Stride Bruising

[Wickerman]

It could also be considered that if Packer chose to invent his part in the presence of the grapes, he might also have been careful to provide a description of the purchaser which was consistent with an already published description of a suspect?

In the Monday morning papers (Daily News), PC Smiths suspect made known:

The following is a description of a man stated to have been seen in company with the woman murdered in Berner-street, and for whom the police are looking:-Age 28; height 5ft. 8in.; complexion dark; no whiskers; black diagonal coat, hard felt hat, collar and tie; carried a newspaper parcel; was of respectable appearance.

No other description (from Marshall or Brown) was announced until Friday 5th Oct. The police obtained this next description from Packer by the 4th.

"...a young man from 25-30 about 5.7. with long black coat buttoned up – soft felt hat, kind of Yankee hat rather broad shoulders"

[Observer]

The yard was swilled down before 4:30 on Sunday morning, while it was still dark.

Yes and the drains were checked, no sign of any grapes. And how could grapes be swilled away?

In her body?
The autopsy was conducted 38 hrs after her death. Providing she spit out the skins & pips, as many (including myself) do, then her stomach acids (which do not dissipate at death) had 38 hrs to make the watery pulp unrecognizable.

No not in her body, but no trace of grapes were found in her stomach anyway, and just because you spit out the pips that doesn't mean Stride adopted the same procedure.

No, why did Dr Blackwell not mention seeing any grapes? He spotted the cachous, surely grapes would have been much more visible, why did he not mention seeing any grapes?

Spooner did see an empty piece of paper in her right hand. Wouldn't the grapes have been sold in a folded paper sachet?

The paper Spooner saw were the cachous which were wrapped in paper. You know that, I know that, everyone knows that. Dr Blackwell did not mention two pieces of paper in her hand, in fact he stated that her right hand was open, and her left hand contained the cachous.

Why did Blackwell fail to see any grapes?

[Observer]

He seemed to be a publicity seeker, or at least became one.

You didn't answer my question. Do you think Packer invented his story regarding the grapes as a result of reading an account that grapes had been found in the hand of Liz Stride?

[Wickerman]

Yes and the drains were checked, no sign of any grapes. And how could grapes be swilled away?

How many grapes are we talking about, two, four, twenty?
Half a pound of grapes is too many to hold in your fingers, so if she had any in her hand is was not more than a couple.

No not in her body, but no trace of grapes were found in her stomach anyway, and just because you spit out the pips that doesn't mean Stride adopted the same procedure.

Quite so, but IF she had spit these out we have the reason why Phillips did not find any.

No, why did Dr Blackwell not mention seeing any grapes?

Her right hand was across her breast, anything held in her fingers could easily have slipped down in the dark, remember her chest faced the wall so in the pitch black below her abdomen nothing would be visible.

He spotted the cachous, surely grapes would have been much more visible, why did he not mention seeing any grapes?

The hand which held the cachous was extended away from the body. Two or three black grapes dropped in the mud and blood?, in the dark , may have not been seen until the body was removed, and then stepped on in the darkness.
If I can see a reasonable explanation for an incident I tend not to dismiss it. Even though it may not be a popular position to take.

The paper Spooner saw were the cachous which were wrapped in paper.

Ok, yes, but when we read "right hand" when everyone else said "left hand" then we must consider that either the press got the hand wrong or, they got it right, and this was another detail not mentioned by others.

Dr Blackwell did not mention two pieces of paper in her hand, in fact he stated that her right hand was open, and her left hand contained the cachous.

You tell me who removed the cachous because Blackwell nor Phillips could agree. So lets not run away with the idea that Blackwell observed everything correctly that night

Why did Blackwell fail to see any grapes?

Had they fallen from her fingers by the time he arrived?
PC Lamb had grasped her right hand to feel her pulse before Blackwell arrived, that action might cause anything to slip from her fingers.

[Observer]

Then why did Pc Lamb not report seeing any grapes in her hand? Also Blackwell reported the hand as open, if she had held any grapes in the right hand then surely the hand would have been in a closed position. The fingers of left hand were partially closed which is consistent with holding on to something, why not the right hand. None of the Jews present touched the body, Spooner merewly felt the chin. As you say the first person to touch the hand was Lamb, he didn't see any Grapes, and yet Deimshutz had seen them before Lamb arrived.

[Wickerman]

You didn't answer my question. Do you think Packer invented his story regarding the grapes as a result of reading an account that grapes had been found in the hand of Liz Stride?

Do I think he could have invented the story? - Yes.

Am I sure he did? - Certainly not. But, he is not a reliable witness because he did change his story. So, what else about him should we be wary of?

Even if he lied about the grapes, does that mean the man he saw with Stride never existed?
He does place the suspect at the right spot, opposite the club, and at the right time, 12:30, the same as PC Smith. But this was before Smith gave his evidence at the inquest.
So, how did Packer know where this man stood and at what time?

And, the descriptions of the two suspects (by Smith & Packer) are not significantly different.

So, is there something to it or not?

[Wickerman]

Then why did Pc Lamb not report seeing any grapes in her hand? Also Blackwell reported the hand as open, if she had held any grapes in the right hand then surely the hand would have been in a closed position. The fingers of left hand were partially closed which is consistent with holding on to something, why not the right hand. None of the Jews present touched the body, Spooner merewly felt the chin. As you say the first person to touch the hand was Lamb, he didn't see any Grapes, and yet Deimshutz had seen them before Lamb arrived.

