Stride..a victim?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Other's have made the same proposal, but an inquest is a public event, thats the whole point of an inquest. So I don't see how that works.

So what are your thoughts on the senior investigators pretending that Schwartz appeared?

[Michael W Richards]

Do we know why Mrs Mortimer wasn't at the Inquest?

There was no reason to call upon someone that claimed to see nothing but Goldstein and the young couple Herlock. The Inquest question was How Liz Died, and Israels account would have been very pertinent to that question. His absence speaks volumes.

As for Caz, the idea of blackmail being a possible link to Kate murder isnt devoid of evidence. We have a friend stating that Kate planned to give a name to police for the unknown murderer wreaking havoc, she gets drunk that afternoon on someone elses nickel, and she seems to have cause to be where she is found...she didnt just decide to head the opposite way to where she and John lived so she could trawl in Mitre Square. There is foundation for that premise, there is none for an interruption in the passageway off Berner.

In fact there are many questions about her last 24 hours. If they pawned the boots Friday night as per the ticket, then why would she have to sleep at a workhouse and why would Kelly claim he pawned the boots Saturday morning. Do we have any record of where Kate actually stayed that night? Would someone staying in a workhouse be let out without having to do any chores that morning? Do we know who she was with that afternoon..and why someone buys her a few drinks. Do we know why she turns the opposite direction of her last "home"....towards the city? Do we know if she knows Sailor Man, ...or even if that is her seen there.

We know Liz cleaned all afternoon, was paid for it, had a beverage with the lodginghouse manager around dinner, and early in the evening she askes for a lint brush to clean her full length skirt. We know that she confided to a resident that she didnt know when she would be back, and left her with a piece of velvet until her return. We know her lodgemate described her wearing "her good evening attire". She is seen later wearing a flower arrangement. We know that over the course of the next few hours she is seen with men, but apparently doesnt consume any alcohol, or as they reported themselves, service any of them. We last see her outside a club that had a meeting with some 200 plus attending, about an hour after most people had left. Some 20 or so Members remained upstairs. We know that she worked among the Jews as a cleaner during the weeks leading up to this night, and that she had that week ended a relationship.

If you use whats there a reasonable story for what Liz is doing there is apparent. And using the physical evidence, so is what happened to her. She died because someone killed her. Not any indication at all he was a Ripper, or THE Ripper.

Both these stories have many possible answers that do not include being victims 3 and 4 in a series by a mutilator.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Aren't you being a bit selective here?

Mrs Mortimer (The Evening News) said: '....shortly before a quarter to one she heard the measured heavy tramp of a policeman passing the house on his beat. Immediately afterward she went to the street door...she remained standing there ten minutes...'

But PC Smith said that he passed between 12.30 and 12.35. So if she went out after Smith and stood for ten minutes this would have had her back inside for 12.45. Just in time to miss Schwartz.

I'll repeat.....where's the issue?

Start by considering the fact that Smith's beat had mean timespan of 27― minutes

[Fisherman]

Trevor...? TREVOR!!!

[caz]

There is nothing within the Stride evidence that suggest anything other than her killer most probably intended to kill her. Thats all thats there. Why I strongly object to this interruption consideration is because it alters the evidence. Suddenly the murder becomes more than it obviously is. East End violence.

You can object as strongly as you like, Michael. But other than the bleedin' obvious, that her killer almost certainly intended that single cut to be a fatal one, you don't know any more about his identity, or his reasons for committing this crime than anyone else. So it's not 'obviously' a simple case of 'East End violence'. That's an entirely baseless opinion. Men didn't typically end up cutting a female throat just for jolly, so there was more to this than "Saturday night's all right for slashing".

If we knew all the conversations Stride had with everyone she met that night, and over the previous few days, we might have more of a clue as to what may have caused her killer to do what he did. But we can be sure something flipped him over into the act of murder. No 'interruption' necessary to know that much. Any man who could become that violent, and could kill with one slash of his knife, could have killed anyone with enough provocation, male or female. If Chapman's killer would have had no hesitation in killing a male witness for entering the yard at the wrong time, the same would have applied if the witness was female, and in neither case would we expect to see the witness mutilated. The idea that the ripper, uniquely, would never have used his knife on anyone, in any situation, or for any reason, other than for the purpose of mutilating the victim, regardless of the circumstances, does not seem remotely logical to me. The man had to be a killer first, in order to be a mutilator second. And once a killer, he could kill without mutilating if and when the occasion called only for the former.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

We know Liz cleaned all afternoon, was paid for it, had a beverage with the lodginghouse manager around dinner, and early in the evening she askes for a lint brush to clean her full length skirt. We know that she confided to a resident that she didnt know when she would be back, and left her with a piece of velvet until her return. We know her lodgemate described her wearing "her good evening attire". She is seen later wearing a flower arrangement. We know that over the course of the next few hours she is seen with men, but apparently doesnt consume any alcohol, or as they reported themselves, service any of them. We last see her outside a club that had a meeting with some 200 plus attending, about an hour after most people had left. Some 20 or so Members remained upstairs. We know that she worked among the Jews as a cleaner during the weeks leading up to this night, and that she had that week ended a relationship.

She had dinner at the Bricklayer's Arms with a middle-class man, and God knows who else.
I didn't know escorts were a thing, back then.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Start by considering the fact that Smith's beat had mean timespan of 27― minutes

That means nothing to me. We have him saying what time he passed along Berner Street. I'm hardly surprised that in the case of what John Richardson did or didn't say to Inspector Chandler it's been stated that the police officer was more likely to have been correct. And yet here when there are time differences lo and behold it's the witness that's trusted.

I'd say that Smith was likeliest by far to have been correct. Which places Mrs Mortimer in her house when Schwartz arrives. We can dispute Schwartz for days on end but there is nothing from the witnesses that dismissed his statement.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Trevor...? TREVOR!!!

I can answer for him if you like Fish? Then again, you already know the answer.

[caz]

Which are those "several other factors", Trevor? As for "accepted methods" of killing in Victorian times, killers rarely adjust to what is accepted or not. Of course, people have had their throats cut since the first knife was invented, but that does not affect how murder as such was not a common thing in the East End. It was not an everyday matter to find women with slashed throats on the East End streets.

Indeed, Fish. It's not as if we are discussing a known male gang member who was found with his throat cut, and trying to argue that the ripper did it and would have mutilated him given half a chance.

Love,

Caz
X

[Herlock Sholmes]

.
We know Liz cleaned all afternoon, was paid for it, had a beverage with the lodginghouse manager around dinner, and early in the evening she askes for a lint brush to clean her full length skirt. We know that she confided to a resident that she didnt know when she would be back, and left her with a piece of velvet until her return. We know her lodgemate described her wearing "her good evening attire". She is seen later wearing a flower arrangement. We know that over the course of the next few hours she is seen with men, but apparently doesnt consume any alcohol, or as they reported themselves, service any of them. We last see her outside a club that had a meeting with some 200 plus attending, about an hour after most people had left. Some 20 or so Members remained upstairs. We know that she worked among the Jews as a cleaner during the weeks leading up to this night, and that she had that week ended a relationship

So we know that she was a woman who did poorly paid cleaning work. We know that she resorted to prostitution. We know that she was 'seen' with men on that night. Perhaps she didn't go out with the intention of soliciting? Perhaps she was meeting a man friend on a first date but it didn't go well so she left him and ending up trying to earn money? Perhaps she was approached by a regular? Or perhaps she did go out soliciting? Perhaps she argued with BS man who was a punter and he pulled a knife and killed her? Perhaps BS man left and Pipe Man came over acting as the Good Samaritan but hoping for a freebie which caused an argument which led to him pulling a knife? Perhaps a club member was standing on the backdoor step smoking and he saw the Schwartz incident and tried to take advantage whilst 'comforting' Liz leading him to pull a knife to silence her? Or perhaps she was killed by Jack The Ripper (who might have been BS Man or Pipe Man) and as he was about to mutilate her he heard Diemschutz cart approach the gateway? Perhaps he ducked behind the gate and left when Diemschutz went inside?

I'd say that everyone of those 'perhaps's are possibles.

[Trevor Marriott]

No, Trevor, donīt give me a clue, give me facts. Otherwise, it is there "for all to see" how you are trying to sidestep my question.

So letīs hear it, please!

DYOR

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[caz]

As for Caz, the idea of blackmail being a possible link to Kate murder isnt devoid of evidence. We have a friend stating that Kate planned to give a name to police for the unknown murderer wreaking havoc, she gets drunk that afternoon on someone elses nickel, and she seems to have cause to be where she is found...she didnt just decide to head the opposite way to where she and John lived so she could trawl in Mitre Square. There is foundation for that premise, there is none for an interruption in the passageway off Berner.

I think it was the late Don Souden who gave a talk on popular ripper myths at one of the conferences, and said there was no reliable evidence for Eddowes telling this 'friend' she knew the murderer's identity. It was almost certainly said to inject a bit of extra drama into the poor woman's fate, along with the fire engine impressions. In any case, she'd only just got back from the hopping, and wasn't around for the previous murders, so was hardly in a position to know anything of the sort. The most recent name he was known by was Leather Apron. There is no foundation for the 'premise' that she headed off to Mitre Square to try her tiny hand at blackmailing either the latest Leather Apron or a robber, in the hope of taking some cash home to avoid the "good hiding" she feared. This has no legs and is beyond ludicrous as a ploy to force yet another throat-cutting lady killer onto the stage.

[Fisherman]

DYOR

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Deplorable

You

Overleap

Responding ...?

Donīt be afraid, Trevor. The worst that can happen is that you are shown to be wrong. When I research and make claims, I am always prepared to answer any criticism I receive. I genuinely believe that is how it must work.

[Fisherman]

So we know that she was a woman who did poorly paid cleaning work. We know that she resorted to prostitution. We know that she was 'seen' with men on that night. Perhaps she didn't go out with the intention of soliciting? Perhaps she was meeting a man friend on a first date but it didn't go well so she left him and ending up trying to earn money? Perhaps she was approached by a regular? Or perhaps she did go out soliciting? Perhaps she argued with BS man who was a punter and he pulled a knife and killed her? Perhaps BS man left and Pipe Man came over acting as the Good Samaritan but hoping for a freebie which caused an argument which led to him pulling a knife? Perhaps a club member was standing on the backdoor step smoking and he saw the Schwartz incident and tried to take advantage whilst 'comforting' Liz leading him to pull a knife to silence her? Or perhaps she was killed by Jack The Ripper (who might have been BS Man or Pipe Man) and as he was about to mutilate her he heard Diemschutz cart approach the gateway? Perhaps he ducked behind the gate and left when Diemschutz went inside?

I'd say that everyone of those 'perhaps's are possibles.

Perhaps.

(Sorry, couldnīt resist.)

[rjpalmer]

I suspect the locals were terrified in a way we cannot comprehend.

They must have been acutely aware that if they became involved in even a marginal way, suspicion would rain down on their own heads.

I remember there was a murder in my neighborhood as a child, and one of the first impulses was to look around and wonder what your neighbor was thinking about you. I felt that even as an eight year old.

The fear was real; it was palpable. Make no mistake: grisly crimes like this in your own proximity shake the living shite out of you.

It took backbone to be a Richardson or a Schwartz or a Hutchinson, and, if the last 130 years have shown anything, getting involved is an entirely thankless task. It's a risk that only someone with a sense of civic duty will take.

Blackmail? No chance.