Stride Bruising

[DRoy]

Dave,

Swanson's report came out almost two weeks after the inquest ended. If Schwartz gave any evidence at all at the inquest you'd assume it would be the same evidence he already gave. What new evidence would be learned from Schwartz at the inquest? Why would Swanson comment on what he'd already know?

This is why as I mentioned before, Schwartz at one time was believed and his statement was thought to be important but eventually found out not to be.

Anderson in his draft letter is only responding to Swanson's report regarding the word 'Lipski'. Anderson most likely assumed Schwartz would testify. Warren then follows the same incorrect assumption by Anderson. Swanson also doesn't say he believes Schwartz, his comment is based on the original statement apparently taken by Abberline.

Cheers
DRoy

[DVV]

Hi Roy

Dave,

This is why as I mentioned before, Schwartz at one time was believed and his statement was thought to be important but eventually found out not to be.

DRoy

This I challenge you prove (as Anderson would exclaim).
Schwartz was considered, and is still considered a most important witness.
Unless I misread the sourcebook, Begg, SPE, Sugden, etc etc.

Cheers

[DRoy]

Dave,

Obviously I can't prove it but I also don't think it can be. However, the timeline and what is said in the reports, it appears we interpret it different. Perhaps those you've named will provide an updated opinion which I'm sure they too will acknowledge is reasonable and possible.

All the best
DRoy

[Errata]

Hi all,

To answer a question you asked a few posts back Lynn....yes, I believe the shoulder pokes happened while Liz was holding her cashous. She went to move past him after the threats, maybe said something derogatory to him, and he grabbed her scarf as she began to leave...twist , slice, drop.

Well, we know that her "capture" and murder had to be one fluid motion, or she would have dropped the cachous. Not just to try and fight, thought that would be a natural conclusion, but also because jerking her around after the throat cut would knock the bag out of her hands. It's also how we know she didn't just drop to the ground. The impact would have sent the cachous flying. Cutting the vagus nerve could easily result in her muscles clenching, including her hand around the bag, but that would not persist if her arm whacked the ground from falling. She had to be lowered down. So the real question is why lower her to the ground instead of letting her fall, and if she was lowered, how did she end up on her side?

[Bridewell]

The Macnaughten Memorandum isnt a diary entry and it states that 3 men were the most probable killer, none with any supporting hard evidence, and that "no-one saw the killer".

In the Aberconway version:

"No one ever saw the Whitechapel murderer (unless pos-
sibly it was the City P.C. who was (on) a beat near Mitre Square)"

http://www.ripperologist.biz/aberconway/page6.jpg

Was that removed from the 'file' version because it was untrue or because it was a truth which it was deemed prudent to omit? Who knows, but the fact of the matter is that one version of the MM admits of the possibility that someone (a City P.C.) did see the murderer.

[Bridewell]

If so, my money would be on Harvey.

[caz]

If the killer placed the cachous between Stride's fingers himself, after cutting her throat (as a final insult, perhaps, implying she needed them to freshen her breath?), it would remove the problem of her holding onto them while she was being assaulted and/or killed.

Another 'what if?' just for jolly.

After all, Eddowes's killer took precious time to nick her eyelids and he could have left the thimble by her side, which I seem to recall was associated with prostitution in some way.

Love,

Caz
X

[Observer]

Hi Caz

I proposed the very same thing a long while ago. Needless to say it didn't go down very well!

I also supported the suggestion (that the killer placed the cachous in Liz Stride's hand) with the fact that Kate Eddowes thimble was found in the close proximity to one of her fingers. It's my belief that Eddowes killer actualy placed the thimble on her finger, it becoming dislodged by one of the persons who attended the scene shortly after her murder.

Add to this the fact that Annie Chapman's meagre belongings were placed neatly by her body, and we do indeed seem to have a "jolly " killer. I believe the man was taking the veritable urine.

Regards

Observer.

[Fisherman]

Hi Caz

I proposed the very same thing a long while ago. Needless to say it didn't go down very well!

I also supported the suggestion (that the killer placed the cachous in Liz Stride's hand) with the fact that Kate Eddowes thimble was found in the close proximity to one of her fingers. It's my belief that Eddowes killer actualy placed the thimble on her finger, it becoming dislodged by one of the persons who attended the scene shortly after her murder.

Add to this the fact that Annie Chapman's meagre belongings were placed neatly by her body, and we do indeed seem to have a "jolly " killer. I believe the man was taking the veritable urine.

Regards

Observer.

Hi Observer!

I think itīs a slightly bold suggestion that the thimble would have been on Kateīs finger and fallen off as she was tampered with. More likely, it was by her side from the outset.

But letīs assume that you are correct. Or letīs at least assume that the thimble was PLACED by her finger. And letīs assume that Chapmanīs gear was placed neatly by her body. And that Strideīs cachous was placed between her thumb and index finger. And, letīs not forget, that Kellyīs innards were placed between her feet (the liver) and as an improvised pillow, under her head.
Letīs assume that the killer was a "jolly" one, playing some sort of game if you will; how does that to your mind compare to the torso killer, distributing body parts, seemingly for jolly, playing some sort of game...?

Just thinking out loud here. It struck me that this may be some sort of a resemblance of a weird sense of humour or something such.

Thoughts?

The best,
Fisherman

[curious4]

Seamstress?

