Time of Death Analyzation

[lynn cates]

blunt

Hello Messmates. Have a go at the A-Z, p. 437.

"(iii) Injuries caused by a short, broad, possibly blunt knife . . ."

Begg, Fido, and Skinner said it, I believe it, and that settles it.

Cheers.
LC

[Jon Guy]

Hello there Fisherman!!

Good point regarding Blackwell`s opinion. The tailing off cut and the pulled tight scarf does seem to indicate that she was cut falling. But no arterial spray was found, which would have occurred if she was falling?

Problem - if this was Jack, why did he not turn her on her back before cutting?

He may have rolled them over on the left side when he cut the throat, and then pulled them on their back`s when the blood pressure had dropped.

if he chose to cut although she lay on her left side, very close to the wall, and if he did lift her by the hair, then he was in total control. Then why oh why the tentative, shallow cut? It makes no sense at all.

But it wasn`t a tentative, shallow cut. All the major arteries on the left side had been severed. Blimey, I`ve ended up making a case for our Jack.

[lynn cates]

Coram

Hello Tom. Isn't he actually saying that it is not likely that the Coram knife was the one used, but that such a small, dull bugger is not inconsistent with the wounds inflicted?

The best.
LC

[Tom_Wescott]

I`m not saying this rules out Jack. But it wasn`t the same 6-8 inch blade (plus handle) that took out the C4.

The knife in question was not used to kill any of the C5.

Dr. Phillips is saying that the Coram knife was not the murder weapon. He believes such a large knife would be unlikely because he's assuming Stride was on the ground, on her left side, when the wound was inflicted. This, however, may not have been the case. But what we're discussing here is the sharpness of the knife. The knife that killed Stride was certainly sharp and we have no way of knowing the size of the knife because Stride was not stabbed. All we know is that a sharp knife was used, which is certainly consistent with the other 4 C5 victims.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Fisherman]

Hi Jon!

I think that when Phillips speaks of the position of the body, he has drawn the conclusion that Stride was cut lying down. And indeed, a longbladed knife would have been awkward to use from a position behind/over her, to produce the gash in the neck.
But we must also remember that Blackwell was not in agreement with Philllips, at least not from the outset. For he threw forward the suggestion that she was cut during her fall.
Dave Yost, in his recent book on the Stride slaying, thinks that Blackwell was probably right, and as far as I can see, he may well have a point. It would certainly have been much easier to reach around her neck with the blade if it was done while she was still standing up, or had commenced to fall.

If she was cut lying down, I think we need to accept a scenario where the killer grabs her by the hair and lifts her head from the ground to reach in under her with the knife. Then he cuts, and drops the head back onto the ground.
Problem - if this was Jack, why did he not turn her on her back before cutting? And if he chose to cut although she lay on her left side, very close to the wall, and if he did lift her by the hair, then he was in total control. Then why oh why the tentative, shallow cut? It makes no sense at all.

The best,
Fisherman

[Jon Guy]

Hi Chaps

This is what Phillips said at the Inquest about the size of the knife that killed Stride:

The Coroner: Referring to the large chandlers knife :"Is it such as knife as could have caused the injuries which were inflicted upon the deceased? "

Dr Phillips:"Such a knife could have produced the incision and injuries to the neck, but it is not such a weapon as I should have fixed upon as having caused the injuries in this case; and if my opinion as regards the position of the body is correct, the knife in question would become an improbable instrument as having caused the incision."

I`m not saying this rules out Jack. But it wasn`t the same 6-8 inch blade (plus handle) that took out the C4.

[Fisherman]

"You argue that Liz would have taken out the cachous when she felt at ease like she would have done when discussing things with an aqaintance. But if this is so,this acquaintance went on to cut her throat. Are we to believe that this action came completely out of the blue ... ?"

Yes, c.d - you are. And the very fact that she still held her cachous in her hand bears witness to the viability of such a proposition. Whoever cut her, cut her real quick and caught her by total surprise.

...and no, there is no rule stating that aquaintances must cut at slower paces or inform their victims about the proceedings before they cut away. The fact that she was taken by surprise does not tell us anything about how close she was to her killer, I´m afraid!

The best, c.d!
Fisherman

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Lynn. It's a sad truth, but not all Ripperologists are as humble as myself, AP Wolf, and Perry Mason. I got the first edition of Trevor's book and remember that 80% of it was just reprinting the inquest testimonies already available for free on here. It had one chapter of new material. Perhaps his later editions had more of Trevor's personal observations. But I can assure you he was quite mistaken in suggesting that the knife that killed Stride was dull. It's difficult to take a dull knife and kill a woman with one stroke.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[lynn cates]

ripperologist

Hello Tom. That's just it. I am not arguing ANYTHING. I am merely making an observation.

Are you suggesting that a ripperologist has ego? May it never be! (snicker!)

The best.
LC

[Tom_Wescott]

Lynn,

I have no idea what you're arguing here. I'm sure Trevor is a good guy. A little high on himself for my tastes, but a good guy. I don't care what he says, the knife that killed Stride was not dull. Queen Victoria has nothing to do with it.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[lynn cates]

Queen Victoria

Hello Tom. We mustn't forget: Trevor is perhaps the only author who has followed up on a theory which was possibly first put forward by Queen Victoria herself regarding a tar as suspect.

The best.
LC

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Lynn,

Well, you should know better than that.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[lynn cates]

implications

Hello CD. Good point (sorry for the Flynnism!). He may well have carried 2 knives.

I leave it to your imagination what implications that might have for the Tabram murder.

The best.
LC

[lynn cates]

knives and knives

Hello Tom. Actually, I am well aware of Coram's knife.

To be honest, I am following Trevor Marriott's description after his reading the slightly convoluted descriptions by others.

Cheers.
LC

[Tom_Wescott]

Personally, I don't think Stride was a Ripper victim because location of the killing departed from his usual MO in that he did not take her to a secluded place in the yard and, therefore, deprived himself of the opportunity to mutilate. Also, the yard, to the best of my knowledge, had only one way of escape not counting the club building itself and I think this departs from his MO (Kelly excepted in this case) as well as putting him at great risk of capture.

Dutfield's yard was more in keeping with the Ripper's MO than Millers Court, that's for sure. 29 Hanbury Street also only had one entrance/exit, and in both locations the killer chose to kill his victim right next to the exit to allow for easier escape should the need arise. Obviously this need did not arise in Hanbury Street. Both locations were a yard. In the case of Berner Street, the occupants of the building had not yet gone to bed. In Hanbury Street they were just waking up.

Hello CD. The reports on the other 4 included "long, sharp knife." Liz's was thought to be shorter and duller.

Quite the contrary, Dr. Phillips, et al, felt that Stride's killer used a sharp knife. You're being confused by the knife Thomas Coram found the next day, which was not the murder weapon, but was discussed much at the inquest.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott