Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Stride..a victim?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by erobitha View Post

    If you break it down, the attacks had 3 key phases:

    1) LURE - This was the ruse he used to get their trust and lead him to their preferred location
    2) KILL - This the act of killing them as quickly and noise free as possible. Then slitting their arteries in their neck to ensure death but also for a little showmanship
    3) MUTILATE - This was why he did what he did. The extreme mutilation is what excited him and drove him to do what he did - culminating with Kelly which to him was his masterpiece.
    By that logic he should have done 5 'Kelly's'
    Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

      So there is much blood on the ground by that point, yet when Spooner arrives she is still bleeding!

      Baxter: Was any blood coming from the throat?
      Spooner: Yes; it was still flowing.

      There must have been a lot of liquid in that gutter.
      Spooner said he arrived four or five minutes before Lamb did. Lamb said he preceded Blackwell with some ten to twelve minutes. Blackwell was there at 1.16, meaning that Spooner was in place around 1 AM. Bearing in mind that she had only had the vessels of one side severed, I donīt think that it is unreasonable that Stride may have bled as Spooner saw her.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

        [Star, Sep 9] There is no blood except in the yard corner, and a huge splash on the fence, like the spurt from an artery.

        Stride was probably killed when on the ground, and right near the wall of the club. So there must have been a lot of blood on that wall, right?
        That all depends on many factors. Was she already dead as she was cut or did her heart beat? How was the throat positioned as he cut?

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
          Can

          Cant agree with you on that sorry

          www.trevormarriott.co.uk
          I am suggesting a possibility, and as such, you cannot disagree about the existance of that possibility. If you donīt think it is likely, thatīs just fine. To me, it is by far the likeliest explanation.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

            Spooner said he arrived four or five minutes before Lamb did. Lamb said he preceded Blackwell with some ten to twelve minutes. Blackwell was there at 1.16, meaning that Spooner was in place around 1 AM. Bearing in mind that she had only had the vessels of one side severed, I donīt think that it is unreasonable that Stride may have bled as Spooner saw her.
            Sort of missing my point, Fish, which is that Spooner arrives minutes after Diemschitz first sees all the blood - when it has already flowed a long way.
            Phillips was struck by how much blood there was, considering the size of the victim.
            Was it all blood? Was some of it rain? Was some of it 'padding'?
            Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

            Comment


            • #51
              As ha
              Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
              Trevor, there is physical evidence of strangulation on the first 2 victims, what you feel wasnt required was still done regardless. The silence factor would be one reason to do it, the making the victim unable to struggle upon unconsciousness would be another. And there is evidence that it was done.
              As has been pointed out there is no logic to strangling first then cutting the throat in order to kill

              www.trevormarriott.co.uk

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

                By that logic he should have done 5 'Kelly's'
                Only if he killed all victims on Nov 9 - and was not disturbed. There are many examples of serial killers exploring as they go along. They ultimately reach their final goal on account of these explorations, that allow for them to evolve. They do not necessarily have a clear picture of their ultimate aims from the outset, it is something that develops as they go along.

                And even if he DID kill all victims on Nov 9, there is every chance that he would do different things to them anyway. That too would be about exploring.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

                  Sort of missing my point, Fish, which is that Spooner arrives minutes after Diemschitz first sees all the blood - when it has already flowed a long way.
                  Phillips was struck by how much blood there was, considering the size of the victim.
                  Was it all blood? Was some of it rain? Was some of it 'padding'?
                  If you can show me that Stride could not have bled as Spooner arrived, for whatever reason, then yes, I am missing your point. Can you?

                  As for the blood volume at the site, a grown woman has around five liters of blood in her body. That is enough to form a very long trail of blood.
                  Last edited by Fisherman; 10-22-2020, 01:35 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                    As ha

                    As has been pointed out there is no logic to strangling first then cutting the throat in order to kill

                    www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                    ... whereas there IS logic to the suggestion of first strangling to kill or at least incapacitate into silence and a limp body, and then slitting the throat to allow for blood to empty out before he sets about eviscerating.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

                      That all depends on many factors. Was she already dead as she was cut or did her heart beat? How was the throat positioned as he cut?
                      If she were dead when cut, would the blood have flowed all the way to the door?
                      That flow sounds to me like a heart still beating for some time after.
                      Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Y
                        Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

                        ... whereas there IS logic to the suggestion of first strangling to kill or at least incapacitate into silence and a limp body, and then slitting the throat to allow for blood to empty out before he sets about eviscerating.
                        But in my opinion, the evidence points to the fact that they all had their throats cut from behind while still standing. In which case the killer would be able to place his hand over the victims throat to silence and subdue them. If we look at Eddowes and the cuts to her face in my opinion point to her trying to avoid the killer's knife in that way.

                        If the motive was only murder and mutilation your theory falls down. The evidenec to suport the evisceration theory is highly contentious

                        www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

                          If you can show me that Stride could not have bled as Spooner arrived, for whatever reason, then yes, I am missing your point. Can you?
                          I'm not questioning Spooner's observation, and Spooner seems a very solid and responsible citizen, to me. He even dumped his girlfriend on the street, so he could participate in a more pressing matter. Seriously, you've got to admire the man...

                          Anyway, the point is that Phillips seems slightly fascinated by the amount of blood - even a little perplexed - and a man of Phillip's authority asking if he may use a word? What's that about? It's as though he can't quite bring himself to state what really seemed to be the case - that the quantity and nature of the blood flow was incongruent with the apparent bodyweight of the victim.

                          As for the blood volume at the site, a grown woman has around five liters of blood in her body. That is enough to form a very long trail of blood.
                          ...while her heart is still beating. So where is the splatter on the wall?
                          Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

                            If she were dead when cut, would the blood have flowed all the way to the door?
                            That flow sounds to me like a heart still beating for some time after.
                            Dr Blackwell's testimony, The Times 3 Oct: "Deceased would have bled to death comparatively slowly, on account of the vessels on one side only being severed, and the artery not completely severed.....
                            ....Deceased would take about a minute and a half to bleed to death"

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

                              If she were dead when cut, would the blood have flowed all the way to the door?

                              Depends on the amount of slope there was. Small streams have no heartbeat, do they? They neverthless run as long as their sources feed them, and Stride would have fed her bloodstream as long as there was blood that left the body on account of gravity.

                              That flow sounds to me like a heart still beating for some time after.
                              No, that would not have been necessary. If you put a dead pig on the ground and cut itīs neck open, the blood will run out anyway, and form a stream. And as long as the blood is in itīs vessels, it will not coagulate.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                                Y

                                But in my opinion, the evidence points to the fact that they all had their throats cut from behind while still standing. In which case the killer would be able to place his hand over the victims throat to silence and subdue them. If we look at Eddowes and the cuts to her face in my opinion point to her trying to avoid the killer's knife in that way.

                                If the motive was only murder and mutilation your theory falls down. The evidenec to suport the evisceration theory is highly contentious

                                www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                                But doesn't the spray of blood against the fence at the Chapman crime scene suggest that she was lying on the ground when her throat was cut?

                                there,s nothing new, only the unexplored

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X