Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Stride..a victim?

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

  • Just for those that want to continually argue about facts with me, I am taking some time away from this. There has to be better hobbies than arguing whether the Earth is flat or not. Ill find one. So a non-reply is because I didnt read your insult or question. Have at er...
    Michael Richards

    Comment


    • It's an interesting observation.

      Some modern theorists have taken Stride's supposed nickname 'Hippy Lip' to mean 'epileptic,' but I agree that the odd appearance of her lower lip in the mortuary photograph raises doubts about this interpretation.

      What is somewhat strange is that I insist on writing 'supposed' nickname, because the claim that Stride was known as 'Hippy Lip Annie' seems to spring from an American source--evidently a correspondent for the New York World, and this was then reprinted in several American newspapers the first week of Oct 1888 (The Boston Globe being one of them). I don't believe any of the London papers made this claim, did they? If it appeared in the British press--the Telegraph, the Daily News, the East London Observer, etc. I'm missing it. Does anyone have a local source for this?

      In fact, I don't see 'Hippy Lip' making an appearance in the British press until the following month, late November, and even then it is in a highly dubious special report about the Annie Farmer affair that might also have had an American journalist behind it.

      If this was indeed Stride's nickname, it seems to have been known to very few people, one of them being an American journalist. Or else he simply made it up, which would also be strange considering the mortuary photograph.

      And if her swollen lip was related to the murder, or even a recent injury, you'd think Phillips would have mentioned it.

      It's a curious business.


      Comment


      • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
        Blackwell: "The deceased was lying on her left side obliquely across the passage, her face looking towards the right wall. Her legs were drawn up, her feet close against the wall of the right side of the passage. Her head was resting beyond the carriage-wheel rut, the neck lying over the rut. Her feet were three yards from the gateway."
        I swear that this is the last time I'll mention the wheel rut! But Phillips states, in describing Stride:

        "there was mud on the left side of the face and it was matted in the head"

        "Matted" sounds like a lot of mud and I've always associated this with the wheel rut, since her head was over the top of it. I'm just thinking that Dutfield's Yard might have been in worse repair than the visualizations, the only relevancy being that it might have made it a somewhat less likely spot for an unfortunate to conduct her business.

        I'll leave it.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
          Just for those that want to continually argue about facts with me, I am taking some time away from this. There has to be better hobbies than arguing whether the Earth is flat or not. Ill find one. So a non-reply is because I didnt read your insult or question. Have at er...
          That's up to you Michael but it appears that you're wedded to your own take on events to the extent that you ignore anything that contradicts it.

          Why do you accept as gospel Fanny's comments about being on her doorstep virtually the whole time and yet you ignore the more detailed version of events which contradict this?

          Why do you assume that Fanny owned a clock?

          Why do you assume that Smith couldn't have been correct in the time that he passed?

          Ill ask again....is there a statement by Goldstein saying that he passed at 12.55 (I'm not saying that there isn't but I'd like to know) Because if there isnt then your basically saying " we know that she was on the doorstep at 12.55 because she saw Goldstein at that time and we know that Goldstein passed exactly at that time because Fanny said so."

          ....

          I have no vested interest in any of these timings I'm simply saying that we can't just pick and choose who to believe on no solid grounds. And if what Fanny told the Evening News was her breakdown of events (and why wouldn't it be?) then she's hardly the most trustworthy of witnesses yet you're prepared to turn her into a saint purely to dismiss Schwartz?

          Schwartz can be doubted but he cannot be dismissed. The basis for his 'dismissal' often appears to be framed in terms of him not being at the Inquest but as Sugden (hardly a fanciful theorist) says there are numerous reasons why he might not have appeared. One that stands out to me is that he was afraid of repercussions from either BS Man or Pipe Man that he laid low until the Inquest was over?
          Regards

          Herlock




          “...A yellow fog swirls past the window-pane
          As night descends upon this fabled street:
          A lonely hansom splashes through the rain,
          The ghostly gas lamps fail at twenty feet.
          Here, though the world explode, these two survive,
          And it is always eighteen ninety-five.”

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

            Caz. Fanny didnt hear a policemans tread, she heard boots which she believed were policemans. And you insist on propogating an idea that Fanny missed most of what happened in that half hour instead of using her words that describe that half hour and her observances. Nearly the whole time isnt vague. Its almost all.
            I don't give two hoots, Michael, whose boots Fanny heard, or what time she heard them. My point was that she was inside at the time, but saw and heard nothing during the whole time she claimed to be on her doorstep, staring at this silent, empty outdoors, after midnight on the last day of September. If she missed everything that went on during the immediate aftermath of the discovery of "another murder", when the club members were supposedly in full-on damage control mode, she surely must have gone inside by then. So what am I missing?
            Last edited by caz; 11-26-2020, 12:01 PM.
            "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


            Comment


            • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

              I don't get this Michael?

              First, how did they check their times? We know how Diemschutz checked his.

              And secondly, if Fanny was correct in her PC Smith time then Diemschutz would have arrived at precisely the time that she heard the cart.

              Those others appear to have been wrong.
              So does Michael believe the pony and cart arrived with Diemschutz at around 12.40, upon which the pony got spooked and "another" murder was discovered, and the club members rallied round to discuss their cunning plan while Stride was still bleeding out? But Fanny saw and heard nothing of this, yet she did hear the same cart's departure shortly after 1 am, from inside her house?

              Love,

              Caz
              X
              "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


              Comment


              • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

                Fanny was in her home, presumably she had a clock to access. Which is why she gives times for events. She also says she was at her door for almost that entire half hour, but we can assume she wasnt at around 12:40-12:45, because she says she heard boots. We know when Goldstein passes she is at her door, she gives that time as being around 12:55-56, again, presumably because she had checked the time while inside. She says she was at her door until just after 1. She does not see or hear any cart, horse or Diemshitz arrive at 1. She hears a cart and horse just after retiring, after 1.

                3 of the 4 witnesses that say they were alerted to the body came from inside the club, one estimated that since his return at 12:30 he spent 10 minutes inside before being summoned. All three had access to a clock inside the club, and all 3 give their time of first being aware as 12:40. Spooners story allows for the same approximate time he follows the "2 jews", who are never identified adequately.

                This means she didnt see Goldstein at 12:40, remember..she hears boots at around that time. She is inside momentarily. As men are gathering around the body apparently.

                This all stems from trying to rework or cast aspersions on Fannys statements, which for me is ridiculous. She gave times and events, and had no reasons to lie or embellish. The fact that she says the boots were a policemans is something she could not have known, nor is whose cart passed by after 11 and which way it was headed. She couldnt have known that for certain. So theres a human nature issue,,,she presumes about what she has heard. Like you and others do.

                She doesnt need to presume about what she sees. Or at what time it was.


                And that is....nothing but the young couple from 12:35 until 12:55, and only Goldstein at that time. She doesnt see or hear anyone arrive at 1. Like Louis says he did "precisely".
                Do you see what you did there, Michael? There certainly is a human nature issue here. You just presumed Fanny had a clock to access; that this clock was showing the correct time; and that she routinely made a mental note of the time it was showing whenever she went to her front door; whenever she returned inside; whenever she heard footsteps, or ponies and carts, or voices coming from the street; and whenever she saw a passer-by. Who does that in real life? Remember, she didn't hear or see anything out of the ordinary until just after 1am, when she had retired for the night, not expecting any drama and totally oblivious while it was being acted out. Her given timings for her earlier movements, and what she heard or saw, would have been rough estimates at best, except perhaps for the time she settled down, if this was usual for a Saturday night.

                You seem to believe that Fanny could not possibly have been wrong or mistaken, and because she had no reason to lie, anyone else whose account conflicted with hers must have been lying and either involved in the murder itself or part of some fanciful cover-up operation.

                You are using Fanny as an egg timer in order to punch home your version of the night's events. But she was just another fallible human being, who witnessed bugger all of any import.
                Last edited by caz; 11-26-2020, 01:21 PM.
                "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


                Comment


                • Originally posted by caz View Post

                  Do you see what you did there, Michael? There certainly is a human nature issue here. You just presumed Fanny had a clock to access; that this clock was showing the correct time; and that she routinely made a mental note of the time it was showing whenever she went to her front door; whenever she returned inside; whenever she heard footsteps, or ponies and carts, or voices coming from the street; and whenever she saw a passer-by. Who does that in real life? Remember, she didn't hear or see anything out of the ordinary until just after 1am, when she had retired for the night, not expecting any drama and totally oblivious while it was being acted out. Her given timings for her earlier movements, and what she heard or saw, would have been rough estimates at best, except perhaps for the time she settled down, if this was usual for a Saturday night.

                  You seem to believe that Fanny could not possibly have been wrong or mistaken, and because she had no reason to lie, anyone else whose account conflicted with hers must have been lying and either involved in the murder itself or part of some fanciful cover-up operation.

                  You are using Fanny as an egg timer in order to punch home your version of the night's events. But she was just another fallible human being, who witnessed bugger all of any import.
                  Exactly Caz. And against Fanny we have a Police Constable on his regulated beat who said that he'd passed between 12.30 and 12.35. And wouldn't he just have just passed the clock that Diemschutz himself took his time from making it far less likely that Smith was wrong? And so if Fanny went to her doorstep just after he'd passed (as she'd told the Evening News reporter) then she was there from between 12.30 and 12.35 until 12.40 to 12.45.