If the killer placed the cachous between Stride's fingers himself, after cutting her throat (as a final insult, perhaps, implying she needed them to freshen her breath?), it would remove the problem of her holding onto them while she was being assaulted and/or killed.

Another 'what if?' just for jolly.

After all, Eddowes's killer took precious time to nick her eyelids and he could have left the thimble by her side, which I seem to recall was associated with prostitution in some way.

Love,

Caz
X

Hello Caz,

Are you perhaps referring to the fact that prostitutes were supposed to have called themselves euphemistically "seamstresses"?

Best wishes,
C4

[lynn cates]

I got got got got no time.

Hello Caroline.

"If the killer placed the cachous between Stride's fingers himself, after cutting her throat (as a final insult, perhaps, implying she needed them to freshen her breath?), it would remove the problem of her holding onto them while she was being assaulted and/or killed."

Yet, no time to mutilate?

Cheers.
LC

[Observer]

Hi Observer!

I think itīs a slightly bold suggestion that the thimble would have been on Kateīs finger and fallen off as she was tampered with. More likely, it was by her side from the outset.

But letīs assume that you are correct. Or letīs at least assume that the thimble was PLACED by her finger. And letīs assume that Chapmanīs gear was placed neatly by her body. And that Strideīs cachous was placed between her thumb and index finger. And, letīs not forget, that Kellyīs innards were placed between her feet (the liver) and as an improvised pillow, under her head.
Letīs assume that the killer was a "jolly" one, playing some sort of game if you will; how does that to your mind compare to the torso killer, distributing body parts, seemingly for jolly, playing some sort of game...?

Just thinking out loud here. It struck me that this may be some sort of a resemblance of a weird sense of humour or something such.

Thoughts?

The best,
Fisherman

Hi Fisherman

Bold suggestions seem to be the norm around these parts! I'm thinking Dynamitards et al. Lets see what Dr Brown said regarding the thimble

"Both palms were upwards, the fingers slightly bent. A thimble was lying near."

So not such a huge jump to theorise that the thimble was placed on the finger. I'd assume the killer, (immediately after cutting her throat) went through her pockets. Thus if he placed the thimble on her finger it would have been shortly after this. So it's possible that he himself dislodged it as he carried out his mutilation.

Jack The Ripper, was not unique (should he have been guilty of these "funny little games" ) whilst carrying out his crimes. Gary Ridgeway, Peter Sutcliffe, to name but a few employed such tactics.

Regarding the torso murders, I quote Sutcliffe.

"I started sawing through her neck the blade
might have been blunt because I was getting nowhere at all so
I gave it up. If I had cut the head off I was going to leave it
somewhere else to make a big mystery out of it."

Games indeed Fisherman. It's a big game to a lot of these serial offenders.

"Catch me when you can Mishter Lusk"

Comes to mind

Regards

Observer

[Fisherman]

Hi Fisherman

Bold suggestions seem to be the norm around these parts! I'm thinking Dynamitards et al. Lets see what Dr Brown said regarding the thimble

"Both palms were upwards, the fingers slightly bent. A thimble was lying near."

So not such a huge jump to theorise that the thimble was placed on the finger. I'd assume the killer, (immediately after cutting her throat) went through her pockets. Thus if he placed the thimble on her finger it would have been shortly after this. So it's possible that he himself dislodged it as he carried out his mutilation.

Jack The Ripper, was not unique (should he have been guilty of these "funny little games" ) whilst carrying out his crimes. Gary Ridgeway, Peter Sutcliffe, to name but a few employed such tactics.

Regarding the torso murders, I quote Sutcliffe.

"I started sawing through her neck the blade
might have been blunt because I was getting nowhere at all so
I gave it up. If I had cut the head off I was going to leave it
somewhere else to make a big mystery out of it."

Games indeed Fisherman. It's a big game to a lot of these serial offenders.

"Catch me when you can Mishter Lusk"

Comes to mind

Regards

Observer

Thanks for that, Observer! Yes, there are a number of jolly people amongst the serial killerīs ranks - but it is not the norm, Iīd say. And your example about Sutcliffe, though interesting, leads my thought more to an effort to obscure. What I am looking for is something different, a bit more explicite. Posting stuff to the police comes to mind, but Jackīs suggested placing of things and the torso killers distribution of body parts (among other places into the garden of a descendant of Mary Shelleyīs...!) is taking it a step or two further.

All the best,
Fisherman

[DRoy]

The problem with Liz's killer playing around is the position of the body. We know 'Jack' liked his victims on their back with their legs spread. Liz wasn't in that position, she was in a fetal position. It would have taken 'Jack' a couple seconds to move her into the position he wanted...yet he didn't. Why not? I would be a lot more convinced that Liz was murdered by 'Jack' if she were in that position.

Since she wasn't put on her back, legs spread or mutilated it's been suggested her killer was in a hurry to get out of there. So instead of 'playing' with the body like his previous and later victims, it's now being suggested he spent his valuable time 'playing' with her belongings?

Either Liz's murderer wasn't 'Jack' or if it was 'Jack' then he got out of there immediately after slitting Stride's throat.

DRoy

[Wickerman]

Hi Lynn.

Hello Caroline.

"If the killer placed the cachous between Stride's fingers himself, after cutting her throat (as a final insult, perhaps, implying she needed them to freshen her breath?), it would remove the problem of her holding onto them while she was being assaulted and/or killed."

Yet, no time to mutilate?

Cheers.
LC

You're assuming it was Jack?