Two

Huh? Are Mel Gibson and Bruce Willis really your ideal Christian role models?

I wonder how their ex-and-soon-to-be-ex-wives who caught their husbands breaking their marriage vows by having affairs with women half their age would respond to that assessment? (Gibson's illicit affair with a 24yr old Russian pop-star is in the papers right now.)

And how in the world does being from California (as I am) make you an atheist? (I'm not!)

For that matter, how does being gay or liberal make you an atheist?

And what does ANY of this have to do with the murder of poor Elizabeth Stride??? I'm baffled.

Best regards, Archaic

I dont think a bash is in order for some ideas that Tom was discussing regarding my comments Arc Angel .....I was simply suggesting that religion would mean little to an actor in the LVP unless he is involved with community theater within his own ethnic group. Using modern actors I know as the basis.

Its not worth arguing about.

Cheers

[Archaic]

Huh???

These days many actors are atheists because they're gay, liberal, or from California. But many (such as Mel Gibson, Bruce Willis, and countless others) see no reason they have to lose their soul to follow their calling. I understand where you're coming from, but I still consider it very unfair generalization to assume all or most actors are Godless creatures.
Tom Wescott

Huh? Are Mel Gibson and Bruce Willis really your ideal Christian role models?

I wonder how their ex-and-soon-to-be-ex-wives who caught their husbands breaking their marriage vows by having affairs with women half their age would respond to that assessment? (Gibson's illicit affair with a 24yr old Russian pop-star is in the papers right now.)

And how in the world does being from California (as I am) make you an atheist? (I'm not!)

For that matter, how does being gay or liberal make you an atheist?

And what does ANY of this have to do with the murder of poor Elizabeth Stride??? I'm baffled.

Best regards, Archaic

Pirate and Perry,

The blood on her hands and wrist appeared as oblong spots and were probably transfered there from her neck by Edward Johnston when he first unbuttoned her collar and then felt her wrist. At least that's how I see it.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Thats a reasonable interpretation Tom, you may well be right. It is somewhat surprising to me that they would even let someone hanging outside the Beehive touch the body at all.....doesnt Diemshutz say he told everyone that had come out to see the woman to not touch anything? he just lights a match and then runs inside when he found her, leading one to believe that he didnt check for a pulse....so why would they let Spooner do that?

If the police suspected anyone touched or moved the body in any way that would have likely been Club people....so letting a stranger, Spooner, do his own thing by the body seems odd to me.

Might be nothing.

Cheers Tom

[Tom_Wescott]

Pirate and Perry,

The blood on her hands and wrist appeared as oblong spots and were probably transfered there from her neck by Edward Johnston when he first unbuttoned her collar and then felt her wrist. At least that's how I see it.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Seriously, years ago, I played with the possibility that "theatrical appearance" could be describing "Astrakhan Man".

Same here.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hi Everyone

Just getting back on topic…

I thought I had read somewhere that there was blood on Strides hands and wrist. I’ve found it..

JtR Facts p162.

When the body was undressed it was noted that that there was a bluish discoloration over both shoulders, especially the right, and under the collarbone and in front of the chest. These marks were produced by pressure from two hands, but may not have been recent or connected with the crime. Dr Philips believed that Stride had been seized by the shoulders and forced onto the ground, where her murderer, who was on her right side (ie Facing the wall), had cut her throat left from right. He thought that the murderer had ‘a knowledge of where to cut the throat’ and stated that he would not necessarily have been blood stained, the commencement of the wound being away from the murderer, so that the blood flowed away from him into the gutter.

HOWEVER, Philips theory did not account for Strides bloodstained hand and wrist, and he wasn’t able to provide an explanation for it?

Does this indicate that Stride did indeed put up a struggle unlike the other victims??

Pirate

I think that may stem from her throwing her hands up to her throat when he took hold of her scarf. Blackwell noted the nicks on the scarf, and the twisted knot, it would seem that for at least a moment or two, she was choked. If he cuts her while falling, a possibility, her hands would still be at the scarf and would likely get some blood on them as she fell...gradually relaxing and dropping from her neck.

Why would she have cashous in her hand when that happens? In my estimation, because she didnt know the scarf choke was coming. She was not threatened. Why not? Because her back was turned to the killer and she was perhaps heading back out the gates.

Cheers all.

[Jon Guy]

Was he perhaps only guilty of using his dramatic licence to create more of a scene than he had actually seen?

I was thinking that it was possibly more likely that Schwartz did describe the incident as it happened, and it was just lost in translation.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Everyone

Just getting back on topic…

I thought I had read somewhere that there was blood on Strides hands and wrist. I’ve found it..

JtR Facts p162.

