Tweet
Hello all,
I've always been a bit puzzled about something so I thought Id put it out here and see if anyone has any ideas.
Elizabeth Stride was said to have been identified by print time Monday October 1st, as in the Daily News:..."The body found in Berner-street has been identified as that of Elizabeth Stride". And the Echo on the 1st:"The only other prominent fact yet made public is that Stride was seen in the company of a man, the description of whom tallies in some degree with that of the mysterious companion of Chapman". And the Evening News of the same day; " It was late in the afternoon, however, before any one was able to say they knew her. Eventually she was identified as Elizabeth Stride, familiarly known as Long Lizzie, who had been living at a common lodging-house, No. 32, Flower and Dean-street and who plied her painful trade in the neighbourhood".
Interestingly though, to me at least, at the opening of the Inquest the jury Foreman stated he thought the Inquest was for Liz Stride and asked why the Inquest was in her name if the victim was not identified, and the Coroner replied; "That (the Stride ID) was a mistake. Something is known of the deceased, but she has not been fully identified. It would be better at present to describe her as a woman unknown. She has been partially identified. It is known where she lived. It was thought at the beginning of the inquest that she had been identified by a relative, but that turns out to have been a mistake."
The next day the Inquest resumed and by far the longest and most involved witness presentation is by Mary Malcolm, who was sure the dead woman was her sister, Elizabeth Watts.
My question is this; If the address of the deceased was known (by the Coroner), and papers published the name of the victim in their October 1st editions, and the Inquest is opened on Oct 1st using the victim name Elizabeth Stride (by the Jury Foreman), then why are we entertained by Mary Malcolm on Tuesday the 2nd?
It would seem they knew who Liz was early on Oct the 1st.
Best regards
I've always been a bit puzzled about something so I thought Id put it out here and see if anyone has any ideas.
Elizabeth Stride was said to have been identified by print time Monday October 1st, as in the Daily News:..."The body found in Berner-street has been identified as that of Elizabeth Stride". And the Echo on the 1st:"The only other prominent fact yet made public is that Stride was seen in the company of a man, the description of whom tallies in some degree with that of the mysterious companion of Chapman". And the Evening News of the same day; " It was late in the afternoon, however, before any one was able to say they knew her. Eventually she was identified as Elizabeth Stride, familiarly known as Long Lizzie, who had been living at a common lodging-house, No. 32, Flower and Dean-street and who plied her painful trade in the neighbourhood".
Interestingly though, to me at least, at the opening of the Inquest the jury Foreman stated he thought the Inquest was for Liz Stride and asked why the Inquest was in her name if the victim was not identified, and the Coroner replied; "That (the Stride ID) was a mistake. Something is known of the deceased, but she has not been fully identified. It would be better at present to describe her as a woman unknown. She has been partially identified. It is known where she lived. It was thought at the beginning of the inquest that she had been identified by a relative, but that turns out to have been a mistake."
The next day the Inquest resumed and by far the longest and most involved witness presentation is by Mary Malcolm, who was sure the dead woman was her sister, Elizabeth Watts.
My question is this; If the address of the deceased was known (by the Coroner), and papers published the name of the victim in their October 1st editions, and the Inquest is opened on Oct 1st using the victim name Elizabeth Stride (by the Jury Foreman), then why are we entertained by Mary Malcolm on Tuesday the 2nd?
It would seem they knew who Liz was early on Oct the 1st.
Best regards
Comment