The Murder of Elizabeth Stride

[curious4]

Tom, we don't know which part of Schwartz' story might be true, including his (or other IWEC members') perhaps having seen Stride with “Pipeman“ and his minions on September 30 or even previously, despite the IWEC and other neighbors denying of having seen Stride before on Berner Street.

Wow! It's the very first time in my life I've been called a “people person, caring about those she associates with“. I almost feel like I should run and enlist as a nurse, or a kindergarten teacher! Normally, my people call me a “misanthrope“. No, Tom, really, it's just attention to detail, until Alzheimer's hits. I happen to recall that Curious is a housewife or something from Sweden, simply for the same reason I insisted on finding out about the German Emperor('s clothes).

Not Swedish either. Male or female - is it relevant? But yes, female, definitely!

[curious4]

Either having a child out of wedlock or an std could get her registered as a prostitute at the time in Sweden - anything that could be construed as "loose living"

Unhousewifely yours,
C4

[curious4]

I can see where C4 is coming with his idea that Phillips might have been comparing the bruising to cases from his past, based on the material C4 is using as his source. That's why it's so necessary to read ALL the papers who offered their own coverage of the inquests. Doing so, you will see that there's no question of what Dr. Phillips is saying - he noticed the bruising appear and get progressively more pronounced. this is Parimortem bruising, and it could only have occurred within a short time prior to death or even after death - possibly even when her body was picked up for moving inside the club. Most likely, it occurred prior to death. but a malnutritioned, middle-aged woman with fair skin would be extremely easy to bruise, so a client trying to get a grip might be all we see here. It's impossible to say.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hello Tom,

Could you point me in the right direction to confirm this? I have always assumed that there would be no reason for Phillips to check this bruising twice more. What would that add to the inquiry?

Regards,
C4

[c.d.]

Can we invoke some sort of "asterisk" rule with regard to Liz Stride being a prostitute? Maybe every time we refer to her as a prostitute we can just add a * and everyone agrees that this means that although we can't say with 100% metaphysical certainty that she actually engaged in prostitution she was registered as a prostitute in Sweden although sometimes that simply meant she had an STD or a child out of wedlock or some other reason that we don't know about but there are witnesses who mentioned that she sometimes engaged in prostitution or that they simply alluded to that fact although we can't be absolutely sure of what they were trying to imply or perhaps they had some sort of grudge against Liz and were trying to smear her reputation and we can't verify their statements with 100% metaphysical certainty.

And when we use two asterisks ** it will mean that although Liz was a prostitute* (see above for meaning of asterisk) we are not sure that she was engaging in the actual act of prostitution at the time because sometimes prostitutes take a day off and have a love life or are out on the street shopping or looking for a place to take a leak etc.

Yes, that was sarcasm and a deliberate run on sentence. Maybe it is just me and I am a bit cranky today but it seems like it is getting harder and harder to discuss things on these boards.

c.d.

[c.d.]

Let's be real careful with this characters don't behave in a prescribed way thing otherwise we are going to have to invoke another asterisk rule and any attempt at probability versus possibility will be out the door.

c.d.

[c.d.]

[QUOTE=Phil H;176624]The tone of responses to posts that challenge the narrow focus of conventional thinking amuses me.

the one I am about to respond to is a good example. The sense of outrage is almost tangible. That then means that the questions are posed in such a way that they are the wrong questions - because they are all centred on cherished "cob-webby" hypotheses. open the windows and let the fresh air in guys"

Phil,

I am not really appreciating your lecture here. You seem to be channeling the spirit of our good friend Perry Mason aka Michael. If I hold a certain view it is because I have looked at the evidence and I believe that that view is the most probable. If it is the conventional view, so be it. Taking a fresh look at things is fine and should be encouraged but a different approach doesn't necessarily mean that it is the correct one.

c.d.

[mariab]

I have always assumed that there would be no reason for Phillips to check this bruising twice more. What would that add to the inquiry?

Curious,
if Stride's bruises were augmenting and becoming more pronounced postmortem, Dr. Phillips would have registered this, and possibly would want to re-check it.
Apologies for calling you a housewife and a Swedish! I recall about the Scandinavian part from the Liz and the grapes thread, where we were talking about snow conditions. (I'm a freestyle snowboarder on withdrawal for most of this season, which I can assure you is not a pretty sight, and I just had to leave Iceland without really wanting to.)