Correct, but her right hand was palm down, her left hand was palm up.

It is possible Lamb was more concerned about keeping the crowd back, as he said, than noticing if anything was in her fingers when he grasped her hand.

I still don't know why Diemschitz & Kozebrodski saw grapes if they were not there.

Why do you think that is?

[Observer]

Right ok Wickerman, but I beg to differ. The mere grasping of the wrist by Lamb would not have caused the hand to open, which was the postion it was in when Blackwell arrived. If Deimshutz had observed grapes in Stride's right hand, then the hand would have been closed around the grapes.

I believe it is possible that Packer was interviewed by a reporter on the day of the murder, and he told him his story about Stride the man and the grapes. The reporter then interviews Deimshutz, and then for poetic license adds the "fact" that Deimshutz saw grapes in Strides hand.

[Wickerman]

Right ok Wickerman, but I beg to differ. The mere grasping of the wrist by Lamb would not have caused the hand to open, which was the postion it was in when Blackwell arrived. If Deimshutz had observed grapes in Stride's right hand, then the hand would have been closed around the grapes.

Alright, so you don't think her hand could have been relaxed across her breast with a couple of grapes under the fingers?
Lamb raised her hand slightly to get his fingers under the wrist and grapes slipped out into the darkness?
So long as this is not impossible I don't think it wise to rule it out.

The grapes are a bit of a fringe issue for me, whether they existed or not makes no difference to the case that I can see.

I believe it is possible that Packer was interviewed by a reporter on the day of the murder, and he told him his story about Stride the man and the grapes. The reporter then interviews Deimshutz, and then for poetic license adds the "fact" that Deimshutz saw grapes in Strides hand.

Ok, but Packer was not mentioned in the press until the 4th, Thursday. Thats a long time for a reporter to sit on a story when the city is in an uproar, isn't it?

[lynn cates]

fistful of . . .

Hello Jon.

"The grapes are a bit of a fringe issue for me, whether they existed or not makes no difference to the case that I can see."

I largely agree. But consider this. If Liz had grapes, would they not most likely be held in her right hand, the cachous in left?

Now, regarding her purported activities and location, how many are consonant with having both hands full of such consumable items?

Cheers.
LC

[Observer]

Mr Cates beat me to it. Liz in life standing with cachous in one hand and grapes in the other? I don't think so.

However the grapes ,if they existed, make a great difference to the case. If Deimsgutz saw grapes in Stride's hand, then Packer in all likelyhood told the truth, and we would have another description at our disposal of a potential culprit for the murder of Liz Stride.

"Alright, so you don't think her hand could have been relaxed across her breast with a couple of grapes under the fingers"

No

"Ok, but Packer was not mentioned in the press until the 4th, Thursday. Thats a long time for a reporter to sit on a story when the city is in an uproar, isn't it?"


It is yes. But, so long as this is not impossible I don't think it wise to rule it out.

[Wickerman]

Mr Cates beat me to it. Liz in life standing with cachous in one hand and grapes in the other? I don't think so.

I agree entirely with you both, something retained in both hands is questionable.

Then so is two witnesses claiming to see grapes, and, the fact a grape stalk was found in the drain, and, fruit stains on her handkerchief?

However the grapes ,if they existed, make a great difference to the case. If Deimsgutz saw grapes in Stride's hand, then Packer in all likelyhood told the truth, and we would have another description at our disposal of a potential culprit for the murder of Liz Stride.

I don't see a major difference between the description, the location, and the time of sighting, given by Smith and that given by Packer. The question is, how come?

"Ok, but Packer was not mentioned in the press until the 4th, Thursday. Thats a long time for a reporter to sit on a story when the city is in an uproar, isn't it?"

It is yes. But, so long as this is not impossible I don't think it wise to rule it out.

I guess I asked for that.

But seriously, an important revelation held back by a hungry press for three days is hard to accept. I think it more likely that Packer sized the moment and jumped on the bandwagon.

[lynn cates]

whence?

Hello Jon. Thanks.

But if it's a STALK, where did the grapes go? If the reports are correct, there were grapes remaining when in her hand.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Hello Jon. Thanks.

But if it's a STALK, where did the grapes go? If the reports are correct, there were grapes remaining when in her hand.

Cheers.
LC

You think they wouldn't separate from the stalk after being swilled on the yard?

We're still avoiding the issue of why Diemschitz and Kozebrodki claimed to see grapes.

[Tecs]

Do you think Packer invented his story regarding the grapes as a result of reading an account that grapes had been found in the hand of Liz Stride?

Hi all,

I thought that Packer was ruled out years ago as a decent witness? I did notice though, that in the Scotland Yard photofit from a few years back, Packer's was one of the descriptions used to form the composite. Maybe he's undergoing a re-evaluation?

I always thought that he may have just taken the chance to do some free advertising. Knowing that "slumming" was going on and people were visiting the area looking at the murder sites etc he could have used the chance to advertise his business. Buy your lovely grapes from the man who actually sold some to the killer. Stop and have a chat munching on Matt's lavverly wares, whilst observing the place where poor Liz died.

It's often said that the poor Eastenders couldn't afford grapes (which makes you wonder just who he usually sold them to...?) but the out of towners could. And it would make Berner St a more desirable place to look at than the other nonentitous sites.

regards,