Stride..a victim?

[erobitha]

As I said before, the hallmarks of how Stride was murdered mirror all the other canonical 4. Bruising from possible strangulation on the neck followed by a slit to the artery in the neck. That type of murder was not common at that time so for it to happen twice in an hour is simply statistically unlikely being anyone else but Jack. The lack of mutilation on Stride simply cannot be through choice but necessity. Disturbance was the best assumption then and it remains so today.

[Michael W Richards]

As I said before, the hallmarks of how Stride was murdered mirror all the other canonical 4. Bruising from possible strangulation on the neck followed by a slit to the artery in the neck. That type of murder was not common at that time so for it to happen twice in an hour is simply statistically unlikely being anyone else but Jack. The lack of mutilation on Stride simply cannot be through choice but necessity. Disturbance was the best assumption then and it remains so today.

And that the above premise has no evidence support doesnt bother you? Thats the best "guess" as to why Liz Stride isnt mutilated? The evidence says she was grabbed, cut once by sliding a knife under her chin, dropped...perhaps being held by her scarf at the time, and then left alone. 2 seconds. There are a ton of things that could have revealed something like an interruption, yet none are in evidence. Now, the majority of corroborated witness statements suggest that the body was discovered up to 15min earlier than Louis stated, so his actual arrival time might be seen as a possible source for an interruption, but few seems to accept those corroborated statements.

Catch 22.

[DJA]

[QUOTE=erobitha;n745207] Bruising from possible strangulation on the neck followed by a slit to the artery in the neck.[/QUOTE

The bruising was on the shoulders.

[DJA]

The evidence says she was grabbed, cut once by sliding a knife under her chin, dropped...perhaps being held by her scarf at the time

Catch 22.

No it doesn't.

Catch 18.

[DJA]

Anybody consider that the baker's clock, that Diemschutz's time depended on, might have stopped working at 1 pm the previous day?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

And that the above premise has no evidence support doesnt bother you? Thats the best "guess" as to why Liz Stride isnt mutilated? The evidence says she was grabbed, cut once by sliding a knife under her chin, dropped...perhaps being held by her scarf at the time, and then left alone. 2 seconds. There are a ton of things that could have revealed something like an interruption, yet none are in evidence. Now, the majority of corroborated witness statements suggest that the body was discovered up to 15min earlier than Louis stated, so his actual arrival time might be seen as a possible source for an interruption, but few seems to accept those corroborated statements.

Catch 22.

Best assumption = best guess. Well put.

If the disturbance was physical, name it!
If mental, then why doesn't Jack just take a quick walk around the block, and go straight back into Dutfield's Yard? Much simpler than starting again. Safer too.
Indeed, why even leave the yard? He could just sit cross-legged on the ground and do some meditation, or just kick back for a while and enjoy some grapes.

[Michael W Richards]

Blackwell:

"The mouth was slightly open. The deceased had round her neck a check silk scarf, the bow of which was turned to the left and pulled very tight. In the neck there was a long incision which exactly corresponded with the lower border of the scarf. The border was slightly frayed, as if by a sharp knife."

"I formed the opinion that the murderer probably caught hold of the silk scarf, which was tight and knotted, and pulled the deceased backwards, cutting her throat in that way. The throat might have been cut as she was falling, or when she was on the ground. The blood would have spurted about if the act had been committed while she was standing up."

"[Coroner] A hand might have been put on her nose and mouth? - Yes, and the cut on the throat was probably instantaneous."

Phillips:

"Coroner] Would the injury take long to inflict? - Only a few seconds - it might be done in two seconds."

"[Coroner] Is there any similarity between this case and Annie Chapman's case? - There is very great dissimilarity between the two."

"[Coroner] Was there any appearance of an opiate or any smell of chloroform? - There was no perceptible trace of any anaesthetic or narcotic. The absence of noise is a difficult question under the circumstances of this case to account for, but it must not be taken for granted that there was not any noise. If there was an absence of noise I cannot account for it."

My Post:

"The evidence says she was grabbed, cut once by sliding a knife under her chin, dropped...perhaps being held by her scarf at the time, and then left alone. 2 seconds.'

I should have added scarf twisted after grabbed, but its fine the way it is.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

The bruising was on the shoulders.

I don't believe this to be true.
Here is Phillips, quote in the Times, Oct 4:

Over both shoulders, especially the right, and under the collar-bone and in front of the chest there was a bluish discolouration, which I have watched and seen on two occasions since.

The phrase 'over both shoulders', is interpreted by almost everyone as meaning 'on the shoulders'.
Is this interpretation correct? Daily News:

Over both shoulders, especially right from the front aspect under the selar bones and in front of chest there is a bluish discolouration (which I have watched and seen on two occasions since).

The bruising is not (only) 'under the collar-bone and in front of the chest', because that is the same place!

Some of the bruising is actually located above the shoulders and under the selar bones (actually a depression in the body of the sphenoid bone).
This might be the upper-jaw region. By contrast, if Phillips had meant 'on the shoulders', he could have said just that.

I interpret 'in front of the chest' to mean 'on the chest' and not a repetition of 'the front aspect'.
So there is more bruising there.

Thus we have:

Bruising near upper-jaw.
Bruising on chest.
A scarf tied very tightly around neck.
Right ventricle full of dark clot.
An incision to throat commencing on the side on which victim lay, and deepest on that side.
No arterial spray on wall or between victim and wall.
Cachous in hand.
Unrumpled clothing.
No cries for help, overheard.

How many men were involved in this crime?

[DJA]

under the collar-bone and in front of the chest there was a bluish discolouration, which I have watched and seen on two occasions since.[/I]



Thus we have:

Bruising near upper-jaw.
Bruising on chest.
A scarf tied very tightly around neck.
Right ventricle full of dark clot.
An incision to throat commencing on the side on which victim lay, and deepest on that side.
No arterial spray on wall or between victim and wall.
Cachous in hand.
Unrumpled clothing.
No cries for help, overheard.

How many men were involved in this crime?

"Under the collar-bone" bears very careful consideration.

Have a look at what lies underneath.A Gray's Anatomy diagram would be handy.

You are correct with the remainder.

One.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

"Under the collar-bone" bears very careful consideration.

Have a look at what lies underneath.A Gray's Anatomy diagram would be handy.

The bruising is to the head and chest.

You are correct with the remainder.

As well.

One.

Two or three.

[DJA]

The bruising is to the head and chest.

You were on the right track with the bruises under the collar-bone.

Pressure to the Subclavian arteries gives control of both arms and cuts off crucial blood supply to the head.
That is not all in that vicinity,however they are sufficient.

Now where are the strangulation marks again?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Anybody consider that the baker's clock, that Diemschutz's time depended on, might have stopped working at 1 pm the previous day?

This suggestion suggests to me that things are starting to get desperate, for this poster.

Wess indicated to a reporter what approximate time the murder occurred. Echo, Oct 1:

In the course of conversation (says the journalist) the secretary mentioned the fact that the murderer had no doubt been disturbed in his work, as about a quarter to one o'clock on Sunday morning he was seen- or, at least, a man whom the public prefer to regard as the murderer- being chased by another man along Fairclough-street...

A few days later, and according to Arbeter Fraint, nothing had changed in that regard:

The first murder occurred on Saturday night about a quarter to one.

They just didn't bother telling their readers how they new it occurred then, or who the murderer was.

[DJA]

Whoosh!

[c.d.]

Best assumption = best guess. Well put.

If the disturbance was physical, name it!
If mental, then why doesn't Jack just take a quick walk around the block, and go straight back into Dutfield's Yard? Much simpler than starting again. Safer too.
Indeed, why even leave the yard? He could just sit cross-legged on the ground and do some meditation, or just kick back for a while and enjoy some grapes.

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

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. And you are talking about him collecting himself and giving it the old college try? Are you serious on this or is this sarcasm?

c.d.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

You were on the right track with the bruises under the collar-bone.

Pressure to the Subclavian arteries gives control of both arms and cuts off crucial blood supply to the head.
That is not all in that vicinity,however they are sufficient.

Pressure in that region is not going to cause a sudden loss of consciousness.
Simply because you've found some mechanism, does not mean every anomaly is magically explained away.
So who kept her quite while this was occurring?
Who got her on the ground so this pressure could be applied?
Who caused the bruising to the head?
Who tightened the scarf to a point that she may not have been able to make much noise, and why bother anyway, with the magic pressure trick to take care of this?
Why no signs of a struggle or rumpled clothes?
How did her boots end up tucked behind the gate?
How does this person with no control of arms, and minimal blood supply to the head, manage to hold onto the cachous packet?
Was this trick used on other victims?
Where is the arterial spray?
Where is the evisceration?
Is this the attacker who supposedly threw Stride to the footway?
How does that clumsy half-drunk thug, suddenly become a martial arts expert?

Now where are the strangulation marks again?

I didn't mention any.