The Murder of Elizabeth Stride

[lynn cates]

sermon time

Hello Michael. But that was true of most lodging houses.

As for Dr B, here's a little thought experiment for you. Take B's speech and Liz's purported reply, ("What about we who are up to no good?") You role play reciting the Doc's speech and let a female friend recite Liz's remark. I daresay that, when finished, you both laugh yourselves to tears.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

bless me father

Hello CD. Asterisk is not accepted. You must do FULL penance. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[The Good Michael]

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

Barnardo's statement for one, though you can refute it. I was actually reading through the Facts last night and Tully's book and there were many indications therein of her being an active prostitute. Circumstantially speaking, there were the appeals for assitance from the Swedish embassy, the lodging house for (mainly) prostitutes in which she lived and all her lying stories that imply she was full of shyt. I have no books with me so the particulars will have to wait for a long time as I have no internet where I live and cannot have it there as it is 100 meters out of reach of wifi.

Mike

[lynn cates]

Clouseau: "Nothing escapes me."

Hello Caz. My inference (merely an inductive one) is that the witnesses could have been bettered by a bit of training. Certainly glad that my life or freedom does not depend on their testimony.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

piscator

Hello Maria.

"Who's Christer?"

Och, lassie, dinnah ye know? He's FISHERMAN.

"Stride's flower appearing and disappearing can mean that
. . . the witnesses confused her with another woman [.]"

Now you're talking! Recall the Watts conundrum? How many coincidences?

Cheers.
LC

[c.d.]

Hi Michael,

I think it is more probable* that Liz was prostituting* herself that night than the notion that she was on a date but I don't find the suggestion of a date to be ridiculous. Even prostitutes can have a private life.

So let's see here -- I have to use an asterisk to appease Lynn for the probable and one for saying Liz was a prostitute in the first place.

c.d.

P.S. I'll throw in another * just for good measure for speaking colloquially rather than coming from an epistemological position. I swear I didn't mean to. It jus happened that way.

[The Good Michael]

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?

A true suspectologist would choose the one out of the twelve that fit their theory. In effect that means there can be only one flower report.

Mike the Helpful

[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

[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

[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. ;-)

[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

[Phil H]

I am not really appreciating your lecture here.

Cd - I obviously struck a chord.

Phil

[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.

[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

[lynn cates]

P &amp; 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