Pub or Street?

[DJA]

As discussed last September,there were at least two brands of English cachous available at the time,Hooper's and Thomas Jackson.

Lajaunie were formulated in France in 1880.

[Fisherman]

Then how could he know the hands were cold?
Yes, he took hold of the hand, which is to be expected by a doctor to feel for a pulse.

He of course could put his fingers against a hand without tampering with it or changing itīs position, Jon. Which was in all probability exactly what he did.

Precisely, (feel for the pulse) thankyou.

You can feel for the pulse at the neck, which was readily accessible. If he felt for it on the hand, he will reasonably have put his fingers against the left hand wrist, which was conveniently resting against the ground underneath Stride. However, he said very clearly that he did not look at the hands, and I think we must accept this.


No, because the neck was the point of the wound. He will know not to disturb the injury to the body, especially when the hand is easily accessible.


Stride was lying with the right side of the neck up, the side that was not very deeply damaged, and there would have been ample space to feel for a pulse at the neck without disturbing or touching the wound as such. Equally, he could have used the hand, but we have it on record that he says that he did not look at the hands, and that makes it less likely that he palpated them for a pulse. And of course, Johnston never says he DID palpate for a pulse, whereas he DID say that he felt the body for warmth. It may well be that he realized that she was dead and so he didnīt need to palpate for a pulse in the first place. He said that the blood had all run away and coagulated, so there really was no hope of life.

Which means the fingers were not clenched as in the other cases - not consistent with strangulation?
Not that the fingers were not folded.

The hand was open, Jon. Open hands do not have folded fingers, do they?

Remember, things get missed in the dark. PC Lamb did not notice anything in her left hand, yet it is commonly accepted she was holding those cachous.
People, including police & doctors can miss details in the dark. They are only looking for certain things, not taking note of everything.

Then again, the left hand WAS clenched, and the packet was small, so that could explain the matter very neatly. But they were of course not missed, so why would the grapes be? It makes no sense whatsoever, least of all if Kozebrodsky and Diemschitz could see them in her hand as the doctor examined it!

Not cherries, blackberries, strawberries, blueberries? - why grapes?
Blueberries are more the size of clotted blood, not grapes.

That, Jon, depends on the size of the clots. And the reason the witnesses opted for grapes could be on account of how they were common merchandise. Plus it could be on account of how blueberries are round, not oblong, strawberries are heart shaped, not oblong and blackberries are not oblong either.

Was Mary Kelly covered in grapes?, Annie Chapman, Kate Eddowes?

None of the C5 were.

Christer, blood will clot AT an open wound, it is the body's defense in an attempt to halt blood loss.
If there is blood clotted ON the hand there MUST be a wound ON the hand - there was no wound on the hand!
Blood takes time to clot, it is not instantaneous.

No, Jon, there must not be a wound on a hand to allow for blood clots on it, just as there need not be a wound to a wall to allow for the same thing. The blood must of course have come from another source than the hand, otherwise Phillips would not have called it a mystery.

Stride cannot get blood clots on her own hand by touching her throat, in that case there would be smears of blood.

That is correct! And so it was not Stride who transferred the blood to the hand.

(even if she had grabbed her throat, that blood would be in the palm of her hand, not on the back & wrist, and it wouldn't be clotted)

There is no law prohibiting cut people to touch the cut area with the backs of their hands, though. But as I said, I do not think Stride transferred the blood to her hand.

Smears or stains of blood do not look like grapes! (neither do real blood clots actually)

Not if you look three-dimensionally at them, no. But if you see them as two-dimensional in the dark, I disagree: in such a case, there is nothing prohibiting them looking very much like grapes. Google "blood stains", Jon!

I remember this same debate years ago. I pointed out then that the most likely cause (in my opinion) of the blood on the back of the right hand was when PC Lamb felt for a pulse. He stated, when he began to examine the body the blood was clotting, to know that in the dark he must have put his fingers in the blood. The blood is either wet or sticky - clearly it was sticky (clotting) and he felt for the pulse with the same hand causing the transfer of blood.

That would produce imprints, though, not clots. And anybody familiar with how a pulse is taken knows that you use your fingers, not the thumb. So the distribution of the clots is wrong - there should have been four imprints at the wrist and a single imprint from the thumb at the back of the hand. And frankly, would not Phillipos realize that he was looking at a palpation when seeing the blood?

Whether the grapes really existed or not has no great impact on the Ripper murders, it's one of those little details of no real consequence.
There is no theory behind it that I can think of, yet in order to try dismiss the grapes some have had to invent a conspiracy theory out of nothing. It's all rather bizarre.

I find it a lot more bizarre when somebody believes in a trained medico taking hold of the hand of a murder victim and failing to see a bunch of grapes falling out of it, while two witnesses notice those grapes. And then the grapes - Shazam! - magically disappear.
Then again, that is what Ripperology is always about: People calling ideas they dislike bizarre, people talking about inventing conspiray theories (not that I understand how it makes for a conspiracy theory to suggest that two witnesses can get things wrong in a state of confusion and bewilderment and from a distance in the dark - I think magically disappering grapes that medicos avoid speaking about makes for a much better conspiracy). Oh, and of course, what Ripperology is so often serving up: sour grapes...

Maybe we should just settle for disagreeing, Jon?

[Fisherman]

As discussed last September,there were at least two brands of English cachous available at the time,Hooper's and Thomas Jackson.

Lajaunie were formulated in France in 1880.

Ah, yes, right you are. I misremembered that one. But the main thing to remember is that what we today refer to as cachous were not the only type of tablets sold as cachous in London of 1888 - there were also mild, sweet tablets sold by that name, and so it seems the types could easily be confused. And we donīt know what type Stride had in her hand.

[Observer]

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?

[DJA]

It does.

Most likely medication for the haemorrhageing of her bottom lip.

Apparently the last thing she did was pick them out of Jack's hand.

[Fisherman]

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?

Not to me, no - but it apparently did to Notblamedfornothing, which was why I offered my take on things.

[Wickerman]

He of course could put his fingers against a hand without tampering with it or changing itīs position, Jon. Which was in all probability exactly what he did.

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.

You can feel for the pulse at the neck, which was readily accessible. If he felt for it on the hand, he will reasonably have put his fingers against the left hand wrist, which was conveniently resting against the ground underneath Stride. However, he said very clearly that he did not look at the hands, and I think we must accept this.

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.

Stride was lying with the right side of the neck up, the side that was not very deeply damaged, and there would have been ample space to feel for a pulse at the neck without disturbing or touching the wound as such. Equally, he could have used the hand, but we have it on record that he says that he did not look at the hands, ........

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.

Then again, the left hand WAS clenched, and the packet was small, so that could explain the matter very neatly. But they were of course not missed, so why would the grapes be? It makes no sense whatsoever, least of all if Kozebrodsky and Diemschitz could see them in her hand as the doctor examined it!

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

No, Jon, there must not be a wound on a hand to allow for blood clots on it, just as there need not be a wound to a wall to allow for the same thing. The blood must of course have come from another source than the hand, otherwise Phillips would not have called it a mystery.

Round blood clots on a wall?
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 find it a lot more bizarre when somebody believes in a trained medico taking hold of the hand of a murder victim and failing to see a bunch of grapes falling out of it,....

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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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]

[/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.

[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]

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]

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.