Did jack kill liz stride?

[c.d.]

Hi Garry,

Let me try to provide a different take on things. If Liz was absolutely terrified of being a Ripper victim, the best thing for her to do would be to stay off the streets. If she believed every customer and every man on the street was the Ripper, she wasn't going to make much money. I think her screams are more of surprise than of fear. It is quite possible that her fall was the unintentional result of her pulling one way and the BS man the other way. I don't think that it is unique in the annals of prostitution that a prostitute got hassled a bit by a drunken potential customer.

I agree with you that since her clothing showed no sign of damage that she probably was not dragged into the yard. But why would she voluntarily go off with the man who had just thrown her to the ground? If it were Kidney or some other man in her life is she so naive as to think he has good intentions on his mind? Why voluntarily go off with him somewhere private then? So she could endure another beating?To me, this says customer (Jack) all the way.

As for the blood and time of death, we already have a medical man (Dr. Bond) on the scene. Did he not notice the blood himself? How do we know that he didn't already take that into consideration along with other factors? You are now taking this one factor to completely (and with virtual certainty) alter the time of death. That is a huge leap.

As for Diemschutz's arrival, it is not the only thing that might have made Jack turn tail and run. A sudden noise or door slamming or even just plain old paranoia could have been a factor. So eliminating Diemschutz doesn't eliminate the non-evisceration factor.

As for it being a domestic, why are they bothering to keep their voices down with singing going on in the club? With all respect to Liz, are they a couple who are worried about their social standing? Why are there no marks on Liz's face to indicate that she had been hit? Wasn't that Kidney's M.O.? Swanson's report speaks for itself and the conclusion is quite clear. The police found nothing to indicate a possible domestic. To argue the contrary is speculation.

c.d.

[Hunter]

As for it being a domestic, why are they bothering to keep their voices down with singing going on in the club? With all respect to Liz, are they a couple who are worried about their social standing? Why are there no marks on Liz's face to indicate that she had been hit? Wasn't that Kidney's M.O.? Swanson's report speaks for itself and the conclusion is quite clear. The police found nothing to indicate a possible domestic. To argue the contrary is speculation.

That's it C.D... Swanson ( influenced by Abberline, who knew the East End) spells out the fact that Liz was a prostitute; that Broad Shoulders may not have been the last person with Stride ( because of the possibility of "accosting or being accosted" by several men in a short time). I've stated it before but, given the evidence, whoever killed her intended to do so as soon as he met her and hid his intentions until the moment of attack. She never expected it. Domestics just don't happen that way.

The domestic that did happen that night, the Sarah Brown killing in Westminster is a classic example. Mr. Brown killed his wife in front of their children after an argument. He stabbed her in the throat and then ran the point of the knife across... she tried to defend herself in the process but he overpowered her; then, walked down to the police station and gave himself up. The scene showed that is was messy and done in a fit of rage... much different than Stride's murder, which was quick and unexpected and no ruckus that would make a scene and bring witnesses to bear.

I'm sorry, but I don't believe that we, today, are smarter than the police and the people who were there and were privy to things that we can't even comprehend.

[harry]

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?

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
In agreement with Harry, an erractic style of walking , does not necessarily imply being drunk, it could well be that he had a medical problem, that left him unsteady on his feet.
Broad shouldered is the only suspect that has been seen in walking mode, men seen with Chapman/Eddowes were stationary, so no comparison can be made.
There could be some support for the theory, that Nichols assaliant and Strides, were the same man, as the former may have been able to initially get away from her attacker[ according to oral history], and the latter could have broken free after being pulled into the street, and possibly withdrew into the safety of the club area.
However according to Hutchinson [ if one believes his account] Astracan' Walked kind of sharp', ruling out this person being her killer, which is entirely plausable, considering the time frame, and later witness accounts.
Could Jack The Ripper, have been a man suffering from polio, or a serious war wound , eg Zulu wars, or sudan conflicts, after all contempary suspects were soldiers.
Regards Richard.

[Rubyretro]

Actually, the idea that Liz was killed by someone other than the man who killed Eddowes, is not all that new and goes all the way back to 1888. Evans and Skinner discuss this in their The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Companion/Sourcebook: An Illustrated Encyclopedia.
It's in Chapter 25.

A problem I have with Liz being killed by JtR is that this killing was very daring in that the club was full of people, and the killer could have been interrupted at any moment. The site seems a bit more public than the others, incldg # 29 Hanbury. It doesn't seem quite like the place that JtR would choose. I'm not saying he wasn't daring nor denying the possibility that he could have been Liz's killer. Just that it doesn't seem quite the same as the others. This seems more like a killer who wanted to get the deed done rapidly and then get out.

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.

[caz]

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.

Alternatively, Stride's killer may have tried and failed to get her to a quiet enough location, and very much aware that the yard where she had chosen to dig her heels in was no place for an extended session (and he would have been right about that), cut her throat as well as his losses and went looking for someone easier to control.

Why wouldn't he have left her alive in that case?

Lots of plausible reasons, but arguably one of the best: why would he? He was known for cutting women's throats and leaving them dead.

Love,

Caz
X

[Garry Wroe]

Let me try to provide a different take on things. If Liz was absolutely terrified of being a Ripper victim, the best thing for her to do would be to stay off the streets. If she believed every customer and every man on the street was the Ripper, she wasn't going to make much money.

If you’d care to re-read my post, CD, you’ll find that I never made any allusion to Stride being ‘absolutely terrified of being a Ripper victim’. The point I was trying to convey was that the recent murders would have contributed to her sense of vulnerability. Under such circumstances, an attack such as the one described by Schwartz would have assumed far greater significance during the timeframe under scrutiny than would have been the case had it occurred three or even six months earlier. For a typical case in point, see the way in which Mrs Humphries responded to the ‘white eyed man.’ There are plenty more examples besides. As for Stride ‘staying off the streets’, Kelly was said to have been petrified of the Ripper, but it didn’t deter her from hawking her body on a regular basis.

I don't think that it is unique in the annals of prostitution that a prostitute got hassled a bit by a drunken potential customer.

Couldn’t agree more. But then very few of these women were lying dead with their throats cut within ten minutes of encountering their problem customer.

I agree with you that since her clothing showed no sign of damage that she probably was not dragged into the yard. But why would she voluntarily go off with the man who had just thrown her to the ground?

Go to any city centre on any night of the week and you’ll find couples having a ‘marital.’ Rather than air their differences within earshot of strangers, they tend to find somewhere that accords them a little more privacy.

If it were Kidney or some other man in her life is she so naive as to think he has good intentions on his mind? Why voluntarily go off with him somewhere private then? So she could endure another beating?To me, this says customer (Jack) all the way.

With all due respect, CD, you appear to be applying modern standards of behaviour to what was a very different world. Late-Victorian lower working-class women were frequently beaten and were expected to take their beatings without complaint.

As for the blood and time of death, we already have a medical man (Dr. Bond) on the scene. Did he not notice the blood himself? How do we know that he didn't already take that into consideration along with other factors? You are now taking this one factor to completely (and with virtual certainty) alter the time of death. That is a huge leap.

As far as I’m aware, Bond never attended the Stride crime scene. The doctors who did attend certainly considered the blood-related evidence and, on the basis of such, postulated times of death which were wholly compatible with the scenario outlined in my earlier post. The problem, however, is that the variance within these estimates is largely ignored as a consequence of the evidentially unsupported notion that Diemschutz’s arrival on the scene interrupted the killer and thereby deprived him of the opportunity to inflict further injury to the body. I have merely taken Diemschutz out of the equation and examined the evidence for what it is. Contrary to your observation, therefore, there are no huge leaps in my evaluation. The people, in my view, who have made the greatest leaps are those who construct a theory around the arrival of Louis Diemschutz. I have simply followed the evidence.

The police found nothing to indicate a possible domestic. To argue the contrary is speculation.

I’m sorry, CD, but I don’t share your apparent belief in the infallibility of Abberline and his men. Mistakes are made in every large-scale criminal investigation and I see nothing in the Stride case to suggest that it was an exception to the rule.

Regards.

Garry Wroe.

