The Berner Street Con(spiracy)

This murder is so blatantly not Jack, that to engage anyone else in that discussion any longer for me is pointless,....so Ill bid you adieu, and let the nonsense flow without my disruption.

Thank god this resource doesnt require that evidence be submitted with counter posts.....there never would have been a Liz Stride/Ripper thread beyond an opening post.

Good luck.

editted to add.......the above is your answer Tom.

This murder is so blatantly not Jack, that to engage anyone else in that discussion any longer for me is pointless,....so Ill bid you adieu, and let the nonsense flow without my disruption.

Thank god this resource doesnt require that evidence be submitted with counter posts.....there never would have been a Liz Stride/Ripper thread beyond an opening post.

Good luck.

[Tom_Wescott]

Why is everyone jumping C.D's arse today?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

P.S. Be careful with those kind of questions, Michael, cuz they can come right back to you.

Hi Michael,

So if read that correctly you are right and everyone else is wrong. All opinions are equal but some opinions are more equal than others.

Oh please.

c.d.

I know you can read, but do you? Name one piece of evidence that supports your claim that Jack the Ripper killed Liz Stride, or that he was interrupted, that he would kill only, cut once, or kill twice a night?

Regards

[Tom_Wescott]

Simon,

She may have been technically alive, but brain dead and beyond saving. But let me say I'm a little confused. I thought you bought into Michael's idea that she was killed at 12:45. If what you say is correct, then she would have been cut about the time she was found. She certainly didn't spend the day out there bleeding out slowly.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hi Michael,

I am operating on the assumption that Jack didn't want to be caught and hanged. Now if you accept that assumption, that helps explain a lot.

Known data and science haven't solved the question of who killed Liz or we wouldn't be debating it.

c.d.

No you arent assuming that at all...you are assuming the man who gained a nickname by Ripping women after killing them might only just kill even when he can hear someone coming, and that he might make a single cut, cut the victim while falling this time, and that it frustrates him so much he does to Kate everything he has already done to 2 consecutive victims before Liz, and just added facial cuts to show his "frustration".

Without Liz in the Canonical Group, you have 3 women killed consecutively, within 5 weeks, and with virtually identical acquisition and murder styles, and very similar abdominal cutting.

Im waiting for "but Jack wasnt feeling himself that night" as the next counter strategy.

Best regards

[c.d.]

Since the burden of proof for an assumption that the club may have covered up some aspects of that night is being met with statements and circumstantial evidence that is on record,....how about detractors use the same burden of proof......prove Jack was interrupted. Prove that anyone who you think saw blood flowing in the dark was a qualified opinion.....prove that The Ripper entered at the last minutes using known data...prove that we have any reason to think he cuts victims once, and kills twice a night.

My opinion is offered with evidence that supports it...countering with only your opinion that anything could have happened isnt a counter at all.

Best regards

Hi Michael,

So if read that correctly you are right and everyone else is wrong. All opinions are equal but some opinions are more equal than others.

Oh please.

c.d.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Tom,

If dead people are in the right position blood can drip from a wound courtesy of gravity. But if their hearts ain't beating they can't chugg it out by the bucket load.

Edward Spooner said that blood "was still flowing" from Stride's throat. If that was true, then Stride was still alive at the time.

Regards,

Simon

[Tom_Wescott]

I'm not even saying that I subscribe to the theory that Diemschutz interrupted the killer. It's certainly possible. But there's a number of other possibilities. However, it's extremely unlikely that Stride was killed at 12:46am and if you had Blackwell here to ask him, he'd say that was within the realm of possibility, but not the most likely scenario, which is pretty much what he said back then.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Since the burden of proof for an assumption that the club may have covered up some aspects of that night is being met with statements and circumstantial evidence that is on record,....how about detractors use the same burden of proof......prove Jack was interrupted. Prove that anyone who you think saw blood flowing in the dark was a qualified opinion.....prove that The Ripper entered at the last minutes using known data...prove that we have any reason to think he cuts victims once, and kills twice a night.

