Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Did jack kill liz stride?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 149
         
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 8 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 28 68 118 149 template Next
  • #256
    Originally posted by Sox View Post

    Well I can tell you one thing for certain, removing a head, using only a knife, requires a degree of skill. No knife, no matter how sharp it is, will cut through bone, you have to find a joint, and even then it is very difficult. For the first two years of my working life I was apprenticed in a Butchers, old style, in an open air market in Liverpool. I think that trying to take off the head became a part of his ritual....maybe that failure resulted in the damage to Kate & Marys faces.

    .
    Sox,

    I once believed that Jack tried to remove the head.

    I no longer believe so for if he wanted to decapitate them he would have.

    He only cut once, no sawing action.
    Washington Irving:

    "To a homeless man, who has no spot on this wide world which he can truly call his own, there is a momentary feeling of something like independence and territorial consequence, when, after a weary day's travel, he kicks off his boots, thrusts his feet into slippers, and stretches himself before an inn fire. Let the world without go as it may; let kingdoms rise and fall, so long as he has the wherewithal to pay his bills, he is, for the time being, the very monarch of all he surveys. The arm chair in his throne; the poker his sceptre, and the little parlour of some twelve feet square, his undisputed empire. "

    Stratford-on-Avon

    Comment

    • #257
      separation

      Hello Corey. You see, you are presupposing something. Who is "it"? Jack?

      The Fenians/Socialists are involved, to my mind ONLY in C3-C5. That's why I insist on separating canonicals. It's entirely possible that some crazed sex killer (since you like that scenario) killed Polly and Annie. Plenty of suspects. Choose whomever you like. He was caught and put away. SY would likely not even know that they had gotten him. They might still think a killer is on the loose.

      But this says NOTHING about C3-C5, which is a whole, different game.

      The best.
      LC

      Comment

      • #258
        Hi Lynn,

        Chapman and Kelly were ripped up in the same distinctive manner.

        Amitiés,
        David

        Comment

        • #259
          thanks

          Hello DVV. Thanks.

          At the end of the day, I think you will be pleased at my point of view, for I think there is a good bit of evidence that places Fleming as the killer of C5 and possibly C4.

          Have faith.

          The best.
          LC

          Comment

          • #260
            Originally posted by Sox View Post

            About the scarf.........''what we have is a woman that was choked using her own scarf and had her throat cut by the assailant as she fell on her side''.....sorry Michael but we really have nothing of the kind. There is nothing in the post mortem to suggest she was strangled & if we believe Schwartz then her earlier assailant could have 'tried to pull the woman into the street' by her scarf no?
            I cant believe I have to address a counter argument that could have been prevented by reading Inquest transcripts....as I suggested in the first place...

            From Blackwell...."The deceased had round her neck a check silk scarf, the bow of which was turned to the left and pulled very tight. In the neck there was a long incision which exactly corresponded with the lower border of the scarf. The border was slightly frayed, as if by a sharp knife. The incision in the neck commenced on the left side, 2 inches below the angle of the jaw, and almost in a direct line with it, nearly severing the vessels on that side, cutting the windpipe completely in two, and terminating on the opposite side 1 inch below the angle of the right jaw, but without severing the vessels on that side."

            and Blackwell again...

            "I formed the opinion that the murderer probably caught hold of the silk scarf, which was tight and knotted, and pulled the deceased backwards, cutting her throat in that way. The throat might have been cut as she was falling, or when she was on the ground. The blood would have spurted about if the act had been committed while she was standing up. "

            By putting 1 and 2 together you should see that by grabbing a scarf and twisting it from behind the killer "chokes" the victim, its not rocket science.

            You can add that Phillips also saw no similarity with the skill and knowledge he observed in the first 2 murders.

            There is no debate...she was grabbed by her scarf, it was twisted....which closes her airway....just like "choking".

            Best regards

            Comment

            • #261
              Mike,

              Sorry, but in the inquest I dont see where it actualy says she was choked, your arguements are based on your opinions. Just because a scarf was tight doesnt mean she was choked first.

              again, good try.
              Washington Irving:

              "To a homeless man, who has no spot on this wide world which he can truly call his own, there is a momentary feeling of something like independence and territorial consequence, when, after a weary day's travel, he kicks off his boots, thrusts his feet into slippers, and stretches himself before an inn fire. Let the world without go as it may; let kingdoms rise and fall, so long as he has the wherewithal to pay his bills, he is, for the time being, the very monarch of all he surveys. The arm chair in his throne; the poker his sceptre, and the little parlour of some twelve feet square, his undisputed empire. "

              Stratford-on-Avon

              Comment

              • #262
                Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
                Hello DVV. Thanks.

                At the end of the day, I think you will be pleased at my point of view, for I think there is a good bit of evidence that places Fleming as the killer of C5 and possibly C4.

                Have faith.

                The best.
                LC

                Hi Lynn,

                stop teasing.
                Can't wait longer.
                Can't believe C4 and C5 have been killed by the same hand.
                That will be a revelation - let alone the possible implication of bad man Joe.

