Elizabeth Stride ..who killed her ?

[lynn cates]

yup

Hello Tom.

"The scarf was probably pulled tight at the moment her neck was cut, as illustrated by the fact that the knife actually cut through part of the scarf."

Absolutely.

Cheers.
LC

[Tom_Wescott]

The tight scarf

The scarf was probably pulled tight at the moment her neck was cut, as illustrated by the fact that the knife actually cut through part of the scarf. Therefore, the reason it was pulled tight was not to knock her off balance or to strangle her but to lift her neck/head from the rock in order to get the knife under and cut her throat. As for how she was rendered unconscious, we'll never know for sure, but either she fainted or was garrotted.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Harry D]

One of two unlikely scenarios occurred -either three killers or two killers, one of whom killed twice. To apply Occam's Razor I think you would need to present a convincing argument that one possibility was much more likely than the other. I don't find myself able to say, with confidence, whether or not Eddowes was killed by the same person who killed Stride. If we knew, for certain, which was the case it would be really useful - but we don't. It's one of the great unknowns.

I've already presented a convincing argument in favour of one particular scenario over the other: the fact that these crimes were unprecedented in Whitechapel before the Autumn of Terror. There were three knife murders that day, one was a domestic where the victim was killed in her own home and the killer handed himself in, the other two were seemingly random, unsolved attacks on prostitutes in public areas which happened at the height of the Ripper attacks. Now, if we consider the criminal history of the area, and the proximity and timing of these murders, the only logical outcome is that the Ripper struck.

Incidentally, I do wonder if the Ripper believed he had been seen during the Stride murder, which might explain the lack of mutilations and why he wasted no time in attacking his next victim? It might even explain the intensity of Eddowes's injuries. The Ripper was panicking and thought he had nothing to lose, or he was still buzzing from the Stride murder. However, he managed to avoid detection but kept a low profile until he felt safe enough to find his next victim... or did she find him?

[John G]

Hello John. Thanks.

I agree that the scarf was pulled tight and the knot to the left. Of course, that is not the same as strangulation. It likely served only to pull her off balance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a95rqNxxbiM

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

Thanks for your very informative reply. To be honest I'm not totally convinced myself that the killer's intention was to strangle Stride. Nonetheless, what is surely the salient point is that despite the fact that Stride's windpipe had been divided, and her carotid artery partially severed, there was very little blood on Stride or the surrounding area.

Of course, considering the injuries you would have expected lots of blood from arterial spray, which didn't happen. This was probably because her throat was cut when the victim was close to the ground. This also seems to be what happened in the case of Eddowes (see Dr Brown's testimony), and possibly Chapman, although the evidence also suggests she was either strangled or suffocated. In the case of Nichols, there was no blood found on her breast, body or clothing, despite the fact that she'd been virtually decapitated. I would therefore argue that this also suggests that her throat was cut whilst she was close to the ground: see, for example, Keppel et al. (2005).

In summary, it seems to me that Stride's killer was either very lucky or had learned from previous mistakes: for some reason the name Martha Tabram springs immediately to mind!

Best wishes,

John

[John G]

Good point, Rosella.

In fact, we don`t if Nichols was strangled either, she definitely had a hand across her mouth and possibly nose, which could have resulted in her biting her tongue.
Chapman was said to have had her breathing interfered with, which doesn`t have to be strangled.
Tabram looks like she`s been strangled but the doctor makes no mention of it.
So, could be that Stride`s scarf was pulled forcibly in some way, either to expose the neck, or to pull Stride to the ground or choke her.

Hi Jon,

Yes, I believe it was Philip Sugden who argued that Nichols, Chapman and possibly Eddowes were suffocated rather than strangled. A link was therefore suggested on the basis that the victims had their throats cut whilst they were close to the ground and they had been either strangled or suffocated.

Best wishes,

John

[Bridewell]

Occam's Razor. As I stated earlier, this kind of crime was practically unheard of in Whitechapel before 1888. Then we suddenly have a trend of victims (mainly working girls) having their throats slashed and being left sprawled out in public areas. What is the simplest, straightforward explanation? That Stride was murdered by a known serial killer at large in the area who, for whatever reason, refrained from his post-mortem signature? Or that a separate, second killer happened to target Stride in a similar style 45 minutes before the Ripper struck again? Again, I'm not stating that it's inconceivable that such a coincidence would occur, I'm saying that all things considered it's pretty damn unlikely.

One of two unlikely scenarios occurred -either three killers or two killers, one of whom killed twice. To apply Occam's Razor I think you would need to present a convincing argument that one possibility was much more likely than the other. I don't find myself able to say, with confidence, whether or not Eddowes was killed by the same person who killed Stride. If we knew, for certain, which was the case it would be really useful - but we don't. It's one of the great unknowns.

[lynn cates]

duration

Hello Rosella.