Abby, Lynn,
Stride most clearly was working it on the night of September 30, hence the host of different men she was seen spending time with for short intervals. And Lynn, your Rocker is still in impeccable condition, despite its travelling to Iceland.
(Now I bet I'm gonna be accused again of being a “people person“, just because my brain happened to register someone's location and a colleague was generous enough to lend me a book, for research.)

Maybe it is just me and I am a bit cranky today but it seems like it is getting harder and harder to discuss things on these boards.

Fully agree, C.D., and you don't even wanna know how cranky I am myself today.

With looots of hugs and kisses for all the bunnies and the butterflies and my barbie doll from casebook's biographer, AKA the people person who deeeeeply cares about those she associates with

[lynn cates]

P & P

Hello CD. I'd be delighted to use all sorts of asterisks where this case is concerned. My first set would be appended to all talk of JTR. It would be interpreted to mean, "If you really believe there was such a chap."

I'd be delighted if you could distinguish probability from possibility. I am of the old school of philosophy that says possibility is merely "the ignorance of causation." We see it as an epistemological claim rather than an ontological one.

Mathematically, a possibility is indicated by any real number k, such that k > 0 and k < 1 or k = 1. But this seems to coincide with the notion of probability. To say X has a probability of 1/10 is still to say that X is probable.

But perhaps you are speaking colloquially? In that case, I cannot help you. As I've stated elsewhere, I do not keep up with such twaddle.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

sightings

Hello Maria. Clearly? Christer has argued that all the Liz sightings involved 1 man. But look at the sightings. Watch Liz's flower appear and disappear.

Here's an interesting exercise for you. Plot the times and places of EACH purported Liz sighting. What do you discover?

Cheers.
LC

[c.d.]

Hello CD. I'd be delighted to use all sorts of asterisks where this case is concerned. My first set would be appended to all talk of JTR. It would be interpreted to mean, "If you really believe there was such a chap."

I'd be delighted if you could distinguish probability from possibility. I am of the old school of philosophy that says possibility is merely "the ignorance of causation." We see it as an epistemological claim rather than an ontological one.

Mathematically, a possibility is indicated by any real number k, such that k > 0 and k < 1 or k = 1. But this seems to coincide with the notion of probability. To say X has a probability of 1/10 is still to say that X is probable.

But perhaps you are speaking colloquially? In that case, I cannot help you. As I've stated elsewhere, I do not keep up with such twaddle.

Cheers.
LC

I rest my case.

c.d.

[Phil H]

I am not really appreciating your lecture here.

Cd - I obviously struck a chord.

Phil

[The Good Michael]

I am finding it somewhat ridiculous that peole are suggesting Stride wasn't actively prostituting herself that night. Why not? She was as active in that trade as any of the other victims. At the lodging house (Flower and Dean) she was surrounded by many fallen women who denied nothing about their chosen careers. Is it wishful thinking for some particular reason that she was just strolling about the town with various men, but not selling herself?

This kind of thing comes up with Kelly often as well. There was no difference between any of these ladies regarding how they got their doss and gin money, and make no mistake about that. Or if there is a difference, there has been no evidence of such. I really want to know why some folks want to pull certain ladies away from their game. I wonder what purpose that serves.

Mike

[mariab]

Hello Lynn.

Christer has argued that all the Liz sightings involved 1 man. But look at the sightings. Watch Liz's flower appear and disappear.

Who's Christer?
Stride's flower appearing and disappearing can mean that
- either the witnesses confused her with another woman
- or her flower was covered by the body of the man she was engaged in activity with when spotted by the witnesses.

Here's an interesting exercise for you. Plot the times and places of EACH purported Liz sighting. What do you discover?

A prostitute in action?
Incidentally, the only exercise I'd be interested in engaging right now would be to ice climb Vatnajökull or ride down Snaeffels, which I was supposed to be doing now, but dream on. And I don't wanna commit hybris by complaining too much. ;-)

[caz]

Watch Liz's flower appear and disappear.

So what does that tell you Lynn, and how would you know if you were probably correct about it, possibly correct or barking up the wrong tree entirely?

If a dozen witnesses had spotted a dozen different couples, canoodling in the darkness, and each woman had worn a flower on her bosom, would you expect a dozen faithful flower reports?

Love,

Caz
X

[lynn cates]

What's my line?

Hello Michael.

"She was as active in that trade as any of the other victims."

If you have a single shred of evidence for this, I'd LOVE to see it. You are right about MJK but there are similar questions regarding Kate. All of which brings up my next question:

When was the last time you saw Polly and Annie's vocation questioned?

Cheers.
LC