How "safe" were the respective murder sites?

[Cogidubnus]

I would speculate that, increasingly frustrated, his patients ran out

Hi John G

You're surely not propounding the "Ripper as a medical man" theory are you?

All the best

Dave

[John G]

You know I can't help but thinking that James Brown's evidence might be crucial in respect of the Stride murder location. Brown stated that he saw a man bending over a women, who he later stated was almost certainly Stride, and giving the impression that he was impeding her. He then heard the woman say, "No, not tonight, some other night." Now, all of this suggests to me that the man may have been propositioning Stride and she was rebuking his advances, possibly because she wasn't soliciting on that particular evening.

Now, the Brown sighting was around 12:45 and Strides's body was discovered at 1:00am and, for reasons I outlined in earlier posts, I believe that the evidence points to her being killed just prior to that time.

Is it therefore possible that, in the intervening 15 minutes, her killer was trying to persuade her to go with him to a more secluded location that he had selected? If so, I would speculate that, increasingly frustrated, his patients ran out and that resulted in the altercation/assault witnessed by Schwartz. And if he was the same man who killed Nicholls and Chapman, he might have become overconfident, and prone to riskier behavior as a result of those earlier successors.

Speculating further, at this point, and assuming he intends to eviscerate Stride, he's forced to improvise. He notices the near pitch black darkness of Dutfield's Yard, which he forces her in to. Then, in typical Ripper fashion, he quickly forces her to the ground and slits her throat, expertly avoiding arterial spray- very little blood was apparent at the murder site-by cutting the throat when she was near to the ground (gravity) and using her scarf as a ligature to stem the flow of blood.

Now I would argue that this particular location wasn't such a bad choice. It was very dark, and therefore secluded to that extent, and the murder took place at the front of the yard, giving the killer a clear escape route into the street. Yes, there seemed to be quite a few people milling about, but Schwartz and Pipeman had been easily repulsed and clearly none of the locals presented anything like the threat of PCs Harvey and Watkins, especially as Eddowes' killer had entered the Square as little as 5 minutes prior to Harvey's arrival and 8 minutes before Watkins'.

Nonetheless, he perhaps becomes concerned by the adjacent noisy club and the appalling lighting conditions were hardly conducive to someone intending to eviscerate his victim. Eventually, he decides that this is all too risky and fleas the scene in search of another victim.

Well, the argument sounds good to me but i'm sure others will notice a few minor flaws!

[RockySullivan]

Don't want to hijack the thread, but if I understand you correctly, there is a possibility that Stride suspected her assaillant of being JtR, so he killed her, not as one of his "fantaisie murder" but to silence her, because she's seen him? So Jack wasn't interrupted?

This is a very interesting angle, I must say.
Chapeau!

Now back to our regular programming.

Interesting theory...wasnt Eddowes the one who claimed to know the ripper's identity? Perhaps The ripper was on a mission that night.

[SirJohnFalstaff]

Hello Sam,

Nice to see you posting again by the way.

But what if Stride did or said something that made Jack want to kill her right there and then? And is it correct to look at the choice of location from only the perspective of the killer? I am sure that Stride was aware of the two previous murders as well as that of Tabram. Maybe she felt that being near the club enabled her to call out for help if she needed it. If Jack wanted to kill her and she would not budge in choice of location what was he to do?

c.d.

Don't want to hijack the thread, but if I understand you correctly, there is a possibility that Stride suspected her assaillant of being JtR, so he killed her, not as one of his "fantaisie murder" but to silence her, because she's seen him? So Jack wasn't interrupted?

This is a very interesting angle, I must say.
Chapeau!

Now back to our regular programming.

[Sam Flynn]

"Sleepy Hanbury"? At 5.30? Come on - people were rising all over to start their day, and there would have been nothing sleepy about it.

They were beginning to rise (cf. Davis and Cadoche), and there were only a few cart-drivers somewhere down the street when Davis ran out to get help. It was sleepy enough, alright.

It would arguably have been the busiest street of them all at that remove in time.

The evidence in no way supports that suggestion.

... but at 3.30, it would have been decidely sleepy.

Indeed, but thankfully this is not a Crossmere "Time Of Death" thread, Fish.

