Liz Stride: Why No Loud Cry?

[protohistorian]

Sorry, thought you were referring to post attck. Dave

[protohistorian]

Given the description of her wounds, she was likely unnable. Dave

[Rubyretro]

my thoughts on the 'noise' created by Liz's killing in Berner Street would be the following :

-Dutfield's Yard was considered a place of 'ill fame' by neighbours, and rows were common outside the Jewish Club..therefore there might be quite alot of
noise which people in the road wouldn't pay attention to (and that includes screams and shouts).

-Liz screamed 3 times during her altercation with BS Man..but clearly didn't want anyone to come running, as she instinctively kept her voice down.

-When Liz was murdered in Dutfield's Yard, the attack was so fast and by surprise that she never got the chance to call out...otherwise I feel that people hearing her screaming would have sensed the difference.

To illustrate the last point, one might be used to dogs fighting and barking and yelping down the street, but if you heard a dog that was in severe shock and pain from being hit by a car, I think that you can hear a diffrence in the
'yelps'.

[Sally]

All the films I have seen show the murder carried out in almost total silence. I'd like to know how much background noise there was? Cobbles are noisy and we know there was at least one cart out and about. It was one of the most highly populous areas of London, big families in all those houses, people in the club, so hardly silent?

That time in the morning, how many other people out and about? Gas lamps were quite noisy I'm told? Surely with that backdrop of noise would any crys stir much interest and travel very far? Would you hear them above the noises within the household?

Just something that has always intrigued me.......................

Hi Hoxton

I wonder if perhaps the pitch of the sound has something to do with how easily it is heard. I think in this instance there must have been considerable background noise - such as you mention. I think if there had been a scream, whilst it may not have travelled far, it would have been distinctive enough to have been heard in the locality. I suspect that in all probability there was no time for a scream.

[Hoxton Creeper]

General Background Noise.

All the films I have seen show the murder carried out in almost total silence. I'd like to know how much background noise there was? Cobbles are noisy and we know there was at least one cart out and about. It was one of the most highly populous areas of London, big families in all those houses, people in the club, so hardly silent?

That time in the morning, how many other people out and about? Gas lamps were quite noisy I'm told? Surely with that backdrop of noise would any crys stir much interest and travel very far? Would you hear them above the noises within the household?

Just something that has always intrigued me.......................

[harry]

Fisherman,
As I have written before,we cannot,because of the language difficulty,be sure that parts of the testimony was not suggested.
Sure BS spoke with her,but because she would have been wholly or partly obscurred by BS,her movements would not have been noticed by Schwartz,who at that time must have been some paces behind.She might also have spoken.In the time that words were exchanged,Schwartz had drawn level,and that is when the alledged assault took place.So there is an interval given to talk.All BS?All the action BS?

Now Schwartz gives not one but two full face on descriptions of the two men he saw,even to the colour of hair,even though both were wearing hats.Believeable?In the circumstances he describes implausable to the extreme.Again,the height of 5'11'' must also be viewed with caution. a hat,in the poor light available.pipeman was coming from the shadows,might well cause an exageration of height.
You want to accept Schwartz as reliable,his evidence as untainted,his story a full,complete ,and factual account of what happened,by all means do so.I can't.

[Fisherman]

That, David, is an interesting way of putting it...

The best,
Fisherman

[DVV]

Yes Fish, I really can't see why BSM should be suspected of being innocent!

Amitiés,
David

[Fisherman]

Right, Harry, here it is (again):

12.45 a.m. 30th. Israel Schwartz of 22 Helen Street, Backchurch Lane, stated that at this hour, on turning into Berner Street from Commercial Street and having got as far as the gateway where the murder was committed, he saw a man stop and speak to a woman, who was standing in the gateway. The man tried to pull the woman into the street, but he turned her round and threw her down on the footway and the woman screamed three times, but not loudly. On crossing to the opposite side of the street, he saw a second man standing lighting his pipe. The man who threw the woman down called out, apparently to the man on the oppos- ite side of the road, 'Lipski', and then Schwartz walked away, but finding that he was followed by the second man, he ran so far as the railway arch, but the man did not follow so far.

"...he saw a man stop and speak to a woman"
And so it seems the inititative was on BS man´s behalf, not on Strides.

"The man tried to pull the woman into the street"
And so he was not trying to push away at all - he tried to drag her with him.

"the woman screamed three times, but not loudly"
And so we KNOW that she was able to call out - but chose to do so in a lowered voice.

As has been pointed out by many posters here, BS man is by far the most probable killer of Stride. If he was Jack or not is another question, but there are no ways to get around the fact that he manhandled her very few minutes before she was found dead, and that he is the very last person seen in her company before that discovery. So we have a man who physically abuses a woman mere minutes before she is killed, and we have witness testimony saying that (apart from Goldstein) no other persons were seen around the area at that time.
Harry, drawing the conclusion that this points to BS mans innocense defies logic. Surely you must see that?

The best, Harry!
Fisherman

[harry]

It is by no means certain that BS simply walked up to Stride and began an attack.She may have accosted him.I doubt Schwartz would have seen Liz untill a hand was placed on her shoulder.He was behind BS,a broad shouldered fella,the light was poor,and she was wearing dark clothing.In addition it is by no means clear whether she was just inside or on a par with the entrance.Even BS may have been taken unawares by her appearance,and was simply pushing away,perhaps rather forcibly,an unwanted solicitation.It happens.Rejections of the kind would have been commonplace.
Schwartz also tells of raised voices as he hurried away,so it seems at least her mouth may have been in use to raise a scream if she really felt threatened.
So on the information to hand,I do not see BS as even her killer.

[Dan Norder]

actually Nathan Shine.

Not this again. Someone coming up with a story about a witness sighting a century after the fact doesn't mean it's actually real. Lots of families would have had stories placing their ancestors in the thick of things, and there's no reason to assume any of the ones that came about so late after the fact are true unless they are backed up by reliable evidence... and in this one there isn't, as the story doesn't match the known details given by witnesses interviewed and documented by police at the time.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Tom and AP,

In the interests of British fair play I've now read the Koster article and 1912 Nathanial Shine story.

A question—

Can we place Nathanial Shine in Berner Street on September 30th 1888?

Seconds out!

Regards,

Simon

[Tom_Wescott]

Simon,

Don't let AP confuse you with the Shine business. No one of that name had anything to do with it. The body was found by Diemschutz. Period. The 'young boy' element came about either because of the youthful Kozebrodski, who was glued to Diemschutz's hip, or the even younger boy (whose name I can't remember right now! Ahhhh!) who lived down the street but was early at the scene and was not shy at all in talking to reporters.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Cap'n Jack]

Simon, Tom was fired out of that black hole machine in time for the end of the world, but he still won't admit that the witness he discusses is actually Nathan Shine.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Tom,

Many thanks. That'll do nicely for the time being.

Welcome back, by the way. Whereya bin?

Regards,

Simon