Escape Routes From Dutfield's Yard: Pall Mall Gazette

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Greg. I don't believe each murder was committed in exactly the same manner. In some instances there were two seperate wounds inflicted to the throat. One explanation for this could be the first cut was to 'bleed' the victim, as I described before, the second being either pure viciousness or to speed up the bleeding process, which would allow for less blood in the abdominal cavity when he opened them up.

I'm not certain that the Ripper strangled the victims in the standing up position, and I'm not certain that all of them were strangled in any manner.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Rob Clack]

The wounds in the throat started on the left side so it would be very awkward to cut there throats if they were lying on there sides and if he was doing this in Strides case he would be pulling the knife towards himself. It would have been easier to have the victims flat on there backs. Although I am inclined to think in Strides case she was standing up and her throat was cut from behind and then she fell to the ground on her left side.
The only victim that showed signs of strangulation (other than Catherine Mylett) was Annie Chapman.

Rob

[GregBaron]

Subdued.........

Wow Tom, interesting thoughts..........I don't see how he couldn't
have strangled them to get them to the ground without so much as
a whimper or any signs of a struggle. The only other thing I could
think of is if he chloroformed(sp?) them and then laid them down but
I would think this would show up in autopsy? To me they had to be
subdued to quietude before killing. Weren't their tongues hanging out
and faces swollen indicating asphyxiation? How else could it be done?

Greg

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Greg. I'm not saying they weren't strangled. In fact, I'm relatively certain at least a couple were. However, there's not evidence of this in every case. As for chloroform, this leaves distinct traces around the mouth and in the throat. This was looked for in at least the case of Stride and was not found. The doctors had no idea how she was subdued. I think she may have fainted.

The wounds in the throat started on the left side so it would be very awkward to cut there throats if they were lying on there sides and if he was doing this in Strides case he would be pulling the knife towards himself. It would have been easier to have the victims flat on there backs.

Hi Rob. Keep in mind I'm talking about the initial wound. There's no question in the case of Eddowes that after her throat was cut and the arterial spray had lessed that she was turned on her back for further mutilation to the throat and face. You'll remember that the left side of her face was very muddy, and I imagine this was caused when the Ripper pushed down on the right side of her face to leverage her head so he could pull the knife along her throat. In the case of Stride the Ripper used her scarf to pull her head off the rough stones and give his knife room while leveraging her head. This would be why the scarf was tightened the way it was.

Although I am inclined to think in Strides case she was standing up and her throat was cut from behind and then she fell to the ground on her left side.

I'm inclined to disagree with this, because it does not explain the fact that her scarf was pulled tight at the moment the knife was used, and the spray would be instantaneous, yet there is no blood on her or the wall, so I'm inclined to think she was on the ground when she was murdered.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Fisherman]

Rob Clack writes:

"...I am inclined to think in Strides case she was standing up and her throat was cut from behind and then she fell to the ground on her left side."

Iīm almost with you on that one, Rob, but for the detail that if she was cut standing up, I would have expected a jet of blood hitting the ground. And no such jet was reported. That is why I am inclined to believe that she was cut during a fall caused by the killer grabbing her scarf and pulling her off balance.
If we imagine a right-handed killer, then he would have grabbed the scarf with his left hand, holding the knife in his right one, and therefore, reasonably the pulling power would have tended to rotate Strides body to the left. And if she was cut during such a fall, then the first part of her that hit the ground may well have been that jet of blood, forming a pool - on which she subsequently fell. After that, the bloodflow from the wound would simply have added to the stream floating away down the rut.
Most interestingly, though, we may observe the fact that if this all holds true, then she was grabbed by that scarf and pulled backwards at a stage where she was heading for the gates. If the same thing had happened as she was entering the yard, she would have ended up in an exact mirror image of the position in which she was found, that is to say that she would have been lying on her left side, but with her head towards the gates and her feet away from them, facing the southern wall instead of the northern one. And as no commotion was heard and since no signs of a battle were to be found, the conclusion that Stride herself opted for leaving and set out to do so in a calm and collected fashion, cachous in hand, becomes quite a tempting one to my mind.

As for the debated sharpness of the knife, I think that the fraying of the border of the scarf has a lot to say - to produce such a thing with a blunt knife simply cannot be done. And just like Tom says, the character of the wound does not give away any information about whether the blade was pointed or not.

The best,

Fisherman

[Tom_Wescott]

I think that the fraying of the border of the scarf has a lot to say - to produce such a thing with a blunt knife simply cannot be done.

