Was Dutfields Yard Really Empty?

[perrymason]

Hello all,

It is abundantly clear, by using the members statements, that at approx 12:40am, the yard was empty. If we use Schwartz's statement, Liz is around the entrance at approx 12:45am. Leaving 5 minutes when the "Ripper" killer might have gained access to the yard, if he is to be there when she enters...(if hes not a member of the club or someone we have reason to suspect was there...like BSM, PM, and of course Liz herself...or if he is one of those members, or Broadshoulderedman or Pipeman, and not Jack the Ripper).

Anyone trying to enter the yard after 12:40 ish would need to slip past Liz nearby the gates, and do so almost as soon as Lave, then Eagle, were in the yard to be there for a surprise, and of course you would also need to explain why BSM then just walks away from the scene in time for a new ruffian to take charge, when he obviously had interest in Liz when he grabbed her, and it seems he helped her to her feet as well, ..perhaps to continue his insistence she accompany him to the nearest alley,...a request that apparently was declined.

So...You have a thug,..perhaps drunk and ruffled... a victim, at or about the murder site, near the time she was cut, and an empty yard. What more is needed for a victim who only had a single, death dealing cut? And yet people insist that makes less sense than Jack the Ripper killing her by using some mysterious entrance and exit.

Liz was likely killed by someone affiliated with the club in some manner, and that could well be BSM. Jack the Abdomen Ripper had other plans that night.

Best regards all.

[Mitch Rowe]

Where I differ from some of y'all is that I never use the differences in the crimes to evaluate whether they are possibly connected. People are creatures of habit but they can also adapt. Its the habitual things Im looking for. But thats not to say the adaptation is not important. It can also tell us something about the way JTR reacts to certain situations and may have a signature of its own.

Oh..And is there any importance to the depth and size of Strides wound as opposed to the others? Not as far as excluding her in my opinion. But once one accepts Stride as a JTR victim it becomes very important! Because now we know what JTR didnt do. And that can lead us somewhere.

[Fisherman]

Mitch writes:
"What do we have in MJKs case? The blood didnt just happen to drain in the corner of the bed and room. JTR made that happen. It seems like JTR drained her blood. There was a reason beyond killing her that he did that."

Mitch, whenever somebody has her throat cut, severing all major blood vessels in the neck, you will end up with a picture where you can make the assumption that it "seems like" the victimīs blood has been drained.
But that does not go to show that the sole purpose of cutting that neck was to drain the blood, does it? If such was the case, you may argue that the guys handling the guillotine during the French Revolution did what they did simply because they wanted to drain the condemned ones of blood.

It is like stating that the Rippers objective when opening up the abdominal cavities of his victims was to subject the intestines to oxygen – it follows, but it does not have to be the purpose.

The best, Mitch!
Fisherman

[Suzi]

Mitch writes:

"Cutting the neck so deeply like the other victims was probably considered work to JTR. "

This thread is getting stranger by the minute, I have to say! Besides, I do not think that he necessarily cut to bleed the women. My guess is that he wanted to ensure silence by severing the windpipe.

The best,
Fisherman

Hi Fisherman-
I'd bowed out too but for what it's worth,I agree- that would seem the obvious thing...Gawd we'll be getting into the 'wine glass' bit next Hmmmmmmmmm obviously used by the killer to take a dainty slurp of 'the red stuff' before discarding the glass and sending it hurtling into Ripper mythology! (along with coins,top hats,capes,fog etc ) Sigh...........

Suzi

[Mitch Rowe]

Mitch writes:
"What do we have in MJKs case? The blood didnt just happen to drain in the corner of the bed and room. JTR made that happen. It seems like JTR drained her blood. There was a reason beyond killing her that he did that."

Mitch, whenever somebody has her throat cut, severing all major blood vessels in the neck, you will end up with a picture where you can make the assumption that it "seems like" the victimīs blood has been drained.
But that does not go to show that the sole purpose of cutting that neck was to drain the blood, does it? If such was the case, you may argue that the guys handling the guillotine during the French Revolution did what they did simply because they wanted to drain the condemned ones of blood.

It is like stating that the Rippers objective when opening up the abdominal cavities of his victims was to subject the intestines to oxygen ? it follows, but it does not have to be the purpose.

The best, Mitch!
Fisherman

Dude...JTR held MJKs head at the corner of the bed when he cut her head off. That was a deilberate act on his part. MJK wasnt sleep that way. No one sleeps that way.

[Simon Owen]

For myself , I believe that Jack strangled or throttled his victims , firstly to subdue them and secondly to prevent them from screaming. Once they were rendered halfway insensible , then he would cut the throat in order to release as much blood from the victim's body as possible before he began mutilation.

To me , this suggests an organized killer able to both plan and carry out his killings in a logical way. Not a crazed lunatic like Kosminsky but an intelligent , sociopathic and probably charming murderer who was able to converse with his female victims and steer them to places where they could be dispatched with the minimum chance of interruption.

I'm surprised that people believe that Stride is not a victim : I think the most likely scenario is that Liz refused to co-operate with her killer or fought back , thus the Ripper had to kill her quickly and flee unsatisfied. He took his terrible revenge on Catharine Eddowes.

The real questions to ask are : why was there a Double Event that night , and why did the second murder take place over the City boundary not in the East End ?

[Mitch Rowe]

For myself , I believe that Jack strangled or throttled his victims , firstly to subdue them and secondly to prevent them from screaming. Once they were rendered halfway insensible , then he would cut the throat in order to release as much blood from the victim's body as possible before he began mutilation.

To me , this suggests an organized killer able to both plan and carry out his killings in a logical way. Not a crazed lunatic like Kosminsky but an intelligent , sociopathic and probably charming murderer who was able to converse with his female victims and steer them to places where they could be dispatched with the minimum chance of interruption.

I'm surprised that people believe that Stride is not a victim : I think the most likely scenario is that Liz refused to co-operate with her killer or fought back , thus the Ripper had to kill her quickly and flee unsatisfied. He took his terrible revenge on Catharine Eddowes.

The real questions to ask are : why was there a Double Event that night , and why did the second murder take place over the City boundary not in the East End ?

I would guess the victims were pretty much passed out by the time JTR cuts the neck.

The FBI classified JTR as a disorganized killer. And I believe the main and probably the only reason they did that was because JTR killed and left his victims at the crimescene. Thats OK but thats a modern interpretation of the events. I believe the FBI made a mistake. Considering the overpopulation of the EastEnd. The lack of private transportation. The possibility that JTR lived in a doss house. ECT... I believe what JTR did was nearly the perfect crime at that time in History.

I guess the reason People discount Stride as a victim is because some People decided they knew how to interpret a crimescene when they knew very little about it. Oh.. I can read the replies now..."But who are you Mr. Rowe? What makes YOU such an expert? Where are your credentials????
And to that I say... I challenge and have challenged any World Class expert with a sound reputation to come to these boards and debate with me. I am not afraid. Im fully confident I know at least a little mor than nothing.

Now to the question of why a double event??
The most obvious answer is that Diemschutz probably ruined JTR plans of killing and mutilating Stride. JTR gets the hell out of there because he knows Diemschutz has already discovered the body. He dont want to be in a place where Police are on alert and running around looking for him. Sounds perfectly logical to me. Not disorganized but logical.

[Celesta]

I would guess the victims were pretty much passed out by the time JTR cuts the neck.

The FBI classified JTR as a disorganized killer. And I believe the main and probably the only reason they did that was because JTR killed and left his victims at the crimescene. Thats OK but thats a modern interpretation of the events. I believe the FBI made a mistake. Considering the overpopulation of the EastEnd. The lack of private transportation. The possibility that JTR lived in a doss house. ECT... I believe what JTR did was nearly the perfect crime at that time in History.
.

I think you have a point here, Mitch. He also may have lacked funds to do certain things he might have done if he had had them.

[Fisherman]

Mitch writes:
"JTR held MJKs head at the corner of the bed when he cut her head off. That was a deilberate act on his part. MJK wasnt sleep that way. No one sleeps that way."

That, Mitch, was not the question at hand, was it? It was all about you stating that the main objective for the Ripper when cutting Mary Kellys neck, was to bleed her off, to "drain" her.
He deliberately cut, yes. But that has never been an issue.
The fact that she was in the top corner of the bed when it happened has never been an issue either. It is abundantly clear.
What we can learn from her position when cut, however, is a different matter altogether. For some reason you seem to think that his cutting her at that top corner must imply that he wanted to bleed her off in a spot where the blood would be out of the way later on, so to speak.

That, Mitch, is something you are welcome to speculate. It is in no way impossible, but other speculations, grounded on other thoughts, may just as well hold the key to why it went down the way it did.

Mary Kelly was the only victim that died in her bed. Moreover, it seems obvious that she had undressed to go to bed. If we assume that she took somebody with her to that bed, someone who either undressed along with her, or who arrived as she was already in bed, and if we allow us the assumption that she took that person into her bed out of her own free will, then it seems reasonable that she may have crept into the bed before her companion did so.
That, Mitch, would leave her on the side of the bed closest to the partition, which in itīs turn means that her head would end up very close to the spot it was when she had her throat cut. It is not as if her head was pressed into that partition - we have the cuts in the bed linen between partition and head to tell us that.
All in all, this presents us with the apparent possibility that Mary may have lain down herself in the spot where she met her fate. There is no reason to assume that she was deliberately placed there to bleed her off.

Once again, I will press the point that although cutting the neck of a person means that there wil be less blood in the abdominal cavity afterwards, it is not as if that is something that happens immediately. If he needed to empty the bodies of blood, he would have to wait for a significant amount of time before setting about cutting in the stomach, and even then he would not face a cavity that was dried up or something like that. If you consider the fact that he cut off a piece of Eddowes apron, you will realize that he probably did so because he needed to dry his hands.

The only absolutely immediate effect reached by severing a neck deeply is that the one who suffers the cut is left with no possibility to cry out. Death and drainage are secondary effects, although they are safe such ones.
The one thing he could NOT risk was that his victims cried out, and THAT would be the more credible reason for severing the neck, than draining the victims of blood.

Your very own dude,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Simon Owen writes:
"I'm surprised that people believe that Stride is not a victim : I think the most likely scenario is that Liz refused to co-operate with her killer or fought back , thus the Ripper had to kill her quickly and flee unsatisfied."

Right, Simon, ask yourself this: Even if she DID fight back or refused to co-operate (and there are NO signs of any struggle, just as there was nothing heard), what happened as he cut her neck and she fell to the ground? Did she fight back from a lying position? I wouldnīt think so.

But still, that killer did not mutilate her. Strange, is it not?

All the best, Simon!

Fisherman

[Jon Guy]

Hello Fisherman

But still, that killer did not mutilate her. Strange, is it not?

Not if he knew he had been seen assaulting her. Considering the number of Policemen in the vicinity he only had two or three minutes to get out of there safely.

[Fisherman]

Jon Guy writes:
"Not if he knew he had been seen assaulting her. Considering the number of Policemen in the vicinity he only had two or three minutes to get out of there safely."

If, John. If.
That does not change things, does it?

She was not mutilated - strange.
She was found on her side - strange.
She was cut in a less deep manner - strange.
She seemed to be enjoying a love affair close in time to the murder - strange.
She was killed south of Whitechapel High Street - strange.
She was attacked a very short time before the murder - strange.

These things were, are and remain strange, Jon, long as we have no safe answers to why the came about. That is why Stride is often thought killed by somebody else than the Ripper, right?

The very fact that people fail to realize that these things are strange is, well...Strange!
That is if - IF - these people are not ... No, letīs forget it, shall we?

The best,
Fisherman

[c.d.]

Jon Guy writes:
"Not if he knew he had been seen assaulting her. Considering the number of Policemen in the vicinity he only had two or three minutes to get out of there safely."

If, John. If.
That does not change things, does it?

She was not mutilated - strange.
She was found on her side - strange.
She was cut in a less deep manner - strange.
She seemed to be enjoying a love affair close in time to the murder - strange.
She was killed south of Whitechapel High Street - strange.
She was attacked a very short time before the murder - strange.

These things were, are and remain strange, Jon, long as we have no safe answers to why the came about. That is why Stride is often thought killed by somebody else than the Ripper, right?

The very fact that people fail to realize that these things are strange is, well...Strange!
That is if - IF - these people are not ... No, letīs forget it, shall we?

The best,
Fisherman

Hi Fisherman,

It seems strange that you find so many things strange but don't find other things to be so strange.

There were no signs of a struggle - strange
Liz only had one cut to her body and that was to her throat - strange
Liz manages to hold on to the bag of cachous and the bag doesn't break - strange
The BS man kills Liz after being seen by Schwartz and the Pipe Man - strange

How some people overlook these little tidbits is well...ah, you know.

c.d.

[Jon Guy]

She was not mutilated - strange.
She was found on her side - strange.
She was cut in a less deep manner - strange.
She seemed to be enjoying a love affair close in time to the murder - strange.
She was killed south of Whitechapel High Street - strange.
She was attacked a very short time before the murder - strange.

I would have listed aand the lack of evidence of any form of strangulation as

[Fisherman]

Well, c.d., who says I overlook them? Here goes:

There were no signs of a struggle - strange

All depends on how fast and surprising the attack was - and I fail to see that the Ripper was the only one capable of fast attacks.

Liz only had one cut to her body and that was to her throat - strange

Do you think so? Then check out just how common a murder weapon the knife was, and just how common the method of cutting throats was, beginning with the THREE murder victims of that night.

Liz manages to hold on to the bag of cachous and the bag doesn't break - strange

All depends on how fast and surprising the attack was - and I fail to see... wait a minute, youīve had that answer already, havenīt you...?


The BS man kills Liz after being seen by Schwartz and the Pipe Man - strange

If he was the Ripper, who admittedly put some effort into arriving and disappearing unnoticed - yes, then it is very strange indeed. Thanks for pointing it out!

All the best, c.d.!

Fisherman