Did jack kill liz stride?

[Sam Flynn]

Like Socrates...

Hemlock Holmes!

[DVV]

Tough as the neighbouhood was, Sam, there is no case like Stride's in 1888.
She was lowered to the ground, and had her throat cut from left to right.
Not to mention the day.

Amitiés,
David

[Chadwick]

Hello Chadwick. I thank you.

"It is speculated (and that is all we do on these pages) that the Ripper then went on to kill Catherine Eddowes."

I completely agree. But I'm not sure that speculation is the same as the obvious.

You are quite right about the different opinions--and I'd have it no other way. And I'm delighted you are wishing to learn. Of course, there are a few characters, like me and Mike (PerryMason), of whom you must be careful. Like Socrates of old, we tend to corrupt the morals of the young. (snicker!)

The best.
LC

Indeed. I have already come across a scrap between various players and Mike(PerryMason). I will endeavor to be discerning and take your warning with a smile.

What is obvious to some (who believe the theory that the Ripper was interrupted and moved on to Catherine Eddowes to satiate his desires) is not obvious to others (who apparently follow your line of thinking). If both sides are speculating, which you agree we are, my phrase is not out of line, given my perspective. To me it is obvious. I will not contend with you, if you do not agree.

Best,
~Chadwick

[lynn cates]

mutilataus interruptus

Hello Chadwick. I think I see what you mean. I think of "obvious" as being close to certain--brooking no argument; seen at a nonce.

By the way, I (and I daresay most of us) once bought into the mutilatus interruptus theory. In fact, I would recommend you not abandon it for as long as you are experiencing no unanswered questions about it.

The best.
LC

[Sam Flynn]

Tough as the neighbouhood was, Sam, there is no case like Stride's in 1888.

Maybe not, Dave - although I'm not so sure. What about 1889, 824BC, 1902 - or any other year - when someone got killed by having their throat (half) cut? What about cutthroat murders elsewhere, for that matter? In the grand scheme of things, perhaps two murders in an hour in the East End shouldn't be treated any differently from one murder in the East End and another an hour later in Twickenham.

(Not that both murders occurred in the East End, strictly speaking.)

She was lowered to the ground, and had her throat cut from left to right.

As often happens with throat-cutting cases - so that's hardly a sufficiently distinguishing feature.

Not to mention the day.

I worked out the approximate odds of that a while back, and they're not particularly scary. Even if they were, is it that remarkable that two murders occur on the same night? Especially if one of them is a straightforward cutthroat jobbie, whilst 'tother is a full-on "rip"?

If you go back and read my original post, I spelled out my rationale using rather deliberate words - there is not enough to definitely ascribe Stride's murder to Jack the Ripper.

[perrymason]

Indeed. I have already come across a scrap between various players and Mike(PerryMason). I will endeavor to be discerning and take your warning with a smile.

What is obvious to some (who believe the theory that the Ripper was interrupted and moved on to Catherine Eddowes to satiate his desires) is not obvious to others (who apparently follow your line of thinking). If both sides are speculating, which you agree we are, my phrase is not out of line, given my perspective. To me it is obvious. I will not contend with you, if you do not agree.

Best,
~Chadwick

Hello Chadwick,

It seems Ive acquired something of a reputation with you...well see if its warranted shall we?

On the interruption theory, which is the connective thread supposition that is offered by the contemporary investigators, it appears that there is a distinct lack of physical evidence available for them to have made such a determination. There are no interrupted acts seen in Liz Strides demeanor or by additional wounds beyond the murder stroke. In point of fact, she lay as she fell, on her left side, untouched from that point by other than Spooner and Club members before she was taken away.

Therefore, it is an unsustainable and indefensible opinion based on the existing evidence.

What then is left to attribute the death of Liz Stride to a man known for the severing of both throat arteries and the subsequent mutilation of their deceased bodies?

Her proximity to Mitre Square? The night she is killed on? The fact that she was known to solicit.....I might add just as she was known to work for Jewish families in the area....that she was killed in the murder district?...that the weapon was a knife........just how granular does this inspection have to get to put the Ripper case together for Liz? That her bonnet was like Pollys?

Lynn wasnt warning you about me, it was that he and I and some other folks are not aboard the Ripper train in the same way as many other members may be. We question things.

I hope youll forgive the tone, its difficult being polite when you are meeting someone who has just inferred some not nice thoughts about me.

Seems the night for it.....so, my apologies If I am coming across too droll.

Best regards

[corey123]

Mike,

There is no evidence supporting a interuption theory besides that the pony was neying and stoped moving, why would a horse do so? If not in the presence of something it feared, a dead body, why fear it, why would a animal fear it?

Also I too see a problem with her falling to her side, but then I have a solution, what if she herself moved on her side befor she died???

yours truly

[KatBradshaw]

There is no evidence supporting a interuption theory besides that the pony was neying and stoped moving, why would a horse do so? If not in the presence of something it feared, a dead body, why fear it, why would a animal fear it?

Surely it would react like this if it was being lead to tread on somthing it saw it couldn't tread on. Like if you go to put your own foot down and realise that cat is just under it!

[corey123]

I dont know, most likely but its odd that the horse doesnt stop right infront of the body but right when it enters the yard. So I think its a different case then just not wanting to trodd on something you know what I mean?

[DVV]

If you go back and read my original post, I spelled out my rationale using rather deliberate words - there is not enough to definitely ascribe Stride's murder to Jack the Ripper.

I've read, Sam,

and that's why I've pointed out the lack of evidences against other suspects.
Stride's murder fits the Ripper MO - to some extent.
And since it happened on a "Ripper night" (and I won't repeat other arguments such as victimology, location, etc), I would rather say that we have not enough to dismiss her as a canonical victim.

Amitiés,
David

[corey123]

I've read, Sam,

and that's why I've pointed out the lack of evidences against other suspects.
Stride's murder fits the Ripper MO - to some extent.
And since it happened on a "Ripper night" (and I won't repeat other arguments such as victimology, location, etc), I would rather say that we have not enough to dismiss her as a canonical victim.

Amitiés,
David

I agree, not enough to disprove her as a victim of the ripper.

yours truly

[Sox]

Surely it would react like this if it was being lead to tread on somthing it saw it couldn't tread on. Like if you go to put your own foot down and realise that cat is just under it!

Hi Kat.

Strides body was not 'in front' of the cart when Diemschutz entered the yard, it was to the right of the cart, and the horse shied to the left. Moreover, if the horse was blinkered it is unlikely to have 'seen' the body. What is more likely is that a sudden movement startled it, which is where the 'interruption' theory springs from.

[Sox]

Thats a view from the yard looking towards the gate. Only one side of the gate is open in this image, so if you imagine Diemschutz coming through when both gates are open, you'll get the picture.

[Hunter]

Undecided

Hello everyone,

The text on the graph says that I am not allowed to vote but since there isn't a none of the above selection, it doesn't really matter.

Alot of this murder is speculation on either side given the evidence but one thing is certain- whoever killed her left her dying body quickly. It would be natural for someone to put their right hand to the wound and curl up on their side in their final agony. It would be reflexive. The cachaus still in her hand meant that the attack was sudden and deliberate- a total surprise. Has anyone thought that she may have never seen her attacker?- and if so how would that fit?

Best wishes,
Hunter

[lynn cates]

another point of view

Hello Chadwick. I was pulling your leg about Mike. He and I are the "alternative point of view"--as he says, we are not on the train.

I'm sorry if there was a misunderstanding.

The best.
LC