Elizabeth Stride ..who killed her ?

[Fisherman]

Tom W writes:

"If you can't argue on my level, don't attempt to argue with me."

Erm, to be honest, Tom, I am doing all I can to AVOID your level of arguing. But letīs make things swift and sweet here. Just answer the two questions:

1. What evidence tells us that Kidney and BS man did not look like each other? My suggestion is that there is no such evidence about. Letīs see what you can bring to the table. Fair enough?

2. What do you use to assert that Kidney - SPECIFICALLY - was looked into by the police, and what exact information can you give us on his alibi? Is it not true that the alibi - if it existed - may have been "I was asleep"?

Your level of arguing very often contain assertions that are untenable, the way I see things. The way you see things too, actually, since you very well know that the questions I put to you will show quite clearly that you are assuming far too much on these points.
So why blemish your good reputation by saying things like these? The ones that may catch on will very easily be able see that they have been conned, once they read up a bit.
So why? Thatīs question number three.

Fisherman

[Celesta]

Whoever Other is, he must be influential. He's only lagging Broad-shoulders by one vote.

[perrymason]

Hi again all,

I guess my strong wording didnt help my cause.....and I assumed it would be a point that few could disagree with.

I dont think that we can assume Israel Schwartz had the confidence of the authorities because he is clearly not a part of the 5 day formal review of the evidence gathered. James Brown is.

If James Browns account is the one police trusted, (regardless of any claims outside the Inquest that Schwartz was indeed trustworthy Browns is the only story for 12:45am timing that is given), then his story gives us Liz and a man talking by the school, no-one in front of the gates leading to a multiple witness stated empty yard, no Pipeman and no Broadshouldered Man.

My contention is that we should be using the last sighting that is accredited by its inclusion at the Inquest.

This one;

"Brown, a dock labourer of 35 Fairclough Street, testified to seeing a woman with a man at 12.45am, 30th September 1888 in Fairclough Street whilst he was getting his supper from a chandler's shop on the corner with Berner Street. He saw the couple standing by the Board School; the woman had her back to the wall, facing the man who had his arm up against it. Brown heard the woman say "No, not tonight, some other night" which attracted his attention. There was no trace of an accent in the woman's voice.

The man was described as being about 5ft 7in tall and stoutly built, wearing a long overcoat which went down almost to his heels. He was wearing a hat, but Brown was unable to describe it. It was quite dark, so he could not tell if the woman was wearing a flower on her jacket, but both appeared sober. Brown went home and finished his supper. Fifteen minutes later he heard screams of 'Police!' and 'Murder!', but on opening his window he could not see anybody in the street. A short while later, he saw a police officer at the corner of Christian Street. A man called to the constable that he was wanted and Brown watched him run to Berner Street.[1]"

In that scenario the man seen with her isnt accosting her.

The issue with the cashous is that yes, she could have calmed herself after an altercation with BSM by taking a breath mint, but it is hard to imagine the precise timing of when she might reach into her pocket for them if she just had the altercation. If she is having a conversation where she is calm, not threatened, and with someone she knows....perhaps indicated by the "perhaps some other night" line, then we may have a semi regular client, maybe even a recent ex, and cashous may have been appropriate for the close quarter conversation. And besides, Schwartz is not an Inquest witness anyway.

The thing is.....if Schwartz is not included in the official proceedings because he was not believed, then a most promising suspect in the form of BSM disappears, and literally anyone from the man seen with her to someone from inside the yard grabbing her when she came near the gates is on the table.

If this "anyone" was Jack though, his desire to only kill Liz needs to be addressed, because the evidence says he did all he wanted when he cut her throat. She is untouched after being dropped.

I believe Liz Stride was waiting for someone specific....I believe it cannot be the man talking to her that she puts off until another night, and I know that at least 28 men were still in the Club at that time and people awake in the cottages...one member had just returned before Brown saw Liz. Its not a huge leap to imagine she is turning down a potential client because she has a date....she is dressed nicely, has a flower on her breast, has cashous, and intentionally told a lodging house roomy that she would not return that night.

Best regards all.

[Fisherman]

Tom W writes:

" AP, gotta love your dramatic flair. It was more like "I believe she liked me more than any other man."

The exact inquest recording reads "I think she liked me better than any other man"

Fisherman

[Celesta]

she is turning down a potential client because she has a date....she is dressed nicely, has a flower on her breast, has cashous, and intentionally told a lodging house roomy that she would not return that night.

Best regards all.

Well, it could be that she was turning him down for that reason, Michael. 'Not tonight, some other night', because I'm busy tonight. It's also possible that this was the guy she was meeting, and she decided that she didn't care for him afterall, that something about him made her uneasy?

[perrymason]

Well, it could be that she was turning him down for that reason, Michael. 'Not tonight, some other night', because I'm busy tonight. It's also possible that this was the guy she was meeting, and she decided that she didn't care for him afterall, that something about him made her uneasy?

That could well be Celesta. Then we would have her leaving the company of that man and making her way towards the gates of Dutfields Yard. So she can find a more suitable client? The issue with that is that the yard, according to Eagle and Lave, was empty at 12:40am. They noticed that fact, but not each other, even though they both must have been in the yard at the same time based on their statements. If its empty and she is working why would she dump the man by the school and head towards an empty yard's gates? Waiting for members to come out at some point maybe? Maybe...but consider why she was so sure she would not be needing her usual bed on this night.

If she works, she earns and rents her usual bed. She is not known to go home with clients to my knowledge. So if she is working, what were the after work plans for sleeping?

