Folie a deux

[corey123]

Hello Lynn,

Agree to disagree, I believe is the wisest of choices. However, I am still exploring this theory of yours as well. Very interesting.

And to Fishermen,

Thanks. The best to you as well.

And lastly to Scorpio,

"A hypothesis should be based on observed phenomena, not an association between unrelated factors bound together by a preconception."

As I understand there very well is a pattern to this.

Yours truly

[Fisherman]

Corey writes:

"An honest mistake on my part. Apologies."

Thatīs quite alright, Corey - no big deal!

The best,
Fisherman

[lynn cates]

OK

Hello Corey. Thanks. Disagreeing is OK. Frankly, I don't ascribe illogic to the Ripper believers. I once believed the same and was even a Druittist.

We understand and respect each other and the other point of view. Of course, if I find evidence that shows me wrong, so be it. And I'd be the first to share that.

Cheers.
LC

[corey123]

Hello Fishermen,

An honest mistake on my part. Apologies.

And Lynn,

My good friend, as you know, here we both disagree, and I do belive this particular issue is a very good debatable topic. Lets thow out Schwartz's story for a moment, for you know some reasons to my madness, my doubt of his credability, if we look into Louis Deimshitz's history, perhaps the later history that is.

So like I said, tossing his story aside we are indeed left with what is a very plausable murder attempt by our very own, "Jacky".

Yours truly

p.s Lynn, not that your account for it isn't logical. It is still in my mind very plausable.

[lynn cates]

problem

Hello Scorpio. You are right that:

"A hypothesis should be based on observed phenomena, not an association between unrelated factors bound together by a preconception."

And that is my ENTIRE problem with C3-C5.

Cheers.
LC

[Fisherman]

Hi Corey!

You write:

"If she didn't scream too loud, then the attacker might have not been too much of a threat to her. I do believe if she was truly in danger she wouldn't have hesitated to scream as loud as she could."

...and I could have been the author of those lines - for this is exactly what I have been saying all along!

The best,
Fisherman

[corey123]

Hello Fisherman,

Perhaps you are right, but every time I see that she only screamed three times, as you said "not too loud", a observation pops up. If she didn't scream too loud, then the attacker might have not been too much of a threat to her. I do believe if she was truly in danger she wouldn't have hesitated to scream as loud as she could.

You are right, the fear came in after the sighting. However, the situation is still odd to me, and not wholly believalbe.

Scorpio,

Yes, you are right, the interuption theory doesn't have much weight behind it, but what has? It is still plausable as any theory. If you lower the time of discovery from 1:00 to about 12:45-50 then it is very plausable. Remember Louis was the chairmen for the IWMC, so he would have gathered his men and made sure they all had excuses and what not.


Yours truly

[Fisherman]

Corey asks:

"do you ever second guess what you think happened? If you stick fear in the equation, you may find a very different out come that what is normally preceved."

Lets keep in mind, Corey, that Schwartz was scared AFTER he had witnessed the attempt to drag Stride out into the street, and AFTER she had been thrown to the ground and cried out three times, "but not very loud". It was not until "Lipsky (or Lizzie ...) was yelled that Schwartz scuttled off.

But even if we allow for a frightened Schwartz at an earlier stage than this - letīs say that he was intimidated by BS man looking tipsy, just for theories sake - what do we get that can be interpreted as the result of having been scared?
Would a scared man be more inclined to perceive BS man trying to drag Stride along with him? Is there something especially intimidating in that particular direction of pulling? Would a scared man perceive the victim of street violence LOWERING her voice, instead of crying out for all she was worth?
Of course not.
The one thing that could be reasonably suggested along these lines would be that he may have gotten the size and physical stature of BS man wrong, since fright may have had him exaggerating such factors. But the rest? Hardly.

The best,
Fisherman

[Scorpio]

Hi, thanks for the replies to my theory, which is tenuous i know, but i feel some original thought regarding the Stride murder is needed. The lone ripper/ Diemshutz intervention hypothesis is poor. A hypothesis should be based on observed phenomena, not an association between unrelated factors bound together by a preconception.
Scorpio

[corey123]

Hello Scorpio,

The police found no holes in the story, that still doesn't grant it true. However, as Maurice said, almost no one finds a connection with the two murders.

However, you are right, if, and I say if, Schwartz's story is true, that almost certainly marks Stride's murder not that of the ripper.

I have a question, have you ever seen something that frightened you, and you ran? Tell me do you ever second guess what you think happened? If you stick fear in the equation, you may find a very different out come that what is normally preceved.

Yours truly

[The Grave Maurice]

Scorpio,

Interesting point you make about two men being seen with Stride and Mylett. I don't recall anyone making that specific point before. The difficulty you face, of course, is that almost no one considers the Mylett death to be linked to JtR, and that the men seen with Mylett were described as being sailors. I admire your initiative, though.

[Scorpio]

Hi, i do not find Schwartz's testimony suspect and neither did the police. Packers grape munching Yankee is suspect, but schwartz's duo do not belong in a Holmesian yarn.

[corey123]

Hello Scorpio,

This is only credable if you agree that Schwartz's story is believable. This I have many doubt's in.

[Scorpio]

In a certain JTR book that i read recently, the author adamantly dismisses the double event scenario due to contradictory circumstantial evidence. After a review of the stride inquest material, an odd coincidence became apparent to me that adds further doubt to the double event hypothesis, in my mind.
Arguably, the last individual to see Stride alive was one Israel Schwartz. According to his statement two men appear to have been involved in the Stride attack. The first of these two characters accosted Stride, while his companion, a considerably taller man, appeared to be hovering about in a curious fashion before reacting to the first man's consternation at being eyeballed and chasing Schwartz away.
Compare this odd tale, if you please, with the statement given by one Charles Ptolomey regarding the murder of Rose Mylett/Lizzie Davis on the 20th Dec 1888. According to Ptolomey, Mylett was accosted by a shorter men while his taller companion " walked up and down " in a strange fashion, a short distance away. I feel there is enough similarity in these statements to suggest a double event of a very different nature. Both Schwartz and Ptolomey statements can be found in the ultimate JTR sorcebook, if you care to look.
Homicidal double acts are not unknown in the history of crime. The hillside stranglings commited in 1970's California are probably the best known example, followed by Leopold and Loeb in 1920's.
Thanks for reading my post, i hope it adds something worthwhile to double event debate, Scorpio.