Pub or Street?

[Fisherman]

Nice pic, Mr Barnett! A touch of exoticism, those jars!!

[MrBarnett]

I’m with you, Christer. She could have bought them herself or someone could have bought them for her.

And she could have bought them on the night she was killed or days - weeks - beforehand.

I don’t think this brand of cachous would have been available in 1888, but these are probably the sort of jars from which they would have been dispensed into small bags or wraps of tissue paper at that time.

[Fisherman]

I’ve seen evidence that in the 1880s scented cachous were being sold at 1d to 3d per oz, and they would have probably been available loose at weights from 1/4 oz. So it seems unlikely that Stride, who worked at cleaning, who had a long term relationship with a man in employment, who occasionally received relief from the Swedish Church in Prince’s Square, and who to some extent operated as a prostitute, couldn’t have afforded to splurge a farthing on the occasional luxury such as a quarter of cachous wrapped in tissue paper.

There’s no reason to suppose she couldn’t have bought the cachous herself, but however she obtained them, she would probably have made them last. The packet found on her body needn’t have been bought on the day of her death.

All very true, Mr Barnett. Thank you for the information, much appreciated. I am not saying that we must accept that she bought the cachous herself, of course, only that we cannot possibly rule out that she did!

[Fisherman]

It's all a matter of probability, of course. Possibly, he...

1. was completely mistaken about the grapes, the clenched hands, who unclenched the non-clenched hands, the side of the hand holding 'grapes' he was looking at, and was bewildered as to why the grapes seem to stay wedded to the hand, after this point
2. did indeed witness someone move grapes from the hand, prior to the arrival of Johnston
3. lied about the clenched hand and grapes - the obvious reason would be to suggest that she gripped the grapes (and cachous) tightly when the killer struck, who then placed her down where she was found - thus no movement of the body after this point, which would preclude a backyard job

#1 is very long odds - I'd give you 100/1
#2 would suggest body tampering, probably for the reason given in #3. This is because she probably couldn't go to ground holding grapes and cachous in her hands - they must have been placed in her hands after the moment of murder. This would suggest club involvement in the murder.
#3 would suggest the club is trying extra hard to look innocent, because an Anarchist club with a poor rep needs to, or because some of them are up to their necks in the murder.
An innocent club telling lies is a risky strategy, so why bother, whereas a guilty club has little choice but to take risks.
Consequently, Diemschitz' claim to have seen grapes, and Kozebrodsky backing this up, looks bad.
The fact that at the inquest, Diemschitz has not only 'forgotten' about the grapes in one hand, and cachous in the other, but instead claims to have not even seen the position of the hands, make him look even more suspicious.
It's just not the sort of details that one would forget, after a single day.

I think it is a lot simpler. There were never any grapes in the hand (The Times of the 3:rd of October writes, quoting Blackwell: "The right hand was lying on the chest, and was smeared inside and out with blood. It was quite open.")

Now, if the hand was quite open and she was on her side with the hand dangling over her chest and quite open, logic dictates that no object, least of all round or oblong objects, would stay in the hand, and so we may conclude that the hand had not a single grape in it.

As for Diemschitz not speaking about the grapes at the inquest, that may well owe to him having realized by then that he got it wrong on the night.

Isnīt that a much less intricate and unlikely explanation than one of conspiracies and lies - and gravity-defying grapes?

[MrBarnett]

I’ve seen evidence that in the 1880s scented cachous were being sold at 1d to 3d per oz, and they would have probably been available loose at weights from 1/4 oz. So it seems unlikely that Stride, who worked at cleaning, who had a long term relationship with a man in employment, who occasionally received relief from the Swedish Church in Prince’s Square, and who to some extent operated as a prostitute, couldn’t have afforded to splurge a farthing on the occasional luxury such as a quarter of cachous wrapped in tissue paper.

There’s no reason to suppose she couldn’t have bought the cachous herself, but however she obtained them, she would probably have made them last. The packet found on her body needn’t have been bought on the day of her death.

[DJA]

Exclusive brand.

Sutton's Own.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Sorry, but we cannot possibly know how Stride spent her money - or even how much money she had to spend.

We can possibly know - on cheap food, booze, doss house accommodation and rent.
Very little left over.

If it had been a Rolex watch or a Bentley we were discussing, it would be another thing, but it is a few cachous wrapped in tissue, representing a very low value.