"If you were Elizabeth I don't think you would feel there was too much difference between being strangled and being throttled by having your neckerchief pulled so tight you couldn't breathe."

But there would be a vast difference in duration.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

scarf

Hello John. Thanks.

I agree that the scarf was pulled tight and the knot to the left. Of course, that is not the same as strangulation. It likely served only to pull her off balance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a95rqNxxbiM

Cheers.
LC

[Jon Guy]

Hi Harry,

I responded to the above because in fact only 2 victims within the Canonical Group were "sprawled" out in public areas. Polly and Kate. The other 3 were killed on private property.

Just like Mrs Brown.

Cheers

Hi Mike

What about Eddowes ?

Although I know you are one of the few who is only interested in the "Canonical 5", McKenzie was certainly found "sprawled" out in a public place too.

[Jon Guy]

If you were Elizabeth I don't think you would feel there was too much difference between being strangled and being throttled by having your neckerchief pulled so tight you couldn't breathe.

Good point, Rosella.

In fact, we don`t if Nichols was strangled either, she definitely had a hand across her mouth and possibly nose, which could have resulted in her biting her tongue.
Chapman was said to have had her breathing interfered with, which doesn`t have to be strangled.
Tabram looks like she`s been strangled but the doctor makes no mention of it.
So, could be that Stride`s scarf was pulled forcibly in some way, either to expose the neck, or to pull Stride to the ground or choke her.

[Rosella]

If you were Elizabeth I don't think you would feel there was too much difference between being strangled and being throttled by having your neckerchief pulled so tight you couldn't breathe.

I don't know about Berner Street being an ideal location but Dutfield's Yard would only be so if you could guarantee that no club members would decide to enter the club by the side door while you and your victim were in the vicinity.

[John G]

Hello John. What makes you think Liz was strangled?

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

Oh dear, I thought I was going to get away with that! Dr Blackwell, of course, concluded that her killer had pulled tightly on her scarf. And I believe some authors, Philip Sugden, for example, have interpreted that as evidence of strangulation.

Nonetheless, I accept that, technically, it is not proof of strangulation. However, I think the point is largely incidental as the effect would surely be the same. i.e it would have prevented arterial spray by stemming the blood supply.

By the way, I forgot to mention what an ideal location Berner Street was for a murder- probably afraid of stirring up a hornet's nest! In fact, the more I think of Stride's murder the more I am drawn to the possibility that her killer had drawn up a full scale risk assessment!

Maybe he was just far too organized to be JtR. Now there's a controversial thought!

Best wishes,

John

[lynn cates]

strangled

Hello John. What makes you think Liz was strangled?

Cheers.
LC

[John G]

Hello,

I find statistical evidence, such as the excellent data provided by Colin Roberts, highlighting the extreme rarity of these types of crimes, very useful. However, once you start expanding your criteria then obviously more coincidences are likely to appear.

Thus, the murder of Sarah Brown was a far more common domestic murder. She wasn't killed in the street or at the back of someone else's property. She was murdered in her own home and her husband quickly confessed to the crime.

She was not a street prostitute and she had not been walking the streets on the night of her murder. She was killed in Westminster, not Whitechapel, at around 10:50 pm on the 29th September. Her husband confessed at a police station about 10 minutes later. She was not killed around a mile from another murder, nor within about 45 minutes.

And there is clearly more than time, place and the status of the victim that links Stride to the C5. I consider it highly relevant that there was virtually no blood on Stride or the surrounding area. Why? Because, as the medical testimony reveals, she was probably killed whilst close to the ground whilst being strangled, thus preventing arterial spray: important for her killer because it means that he would not be covered in blood.

Moreover, this was exactly the same strategy that a killer applied in two earlier murders: the murders of Polly Nichols and Annie Chapman, providing a clear link.

In my opinion this fact alone clearly indicates pre-planning by an experienced, relatively organized killer. It does not suggest a much more common domestic murder by someone who is likely to confess at a police station 10 minutes later.

Cheers,

John

[Michael W Richards]

Occam's Razor. As I stated earlier, this kind of crime was practically unheard of in Whitechapel before 1888. Then we suddenly have a trend of victims (mainly working girls) having their throats slashed and being left sprawled out in public areas. What is the simplest, straightforward explanation? That Stride was murdered by a known serial killer at large in the area who, for whatever reason, refrained from his post-mortem signature? Or that a separate, second killer happened to target Stride in a similar style 45 minutes before the Ripper struck again? Again, I'm not stating that it's inconceivable that such a coincidence would occur, I'm saying that all things considered it's pretty damn unlikely.

Hi Harry,

I responded to the above because in fact only 2 victims within the Canonical Group were "sprawled" out in public areas. Polly and Kate. The other 3 were killed on private property.

Just like Mrs Brown.

Cheers