Originally posted by Fiver
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
A closer look at Leon Goldstein
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
If he wants to kill her specifically cd, then she is not a randomly acquired target is she? Like the ones Jack seeks out?
And why would it always have to be one or the other, random or targeted?
What would prevent Jack from targeting a woman specifically if he chose to do so?
c.d.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
It may be commonly repeated, but I'm not sure how many students of the case regard it as a fact.
We should put more thought into what we read and cease regarding these details as factual. It has to stop somewhere, I personally have no theory as to who Goldstein was or what his role may have been. Details will only become clearer when we stop misrepresenting what is written.
There is also the possibility the reporter made an error as to which hand contained the cachous, not necessarily the witness (Spooner).
As Stride was found on her left side, with her left arm under her body, but the forearm projecting out away from her. This means the back of her left hand will have been on the ground. Try that position yourself, you can't turn the palm of the hand to face the ground. So, her left palm was faced up, so if the packet of cachous was already on the ground, but her hand was positioned over the cachous, where they could be seen between the thumb & forefinger, as her fingers may clench together they may have trapped the packet of cachous between her fingers as they curled up.
The resulting appearance was that she held a packet of cachous between her thumb and forefinger - a totally unnatural position for holding anything in your hand. If the packet had been found in the palm of her hand then we could believe she was holding them. But as they were only pinched between her thumb & forefinger, I suspect the packet was already on the ground, it was just that her left hand fell partially over the packet, between her thumb & forefinger.
This cachous business has been a huge distraction to the case.
Doesn't he mean the arm was straight? That could mean the thumb and forefinger were uppermost, with the palm and back of hand vertical to the ground.Andrew's the man, who is not blamed for nothing
Comment
-
Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
Im not predicting anything, Im suggesting that some witnesses were either intentionally misleading or all off on their timing by around 20 minutes. I think under the circumstances the probabilities are greater for the first of those 2 options. Louis, Morris and Lave...then later, Israel.
By predict, I mean that a theory can constrain the movements of certain actors, in time and space, to the point that only a single possibility remains. According to your theory, the timing of the murder and more importantly the time of the discovery means that Eagle and Lave must see more than either man admitted to. The same seems to be true of Fanny hearing the pony and cart at close to 1am. The body had been discovered many minutes prior, in your theory, hence Fanny must have heard the pony and cart being led away.
If a theory doesn't allow for any other possibility, regarding one or more elements of the theory, opposing evidence cannot be processed in an objective-like manner.Andrew's the man, who is not blamed for nothing
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by c.d. View Post
How were you able to determine which of the victims were randomly acquired targets and which were targeted specifically?
And why would it always have to be one or the other, random or targeted?
What would prevent Jack from targeting a woman specifically if he chose to do so?
c.d.
Which brings up the point, the reason you keeping making suggestions within the realm of possibility to explain what we see this and not that, is that you seem to feel the man in this story is just out to kill. I think, based on what I see and the realm of probabilities, that the man in this story kills first. But he cuts after. Its that part, not any old kill, that gives him what he seems to want. Think about the risk he took each time, it had to be a meaningful opportunity I think. That more than any other point makes me open to him being in Mitre Square, because I dont see the same intense focus on objectives similar to Pollys killer had. Maybe the light?Last edited by Michael W Richards; 03-05-2024, 12:32 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post
You managed to avoid the issue of how long Spooner took to walk from the pub on Settles St, to outside the Beehive on Fairclough St.
By predict, I mean that a theory can constrain the movements of certain actors, in time and space, to the point that only a single possibility remains. According to your theory, the timing of the murder and more importantly the time of the discovery means that Eagle and Lave must see more than either man admitted to. The same seems to be true of Fanny hearing the pony and cart at close to 1am. The body had been discovered many minutes prior, in your theory, hence Fanny must have heard the pony and cart being led away.
If a theory doesn't allow for any other possibility, regarding one or more elements of the theory, opposing evidence cannot be processed in an objective-like manner.
Its really a very workable storyline using the witnesses that A) had no direct financial gain from that club being in continued operations, and B) had senior responsibility for what transpired on the property at that time. Those men had mitigating circumstances which could lead them to be self protective in whatever way they could. Maybe just by seeing nothing and later adding someone from off the property as the most probable killer? Im still surprised many dont see that logic also.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Michael W Richards View PostHello again,
I would think immediately associating this new murder with the last assumed Ripper kill, Annie Chapmans, is something that brings to mind the apples and oranges analogy. Both fruit, but completely different. Far more knife attacks happened in that city than ones that included abdominal mutilations, and in fact a third one happened on that same night. Not unsolved, and a domestic murder, but that doesnt alter the fact that 3 women that night had their throats slit.... with knives. Something Im sure you have done at one point or another is to look at ALL the murders that year in London. I believe just over 50 some odd. Not just Unsolved, and not just within a square mile of each other, but all of them. Note how many were committed with knives or other implements vs how many involved knives used for organ extractions. Its not a fair contest. Knives were by far the most commonly used weapon, and organ extractions as part of a murder were exceedingly rare. Liz Strides death by definition was within that first predominant grouping. Annies decidely wasnt. To immediately claim that "another murder" has happened, based on the fact that the only murderer on peoples minds at that time was the serial mutilator, is effectively intentional misdirection.
If youd noted, I suggested that the man came from that property....substantiated by the fact that the ONLY men known to be near that kill site at that time were the men still in attendance at that club. I dont believe he had to be a member, and in fact if we accept portions of what Israel said he saw, he may well have been an antisemitic gentile. The evidence suggests that no other men were anywhere close to those gates, and multiple witnesses said the street was deserted that last 25 minutes, other than Goldsteins pass by seen by Fanny. You may find it "unlikely" a club attendee committed this murder, but the fact remains that they were the only people who could have done it and not be seen from the street.
Your resistance is based on your hunches. The question of who could have done it needs no hunch to figure out. He was almost certainly from that property.
Love,
Caz
XLast edited by caz; 03-05-2024, 01:27 PM."Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post
Who do you suppose the police would have spoken to at the "coffee house"?
Love,
Gene Hunt
X"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov
Comment
-
Originally posted by caz View Post
I don't have the police down as complete fools, so I am assuming they were able to satisfy themselves that Goldstein was in the clear. This was not the 1970s, when fitting up some foreign sounding Joe might have seemed like a good way to 'clear up' an unsolved crime.
Love,
Gene Hunt
XAndrew's the man, who is not blamed for nothing
Comment
-
Originally posted by c.d. View PostBut what if he specifically wanted to kill Stride and she said it is here or not at all?
c.d.
I doubt that Stride said "you kill me here or not at all".Sorry, I knew what you meant.
I do think it's entirely reasonable to suppose that if a predator like the ripper saw Stride earlier that evening, or just spotted her at the club's entrance, he could have made up his mind to target her. He didn't need to kill where he encountered his prospective victims. Quite the reverse, if it was too busy and they were willing to lead him somewhere they could be alone together for the time they both needed. Appreciating that the club's yard was far from ideal in that respect, he could have tried - evidently without success - to persuade Stride to accompany him to a quieter spot, but he could not have forced her without drawing unwanted attention. Depending on her reaction and his state of mind and mood, he could have passed the point of no return and cut her throat with ruthless efficiency before running off to try his luck in another part of town.
Why this would be considered 'out of character' by some posters, I really haven't a clue.
Love,
Caz
X
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post
Goldstein's known visit to the Spectacle Alley cafe (or whatever it was) that night, could not have cleared him of the murder on Berner St any more than it could have cleared him of the murder at Mitre Square. It's no wonder he was reluctant to go to the police, in contrast to Wess, who seems to have been a reader of the Star.
Love,
Caz
X"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov
Comment
-
Originally posted by c.d. View PostHi c.d.,
I doubt that Stride said "you kill me here or not at all".Sorry, I knew what you meant.
It's a good thing you added that "Sorry" or you would be on the list. Maybe on the bottom of the list but still on the list.
c.d."Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov
Comment
-
What about another theory (big yawn by some! I don't blame them) What about if everyone's involved. Please don't give up at this point. What about that when BSM arrives and he starts his pushing and pulling a larger confrontation takes place. You know. Big argument, Fanny Mortimer and many others says rowdiness is quite normal at the club. Bit of a punch up. Liz gets her throat cut. In that dark gateway who knows whos pushing pulling who. Gets out of hand. The participants clear off back into the club or the street. The Louis drives his cart in and sees the body. Participants deny all knowledge. Don't want to be involved in a murder. Who the participants were well thats anybody's guess but clearly some are keeping their mouths shut because there was activity in the street it would be impossible not to see anything such as suggested by Lave.
I think we are viewing the club in the wrong light. It was a busy venue. I think it was 11.30 approx when about 70 people left the club, I think. I don't suppose they all went straight home?
May be a silly thought
NW
Comment
Comment