The Murder of Elizabeth Stride

[lynn cates]

errata

Hello Phil.

"Your posts are usually one's I can nod my head in broad agreement with"

Thanks, having been a son and now a husband, I find it safe to agree with broads. (heh-heh)

"Builds supposition on supposition."

It does indeed. I use this merely as my research agenda. I think you will admit that John Kelly's testimony leaves much to be desired. Oddly, I never paid much attention to it UNTIL I saw the listings in the SB ledgers. And, to this day, I am not sure that the John and Catherine are the right ones, any more than I am sure that the alias of Johann Stammer (John Kelly) means anything germane to the case. But all this HAS forced me to look over John's testimony--and it is egregiously bad.

"Are you saying here that EDDOWES as an individual was specifically targetted - or that the next victim's injuries were planned?"

Both, actually. And I believe it was announced by whoever wrote the "Dear Boss." (Although I DO NOT believe that Kate's slayer wrote it.)

"We don't know that Isenschmidt was "Jack" - that is your conclusion and your inference."

Indeed. But if even a quarter of the things we know about JI could be attributed to, say, Aaron Kosminski, all his followers would uncork a bottle of champagne.

"So where would the killer of Eddowes have got that information; from what source? Was it a single killing as your statement implies?"

My source was "The Centaur." I posted it on my Kaufmann thread, post #6, if I recall properly.

Finally, I KNOW you are not "knocking" my ideas. You criticise, but only to learn--as I do. Frankly, I criticise my own ideas more than anyone else could. Constructive criticism is a good thing.

You have a good imagination and, I think, that is PRECISELY what is required for this business. Of course, the 2 extremes must be avoided, 1. no imagination 2. over active imagination. Sometimes difficult to achieve the old C of E standard, the Via Media.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

no need to shout (heh-heh)

Hello Maria.

"I know that you suspect Wess having fibbed, but it could also be a(nother) journalist's mixup."

I'm baffled. What sort of a mix up? Actually, it's a minor point, but I have a hunch that Wess saw the body whilst he was in the yard.

I know that the hypothesis was for the sake of the argument. That is why I readily accepted.

"Had the murders been orchestrated (by a foreign intelligence), they would have left 2 similarly slain corpses."

What on earth makes you believe that? My point of departure has been Sir Charles' ruminations. I plan to pursue that--at least until I "definitely ascertain" that he was mistaken.

"The evidence shouts . . . "

Ah, but it doesn't shout very loudly, nor 3 times (heh-heh).

" . . . Stride was an interrupted crime"

What evidence? If one engages in a petitio principii and uses as a premise, "Liz was killed by a mutilator" then, of course, that must be the explanation.

What has happened is that you have projected an opinion into the evidence, and so then it seems clear that the assailant didn't get to finish. Now we ALL do that same thing, so I'm not complaining of that fact. But, realistically, I don't see any "shouting" evidence of an interruption. All I see is a lady, with a cut throat, who died cachous in hand, face pointed east. I am not sure how to get from THAT to an interruption.

Cheers.
LC

[mariab]

Hello Lynn.

I fully believe that Wess said that. My point is that he may be fibbing.

I know that you suspect Wess having fibbed, but it could also be a(nother) journalist's mixup. It's not what we believe, it's what the evidence says. In how many newspapers reports does the Wess quote about the gates ("Just because they were open.") appear? No time to research this now (as I just woke up ;-)), but in a few weeks, hopefully.

I will accept your hypothesis and say the murders were orchestrated. Now, Liz's murder was to be near the IWMEC for obvious purposes. If anyone knew the least thing about the club and its meeting that night, that person would realise the danger in killing AND mutilating inside the yard. Just a simple throat cutting would, in itself, be problematic. So just leave a body.
Kate's killing seems to have been planned a good bit in advance. There, not only were mutilations needed (to make continuity with Isenschmid's work) but also the ears and nose were required to be cut off to remind one of the work of the Russian socialists who did precisely THIS to a police informant.