[Sam Flynn]

Nice to see you posting again by the way.

Thanks, CD. Life is pretty up-and-down at the moment, but I still have the occasional lucid period

But what if Stride did or said something that made Jack want to kill her right there and then?

Possible, but Jack was rather experienced by now. I doubt that the person so recently responsible for an evisceration murder as elaborate as Chapman's would have been unduly spooked by anything Liz may have said. If he had, I'm pretty sure she wouldn't have let her get away with a mere cut throat; he could at least have messed up her face a little, à la Eddowes that very same night.

And is it correct to look at the choice of location from only the perspective of the killer? Maybe [Stride] felt that being near the club enabled her to call out for help if she needed it.

A good observation. We should, of course, take the victims' perspectives into account - although, in Stride's case, it seems that she was seen at various locations, possibly with different men, throughout the night. She didn't seem unduly worried, as far as I can tell.

If Jack wanted to kill her and she would not budge in choice of location what was he to do?

Move on... to find a different victim in a quieter part of town. I think Jack was a man who knew what he was doing, and was very much in possession of his faculties when he set out to kill. From that perspective, I believe he chose his moments carefully.

[Sam Flynn]

Ah, but the "alternative exists and entrances" would also have given the killer more escape opportunities and hiding places, as you, rightly, argued was the case with Mitre Square.

Not if, as in Dutfield's Yard, those alternative exits and entrances took you into an occupied building!

However, having reviewed a number of sources I am forced to concede that Berner Street and the surrounding area didn't seem to be at all "sleepy"

Quite so. The entire area - let alone the narrow bottleneck at the entrance to Dutfield's Yard - was not a good place to go in search of potential dissection specimens. A local Jack would probably have known that, too, which is why most of the evisceration murders happened in comparatively "safe" locations. With the exception of Hanbury Street, of course.

Nonetheless, I am surprised that "sleepy" Hanbury Street wasn't busier than it appeared to be.

It seems to have been, by all accounts, at the time Chapman was murdered and/or her body was discovered. The comparative quietness around Hanbury Street is its saving grace; were it not for that fact, it would have been a much riskier venue than Dutfield's Yard.

[lynn cates]

game

Hello Christer. Thanks.

"And that also means that Long´s sighting was no longer considered a clue in October. Exit Long."

You're playing a game now. Exit Christer.

As for Phillips, here is PRECISELY what Baxter said of his time.

"It was true that Dr. Phillips thought that when he saw the body at 6.30 the deceased had been dead at least two hours, but he admitted that the coldness of the morning and the great loss of blood might affect his opinion, and if the evidence of the other witnesses was correct, Dr. Phillips had miscalculated the effect of those forces." ("Ultimate" pp. 103 & 4.)

With all due respect, it is time to stop playing games.

Cheers.
LC

[John G]

Stride's murder was committed in a natural bottleneck just within the gates, which was an incredibly risky spot to choose (or be lured into) in order to commit an evisceration murder. That "bottleneck" puts it on a par with Hanbury Street, but at least the latter didn't have alternative exits and entrances, unlike Dutfield's Yard with its side doors and outhouses. Dutfield's was made even riskier in my view, by the comparative bustle in and around Berner Street and the Clubhouse itself; such conditions didn't seem to apply at sleepy Hanbury.

Ah, but the "alternative exists and entrances" would also have given the killer more escape opportunities and hiding places, as you, rightly, argued was the case with Mitre Square. I also feel that when comparing risk you have to take into consideration the lighting conditions. At Hanbury Street sunrise was at 5:23 so if Chapman was killed after this time it would presumably have been fairly light, whereas, in contrast, Dutfield's Yard seemed to be cloaked in almost total darkness, I mean, even Diemschutz initially mistook Stride's body for a heap of dirt, and that from pretty close range. Incredibly, it didn't seem to be that much brighter inside the club: PC Lamb was forced to strike a match in order to examine the hands and clothing of the club members. And, of course, the darkness would also have afforded the killer a perfect opportunity to hide away in the yard if disturbed.

However, having reviewed a number of sources I am forced to concede that Berner Street and the surrounding area didn't seem to be at all "sleepy", although reviewing Fanny Mortimer's account maybe some of the witnesses, i.e Mortimer, were!

