Escape Routes From Dutfield's Yard: Pall Mall Gazette

[lynn cates]

poker faced

Hello Archaic.

"the killer must have been in a very frustrated, angry and amped-up state with his adrenalin pumping after almost being caught red-handed murdering Liz."

Possibly. But not necessarily.

"This is especially true if he had intended to do even worse things to her and been thwarted."

Yes. IF that were his game.


"As a result of simple physiological processes he might have been a bit red in the face, perspiring, breathless, jittery, tense, etc."

Again, quite possible. But there are a lot of cool customers out there. Poker faced.

The best.
LC

[Archaic]

Hi, Lynn.

I think the killer was very, very good at deception, but I still think the simplest explanation is that he escaped via the front gate when he had the chance.

I believe he also killed Catherine Eddowes, and that he was well on his way towards Mitre Square while Dutfield's Yard was still in confusion.

I see him as a sexual psychopath; do you envision him as a professional assassin?

Best regards, Archaic

[Monty]

Rob,

Anyone would think these escape routes have been examined before.

What the frig do you do?

Monty

[lynn cates]

jigsaw puzzle

Hello Archaic.

"I see him as a sexual psychopath; do you envision him as a professional assassin?"

Well, he could have been one, the other, both, or neither.

If he were the latter, perhaps terrorism is his game? Perhaps some political cause?

"Psychopath" is an older term which, if I recall properly, has been replaced by "sociopath."

There is much to suggest this, but first I need to know who were his victims, who were not. I suppose many are tired of Mike's and my harping on this, but I cannot solve a jigsaw puzzle until I have all and only the proper pieces. I think many will admit that, what counted hitherto as the proper pieces, just do NOT fit.

The best.
LC

[Howard Brown]

Briefly...If you personally believe that the arrival of Diemshutz was the reason the killer left the scene, then you have a few options to choose from in regard to the subsequent series of events as to the flight of the killer.

If you don't...and you take into consideration the killer was disturbed by someone else or something else prior to Diemshutz....then there are less options to choose from or rather, required. He just went out the way he came in.

Likewise, there is only the speculation, not fact, that the killers blood and adrenaline levels were up as there is no proof that he was almost caught red handed.

If something or someone from a short distance away... had caused him to stop before he started to do to Stride what he had done to say, Chapman, he had sufficient time to collect himself and calmly walk down the road to the next item on his agenda....that is, if you believe he killed both women.

Its when we assume that Diemshutz was the only reason for his flight that all the discussion as to what he did or might have done materializes.

[lynn cates]

branching forks

Hello Howard.

"Its when we assume that Diemshutz was the only reason for his flight that all the discussion as to what he did or might have done materializes."

PRECISELY! And there are many branching forks in the logic before this; and, in the case of the other C5; and, the non-C's; and, the motives; and, and, and.

One can sit down and literally concoct 100 different scenarios--mixed and matched from various suspects, witnesses and, yes, even victims--and all more or less internally consistent.

The best.
LC

[perrymason]

Its when we assume that Diemshutz was the only reason for his flight that all the discussion as to what he did or might have done materializes.

Hello my friend,

The thing is that its not a "reason" that has been concocted in the years that have elapsed since the crimes, it is in fact integral to the arguments put forward by the contemporary police themselves. Statements were made that Diemshutz MUST have interrupted the killer....and that is a suggestion without any merit found in the physical evidence.

Best regards as always.

[Rob Clack]

Rob,

Anyone would think these escape routes have been examined before.

What the frig do you do?

Monty

Move onto other things

Rob

[Tom_Wescott]

I'm amazed this thread has reached three pages. The article doesn't even mention numerous escape routes from the yard. It simply says the killer could have scaled a fence. The 'numerous escapes' refer to Berner Street itself, with it's many byways. I think even Perry Mason and I could agree that the killer came and left through the gateway.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Archaic]

Hi, Monty and Rob; I have a question for you.

Your comments seem to imply that because you two have "examined the escape routes before", you feel that the rest of us shouldn't discuss a topic which interests us.

