Liz Stride: The Newest of Theories

[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

[Ben]

...which assumes for no good reason that Broad-Shoulders man couldn't be the Ripper (his actions seem perfectly compatible with those of known serial killers) and also that Israel Schwartz's testimony is trustworthy in the first place.

Absolutely.

The notion that BS man couldn't have been the ripper is closely allied to the concept of serial killers as virtual robots with immaculately fine-tuned MOs, which we know to be nonsense. 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.

That said, I've no real problem per se with the argument that Stride was a ripper victim (I'm not too far off the fence myself). 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.

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.

Best regards,
Ben

[DVV]

Viech d'ai! Lou counouissi pas gaire, aqueù papié Joùsé!!! Qu'es aco??"

Seriously Simon, I appreciated your previous post about the double-event, though I can't decide anything about Stride's murder...

Amitiés,
David

[Simon Owen]

"la main gauche appuyée sur le sol tient un petit paquet de cachou enveloppé dans du papier Joseph"

[DVV]

"C'est bon pour la gorge, c'est bon pour le nez,
C'est bon pour les bronches si vous êtes enrhumés,
Cachous Lajaunie, cachous Lajaunie..."
The Fabulous Trobadors, Toulouse, early 90's.

[anna]

Dan,

Any suggestions as to why we should all carry on debating this topic then?

There has to be the belief,that at some time we can get somewhere with it.

[Simon Owen]

One of the charms of these boards are that you get to say the same thing over and over again.
So when Simon Wood asks: "Wouldn't the cachous be used to sweeten the breath for purposes of kissing ?"

...then I of course will tell him no, that need not be the case at all, I get to explain to him that cachous were EITHER strong or mild and sweet, and I get to elaborate on the fact that the opinion that East End harlots spent their days and night chewing away at french, strong cachous from Lajaunie is something that is totally and utterly unsubstantiated since we have NO evidence whatsoever of ANY prostitutes of that period, in that town, using cachous for purposes of improving their breath to please their customers.
Killed prostitutes had their belongings listed, just like "our" unfortunates. I am still waiting for somebody to show me such a list that contains cachous. Such lists seem incredibly hard to come by, for some reason. Makes you wonder why, does it not, since it simply MUST have been such a common practice.

Then again, it can get awfully tedious to repeat yourself over and over again. Lajaunie were not even selling their famed cachous at that time, Simon, by the way.

Oh, well...

Fisherman(s friend)
Strooooong convictions

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

[anna]

Hi all,
I think the cachous belonged to Jack,perhaps he was a pipe smoker?

Maybe they were in a top pocket as Liz grabbed for his jacket,and the sweets came out and were still in her hand as she fell.To me,it's quite possible that she would try to grab at his clothing,to stop herself from falling.
Holding onto something would also have given her some sort of reassurance,so the fact that the sweets are still in her hand,makes sense.

[Dan Norder]

Besides, it could be argued that the Ripper seemed a lot more cautious about not being seen before or after his handiwork

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