Broad Shoulders, Elizabeth's Killer ?

[Michael W Richards]

Just had one last kick of the can to see if anyone who still cannot see the argument against Louis Diemshitz timing clearly might finally have a "light bulb"..Aha.. moment. Apparently my recitation of known quotes and known facts again, and the simple fact that If Louis had arrived when he said he did witnesses like Lamb, Johnson and Blackwell could not have been correct with their times, isnt compelling enough for some to rethink their objection to the idea. It doesnt take a genuis to determine that all the times as they have been given cannot be, particularly when the times are differing by as much as 20 minutes from witness to witness for the same event. So some people choose a preferred source I suppose. Id rather use the majority times and events myself, when something from one witness can be substantiated by another witness, and in one case here, by 3 witnesses...well, lets just say the numbers favour the likely facts here. I believe its the same kind of reluctance that refuses to acknowledge that there is absolutely no hard evidence that a serial mutilator killed Liz Stride. Instead, we have the creation of the Interrupted Serial Mutilator...though there is as much evidence for an abbreviated action as there is for a mutilator.

For Darryl, I suggested some years back that the bruises were hard pokes by her assailant, perhaps while she had her back up against the club passage wall. She pushes him back and heads for the gate, he grabs her by the scarf, twists and pulls and while she is falling backwards off balance, he slides a knife under her throat. Simple, 2 seconds as Blackwell suggested, and completely unlike any Ripper killing before and after.

[Michael W Richards]

Apparently in 1874 the government set the pub closing times in London at 12.30 am. As Schwartz mentions seeing the man lighting his pipe apparently in the doorway of the Lord Nelson doesn’t this at least suggest the real possibility that the pub was still open and that Pipeman had just exited when the Schwartz incident occurred? I, and others, have suggested before that it’s possible that Schwartz was simply mistaken about the time that he’d seen the incident.

So why couldn’t it be possible that the incident took place sometime just before 12.30 and that it was entirely unconnected to Stride?

Might want to revisit that....the Pubs closed at midnight in 1888. There is only 1 place on Berner Street at that time of night that was actively serving booze...and the murder happened in its entranceway to the yard.

[Michael W Richards]

The above can be dismissed as an exercise in justifying things that aren’t the case. If we take the times as they are stated purely because that’s what they said then it cannot remotely be called an honest or reasonable approach to take. This is so obvious and so basic that it shouldn’t require repeating on a forum for adult posters. Everyone can see this and everyone accepts it accept for one or two people who are invested in the idea that there was ‘dirty work afoot,’ and all manner of unbelievable and baseless plots were going on in Berner Street.

The very least we should expect is the facts being stated correctly. For example, we get this ‘convenient’ assertion:



Yet at the inquest Lamb himself tells us:

“Yes, and only the soles of them. There were no signs of a struggle. Some of the blood was in a liquid state, and had run towards the kitchen door of the club. A little - that nearest to her on the ground - was slightly congealed. I can hardly say whether any was still flowing from the throat. Dr. Blackwell was the first doctor to arrive; he came ten or twelve minutes after myself, but I had no watch with me.”

Now, I fully expect this point to be ignored or glossed over but I’ll wait and see if an error is admitted for a change.

Furthermore, if we take these statements of time at face value then how do we square Spooner saying:

“I believe it was twenty-five minutes to one o'clock when I arrived in the yard.”

And yet in the very same statement he says:

“ I stood by the side of the body for four or five minutes, until the last witness arrived.”

This last witness was Lamb of course. Michael naturally wants us to take 12.35 as the time that he arrived because that is the time mentioned and he believes that we are obliged to consider them accurate because they exist in writing but I doubt that he’ll be able to find a way of justifying Lamb allegedly arriving at the yard at 12.40 (or 5 minutes after Spooner got to the yard)

This is just one way among many that shows how unreliable times were. I know it, everyone on here and their dogs knows it except for those with a script to follow.

Not to accept a margin for error on timings is manipulation. It’s the falsification of reality to suit a purpose. Misinformation should not be considered acceptable. We have to look at events reasonably and with a large slice of common sense and a little less fictional drama. How much time do we have to waste on this nonsense? How much time spent constantly re-stating what’s obvious to all?

