Did jack kill liz stride?

[c.d.]

Hi Trevor,

Dutfields Yard may not have been a location that was regularly used by prostitutes but that doesn't mean that it couldn't have been used by Liz on that evening. It had a privy where she could clean up and more importantly (from her perspective and not her killer's) there were people nearby that could be summoned with a scream for help. This point gets overlooked. Liz had to be aware of the previous murders. Why go off somewhere dark and deserted when the deed could be accomplished in a much safer location?

You keep saying that the police suspected the killer of the previous victims but that victim had no name. Again, how do they know that Kidney wasn't the Ripper? You also state that the police would have been aware of the relationship between Kidney and Liz and that it included physical abuse. You build the very obvious case for Kidney being the prime suspect but then go on to say that it appears that Kidney was never questioned about his whereabouts. That simply does not follow unless the police were absolute fools.

Yesterday, where I live, there was a news story about a murder of a woman and her daughter in their apartment. Neighbors called the police after hearing a loud argument (no surprise there). Police are now searching for her ex husband/father of her child. No surprise there either. It is the first place they look. The same would be true in 1888. Human nature doesn't change. When they find him, they will ask him where he was that night just as the police would have asked Kidney.

c.d.

[c.d.]

Tom
As I said in a previous post you are obsessed with Stride with being a JTR victim and that is clouding you ability to assess and evaluate all the facts in an unbiased way. The facts to suggest she wasnt a Ripper victim far outweigh the facts suggesting she was yet you still choose to disregard them

...and are you not equally obsessed with trying to prove that Stride was NOT a Ripper victim? As to the facts outweighing etc., I am assuming you meant to say "in your opinion."

c.d.

[Tom_Wescott]

Oh that Trevor...

Tom
As I said in a previous post you are obsessed with Stride with being a JTR victim and that is clouding you ability to assess and evaluate all the facts in an unbiased way.

Yes, you have said that, but repeating it ad nauseum will not make it any less of a mistake on your part than it already is.

The facts to suggest she wasnt a Ripper victim far outweigh the facts suggesting she was yet you still choose to disregard them

What you call 'facts' are to me poorly thought out ideas drawn from years of misinformation and half-baked theorizing. I don't blame you for chosing to insult me instead of debate me.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Celesta]

Personally , I think that it's EXACTLY the Person who JtR would choose, and that is a prostitute soliciting next to the jewish club.

It was daring, and he did risk being interrupted -and in fact he probably was, causing him to stop before mutilating her.

The club meeting may also have attracted a number of racist thugs to the vicinity, and have caused Schwartz to be chased.

It was probably a good place to pick up a prostitute. There's a thread here somewhere that discusses this. It's kind of old so you'd have to go back aways to find it.

[c.d.]

Hi Tom,

You took my comment that it certainly could have been a domestic out of context. I was simply making a point that it was possible (which it is). But then I immediately followed that by offering evidence to the contrary including Swanson's report. I concluded by saying that I just didn't see it as a domestic.

c.d.

[Trevor Marriott]

...and are you not equally obsessed with trying to prove that Stride was NOT a Ripper victim? As to the facts outweighing etc., I am assuming you meant to say "in your opinion."

c.d.

i am commenting on two diferent posts here

CD I am not obsessed as i have stated the facts to suggest she wasnt a victim far outweigh the facts to suggest she was. It is fact and not my opinion.

Kidney was subsequently found as he appeared at the inquest. Even then he wasnt asked about his wherabouts. The whole case smacks of "amateur night at dixie"

The doctors states that the knife used to kill her was a small knife. Take a look at the mortuary pic of stride you can see the neck wound then take a look at Eddowes neck see the difference

As to going to use the privvy to clean up this is now getting into fantasy world now i dont know where some of you people get these ideas from.

In one breath CD states Kidney didnt kill her then in the next breath the same posters asks the question could Kidney be the Ripper.

The area where she was killed wasnt that secluded only a few steps to the street.

Prostitutes will still continue to take chances to earn money even though a killer may be on the loose. That is also fact !

[c.d.]

i am commenting on two diferent posts here

CD I am not obsessed as i have stated the facts to suggest she wasnt a victim far outweigh the facts to suggest she was. It is fact and not my opinion.

Kidney was subsequently found as he appeared at the inquest. Even then he wasnt asked about his wherabouts. The whole case smacks of "amateur night at dixie"

The doctors states that the knife used to kill her was a small knife. Take a look at the mortuary pic of stride you can see the neck wound then take a look at Eddowes neck see the difference

As to going to use the privvy to clean up this is now getting into fantasy world now i dont know where some of you people get these ideas from.

In one breath CD states Kidney didnt kill her then in the next breath the same posters asks the question could Kidney be the Ripper.

The area where she was killed wasnt that secluded only a few steps to the street.

Prostitutes will still continue to take chances to earn money even though a killer may be on the loose. That is also fact !

Hi Trevor,

Well, if you look at the poll that accompanies this thread you will see that the majority hold a different view of these "facts." Sorry, but call it what you will you are stating your opinion just like everyone else.

How do you know that Kidney was never asked about his whereabouts? Do you not see the non sequitur here? You provide facts which make Kidney the prime suspect but then opine that the police missed these oh so obvious facts.

Yes, women clean up after sex. Trust me on this one. I didn't say she used the privy only that the location held that advantage has she desired to do so.

Again, you misinterpreted what I said. The police did not know that Kidney wasn't the Ripper. How could they? They didn't know who the Ripper was. And neither do we. Kidney might have been the Ripper. We simply don't know. I simply stated that he seems an unlikely candidate.

c.d.

[Tom_Wescott]

Kidney was subsequently found as he appeared at the inquest. Even then he wasnt asked about his wherabouts. The whole case smacks of "amateur night at dixie"

Michael Kidney had most certainly been questioned about his whereabouts, etc. prior to the inquest, as one would rightfully expect.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

The doctors states that the knife used to kill her was a small knife.

This is really getting on my tits. The doctors said absolutelyl no such thing and I think it's becoming quite clear here who is and who isn't obsessed with their pet theories to the point that they'll exclude the facts in order to hold on to them.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[c.d.]

[QUOTE=Tom_Wescott;131105]This is really getting on my tits.

Maybe you can find a privy where you can clean up.

c.d.

[DYLAN]

Trevor.

You keep rattling on that the facts and evidence suggest that Stride was not a Ripper victim.

From where I stand, I think the facts and evidence suggest just the opposite.

You may have served in the police force for some years, but I venture to say from what I've read here, that Tom is a better detective than you are.

DYLAN

[Fleetwood Mac]

A drunken BS.That again is, and can only be,an assumption on the part of Schwartz.He may have noticed some erratic style of walking,but does that neccessarily and automatically prove the man was drunk?

Would certainly agree with this. "Drunk" is relative.....and aggression could have been assumed to be the cause of drink as a matter of course in those days....the two going hand in hand.

Easy to make a mistake.

Am I the only one who found it strange that Cox followed the man and Mary up Millers Court but didn't notice she was drunk until she spoke?.......could easily have made a mistake because drunk people don't tend to walk particularly well.....and there's a fair chance a drunk person would have betrayed her state of mind by stumbling around.

It certainly does not prove the man was drunk.....just as Cox's statement does not prove MJK was drunk.

And this is the thing that makes so many contrasting alternatives so plausible and so easy to pull holes in witness's/suspect's statements......it is easy for people to make a mistake in poor light.......and in drink themselves.....and making judgement calls on other people's behaviour....based on what?....how they would behave? their own experiences.....and that really is the case...we only know of the world that which we've experienced.

[Fleetwood Mac]

A general comment here.....

There's talk here of what JTR would have done....would have found a quiet spot etc....this doesn't account for the murdered woman's actions....JTR wasn't in control of everything. It stands to reason that things wouldn't have always gone according to plan.....it's possible that something went awry along the way.

And the other point is this: why would another killer kill in such a place and take such a risk any more than JTR would? Both faced the same penalty. In some respects you could argue JTR was more likely to take such a risk....as killing for him would have been up there on his agenda of things to do and so more of an urge....whereas a domestic....well....he would have had the luxury of picking and choosing a location affording a minimum amount of risk.

[Hunter]

Just one quick point. Trevor stated that if JTR killed Liz he would have taken her to the rear of the yard where it was darker... See, this is why people should investigate every aspect of a subject before they consider an opinion to be worthy.

The front, not the back, of Dutfield's Yard was dark. Louis had to light a match to see Liz's body... remember? The width at the front was about 9 ft 2 inches across. A 6 ft man could lie down, stretch his arms and touch both walls. Perspective of the crime scene is important in order to understand events and a historical background of the culture of the time is useful as well.

There is much information here and other places about the layout of the crime scene. Some folks need to take a look.

[Supe]

Fleetwood,

Not only is drunk a relative term, it is even more so in this instance. In his Star interview, Schwartz is reported as saying "...he noticed some distance in front of him a man walking as if partially intoxicated." Later, the same man is called "half-tipsy."

Neither description would sugggest being rip-roaring drunk, but further that condition is based on his walk alone. Presumably that meant he wavered a bit, but that could also cover anything from a sailor who had not yet recovered his "land-legs" to someone suffering from a bad case of bunions.

In any case, to call someone "partially intoxicated" ought not immediately conjure up visions of a fully beligerent drunk.

Don.