Who really witnessed Jack the Ripper?

[Harry D]

No one thinks Pipeman is a viable suspect?

[Abby Normal]

No one thinks Pipeman is a viable suspect?

Not really
Why should he be? It's unclear what he was doing and seems like he was just another innocent bystander. I also get the impression that if anything he may have been an invention by Schwartz to help explain his own less than brave actions.

Broad shoulders was seen attacking the victim so if it's anyone it's him. Plus I doubt it would be realistic that stride would so quickly go into a secluded spot for prostitution immediately after just being assaulted, or that the ripper as pipe man would do so also.

[Natasha]

I have mentioned the following before, but no one took a blind bit of notice.

I think we should consider Israel Schwartz a suspect.

The fact that Liz Stride was found clutching a packet of cachous, I find that strange, because if she was being attacked by a man who Schwartz saw, then why would she still be holding the sweets? If she was struggling and trying to get free of an attacker wouldn't she have dropped everything she was holding and would have tried to put up a fight?

I think the ripper (although I'm not really sure that all the murders were connected) would attack his victims blitz style/sudden, this would explain a lack of screaming etc and perhaps the reason why the sweets were still in her hand, so having said that Israel Schwartz's account doesn't make sense. Also why didn't Schwartz immediately seek help, if by his account, he saw a woman being attacked?

[Harry D]

Not really
Why should he be? It's unclear what he was doing and seems like he was just another innocent bystander. I also get the impression that if anything he may have been an invention by Schwartz to help explain his own less than brave actions.

Broad shoulders was seen attacking the victim so if it's anyone it's him. Plus I doubt it would be realistic that stride would so quickly go into a secluded spot for prostitution immediately after just being assaulted, or that the ripper as pipe man would do so also.

Hello, Abby.

I believe Pipeman's actions are worthy of suspicion. Why was he lurking in the shadows calmly watching BS attack Stride? Why didn't he feel the need to intervene or call for a copper? Why did he never come forward afterwards? From the information we have on him, he seems to fit the Ripper profile more than BS, that's for sure. If the Ripper was an opportunist killer, then perhaps Pipeman was biding his time in case the woman was left vulnerable, or perhaps he just stopped to enjoy some brutality against a whore? Schwartz stated that Pipeman was carrying a knife, whereas there is no mention of BS having one.

A conceivable scenario could be:

* BS attacks Stride
* Pipeman watches with interest
* Schwartz walks on by
* Pipeman pursues Schwartz off the scene
* Pipeman returns and drags the disoriented Stride into the yard and kills her.

[Damaso Marte]

Or we could go with the far simpler explanation of Schwartz making it all up.

[Harry D]

I see no reason to doubt Schwartz's testimony.

[Dr. John Watson]

No one thinks Pipeman is a viable suspect?

Pipeman is a very unlikely suspect. The description given by Schwartz doesn't come close to matching the guy seen with Eddowes, who was almost certainly her killer. The only way I'd take him seriously is if the newspaper story quoted Schwartz correctly as saying the man held a knife instead of a pipe, which I find difficult to believe. As to Pipeman's leaving the scene, I can understand him not wanting to get involved with what might have appeared as a family quarrel, especially if the attacker (BSM) appeared threatening.

John

[Michael W Richards]

I see no reason to doubt Schwartz's testimony.

I see no presence at the Inquest or in its records, a very weak story for what he was doing there at 12:45am, and no corroborating accounts as very good reasons to do just that Harry.

All the best Harry

[Natasha]

I see no presence at the Inquest or in its records, a very weak story for what he was doing there at 12:45am, and no corroborating accounts as very good reasons to do just that Harry.

All the best Harry

I agree, he was not at the inquest, and was not thoroughly questioned as to what he was doing out at that time. He obviously saw Stride (according to the info on here) as he identified her.

As there were numerous descriptions of a man of Jewish decent, why were there no intense investigations/questioning of the Jewish inhabitants? It wouldn't surprise me if the GSG was indeed written by some disgruntled East Londoner.

Why were the Jews not questioned, especially Schwartz? I think he may have had something to do with Stride's death.

[Vincent alias Jack]

Carroty Mustache

Mary Cox was the only witness who got a look at the killer just before he killed. And she saw him up close as he and Mary Kelly entered the very room she was murdered in a short time later.

Cox described the man as having “blotches on his face, small side whiskers, and a thick carroty moustache.” She said he was between 35 and 36.

Vincent van Gogh was 35 at the time, had blotches on his face and a red mustache and beard.

Oh, and Mrs. Fiddymont and her friends also saw him in her bar after he killed Chapman.

Vincent van Gogh was Jack the Ripper.

Thanks,
Dale Larner

[GUT]

Mary Cox was the only witness who got a look at the killer just before he killed. And she saw him up close as he and Mary Kelly entered the very room she was murdered in a short time later.

Cox described the man as having “blotches on his face, small side whiskers, and a thick carroty moustache.” She said he was between 35 and 36.

Vincent van Gogh was 35 at the time, had blotches on his face and a red mustache and beard.

Oh, and Mrs. Fiddymont and her friends also saw him in her bar after he killed Chapman.

Vincent van Gogh was Jack the Ripper.

Thanks,
Dale Larner

G'day Dale

Well why do you believe she saw the killer?

[Wickerman]

The fact that Liz Stride was found clutching a packet of cachous, I find that strange, because if she was being attacked by a man who Schwartz saw, then why would she still be holding the sweets?

Hi Natasha.

The term you are looking for is known as 'Cadaveric Spasm', when the fingers clench something at the point of death.

For example, Mason (1993) notes that hands amputated in airplane crashes have been found holding onto seatbelts, or knives found clutched within the hands of victims of knife fights.

http://bonesdontlie.wordpress.com/2013/10/01/new-morbid-terminology-cadaveric-spasm/

It's a purely natural phenomena.

[Wickerman]

Mary Cox was the only witness who got a look at the killer just before he killed. And she saw him up close as he and Mary Kelly entered the very room she was murdered in a short time later.

Kelly went out on the streets after she saw Blotchy.

[Natasha]

Hi Natasha.

The term you are looking for is known as 'Cadaveric Spasm', when the fingers clench something at the point of death.

For example, Mason (1993) notes that hands amputated in airplane crashes have been found holding onto seatbelts, or knives found clutched within the hands of victims of knife fights.

http://bonesdontlie.wordpress.com/2013/10/01/new-morbid-terminology-cadaveric-spasm/

It's a purely natural phenomena.

Hi Jon

That did cross my mind, and I would defo apply that to someone who had been attacked blitz style. But in the case of what Schwartz had said he had seen, I think if Schwartz was telling the truth, then that would mean the murder would have been dragged out, therefore Stride would be struggling and I would guess that to get a good grip on the assailant she would have dropped everything she was holding and would proceed to at least strike, pull, pry someones hands off of her.

[Vincent alias Jack]

Kelly went out on the streets after she saw Blotchy.

Nope.