Nonetheless, I am surprised that "sleepy" Hanbury Street wasn't busier than it appeared to be. I mean, surely in a working class district in Victorian England a whole range of people would have been getting ready to go to work, or leaving for work, after 5:00am? I really wonder if the local police may have been less than robust at identifying potential witnesses. Or am I just being cynical?

[John G]

A far more likely explanation is that Schwarz was wrong about the time. As I noted on another thread there is no evidence that Schwarz had a watch, or evidence that he referred to a watch at the time of the assault.


Very possible that Schwarz was confused regards time, but for the sake of debate:

Schwartz had lived on Berner St so would have presumably been aware of the same clock in the Harris' tobacconists that Diemschutz used to make his tim estimate.

I'm also not sure where Schwartz was coming from - if it was from something that had a fixed 'end' he may have based his time estimate on that.

Yes, some very good points. However, for the reasons I have given in other posts I still feel that Schwartz was wrong about the time of the assault he claimed to have witnessed

[John G]

Hello John G,

Schwartz never said that he witnessed "an attack." So that is your own word. According to Schwartz, he simply saw a woman being pushed to the ground. And we don't know if the pushing was intentional or not. As for Liz being frightened enough to leave the scene, I think being hassled by drunken men was a common occurrence for prostitutes doing business in Whitechapel and would simply have been just another day at the office.

c.d.

P.S. I am now waiting for Lynn to say what proof do we have that Stride was a prostitute?

Hello C.D,

Yes, I think of all of the C5 murder sites Berner Street is the most contentious. Regarding the altercation witnessed by Schwartz. According to his reported account he claims to have witnessed a man pull Stride into the street and subsequently throw her down on the footway, Apparently Stride was so alarmed by this that she screamed three times. I would, therefore, conclude that Schwartz is describing an assault, although at this stage possibly not a very serious one, and if PC Smith, say, had witnessed the same event I feel sure he would have intervened.

As regards the timeline. For me the evidence strongly points to Stride having been murdered at about 1:00am. This is supported by the fact that her body was still warm when inspected by Spooner and the was still blood oozing from her neck-I believe that medical opinion was that she would have bled out in about a minute and a half. It is also supported by the evidence Fanny Mortimer who claimed that if the killer had come out of the yard before 1:00am then she would have seen him (although he would concede that she is probably not the most reliable witness!)

And Schwartz's evidence is arguably contradicted by James Brown, who stated that he saw a woman he believed was Stride, with a man, at the same time that Schwartz claimed to witness the altercation.

And if Schwartz was correct with his time then why did nobody witness Stride between 12:45 and 1:00am? After all, Schwartz claimed to have seen an altercation involving Stride outside the gates of the club where her body would subsequently be found so I think it reasonable to assume that she would have remained in the vicinity of the club. And, of course, Fanny Mortimer said that she was standing in the doorway of her house during most of this period and she saw nothing.

It does appear, however, that Schwartz's timings went unchallenged, but then so did Edward Spooner's when he claimed to have arrived at the murder scene at 12:35am- he even stated this obviously mistaken time at the inquest and not even the coroner thought to question it!

However, I would acknowledge that there are difficulties: Fanny Mortimer doesn't come across as a very reliable witness to me and James Brown's testimony is not altogether irreconcilable with Schwartz: he estimated the time of his sighting at "about" 12:45 and, of course, he saw Stride at the corner of Berner Street, and so very close to the Schwartz sighting.

Finally, as I pointed out in a previous post James Brown heard Stride, or someone he believed to be Stride, say to a man "No, not tonight, some other night", so maybe Stride wasn't soliciting that night!

[Fisherman]

lynn cates: Hello Christer. Thanks.

"The inherent meaning is that the police awarded Long no credibility at all"

You know better than that. Their inquiries came up empty. Hence, no suspect in custody--other than the perpetrator (unbeknownst to them).

That was what followed from not having any leads. But what the FACT that they said that they had not a clue in the case means, is that they had not a clue in the case. And that also means that Long´s sighting was no longer considered a clue in October. Exit Long.

If they had put stock in Long, they would have had a massive clue in her description. They did not, however.

