How Would Jack the Ripper Have Reacted?

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Lynn,

As you know, I spearheaded the whole 'Schwartz the liar' theory a long time ago. I seriously looked it but was forced to conclude that there's just not enough evidence to brand him a liar. His evidence that the street was silent (except for Stride/Pipeman/BS man) was supported by Fanny Mortimer, who appears to have not come to her door until just after the Schwartz episode. The story itself had no loud and crazy loop holes, and he was apparently able to provide a good description of Liz Stride PRIOR to being taken to the mortuary, and given her relatively unique appearance, this would have been quite a feat to get lucky. And then you have the little details such as being pulled by the shoulders, and there, in fact, being finger marks on the shoulders. I do think Schwartz was a friend of the Berner Street club, but as Leon Goldstein proved, you CAN be a club member and still tell the truth.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Hunter]

Just a clarification on the condition of Elizabeth Stride's bodice.

[Coroner- questioning Edward Johnston] Did you undo the dress?

[ Johnston] The dress was not undone when I came. I undid it to see if the chest was warm.

[lynn cates]

hippy lip

Hello Tom. Thanks. I had not heard of his pre-description before.

Did he get the "hippy lip" part right?

Cheers.
LC

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Lynn, I have no idea about that, but Abberline would have taken a full statement, with particulars, to determine if he was worth the trip to the morgue. The mortuary was on lock down. People who actually knew Stride weren't allowed in to view the body. This is likely from the fall out over Violenia from the Chapman investigation, who they surmised had made up his story simply to see the body. They would have suspected the same from Schwartz, a foreigner who told a strikingly similar tale.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Errata]

Just a clarification on the condition of Elizabeth Stride's bodice.

[Coroner- questioning Edward Johnston] Did you undo the dress?

[ Johnston] The dress was not undone when I came. I undid it to see if the chest was warm.

In situ she was described as having her dress undone at the neck. Even by Diemshutz, who was first at the scene. I had thought that it was because she was a prostitute, and was displaying wares so to speak, but now I think about it, if a guy who stumbles across a corpse notices that her top few buttons are undone of all things, it had to be pretty uncommon. So I don't know why they were undone.

On the other hand, I don't know why they were undone and not popped off like you would expect from someone trying to get in there, so it's a mystery.

[Errata]

Just a few things...the 'bruises' on Stride's shoulders were noted as 'finger marks' by the doctors, meaning they resulted from applied pressure as opposed to blunt force trauma. No abrasions on her face. Bruise on chest. The finger marks must have occurred at the time of death, or within minutes before or after death. Based on witness statements, no one was seen squeezing her shoulders after her body was found, so we're left with it occurring at or just before her death. This, in turn, leaves two possibilities:

1) BS Man was responsible. The Star included the very interesting observation (from its interview with Schwartz) that he grabbed Stride 'by the shoulders'. It's one of those little details you can't imagine being made up, so was probably true.
2) Her killer (assuming he was not BS Man) left the finger marks, and this might very well explain how she was rendered unconscious.

The chest bruise may not have had anything to do with her murder.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

An abrasion on the chest is odd. Bruises, sure. But a circular scrape the size of a golf ball is just odd. Not unexplainable, not indicative of anything, just odd.

Now I don't think Stride was killed by the Ripper. And I'm spitballing on a robbery, because it's Wednesday, and I don't have any more Project Runway to watch. And I don't need it to be a robbery in order to not believe she was a victim of the Ripper. But her murder, Ripper or no, has some quirks to it. Her position is unusual, the mud spatter appears inconsistent with how she was found, she hung on to a paper bag, she has an odd scrape.

It's a theory, and one I'm not especially wed to. Especially since I literally just came up with it. But it's worth thrashing out, if not necessarily on this thread, if for no other reason than to rule it out. I have done any number of really odd things in my life. I have had bruises on my chest, welts, burns, a rib sticking through once, I've even had scrapes in a line with a collar or a bra. But I'm thinking really hard, and I cannot for the life of me figure out how she got a golf ball size scrape on her chest of all places, unless something was there. Something that nobody mentioned was missing. And abrasions heal pretty quickly, so it couldn't have been there long. After a couple of hours the redness fades and you can't tell they are there unless they start flaking skin. And she was wet, so it had to be pretty fresh...

It's odd is what I'm saying. If Schwartz is telling the truth, that's kind of odd too. Thats not the behavior of a couple of guys trying to rape or rob a prostitute. I mean, they aren't trying to get her into a place out of sight. He tries to pull her into the street, not push her into the alley. They aren't afraid of being seen. So they want her for some other reason. She's a Whitechapel prostitute. What else do they think they are going to get out of her? I think it's a fair question.

[Tom_Wescott]

In situ she was described as having her dress undone at the neck. Even by Diemshutz, who was first at the scene.

This must be more of your family folklore, because her neck wasn't unbuttoned until Johnston went to feel for a pulse.

An abrasion on the chest is odd. Bruises, sure. But a circular scrape the size of a golf ball is just odd. Not unexplainable, not indicative of anything, just odd.

Odder still for the fact that she had no abrasion on her chest. She had a bruise.

It's a theory, and one I'm not especially wed to. Especially since I literally just came up with it.

Yes you did!

And I don't need it to be a robbery in order to not believe she was a victim of the Ripper.

Odder still is this statement. I don't believe a person, living or dead, has had to accept a robbery scenario in order to believe that Stride was a Ripper victim. People believe this because the evidence points strongly to that conclusion.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Errata]

This must be more of your family folklore, because her neck wasn't unbuttoned until Johnston went to feel for a pulse.

Lets go to the inquest, shall we?

In Diemshutz's testimony:

"[Coroner] Did you notice whether the clothes of the deceased were in order? - They were in perfect order.
[Coroner] How was she lying? - On her left side, with her face towards the club wall.
[Coroner] Was the whole of the body resting on the side? - No, I should say only her face. I cannot say how much of the body was sideways. I did not notice what position her hands were in, but when the police came I observed that her bodice was unbuttoned near the neck. The doctor said the body was quite warm. "

Now, I'm totally willing to admit that the timing here is fuzzy. Johnston came with the police. But it seems unlikely he came with the first police on the scene. It sounds like Diemshutz is saying that when the police (with light) showed up, her neck buttons were undone. And then when Johnston arrived, he actually undid the bodice to feel her chest. But I don't know the order in which people came and left.

I also don't know how many buttons have to be undone in order for a man to feel her chest. Victorians had pretty high necklines, usually covering the suprasternal notch. Two or three buttons undone at the neck of a dress with that high of a collar does not allow a man to get a hand in down to the heart area. Unless he's Gumby. I assume that he would have had to unbutton her at least down to her cleavage, which to me would be described as "undone" not "undone at the neck".

So it seems it could go either way.

Odder still for the fact that she had no abrasion on her chest. She had a bruise.

Again to the inquest and Baxter Phillips:

"The throat was deeply gashed, and there was an abrasion of the skin, about an inch and a quarter in diameter, under the right clavicle."

Now Blackwell says "The Foreman: Did you notice any marks or bruises about the shoulders? - They were what we call pressure marks. At first they were very obscure, but subsequently they became very evident. They were not what are ordinarily called bruises; neither is there any abrasion. Each shoulder was about equally marked. "

But this seems to be about about the shoulders, and not the chest. And yes, the two are terribly close together. Given that they are pressure marks, he probably doesn't mean the along the trapzius muscle, which is considered neck, he probably means long the deltoid muscle, which is high upper arms. Which is a common place for fingermarks.

Odder still is this statement. I don't believe a person, living or dead, has had to accept a robbery scenario in order to believe that Stride was a Ripper victim. People believe this because the evidence points strongly to that conclusion.

Was or was not? No they don't have to accept any scenario. I don't think she was a Ripper victim because I don't think her murder at all fits. I was just throwing it out there, because it's easy for people to say "you want it to to be X so that you can believe Z" which isn't true, but I thought that statement might eliminate the particular angle. Is all.

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Errata,

By the time the police got there and Diemshitz was able to see the body, her collar HAD been unbuttoned, by Johnston, who stated it was he who unbuttoned it. There was no abrasion at all. It was mud. And I can appreciate your point about making your stance clear. Many folks around here, for some odd reason, are indeed prone to jump to conclusions about other posters' motives for little or no reason.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Errata]

Hi Errata,

By the time the police got there and Diemshitz was able to see the body, her collar HAD been unbuttoned, by Johnston, who stated it was he who unbuttoned it. There was no abrasion at all. It was mud. And I can appreciate your point about making your stance clear. Many folks around here, for some odd reason, are indeed prone to jump to conclusions about other posters' motives for little or no reason.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Respectfully, I disagree. Diemshutz says in his testimony that the doctor arrived twenty minutes after the constables, and it's at the arrival of the constables that he notices the buttons. And Johnston says he only got there two minutes before the doctor did. So I do think her neck button were undone when she was found. Now she could have been walking around like that all day. It isn't necessarily a thing.

But you are correct the "abrasion" washed off. Though thats not really a place mud gets to all that often. And if it appeared to be an abrasion until it washed off, I have to think whatever is was was red or pink. I mean, if it was from something black or blue, the stain would be blue and would look like a bruise, if it was brown it would stain yellow and look like an old bruise. So I still think something was in there, but as it was a stain and not a scrape that significantly lengthens the time in could have been there.

If my spelling is terrible I apologize. I just got a new laptop and the keyboard requires some getting used to.

Though one question I would dearly like answered is that if Schwatrz was telling the truth, what on earth did those men want from Liz Stride?

[Tom_Wescott]

Respectfully, I disagree. Diemshutz says in his testimony that the doctor arrived twenty minutes after the constables, and it's at the arrival of the constables that he notices the buttons. And Johnston says he only got there two minutes before the doctor did. So I do think her neck button were undone when she was found. Now she could have been walking around like that all day. It isn't necessarily a thing.

I think we're working from a different set of facts.

But you are correct the "abrasion" washed off. Though thats not really a place mud gets to all that often.

It does when your neck is propped upon dirty stones. But that's another fact that appears to be part of my unique collection, according to some posters.

Though one question I would dearly like answered is that if Schwatrz was telling the truth, what on earth did those men want from Liz Stride?

I should think that was obvious. They were Fenians trying to recruit Stride into being a spy for them. When she told them she was already spying for the Jews, they were left with little choice but silence her.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott