Diemschutz arrival

[miakaal4]

To SHJim
Ha ha, you should re the thread. I tell you mate, I thought Deimshultz arrival was pretty much accepted until I posed my question. Turns out that is not the case at all. From 12.45 until 01.00 the lid comes down, and everything inside that time is uncertain, including Deimshultz disturbing the killer. I still think he did, but there are some very good arguements on this thread saying he may not have.

[Hunter]

The medical evidence makes it crystal clear to us that the "mindset" of the Whitechapel killer was highly set on postmortem mutilations, requiring a steady increase from murder to murder. I don't adhere much to profiling, but here it's impossible to deny that the postmortem mutilations are what profilers call the case's "signature".

The medical evidence may "suggest" a pattern in this series, and indeed, if that is the assumption, then certainly Elizabeth Stride is "the odd one out" for all of the noted reasons. That means that she could have been killed by someone else for an unknown reason. Many subscribe to that notion and considering the fact that we don't know who killed any of these women, it is a credible possibility.

It also can not be denied that--given the general evidence every student is aware of--the person who killed Catherine Eddowes would be a strong suspect in this murder too. There are enough similarities to make this so. But explaining the reason that Stride was apparently "just killed" by the murderer being interrupted by Diemshitz is based on supposition with no tangible evidence that this was the case. We don't know what happened except that Elizabeth Stride had her throat cut.

If you believe that this skien was the work of a serial murderer, than it must be understood that many men who were convicted for such crimes had instances that were not relevant to their so-called "signature" or even MO. In some cases, it was only after they were apprehended that other murders were associated with them. They had all sorts of reasons for the "odd one out."

I know that my explanation is probably too "cut and dried" for most who like to theorize beyond the limited criteria that most historians apply, but that is the way I see it. I'm one to accept that we simply don't know and probably never will with anything conclusive, but I understand that would make discussions on this topic rather boring. I just try not to get involved anymore in circular debates that accomplish very little.

[Spring heeled Jim]

Miakaal although I am new here I already feel it is hard to stop a topic going off on a tangent but that is no bad thing as whether or not the killer was interrupted is a complex issue. The only way you can get to the best approximation of if an interruption took place is to weigh up what is the most likely turn of events that evening. All supposition and conjecture in the main but it does add weight/detract from any possible interruption scenario when the context is taken into account?

[miakaal4]

Having just checked on my original question I must admit that I am amused to find that there is no possible answer to be had. There are so many theories around the actual time of Strides death, that the arrival of Deimshultz could almost be argued as irrelevant! Let alone if the killer was caperble of stopping his mutilations.
It is utterly fascinating!

[lynn cates]

article

Hello Maria.

"The medical evidence makes it crystal clear to us that the "mindset" of the Whitechapel killer was highly set on postmortem mutilations"

How so? I would wonder whether the medical evidence makes clear--let alone, "crystal clear"-- "the" rather than "a" Whitechapel killer?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Baxter

Hello Cris. Thanks. Yes, Baxter was more inclined towards Stride than Eddowes. And you are also correct that it was the assassin's ability to avoid detection and stealth that led him to that conclusion.

Cheers.
LC

[Spring heeled Jim]

Hi Maria the reason I mention the subduing in the context of being interrupted is that if the killer simply wanted to kill and had got their hands near her neck then in my mind they would have simply throttled her if they had two hands in the region of her neck and then be gone off quickly hence reduced chance of there being an interruption.

I just cant get my head around the idea of someone subduing with both hands and then letting go before she was unconscious to get a knife out and cut her throat. My mind tells me I would keep hold of the victim until I knew they were not going to scream and if the primary purpose was just to kill I would simply strangle them not produce a knife and cut their throat which would result in blood and the increased risk of getting evidence on me particularly if I was a club member.

I know it is possible she was subdued with one hand but I find this scenario unlikely. All this in a round about way is related to an interruption because if it was a simply a case of her being killed and that was the primary motive then I doubt there was an interruption but if that killing was a means to an end re the ultimate goal of mutilation then yes I think the killer did hear something that spooked him.

[mariab]

Thanks Hunter for a well informed and level headed post, as always.
Only thing I'm disagreeing with:

but it is equally an assumption that this killer would always mutilate. We have the medical evidence as to what happened in each case. We have no evidence about the mindset of the murderer in each instance.

