Did jack kill liz stride?

[Trevor Marriott]

Yes, I do know when to quit. That would be when someone provides a logical rebuttal of what I stated as opposed to an obnoxious statement from a pompous ***hole.

c.d.

And you sir are an irritating t..t your posts prove you know nothing about logic, and if you had a brain you would be dangerous

[Hunter]

The point is Trevor, that neither Diemshutz or Lamb could even tell what was lying there until they got some light so it had to be pretty dark.

[c.d.]

And you sir are an irritating t..t your posts prove you know nothing about logic, and if you had a brain you would be dangerous

I suppose I should be insulted but then again I have to consider the source.

c.d.

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi c.d., of course you're not at all irritating. As for your question, I'm not sure I understood it. You asked what evidence there is that Stride was using the privvies in the yard, or I think that's what you're asking. There was no evidence at all, which was the point I was making, rendering moot any prolonged discussion on the topic.

Hi Trevor. It's not guesswork to say that the pathway was extremely dark, it's a matter of written history. It was a narrow slit between two buildings that blocked any moonlight from touching it. There were no ground floor windows seeping light into the area. For this reason, Diemshitz did not know what he was looking at on the ground until he bent over it with a match, and he was a very young man. As you walked further back the yard opened up and you had plenty of moonlight, not to mention light from the cottage windows and from Philip Krantz's office. The actual yard was far more inhabited than the pathway would have been, much better lighted, and further from an exit.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[c.d.]

Hi Tom,

Apparently I am doing a piss poor (pun intended) job of explaining myself. What I am asking is what evidence could there be that Liz intended to use the privy or actually used it? We would have to know her intentions and there would have to be some way to verify that she did use the privy. I can't think of any way to confirm that which is why I am failing to see how the point is moot.

c.d.

[Trevor Marriott]

In reality does it matter whether it was dark or half dark. Does it take us any further in our quest to ascertain if Stride was a Ripper victim or not. The answer is it does not.

Again days have been spent arguing about irrelevant and pointless issues lets stick to the facts and move on.

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Trevor. It's remarkable how "irrelevant" a point becomes when the facts don't support your hypothesis. Of course the ambience of the murder spot matters.

Hi c.d. What you're talking about is negative evidence. You're suggesting that because there's no proof that Stride didn't use the toilet, that we could suppose she did. But such an argument falls to pieces before it even takes off. To theorize that she used the toilet in Dutfield's Yard, you'd first have to have a piece of evidence that suggested the possibility, and there isn't any, so it becomes pointless to discuss it.

What we do know is that Stride was in a dark spot of the yard with a man, and as she was a practicing prostitute, the evidence would allow us to draw the conclusion that she was soliciting. That might not be the correct conclusion, but it is a conclusion with a strong factual foundation.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[robhouse]

May I ask.. where was this Tiger Bay exactly?

[Jon Guy]

Rob,

http://www.victorianlondon.org/districts/bluegate.htm

"Some mention of the nickname, "Tiger Bay" is in order at this point due to its having been, at one time, almost synonymous with Bluegate Fields. During the Victorian times, "Tiger Bay" was used (mostly by sailors but by others as well) to refer to various of the worst slum areas or districts as well as a few actual streets near the east-end London docks. Allegedly, the nickname was inspired by the awful nature of the brothels (and their operators) in the worst areas where many of the sailors were so badly treated. Use of the name was not reserved or restricted for reference to any one location or street exclusively - hence, any area or street could be a "Tiger Bay" as Bluegate Fields certainly was. In one or more documents, Brunswick Street is referred to as "Tiger Bay". In separate articles, Dorset Street and Flower-&-Dean Street (both in nearby Spitalfields and close to one another) are referred to as "the worst street in London". There once was an actual Tiger Bay (present day Cardiff Bay of Wales) that was also a notoriously rough dock area - perhaps this was the original source of the nickname that ended up being applied to some of the east-London dock areas."

[robhouse]

Hmmm... it seems to refer to Brunswick Street, which was just south east of Batty Street.... as referenced in this:

Witness Edward Spooner:
"As I was going to Berner-street I did not meet any one except Mr. Harris, who came out of his house in Tiger Bay (Brunswick-street)."

Stride Inquest, Times (London) - Wednesday, 3 October 1888

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Rob,

That appears only in the Times account of the inquest and was probably the reporter tossing in his tuppence. However, some reporters and people thought Berner Street was Tiger Bay, so it was that general area around Berner Street.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Fleetwood Mac]

In reality does it matter whether it was dark or half dark. Does it take us any further in our quest to ascertain if Stride was a Ripper victim or not. The answer is it does not.

Again days have been spent arguing about irrelevant and pointless issues lets stick to the facts and move on.

It matters a great deal of course.....because it would be a coincidence that a 'domestic' just happened to have happened in the darkest spot in the yard. Rather - the darkest spot in the yard suggests it was deliberately chosen - in advance. Not spur of the moment rage against a lover prostituting herself i.e. Kidney.

'Does ask questions about Schwartz's testimony though. Time wrong?