Great point, and one I didn't think to mention, although it was Monty and not Rob who suggested a blunt knife. I don't wish to put Monty on the spot, but as he is such a well-versed and deservedly respected Ripperologist, it just goes to show how ingrained all the Stride myths are if he can be tripped up by them. This is why I publish and post so much on the subject. Eventually I hope to set the record straight. Good to see you around again, Fisherman. Been a long time. I would love to get your feedback on my Exonerating Michael Kidney essay.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Fisherman]

Tom writes:

"I would love to get your feedback on my Exonerating Michael Kidney essay."

You shall have it, Tom. May be a while, though - I need to read it through more thoroughly, and I wonīt get around to doing that for the next two or three weeks.

"Been a long time."

It has. Good to talk to you too, by the way!

The best,

Fisherman

[Monty]

Hold on,

I think there is some confusion over blunted here.

I didnt say it wasnt a sharp knife, Im stating that there is doubt over the tip of the knife, that Phillips testified that there was no evidence supporting a sharp pointed knife.

A contradiction to Browns statement that it "must have been a sharp-pointed knife, and I should say at least 6 in. long" with regards the Eddowes murder, who was killed just under an hour after Strides murder.

Monty

[Rob Clack]

In the case of Stride the Ripper used her scarf to pull her head off the rough stones and give his knife room while leveraging her head. This would be why the scarf was tightened the way it was.

Hi Tom, Doctor Blackwell was of the opinion that the scarf was pulled backwards, which would support my opinion that her throat was cut from behind.

I'm inclined to disagree with this, because it does not explain the fact that her scarf was pulled tight at the moment the knife was used, and the spray would be instantaneous, yet there is no blood on her or the wall, so I'm inclined to think she was on the ground when she was murdered.

Who said the scarf was pulled tight at the moment the knife was used? We don't know exactly how tight it was and Stride could have tied it that way herself. Also if she was facing the wall any arterial spray would have gone to her left missing herslef and the wall.

Rob Clack writes:

"...I am inclined to think in Strides case she was standing up and her throat was cut from behind and then she fell to the ground on her left side."

Iīm almost with you on that one, Rob, but for the detail that if she was cut standing up, I would have expected a jet of blood hitting the ground. And no such jet was reported. That is why I am inclined to believe that she was cut during a fall caused by the killer grabbing her scarf and pulling her off balance.

It's just a thought of mine, but her blood was flowing into the gutter which might disguise any arterial spray. I think it was Doctor Blackwell who said Strides throat could have been cut as she was falling, so what you are saying is also a possibility. I'm no expert on throat cuts and arterial spray so it's just an opinion of mine.

Rob

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Tom, Doctor Blackwell was of the opinion that the scarf was pulled backwards, which would support my opinion that her throat was cut from behind.

I know, but he was asked this opinion before having done an autopsy, or even undressing or cleaning the victim. The fact is that the scarf was pulled tight at the side, not at the front as though the killer had been standing behind her when this occurred.

Who said the scarf was pulled tight at the moment the knife was used? We don't know exactly how tight it was and Stride could have tied it that way herself.

The doctors said it. The knife followed the line of the scarf even nicking it in places, so there's no question it was pulled tight at the moment the knife came across it, and there was no question in the doctors' mind that the killer had pulled it tight. It was obviously too tight for her to have worn it that way.

Also if she was facing the wall any arterial spray would have gone to her left missing herslef and the wall.

Not true. There still would have been a jet on the wall, even if a bit to her left, and blood would have pumped out onto her clothing, keeping in mind the carotid artery was cut but not severed. However, all of the blood was in the gutter under her neck.

I think it was Doctor Blackwell who said Strides throat could have been cut as she was falling.

He did say that, but then we have a killer doing some sort of twisted ballet with Stride, a scarf, and a knife. While possible, it's not plausible. What makes more sense is that the killer had Stride unconscious on the ground and used the scarf to pull her head up in order to fascilitate the use of his knife. That's the only practical reason for tightening her scarf at all and it's the only scenario in which all of the facts fit nicely into place. This holds true regardless of your bewildering ack of faith in my instincts and reasoning abilities.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Fisherman]

Tom W writes:

"The fact is that the scarf was pulled tight at the side, not at the front as though the killer had been standing behind her when this occurred."

Hmm, Tom; this is how it was worded by Blackwell at the inquest:

"The deceased had round her neck a check silk scarf, the bow of which was turned to the left and pulled very tight."

My understanding of this is that there was a bow on the scarf which the killer grabbed by putting his hand over it and round the scarf, the outside of his fist connecting with the back of Strides neck. After that, he pulled the scarf tight by twisting the bow counter-clockwise, to the left, that is.
On what evidence do you ground your wiew that the main pressure was to the side of the neck? Of course, the bow may have been off-centered and more to the left than the right as he grabbed it, but that would only have facilitated his grip if it was done using the left hand, and it would in no way tell us that he was not behind Stride at the time.

"the killer had Stride unconscious on the ground and used the scarf to pull her head up in order to fascilitate the use of his knife. That's the only practical reason for tightening her scarf at all and it's the only scenario in which all of the facts fit nicely into place."

Canīt agree with you there, Tom, since I believe that the scenario I presented is every bit as good as your suggestion in most instances - and better in a few.
In your scenario, you need to have Stride out of action for some significant time before she was cut, and you suggest that she was unconscious before the knife came into action. But how this came about is not easily explained. You suggest that she was given to fits and simply fainted, but that is a bit too convenient to my taste. Moreover, to fit your bill, we need to have a starting stretch where she either accompanies her killer into the yard or is forced by him to go there. In any case, she does so silently enough to stay undetected by the good mrs Diemschitz and any other of the clubbers and residents of the yard, just as her clothing stays untangled with. Then, AFTER these preceedings, she faints at the precise moment when the killer brings his knife out, allowing him the perfect opportunity to make his cut. And she does it in a position where she actually ends up very close to the wall, lying firmly on her left side...? Was she facing the wall as she fainted? It all seems very awkward to me.
Her position is far easier to explain - the way I see it - by a forced fall caused by the killer grabbing her from behind as she is about to exit the yard, turning that bow tightly to the left, sending Stride into a left spin, cutting her in that movement and causing the body to slump down and end up that close to the wall, on her left side. No need for any period of unconsciousness prior to the cutting = one awkward difficulty to explain things eliminated ...

The best,

Fisherman

[Jon Guy]

I know, but he was asked this opinion before having done an autopsy, or even undressing or cleaning the victim.

Not true.

He was asked his opinion at the Inquest on the afternoon of Tues Oct 2nd.

He conducted the post mortem examination on the afternoon of Mon 1st Oct.

[Fisherman]

Rob Clack writes:

"It's just a thought of mine, but her blood was flowing into the gutter which might disguise any arterial spray. I think it was Doctor Blackwell who said Strides throat could have been cut as she was falling, so what you are saying is also a possibility. I'm no expert on throat cuts and arterial spray so it's just an opinion of mine."

I am no expert on the results of throat-cutting either, Rob! But what Phillips said at the inquest was:
"My reason for believing that deceased was injured when on the ground was partly on account of the absence of blood anywhere on the left side of the body and between it and the wall."
By this he would have meant that both sides of the body were searched for blood spray, but none was found. My guess is that the only way in which the bloodflow could have disguised the arterial spray, would be if the opening in the blood vessel was, as she was cut, facing the spot where her neck ended up after her fall. That is why I think that her body was already well on itīs way towards the ground as she was cut, just as I think that the left spin produced by the killer pulling her backwards and to his left (if not, she would have fallen into him) had positioned her in a fashion where the opening of the vessel was directly above and facing the spot in question. Her neck may well have been less than a metre over the ground as the blade cut into the artery, and even closer to the ground when the blood started exiting from the wound.
Just as you say, this was something Blackwell suggested.

The best,
Fisherman

[Hunter]

Phillips suggested she was pulled backwards by the shoulders due to the impressions there that he said he noticed at each examination. Though Blackwell suggested her being pulled back by the scarf and the throat cut while falling, upon his recall at the inquest he conceded that there were bruises on Elizabeth's shoulders.

Its only practical to either cut the throat while the victim is standing or while lying. If the killer put the bruises on Liz's shoulders - one on each side- I doubt he had 3 hands.

[Tom_Wescott]

Fisherman,

All I can say is that your scenario is unworkable. The knot was pulled to the left and pulled tight, which means it must have been pulled from the right side of her body, which is not practical standing up and is impossible from behind, so he must have first laid her down. By necessity, he moved her onto her left side to position himself behind her and to force the blood away from himself. He pulled on the scarf to lift her neck up from the jagged stones to fasciliate his knife. It's that simple. Don't be so damn stubborn.

Jon Guy,

Why do you say that?

Hunter,

Those finger mark bruises over the shoulders, and the solitary bruise on her chest bug me a bit, but of course we can't be 100% certain they were left by her killer. She was, after all, a prostitute who had been with a number of men that evening. However, the Star report of Schwartz's testimony has BS Man grabbing her by the shoulders and throwing her down, and this was reported before it was known about the bruises, so I find that little detail intriguing. Both Blackwell and Phillips offered unlikely and unconvincing scenarios for the murder. In Phillips defense, he was under the wrong impression that the killer had spilled Stride's cachous and from this concluded there was a struggle of some sort. He didn't learn otherwise until it came out at the inquest.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott