Did jack kill liz stride?

[c.d.]

Hello Lynn,

Well doesn't it seem logical that if the police concluded that it was an out and out lie that they would have looked to the club itself as the source?

c.d.

[Sam Flynn]

I wonder what the perception of all of these murders and who committed them would be if the name Jack the Ripper had not been invented

Even without the nickname, I think we'd still perceive a synergy between the Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes murders, with Kelly's inclusion in the series possibly being disputed. Were it not for the co-incidence of the Eddowes and Stride murders, the latter would probably be grouped with Coles inter alia as a distinct outsider.

[Sam Flynn]

The medical evidence concludes that Nichols and Chapman were robbed prior to murder

Chapman, perhaps... even there it's speculative. As for the others, I can't recall much to suggest that robbery actually took place. Even if it had, then any conclusions should be tempered by the reality of the economic climate at that time and place. Robbery, with or without violence, was hardly rare.

[lynn cates]

evidence

Hello CD. Thanks.

I prefer their original language, "We need more evidence." We may take that any way we like.

Abberline tried to pull some information from Schwartz, but he was uncertain.

Cheers.
LC

[DRoy]

Hi DRoy. Schwartz was kept 'under wraps', so to speak, as he was considered a prime witness. He was asked not to speak to the press and the police were not to make him known to the press.

Had Schwartz been discredited by this late date, somehow escaping Swanson's attention, then Abberline (who would most certainly have known) would have said so at this time.

Tom,

Thanks for the reply.

But just to be clear, there is nothing new then on Schwartz and we still don't know why he didn't attend the inquest? You are assuming they wanted to hide him yet he is not known to ever be used as a witness nor has his name been mentioned since Swanson's report? Okay.

In regards to someone telling Swanson that he made a boo boo by reporting old news, I can see that happening and then Schwartz never being talked about again. Sound familiar? Because that's what has happened!

The police must have learned something about Schwartz's statement that wasn't correct (time, translation, victim, etc) which is why he didn't attend the inquest.

Cheers
DRoy

[Tom_Wescott]

Hello Tom.

"After all, you don't fight an armed man who tells you he won't hurt you if you stay silent. You do as he says."

Unless you involuntarily lose your composure and scream.

Cheers.
LC

Which apparently didn't happen in these cases.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Tom, when you remove your own ring you twist & turn it so as not to injure yourself.

"...There was an abrasion over the bend of the first joint of the ring finger,..."
Thats the medical evidence.

An abrasion is the result of someone else not being so thoughtful, the rings were removed by someone else.

You've been on the scene a long time. Didn't you read what I wrote about all this in Ripper Notes? That very abrasion proves my point correct.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Hello Tom!
Stride does not need to be wet though, and the rain does not need to be coming down, it needs to be wet on the surface. Puddles, mud, that sort of area. I see what you are saying about a robbery, it is just an option to a scenario that can not go anywhere without knowing the type of cachous that she was holding. If he cared about the knife, he would wipe the blade after the cut, if he didn't care for it, why risk carrying it around after a kill? It seems feasible to me, if Schwartz is telling the truth. It does not matter though since the broad term of cachous could include types that do not dissolve on the tongue.

Some of the cachous hit the ground and they did not dissolve. Abraham Heshburg was on the scene when Johnston opened her hand. He saw the cachous when the tissue was opened and estimated 6 or 7. Subsequently some spilled to the ground. They did not dissolve. They were plain ordinary cachous. Sweet meats.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Sam Flynn]

You've been on the scene a long time. Didn't you read what I wrote about all this in Ripper Notes? That very abrasion proves my point correct.

I tend to agree, Tom, but the possibility remains open that she removed it herself. I've suffered from "chubby finger syndrome" in the past, and have abraded my own knuckle skin whilst taking off a ring.

[Tom_Wescott]

Tom,

Thanks for the reply.

But just to be clear, there is nothing new then on Schwartz and we still don't know why he didn't attend the inquest? You are assuming they wanted to hide him yet he is not known to ever be used as a witness nor has his name been mentioned since Swanson's report? Okay.

In regards to someone telling Swanson that he made a boo boo by reporting old news, I can see that happening and then Schwartz never being talked about again. Sound familiar? Because that's what has happened!

The police must have learned something about Schwartz's statement that wasn't correct (time, translation, victim, etc) which is why he didn't attend the inquest.

Cheers
DRoy

He was not used as a witness to our knowledge. Based on a report, Schwartz may have been named as a suspect by Pipeman. Probably for this reason, there was some early doubt on the part of the police as to Schwartz's statement, but they resolved this by Oct. 19th. Around the time of the inquest the police were arresting men based on Schwartz's statement, so they were taking it very seriously. If, as you say, Schwartz was not at the inquest because the police didn't think him important, then why were they arresting men based on his evidence?

Your post about someone telling Swanson he 'boo-booed' by mentioning Schwartz in his report is not something that happened at all. The subsequent back-and-forth survives and no one tells Swanson anything of the kind. Quite the opposite.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

I tend to agree, Tom, but the possibility remains open that she removed it herself. I've suffered from "chubby finger syndrome" in the past, and have abraded my own knuckle skin whilst taking off a ring.

She may very well have. She was being robbed.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Wickerman]

Robbing a corpse of incidentals just incase they may have some value, or for trophies, is quite a different matter to murdering & mutilating the woman you just robbed.

The former comes under the purview of taking trophies, the latter suggests the victim carried valuables, which is not true.
It also suggests the murder & mutilation were performed in order to cover up a mugging.
Which couldn't be further from the truth.

There is no sense whatsoever in robbing a woman you are about to kill - thats backwards thinking.

The saying adopted by the Highwayman of old was - "your money or your life", not "your money then your life".

The killer took trophies after her death - thats all.

[lynn cates]

prescience

Hello Tom. Thanks.

"Which apparently didn't happen in these cases."

And he knew that in advance?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

rings

Hello Gareth, Tom. I'm good with Annie having the rings wrenched off.

Not sure if we can extrapolate to the others, however.

Cheers.
LC

[Tom_Wescott]

Robbing a corpse of incidentals just incase they may have some value, or for trophies, is quite a different matter to murdering & mutilating the woman you just robbed.

The former comes under the purview of taking trophies, the latter suggests the victim carried valuables, which is not true.
It also suggests the murder & mutilation were performed in order to cover up a mugging.
Which couldn't be further from the truth.

There is no sense whatsoever in robbing a woman you are about to kill - thats backwards thinking.

The saying adopted by the Highwayman of old was - "your money or your life", not "your money then your life".

The killer took trophies after her death - thats all.

You've got it a bit backwards, my friend. Think on it a while.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott