Evidence to prove a suspect valid

[Observer]

One of the things you sort of have to stand back and admire is how WELL Stride was killed. Single expert cut, no sawing about, no mess, throat wound positioned perfectly over a drain, nerve severance causing reactive paralysis...

I mean, if this happened today (or maybe 30 years ago) there would be no question that this was a mob hit.

I'd agree. Also, this is what Coroner Baxter alluded to in his summing up,

The ordinary motives of murder - revenge, jealousy, theft, and passion - appeared, therefore, to be absent from this case; In the absence of motive, the age and class of woman selected as victim, and the place and time of the crime, there was a similarity between this case and those mysteries which had recently occurred in that neighbourhood, there had been the same skill exhibited in the way in which the victim had been entrapped, and the injuries inflicted, so as to cause instant death and prevent blood from soiling the operator, and the same daring defiance of immediate detection.

[Observer]

Hi Errata

Let's suppose the killer is positioned behind Stride. He places the crook of his stronger arm around her neck and begins to choke her. She forms a fist around the cachous and fights back. The killer grasps her hand to avoid being struck; the cachous are now encased. He is now holding her hand and choking her. She becomes unconscious and he lowers her to the ground, still holding onto her neck and hand. She is now lying on her left side. The killer then releases his hold on her hand and her hand relaxes. He cuts her throat

[Errata]

One of the things you sort of have to stand back and admire is how WELL Stride was killed. Single expert cut, no sawing about, no mess, throat wound positioned perfectly over a drain, nerve severance causing reactive paralysis...

I mean, if this happened today (or maybe 30 years ago) there would be no question that this was a mob hit. Even back then this was not a super common way to kill someone, and it takes a certain amount of skill. Pressure enough to sever the carotid and divide the trachea, super sharp knife...

And then we have this weird conflict. I know the evidence says she was not killed standing up. But she HAD to be. First of all, no one has ever come up with a reasonable explanation for her to lie down in the mud. Secondly, the "damned cachous". She would not hold onto them and lie down. She'd put them in a pocket or something. I'm not sure she could have had them in her hand and lie down. Getting from standing to prone is kind of a process and it uses both hands. Especially in mud. There is no injury that causes unconsciousness where she would not have let them go. Yes, ischemic problems would cause her to tighten her grip. For a few seconds. But once actually unconscious she would have dropped them. Or at least opened her hand.

So if she could not have been knocked out or incapacitated without letting them go, and she could not have laid down with them in her hand, then the conclusion has to be that the ischemic attack that caused her to clench her hand killed her. And killed her so quickly that she neither fought nor dropped the damn bag. And thats not choking. If she had been choked she would have dropped the bag. And to be perfectly honest, it could only barely be the throat cut. It would require not just the severance of the Vagus nerve, but for there to be a total overload sent down to the heart. And that's just luck.

This is one of the things about this case that drives me batty. Blood spatter says one thing, behavior another. In order to do what Jack did, he had to do what no one could do. Not alone. The whole thing is impossible.

[Errata]

Hello Errata. Maybe two. The wording is ambiguous.

But IF there were a second superficial cut, it would have been as the adjective implies.

Cheers.
LC

I consider a paper cut superficial. On the other hand, the cut on my index finger that required 20 stitches and severed the nerves costing me the sensation on the right side of my finger was labeled "superficial". Because it was not life threatening, nor was it an amputation. The doctor who stitched said it was a "nasty" cut, but the bill said "superficial". So thats why I ask. I had to pry a bread knife out of bone. I did not consider that superficial. Medical coding evidently did.

[lynn cates]

superficial

Hello Errata. Maybe two. The wording is ambiguous.

But IF there were a second superficial cut, it would have been as the adjective implies.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

parallel

Hello Tom.

"Actually, Nichols and Chapman had two. But Stride and Eddowes had only one."

Yes, indeed! And the two cuts were parallel.

Cheers.
LC

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo.

G'Day Digalittledeeperwatson



But I think their opinion deserves as much, if not more, weight than those of us looking on 125 years later.

Generally speaking yes. It is just good policy to exercise caution about people you've never met. And people you have met. Ah hell, I'm really paranoid so... I by no means view people from the past as idiots or lesser.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo.

And copycat murderers never kill with the same precision as the professional they're copying. Stride was felled with one slice of the blade. Apparently most of you on this thread don't know or appreciate how rare that is. She was also rendered silent in a manner we can only guess at. This was neither a domestic murder nor was it her killer's first.

As for Errata's notion that Stride and Eddowes were so different as to not warrant comparison, I'd same the exact same is true with Nichols vs Eddowes, or Chapman vs Kelly. We're not dealing with absolutes here, we're dealing with probabilities, and the great wealth of evidence points towards the probability that whoever killed Eddowes killed Stride. In fact, it could be argued that's more of a probability than that the man who killed Nichols killed Eddowes.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Some things I agree with and some I don't. Your first paragraph is spot on and I think that those points get swept under the rug and forgotten often. Possibly for convience sake.

The possibility that Stride's murderer went on to murder Eddowes, is incredibly high. Probability not so high. Without actually doing any Math, as my sanity would probably completely crumble, I would estimate the probability between 15-35% in favour. Regardless, your points are very valid. The guy who's been running around slitting womens' throat isn't the last place I'm gonna start looking for a guy who slit some woman's throat. Unless there is something conclusive to remove the possibility. Which so far there just isn't.

[GUT]

G'Day Digalittledeeperwatson

Certainly. But with conflicting opinions, and opinions in general, one should be wary since none of us know any of the people who were there. Their opinions shouldn't be disregarded by any means though.

But I think their opinion deserves as much, if not more, weight than those of us looking on 125 years later.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo!

G'Day Digalittledeeperwatson

You forgot to add [in my opinion at least] the opinions of those on the ground that saw the crime scene and examined the body.

GUT

Certainly. But with conflicting opinions, and opinions in general, one should be wary since none of us know any of the people who were there. Their opinions shouldn't be disregarded by any means though.

[GUT]

G'Day Errata

Eddowes had two. one was just pretty superficial. And you kinda gotta wonder what their definition of that is. Is superficial like a paper cut? Is it horrid merely not life threatening?

I've wondered the same thing what did they mean.

But I guess we'll never know.

[Errata]

Actually, Nichols and Chapman had two. But Stride and Eddowes had only one.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Eddowes had two. one was just pretty superficial. And you kinda gotta wonder what their definition of that is. Is superficial like a paper cut? Is it horrid merely not life threatening?

[Tom_Wescott]

Tom,

Did all the victims suffer only one slice of the blade?

Just to be clear, my previous post was referencing the other possible Ripper victims and suspects not Stride.

Cheers
DRoy

Actually, Nichols and Chapman had two. But Stride and Eddowes had only one.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[DRoy]

Tom,

Did all the victims suffer only one slice of the blade?

Just to be clear, my previous post was referencing the other possible Ripper victims and suspects not Stride.

Cheers
DRoy

[Tom_Wescott]

And copycat murderers never kill with the same precision as the professional they're copying. Stride was felled with one slice of the blade. Apparently most of you on this thread don't know or appreciate how rare that is. She was also rendered silent in a manner we can only guess at. This was neither a domestic murder nor was it her killer's first.

As for Errata's notion that Stride and Eddowes were so different as to not warrant comparison, I'd same the exact same is true with Nichols vs Eddowes, or Chapman vs Kelly. We're not dealing with absolutes here, we're dealing with probabilities, and the great wealth of evidence points towards the probability that whoever killed Eddowes killed Stride. In fact, it could be argued that's more of a probability than that the man who killed Nichols killed Eddowes.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott