Did jack kill liz stride?

[Ben]

You would expect that she would have put her hands out to break her fall. In trying to regain her feet, you would expect her to put her weight on her hands with her palms out.

I wouldn't, CD.

I'd expect her to retain at all costs that which she considered valuable for her services that night (and potentially costly to replace), which could have been achieved very easily by clenching her fists containing cachous as she fended off her attacker. This would be perfectly consistent with BS as Stride's killer. Should you dispute this, for whatever reason, the better argument is that Schwartz made the whole thing up. Better, at least, than arguing that a vastly improbable second attacker arrived on the scene and attacked her in the same location as the first attack from an entirely unrelated first attacker just a few minutes later - a scenario that fits very disastrously indeed with the retained cachous.

All the best,
Ben

[Tom_Wescott]

You guys are all over the place.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[c.d.]

Hello Michael,

You keep trying to get mileage out of the fact that Schwartz did not testify in front of Baxter. The fact is that neither you nor anybody else knows why. Therefore, any possible reason put forth is mere speculation.

c.d.

[c.d.]

The scarf may have been pulled tight when BS man used it to pull her into the yard after his initial attack.

Hello Abby,

The scarf scenario brings up the old cachous problem. First the packet of cachous had to survive Liz being thrown to the ground. You would expect that she would have put her hands out to break her fall. In trying to regain her feet, you would expect her to put her weight on her hands with her palms out. And if she was being choked with a scarf around her neck the natural inclination would be to open your hand and try and get your fingers between scarf and throat to pull it away. Yet, none of these thing dislodged the cachous. It would therefore seem that she did not have the cachous out at the time. It is hard to believe that as she was being led to her death that her last wish was to go through the pearly gates with fresh breath. To me, this indicates that the BS man had left the scene when she took the cachous out.

c.d.

[lynn cates]

scarfing it down

Hello Abby.

"The scarf may have been pulled tight when BS man used it to pull her into the yard after his initial attack."

Would this have cut the scarf? And did Schwartz or anyone testify that BSM pulled her into the yard by the scarf?

LC

[lynn cates]

you get my pint

Hello Christer. Thanks.

"The frayed scarf more or less guarantees that the killer pulled on the scarf as he cut."

Quite.

"You are making a good point here, Lynn."

Why, thanks mate.

"Personally, I think she was cut on her way down, or as she hit the ground, whilst the killer was still choking her by pulling the scarf."

Bingo! Come see me at the "Dog and Duck" and your next pint is on me.

Cheers.
LC

[Abby Normal]

The scarf may have been pulled tight when BS man used it to pull her into the yard after his initial attack.

[Fisherman]

Hi again Fisherman

I'm pretty sure that whoever accompanied Annie Chapman to the backyard of 29 Hanbury Street was fully aware of the dangers involved.

Regards

Observer

I have that exact same feeling, Observer - but I would not use the word "sure" to describe it. I have noticed that whenever I do, somebody is upset by it.

The best,
Fisherman

[Observer]

Sheep ticks

[Observer]

This is good stuff altogether, Observer. I think you are spot on here, with a very small exception: since we donīt know who the killer was (well ...), we must open up for the possibility that the killer was not aware that he could be interrupted. A looney, that is. Or Iss.

Still think you are right here too, though.

The best,
Fisherman

Hi again Fisherman

I'm pretty sure that whoever accompanied Annie Chapman to the backyard of 29 Hanbury Street was fully aware of the dangers involved.

Regards

Observer

[Observer]

The uterus had to be intact, with all of its appendages, for Baxter's theory to work. It would be no use as a specimen otherwise. Kate Eddowes' cervix was left behind, meaning that her killer did not have a particular 'design' in extracting organs for that purpose... which means his already controversial theory was a wash... unless he could suggest that the women were killed by different hands and find some excuse for it.

Hi Hunter

I forget how we drifted onto Baxter's Uteri theory, but let us put that to one side for a moment.

My initial post was in agreement with Baxter's observation that whoever killed Stride showed the same entrapment, the same skill in which the injury had been inflicted so as to cause instant death, and prevent blood from soiling his person. The same daring defiance of immediate detection, as in the murders of Nichols, and Chapman.

As far as I can see , these same methods were employed in the killing of Catherine Eddowes. Does it matter whether Baxter considered Eddowes the work of an imitator?

As I said, I'm sure that if he were asked whether Eddowes murderer employed the same tactics of entrapment, the swift subduing, the throat cutting whilst in the prone position so as to avoid being soiled with blood, the same daring defiance of immediate detection, then I reasonably sure he would have answered in the affirmative.

Regards

Observer

[Fisherman]

...IF he cut whilst pulling on the scarf, the knife frayed the edge of the scarf.
Cheers.
LC

The frayed scarf more or less guarantees that the killer pulled on the scarf as he cut. You are making a good point here, Lynn. Personally, I think she was cut on her way down, or as she hit the ground, whilst the killer was still choking her by pullling the scarf.

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Hi Fisherman,

I'd concede that there is a possibility that the back streets were pretty desolate at 3:30 a.m. however, from Nichols inquest.


"The Coroner: Whitechapel-road is busy in the early morning, I believe. Could anybody have escaped that way?
Witness: Oh yes, sir. I saw a number of women in the main road going home. At that time any one could have got away."

I have found similar quotes regarding Commercial Street, Commercial Road, and other major Streets. The point is those people had to enter those streets from the lesser side streets. Not all of them inhabited the major streets.

However

Regardless of the time of day. Was there a threat that the murderer could be interrupted mid murder? Absolutely. Was the murderer aware that he could be interrupted mid murder. Absolutely. More so (due to the earlier hour) during the Stride murder. It need not necessarily have been Deimshutz that prompted Stride's killer to abort the mutilation. Then again, we must ask ourselves, was mutilation on the mind of the murderer as he slit Liz Stride's throat?

Regards

Observer

This is good stuff altogether, Observer. I think you are spot on here, with a very small exception: since we donīt know who the killer was (well ...), we must open up for the possibility that the killer was not aware that he could be interrupted. A looney, that is. Or Iss.

Still think you are right here too, though.

The best,
Fisherman

[Hunter]

Oh the uterus gathering theory. I've never understood this. Eddowes killer took her kidney as well as her uterus. This fact shatters Baxters uterus gathering theory? Can't see how.

The uterus had to be intact, with all of its appendages, for Baxter's theory to work. It would be no use as a specimen otherwise. Kate Eddowes' cervix was left behind, meaning that her killer did not have a particular 'design' in extracting organs for that purpose... which means his already controversial theory was a wash... unless he could suggest that the women were killed by different hands and find some excuse for it.

[The Good Michael]

Sorry, I should have used my loaf and said cereal killing.

Surreal killing's more like it here.

Mike