The medical evidence makes it crystal clear to us that the "mindset" of the Whitechapel killer was highly set on postmortem mutilations, requiring a steady increase from murder to murder. I don't adhere much to profiling, but here it's impossible to deny that the postmortem mutilations are what profilers call the case's "signature".

I would like to know people opinion of whether there was some kind of subduing prior to the throat cut and if this subduing involved two hands? {...} In my mind is worth questioning this scenario with regards any possible interruption.

Subduing a person from behind with just the left arm decisively around their neck (the right hand holding the knife) is easily feasible. But the subduing had nothing whatsoever to do with the interruption. According to the evidence of Stride's body in situ and to the testimonies given by the Club members, the interruption must have occurred just prior to the mutilations.

[Hunter]

Compare Baxter: "Polly and Annie's assassin killed them to harvest their organs. Polly had all her organs. Therefore, he was interrupted."

The same could be said about the events of Sept. 30, using Baxter's criteria... which I believe is flawed because of the overall theory Baxter was promulgating at the time. And for some strange reason (actually it was because of his theory) Baxter insinuates that Stride fell victim to the same individual who killed the first two, and Eddowes--who was mutilated--didn't.

I agree that the idea of Stride's murderer being interrupted is based on an assumption that a serial mutilator wasn't able to complete his task, but it is equally an assumption that this killer would always mutilate. We have the medical evidence as to what happened in each case. We have no evidence about the mindset of the murderer in each instance. Anything could have happened and it is all conjecture. We know nothing about who killed any of these women.

[Spring heeled Jim]

I would like to know people opinion of whether there was some kind of subduing prior to the throat cut and if this subduing involved two hands? I know Lynn has given his opinion but I wondered what others thought? In my mind is worth questioning this scenario with regards any possible interruption.

[mariab]

No, just an incompletion of the throat wound, commencement of mutilation, disturbence of clothing, body position....you know, that sorta evidence.

Interesting, Monty, cuz the way I see it, commencement of mutilation and disturbance of clothing (in the lower body area) would have to occur after the body was turned around. Thus, in my interpretation, the Stride evidence in situ fits with interruption. Esp. if one considers the timing and Diemshitz' testimony.

Just out of curiosity, Monty, (curiosity killed the cat ), if you're unconvinced about it having been one by the Ripper, do you see Stride as a random killing, connected to the Club, or a domestic? Somehow I'm having the feeling you'd rather not commit yourself to an interpretation? (Kinda like, not wanting to connect the GSG with the apron?)

[Bridewell]

Hi, Bridewell,
Haven't talked with you in awhile.

I'd never thought of her cleaning the club before. It's possible, but her appearance suggests to me a social occasion instead of waiting to go to work. The clothes brush, the flower, the breath sweetners . . . more social, I think.

Plus, would she have told the doss house/or person to whom she gave the green velvet to hold that she would not be back that evening?

Unless, she expected to be busy until around breakfast time?

How would those things fit together? Do they?

curious

Hi Curious,

They probably don't fit together. Hence my comment about it being dangerous when a thought occurs to me!

Regards, Bridewell.

[Monty]

There's NO evidence, Monty? Apart from Diemschitz' testimony, the timing, and the body in situ?
Not sure what you would have considered as evidence of interruption. A man seen running away from the scene? A man caught by Diemshitz in Dutfield's Yard, blood dripping knife in hand, complaining "frickin' anarchist Jewish dudes didn't let me finish"?

No, just an incompletion of the throat wound, commencement of mutilation, disturbence of clothing, body position....you know, that sorta evidence.

As opposed to the assumption you list.

Monty

[lynn cates]

Colin and Colin

Hello Colin. Thanks.

Have you been chatting up your namesake? (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

deus ex machina

Hello Maria. Well, those would work.

Why does one even CONSIDER interruption? "Because Liz was killed by Jack, Jack mutilated, Liz was not mutilated, hence he was interrupted."

Compare Baxter: "Polly and Annie's assassin killed them to harvest their organs. Polly had all her organs. Therefore, he was interrupted."

I think the logic phrase is deus ex machina.

Cheers.
LC