Liz Stride: The Newest of Theories

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Observer,

As I said, it could well be that the Ripper, if Ripper he was, was wary of Schwartz, or Pipeman returning with a policeman

Which brings me back to a point I made earlier, namely - why didn't her assailant just leave it there at the point that Schwartz left? After all, it's not as if being charged with squabbling was going to get him into much hot water with the Law, even assuming that Liz - or the police - decided to take it further. It strikes me that Stride's killer took it into his mind to kill her, but to do no more than that.

If he had been Jack, then I can easily imagine her ending up with more than half her neck cut through - and possibly a lot more besides. It would have taken scarcely a minute for the knife to have completed any intended circumnavigation of her throat, for her skirts to be thrown up and at least an initial slash to be made into her abdomen.

[Scotland Yard]

In order to conclude thus, Gary, it's necessary to know the "background probability" of random attacks in London at that time. It might feel like coincidence, but why "feel" when it's possible to quantify?

Fair enough.

If he had been Jack, then I can easily imagine her ending up with more than half her neck cut through - and possibly a lot more besides.

Yes, I can too. But I can just as easily imagine any number of reasons for him to skidaddle just as soon as he'd killed her. As Observer suggested, maybe he was worried that one or both of the two blokes he'd just scared off might return and he felt he was taking a big enough chance even cutting her throat. Maybe the proximty of the club door coupled with a sound from within sent him packing.

His compulsion to mutilate may have been strong but his desire to not get caught I'll wager was stronger.

The first two of the Yorkshire Ripper's victims survived because he was interrupted. Sometimes random chance is the difference between life and death. Or in this case it could have been the difference between a cut throat and extensive mutilation.

Gary

[joelhall]

or maybe cos his mate was there too, he didnt have to take anything to prove hed done it.

[Scotland Yard]

In order to conclude thus, Gary, it's necessary to know the "background probability" of random attacks in London at that time. It might feel like coincidence, but why "feel" when it's possible to quantify?

Thinking this over, what's the 'background probability' of someone having their throat cut by a serial killer who not only favoured the cutting of throats but also was known to be at large in the area that night.?

[harry]

There is a limited time period of perhaps 12-13 minutes from the first contact with Stride,untill Diemschultz arrives.As I said before,it does not appear,from what Scwartz reported,a continuous attack beginning with a throw to the ground and ending with a cut throat,(refer his hearing raised voices,and evidence of Stride being killed inside the yard).So if the same man scenario is to be accepted,there would have to be a period of his diminishing rage,then a time of pacification with a victim that would surely have viewed any approach with extreme caution.I simply can't accept it.Timing wouldn't allow it.
What I can accept is that the first altercation having ended,that attacker,faced with a hostile response,quickly exits the scene leaving another apparent sympathetic person to console her.We can at least place another man on the scene.
Sam,
Of course I meant the ripper,but not knowing his name,I had to create another desciption.

[The Good Michael]

Harry,

A completely sensible alternative to other things people try to make work.

Mike

[Scotland Yard]

So if the same man scenario is to be accepted,there would have to be a period of his diminishing rage,then a time of pacification with a victim that would surely have viewed any approach with extreme caution.I simply can't accept it.Timing wouldn't allow it.

The timing wouldn't have allowed for the killer to compose himself on his way to Mitre Square?

Why ever not? Its at least a ten minute walk and there's no evidence he met Eddowes right away. Ample time for an adrenalized person to at least 'assume' an air of innocuosness. In fact I'd say the condition would lend itself to putting on a 'performance' of someone with a casual air about them. Its possible that whatever high emoton made him kill Stride, it had dissipated into a calm exhilleration by the time he met Eddowes.

Regards,
Gary

[Fisherman]

Mike writes:

"Because the circumstances are somewhat anomalous, doesn't make the Ripper NOT the killer"

Great argument, Mike. I´ve no idea how to manouvre around it. Then again, is this not something that could be said of every unsolved murder in that particular period? Just-because-she-was-poisoned,-that-does-not-prove-that-the-Ripper-did-not-do-it sort of thing?