"Phillips said what?"

That he could be mistaken as to the time. Obviously a reference to the fact that his time was out compared to Long and Cadosh.

But that was not what you responed to. You responded to the sentence ""He went on to say: "Again if the evidence of Mrs. Long is correct that she saw the deceased at 5:30 a.m. then the evidence of Dr. Phillips as to probable time of death is incorrect" by saying that this was what Phillips said.

Clearly he didn´t. He said nothing of the sort. Not even near.

And his stating that it could be as little as two hours had nothing to do with Long and/or Cadosch, I´m afraid. The estimation he made would not have been something he altered to fit the tesitmony of others. That is rather a strange thing you are suggesting there, Lynn. It would have been extremely unprofessional:

"I think she has been dead for a week, since she has started to decompose."

"But a witness saw her five minutes ago!"

"Oh, alright then. She could have cooled of very quickly, I guess."

Great stuff that, Lynn. Very inventive.

"They came up with a decision that Phillips was correct and Long was wrong."

I, too, think Phillips was correct. And he said his time could be off. Where do they say Long was mistaken?

That is involved in the fact that they had no clue.

Thanks for the well wish. Right now, all I have is a strangler who wore an apron and carried knives. I'll keep looking. (heh-heh)

I´m not holding my breath. But I´m happy to have a lot more on my man than you have on yours.

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Sam Flynn:

Stride's murder was committed in a natural bottleneck just within the gates,...

Yes, so it was!

... which was an incredibly risky spot to choose (or be lured into) in order to commit an evisceration murder.

True enough, Gareth! However, I am reasoning that the killers agenda did NOT include a bottleneck killing as he moved in on Stride. I think that he would have had the purpose to take her deep into the far end of the yard, and kill and eviscerate her there, as far away from prying eyes as possible. But then he got wind of the door, realized that he had made a bad choice, and changed plans.

After that, he killed Stride, whether from frustration of having had an evisceration taken away from him, or because ha had showed his intentions and wanted no witness alive, I will leave unanswered.

That "bottleneck" puts it on a par with Hanbury Street, but at least the latter didn't have alternative exits and entrances, unlike Dutfield's Yard with its side doors and outhouses.

As things turned out, the killer realized that it was a poor choice of venue, if I am correct - but what I have been saying all along is that he could have gone for it BEFORE he knew about the door. If the door had not been there, it would have been a very good choice, I believe.

Dutfield's was made even riskier in my view, by the comparative bustle in and around Berner Street and the Clubhouse itself; such conditions didn't seem to apply at sleepy Hanbury.

"Sleepy Hanbury"? At 5.30? Come on - people were rising all over to start their day, and there would have been nothing sleepy about it. It would arguably have been the busiest street of them all at that remove in time.

... but at 3.30, it would have been decidely sleepy.

Anyhow, killing in the bottleneck was okay, it only took a second. Eviscerating there would have been very risky, I agree with that. But I still think he never meant to in the first place.

All the best,
Fisherman

[lynn cates]

Phillips, et al

Hello Christer. Thanks.

"The inherent meaning is that the police awarded Long no credibility at all"

You know better than that. Their inquiries came up empty. Hence, no suspect in custody--other than the perpetrator (unbeknownst to them).

"Phillips said what?"

That he could be mistaken as to the time. Obviously a reference to the fact that his time was out compared to Long and Cadosh.

"They came up with a decision that Phillips was correct and Long was wrong."

I, too, think Phillips was correct. And he said his time could be off. Where do they say Long was mistaken?

And, really, logic is an academic discipline. No doubt you mean REASONING?

Thanks for the well wish. Right now, all I have is a strangler who wore an apron and carried knives. I'll keep looking. (heh-heh)

Back to topic.

Cheers.
LC

[c.d.]

Hello Sam,

Nice to see you posting again by the way.

But what if Stride did or said something that made Jack want to kill her right there and then? And is it correct to look at the choice of location from only the perspective of the killer? I am sure that Stride was aware of the two previous murders as well as that of Tabram. Maybe she felt that being near the club enabled her to call out for help if she needed it. If Jack wanted to kill her and she would not budge in choice of location what was he to do?

c.d.