Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Grapes in hand prove nothing...do they?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Grapes in hand prove nothing...do they?

    I have on several boards been making a lot of fuss about the grapes Liz was eating during 0055 and 01.00 on the night of her death. Despite what is claimed in books or postings here, I do not like the "shoehorning" of evidence or statements to fit MY suspect. At this time I don't have one. There are some suspects on the main list who I think definitely were not JtR, but it's my opinion and that's all. In the case of the grapes, it seems several people, individually told the press that she was, "lying on her left side her arms outsretched with the fists clenched, in the right hand she was holding grapes in the left sweetmeats." Or something like that. Both Constables, Dew and Lamb reported to the press they saw "Skins and stones" (Dew) "Grapes in the right hand" (Lamb.)
    So if they hand leapt upon the idea that she had bought the grapes from nearby Mr Packer, they could have got a very good description of the man who was with her, if anyone was, that is. We know she was seen with a well dressed man at 0035 opposite Dutfields yard. Now, so what?
    See looking at this from another view, let's assume the guy bought her the grapes, it's cold and wet. They are discussion terms perhaps when seen by Constable Smith at 00.35. He goes off, Packer goes to bed, they arn't going to hang around until 01.00 before they get going are they? Chances are, they crossed the street behind Smith,s receding back and got the business done. 15-20 mins later the "well dressed 28 year old" could have been on the way home to the Mrs and kids.
    Because as I've said elsewhere I think it very odd that a woman who is about to bend over to service a client, JtR, would have both hands full. She will need to support herself or would be too unsteady. She would put the grapes and sweets down first, wouldn't she? This could mean that the killer was not the grape buyer. The skins and pips on the ground means she was eating them in the yard, like I said, I cannot believe on a crappy wet night, that any punter would hang around while a 3 penny tart finished her grapes. But she might have picked them up again after he had gone, started eating and spitting, then got jumped by the killer.

  • #2
    Where is the bending over thing coming from?
    "When the legend becomes fact... print the legend"
    - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by erobitha View Post
      Where is the bending over thing coming from?
      We'll send you a book. In the meantime you probably need to get out more.

      c.d.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by c.d. View Post

        We'll send you a book. In the meantime you probably need to get out more.

        c.d.
        I have two kids, I think I figured it out.

        My point being, why does she have to be bent over? Is there some evidence that is what she did? My understanding of Victorian women in general was that the front of their dresses and skirts were designed to pull up easily at the front so they could use the toilet. Why would that same approach not be the same for prostitutes. A lift up of the skirt against the wall for a quick knee trembler is much more likely than bending over.
        Last edited by erobitha; 08-27-2020, 02:27 PM.
        "When the legend becomes fact... print the legend"
        - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by c.d. View Post

          We'll send you a book. In the meantime you probably need to get out more.

          c.d.
          Bedsheet with a hole in it everytime....
          Thems the Vagaries.....

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by erobitha View Post

            I have two kids, I think I figured it out.

            My point being, why does she have to be bent over? Is there some evidence that is what she did? My understanding of Victorian women in general was that the front of their dresses and skirts were designed to pull up easily at the front so they could use the toilet. Why would that same approach not be the same for prostitutes. A lift up of the skirt against the wall for a quick knee trembler is much more likely than bending over.
            You know something detective Erobitha, I reckon you have a point there. I assumed, (a deadly thing to do), that she took it from behind, thinking it more practical. However the cachous support your view, so I stand corrected.

            Comment


            • #7
              All jokes aside,it appears that Stride had just taken the cachous out of Jack's palm with her thumb and forefinger when attacked.
              My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

              Comment


              • #8
                Has some new evidence been found that indicates that Liz Stride was soliciting? In her "good evening wear"...with a skirt down to her boot tops...with breath and mouth fresheners and a new flower arrangement? I though not.

                There is not one shred of evidence Liz was soliciting, and there is such evidence in both of the alleged Ripper victims preceding her. So, he now just cuts once anyone who is out at night?

                Pleeze. Missing an intelligent argument here lately.
                Michael Richards

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
                  Has some new evidence been found that indicates that Liz Stride was soliciting? In her "good evening wear"...with a skirt down to her boot tops...with breath and mouth fresheners and a new flower arrangement? I though not.