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Harry writes:
"So if the same man scenario is to be accepted,there would have to be a period of his diminishing rage,then a time of pacification with a victim that would surely have viewed any approach with extreme caution.I simply can't accept it.Timing wouldn't allow it."

...and Gary questions it, thinking that Harry is speaking of the Mitre Square murder. But I don´t think he is, Gary! (Correct me if I´m wrong, Harry)

I think what Harrry means is that the same man scenario involves BS man first manhandling Stride, then calming down, and only thereafter killing her.
And, Harry, I think that is wrong. If BS man was her aquiantance, then that would provide exactly the type of background that could result in that chain of events. He throws her to the ground, and sje gets mad at him. She takes him into the yard (since domestic quarrels are usually not something you do in public) to tell him off, and at that stage he is repentful. He hopes she will forgive him, and take him back, but she does not. She tells him it is over, and that she does not want to see him again. Bingo, that´s it - a red haze draws over his eyes and he kills her for the oldest of motives; nobody else can have her if he can´t.
That takes care of your problem, Harry, plus it provides us with a neat explanation to why she felt enough at ease to take her cachous out.

The best, Harry!
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Monty writes:

"Throat cuts are rarer than we have been told by some authors. Thus to have 2 in one night is unique."

Three, actually, Monty - but then you know that already! Like I have said before, I think that the press may have played a role, filling the pages with cut throats - it would be firmly placed in the back of the brain of each East End villain that a cut neck was a swift way to despatch of people. The method may actually have been somewhat popularized by the journalists of the day.
Then again, the statistic fact that stabbings are more common than throat-cuttings still stands. But there are many things that have to be weighed in when analyzing how much that actually tells us. One of them being that many knife wound victims receive their wounds in a brawl, where they may have a knife in their hand themselves. In such cases it is far more probable that the opponents will receive stabs than cut necks. Just to take one example.

The best, Monty!

Fisherman

[claire]

If BS man was her aquiantance, then that would provide exactly the type of background that could result in that chain of events. He throws her to the ground, and sje gets mad at him. She takes him into the yard (since domestic quarrels are usually not something you do in public) to tell him off, and at that stage he is repentful. He hopes she will forgive him, and take him back, but she does not. She tells him it is over, and that she does not want to see him again. Bingo, that´s it - a red haze draws over his eyes and he kills her for the oldest of motives; nobody else can have her if he can´t.
That takes care of your problem, Harry, plus it provides us with a neat explanation to why she felt enough at ease to take her cachous out.

Aw, Fisherman! It's a generous theory, but I think it's probably a gross over-romanticisation of the situation...for one, I doubt that the inhabitants of fair Whitechapel gave a hoot if they were observed having a bit of a ding-dong. Secondly, I'm sorry. I might be a very shallow person. But I'm pretty dubious that some casual acquaintance of Ms Stride would have been that enamoured of a toothless, befouled and boozed up old woman to the extent that he would have to kill her if he thought anyone else might have her.

Of course, if she thought he'd already cleared off and headed into the yard for a previously arranged assignation--even if that was as casual as having done a punter from the club in that yard before and wondering if there might be a bit of trade if she went there again--then that's another matter. Maybe BS man had approached her for a bit of business and she'd knocked him back, thinking there'd be richer pickings in the yard. Heads in there, goes to freshen her nasty breath for an anticipated punter, BSM (no, not the British School of Motoring) follows her in, grabs her scarf from behind and does away with her in a fit of pique.

Then again, the anticipated richer pickings, from the club or otherwise, may well have been J. Ripper, Esq. (And I'm not ruling out the admittedly outside chance that he exits the club on his way to Mitre Sq for his pre-arranged with Kate, gets stridently propositioned by Stride, all of a tizz given her recent altercation, loses his temper because he's afraid of being delayed, and quickly dispatches her.)