[Trevor Marriott]

I will re iterate "again" what i recently posted on this topic and agree with Gary on several points he has highlighted.

I personally would not rule out Kidney.

If her kiiiler had been Jack then he would have lured her away from the road and further down into the yard where it was almost pitch black there he could have continued with almost no fear of interruption, but to be so closer to the road where she was killed is not consistent with other murders.

As I said previous whoever killed Chapman,Nicholls and Eddowes knew how to use a knife to kill. Victims grabbed from behind long sharp knife inserted deep into throat and then drawn across. This method is consitent with how someone with military training would kill.

As far as strides wound is concerned if the same kiler had killed her he would have adopted the same method. Forget about all this rubbish about her possibly being killed with her own knife,or the killer using less force on her than others amd thereby making a smaller wound.

The problem the police had was that following the discovery of Stride and the subsequent disccovery of Eddowes, their judgment like some on here was clouded.

They already had previous murders whereby prostitutes had been attacked, they had no real time to investigate Strides murder rationally. Naievety led them to suspect all the murders were comitted by the same man.

In high insight which is a valuable commodity they were blinkered as they were about other aspects of the case. They had no exeperience of dealing with a serial killer if this had happened today Kidney would have been the first to be arrested. There was even a doubt raised during the inquest when they had supposedly last seen each other. No one came forward and alibied him out.

[c.d.]

Hi Trevor,

Maybe Liz didn't want to go further into the yard with someone she just met when she knew that the Ripper was active. It is also possible that at one point they were deeper into the yard but her killer (Jack or someone else) had no opportunity to strike at that point and had to wait until Liz started to leave.

Since the police didn't know who the Ripper was, how could they be sure that it wasn't Kidney? You say that today Kidney would have been the first to be arrested. On what basis? If you meant to say prime suspect, then I agree with you. That would mean that he would be questioned and asked to produce an alibi. If the police back then couldn't come to that same conclusion then they were far more than just naive. They would have to be fools ten times over.

c.d.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Trevor,

Maybe Liz didn't want to go further into the yard with someone she just met when she knew that the Ripper was active. It is also possible that at one point they were deeper into the yard but her killer (Jack or someone else) had no opportunity to strike at that point and had to wait until Liz started to leave.

Well if she was going to do business with the man surely she would have picked a spot away from the road. There has nothing i recall being suggested to say that Dutfields Yard was used by prostitues to take their clients to. Wheras the Hanbury St address was. I would also imagine that the darkest part of Mitre square may well have been used also. Eddowes may have known that hence being found dead at that same location. Stree Prostitutes are creatures of habit. they tend to use the same locations to take their punters to. They are also very territorial

Since the police didn't know who the Ripper was, how could they be sure that it wasn't Kidney? You say that today Kidney would have been the first to be arrested. On what basis? If you meant to say prime suspect, then I agree with you. That would mean that he would be questioned and asked to produce an alibi. If the police back then couldn't come to that same conclusion then they were far more than just naive. They would have to be fools ten times over.

c.d.

Well it wouldt have taken them very long to establish that Kidney and Stride had a torrid relationship. The police have to start off somewhere in a case such as this. Kidney first port of call. After all they soon arrested Pizer and there wasnt even a connection between him and Chapman. Like i said previous they beleived the killer of the other victims was responsible given all the circumstances.

Stride told two witnesses that she hadnt seen Kidney since the Thursday before her murder. Kidney told police he hadnt seen her since the Tuesday. It also appears that Kidney was never ever questioned about his wherabouts at the time of her murder. With all that information his feet shouldnt have touched the ground on the way to the cells. All that is needed is mere suspicion !

[Tom_Wescott]

As for your opinion of Tom Wescott... it is an opinion that I do not share. He is a competent researcher and an emminent authority on this aspect of the case.

Thank you for that, Hunter. That means a lot.

I am not bothered whether you share my opoinion of Tom Wescott even the best and most resepcted of researchers are not always right.It a shame that when they are proved wrong they arent big enough to accept it.

While I'm certainly not the best and far from the most respected of researchers, you mention my name here so I can't help but think you're suggesting I've been proved wrong on a point that I've refused to budge on. Please let me know what point that is. I have been 'proved wrong' a number of times and not only have 'admitted it', but have relished the new information that allowed me a new perspective. I'm far, far from unbendable.