                  There is not one shred of evidence Liz was soliciting, and there is such evidence in both of the alleged Ripper victims preceding her. So, he now just cuts once anyone who is out at night?

                  Pleeze. Missing an intelligent argument here lately.
                  Just curious. We often don't see eye to eye on things, but correct me if I am wrong - you seem to have more to discuss on the case of Elizabeth Stride than any other victim?

                  You clearly don't believe she was a JTR victim. Is it a mission to convince others to believe the same?

                  The mode of the kill is the same. Strangulation, then when passed out he slits their throats. In every victim he shows the same process. It is how he kept noise to a minimum. His aim was to kill as quickly as possible and that is exactly what happened in Liz's case. He knew to cut the major arteries in the neck. We see almost exactly the same injuries which caused death on Annie Chapman. My guess is he did the same too on Nichols but thought he could remove her head afterwards and tried to do so.

                  Blackwell on Stride:
                  "In the neck there was a long incision which exactly corresponded with the lower border of the scarf. The border was slightly frayed, as if by a sharp knife. The incision in the neck commenced on the left side, 2 inches below the angle of the jaw, and almost in a direct line with it, nearly severing the vessels on that side, cutting the windpipe completely in two, and terminating on the opposite side 1 inch below the angle of the right jaw, but without severing the vessels on that side. I could not ascertain whether the bloody hand had been moved. The blood was running down the gutter into the drain in the opposite direction from the feet."

                  Phillips on Chapman:
                  "The throat had been severed. The incisions of the skin indicated that they had been made from the left side of the neck on a line with the angle of the jaw, carried entirely round and again in front of the neck, and ending at a point about midway between the jaw and the sternum or breast bone on the right hand. There were two distinct clean cuts on the body of the vertebrae on the left side of the spine. They were parallel to each other, and separated by about half an inch."

                  This type of kill is highly unusual at the best of times, let alone on the same night an hour apart. Debate all you want but the evidence does not favour your theory that Stride was not a JTR victim. Every indicator suggests she absolutely was. Mutilation did not happen because of interruption.
                  "When the legend becomes fact... print the legend"
                  - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Women's skirts were always down to the ankles, this was Victorian England. But, you're right, Stride didn't carry a sign across her back saying "Available", but then neither did any of the others.
                    Is this another aspect of your "Yellow Brick Road" theory?
                    Regards, Jon S.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
                      Has some new evidence been found that indicates that Liz Stride was soliciting? In her "good evening wear"...with a skirt down to her boot tops...with breath and mouth fresheners and a new flower arrangement? I though not.

                      There is not one shred of evidence Liz was soliciting, and there is such evidence in both of the alleged Ripper victims preceding her. So, he now just cuts once anyone who is out at night?

                      Pleeze. Missing an intelligent argument here lately.
                      Hello Michael,

                      I will copy my post from another thread.

                      Whether Stride was actively soliciting that night is a moot point. The real point is what would her reaction have been if she had been approached and offered extra cash for her services and that we simply don't know.

                      For all we know, she might have been on a date earlier that evening. But dates can end and in her financial situation she most certainly would have been in need of money. The end of the evening is the key not the beginning of the evening. That seems like an intelligent argument to me.

                      c.d.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by DJA View Post
                        All jokes aside,it appears that Stride had just taken the cachous out of Jack's palm with her thumb and forefinger when attacked.
                        If that is the case then it would appear that she did not have them in her hand when thrown to the ground by the B.S. man or else in all likelihood they would have been scattered in attempting to break her fall and especially if she attempted to fight him off. Which would mean that either Schwartz was lying, confused as to what was actually taking place, or Stride's killer came on the scene after the B.S. man had left.

                        c.d.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Hello Michael,

                          What exactly would be "evidence of soliciting?" Do the women have to be seen holding up a sign or what? Remember that soliciting was illegal so it would seem that some discretion was involved.

                          c.d.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by erobitha View Post

                            Just curious. We often don't see eye to eye on things, but correct me if I am wrong - you seem to have more to discuss on the case of Elizabeth Stride than any other victim?

                            You clearly don't believe she was a JTR victim. Is it a mission to convince others to believe the same?

