did he only use his other alleged knife that one time (and, pretending for a moment she was one of his works too) and with Tabram?

That's the main thing with Stride's and Tabram's murders, and I do get where you're coming from and think you have some pretty neat theories, but it does come down to the knife wound to identify whether or not Jack killed her, not because that was his interested, you're right, it was just a quick way of silencing and killing them, but the strength and way in which Jack slashed Polly's, (especially) Annie's and Kate's throats (I haven't MJK's autopsy[?] stuff in a while, so I'm not sure how severe hers was) are a lot more powerful and not in any way sloppy attempts at cutting a throat.

With that in mind, Stride's murder seems like the work of a different person to the Ripper, and I find it highly unlikely that a stabber like in the case of Tabram (whether he did the whole 39[?] or just two ) could so severely slash a throat in the 'sophistocated' manner in which Jack did, only a few weeks after his allegedly first kill.

Where the hell did he pick up that 'skill' from within such a short time period? It would take a little bit practise to achieve Jack's stellar throat-cutting with Polly et al and there are no reports of severe cases of throat-slashing in and around Whitechapel between Tabram's murder and the canonicals'.

Unless he was a butcher and practised on those in the meantime, but I'd have thought the throat of a human and the throat of an animal would be quite different to slash and be a bit pointless.

[Nothing to see]

M&P writes:

"Even the absence of mutilation isn't the thing that casts doubt over her (Strides, my remark) candidacy as a Ripper victim."

You are right here, M&P - but you ought not to have been!

This is where the differences between Tabram and Stride come into play. For some reason, people are married to the idea that the Ripper needed to cut necks. I think that is wrong; I only think he did this to ensure death and, foremost, silence.Though he DID cut the necks of Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly, that may very well owe to a gained insight into the practicalities of such a measure.
The abdomen, though, is something we KNOW he took an active interest in. He opened up, and he eviscerated, and that is not something you do beacause it has practical implications!!

In conclusion: If the cut neck is there, it is of interest. But that is of subordinate interest to the occasions where we find a cut to the abdomen! Therefore, throughout the years, Stride and Tabram have both achieved wrong amounts of recognition as being Jack´s - in Strides case, she has been overrated, and as for Tabram, she has been too much overlooked.

The best,
Fisherman

Sorry FM My turn to quote. I understand now why you don't quote. I guess it's because you're not seeing things in English. I don't mean to be rude.

I understand now.

You're wrong about Jack's killing method. Choke/strangle into unconsciousness. Throat slashed. Body eviscerated.

Tabram was none of these.

[Fisherman]

NTS, a possible suffocation/strangulation was only witnessed about in one (1) case, that of Chapman.

As for the rest, we are at a loss I´m afraid. So I´d hold my horses if I were you before I tell somebody they are wrong...

The best,
Fisherman

[Mascara & Paranoia]

That just proves that Chapman was the only one who got asphyxiated while being strangled to the ground. Polly, Annie and Kate all had their throats slashed whilst laying down (hence the no spray of blood). So unless Jack asked them to lie on the floor with their skirts up to do the business, I think it's a safe bet to assume that he strangled them to the ground before cutting their throats in order to silence them. The strangling was the silencing, the throat-cutting was the quick killing. Or at least that's the way I always perceived things, and if that is the case then Jack obviously clamped down harder on Annie's throat than the others when he was flooring her, hence the signs of asphyxia. I don't think it was his intention to actually strangle them 'properly'.

[Nothing to see]

Hey FM. I don't think I'm wrong, at all, about how Jack killed.

[ken]

firstly kensie, never worry about asking anyone on here to use their imaginations when discussing the ripper as due to lack of evidence and useful infomation on the subject, imagination has become tool no.1.

i think its an interesting question, personally i reckon if 'he' was caught in the act by the police 'he' would have reacted in much the same way as john christie did when arrested on putney bridge