Actually my landlord has some serious reservations.

Reservations about what, Stride being a Ripper victim or my ideas? Let's not be cryptic.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Garry Wroe

Plenty of people insist that Stride was a Ripper victim but provide little or nothing in the way of substantiation.

Hi Garry. This is absolutely true and not just for Stride but for all four canonicals, which is precisely why I've put much thought to each and every aspect of the Berner Street crime in order to reach a satisfying conclusion and not, as Trevor suggests, to bolster an already existing one.

When viewed objectively, however, the evidence points overwhelmingly in the opposite direction.

Objectivity seems to be very subjective these days.

The throat incision was at variance to those injuries sustained by the known victims.

Not really. Stride was efficiently killed with a single swipe of a sharp knife across her carotid artery. I believe it's the depth of the wound that you find at variance and that has already been explained.

The lack of asphyxiation represents another departure from the killer’s established mode of attack.

Not the lack of asphyxiation, but the lack of the medical men to discover or recognize the signs. As I've stated before, Stride may have fainted, in which case subduing her by strangulation or some other means would not be necessary. We must also consider the possibility that she was strangled or subdued by some other means, the method of which was simply untraceable by the doctors. Whoever killed her, we know that he was able to get her to the ground without a struggle and murder her without emotion, and surely Jack was a more practiced hand at all of this than your loud, angry and abusive Kidney.

The fact that Stride was discovered whilst lying on her side rather than in a supine position also mediates against this being an aborted Ripper attack.

Discovered lying on her side by whom?

The bloodflow from the throat wound as well as its associated coagulation are each suggestive of an attack that occurred much earlier than is often supposed. If so, the theory that Diemschutz interrupted the killer and thereby deprived him of the opportunity to eviscerate Stride is a non-starter.

You mean the blood that Edward Spooner described as still flowing from her wound at approximately 1:06am?

I'm sorry, but where's the objectivity in your work? I don't see it here.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Trevor Marriott]

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

[Tom_Wescott]

The Domestic Question

To my mind, CD, the Stride murder bears all the hallmarks of a 'domestic'.

and

Yes, it most certainly could have been a domestic.

There was only one man in Stride's life, that being Michael Kidney. Setting aside all the evidence the precludes the likelihood of him having been her murderer, let's consider why a number of writers suggest that Stride's murder bears all the 'hallmarks of a domestic homicide'. I have to question if any of these writers have done even the slightest bit of research into domestic murders and how ridiculuously few of them occur in strange yards, are precipitated by no fights, yelling, or physical abuse, and end with the killer silently rendering the victim unconscious, laying her softly on the ground, and killing her with a single swipe of the blade. If this was a domestic homicide, it is an anomaly. Wroe talks of 'rage', but where is it? How is this at all personal? Does this sound like the kind of murder Michael Kidney would commit, based on what we know of him from the inquest? Is it not more likely that the man we know was in the area at that time, with a sharp knife, looking for prostitutes to kill, is in fact the murderer?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Natalie Severn]

and



There was only one man in Stride's life, that being Michael Kidney. Setting aside all the evidence the precludes the likelihood of him having been her murderer, let's consider why a number of writers suggest that Stride's murder bears all the 'hallmarks of a domestic homicide'. I have to question if any of these writers have done even the slightest bit of research into domestic murders and how ridiculuously few of them occur in strange yards, are precipitated by no fights, yelling, or physical abuse, and end with the killer silently rendering the victim unconscious, laying her softly on the ground, and killing her with a single swipe of the blade. If this was a domestic homicide, it is an anomaly. Wroe talks of 'rage', but where is it? How is this at all personal? Does this sound like the kind of murder Michael Kidney would commit, based on what we know of him from the inquest? Is it not more likely that the man we know was in the area at that time, with a sharp knife, looking for prostitutes to kill, is in fact the murderer?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Yes, two murders within an hour of each other and a ten minutes walk away from each other.In the first someone arrives -preventing the ripper staying to finish.In the second he completes his destruction.