Previous Assaults on Liz

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Claire,

Maybe he was having a bevvie or lived nearby and was on his way home...

...oh, joy! Another "impossible thing to believe before breakfast"! Not that I'm saying it's impossible, of course it's not - but in all seriousness it's another coincidence to add to a whole heap of 'em.

Against which, we have the almost insanely straightforward scenario of BS scuffling with Stride, cutting her throat, and getting out of there before the allleged interruption arrives (etc etc).

[Sam Flynn]

Keep your stick on the ice.

...is that the opposite of "puck off"?

[c.d.]

...is that the opposite of "puck off"?

Only you, Sam. Only, you.

c.d.

[claire]

Hi Claire,...oh, joy! Another "impossible thing to believe before breakfast"! Not that I'm saying it's impossible, of course it's not - but in all seriousness it's another coincidence to add to a whole heap of 'em.

Against which, we have the almost insanely straightforward scenario of BS scuffling with Stride, cutting her throat, and getting out of there before the allleged interruption arrives (etc etc).

Yeah, it was kind of tongue in cheek

[perrymason]

Ill tell you this once cd....Im tired of your smart a** comments on this issue. How about you start using evidence to suggest your ideas instead of slagging the people who do, or the veracity of the medical authorities opinions.....

It appears as though you have gotten hold of Perry Mason's super deluxe nano second Olympic stop watch But let me make the following points:

My watch is exactly as Blackwells was, a 10 minute window from 12:46 on is when she was cut. If you can read but not understand or count, its not my watch's problem.

Prostitutes have been "assaulted" without it resulting in death. Most people here said that in all likelihood Liz had experienced far worse attacks than what she received at the hands of the BS man. Obviously they didn't result in her death.

Why would you even suggest that witnessed brutality minutes before a murder should be ignored?

The concensus was that if the BS man had simply thrown Liz to the ground, cussed her out and gone on his way, that the whole incident could easily transpired in less than five minutes.

Thats your opinion, not the facts. The facts are that after the witness and Pipeman left, Liz and BSM were the only two people there. So which one of them is Jack for you...did Jill the Ripper cut her own throat, or BSM the booze tipper?

How much time would Jack needed to do his thing? 3 minutes maybe?

Her death cut took 1 or 2 seconds, and thats all that happened there.

The time of death was simply an estimate and not written in stone as some would like us to believe.

An estimate on a cut that took place no later than 1/2 hour or 20 minutes prior to Blackwells arrival is hardly a stab in the dark cd. Maybe you think Doctors couldnt recognize a 1/2 hour old wound....we certainly disagree.

I don't see anything that prevents Jack from showing up and killing Liz. You can argue probability out the wazoo but I don't see anything that tips the argument that strongly against him being Liz's killer.

Sure cd.....and where is the evidence that suggests anyone other than the two people seen "arrived" on site? If you want to guess that happened because you think Jack killed her, your perogative. But there is not one witness or shred of evidence that anyone magically appeared as you are so fond of suggesting. Maybe first you should explain why BSM, who was trying to acquire a hooker by the looks of it, suddenly changes his mind and leaves in the first place.

c.d.

Your smug little posts on Liz Stride just demonstrate your lack of ability to interpret the known evidence, and the depth of your imagination.

Ben and I quote the medical expert....whom do you quote to suggest BSM leaves and Jack suddenly appears?

Take a moment to read the evidence again, all you have said is pure speculation, and at the expense of the senior medical opinion on site, and all the witness testimony on who was near the gates, or in the yard, around 12:46am.

Maybe she was sponataneously cut...like spontaneous combustion, or maybe Jack jumped over the fence. You still have lots of other ridiculculous and unsupportable possibilities you can use, dont just stick to a puff of smoke and a magical entrance.

In case you dont know how criminal investigations work, the person last seen with a murder victim is the first place to look. Not the last. That means BSM, Sailor Hat, and Blotchy Face are # 1 suspects....that come before the Phantom. First clear one of those men, then talk to me about Jack.

Regards.

[Fisherman]

It is astonishing, is it not?
We are provided with a functioning timeline, a suspected killer is put on place, and to prove his malicious intentions, he sets about manhandling Stride IN CLOSE PROXIMITY!! to the very spot where she is found dead a few minutes later, killed by a method that was admittedly very frequent in that society at that time.
And what happens? People go out of their way to get the suspected killer off the stage, read malicious intents of mutilation into a pair of bent knees, offer a firework of strange coincidences and reoccurring disturbances and a throat-cut held back in ferocity by the sound of an approaching pony. Go away, you simple solution, we want something flashier here!

What happened to good old-fashioned face value? The only - ONLY - thing that is of importance here seems to be to bring Jack onto the stage, at any price.
If Stride had been the only prostitute killed in the East End that autumn, not one of those who try to cram Jack into B S mans shoes would have come up with the notion that the evidence existing pointed to a serial killer being at large.

The best,
Fisherman

[c.d.]

It is astonishing, is it not?
We are provided with a functioning timeline, a suspected killer is put on place, and to prove his malicious intentions, he sets about manhandling Stride IN CLOSE PROXIMITY!! to the very spot where she is found dead a few minutes later, killed by a method that was admittedly very frequent in that society at that time.
And what happens? People go out of their way to get the suspected killer off the stage, read malicious intents of mutilation into a pair of bent knees, offer a firework of strange coincidences and reoccurring disturbances and a throat-cut held back in ferocity by the sound of an approaching pony. Go away, you simple solution, we want something flashier here!

What happened to good old-fashioned face value? The only - ONLY - thing that is of importance here seems to be to bring Jack onto the stage, at any price.
If Stride had been the only prostitute killed in the East End that autumn, not one of those who try to cram Jack into B S mans shoes would have come up with the notion that the evidence existing pointed to a serial killer being at large.

The best,
Fisherman

Thank God people are willing to be open minded about this and consider all possibilities.

c.d.

[Fisherman]

Yes, c.d; and draw logical conclusions from it!

The best!
Fisherman

[perrymason]

Thank God people are willing to be open minded about this and consider all possibilities.

c.d.

It would seem once again that you read but dont understand. My mate Fisherman was I believe saying we have BSM, we have Liz and we have an assault minutes befere her death. But some people keep insisting that the magical phantom appeared to do the deed anyway,....sound familiar?

Thanks for illustrating my point cd, assuming I read your context correctly Fish....but I know you dont see "Jack" here, and neither do I.

Cheers.

[c.d.]

Jeez Louise!!! What is up with you guys???? You have all gone off the deep end on this. No one is allowed to disagree with you. You have all taken on the tone of religious fanatics. These boards would sure as hell be boring if we all agreed on everything.

P.S. Michael, lighten up a bit there my man. Just poking fun as you yourself have done.

c.d.

[perrymason]

Jeez Louise!!! What is up with you guys???? You have all gone off the deep end on this. No one is allowed to disagree with you. You have all taken on the tone of religious fanatics. These boards would sure as hell be boring if we all agreed on everything.

P.S. Michael, lighten up a bit there my man. Just poking fun as you yourself have done.

c.d.

You can disagree with me all you like, Im hardly offended by inferior arguments....but I do not like continually snide comments.

As to who killed Liz cd, Ill stick with the man seen assaulting her minutes before she dies. You can choose Gull for all I care.

I may be wrong, you may be right, but on paper Im the one who uses only the knowns. Thats my point.

Drunk man acosts woman outside empty yard, yells at witness. Within 10 minutes she is cut inside that yard. 2 known people at the site, one showing violent tendencies towards the other. The recipient of the violence is found dead 15 minutes later. Two people scuffling, one dies.....and its more likely that a third party enters, without being seen by Fanny, or Schwartz...and he is Jack, and cuts once?

Sure.
Regards.

[c.d.]

You can disagree with me all you like, Im hardly offended by inferior arguments....but I do not like continually snide comments.

As to who killed Liz cd, Ill stick with the man seen assaulting her minutes before she dies. You can choose Gull for all I care.

I may be wrong, you may be right, but on paper Im the one who uses only the knowns. Thats my point.

Drunk man acosts woman outside empty yard, yells at witness. Within 10 minutes she is cut inside that yard. 2 known people at the site, one showing violent tendencies towards the other. The recipient of the violence is found dead 15 minutes later. Two people scuffling, one dies.....and its more likely that a third party enters, without being seen by Fanny, or Schwartz...and he is Jack, and cuts once?

Sure.
Regards.

Hi Michael,

Well I guess I will just have to keep my inferior arguments to myself. Sheesh.
Too bad we don't all have your insight.

c.d.

[Fisherman]

Sorry if you feel offended, c.d! But I really feel that those who cling to religious beliefs here are not the ones who believe in a simple scenario. Moreover, pointing that belief out as the result of not being open-minded becomes somewhat silly, since the orders given from above back in 1888 and all the way up to recent times was that Stride was a canonical: "The Whitechapel killer had five victims, and five victims only..."

To go against the current and challenge such things, c.d, is to be open-minded. If it was not for open-mindedness, Stride would still be an unchallenged Ripper victim.

But I will drink to your suggestion of not taking it all too seriously any day of the week, c.d. Life´s too short for that!
Oh, and the Whitechapel killer did not have five victims, if you ask me (and you do, don´t you?) - he had four and a half.

All the best,
Fisherman

[c.d.]

Hi Fisherman,

Yes, I was offended. All of a sudden the tone of the posts changed. No longer were arguments weighed and counter arguments offered. It became we are right and no one can question us. It was that arrogance (intentional or unintentional) that was so damn annoying. My position is right so therefore yours is wrong. But neither you nor I can change what happened to Liz or change her killer by the weight of our arguments.

As I said, these boards would be damn boring if all we did was agree.

Stay well.

c.d.

[perrymason]

Hi Michael,

Well I guess I will just have to keep my inferior arguments to myself. Sheesh.
Too bad we don't all have your insight.

c.d.

I like you cd, but your comments on mine, are like poking a stick at a tiger.....expect reaction.

Cheers