I think the evidence suggests she was waiting for someone, her comments to her friend at the lodging house and her leaving fabric with her suggests she felt she knew before leaving the lodging house where she would stay, and the circumstances at 1am make a story with an empty yard just before a very important factoid for the International Club members.

edited to add: I believe we may have a date with a Avian name.

All the best Celesta

[Mascara & Paranoia]

Hi M&P,

How can a throat wound that kills the victim be described as "superficial and tame". It did what it intended to do did it not? And if it was not exactly similar to the other cuts, could there be any reasons for that?

c.d.

I said it was superficial and tame in comparison to the other canonical victims' throat wounds. As for why Stride's throat wound was strikingly dissimilar could be one of two reasons: Jack was interrupted whilst actually slashing her throat, or her killer was an altogether different man. Those are the only logical explanations for it.

[Sam Flynn]

So, pray tell, who was Kidney's successor?

Ureter Franklin?

[perrymason]

I said it was superficial and tame in comparison to the other canonical victims' throat wounds. As for why Stride's throat wound was strikingly dissimilar could be one of two reasons: Jack was interrupted whilst actually slashing her throat, or her killer was an altogether different man. Those are the only logical explanations for it.

And the validation for the interruption is sketchy at best M & P. Its most probable that her throat was cut between 12:46am and 12:56am, because the allowance for error given by Blackwell suggests he thought he may have erred with his initial 20 minutes as being 10 minutes too recent a "cutoff"...pardon the pun.

That.. added to the fact that there is no halted or arrested activity that seems to have taken place upon the body after she is on the ground, on her side, and that it appears the initial attack was made with a knife....something that only happens in the C3 and C5 killings, I think your second logical explanation is more likely in this case.

Best regards

[Christine]

I said it was superficial and tame in comparison to the other canonical victims' throat wounds. As for why Stride's throat wound was strikingly dissimilar could be one of two reasons: Jack was interrupted whilst actually slashing her throat, or her killer was an altogether different man. Those are the only logical explanations for it.

Not at all. What if Jack was using a different knife, such as a pocket knife, because he didn't have a chance to get his larger knife out? I suppose that qualifies as being interrupted, though.

Concerning the interruption, I'm back to the police, who should have questioned every one around and determined the timing as well as possible. They thought that there was an interruption. It's never been clear to me who they thought interrupted, though.

[Celesta]

edited to add: I believe we may have a date with a Avian name.

Ah. Yes, I see. Gonna have to think about this one, but I see what you mean.

[Tom_Wescott]

Sam Flynn, you crack me up.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Mascara & Paranoia]

I agree with you, perrymason. I think it was a completely separate man to Jack who murdered Liz Stride, I was just pointing out to those who want Jack to be her killer that they have to accept that if he was at all interrupted (which is a theory) then it happened while he was actually cutting Stride's throat.

Not at all. What if Jack was using a different knife, such as a pocket knife, because he didn't have a chance to get his larger knife out?

I'm only going by memory here, but I don't think there was any proof whatsoever of the wounds to the victims' throats and their abdomens being performed by separate or different kinds of knifes, so it's a safe bet to assume that the Ripper only used just the one. Even if that was the case, it's even stranger that Jack would use one knife for one victim and another blade on a different victim within 45-odd minutes of each other. You'd expect to see a different knife being used on separate nights; not the same night. All the evidence indicates the Double Event being a Singular one more so than not. As "cool" or whatever it may be for Jack to have offed two 'whores' on one night, facts speak against it. It seems that whoever killed Stride was lucky that Jack was also operating on Sept. 30th.

[Celesta]

Ureter Franklin?

A song by Willa Catheter?

[perrymason]

Concerning the interruption, I'm back to the police, who should have questioned every one around and determined the timing as well as possible. They thought that there was an interruption. It's never been clear to me who they thought interrupted, though.

Hi Christine,

If I may I think you assume too much of our contemporary police force, because clearly their opinions were made too personally, too publicly, and without the evidence that is required to support the allegations.

The interruption was assumed to be by Diemshutz pulling into the yard at 1am. However....the medical estimated time for the cut allows for it to have been made as early as 12:46am, and because Blackwell added 10 minutes duration to the length of time he estimated between the cut and his arrival as a safeguard, we should assume the cut came closer to that earlier time than anything later than 12:56am.

Blackwell also suggested that the scarf may have been used to choke her, and that she may have been cut while falling...perhaps while still being choked with the scarf, it was nicked.

That data, plus the fact Diemshutz horse and cart would be heard approaching on cobblestones a few minutes prior to his arrival, that Liz is lying on her side with her boots just visible below the hemline of her ankle length skirt, that she is untouched since being on the ground, that she has a single wound which is less severe than any alleged Ripper throat cut before or after, and since the yard she is found in was allegedly empty for some 20 minutes before Diemshutz pulls in, ........the case for interruption is effectively devoid of suggestive evidence.

The main thrust behind the belief of an interruption is the belief....not the evidence, but the belief,..... that Jack killed both women that night. So if she escaped mutilation.....it therefore MUST be that he was interrupted.

As you can see by the evidence,...if Jack killed Liz there is no evidence that he wanted anything more than for her to be dead. I dont think anyone can believe that Jack was just a thug or common street knife killer, which this death suggests. Jack the Ripper is most visible in the acts he commits on women he has killed.....their death is where he begins,... something like his soup or salad, its the post mortem acts that are the entree.

If Jack killed Liz the evidence suggests thats all he intended to do. And thats no "ripping".

Best regards.