Did jack kill liz stride?

[Tom_Wescott]

There is indication in the idea of communism. You show me several of these young club members who had maids and butlers and I'll sing a different tune. Having someone serving drinks or cleaning periodically in a business is far different than having personal servants.

Mike

You didn't say 'personal servants', you said servants, which they had. You're moving the goal posts here. Of course they didn't have personal servants, they were for the most part flat broke.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Observer]

The re-enactment wins the day, game over.

Hello Damaso. Thanks.

"Oh come now. Kate was subdued and lowered to the ground somehow, probably in silence. If anything, it was a more elegant killing than Nichols or Chapman."

Yes, but "somehow" tells us little. And that "elegance" does not apply to the deep double cuts of the first two.

"I know you disagree, but many here also believe that Stride was first subdued and lowered to the ground, then cut."

Very well. One may indeed believe what one likes--I am referring ONLY to the evidence.

Cheers.
LC

Doctor Philips likewise was adhering to the evidence, he believed that the throat was cut while Liz Stride was on the ground. The Coroner also believed this to be true.

Re-enactments? All very well. What Mr Cates lacked in his re-enactment though was blood, lots of blood.

From Liz Strides inquest

"[Coroner] From the position you assume the perpetrator to have been in, would he have been likely to get bloodstained? - Not necessarily, for the commencement of the wound and the injury to the vessels would be away from him, and the stream of blood - for stream it was - would be directed away from him, and towards the gutter in the yard."

I find it ludicrous, that should the killer had cut Liz Stride as she was falling then the blood would have been directed downwards, and that her body would then have fallen on top of the blood thus concealing it.

This is what Mr Cates would have us believe, after all he has conducted a re-enactment.

Make no bones about it, should Liz Stride have been cut as she was falling the spray of blood observed would not have been as described at the inquest. There would have been blood splashes on the wall, and around the body of Liz Stride.

Of course there's only one way to find out, and this would require a much more gruesome re-enactment than the one Mr Cates carried out.

Any takers?

Regards

Observer

[Observer]

Unfortunately, it wasn't. It was because he had proposed a theory that had been disproved if Eddowes had been killed by the same hand as Chapman. He wasn't going to admit that he may have been wrong; he couldn't at that point, considering the controversy he had already ignited. And because of this, confusion about the medical evidence and what the medicos involved interpreted has existed to this day.

Which theory was this?

[Observer]

Hello Nick. Thanks.

"I don't necessarily see that a single cut to the neck can rule out the Ripper as the murderer."

No, no "ruling out." But surely the double neck cuts can almost certainly "rule in" a single hand with Polly and Annie? So now the question becomes, Why? Why near identical double cuts then a single cut for the next two? Why cut twice in the first two cases?

Cheers.
LC

I'd agree that the double neck cuts can certainly rule in that Polly Nichols, and Annie Chapman were murdered by the same hand.

Why a single cut to Liz Stride? A much more precarious situation than Nichols, and Eddowes. Earlier in the night, club members singing away, the body ending up lying on it's side after the take down. The killer may well have realised (given the precarious circumstances) the folly of deciding to kill Liz Stride. He thus cut his loses and merely cut her throat, and made off before he was detected.

Catherine Eddowes neck was cut twice

[The Good Michael]

You didn't say 'personal servants', you said servants, which they had. You're moving the goal posts here. Of course they didn't have personal servants, they were for the most part flat broke.

I didn't move any goals. I was specifically referring to having personal servants. Permanent live-in types. If I wasn't clear, that's absolutely what I was talking about and it was an answer to one of Lynn's questions. Of course someone hires another to do work for them at times, but that does not a servant make in the sense I'm referring to for these young socialists.

Mike

[Hunter]

Baxter was presumably happy to believe Stride's killer would have liked to obtain another uterus but failed in his purpose, whereas the kidney taken from Eddowes would have needed more explaining. Easier to suggest it could be the work of an imitator than to have his womb-harvesting theory thrown in the gutter.

We've all seen similar intellectual gymnastics when pet theories appear to be threatened. It would have happened then, just as it happens now. I doubt anyone is entirely immune when we indulge in public speculation.

That's why I rather tongue-in-cheek suggested that Baxter gave birth to Ripperology.

[The Good Michael]

I always buy unsliced bread. Sometimes I use a sharp knife to cut a couple of pieces for a sandwich. Sometimes I sort of cut and tear just to have some buttered bread. When I'm in a hurry, I tear a hunk off. I guess I'd prefer to have time for a sandwich, but often I don't have any cheese or filling for it and butter or plain has to do.

Mike

[Observer]

Unfortunately, it wasn't. It was because he had proposed a theory

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.

As I said, lets not forget that he also cited the skill of the mutilator of Nichols and Chapman, as opposed to the unskilful way in which Eddowes was mutilated, as an indication that Eddowes was possibly the work of an imitator.

"There had been no skilful mutilation as in the cases of Nichols and Chapman, and no unskilful injuries as in the case in Mitre-square - possibly the work of an imitator"

Regards

Observer

[caz]

I always buy unsliced bread. Sometimes I use a sharp knife to cut a couple of pieces for a sandwich. Sometimes I sort of cut and tear just to have some buttered bread. When I'm in a hurry, I tear a hunk off. I guess I'd prefer to have time for a sandwich, but often I don't have any cheese or filling for it and butter or plain has to do.

Mike

Well you are just weird, GM. You would obviously never make the nice, normal, conventional and, above all, consistent serial killer we all know and love.

Love,

Caz
X

[The Good Michael]

Well you are just weird, GM. You would obviously never make the nice, normal, conventional and, above all, consistent serial killer we all know and love.

I was just talking about good, unsliced bread because it's difficult to find where I am in Japan (for 2 more weeks). Who said anything about serial killing?

Mike

[caz]

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?

I think that was the point, Obs. If Baxter's 'possible work of an imitator' observation was a cynical attempt to keep his uterus kettle boiling, he won't have been the last 'ripperologist' to pull such a trick. Kelly's murder must have fried his brain.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

I was just talking about good, unsliced bread because it's difficult to find where I am in Japan (for 2 more weeks). Who said anything about serial killing?

Mike

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

Love,

Caz
X

[Observer]

I think that was the point, Obs. If Baxter's 'possible work of an imitator' observation was a cynical attempt to keep his uterus kettle boiling, he won't have been the last 'ripperologist' to pull such a trick. Kelly's murder must have fried his brain.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz

Fried brain and chips. Re-enactment anyone?

Regards

Observer

[The Good Michael]

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

Surreal killing's more like it here.

Mike

[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.