Half a dozen left, let's say.
So how many in the original packet?
Was it packet though?
If yes, then why aren't the cachous in commercial paper? Why tissue paper?
If no, then are these actually branded cachous, or were they home made - boiled up by Mrs Diemschitz in the kitchen of #40 Berner street?

Probability suggests she would not be a purchaser of lollies, or fruit, or potato pasta meals at pubs.
Someone planted the cachous on her, possibly also the grapes, and someone out of her social class bought her drinks and a nice meal, at the pub.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Yes, he could. How does that help your cause...?

It's all a matter of probability, of course. Possibly, he...

1. was completely mistaken about the grapes, the clenched hands, who unclenched the non-clenched hands, the side of the hand holding 'grapes' he was looking at, and was bewildered as to why the grapes seem to stay wedded to the hand, after this point
2. did indeed witness someone move grapes from the hand, prior to the arrival of Johnston
3. lied about the clenched hand and grapes - the obvious reason would be to suggest that she gripped the grapes (and cachous) tightly when the killer struck, who then placed her down where she was found - thus no movement of the body after this point, which would preclude a backyard job

#1 is very long odds - I'd give you 100/1
#2 would suggest body tampering, probably for the reason given in #3. This is because she probably couldn't go to ground holding grapes and cachous in her hands - they must have been placed in her hands after the moment of murder. This would suggest club involvement in the murder.
#3 would suggest the club is trying extra hard to look innocent, because an Anarchist club with a poor rep needs to, or because some of them are up to their necks in the murder.
An innocent club telling lies is a risky strategy, so why bother, whereas a guilty club has little choice but to take risks.
Consequently, Diemschitz' claim to have seen grapes, and Kozebrodsky backing this up, looks bad.
The fact that at the inquest, Diemschitz has not only 'forgotten' about the grapes in one hand, and cachous in the other, but instead claims to have not even seen the position of the hands, make him look even more suspicious.
It's just not the sort of details that one would forget, after a single day.

[Fisherman]

Her expenditure would have been across 4 categories:

1. food
2. booze
3. doss
4. clothes and miscellaneous items (rare)

No money for delicacies like sweetmeats and grapes.

I have an idea regarding the source of the sweetmeats (they were not cachous, in the medicinal sense).
Also, I have a theory as to who paid for her drinks at the Bricklayers Arms, and the meal, 'apparently consisting of cheese, potato, and farinaceous edibles'.

Sorry, but we cannot possibly know how Stride spent her money - or even how much money she had to spend. If it had been a Rolex watch or a Bentley we were discussing, it would be another thing, but it is a few cachous wrapped in tissue, representing a very low value.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

How do you know that she could not afford cachous? She worked, she had money, and we cannot possibly know how she spent them.

Her expenditure would have been across 4 categories:

1. food
2. booze
3. doss
4. clothes and miscellaneous items (rare)

No money for delicacies like sweetmeats and grapes.

I have an idea regarding the source of the sweetmeats (they were not cachous, in the medicinal sense).
Also, I have a theory as to who paid for her drinks at the Bricklayers Arms, and the meal, 'apparently consisting of cheese, potato, and farinaceous edibles'.

[Fisherman]

[/B]
No Christer, you know her hand was palm down on her breast.
To feel for the pulse with his fingers PC Lamb will lift the hand.
A grape or two will naturally fall to the ground out of sight.


I think the LEFT hand offered up a good chance of palpating for the pulse, Jon. But I donīt think Johnston took it, he just felt for warmth, since he knew Stride was dead.

No, no. you are forgetting her body was facing the wall. Her feet, her knees & left hand were therefore further away as PC Lamb had to be standing behind the body, by her back. So the most convenient hand was directly below him, the right hand across her breast.
The neck was not accessible, it was Johnson who untied her bodice at the neck, not PC Lamb. Johnson arrived after Lamb.

So are you now saying that Lamb was the one who lifted her hand? he was not, we have it on record that he never examined her hands. He felt for a pulse, but it seems he felt the left hand, not the right one, as per the Morning Advertiser:

"I put my hand on the face and on the arm. The face was slightly warm. I felt the wrist, but could not feel the pulse. I put my hand on the wrist, but the pulse had ceased to beat. The body was lying on the left side, and her arm was lying under. I did not examine to see if there was anything in the hand. The right arm was lying across the breast."

Here, the sequence points to how the left hand - lying wrist up - was used. Regardless of which, we also have this from the Times:

"The CORONER. - Did you examine her hands?
Witness. - I did not; but I saw that her right arm was across the breast."

So Lamb was nboit the man who lifted the hand and "opened it" as Diemschitz and Kozebrodzky looked on. And he would nevertheless have worn clothes that identified him a a PC and not a doctor.

Christer, Dr Johnson felt the hands, he said they, "were quite cold".
He also says he did not notice blood on the hand.
He did NOT say that he didn't look at the hands, that was Diemschitz.

Maybe Diemschitz also said it, but the fact of the matter is that Johnston did say that he never looked at the hands:

"The CORONER. - Did you look at the hands? Witness. - No. I saw the left hand was lying away from the body, and the arm was bent. The right arm was also bent. The left hand might have been on the ground."

He did feel at least one hand for warmth, but we donīt know which of them. And at any rate, just like Lamb was not the man examining the hands when Diemschitz and Kozebrodsky made their observations, nor was Johnston. Itīs either that, or one or two of them are lying under oath.

The grapes had fallen from the hand by the time Blackwell arrived.
Neither PC Lamb nor Dr Johnson were asked about any grapes.

But Lamb and Johnston were both aasked about the contents of the LEFT hand. So why the disinterest in the right one? Becasue, Iīd say, the coroner and jury and medicos all knew it was empty. Plus the grpes could not have fallen from the hand before Blackwell arrived since he was the one lifting the arm and examining the hand, while Johnston and Lamb did not.

Round blood clots on a wall?

That was because you said that blood clots on a hand must predispose a wound to that hand. And the clots were oblong, Jon, not round.

I think you are confusing congealed blood stains with blood that has clotted due to flow - what we are talking about are clots of blood that are beaded.
Congealed blood smears are not clots.
"Clot" and "Congeal" is not the same thing.
A pool of blood will congeal (basically flat), whereas blood escaping from a wound will clot (into lumps).

You seem to be forgetting, the blood smears/clots were on the BACK of the hand, the grapes were in the palm of the hand.

I am not confusing or forgetting anything, Jon. Witnesses whoi in bad lighting see blood clots on tha back of a hand and mistke them for grapes will of course think they are looking at the palm, not the back of the hand. Itīs simple logic, right?


Not a "bunch" of grapes, maybe two or three, we don't know.
The man was carrying the package of grapes, it would be unseemly for a woman to have a handful of grapes in the Victorian era.

I fail to see that an East End prostitute (sorry, Mrs Rubenhold...) and a punter in the same area would have been very prudent. Itīs not "Pygmalion", itīs rough people in rough streets.
How many grapes it takes to make a bunch is something I must leave unanswered. I can imagine a small bunch and a large bunch, so there will be some playing room, right?

I do not, however, allow for playing room when it conmes to the suggestion that a medico lifting and examining the hand of a murder victim will miss out on how that hand holds grapes, whereas two witnesses notices them. Nota bene that neither witness says "when the doc lifted the hand, grapes fell from it". Both men say "when the doc lifted the hand, there were grapes in it". So there is no factual base for suggesting that grapes fell from the hand, Jon.

Sorry, but I think your case is very meagre, on the brink of practically non-existant. Which surprises me.

[Fisherman]

If Louis was wrong about there being grapes in the hand, then he could well be wrong about who he witnessed unclenching the hands.

Yes, he could. How does that help your cause...?

[Fisherman]

Stride could not afford cachous.
The type of cachous/sweetmeats might help in determining how she came to be holding a packet of them, because it may hint at the source.

How do you know that she could not afford cachous? She worked, she had money, and we cannot possibly know how she spent them.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Hi Fisherman

Doe's it make any difference as to what kind of cachous Liz Stride was about to partake of seconds before she was murdered?

Stride could not afford cachous.
The type of cachous/sweetmeats might help in determining how she came to be holding a packet of them, because it may hint at the source.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

They could not see any grapes because there were no grapes.

Can you provide us with a reason - any reason - that the medicos would lie about or withhold information about the grapes? I certainly cannot.

If Louis was wrong about there being grapes in the hand, then he could well be wrong about who he witnessed unclenching the hands.