Did jack kill liz stride?

[Natalie Severn]

Thankyou for your nice words dear Sox-much appreciated.It so happens that I have come to almost the very same conclusions as you---I think it very likely the murder of Polly was interrupted because there were police on beats at either end of the street as well as a night watchman further up.He was so lucky in every case not to get caught.
Nite

[Natalie Severn]

The source, not the statement.

Cheers Nats

Cheers Mike- ----and a Happy New Year!

[perrymason]

Cheers Mike- ----and a Happy New Year!

You too sweet lady....all the best for 2010.

My best regards as always


ps...nice thinking on Polly's murder, interruption does have a place in a Canonical murder I think....but just one.

[corey123]

Hello Mike,Hunter,Chad,Gareth,

I really am Iffy on Strides murder. Mike is right, theres no evidence that the killer had Mutilation in mind. And Sam, your right, there were other murders with the same Victimology, but Stride was a good fit and if it were a modern day spree still under governmental investigation the Victimology would be looked at, and any murder within that bracket would be looked at.

If fits the Victimology and the Geographicle profile. But theres no evidence, or not enough evidence to say it was OR was'nt Jack the Ripper.

[Sam Flynn]

its still not a place swarming with "East End geezers" ready to murder if crossed by one of them after having too much to drink.

I alluded to assault and assaults escalating into manslaughter, too - and I certainly made no reference to "readiness" for murder. Furthermore, I did not say that the area was "swarming" with rough geezers, either. It is a fact, however, that Late Victorian slum areas had more than their fair share of rough geezers, and it is also a fact that Jack the Ripper did NOT have a monopoly on misogynistic violence in the East End of 1888... nor before and after it, for that matter.

[Tom_Wescott]

Soliciting and Drinking

It's rare I say this, but I agree with AP in that I can't accept that Stride had not been drinking that evening. As AP pointed out, we know that Stride and her friend Catherine Tanner went to the Queens Head pub at 6:30pm on the day of her murder. I personally believe Best and Gardner did see Stride, which means we find her in the Bricklayer's Arms around 11pm. We next see her 45 minutes later with a different man outside the George IV. The next time we see her she's outside the Berner Street club at 12:35am. In short, she's outside of different clubs and bars with different men all night long.

She was soliciting and she was drinking.

Also, Dr. Phillips only tested her for 'malt liquor'. Why this is I don't pretend to know, but if she drank liquor that wasn't malted, that would explain the discrepancy.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

The Scarf

I agree with Michael that the tightening of her scarf had to have been done by her killer. Even if she'd had only a minute between two seperate attacks, she would surely have used that time to loosen her scarf. Michael seems to agree with Dr. Blackwell's scenario, which is perfectly reasonable. But since Stride was laid down to where her neck laid over the jagged stones of the makeshift gutter, it's equally possible the killer used the scarf to raise her head up enough to allow his knife room to maneuver under her. The presence of these stones may account for why the wound isn't as deep as the other victims.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[perrymason]

I agree with Michael that the tightening of her scarf had to have been done by her killer. Even if she'd had only a minute between two seperate attacks, she would surely have used that time to loosen her scarf. Michael seems to agree with Dr. Blackwell's scenario, which is perfectly reasonable. But since Stride was laid down to where her neck laid over the jagged stones of the makeshift gutter, it's equally possible the killer used the scarf to raise her head up enough to allow his knife room to maneuver under her. The presence of these stones may account for why the wound isn't as deep as the other victims.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Im pleased you agree that Im possibly right......however I feel that no alcohol found in her system needs no further speculation......like the speculation that a woman dressed nicely, with mints in her hand and flowers on her jacket and announced intentions that she would not be staying where she normally does at night, despite having the doss before leaving the lodging house, ...was actually soliciting.

Best regards

[DVV]

Of course she was soliciting.
Now we have come to defend good common sense re-producing (well known, but apparently forgotten) evidences.

Amitiés all
David

[Tom_Wescott]

Mike,

As I mentioned in my last post, Stride was tested for the presence of 'malt liquor'. However, Stride seems to have been consorting with better-than-average class men for the area. She was also an alcoholic with money in her pocket. You can believe she was not drinking, but I'll have to sit back on that one.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Natalie Severn]

Mike,
Liz was up before the beak regularly due for D & D. Also,I would guess she picked up that flower from a client who may have been wearing it .It was very fashionable for Victorian men to sport a carnation or rose in their buttonholes at this time and I dont think she left her digs wearing that flower.

[perrymason]

It is apparent that if she drank she did not drink beer,... or enough to have lasted in her system after she had died.

Since beer was the cheapest "liquor", I think she would have need more that the 6d she left the lodging house with if she drank stronger alcohol.

As to the soliciting....Id prefer to have some evidence that contrasts with the apparent "all night-date night" she seems to have planned and dressed for...again,....before even leaving the lodging house.

You might know the answer to this Tom....Wess is reported to have been seen standing next to Dr Phillips while the yard investigation was taking places....by PC Lamb. Since he says he went home around 12:15am,....are you aware of anyone that was sent for him after the murder was discovered?

Best regards

[c.d.]

I think the whole soliciting question needs some perspective. It makes no sense to think of Liz's occupation as comparable to working in a shop. In order to work in a shop she has to be physically present in that shop. She has no such requirement with regards to soliciting. She carries her place of "business" with her. Consider that she is stopping and talking to men as they walk by. Ok, we would say she is actively soliciting. But what if business is slow and she decides to duck into a pub for a drink. Is she still soliciting or is she not soliciting now? If she is approached by a former customer is that soliciting? What if someone assumes she is soliciting and approaches her? Is that soliciting? What if her date or her plans for the evening fell through? Would there be any reason why she couldn't start soliciting then? What if it is her original intention to take a night off but she gets a good offer for her services? Can she change her mind? Again, she is not a shop girl who has to be physically present at her place of employment. It would seem that the choice to solicit or not solicit is entirely up to her and she can switch back and forth between those two modes as she chooses.

c.d.

[Natalie Severn]

I alluded to assault and assaults escalating into manslaughter, too - and I certainly made no reference to "readiness" for murder. Furthermore, I did not say that the area was "swarming" with rough geezers, either. It is a fact, however, that Late Victorian slum areas had more than their fair share of rough geezers, and it is also a fact that Jack the Ripper did NOT have a monopoly on misogynistic violence in the East End of 1888... nor before and after it, for that matter.

Oh do give over Sam.So was there mysogynistic violence in the rest of London and in outer London and all over England ,Ireland ,Scotland and Wales and in all areas of life for goodness sake.Think of the mysogony of some of the senior police like Robert Anderson,particularly with regards to homeless women!."If they are out on the streets after midnight [trying to get the fourpence needed for bed for the night]" Dont protect them" Anderson warned his men! What sort of a brutal statement is that?

[perrymason]

I think the whole soliciting question needs some perspective. It makes no sense to think of Liz's occupation as comparable to working in a shop. In order to work in a shop she has to be physically present in that shop. She has no such requirement with regards to soliciting. She carries her place of "business" with her. Consider that she is stopping and talking to men as they walk by. Ok, we would say she is actively soliciting. But what if business is slow and she decides to duck into a pub for a drink. Is she still soliciting or is she not soliciting now? If she is approached by a former customer is that soliciting? What if someone assumes she is soliciting and approaches her? Is that soliciting? What if her date or her plans for the evening fell through? Would there be any reason why she couldn't start soliciting then? What if it is her original intention to take a night off but she gets a good offer for her services? Can she change her mind? Again, she is not a shop girl who has to be physically present at her place of employment. It would seem that the choice to solicit or not solicit is entirely up to her and she can switch back and forth between those two modes as she chooses.

c.d.

Using that argument any woman who has ever dated a man can be accused of dating any man she talks to.

Best regards