Stride Bruising

[ukranianphil]

My first post.

According to the Inquest, Dr. Phillips said:
"i have come to the conclusion that the deceased was seized by the shoulders, PLACED on the ground, and the perpetrator was on her right side when he inflicted the cut"

I think out of fear, Liz bent down, and did not struggle. The cachous still being in her hand, is an indication of this.
If she knelt down voluntarily, then there would be no other bruises, and a minimum amount of force was used. she was placed on the ground.

I came to this conclusion because of
Dr.Blackwells remarks at the inquest.

"There were some pressure marks on the shoulders, these were not regular bruises, and there was NO abrasion of the skin".

It is partly this that i believe that Liz stride was NOT a ripper victim.
Phew. My first post.

[Wickerman]

Her chest was pressed against the wall...

If the wall bruised her chest, how was she pressed against the wall without leaving pressure marks on her back?

Regards, Jon S.

[Garza]

Now what do you make of that chest bruise?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Her chest was pressed against the wall...

[Michael W Richards]

I forgot the most important part: A warm welcome back to the boards, Michael!

The best,
Fisherman

Thank you my friend. Ive been studying some other things the past few years but never lost my curiosity for this subject. Ive been following along from the sidelines and am still impressed by the energy and enthusiasm you show.

Its nice to be able to converse again.

All the best amigo,

Mike R

[Fisherman]

I forgot the most important part: A warm welcome back to the boards, Michael!

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Michael:

"Just wanted to say hi to an old friend, Fisherman"

Ah ... THAT Michael! No, I did not realize that, although I should have.

Long time no see! How have you been keeping?

The best,
Fisherman

[Michael W Richards]

Hi again,

Just wanted to say hi to an old friend, Fisherman. Im not sure if you recognize my postings but its just me, perrymason, without an alias..or agenda.

Nice to see you are still at it my friend.

Cheers,
Mike R

[Fisherman]

My pleasure, I´m sure, Lynn!

Fisherman

[lynn cates]

thanks

Hello Christer. I thought so.

And for that, I thank you VERY much.

Cheers.
LC

[JW-D]

Yes it was bittersweet satisfaction. I walked into a second-hand bookstore and East End 1888 and Doctor in the Nineties were side-by-side on the same shelf. I was so astonished to see Fishman's book in a second-hand bookstore I spent a good ten minutes thumbing through it.
Completely forgot about the other book. Both books were on my 'to get' list, but when I went back the next day it was gone.

Jon, I don't have Doc in the 90s either. You have my condolences.

Casebook does have Chapter 3: Jack the Ripper online. But you probably know that. I'll give the link anyway for any newbies unaware:

http://www.casebook.org/ripper_media/rps.halsted.html

Best,
Janice

[JW-D]

Jon S,

I don't have Doc in the 90s either. You have my condolences. :-(

Best,
Janice

[JW-D]

Hi again,

You are correct Janice when you surmised that the general attitude towards prostitution was moderate in many European and Scandinavian countries. Some additional info from that article may be of interest also,.... in Sept of 1864 Lis became pregnant and in April of 65 Lis was in hospital being treated for Venereal disease when she lost the child she was carrying. The church register of baptisms who recorded the birth of her illegitimate stillborn child listed Lis's name as Gustafsson, instead of Gustafsdotter, and her occupation as domestic servant. In February 1866 Lis left for London and her altered residence listing from her parish at the time listed her occupation as, once again, domestic servant.

As to the register...the prostitutes register was not considered a police record but rather more like census data, the police records for many of these women came from Drunk and Disorderly charges or similar.

Thanks, Mike! Yep, the venereal disease would have landed her on the register. So unfair, and a ridiculously high price to pay for a little sex ... Pardon me while I stalk off muttering under my breath about social injustice--then and now.

[Fisherman]

Lynn:

" I seem to recall that, in Iceland, the boy is Xson, but the girl is Ydottir. I believe that in Swedish, it is always son."


In Iceland it is either -dottir (daughter) or -son (son), whereas it used to be -dotter (duaghter) and -son (son) in Sweden. The Icelanders have kept the tradition, whereas it disappeared in Sweden for a hudred years or so, only to be picked up again nowadays. It is still not usual here, but it seems to be increasingly rising in numbers.

The best!
Fisherman

[mariab]

Thanks so much JWD. Only thing I know is I have an acquaintance from a sponsoring brand in Iceland (Nikita) whose name is Stéfansdottír and she's female, while all Icelanders I know with a name ending in “-son“ are male, thus I assume that in Iceland they're still declining names, like the Russians. (Philip Hutchinson, a great connoisseur of Iceland, will know about this I assume.)

[JW-D]

Originally Posted by Michael W Richards: The church register of baptisms who recorded the birth of her illegitimate stillborn child listed Lis's name as Gustafsson, instead of Gustafsdotter

"Gustafsson" {Gustav's son} is the masculine form of "Gustafsdotter" {Gustav's daughter} in Swedish. (In Icelandic it would have been “Gustafsdottir“.) This simply means that Liz Stride's/Lis Gustafsdotter's stillborn child was a male.

Liz's baby was a girl. If you reread Mike's post, you'll see he said Liz's name was given as Gustafsson, not the baby's name. (I know--so many posts, so little time.)

I'm barely fluent in English, much less any other language, but this stuff is fresh in my mind because I read a thread a couple of days ago where SPE generously posted correspondence and pictures he'd received from Klas Lithner. Glenn Lauritz Andersson replied to a question from Simon on the thread, explaining the change in Liz's name from Gustaf's daughter (Gustafsdotter) to Gustaf's son (Gustafsson):

Originally Posted by Simon Wood: One thing still puzzles me about Elizabeth, and that is how she made the leap from the name Gustafsdotter to Gustafsson—as on her statement of employment from Maria Wijsner, and Gustifson on her 1869 certificate of marriage to John Stride. Can you, or perhaps Glenn, elaborate? Regards, Simon

Originally Posted by Glenn Lauritz Andersson: I am no genealogical expert, but Gustafsdotter is an old name form where the last name is based on the father's surname (Gustaf's daughter). It was a tradition that was in use on the countryside for a long time in all of Scandinavia, while the cities quite rapidly started to use the modern name forms of Gustafsson (where the female endning was replaced by the male one for both men and women). It is possible she did this in order to 'modernize' herself to city life. But of course there could be other reasons.

As for 'Gustifson' on her English marriage license, I have no doubt that it was a simple misspelling made by the church, which was quite common when dealing with foreign names.
All the best

The entire thread makes interesting reading:
"Where is Stora Tumlehed?!"
http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=2097

I hope this helps a bit.

Best,
Janice