No, I admit that I put a watch on PC Lambs wrist in error, but please dont tell me that you think he was blissfully unaware of the time on the street,...being a beat copt tasked with that very thing while on duty.

What you continually misrepresent is who is changing the data...you. You make up times you believe that the witnesses really saw what they did, you make up excuses for things going unseen or unheard, you suggest noises can be precisely quantified by someone specific, you discount the ticking of the clock from 1:00 on. Louis Diesmshitz stated that he arrived "precisely at 1am". He stated how he came to that conclusion. No-one making anything up, its his own words. So, if thats true, how does Lamb get there just before or at that time with Eagle and Issac K returning to the club with PC Lamb. The discovery, striking of the match, the checking inside the club, the gathering of men in the passageway, the sending of Issac K, then Eagle, then Louis and Issac[s].....yes, Issac[s], only using what is stated, not what your interpretation is, the search on the streets.......IF Louis arrived at 1 as he stated, then could Lamb have arrived there at 1 or just before with Eagle and Issac K? Could Johnson have been woken, dressed, hurried down to the scene..all in less than 10 minutes total?

Any sentient being knows the answer is no. But now is the time for someone to re-write what Louis actually meant, to disparage all times given because all the sources were not synchronized, and to dispute the majority of witness times, which corroborate each other, using only Louis's insistence that only he knew the actual time. Self serving, of course, and not technically a rebuttal. That would require some contrary facts, not just some posters notions on what we should believe, or what he believes.

Believe what you will, I have nothing to lose or gain, but just remember who is using the quotes from witnesses as they were given, and one thinks he can dismiss them because he thinks he knows what really went on. I have only pursued this point because some students here can be misled by many things some posters assert, for me, Id just recommend using the known facts and taking it from there. The times as I have quoted are accurate as printed and can be checked by anyone, however the excuses need to be explained by the person making them.

[Fiver]

Non-one disputes that there are quite a few circumstantial and physical differences in the C5 list, just like almost everyone knows that the C5 itself is not an established "series" by a single killer. And no-one has ever seriously suggested that Liz Strides murder appears to have been done by a "Ripper". They instead suggest, as you do, that the lack of Ripper features might just be due to some kind of interruption that again, isnt indicated within any known evidence concerning this murder. I dont recall anyone suggesting that the Ripper sometimes doesnt rip, but hey, Ive seen wilder ideas here before.

The very term C5 shows that the majority believe the murders of Nichols, Chapman, Stride, Eddowes, and Kelly are an established series done by a single killer. That belief may be incorrect, but your attempt to deny the existence of the belief makes no sense.

Your claim that "no-one has ever seriously suggested that Liz Strides murder appears to have been done by a "Ripper" is provably false. The Coroner at the Stride Inquest very clearly pointed out the similarities to the other Ripper murders - lack of traditional motive, victim type, time and location of the murder, method of murder, and ability to kill and escape afterwards undetected.

[Fiver]

Liz Stride could have been cut once, while falling, and left untouched from that moment on. Blackwell said "I formed the opinion that the murderer probably caught hold of the silk scarf, which was tight and knotted, and pulled the deceased backwards, cutting her throat in that way. The throat might have been cut as she was falling, or when she was on the ground."

Thats a very selective portrayal of the evidence.

"I have come to a conclusion as to the position of both the murderer and the victim, and I opine that the latter was seized by the shoulders and placed on the ground, and that the murderer was on her right side when he inflicted the cut." - Dr Phillips

"...it was clear from the appearance of the blood on the ground that the throat was not cut until after she was actually on her back." - Coroner Baxter

The only link to the Ripper is the presumption that Catherine Eddowes murder reveals that he was out and about that night. If JtR killed her, of course. But Strides murder, and the act itself... the knife used, are not what we could categorize as Ripperesque.

Anyone who reads the Stride Inquest knows that the Coroner listed several links that you ignore.

[Fiver]

So, the claim by yourself and others that Mortimer said contradictory things, has yet to be justified.

The various accounts in the 1 October 1888 contain contradictions. For example, they list her as living 2, 3, and 4 houses away from the club.

[Wickerman]

Darryl;

Great points but I cannot put aside the low probability, even in WC during 1888, of a woman being fairly violently (the former not to mention the latter) physically assaulted by two different men in such a short time frame (15-20 minutes?) - which of course has been a key factor in BS man theory from what I've read from these forums and books. The only way I can be remotely convinced of a two-man theory is if Stride was scheduled to meet client JtR. I very much welcome any dissenting opinions as to why the above should prevail over probability.

I think your problem disappears if you consider we have misread the whole encounter.
Liz arrived at Dutfields Yard accompanied by JtR, she was seen with him at the Bricklayers Arms, he bought her grapes from Packers shop, they were seen by PC Smith standing opposite the yard.

BS-man was only an intruder walking past the gateway, Schwartz did not see the man Liz was with, he only saw the intruder stagger past and attempt to remove her from the gateway.
We only have one side of this encounter, and the witness's main concern was his own welfare, not that of the woman being manhandled.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

For Darryl, I suggested some years back that the bruises were hard pokes by her assailant, perhaps while she had her back up against the club passage wall. She pushes him back and heads for the gate, he grabs her by the scarf, twists and pulls and while she is falling backwards off balance, he slides a knife under her throat. Simple, 2 seconds as Blackwell suggested, and completely unlike any Ripper killing before and after.

Pokes her, in what direction?

Dr Phillips: Over both shoulders, especially the right, from the front aspect under colar bones and in front of chest there is a bluish discolouration which I have watched and seen on two occasions since.

How many pressure marks were there? Two above the shoulders + two under the collar bones + two more on the chest? That could mean two thumbs pressed three times. With the handkerchief tight around her neck, did she scream three times but not very loudly?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

What you continually misrepresent is who is changing the data...you. You make up times you believe that the witnesses really saw what they did, you make up excuses for things going unseen or unheard, you suggest noises can be precisely quantified by someone specific, you discount the ticking of the clock from 1:00 on. Louis Diesmshitz stated that he arrived "precisely at 1am". He stated how he came to that conclusion. No-one making anything up, its his own words. So, if thats true, how does Lamb get there just before or at that time with Eagle and Issac K returning to the club with PC Lamb. The discovery, striking of the match, the checking inside the club, the gathering of men in the passageway, the sending of Issac K, then Eagle, then Louis and Issac[s].....yes, Issac[s], only using what is stated, not what your interpretation is, the search on the streets.......IF Louis arrived at 1 as he stated, then could Lamb have arrived there at 1 or just before with Eagle and Issac K? Could Johnson have been woken, dressed, hurried down to the scene..all in less than 10 minutes total?

Any sentient being knows the answer is no. But now is the time for someone to re-write what Louis actually meant, to disparage all times given because all the sources were not synchronized, and to dispute the majority of witness times, which corroborate each other, using only Louis's insistence that only he knew the actual time. Self serving, of course, and not technically a rebuttal. That would require some contrary facts, not just some posters notions on what we should believe, or what he believes.

It would be fair to say that Diemschitz' arrival time was only as accurate as the Harris clock allowed it to be. Presumably PC Smith's timing is in conflict with the Harris clock, but I wonder if Smith, who would have picked up the responsibilities of the fixed-point officer at 1am, told the coroner where he was supposed to be at that time, rather than where he actually was - perhaps a few minutes up Commercial Rd.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

The various accounts in the 1 October 1888 contain contradictions. For example, they list her as living 2, 3, and 4 houses away from the club.

They are journalistic errors, not witness errors. What contradictions do you attribute to Mortimer?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I think your problem disappears if you consider we have misread the whole encounter.
Liz arrived at Dutfields Yard accompanied by JtR, she was seen with him at the Bricklayers Arms, he bought her grapes from Packers shop, they were seen by PC Smith standing opposite the yard.

BS-man was only an intruder walking past the gateway, Schwartz did not see the man Liz was with, he only saw the intruder stagger past and attempt to remove her from the gateway.
We only have one side of this encounter, and the witness's main concern was his own welfare, not that of the woman being manhandled.

Can you remind what this man was doing when the BS man came along?

[Darryl Kenyon]

Darryl,
how many pressure marks do you suppose were on each shoulder? One (thumb)? Five (fingers)? Or something else?

Hi NBN

This is what Dr Phillips said - Over both shoulders, especially the right, from the front aspect under collar bones and in front of chest there is a bluish discolouration which I have watched and seen on two occasions since.

I may be wrong and I am no medical man but that seems to me being consistent with being grabbed on each shoulder . Some fingers or thumb would apply more pressure and I doubt there would be five separate bruises on each side. Couldn't pressure from two or three fingers meld into one discoloration ?

They could have been made when BS man threw Liz to the ground [ if you believe Schwartz ], and as I admittedly only speculate may have been made when the killer was laying Liz to the ground from behind.

At the end of the day they are there , so somehow they were made .

Regards Darryl

[Michael W Richards]

The very term C5 shows that the majority believe the murders of Nichols, Chapman, Stride, Eddowes, and Kelly are an established series done by a single killer. That belief may be incorrect, but your attempt to deny the existence of the belief makes no sense.

Your claim that "no-one has ever seriously suggested that Liz Strides murder appears to have been done by a "Ripper" is provably false. The Coroner at the Stride Inquest very clearly pointed out the similarities to the other Ripper murders - lack of traditional motive, victim type, time and location of the murder, method of murder, and ability to kill and escape afterwards undetected.

The word "Ripper" is the key to what I posted, thats all. She was in no way "ripped". But Polly was, Annie was, Kate was and Mary...well, thats a whole new kettle of fish. Strides death, not what you perceive are similar peripheral circumstances, is unlike any other alleged Ripper murder. And the C5 is just a theory, just like many others here.

[Michael W Richards]

Thats a very selective portrayal of the evidence.

"I have come to a conclusion as to the position of both the murderer and the victim, and I opine that the latter was seized by the shoulders and placed on the ground, and that the murderer was on her right side when he inflicted the cut." - Dr Phillips

"...it was clear from the appearance of the blood on the ground that the throat was not cut until after she was actually on her back." - Coroner Baxter



Anyone who reads the Stride Inquest knows that the Coroner listed several links that you ignore.

Dr Blackwell, quoted from the Stride Inquest reported in the Daily Telegraph on October 2nd, "I formed the opinion that the murderer probably caught hold of the silk scarf, which was tight and knotted, and pulled the deceased backwards, cutting her throat in that way. The throat might have been cut as she was falling, or when she was on the ground. The blood would have spurted about if the act had been committed while she was standing up."

"As she was falling".......consider the cuts made on the scarf that mirrored the throat cut. The scarf was tight and twisted when the cut was made. It fits with a cut being made while he choked her. You seem to think that this murder has a lot in common with the other C5 victims, tell me, in which murders is it suggested that the victim was not on her back lying down when the first throat cut, (one of 2 throat cuts made on every other victim), was made?

[Michael W Richards]

Hi NBN

This is what Dr Phillips said - Over both shoulders, especially the right, from the front aspect under collar bones and in front of chest there is a bluish discolouration which I have watched and seen on two occasions since.

I may be wrong and I am no medical man but that seems to me being consistent with being grabbed on each shoulder . Some fingers or thumb would apply more pressure and I doubt there would be five separate bruises on each side. Couldn't pressure from two or three fingers meld into one discoloration ?

They could have been made when BS man threw Liz to the ground [ if you believe Schwartz ], and as I admittedly only speculate may have been made when the killer was laying Liz to the ground from behind.

At the end of the day they are there , so somehow they were made .

Regards Darryl

As I said, someone poking her hard in the chest, under the collar bones, could well be the cause of the discoloration. And actually BSM never threw anyone down in Schwartz's story, she pulled free and fell. And its good to remember that not one witness other than Schwartz says they saw Liz on the street after 12:35, that they saw anyone resembling a Broad Shouldered Man weaving up the street, nor a man smoking a pipe in a entranceway to a pub. Nor Israel himself. Seems odd to me that 3 people and Liz are suddenly on a street that was said to have been empty at the time, seen by no less than 4 witnesses that last half hour. Young couple, Fanny, Lave, and Eagle. If she is actually in the passageway after 12:35, then much more of the evidence that many dismiss can be considered. If Lave and Eagle both said the passageway was empty around 12:40, then where is Liz...and where is her killer? Maybe the alley wasnt empty. Maybe some of the anarchists that worked at that club felt it would be better if no-one saw anyone or heard anything. After all, if Lave and Eagle did see someone in the passageway it would be probable that they were from the club.