My opinion is offered with evidence that supports it...countering with only your opinion that anything could have happened isnt a counter at all.

Best regards

[c.d.]

The part in bold is incorrect.....unless you missed the gist here, no-one interviewed on those premises said that they were in the yard, the privy, checking out the stalls, or smoking by the gates. As for the likelihood Jack was "running scared", see murders 1 and 2.

And it would seem that most of these arguments forget the simple principle here.....Jack didnt get off on killing, he killed to get off on mutilating...one slice Liz shows us that for her killer, just killing was the only apparent goal for him.

Unless Jack has a transporter, changed his mind for only Liz as to why he kills, and how he kills....."may have been cut while falling"....I would recommend looking for known data and science to provide some insights....not science fiction.

Best regards

Hi Michael,

I am operating on the assumption that Jack didn't want to be caught and hanged. Now if you accept that assumption, that helps explain a lot.

Known data and science haven't solved the question of who killed Liz or we wouldn't be debating it.

c.d.

Simon,

You're not getting it. Diemschutz came home, realized (by matchlight) a woman was in the yard. It wasn't until he told everyone in the kitchen and everyone upstairs and they all came down with better light that they got a good look at her and noticed the stream of blood running from her neck, in the gutter, toward their steps. Plenty of time for her to bleed like that from the time the Diemster found her. And yes, dead people can bleed out.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

If anything like the above actually happened, it was that they noticed the blood that had flown from her, not that it was actually still flowing Tom.

Since the evidence suggests that the Dr thought she might have been cut as early as 12:46 with his estimate, first fill the missing 14 minutes then try and introduce the interruption from Diemshutz. Fanny looked towards the gates at least once near 12:45, and she saw no-one, Liz was already likely in the yard.

So are her and Jack negotiating? Reminiscing about the good old days, sharing cashous, playing hide and seek?

Or does he just enter with enough time to cut once when Diemshutz pulls in....even though he would have heard the cart coming minutes before that point?

I dont mind resistance to answers that seem obvious to me, but I do mind farcical premises being used to counter logical analysis.

Best regards

[c.d.]

Hi CD,

I mean you no disrespect, but if you're simply willing to cut your losses and move on rather than bother to invest time, thought and logic in trying to understand a murder scenario which, as handed down to us, is palpably untenable, then why are you bothering at all to discuss the WM?

Regards,

Simon

Hi Simon,

Well again you lost me. If I don't understand the point that somebody was trying to make then I can't respond to it. That is why I asked you for clarification. Your response to my inquiry makes even less sense.

c.d.

No one is disparaging any medical authority. I have no doubt that he gave his best estimate (using the knowledge of time of death in 1888).

And again we go back to Diemschutz being the only possible source of interruption. Just ain't so. Somebody coming out to use the privy or get some air. Could be any number of things including good ole paranoia on the part of Jack. Cut your losses (no pun intended) and move on. Liz was not the only woman on the street that night.

c.d.

The part in bold is incorrect.....unless you missed the gist here, no-one interviewed on those premises said that they were in the yard, the privy, checking out the stalls, or smoking by the gates. As for the likelihood Jack was "running scared", see murders 1 and 2.

And it would seem that most of these arguments forget the simple principle here.....Jack didnt get off on killing, he killed to get off on mutilating...one slice Liz shows us that for her killer, just killing was the only apparent goal for him.

Unless Jack has a transporter, changed his mind for only Liz as to why he kills, and how he kills....."may have been cut while falling"....I would recommend looking for known data and science to provide some insights....not science fiction.

Best regards

[Simon Wood]

Hi CD,

I mean you no disrespect, but if you're simply willing to cut your losses and move on rather than bother to invest time, thought and logic in trying to understand a murder scenario which, as handed down to us, is palpably untenable, then why are you bothering at all to discuss the WM?

Regards,

Simon