It's NOT an hypothesis of mine, it was just for the sake of argument. Come on, Lynn, you know that what you're hypothesizing here doesn't stand.
- Had the murders been orchestrated (by a foreign intelligence), they would have left 2 similarly slain corpses. The evidence shouts that Stride was an interrupted crime, thus it speaks for Diemshitz having said the truth.
- Cutting off the nose and ears of a police informant is light years away from disemboweling a woman and “harvesting“ her organs. There's NO record whatsoever of any foreign intelligence having done that. Which I guess is a good thing. :-)

[Phil H]

Lynn

Your posts are usually one's I can nod my head in broad agreement with, but to say:

Kate's killing seems to have been planned a good bit in advance. There, not only were mutilations needed (to make continuity with Isenschmid's work) but also the ears and nose were required to be cut off to remind one of the work of the Russian socialists who did precisely THIS to a police informant.

Builds supposition on supposition.

Kate's killing seems to have been planned a good bit in advance.

Are you saying here that EDDOWES as an individual was specifically targetted - or that the next victim's injuries were planned?

There, not only were mutilations needed (to make continuity with Isenschmid's work)

We don't know that Isenschmidt was "Jack" - that is your conclusion and your inference.

but also the ears and nose were required to be cut off to remind one of the work of the Russian socialists who did precisely THIS to a police informant.

So where would the killer of Eddowes have got that information; from what source? Was it a single killing as your statement implies?

NOTE: I am not knocking this idea - if you are saying that Eddowes was killed as a police informant. That is a theory I hold in mind all the time. But it works best if disassociated from Stride IMHO.

Phil

[lynn cates]

hypothesis

Hello Maria. I fully believe that Wess said that. My point is that he may be fibbing.

I don't understand your progression argument. I will accept your hypothesis and say the murders were orchestrated. Now, Liz's murder was to be near the IWMEC for obvious purposes. If anyone knew the least thing about the club and its meeting that night, that person would realise the danger in killing AND mutilating inside the yard. Just a simple throat cutting would, in itself, be problematic. So just leave a body.

Kate's killing seems to have been planned a good bit in advance. There, not only were mutilations needed (to make continuity with Isenschmid's work) but also the ears and nose were required to be cut off to remind one of the work of the Russian socialists who did precisely THIS to a police informant.

Cheers.
LC

[harry]

There are two observation's to be made in linking Strides prostitution in her death.The first is that she was not ,while in Berner street that night,propositioning for the purpose of prostitution.The other is that she was,and that she instigated the incident with BS man in making the initial approach.

[mariab]

Apologies, Lynn, I meant of course Wess, and not Diemshitz. I agree about your suspicions pertaining to Wess allegedly having watched the gates ("Just because they were open."), but this report (from the inquest) is corroborated in how many newspapers? My suspicion is that this is a journalist's mix up, for mainly 2 reasons:
1) I've seen reports claiming that the IWEC featured windows looking INSIDE of Dutfield's Yard, which can't be correct. (This in the Eyge book, where he's most plausibly confusing the description of 40, Berner Street with the latter house where the IWEC moved.)
2) Let's imagine for the sake of argument that Stride and Eddowes were a provocatory murder organized by the Okhrana, to harm the London anarchists: Lynn, apart from all the other improbabilities, they would have NEVER orchestrated the murders with one victim only slain and the next one slain AND mutilated, in a progression from Nichols/Chapman. Stride was most clearly an interrupted murder (or, more accurately, an interrupted postmortem), thus it must be concluded that Diemshitz said the truth. (Though he might have exaggerated the time a bit.)

As for testimonies that Stride was a prostitute, there's the man at the F&D lodgings, the police, and female acquaintancies. Can't look this up right now, but I will anyway in the coming weeks, as I'm planning to read up on all reports.

[lynn cates]

Wess

Hello Maria. Diemshitz? I was discussing Wess. He claimed to have looked towards the gates. When asked by the coroner why, he replied "Just because they were open." But as I pointed out, they were usually in that condition. So he must have had a different reason--or else he nearly always looked towards the gates. (Or the correct answer should have been, "No particular reason.")

Which acquaintances? There was a lad at the lodging house who hinted, a bit obliquely, that he believed that Liz was soliciting. Can you direct me to anyone else?