                  I'll ask you Caz as no one else has responded. Michael said that we know that Fanny was on her doorstep at 12.55 because Goldstein passed at that time but did he ever specify the time that he passed?
                  Regards

                  Herlock




                  “...A yellow fog swirls past the window-pane
                  As night descends upon this fabled street:
                  A lonely hansom splashes through the rain,
                  The ghostly gas lamps fail at twenty feet.
                  Here, though the world explode, these two survive,
                  And it is always eighteen ninety-five.”

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post

                    I swear that this is the last time I'll mention the wheel rut! But Phillips states, in describing Stride:

                    "there was mud on the left side of the face and it was matted in the head"

                    "Matted" sounds like a lot of mud and I've always associated this with the wheel rut, since her head was over the top of it. I'm just thinking that Dutfield's Yard might have been in worse repair than the visualizations, the only relevancy being that it might have made it a somewhat less likely spot for an unfortunate to conduct her business.

                    I'll leave it.
                    Yes, roger. The passage floor might have been partly mud with only a stone gutter and centre, or fully cobbled but also muddy - either is possible. Not an ideal spot to conduct business, as you say (there were plenty of more secluded spots further up the yard) but perfectly adequate if eveyone remained upright.
                    Incidentally, the mud on the left side of Stride's face is reminiscent to me of the abrasion to the left side of Eddowes's face, and points to the killer of both pushing their face down onto the ground, probably whilst cutting the throat.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
                      I'll ask you Caz as no one else has responded. Michael said that we know that Fanny was on her doorstep at 12.55 because Goldstein passed at that time but did he ever specify the time that he passed?
                      I don't know the answer to that one, Herlock.

                      It does appear that Fanny must have gone to bed around 1am, with no concerns that anything untoward had been going on. And if Michael's theory is that the club men were lying scumbags who were trying to pervert the course of justice because they suspected one of their own of cutting Stride's throat on their premises, how is it that he relies on their timings for any of this, 'corroborated' or not? If they did find the woman bleeding to death at 12.40-12.45, and wanted to delay raising the alarm, why did they not all sing from the same hymn sheet and have Diemschutz arriving to discover her dead at 1am, just like he said he did? Again, I seem to be missing something crucial to Michael's argument.

                      Love,

                      Caz
                      X
                      Last edited by caz; 11-26-2020, 05:09 PM.
                      "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post

                        It's an interesting observation.

                        Some modern theorists have taken Stride's supposed nickname 'Hippy Lip' to mean 'epileptic,' but I agree that the odd appearance of her lower lip in the mortuary photograph raises doubts about this interpretation.

                        What is somewhat strange is that I insist on writing 'supposed' nickname, because the claim that Stride was known as 'Hippy Lip Annie' seems to spring from an American source--evidently a correspondent for the New York World, and this was then reprinted in several American newspapers the first week of Oct 1888 (The Boston Globe being one of them). I don't believe any of the London papers made this claim, did they? If it appeared in the British press--the Telegraph, the Daily News, the East London Observer, etc. I'm missing it. Does anyone have a local source for this?

                        In fact, I don't see 'Hippy Lip' making an appearance in the British press until the following month, late November, and even then it is in a highly dubious special report about the Annie Farmer affair that might also have had an American journalist behind it.

                        If this was indeed Stride's nickname, it seems to have been known to very few people, one of them being an American journalist. Or else he simply made it up, which would also be strange considering the mortuary photograph.

                        And if her swollen lip was related to the murder, or even a recent injury, you'd think Phillips would have mentioned it.

                        It's a curious business.
                        Stride was identified as "Epileptic Annie" on 1st Oct in the British press (as well as "Annie Fitzgerald" "Elizabeth Stride" (obviously) and "Long Liz", not to mention as Elizabeth Watts by her 'sister' Mary Malcolm, a day or two later) so I don't think it's a stretch at all to think "Hippy Lip Annie" is a version of or a play on that nickname, especially if she did have distinctive lips.
                        The Penny Illustrated Press 6 Oct describes her mouth;

                        "....her lips thick, the upper one especially so, with that sort of double fold often noticed in lascivious women"

                        No mention of any signs of injury or disease from the reporter though. Nor as you say from the doctors.

                        Whether Annie Fitzgerald was a genuine alias used by Liz, or a misidentification of the body as another woman entirely is not clear.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by caz View Post

                          I don't know the answer to that one, Herlock.

