The Murder of Elizabeth Stride

[c.d.]

Hi Lynn,

You say that there was no Ripper scare but certainly the prostitutes were afraid of the unnamed individual who was reportedly cutting the throats of their fellow prostitutes and REMOVING THEIR ORGANS. Even with a three week hiatus it was still clear to them that he had not been caught.

c.d.

[mariab]

Agree with C.D. on both counts.
(Hope this fact doesn't bring forward more posters calling me a “people person“, though.)

[Phil H]

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"

If she knew how to calm Kidney, she never would have been beaten up in the past.

What nonsense - I am no expert on domestic violence, but even I know that relationships between the "beater and beaten" are more complex that that! I also recognisre that you need to destroy counter-arguments to your own for your own peace of mind.

Who knows what Stride's feelings were for Kidney at that moment or previously. Couples have histories. If nothing else she may have been able to ameliorate his violence.

If he was in such a rage, how could she possibly know what his intentions were?

Mayhap she was seeking to find out what his intentions were.

I would think that given a choice she would have preferred not to be beaten up.

I agree - but possibly she had other motivations that night - not wanting to embarrass her "date". Stride may have thought getting off the road and out of sight was more important that being bruised and battered.

...How do the police figure in this scenario? Doesn't it seem reasonable that an ex-lover whom she has recently left and who had a history of abuse with her would be the prime suspect?

But as far as I can see, by the time the police got around to looking into Kidney, the myth of the "double event" had already started to dominate their thinking. Thus if Kidney could have shown he could not have killed Eddowes, the heat might have gone off him.

Don't you think that he would have been questioned and asked for an alibi?

We know he was, don't we? He turned up at the police station voluntarily and angry - which may also have created an impression of innocence. (Which of course he may have been!)

And, if in talking to Schwartz, his description of the BS man resembled Kidney in any way, don't you think that they would have asked Schwartz to take a look at Kidney and see if he was the man he saw throw Liz to the ground?

Always assuming that Schwartz could have done so.

If Kidney got a pass in all of this then we are looking at some very incompetent police work.

Given some of the abuse thrown at the police over the years, would that surprise you? Personally, I think the police in 1888 tried their hardest to do a good job - but if they were making basically erroneous assumptions, the conclusions would be awry, wouldn't they?

So if they were looking for a man who had killed two woman, they may have ruled out any suspects who would not have done so. Similarly for JtR more widely - possible suspects for say, Nicols, Chapman and Eddowes may have been ruled out if they had alibis for Stride or MJK.

As for Mr Westcott's assertions, we know he has his own theory to advance, and I take his post in that light. I admire the work he has done, and he has certainly shed light in interesting places, but i remain at the moment agnostic about Le Grand.

Phil

[Phil H]

Niko

...just for curiosity, what makes you mention that "Jack" only killed three ? Has any theory been written suggesting that Jack only killed three ?

I don't know, off hand, whether any books or articles have been written asserting that theory alone. Peter Turnbull's: "The Killer Who Never Was", suggests that JtR may have been a composite created by the press, and that there was no one overall killer.

That said, I think you'll find threads all over Casebook that discuss how many victims we should attribute to "Jack". There has certainly been discussion of the clear correlation between Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes, while Stride and MJK have been questioned on various grounds.

I, for one, believe that these angles are worth following up because they may throw up suspects who COULD have killed some but not all victims. It also allows us to examine alternative scenarios for some of the other women.

For what it's worth my own current view is that "Jack" was responsible for the three I have mentioned (Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes) and possibly for McKenzie - where I feel the attempt to mutilate might indicate a weaker, less confident "Jack" or that he was disturbed. Stride I assign to Kidney as a domestic; MJK to an "intimate" (possibly Joe Barnett, his brother, Dan, Fleming or someone of that ilk).

Hope that answers the question - sorry if the post is off-thread.

Phil

[curious4]

"Agree to differ"?

What an outrageous suggestion. Doesn't Standing Order no 432 prescribe at least three days' increasingly acrimonious argument over a point like this? Let's not forget what Casebook is all about ...

Well, we can´t ignore Standing Order 432, can we? How about this: http://thinkexist.com/dictionary/meaning/since/ no 2 on the list. Gotcha!

Acrimoniously yours,
C4

[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 just a housewife, Maria, I have both English and Swedish qualifications, but I prefer to keep a low profile.....

[Chris]

Well, we can´t ignore Standing Order 432, can we? How about this: http://thinkexist.com/dictionary/meaning/since/ no 2 on the list. Gotcha!

"In the time past, counting backward from the present; before this or now; ago"

That's the same usage as "eight years since" that you mentioned before. But you're suggesting something different from that - you're suggesting that in addition to "before the present" it can also mean "before a previous occasion." I don't agree. I'm saying that "since last Wednesday" always means "after last Wednesday", not "before last Wednesday."

[curious4]

"In the time past, counting backward from the present; before this or now; ago"

That's the same usage as "eight years since" that you mentioned before. But you're suggesting something different from that - you're suggesting that in addition to "before the present" it can also mean "before a previous occasion." I don't agree. I'm saying that "since last Wednesday" always means "after last Wednesday", not "before last Wednesday."

Hello Chris, Well this is why I came to grief with Standing Order 432, there is no way of knowing in what sense Phillips was using the word unless, in the future, someone can wire up a surviving Victorian brain and ask. I am at present reviewing my Dickens to see whether I can find anything to substantiate my claim. I`ll be back (I hope).

Regards,
C4

[Chris]

Hello Chris, Well this is why I came to grief with Standing Order 432, there is no way of knowing in what sense Phillips was using the word unless, in the future, someone can wire up a surviving Victorian brain and ask.

I think that's overly pessimistic.

[Abby Normal]

Hello Abby. Let's explore.

"BS man is JtR."

As you wish. I have no doubt but that IS and the lads at the IWMEC wished the BS story to imply 1. BS man killed Liz. 2. BS man was NOT Jewish.

"He wanted her in an alley way."

No harm here. Of course, neither Polly nor Annie were in an alley way, but I waive all that.

"She is reluctant, fearful of the ripper scare"

What ripper scare? There was no JTR and the Leather Apron business was winding down. All clear for 3 weeks.

". . . perhaps looking at this new guy as a potential boyfriend."

But beginning when? At an earlier part of that night? Is that why she found someone to keep her velvet piece and another to keep her hymnal? Very well. Let's say she was invited on a date and sees a potential new boyfriend.

"They play their little cat and mouse game over a period of time, walking around, him trying to seduce her into doing what he wants, buying her things, (cachous, flower etc.) she not wanting to go right into the alley."

But this won't do. If Liz is soliciting, you make your client happy, collect the fee, and you're off for verse 2. But perhaps she is walking up and down the street, gazing into his eyes and comparing his sensitivity to the former lout, Michael. But then coyness seems inappropriate here also. Strike while the iron's hot.

"In front of Dutfields yard she refuses again-he gets frustrated and leaves . . ."

Indeed. But if Liz, who began the evening with 6d is doing all this to earn 4d, something is SERIOUSLY wrong with her economic sense.

" . . . then quickly losing his temper turning back around (this is where IS arrives behind him) going back and assaults her. After scaring off IS he drags her into the yard and kills her, quickly leaving."

Notice that, if BS wishes to mutilate someone, he is going to almost as much trouble as Liz is in trying to earn 4d. If he is seen on multiple occasions with Liz, he runs a great danger in being identified. But now, he IS identified--if we accept the Schwartz story. After all, aren't there other women about who can be ripped?

On the other hand, if IS is lying . . .

Cheers.
LC

Hi LC
I dont think LS was actively prostituting that night. I think she was a prostitute but that does not mean everytime she is with a man it is because she is prostituting herself. Also, my idea does not necessarily mean she was on preplanned date either-She probably met her killer earlier in the evening.

[lynn cates]

pleurisy and the union

Hello CD.

" . . . certainly the prostitutes were afraid of the unnamed individual who was reportedly cutting the throats of their fellow prostitutes and REMOVING THEIR ORGANS."

Their organs? Hmm, you used a plural pronoun. Why is that? Surely Annie Chapman was the only woman with organs removed prior to the "Double Event"?

"Fellow prostitutes"? That sounds like a labour union--perhaps, "Amalgamated Sex Workers"? And, once again, this assumes that Liz was soliciting. Recall that, as late as Tuesday, she was cohabiting with MK. So now she leaves him so she can get back to a more satisfying and lucrative position (poor choice of words?) in spite of the fears you claim she has of being murdered?

Something missing here?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Hello Abby.

"I don't think LS was actively prostituting that night."

Agreed.

"I think she was a prostitute . . ."

As you wish. She was registered as one in Sweden. What caused that state of affairs? Perhaps it was because she had a child out of wedlock? (My sainted mum once indicated to me [ca 1966] that any girl who wore her skirt above the knee was a prostitute.) Perhaps she indicated that on a census? And yes, the police THOUGHT so too. So, you're in good company here. (Of course, I leave the possibility of an argumentum ad populam for you to judge.)

" . . . but that does not mean every time she is with a man it is because she is prostituting herself."

Indeed! Even though the mighty Abberline was a great copper, he did occasionally take a night off from his police work.

"Also, my idea does not necessarily mean she was on preplanned date either-She probably met her killer earlier in the evening."

Very well. But do you have a good narrative for her double bailment? If she were out for a late evening but planned to return, why not pay your doss, have 2d left over, and keep your velvet and hymnal yourself?

And what was she doing when she met her killer? Those who say "soliciting" at least have a reason for her to be out and about that night.

Cheers.
LC

[Abby Normal]

I just don't see Jack (as the BS man) going through the motions of "dating" Liz. For one thing, if they spent any time together in public places, it makes him vulnerable to being identified by the police making inquiries afterwards. I also don't see Liz playing the coquette and playing hard to get. If it was supposed to ultimately be a business transaction why not get on with it? Time was money.

c.d.

Hi cd
As i responded to LC, i don't think she was actively prostituting that night.

Spending more time did make JtR more vulnerable I agree as verified to the number of witnesses that saw them together that night. But JtR was a calculting risk taker, but until the murder takes place he is nothing more than a man with a women.

Alot of things made him vulnerable much more so than spending more time in public with a potential victim such as: killing women in public places, killing one women right after killing another, kiling a women broad daylight, killing a women in her apartment where the risk of being trapped was great.(if you beleive he wrote the GSG and any of the letters than these too) I think spending more time than usual with a potential victim is small potatoes to the killer.

Also, I have to comment on the notion that the people involved were bound to act like charactors who behaved by some prescribed way. These were not robots or one dimensional automatons. Every situation was different, the people had different moods, personalities, circumstances, desires etc. that made the events around every murder unique.

[Abby Normal]

Hello Abby.

"I don't think LS was actively prostituting that night."

Agreed.

"I think she was a prostitute . . ."

As you wish. She was registered as one in Sweden. What caused that state of affairs? Perhaps it was because she had a child out of wedlock? (My sainted mum once indicated to me [ca 1966] that any girl who wore her skirt above the knee was a prostitute.) Perhaps she indicated that on a census? And yes, the police THOUGHT so too. So, you're in good company here. (Of course, I leave the possibility of an argumentum ad populam for you to judge.)

" . . . but that does not mean every time she is with a man it is because she is prostituting herself."

Indeed! Even though the mighty Abberline was a great copper, he did occasionally take a night off from his police work.

"Also, my idea does not necessarily mean she was on preplanned date either-She probably met her killer earlier in the evening."

Very well. But do you have a good narrative for her double bailment? If she were out for a late evening but planned to return, why not pay your doss, have 2d left over, and keep your velvet and hymnal yourself?

And what was she doing when she met her killer? Those who say "soliciting" at least have a reason for her to be out and about that night.

Cheers.
LC

Hi LC

And what was she doing when she met her killer? Those who say "soliciting" at least have a reason for her to be out and about that night.


out having a drink, taking a walk, looking for a new boyfriend, shopping, whatever.

As I responed to CD:

Also, I have to comment on the notion that the people involved were bound to act like charactors who behaved by some prescribed way. These were not robots or one dimensional automatons. Every situation was different, the people had different moods, personalities, circumstances, desires etc. that made the events around every murder unique.

[lynn cates]

I robot

Hello Abby.

"These were not robots or one dimensional automatons. Every situation was different, the people had different moods, personalities, circumstances, desires etc. that made the events around every murder unique."

Wholeheartedly agree. But the stereotyped behaviour viv-a-vis some aspects of the 5 killings was what gave rise to the "JTR" myth in the first place. When we begin to think in terms of 5 unique murders we may be well on the way to disposing of the JTR nonsense once and for all time.

Cheers.
LC