Liz Stride: The Newest of Theories

[Ben]

Hi Frank,

Do you not think the BS man was Liz Stride's killer?

Hi Fish,

I think you are well aware that the ONLY mentioning of his appearance has him made out as "respectably" clad!

Although its worth is severely diminished by the absence of any mention of respectability in Swanson's report. 'Ello, we've been heere before.

But I genuinely believe that the man in VChurch passage would have been regarded as a shabby ruffian in ill-fitting clothes by BS man, who, if my guess is correct, was a clerkly looking man, respectably dressed in a short, tight-fitting black (probably cutaway) jacket.

I respect your right to a guess, but I can only disagree with it for reasons already discussed. From what we know, they dressed rather similarly. But I'll heed your sensible suggestion to leave it there.

As you will have noticed, we have a joint suspect by now, a man who was a dockside worker in -89, and perhaps even in -88. Ill-clad in a loosefitting salt-and-pepper jacket and a peaked cap, perhaps? My conviction is that Lawendes´man really was the Ripper

Agreed 100%, and isn't a dock-proximity murder a little intriguing in the context of a dockside-labouring suspect? Someone who committed murders based on a familiarity with the different areas he lived and worked in; 29, 5"7 and stout. Just speculating aloud here, and "another occasion" is a sensible proposal, but you catch my drift.

Best regards,
Ben

[Fisherman]

Ben writes:
" The worst offenders to my mind are those who want Stride to be a ripper victim, but can't bear the idea of the ripper being in any way illusion-shatteringly shabby or "thug-like" in his behaviour, so come up with weak excuses for ruling out the BS man as Stride's killer."

No need to believe he was shabby at all, Ben. I think you are well aware that the ONLY mentioning of his appearance has him made out as "respectably" clad!

More of the same:
"And, Fish me ol' mucker, it's great that we're seeing eye to eye on so many issues lately, but I really don't think you can dispute a superficial congruity between the broad-shouldered man and Lawende's suspect."

Indeed I can, Ben! It of course owes very much to what one calls "superficial congruity", but I really don´t see the twine as very much like each other. Men, yes. Same age, yes. Same height, yes. Dark clothes (well, if pepper-and-salt was dark in this case), yes. Peaked cap, yes.

If we satisfy ourselves with this, then I can see your point. But I genuinely believe that the man in VChurch passage would have been regarded as a shabby ruffian in ill-fitting clothes by BS man, who, if my guess is correct, was a clerkly looking man, respectably dressed in a short, tight-fitting black (probably cutaway) jacket.

But let´s leave it there for the moment, shall we. I think that our seing eye to eye on a number of other bits and pieces, like you mention, is much more important. As you will have noticed, we have a joint suspect by now, a man who was a dockside worker in -89, and perhaps even in -88. Ill-clad in a loosefitting salt-and-pepper jacket and a peaked cap, perhaps? My conviction is that Lawendes´man really was the Ripper, but since that carries us a long way from the intentions of this thread, that had better be left for another occasion too!

The best, Ben!
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Simon writes:

"Yes , very good , but you've got the name of the poster wrong !"

Well, Simon, on these boards everybody is allowed to hold their own convictions, so I would not be too sure about that. Proof, please?
Oh, and by the way: Sorry, mate..!

All the best, Mr Owen!
Fisherman

[FrankO]

Sorry but I don't have mystic powers. (insert smiley face which for some reason didn't work). I can only hazard a guess. I simply don't know when she would have taken out the cachous.

Hi again c.d.,

I didn't expect you to have mystic powers or whatever , I just asked (although poorly perhaps) how in your scenario you envisaged things from the point when Mr BS left the scene until she was killed and how things would have played out making her end up with the cachous in her hand.

From the crime scene evidence I envisage that Stride was either facing the wall when her assailant pulled her to her left side by scarf, but more likely, that he took hold of her scarf with his left hand from behind, while she was facing the gates and that he pulled her backwards, making her spin and end up on her left side on the ground.

To me, the fact that she was holding them in death suggests that she was taken off guard and that there was no struggle.

I completely agree with you there.

All the best,
Frank

[Ben]

Hi CD,

Fair enough, although there's really no incongruity between the attack witnesses by Schwartz and the clues evinced by the discovery of her body. All pretty consistent, or at the very least, not inconsistent.

All the best,
Ben

[c.d.]

Hi CD,



How would this scenario have played out, in your view? If she wasn't strangled, how "sudden" are we envisaging here?

Ben

Hi Ben,

Yes, that was a poor choice of words on my part. I would expect some sort of struggle no matter how she was killed or by whom. So, let me amend my answer and try to put it this way. I would expect a lot less of a struggle if she had been taken off guard by Jack as opposed to being dragged into the yard by the BS man.

c.d.