Cheers.
LC

[mariab]

I spy (the gates) with my little eye

Hello Lynn.
I've looked up Slemen, something about a Ripper book and “haunted houses“, but no details. But I can imagine.
Lynn, your suspicions about Diemshitz having allegedly watched the gates all night have piqued my interest. Maybe Tom would like to discuss this? But first we'd have to know if this Diemshitz testimony isn't simply a mixup in the newspapers. I'll need a couple weeks until I'm up for a “comprehensive“ newspaper search. But you guys have seen lots of newspapers reports, especially Tom (pertaining to Berner Street).

Lynn, Stride's acquaintancies knew and testified that she prostituted herself.

[lynn cates]

old theory

Hello Maria. Tom is quite right that the "Liz & Kate weren't prostituting that night" theory is an old one. Such a theory could scarce arise in the cases of Polly and Annie--after all, it seems clear cut from their own statements that they were. Not so clear with Liz and Kate. Hence the doubt some of us evince about them.

(Just found an old clipping from August 16, 1888 about a young girl who had her throat cut down to the spine in Clerkenwell. I am checking its history now.)

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

I spy

Hello Tom and Maria. Better make that Slemen. It is more likely that, whatever bits of information Liz may have gathered in the past (given her level of Yiddish proficiency), that had NOTHING to do with her death.

Cheers.
LC

[mariab]

I seriously doubt this, since the notion that Stride (and Eddowes) wasn't a prostitute predates the spy theory

Wow, didn't know that. Newbie roots are showing up again.

...and because only two humans alive actually think Stride was a spy - Lynn Cates and Tom Slemen.

I'm pretty sure that Lynn doesn't seriously consider that Stride might have been a spy. Who's Tom Slemen?

[mariab]

I’m not a deeply caring person? I was paying a rare compliment last night when I stated you seem to care about the people on Casebook. Somehow, you’ve become offended by this.

Tom, I know you meant this as a compliment, and I'm not really offended. For some reason it just made me cringe big time, probably cuz 1) it ain't accurate, and I HATE innacuracy 2)it was embarrassing, and 3)you really don't get me, do you? But never mind.

Am I sexier when I’m terse, dismissive, and mean? You tell me

Dunno yet, gotta try. You've never been dismissive or mean to me. And this is not a complain. :-) I like terse though (like right now). And I love it when you complain and whine about my not retaining all the details in your articles. On which I'll do my best to improve, I swear. Because they're worth it.

because I have a very versatile pimp hand.

Which is a joke compared to my lethal kick or butt-head technique, which are documented to have been triggered instinctively, without my even having planned it consciously. With bloody consequences. But we don't want to go there.

[Tom_Wescott]

Tom, I suspect that lots of the non acceptance for Stride having been a prostitute is related to the theory circulating that Stride was a spy. (For which, truly, I'm not sure why it couldn't be considered that she might have been both. Kidding now.)

I seriously doubt this, since the notion that Stride (and Eddowes) wasn't a prostitute predates the spy theory...and because only two humans alive actually think Stride was a spy - Lynn Cates and Tom Slemen.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Again, am I being too much of a “people person“ for laughing at a joke? Tom can laugh at all jokes without being branded “a deeply caring person“, I guess.

I’m not a deeply caring person? I was paying a rare compliment last night when I stated you seem to care about the people on Casebook. Somehow, you’ve become offended by this. Am I sexier when I’m terse, dismissive, and mean? You tell me, because I have a very versatile pimp hand.

G & B wanted a piece of the limelight. Not convinced? They see Liz in a pub, yet she has no malt liquor in her tummy? Still not convinced? Their story is nearly as phony as John Kelly's about "his Kate" and fearing the knife. ("Be careful that's not Leather Apron getting his arms around you.") Finally, they were conspicuously absent from the inquest.

G&B almost certainly saw Liz Stride that night. Want to know why I say that? And incidentally they had a third witness (unnamed) with them who backed up their story.

Brown was pretty sure he saw Liz. That's a trifle weak?

Or perhaps a trifle honest? And he was ‘almost certain’, for the record.

Marshall is the toughest to debunk. But for starters, why is Liz now SOUTH of the club?

Because she was standing outside the George IV pub to pick up punters. Marshall’s house was right next to it.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott