What's your profile for Jack?

[Michael W Richards]

As Observer points out, although with bias...there was a killer out that night who many assume to have been Jack, Observer being one of them, ...but that fact alone does nothing to create a linkage to another murder with a single cut, an hour earlier.... in another part of town.

And Tom, Ive seen this argument before,... and Ive seen as much evidence of that presumption about Liz Stride's main method of earning a living as you present with yours. Liz Strides most recent history just prior to her death is the only relevant data we need to assess, prior charges like a D & D in 87 allow us a broader picture of Liz, but they wont help answer the question "why was she at that spot... on that night?". The fact that she became single that week,... like Kate and John suddenly sleeping apart, or Mary and Joe separating a little over a week prior to her murder, these must be considered as potential influences as to why the women were where they were when they were killed.

Its never been contested that all 5 of the women in the Canonical Group at some point in their lives prostituted themselves...just like hundreds of others in that district at that time. At least 1 of them seems to have made a career choice in that direction. In the case of Stride however we have ample evidence that she very often in her past, and certainly in her immediate past, managed to find respectable work.

The man who killed Polly, then Annie...sought out working street prostitutes. I dont think anyone has suggested he had prior knowledge of them, or that factor wasnt relevant, from the standpoint of opportunity or preference. Of course it was. Its just as relevant that we determine as best we can whether that same condition is Universal within the Canonical Group victims.

In the case of Liz Stride, and Kate Eddowes, and the only one of the five that seemed to make her living solely off prostitution and generous men, we cannot say with any certainty that their circumstances on the night they are killed forced them into a situation where they placed themselves in dark corners with men they did not know, or that we can be certain of their motivations for being where they were.

Cheers

[Tom_Wescott]

Hello Lynn,

How exactly would Jack know whether or not Liz was soliciting unless he approached her? And once approached, what would prevent Liz from accepting Jack's offer? Even if she had been on a date earlier that evening, we have no evidence that the date was still in progress.

Tom provided evidence that the police considered her to be a prostitute. She is standing by herself late at night. No lint on her skirt and a flower are now moot points. The question is what would she do if approached by Jack with a generous offer for her services?

c.d.

Hi C.D., thanks. But Swanson's report was unambiguous. They discovered she was a prostitute. They didn't merely consider her one out of blind bias.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

And Tom, Ive seen this argument before,... and Ive seen as much evidence of that presumption about Liz Stride's main method of earning a living as you present with yours. Liz Strides most recent history just prior to her death is the only relevant data we need to assess, prior charges like a D & D in 87 allow us a broader picture of Liz, but they wont help answer the question "why was she at that spot... on that night?". The fact that she became single that week,... like Kate and John suddenly sleeping apart, or Mary and Joe separating a little over a week prior to her murder, these must be considered as potential influences as to why the women were where they were when they were killed.

I've also been able to place Stride in "that area" (around Tiger Bay) on the Thursday prior to her murder. She was visiting a friend and revealed that she was working as a prostitute. So yes, Stride was an active prostitute.

And yes, when two women are killed in the same way - and not a common way, I might add - within an hour and a short walk from one another, and without apparent motive, then you do in fact have a linkage unless investigation should turn up a reason to believe they were not related. The thorough investigations that followed did not turn up such a reason.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[c.d.]

Hi C.D., thanks. But Swanson's report was unambiguous. They discovered she was a prostitute. They didn't merely consider her one out of blind bias.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hello Tom,

Yes, but the point is that even a prostitute can take a day off. What I was trying to point out was that Jack would have no way of knowing (even if he was aware that she was a prostitute) whether she was available that night unless he approached her. Once approached, whether she was actively soliciting or not, we can't say with certainty what her response would be.

c.d.

[Tom_Wescott]

Hello Tom,

Yes, but the point is that even a prostitute can take a day off. What I was trying to point out was that Jack would have no way of knowing (even if he was aware that she was a prostitute) whether she was available that night unless he approached her. Once approached, whether she was actively soliciting or not, we can't say with certainty what her response would be.

c.d.

Yes, that's true. It just gets a bit tiresome for me that so many seem desperate to omit Stride as a Ripper victim. Why is that? And to do so they have to create fiction, or choose to believe others' fiction. Even Don Rumbelow is doing this now, presumably to seem cool and relevant. It's bad history.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Michael W Richards]

I've also been able to place Stride in "that area" (around Tiger Bay) on the Thursday prior to her murder. She was visiting a friend and revealed that she was working as a prostitute. So yes, Stride was an active prostitute.

And yes, when two women are killed in the same way - and not a common way, I might add - within an hour and a short walk from one another, and without apparent motive, then you do in fact have a linkage unless investigation should turn up a reason to believe they were not related. The thorough investigations that followed did not turn up such a reason.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Tom, what you've "proven" is that Liz did occasionally prostitute herself, which isnt disputed as I mentioned. Youve provided no proof, nor does the report, that on that night, at that location, she was doing just that.

Liz Strides murder is duplicated by a Mr Brown on the very same night, a single throat cut with a knife....the third knife murder on the Double Event night,.. so how she was dispatched when compared with Kates murder was more common. 2 of 3 women were killed that way that night.

You mentioned "without apparent motive"....precisely the point. We dont know the motives for those murders, and therefore should not just assume they are the same.

Cheers Tom

[c.d.]

Hey, don't look at me, Tom. I'm on your side.

c.d.

[Michael W Richards]

Hello Tom,

Yes, but the point is that even a prostitute can take a day off. What I was trying to point out was that Jack would have no way of knowing (even if he was aware that she was a prostitute) whether she was available that night unless he approached her. Once approached, whether she was actively soliciting or not, we can't say with certainty what her response would be.

c.d.

But a stranger would have had a devil of a time getting some woman who wasnt soliciting to accompany him to a dark corner cd...no-one had forgotten a killer was still on the loose.

A working street prostitute by definition solicits payment from strangers for performing sex acts. She has to go to dark spots with strangers.

If Liz wasnt soliciting, and a stranger came to her trying to get her into the passageway, there would have been a struggle and sounds from Liz. According to the evidence of Liz Strides clothing, she wasnt in a struggle...and no-one heard a scream for help.

Im sure youve seen how Israel might provide the impetus and the confirmation for Liz to have screamed and struggled, but in his story that ends outside the gates. And if she isnt soliciting, then how does he, or someone new, then get Liz all the way in the passageway? Without more struggles and screams of course.

Cheers

[Tom_Wescott]

Hey, don't look at me, Tom. I'm on your side.

c.d.

I know that. I was just venting to you.

And for the many people who read these threads but don't post, I'll point out that I don't paint Lynn Cates with the same bush as some others. He's a bit loopy on some points, but unlike others he does often present valuable and original perspectives on the Ripper case.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Tom, what you've "proven" is that Liz did occasionally prostitute herself, which isnt disputed as I mentioned. Youve provided no proof, nor does the report, that on that night, at that location, she was doing just that.

I can't prove that at the time and on that night the clock in Big Ben was reading the time, but logic and history dictates it was.

Liz Strides murder is duplicated by a Mr Brown on the very same night, a single throat cut with a knife....

Mrs. Brown was killed with a single cut to the throat, was she? Just like Stride and Eddowes you say?

You mentioned "without apparent motive"....precisely the point. We dont know the motives for those murders, and therefore should not just assume they are the same.
Cheers Tom

I'm not assuming anything. I don't pretend to the know the motive behind any of these murders. Except the murder of Mrs. Brown, which had absolutely zero in common with the murders of Stride and Eddowes. Having said that, the lack of known motive in any of these cases IS a common factor.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

And by the way, Mike. Yes, there are people who argue that Stride, or Eddowes, were not prostitutes at all.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[c.d.]

Hello Michael,

But even if Liz were not actively soliciting that night, for whatever reason, what prevents her from accepting an offer from a customer? You are trying to make it seems like Liz swore a sacred blood oath not to solicit that night and even God couldn't force her to do so. It would simply be a matter of changing her mind. And if her killer were Jack, and he intended to take back all of his money, it would be quite easy for him to invent some story that he just got paid and was really in the mood and therefore he would double the price. Like in the Godfather, an offer she couldn't refuse.

c.d.

[Observer]

The thing is Tom it's VITAL to their means of creating such fiction that Stride, Eddowes, and Kelly, were not soliciting shortly before they were murdered. Concrete proof that they were, and their theories collapse like a pack of cards. And speaking of cards, they hold all the aces. Definite proof of solicitation immediately prior to their murder, is going to be as elusive a commodity, as the name of Jack The Ripper himself as far as those three are concerned.

Regards

Observer

[Boggles]

what prevents her from accepting an offer from a customer?

Not much, they were in very poor circumstances. She may have had some concern with her suitor, some signal - call it women's intuition, there was a manic on the loose everyone knew this. Something may have made her cautious, something in his behavior, warning signals.

[c.d.]

I don't see why the idea of Liz changing her mind is so difficult to accept. Try this analogy. You have taken the day off from work when you get a call from your boss asking you to come in. You say no, you are off today. He says they really need you and if you come in they will pay you double time. Now the choice is still yours as to whether you go into to work but is the idea of somebody doing so under those circumstances so unthinkable?

c.d.