Is that correct?

Thanks and best regards, Archaic

[Rob Clack]

Hi, Monty and Rob; I have a question for you.

Your comments seem to imply that because you two have "examined the escape routes before", you feel that the rest of us shouldn't discuss a topic which interests us.

Is that correct?

Thanks and best regards, Archaic

Well, me and Neil haven't implied what people can or can't discuss. People are free to discuss what they like but the original question in this thread was whether or not there was other escape routes out of Dutfield's Yard. The answer is there isn't.

Rob

[Archaic]

Hi, Rob.

The original issue of the thread concerns the fact that an 1890 Pall Mall Gazette article states:

"And, even should, by the most remote possibility, the murderer be disturbed by anybody opening the gate from the street entrance,
he is by no means caught in a trap, for there are plenty of backyards that can be scaled, and a great many courts and passages,
leading to Berner and other streets, to be easily reached."

I don't know if the Pall Mall Gazette is correct or incorrect, if they actually went to Dutfield's Yard and tried to find alternate exit routes, or even if they made it all up just for the hell of it on a slow day, but they are one of the more respected newspapers of the time and their article clearly states that there were alternative routes out of the yard.

Our theories concerning the murder of Liz Stride are in large part based upon what we know, or think we know, about Dutfield's Yard.
We have Goad maps, but we don't have any photographs showing details of the interior yard.

I think the Gazette article raises questions that at least worth discussing rather than dismissing out of hand.

Best regards, Archaic

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Archaic,

There's nothing at all wrong with discussing this. But unless you feel that scaling rather high walls and fences was a viable escape route from the yard, then we're left with only the gateway as an escape method. Obviously the killer couldn't have gone through the kitchen door and out the front door. It is true that there were lots of little alleys leading out of Berner Street, but the Ripper would have first had to get to Berner Street, and his only method of doing that was back the way he came - through the gateway.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Archaic]

Hi, Tom.

I agree that the killer is most likely to have left via the front gate. I also think he probably left early on. In my opinion the longer he stayed the dicier his situation got, and he had to have known there were a large number of men inside the club who would be leaving when their meeting ended.

But I welcome the opinions of others; that's why I started this thread in the first place.

It's perfectly fine with me if others feel the killer might have exited via the club-house; I respect their opinions and I'm willing to give serious consideration to their ideas and conjectures.
As I said earlier, my personal view is that exiting via the clubhouse is the diciest & most dangerous route of all, but I have to acknowledge that it is still physically possible that he escaped via the club, and thus deserves to be taken seriously.

The way I see it, we are all in the same boat: none of us can say for a fact that we know exactly what the killer did; we are all thinking out loud, examining the historical record, exchanging ideas and speculating. I see it as a positive cooperative effort.

I'm not afraid of new information that appears to challenge what I think I already "know"; I realize that the state of my knowledge is constantly evolving, so I try hard to keep an open mind.
It doesn't mean that I have to agree with the views of any one else or that they have to agree with mine; I think an examination of all the facts and the free and open exchange of ideas is what's so valuable.

That being so, > I'm curious whether you or anybody else here have any thoughts as to why the Pall Mall Gazette would make these statements about alternative escape routes that you feel are not grounded in fact?

We all know that news articles are often riddled with errors, but from the very vivid way the writer describes opening the gate into the darkness of the yard, it at least sounds as if the writer made an actual visit.

It would be interesting to compare the statements of the various contemporary sources regarding this issue and see if anyone went into greater detail -or better yet, if different people who were physically fit and highly motivated actually tried to exit Dutfield's via the backyard just to see if it could be done.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the issue here isn't so much for each of us to argue what we currently believe the killer did that night,
it's more an exploration of the full range of possibilities that were open to him- including the more dangerous, physically difficult,
and problematic ones.

Thanks and best regards, Archaic

[Tom_Wescott]

Archaic,

Technically speaking, the Pall Mall Gazette was not wrong. Walls could have been scaled. One could say that's an 'alternative method' of escape, but hardly a viable one, and certainly not supported by any evidence.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott