Stride..a victim?

[DJA]

Whoosh!

[NotBlamedForNothing]

How could anyone other than the killer know what might have disturbed him? Is that really meant to be a "gotcha" question?

No. What it is is a demonstration that without a physical cause, the interruption theory explains nothing, and simply amounts to a circular argument.

The killer fled because he was interrupted!

How do you know he was interrupted?

What? Are you kidding? Is that really meant to be a "gotcha" question?
I know he was interrupted because he fled!

As for mental, you seem to forget that if caught Jack is most likely going to find his neck in a noose as opposed to say a lecture from the judge or community service.

You're missing your own point.
If the reason for termination is mental - that is, not something external - then there is exactly zero extra risk than if no 'mental disturbance' had occurred, and he had continued on with his work.

And you are talking about him collecting himself and giving it the old college try?

If he's just had a mental 'hiccup', and we make the interruption assumption that he's insatiate (in the JtR sense), it makes at least as much sense as going to Aldgate and starting again with a new victim.

Are you serious on this or is this sarcasm?

This not just sarcasm. The interruption theory just posits some unidentifiable mental state, so it can never be proven wrong (it's unfalsifiable), and therefore it explains exactly nothing.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Whoosh!

Whoosh indeed.

So when you finish explaining away that lot, perhaps let us know how the blood managed to flow all the way to the side door, given that Dutfield's Yard was covered in mud that night.

You know, all that mud due to the rain, which got her hair all matted, and jacket plastered with it on one side. Though curiously no specific mention of her skirt being muddy.

I find the mud to be quite a mystery, don't you?

[Michael W Richards]

No it doesn't.

Catch 18.

Since I quoted Blackwell and Phillips to support my statement, which is basically a summary of the same contention both had, and you quote no-one or nothing to explain your derisive post, whatever you believe Catch 18 is isnt a counter at all. Its like the majority of your posts....it serves only the poster.

Its funny how often you diss others when you have espoused the most creative and dramatic nonsense about a 5 woman blackmail scheme. The only person to my knowledge ever foolish enough to even suggest such nonsense. You live in an all glass house...maybe you should remember that.

[DJA]

Since I quoted Blackwell and Phillips to support my statement, which is basically a summary of the same contention both had, and you quote no-one or nothing to explain your derisive post, whatever you believe Catch 18 is isnt a counter at all. Its like the majority of your posts....it serves only the poster.

Its funny how often you diss others when you have espoused the most creative and dramatic nonsense about a 5 woman blackmail scheme. The only person to my knowledge ever foolish enough to even suggest such nonsense. You live in an all glass house...maybe you should remember that.

I actually quoted you.

There was no spray as Blackwell testified.

Stride was not cut while standing.

As usual you move the goalposts and cover up your incompetence.

Thanks for the usual unresearched insult.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Its funny how often you diss others when you have espoused the most creative and dramatic nonsense about a 5 woman blackmail scheme. The only person to my knowledge ever foolish enough to even suggest such nonsense. You live in an all glass house...maybe you should remember that.

It's funny that someone would suggest that another poster (me) should stop posting, when his wacky theory is about as popular as Jar Jar Binks.
So Mike, do you think he would resort to that sort of BS, if his own theory were catching on?

[Abby Normal]

It's funny that someone would suggest that another poster (me) should stop posting, when his wacky theory is about as popular as Jar Jar Binks.
So Mike, do you think he would resort to that sort of BS, if his own theory were catching on?

and whats yours again?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Could the bruising have pre-dated the murder?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

and whats yours again?

Put together a collection of plausible suspects.
Go through the list, considering each one in turn to be the Ripper.
Try to prove the guilt of each candidate to oneself for some period, or until the case for falls apart (and is crossed off the list).
Keep going through the list, and chipping away at suspects until only one remains.
However, there is an important caveat at this point; the last man standing must be wearing a peaked cap. LOL

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

I wouldn't say an internally interrupted killer returning to the scene was "zero risk". Times elapsed. He doesn't know if she's been found, if people are about etc. He could casually walk by to have a look, but without knowing what's happening, he risks placing himself at the scene where previously he was unseen. He could be apprehended, questioned, accused. Essentially, he'd have to get far enough away from the scene to avoid apprehension in the event of discovery, and take (how long?) to mentally stabilise, all in the belief that the street has remained totally quiet. There's a degree of risk at least.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Could the bruising have pre-dated the murder?

Good question. I think Phillips implies the bruising is fresh, when he says...

...a bluish discolouration which I have watched and seen on two occasions since.

The bruising become more evident after a day or two.
Having said that, Phillips is a bit vague. For example, I claimed the bruising on the shoulders was actually on the sides of the head.
Was I right? Irish Times:

...the savagery of her assailant is evidenced not alone by the terrible wound in her throat but also by two severe contusions on the head - one on the temple, the other on the cheek...

Was I wrong?

The Foreman: Did you notice any marks or bruises about the shoulders?
Dr Blackwell: They were what we call pressure marks. At first they were very obscure, but subsequently they became very evident. They were not what are ordinarily called bruises; neither is there any abrasion. Each shoulder was about equally marked.

So there is quite a lot of fresh bruising to the head, shoulders and chest, and yet!...

Baxter: Were her clothes disturbed?
Lamb: No. I scarcely could see her boots. She looked as if she had been laid quietly down. Her clothes were not in the least rumpled.

[DJA]

Could the bruising have pre-dated the murder?

The scuffle at the entrance.

However these are pressure marks. Different.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I wouldn't say an internally interrupted killer returning to the scene was "zero risk". Times elapsed. He doesn't know if she's been found, if people are about etc. He could casually walk by to have a look, but without knowing what's happening, he risks placing himself at the scene where previously he was unseen. He could be apprehended, questioned, accused. Essentially, he'd have to get far enough away from the scene to avoid apprehension in the event of discovery, and take (how long?) to mentally stabilise, all in the belief that the street has remained totally quiet. There's a degree of risk at least.

Okay there is some added risk, and yes time is elapsing. However, if he stays and 'goes to work', time is elapsing - but only from a point a few minutes earlier.
This is where the question of Schwartz and Diemschitz' timing becomes important.
What is the window of opportunity - just after 12:45 until just prior to 1am?
Can he afford to lose a few minutes? What does the Mitre Square case suggest?

All this is very hypothetical, but the point is; does our interrupted killer actually need to start again?
Also, how can we know he is 'right' by the time he comes into contact with Eddowes, without ending up with more circular logic?

All this can be avoided by going for the cynical interpretation - interruption is what you're meant to think has occurred.

[Prosector]

The trouble with posts like this when a new topic starts to go haywire is that there very rapidly become so many that it is impossible to reply to individual ones before becoming buried under the avalanche. With regards to the bruising, not just to Stride, but to others also, I believe that JTR must have been able to incapacitate his victims and cause them to lose consciousness before severing the carotid arteries (except in the case of MJK who fought back) and I think that this was probably by pressure on the carotid sinuses (or possibly just one) at the base of the neck and if that was done with the middle and ring fingers, the thumb, which would have been used as a fulcrum, would leave a bruise quite unlike that caused by strangulation. In the case of carotid pressure the bruise would most likely be just below the clavicle. In strangulation it is usually at the back of the neck or shoulders. I don't believe that anyone, then or now, would be able to occlude the subclavian arteries by direct pressure below the clavicles (they are not palpable there, only in the armpits). The problem with carotid sinus pressure (which is taught to Special Forces today) is that it is very chancy and difficult and, in 1888, you would have had to have had a great deal of specialised anatomical knowledge, or have practiced on a lot of people to be sure of it working. Medical students right up to the present day have sometimes practiced this on each other to induce temporary unconsciousness as a bit of a party trick and I believe that this practice did also exist in Victorian times. Craig and his father specialised in carotid massage for therapeutic purposes and wrote a pamphlet about it (it's in the British Library) although recognising that it could be dangerous. Someone mentioned about casing the murder sites beforehand. Craig was almost certainly at a lecture given by William Morris, who he knew well, at the Working Men's Educational Institute earlier the same week.
Prosector

[DJA]

In the case of carotid pressure the bruise would most likely be just below the clavicle.

Craig was almost certainly at a lecture given by William Morris, who he knew well, at the Working Men's Educational Institute earlier the same week.
Prosector

The pressure marks under Stride's collar bone could be due to carotid pressure?