                Amitiés,
                David

                Comment

                • #263
                  Hello David,

                  You have yet to tell me your Flemmings theory and your victim count.
                  Washington Irving:

                  "To a homeless man, who has no spot on this wide world which he can truly call his own, there is a momentary feeling of something like independence and territorial consequence, when, after a weary day's travel, he kicks off his boots, thrusts his feet into slippers, and stretches himself before an inn fire. Let the world without go as it may; let kingdoms rise and fall, so long as he has the wherewithal to pay his bills, he is, for the time being, the very monarch of all he surveys. The arm chair in his throne; the poker his sceptre, and the little parlour of some twelve feet square, his undisputed empire. "

                  Stratford-on-Avon

                  Comment

                  • #264
                    slow and steady

                    Hello DVV. No teasing. Fleming could have been just the man to have done such a job. (Notice I say, job.)

                    Of course, the sources must be referenced, etc. Slow and steady . . . as they say.

                    The best.
                    LC

                    Comment

                    • #265
                      Originally posted by corey123 View Post
                      Mike,

                      Sorry, but in the inquest I dont see where it actualy says she was choked, your arguements are based on your opinions. Just because a scarf was tight doesnt mean she was choked first.

                      again, good try.
                      Put a scarf around your neck and have someone twist it tightly from behind you and pull on it....if youre not choking at that point you win your argument.

                      Best regards

                      Comment

                      • #266
                        Originally posted by corey123 View Post
                        Hello David,

                        You have yet to tell me your Flemmings theory and your victim count.
                        Hi Corey,

                        Phil has wisely opened a thread who imo should be (partly) Fleming-related ("The signatures...a reason ?").

                        Amitiés,
                        David

                        Comment

                        • #267
                          I may choke but not to death, The scarf was pulled, though how tight is never said so we cannot say she was sufficated.
                          END OF STORY
                          Washington Irving:

                          "To a homeless man, who has no spot on this wide world which he can truly call his own, there is a momentary feeling of something like independence and territorial consequence, when, after a weary day's travel, he kicks off his boots, thrusts his feet into slippers, and stretches himself before an inn fire. Let the world without go as it may; let kingdoms rise and fall, so long as he has the wherewithal to pay his bills, he is, for the time being, the very monarch of all he surveys. The arm chair in his throne; the poker his sceptre, and the little parlour of some twelve feet square, his undisputed empire. "

                          Stratford-on-Avon

                          Comment

                          • #268
                            David,

                            I have seen it, about hutchinsons signiture.

                            Yes please do tell us whats your theory about Flemmings.
                            Washington Irving:

                            "To a homeless man, who has no spot on this wide world which he can truly call his own, there is a momentary feeling of something like independence and territorial consequence, when, after a weary day's travel, he kicks off his boots, thrusts his feet into slippers, and stretches himself before an inn fire. Let the world without go as it may; let kingdoms rise and fall, so long as he has the wherewithal to pay his bills, he is, for the time being, the very monarch of all he surveys. The arm chair in his throne; the poker his sceptre, and the little parlour of some twelve feet square, his undisputed empire. "

                            Stratford-on-Avon

                            Comment

                            • #269
                              doctors' testimony

                              Hi everyone,

                              Someone early in this thread suggested that it might not need to be started but it took on wings anyway, didn't it?

                              I will not direct quote here because the testimony is easy to find but it might be noted that Phillips and Blackwell initially had different theories on how Liz was overpowered- Blackwell believing that her scarf was grabbed and Phillips thought her shoulders were grabbed - so take your pick. Just like we are today, they seemed to be confused about the cachous.

                              I don't believe either Dr. implyed that she was choked- at least like the previous 3 victims- but if it was used to pull her back she probably was unable to scream . I think Phillips thought that the scarf may have been pulled after she was on the ground to gain access to the throat. Either way she probably was unable to breath or cry out. They both agreed that it was the cut, not asphixiation, that caused death.

                              The problem with Liz's case is we have conflicting testimonies of witnesses as far as who she was seen with, timings, and method of attack- which unsolved cases usually have. Anyone can pick what they want, discard others and come to their own conclusions.

                              One thing to consider is that she had a little mud on the right side of her jacket and alot on the left and it was matted in her hair. As I've stated before. I think not being intoxicated as the other canonicals were may have meant that she proved to be a handful for her murderer( whoever he was).

                              Best Wishes,
                              Hunter
                              Best Wishes,
                              Hunter
                              ____________________________________________

                              When evidence is not to be had, theories abound. Even the most plausible of them do not carry conviction- London Times Nov. 10.1888

                              Comment

                              • #270
                                2 seconds

                                Hello Hunter.

                                "They both agreed that it was the cut, not asph[y]xiation, that caused death."

                                I think everyone agrees to this. You cannot kill by strangling with a 2 second procedure. Of course, her air would be shut off for a second or two.

                                The best.
                                LC

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 8 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 28 68 118 149 template Next
                                Working...
                                X