Just wondering about the Lipski thing too....wonder if someone can help me out.

a) My understanding is Schwartz hadn't been in the country very long - would he have even known about the Lipski murder case?

b) Schwartz didn't speak English. Would he have been able to understand a Cockney accent? I have a French friend who has been in the country about 6 years now and he really struggles to understand Scouse/Brummie/Cockney - and my accent (Sunderland)? What do you reckon? Any views on whether Lipski on a cockney accent would have been easy on the ear for a non English speaking Hungarian?

c) Would the assailant have known Schwarz was Jewish....from a distance?

Any consensus been reached on these?

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Trevor. It's remarkable how "irrelevant" a point becomes when the facts don't support your hypothesis. Of course the ambience of the murder spot matters.

Hi c.d. What you're talking about is negative evidence. You're suggesting that because there's no proof that Stride didn't use the toilet, that we could suppose she did. But such an argument falls to pieces before it even takes off. To theorize that she used the toilet in Dutfield's Yard, you'd first have to have a piece of evidence that suggested the possibility, and there isn't any, so it becomes pointless to discuss it.

What we do know is that Stride was in a dark spot of the yard with a man, and as she was a practicing prostitute, the evidence would allow us to draw the conclusion that she was soliciting. That might not be the correct conclusion, but it is a conclusion with a strong factual foundation.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

The facts are quite easily recognisable and your conclusions may be wrong.

1. She was murdered in a totally different location to that of the other victims
2. The time of her murder is also diferent from the other victims
3. The way she was killed was different from the other victims.
4. The knife used to kill her was different from that which killed the other
victims
5. No bodily mutilations as there were with the other victims
6 No evidence of clothing disturbed suggesting any form of sexual connection
This adds more weight to the suggestion she had not gone their for sex.
Found with packet of cachous in left hand. This again suggests she was not
there for sex nor for the purpose of taking a pee.

Taking all of the above into account it looks like she had gone into the passageway which was described as a passageway by Dr Blackwell for what might have been a private converastion with someone she knew and trusted. It could be that that the converation turned violent and she was killed.

The question is who would she have known and perhaps trusted to go down the passageway. a person we do not know and will never know or Michael Kidney who she had been having a torrid and violent relationship with for some time. Either way neither of them were JTR.

Another point to clarify Diemschults stated that his pony shied immediatlty at the entrance which suggests her body was nearer to the street than some would suggest.

Those are the facts they are never going to get any better as they say "You pay your money and take your choice"

I know where my money is going

[Tom_Wescott]

1. She was murdered in a totally different location to that of the other victims
You suggesting the other four were all killed on the same spot?

2. The time of her murder is also diferent from the other victims

You suggesting the other four women were all killed at the same time?

3. The way she was killed was different from the other victims.

You suggesting the other four women did not have their throats cut?

4. The knife used to kill her was different from that which killed the other
victims

You sound truly ignorant of the evidence every time you repeat this. To my knowledge, the knives that killed these women were never found. Are you making this stuff up?

5. No bodily mutilations as there were with the other victims

Trevor scores a point!

6 No evidence of clothing disturbed suggesting any form of sexual connection
This adds more weight to the suggestion she had not gone their for sex.

The other women showed evidence of sexual connection?

Found with packet of cachous in left hand. This again suggests she was not
there for sex.

No, it suggests she removed cachous from her pocket and was then murdered.

Another point to clarify Diemschults stated that his pony shied immediatlty at the entrance which suggests her body was nearer to the street than some would suggest.

When Schwartz was in the gateway, the pony's nose would be 3 or 4 feet ahead of him; Stride's feet were four feet inside the gateway. Anything else I can "clarify" for you?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Trevor Marriott]

1. She was murdered in a totally different location to that of the other victims[/B]You suggesting the other four were all killed on the same spot?

Idiot

2. The time of her murder is also diferent from the other victims

You suggesting the other four women were all killed at the same time?

Sarcasm is the lowest from of wit

3. The way she was killed was different from the other victims.

You suggesting the other four women did not have their throats cut?

She was killed with a small wound to the throat the others almost lost their heads

4. The knife used to kill her was different from that which killed the other
victims

Different expert witness state the type of knife which had been used. That description is different from the description given by experts in the other murders

You sound truly ignorant of the evidence every time you repeat this. To my knowledge, the knives that killed these women were never found. Are you making this stuff up?

I am not ignorant of the evidence it is you that is blinded by your own perception of the facts surrounding her murder

5. No bodily mutilations as there were with the other victims

Trevor scores a point!

I think I am ahead on points by a country mile

6 No evidence of clothing disturbed suggesting any form of sexual connection
This adds more weight to the suggestion she had not gone their for sex.

The other women showed evidence of sexual connection?

We were not talking about other women. The suggestion has been raised that Stride had gone into the passageway for sex

Found with packet of cachous in left hand. This again suggests she was not
there for sex.

No, it suggests she removed cachous from her pocket and was then murdered.

What an idiotic statement to make was she going to throw them at her attacker in self defense.

When Schwartz was in the gateway, the pony's nose would be 3 or 4 feet ahead of him; Stride's feet were four feet inside the gateway. Anything else I can "clarify" for you?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Well if i wanted anyhting else clarifying you would be the last person I would contact. As I said previous you are totally obsessed in the belief that Stride was killed by JTR. That again is clearly evident at your futile attempt yet again to pour water on plausible explanations of issues which you are totally at odds with.

The answer here is quite clear put up or shut up

Lets see what the facts are according to you to suggest she was killed by JTR and let me lambast them like you seem to want to do to on here.