[Fisherman]

Claire writes:
"Aw, Fisherman! It's a generous theory, but I think it's probably a gross over-romanticisation of the situation...for one, I doubt that the inhabitants of fair Whitechapel gave a hoot if they were observed having a bit of a ding-dong. Secondly, I'm sorry. I might be a very shallow person. But I'm pretty dubious that some casual acquaintance of Ms Stride would have been that enamoured of a toothless, befouled and boozed up old woman to the extent that he would have to kill her if he thought anyone else might have her."

You are using generalizations here, Claire! "The inhabitants of fair Whitechapel" were not a homogenous mass - they were bold people, shy people, careless people, nervous people, stupid people, witty people, street-wise people and asocial people, just like everywhere else in the world. Generalizations often help to build a simple case, but they really should be avoided since they are extremely unscientific. Remember the scene with Best and Gardner, jeering at Stride and her companion? One of them decided to tease Liz with the remark, “Watch out, that’s Leather Apron getting round you!” And the last Best and Gardner saw of Stride was as she and her amorous gentleman friend made a dash through the rain in the direction of Commercial Road.
So in that case it seems that the couple preferred to leave, since they did not like the comments made about them. In other words, they took their private life matters somewhere where they were on their own, Claire.

As for Stride´s looks, she was described as a girl in her twenties by Diemschitz, and it was said that "traces of prettyness were still about her" as she lie in the morgue. And little would she need to be beautiful to have somebody infatuated with her. Eighty year old men have killed their spouses out of jealousy.

It is not the first time my scenario has been called over-romanticisation, Claire. But it is useless to do so, since domestic brawls is by far the most common reason for a man killing a woman. No romantics involved, just grey, dreary everyday possesiveness.
If you are looking for romanticisation, you ought to bring a colourful serial killer or something like that on the stage - THAT would make for a very colourful scene indeed!

The best, Claire!

Fisherman

[Scotland Yard]

Harry writes:
I think what Harrry means is that the same man scenario involves BS man first manhandling Stride, then calming down, and only thereafter killing her.

Oh, upon re-reading this I suspect you're right...I got hold of the wrong end of the stick. Still see no reason for any pacification though. The argument might well have escalated from there on in - perhaps in deliberately hushed tones for whatever reason. Scwartz's opinion of the woman's crying out even when thrown down was that she did so in a somewhat muted manner.
Gary

[Fisherman]

But why, Gary, would a woman in the Jack the Ripper scare keep her voice down, and let her self be hushed as she is backed into a dark yard? And why would she settle for taking her cachous out as her assailant gets ready to cut her? Makes no sense to me.

The best!
Fisherman

[Scotland Yard]

But why, Gary, would a woman in the Jack the Ripper scare keep her voice down, and let her self be hushed as she is backed into a dark yard? And why would she settle for taking her cachous out as her assailant gets ready to cut her?
Fisherman

Hmmm.

Because she knew him already perhaps. Maybe an old customer that she consciously or otherwise discounted as being the killer despite his rough ways, though I admit this doesn't sound very likely. All the more reason to go with the idea that the BS man left the scene moments after Schwartz did and was replaced a few minutes later by Stride's actual assailant who was unseen by anyone but her. A customer she perhaps felt no reason to be afraid of as he may have been an old regular and someone, again, she discounted as being a danger. Possibly (as has been suggested before) the newcomer had played the knight in shining armour and seen off BS man thus putting Stride at her ease with him.

It's certainly an interesting part of Schwartz's account that he describes the woman screaming three times 'but not loudly'. I mean a scream by its very nature is a loud piercing sound.

Could it be that in his account of this detail, Schwartz was trying to downplay the woman's distress in order to minimise the apprearance of his own cowardliness -even callousness- of not lingering at the scene?

Regards
Gary