                          It does appear that Fanny must have gone to bed around 1am, with no concerns that anything untoward had been going on. And if Michael's theory is that the club men were lying scumbags who were trying to pervert the course of justice because they suspected one of their own of cutting Stride's throat on their premises, how is it that he relies on their timings for any of this, 'corroborated' or not? If they did find the woman bleeding to death at 12.40-12.45, and wanted to delay raising the alarm, why did they not all sing from the same hymn sheet and have Diemschutz arriving to discover her dead at 1am, just like he said he did? Again, I seem to be missing something crucial to Michael's argument.

                          Love,

                          Caz
                          X
                          According to the Morning Advertiser 3 Oct, Leon Goldstein was a member of the club and persuaded to go to the police by Wess;

                          "W. Wess, secretary of the International Club, Berner-street, called at our office at midnight, and stated that, it having come to his knowledge that the man who was seen by Mrs. Mortimer, of 36, Berner-street, passing her house with a black, shiny bag, and walking very fast down the street from the Commercial-road at about the time of the murder, was a member of the club, he persuaded him last night, between ten and eleven o'clock, to accompany him to the Leman-street station, where he made a statement as to his whereabouts on Saturday evening, which was entirely satisfactory. The young man's name is Leon Goldstein, and he is a traveller."

                          Comment


                          • I'm not sure if this belongs in this thread but it may be relevant and I've only just come across it in my files. Without specifically re-opening the Francis Craig debate, when his father died in December 1894, amongst many other obituaries there was one in the West London Observer on Saturday 22nd Dec (which I think was probably written by his son) which contained these lines: "From 1840 to 1856 Mr. Craig devoted himself to public lecturing, and during this period he claimed have demonstrated to a number of Edinburgh doctors “the possibility of suspending the nerves of sensation, so that surgical operations could be performed without pain." Further reading of Craig Senior's books in the British Library show that this referred to putting pressure on the carotid arteries and he cautioned about putting too much pressure on as it could lead to loss of consciousness. The article is illustrated with a meticulous drawing of the anatomy of the carotid arteries and their branches. It is also known that in the late 1850s or early 1860s his son Francis assisted him in lecturing to Edinburgh students. Just thought it might be of interest.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

                              Yes, roger. The passage floor might have been partly mud with only a stone gutter and centre, or fully cobbled but also muddy - either is possible. Not an ideal spot to conduct business, as you say (there were plenty of more secluded spots further up the yard) but perfectly adequate if eveyone remained upright.
                              Incidentally, the mud on the left side of Stride's face is reminiscent to me of the abrasion to the left side of Eddowes's face, and points to the killer of both pushing their face down onto the ground, probably whilst cutting the throat.
                              PARENTAL ADVISORY
                              EXPLICIT CONTENT


                              I'm not inclined to throw this thread off its' natural course; however, JOSHUA, I know you as a member who is a collector of the written material circa 1888. I "stumbled" upon a book that was discussed on this forum in 2003 by Fido & his peers. I was looking for an underbelly book from 1888 that might illuminate all these transgressions that were going on in back alleys in L8nd8n; if the volumes of books have any merit, a passageway wall would have been the Ritz Carlton for some couples. To say that Victorian couples were fiddling anywhere and everywhere once the sun set is the grossest understatement ever written on this forum; and, I don't mean lovebirds when I employ the term "couples". I did a search-term read through the volumes [I swear, DJA, it was purely for historical merit]; I'm certain that there's no way to save my soul now regardless of how many Our Fathers I say. The book is called My Secret Life. I don't recommend anyone reading it who is sheepish to know the ugly truth about how a client or prostitute conducted themselves in 1888. However it does throw some light on how "gay women" monitored the constable, how they were more inclined to lead a client to a secluded place, how the coarseness of their language was 40-grit, and how gateways and passageways and park benches and recesses were "just as good as any place else".
                              there,s nothing new, only the unexplored

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Prosector View Post
                                I'm not sure if this belongs in this thread but it may be relevant and I've only just come across it in my files. Without specifically re-opening the Francis Craig debate, when his father died in December 1894, amongst many other obituaries there was one in the West London Observer on Saturday 22nd Dec (which I think was probably written by his son) which contained these lines: "From 1840 to 1856 Mr. Craig devoted himself to public lecturing, and during this period he claimed have demonstrated to a number of Edinburgh doctors “the possibility of suspending the nerves of sensation, so that surgical operations could be performed without pain." Further reading of Craig Senior's books in the British Library show that this referred to putting pressure on the carotid arteries and he cautioned about putting too much pressure on as it could lead to loss of consciousness. The article is illustrated with a meticulous drawing of the anatomy of the carotid arteries and their branches. It is also known that in the late 1850s or early 1860s his son Francis assisted him in lecturing to Edinburgh students. Just thought it might be of interest.
                                Never doubted that.

                                Something that was mentioned at school concerning life before anesthetics.

                                We are seeking a professional with decades of experience.
                                My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X