Diemschutz arrival

[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.

[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.

[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

[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

[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!

[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?

[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.

[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.

[mariab]

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.

Oh come on Cris, now you're attempting to be all “scientific“. Most of the evidence pertaining to the Whitechapel murders is circumstantial anyway, due to the majority of the sources having been lost and to the fact that the investigation was never concluded. The Diemshitz-cum-poney-interrupting-the-killer is the most likely scenario for what happened that night in Dutfield's Yard, accepted even by the contemporary police. I don't see any reason whatsoever to question it since it fits so well with the evidence. And I'm all for simplicity – when it fits with the evidence.

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 hope your barb on theorizers was not addressed to me, as you may well know that I'm a historian with a PhD, earning my life out of research.
And by the way, I disagree with the sheer historian's approach. I think what the case requires is a combination of a historian's and researcher's approach, and it's mostly the latter than eventually might succeed in managing to make more sense out of this case.

I just try not to get involved anymore in circular debates that accomplish very little.

With you at 100% here. You've read one Stride thread, you've read them all, and I can't see any progress in these circular discussions since I joined casebook in 2010.

[Wickerman]

Some posters are still underestimating what has been done to Stride. Somebody cut her throat. Skillfully and quickly. She died within seconds and nothing could have saved her. The job was done and well done.

It is almost like you say that no-one else had the ability,.... so who killed Coles and McKenzie?


Regards, Jon S.

[lynn cates]

paradigm

Hello Cris.

"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."

Precisely. This should be posted on every Stride thread.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

evidence

Hello Maria.

"The Diemshitz-cum-poney-interrupting-the-killer is the most likely scenario for what happened that night in Dutfield's Yard, accepted even by the contemporary police."

Yes. But did they show it to be the case or merely assume it?

"I don't see any reason whatsoever to question it since it fits so well with the evidence. And I'm all for simplicity – when it fits with the evidence."

Which evidence? If you mean the other WCM that autumn, maybe. But why class them together without evidence and then, once together, using the others as a guide to that one?

Cheers.
LC

[Fleetwood Mac]

It is almost like you say that no-one else had the ability,.... so who killed Coles and McKenzie?


Regards, Jon S.

That is a fair enough point, Jon.

But, there is a difference in that we're talking about 5 murders in a short space of time. I suppose there is more chance of someone else coming along in 1889 or 1891 than there was of someone else cutting throats during Jacks reign.

I think it's certainly possible that someone else was knocking about, but is it likely based on murder figures in London around that time - particularly these types of murders.

How many prostitutes were having their throats cut in dark spots in 1888?

Personally, I think Coles was a Jack and Stride.

[lynn cates]

Brown

Hello Mac. Thought experiment time. By chance, I was reading about the Brown murder in Westminster just today. As you must know, she died by having her throat cut about 2 hours before Liz and only 3 miles away.

Although her mentally disturbed husband readily confessed, suppose he had not.

I submit to you that we would have threads discussing the thesis that "Jack" killed Mrs. Brown, but was interrupted before mutilation began. Next, he went to Berner street and did for Liz. ANOTHER interruption. By now, he was in a frenzy and found Kate at Mitre Square. Success!

And I PROMISE you, someone would be counting the 3 miles from Westminster to Berner and demonstrating the plausibility of the 1-2 hour time frame.

Cheers.
LC

[mariab]

But why class them together without evidence and then, once together, using the others as a guide to that one?

I'm sorry Lynn, but I'm not getting entangled into a discussion about the 2+2+1 theory.

Do you think you can eventually find a minute to look up that Danish diplomate for me? I'll ask my boss about Russian speaking people in Stanford, he's there fairly often and might know peeps from the Russian lit department. (One hand washes the other and so on... Lol. Insert sound of Machiavellian laugh here. )