                            The mode of the kill is the same. Strangulation, then when passed out he slits their throats. In every victim he shows the same process. It is how he kept noise to a minimum. His aim was to kill as quickly as possible and that is exactly what happened in Liz's case. He knew to cut the major arteries in the neck. We see almost exactly the same injuries which caused death on Annie Chapman. My guess is he did the same too on Nichols but thought he could remove her head afterwards and tried to do so.

                            Blackwell on Stride:
                            "In the neck there was a long incision which exactly corresponded with the lower border of the scarf. The border was slightly frayed, as if by a sharp knife. The incision in the neck commenced on the left side, 2 inches below the angle of the jaw, and almost in a direct line with it, nearly severing the vessels on that side, cutting the windpipe completely in two, and terminating on the opposite side 1 inch below the angle of the right jaw, but without severing the vessels on that side. I could not ascertain whether the bloody hand had been moved. The blood was running down the gutter into the drain in the opposite direction from the feet."

                            Phillips on Chapman:
                            "The throat had been severed. The incisions of the skin indicated that they had been made from the left side of the neck on a line with the angle of the jaw, carried entirely round and again in front of the neck, and ending at a point about midway between the jaw and the sternum or breast bone on the right hand. There were two distinct clean cuts on the body of the vertebrae on the left side of the spine. They were parallel to each other, and separated by about half an inch."

                            This type of kill is highly unusual at the best of times, let alone on the same night an hour apart. Debate all you want but the evidence does not favour your theory that Stride was not a JTR victim. Every indicator suggests she absolutely was. Mutilation did not happen because of interruption.
                            Yes, its not been formally conveyed as such, but I do intend to do my best to have Liz Stride retired from the Canonical Group on the existing evidence alone. In the case of Stride there is evidence her scarf was twisted tightly, which in and of itself doesnt indicate it was used for strangulation. He may have grabbed her by the scarf and when she resisted as best she could, it twisted tight. Remember, the physician who tended to her said the act of slitting her throat may have been 2 seconds long. And she may have been cut while falling. Once. This is nothing like any other alleged "Ripper" murder within the Canonical Group. The decidedly square peg in the round hole. They were not killed like Liz was, the only similarity being the type of weapon used.

                            Slitting throats was not at all rare as some would like to believe, and a great many of assaults during those times were with a knife as the primary weapon of the offender. Stride is cut once. There is no indication within the known physical evidence that any further action was intended or interrupted. Therefore, this kill was complete as is. Nothing like Jack, whose specialty comes after that throat cutting...with 2 deep cuts, severing both major arteries. His ultimate objectives were laid bare for all to see in the Chapman murder. Its one of the primary reason why Kate cannot be summarily excluded...like the only non-ripped Ripper victim can.

                            As for solicitation, people want to see what they want, they want to believe desperation drives every move these impoverished people made. They want to overlook the circumstances in favour of the reputation, or the past. In this case, of a woman who when on the register of prostitutes in Goteborg, sought legtimate employment to be removed from it...and was. She arrived in London as a nanny. She owned a coffee shop for a time. She cleaned rooms for money. These are multidimensional beings, who from time to time stepped out of their grim existence to live like someone who had something to live for.

                            I think Liz Strides dress, her demeanor, her primping, her recent single status, and the fact that we have no idea why she is standing outside that club at 12:30am all leads to one of 2 likely scenarios. She is dressed nice to appear for work at the club to clean, likely arranged by one of the Jews she worked for the past few months, or, she is waiting to meet someone..either would explain why she wasnt sure when she would return to the lodging house. You see, if you accept that these were humans with lives, then it can be much easier to understand some of what is there on paper.
                            Michael Richards

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by c.d. View Post

                              Stride's killer came on the scene after the B.S. man had left.

                              c.d.
                              Suspect BS man was Stride's bodyguard who departed as Jack had not turned up as agreed.

                              Stride waiting for Jack in the lane played on his mind,so he returned to pull her out.

                              Once the coast was clear .....

                              The only time Jack was sighted was in Hanbury Street.
                              Chapman's killer was the same height as the GSG author.
                              Pretty much Sutton's "height".
                              My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X