[Ben]

Hi CD,

To me, the fact that she was holding them in death suggests that she was taken off guard and that there was no struggle.

How would this scenario have played out, in your view? If she wasn't strangled, how "sudden" are we envisaging here?

Ben

[c.d.]

Hi c.d.,

Although Mr BS has little to do with why I am inclined to think Stride wasn't a Ripper victim, your scenario offers a reason for Mr BS's aggressive behaviour, him being just another John. Could you elaborate about the taking out of the cachous? When, in your scenario, did she take them out? While she was walking into the yard, while she was standing facing the Ripper in the yard? Where was she standing in relation to the Ripper and club wall? Why was she still holding them in death?

All the best,
Frank

Hi Frank,

Sorry but I don't have mystic powers. (insert smiley face which for some reason didn't work). I can only hazard a guess. I simply don't know when she would have taken out the cachous. To me, it says client. Now it is possible that she agreed to go off with the BS man (a profuse apology and an offer of more money) but that seems improbable. To me, the fact that she was holding them in death suggests that she was taken off guard and that there was no struggle. I suppose that it is possible that she could have kept them in her hand while struggling but if so, why didn't the bag break? I just find it hard to believe that she could be taken off guard after being thrown to the ground. Most rational people would take that as a sign of hostility and expect more hostility to come.

c.d.

[FrankO]

Lots of things can be argued, but whether there's any real evidence to support it or not is another thing entirely.

Hi Dan,

Maybe that should be: too many things can be and are argued. The alternative to what you question is that it was sheer luck that kept him from being caught doing what he did in that densely populated area with relatively many people up and about in the streets during the night, a number of those people being coppers.

Frank

[FrankO]

I know, Ben, we can't know how the Ripper would have acted in any given situation, but my hesitation to believe Stride was a Ripper victim has nothing to do with Mr BS or the possibility of Stride behaving differently than the other victims. It has to do with crime scene evidence and the circumstances surrounging Stride's murder.

The best!
Frank

[Ben]

Hi Frank,

I've no doubt that if the ripper could have adhered to his preferred non-aggressive approach, he would have done. Often though, unforseen factors come into play, such as a change in the attitude of the would-be victim, and "revisions" occur as a consequence as they often do with serials of this nature.

All the best!

Ben

[FrankO]

Good to hear from you, Frank.

Thanks, Ben. Good to 'see' you again, too.

Strictly speaking, the manner in which the victim was approached could have been identical for all we know: man approaches prostitute under the guise of casual client.

Of course you're quite right there, Ben. But to me, that doesn't say much in terms of that pointing to Mr BS being the Ripper. Furthermore, I consider the behaviour after the initial contact as part of the approach and therefore was just establishing that Mr BS's behaviour and that of Lawende's man were different as (far as) we know them and couldn't be more different: Mr BS being active/aggressive, Lawende's man being passive/non-aggressive.

I didn't (mean to) go into why that was or whether it should or shouldn't rule out Mr BS as the Ripper.

The best, Ben!
Frank

[FrankO]

People who don't accept Jack as Liz's killer make the argument that his arrival on the scene just after the BS man had left is too much of a coincidence.

Hi c.d.,

Although Mr BS has little to do with why I am inclined to think Stride wasn't a Ripper victim, your scenario offers a reason for Mr BS's aggressive behaviour, him being just another John. Could you elaborate about the taking out of the cachous? When, in your scenario, did she take them out? While she was walking into the yard, while she was standing facing the Ripper in the yard? Where was she standing in relation to the Ripper and club wall? Why was she still holding them in death?

All the best,
Frank

[Ben]

Good to hear from you, Frank.

The difference in behaviour between, say, Lawende's man and Mr BS could hardly be bigger

Strictly speaking, the manner in which the victim was approached could have been identical for all we know: man approaches prostitute under the guise of casual client. The only "difference" may have occured after that initial meeting, and could be explained away by a difference in victim reaction. For example, while Eddowes may have been as acquiescent as the earlier victims, Stride might well have given him the heave-ho with an unexpected "Not tonight, another night" type reaction, catching him off-guard.

Even though there may be some congruity between the two description-wise, the question should be: what's that worth?

Admittedly very little in terms of incriminating material with which to snare a specific suspect.

Best regards,
Ben

[FrankO]

Something as simple as a non-compliant and brusque Elizabeth Stride, or even a slightly more intoxicated ripper could explain the slight change in approach.

Hi Ben!

Not that it should rule out Mr BS as the Ripper, but slight change in approach? The difference in behaviour between, say, Lawende's man and Mr BS could hardly be bigger.

... but I really don't think you can dispute a superficial congruity between the broad-shouldered man and Lawende's suspect.

Even though there may be some congruity between the two description-wise, the question should be: what's that worth?

All the best,
Frank