Stride..a victim?

[caz]

He couldn't have known, c.d. He only needed to watch her behaviour and he could very reasonably have assumed she would be approachable, and been wrong.

I don't see the problem with that. Didn't Peter Sutcliffe claim that any woman out alone after dark was asking for trouble, nearly 100 years later?

But I forgot, Michael thinks there is no place here for those of us making comparisons between 'Jack' and any man who killed more than two vulnerable women.

Love,

Caz
X

[rjpalmer]

We don't know precisely when or where Eddowes encountered her killer, nor how long they were together before he was able to murder her in Mitre Square.

Well, if it was 'within the quarter of the hour' then we DO know how long Eddowes and her killer were together. Less than 60 seconds or so, since the walking distance, by itself, would take about that long. Unless someone is suggesting the killer picked her up half-way, and by a strange set of circumstances, she jogged with him for eight minutes.

Which is a vital piece of information, no? After killing Stride, he headed, with all due deliberation, directly for Mitre Square, which poses the question why? Why was he was headed in a b-line to that spot, particularly since his digs were considerably east of Mitre Square?

Is he fleeing to the City? No...because after the murder he heads back east. It's all wrong.

We could theorize that he was headed toward a known pick-up spot, say the original Aldgate Tube Station. Fair enough. But that suggests a punter who may not be the average denizen of Whitechapel. He's just a run-of-the-mill punter who picks up his women on the main streets in the known pick-up spots like every other run-of-the-mill punter coming in from the West End.

Yet, the man in Dutfield's Yard is a different animal. He's off the beaten track. There's no reason our Aldgate man would be there. Stride was already AT THE SCENE. She hadn't led him from a main thoroughfare. There is an inconsistency between the two sites that needs to be resolved.

Now, admittedly, I don't have the courage of someone who accuses innocent men of theft, but, in my meek and cowardly manner, I'd rather think that the amount of time that passed between the Stride murder and the Eddowes' pick-up is highly critical in regard to the killer's m.o., and even in regard to where the killer is hanging his hat. Or whether it's the same man.

And if it was truly 15 minutes then--wow--what does this suggest? And what does it suggest differently if it was 40 minutes?

Maybrick aside, of course.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Can we discount that Eddowes might simply have known someone that lived near to Mitre Square? Someone that she might have hoped would either put her up for the night or lend her some money? She'd left the police station skint and might not have wanted to go back to Kelly reeking of drink to get a 'damn fine hiding?'

[FrankO]

I don't want to harp on but I'll try once more. Can any poster suggest what would constitute evidence of Stride's killer being interrupted (short of a crystal ball of course?)

If, for the sake of argument, we suppose that her killer was the Ripper, Herlock, I would suggest as evidence for interruption that she would at least have been found lying on her back, with her throat cut to the vertebrae and perhaps with her dress worked up and/or her legs apart. If, however, we just look at the facts of the case, then I can't think of anything that would constitute evidence of interruption. In fact, I see evidence of her killer being disturbed rather than being interrupted.

[Fisherman]

Herlock!

I haven´t been able to find the material about the Dutfields Yard doors, but I am pretty certain that I´ve seen it convincingly arghued that the doors were hung in such a fashion so as to disallow for anybody hiding behind them without it being very noticeable. In this link:

https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...ge2#post546868

...I think Rickard in post 17 is pretty spot on how it would have looked (although the doors were wooden and not the iron-bar ones in the link). You would have to shove the door very open to be able to get in behind it.

Why is it that you and me constantly end up in discussions about angles of doors and what they may hide, by the way ...? We must do something about that.

[Fisherman]

If, for the sake of argument, we suppose that her killer was the Ripper, Herlock, I would suggest as evidence for interruption that she would at least have been found lying on her back, with her throat cut to the vertebrae and perhaps with her dress worked up and/or her legs apart. If, however, we just look at the facts of the case, then I can't think of anything that would constitute evidence of interruption. In fact, I see evidence of her killer being disturbed rather than being interrupted.

It all boils down to the degree of rarity represented by the excluded details - which is fair enough. However, if the killed was disturbed and decided to leg it, then if that happened as he cut her neck, it is just a case of those voting for the killer being the Ripper being dealt a rotten hand by fate. The ripping and the eviscerations were a later addition, and it´s not the pro-Ripper fraction´s fault that he never got around to it.

However, there is nothing at all that is not in sync with a Ripper murder up to the point Stride has her neck cut. And that must mean that it is a fair assumption that she was a Ripper victim. And to that, it must be added that the gegraphical and chronological distance to the Eddowes deed strenghtens the suggestion.

Which may nevertheless be wrong...

[c.d.]

For what it is worth --- one of BTK's murders was initially not attributed to him in any way. The police didn't even really consider that it could have been him as it was so dissimilar from other murders for which they thought he was responsible. The police were pretty much convinced that it was a domestic and were virtually certain that the woman had been killed by her husband. It wasn't until BTK sent them photos he had taken at the scene along with her driver's license that he had taken that they realized they had been mistaken. He later provided them with details of the murder.

Yes, yes I know -- what does this have to do with Liz Stride? Take it any damn way you want to and with as many grains of salt as you wish.

c.d.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Herlock!

I haven´t been able to find the material about the Dutfields Yard doors, but I am pretty certain that I´ve seen it convincingly arghued that the doors were hung in such a fashion so as to disallow for anybody hiding behind them without it being very noticeable. In this link:

https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...ge2#post546868

...I think Rickard in post 17 is pretty spot on how it would have looked (although the doors were wooden and not the iron-bar ones in the link). You would have to shove the door very open to be able to get in behind it.

Why is it that you and me constantly end up in discussions about angles of doors and what they may hide, by the way ...? We must do something about that.

It's always doors.

Id say that we're in agreement on this one though Fish (for a journalist that must be headline news)

It certainly seems that to open the gate wide enough for a man to hide behind would have impeded Diemschutz and his cart (not only doors but men driving cart's too)

[Herlock Sholmes]

If, for the sake of argument, we suppose that her killer was the Ripper, Herlock, I would suggest as evidence for interruption that she would at least have been found lying on her back, with her throat cut to the vertebrae and perhaps with her dress worked up and/or her legs apart. If, however, we just look at the facts of the case, then I can't think of anything that would constitute evidence of interruption. In fact, I see evidence of her killer being disturbed rather than being interrupted.

If Stride had been found with her skirt up but no mutilations then I'd certainly agree that that would be evidence of interruption Frank but it's a question of at what point was he interrupted? Its possible that he'd got her on to the ground; cut her throat and then been interrupted.

[c.d.]

If Stride had been found with her skirt up but no mutilations then I'd certainly agree that that would be evidence of interruption Frank but it's a question of at what point was he interrupted? Its possible that he'd got her on to the ground; cut her throat and then been interrupted.

But are we limiting ourselves to only actual physical instances of interruption? We can't exclude self generated paranoia. A voice in his head that says this is not a safe place. You are in danger here. Get the hell out quickly. There are other women in Whitechapel.

c.d.

[c.d.]

But if we are simply talking about paranoia it could have started the moment he stepped outside that night. If he is caught he is most likely hanged or put in an insane asylum for life.

c.d.

[Herlock Sholmes]

But are we limiting ourselves to only actual physical instances of interruption? We can't exclude self generated paranoia. A voice in his head that says this is not a safe place. You are in danger here. Get the hell out quickly. There are other women in Whitechapel.

c.d.

I agree with your point c.d. To be honest I'm only countering a point that's been made that because there is no actual evidence of interruption (whatever that would look like) then we should dismiss the suggestion that the killer might have been interrupted. To me this makes no sense as there would have been nothing to show if the killer had been interrupted just after the throat cutting.

[Scott Nelson]

Like the blackmail theories, this suggestion is verging on 'blame the victim' territory.
Consider the possibility that this is fodder for people like Hallie Rubenhold.

This wouldn't put the blame on the victim, but on Jack's quick temper for being approached.

[Scott Nelson]

The women were all vulnerable whenever they ventured out onto the streets alone at night. If some went off meekly with any male stranger, and some didn't, how could any of them be blamed for the violent actions of their killer?

Sorry Caroline, I missed this earlier. I completely concur. In some instances it could have been the Ripper-as-protagonist, other instances it may have been the victim who set Jack off.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

In Stride's case, the fact that she was found to be carrying no coins is close to proof she was not soliciting that night.

Even if true it doesn't mean that she could not have been a Ripper victim. How could Jack have known why she was out by herself late at night?

c.d.

Why are you asking me this question?
My comment was about soliciting (yes/no), not JtR (yes/no).

It's very clear from multiple repetitive posts that many people believe the following:

1. This was a Ripper murder
2. The Ripper prematurely ended his work, and left the scene

Okay, so now that is well and truly sorted, can we talk about something else?

Here's a snippet from the Daily News, Oct 2...

Another four-and-twenty hours of excitement and anxiety for the East-end have elapsed, and so far as can be learned absolutely no progress has been made towards the solution of the terrible riddle which all England is looking to the City and Metropolitan Police to solve. Mr. Baxter yesterday morning began his inquest into the Berner-street case, but the evidence added nothing material to the information already in possession of the public, and, though one or two arrests have been made, up till a late hour last night nothing important had come of them. "We attach no importance to any of them," said a responsible police officer last evening. "They have been merely cases in which inquiry seemed desirable, but we think little of them. We have been able to make no important arrests." "You have had no doubt many suggestions made to you?" it was remarked. "Oh yes, a great many, and some of the papers have made some startling discoveries of important clues, but I am unable to say that the police have at present any knowledge of them."

Why no important arrests by the end of Oct 1?
What could the 'startling discoveries of important clues' refer to?