When the body was undressed it was noted that that there was a bluish discoloration over both shoulders, especially the right, and under the collarbone and in front of the chest. These marks were produced by pressure from two hands, but may not have been recent or connected with the crime. Dr Philips believed that Stride had been seized by the shoulders and forced onto the ground, where her murderer, who was on her right side (ie Facing the wall), had cut her throat left from right. He thought that the murderer had ‘a knowledge of where to cut the throat’ and stated that he would not necessarily have been blood stained, the commencement of the wound being away from the murderer, so that the blood flowed away from him into the gutter.

HOWEVER, Philips theory did not account for Strides bloodstained hand and wrist, and he wasn’t able to provide an explanation for it?

Does this indicate that Stride did indeed put up a struggle unlike the other victims??

Pirate

[caz]

Hi Caz

Liz`s bruises and the position her body when found were discussed earlier in the thread.

It was noted that Liz lay on her left side and looked like she had been placed there, rather than thrown. Link this with the bruises over right collar bone and chest it looks like she has been forced down by some sort of Vulcan grip over right shoulder, and held down, pushing her down on her left side.

Hi Jon,

Indeed so.

For me, that neatly sums up the Schwartz problem. Liz had to find her way to the ground somehow, courtesy of whoever killed her, and here we have Schwartz thinking he is describing a reasonable scenario that explains how she met her downfall (pun intended). But the reported injuries do not appear to add up to how Schwartz saw it all go down. Far from it in fact. No physical evidence for her being thrown down at all, never mind violently, by the average Saturday night drunken thug who doesn't know his own strength.

And if you can get over that little obstacle there's a chunk missing where the same man supposedly takes stock while letting the object of his aggression pick herself up, dust herself off and even take her sweeties out, before he starts all over again, but this time getting into quite a different stride (pun that tends to creep up unbidden) that leaves her with only the signs of this fatal second wind.

If Schwartz thought his account of Liz's ordeal was self-explanatory and helpful, I'd say he was mistaken on both counts.

Was he perhaps only guilty of using his dramatic licence to create more of a scene than he had actually seen?

"Was that a dagger I saw before me?"

"No, 'twas only a pipe you fool."


"Didst I not hear the woman scream three times, but not very loudly?"

"No, 'twas only the owl screaming and the crickets crying."


"I was only trying to help."

(Translations from the Hungarian Phrase Book. There never was a hovercraft full of eels.)

Love,

Caz
X

[Jon Guy]

Seriously, years ago, I played with the possibility that "theatrical appearance" could be describing "Astrakhan Man".

[Jeff Leahy]

Perhaps he was running around shouting “out damn spot?’

[Jon Guy]

Regarding Schwartz, the reporter found him of 'theatrical appearance'

He wore tights and carried a skull around with him?

[Tom_Wescott]

Its actually current local stage actors that I used to make my comments, many of which I know .Politics is indeed of great interest to many of them today, primarily for concerns regarding the preservation of arts funding and the protection of our cultural diversity. But religion is for the most part left a subjective thing, having little or nothing to do with their "craft", and I know zero actors who perform only within their own ethic communities, although Im sure a small non-professional group do.

Since when was Canada 'culturally diverse'? You gotta be careful comparing people of today to those of 1888. That's a very Cappuccina approach to Ripperology that usually backfires. These days many actors are atheists because they're gay, liberal, or from California. But many (such as Mel Gibson, Bruce Willis, and countless others) see no reason they have to lose their soul to follow their calling. I understand where you're coming from, but I still consider it very unfair generalization to assume all or most actors are Godless creatures.

Regarding Schwartz, the reporter found him of 'theatrical appearance' but he did not say that he was actually in the theater. It's just a way of describing his appearance.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[caz]

Indeed, Caz...

Elizabeth Long covered up for the Society of Politically Apathetic English Protestants based at 29 Hanbury Street!!

(Sorry, just transplanting the idea to another scenario to see how it compared.)

And of course, Sam, a certain lavatorially challenged ear witness obviously had his work cut out to prevent a stink involving himself and fellow members of the Privy Council based at 27.

I suspect a genetic condition, hence the rather onomatopoeic surname: Cadosch ("the Splosh"). I believe he was also a deeply religious man as he was known to call out "Jesus Christ Almighty" every morning when nature called at 4am and he woke as regular as clockwork at 5.15.

Clearly there was something in the water with all these members going through the motions and covering their arses, by pretending that it was business as usual and just "another murder" in Whitechapel which had nothing to do with them personally.

A likely story.

Love,

Caz
X

PS If I can't beat the off topic shi*, I may as well add to it.

[Tom_Wescott]

We don't have another elephant in the room here do we?

This time Pink ...

I understand that this upsets some people state side?

Since Don and I are the only Americans presently posting, what is the elephant and who do you assume is upset?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott