Was Stride Really a JtR Victim?

[lynn cates]

This coyness, Star, were no crime.

Hello (again) Jon. Thanks.

"If the Star concocted the story why send it to the Central News Agency and not their own offices?"

Professor Cook covered this in his book. The two entities were bitter enemies. Send it to yourself--suspect whom? But send it to CNA . . .

"Why is it not mentioned in the Star on the 2nd Oct, the day after it was received at the CNA?"

"The Star" went out of their way to be coy and deny both "Jack" missives; however, they milked it for all it was worth.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

standard form

Hello Jon. Thanks.

""Squealed" - meaning, in this case, "to make a noise that drew attention.""

Ah, standard form. Very well. But not loud?

Cheers.
LC

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Thanks Caz.

I know how far the data by itself goes Phil. Exercises, exercises exercises. So where would you put your money? Instinct is important for an investigator.

[The Good Michael]

I must admit Michael that you are braver than I.

I would certainly not dare to make such an assertion on the grounds that you do. Having the testimony presented to the Coroner (when there is no supporting evidence that happened) would give what Schwartz said a wholly different standing. I think that would be misleading and unsustainable.

Sorry to disagree.

l

Haha! Disagree all you want. That's what this stuff is all about. And to be honest, if the statement was presented to the coroner, I don't think it made a ton of difference to the answers of the questions: where did she die? and Was she murdered?

Mike

[Phil H]

I must admit Michael that you are braver than I.

I would certainly not dare to make such an assertion on the grounds that you do. Having the testimony presented to the Coroner (when there is no supporting evidence that happened) would give what Schwartz said a wholly different standing. I think that would be misleading and unsustainable.

Sorry to disagree.

Caz

To answer the question posed in the thread's title, I would say that JtR must at the very least be considered the prime suspect in the complete absence of any other plausible suspect.

That is a perfectly valid point of view, but does rather close one to other possibilities.

I find the clinging to conventional wisdoms quite touching - though I once did it myself.

There are other possibilities for Stride, than being a JtR victim and (for myself) I think it helpful to ponder those somewhat - while never ruling out the usual explanations, of course.

But each to their own.

Phil

[The Good Michael]

To the point, Schwartz' testimony to the authorities which most probably was given as evidence to the coroner in some form,

Michael - can I please ask the basis on which you make that statement?

Phil,

It is an educated guess on my part. I believe his statement was credible and important, so with that in mind, I don't believe it was ignored by the coroner's inquest. I have no proof, but as in all things JTR, there is no definitive word against this either. Logically, to me at least, it makes sense that the coroner would have read the statement or been given it in brief.

Mike

[caz]

To answer the question posed in the thread's title, I would say that JtR must at the very least be considered the prime suspect in the complete absence of any other plausible suspect. Kidney and Stride's other associates were looked into and nothing suspicious was found. I don't buy that a complete stranger, other than JtR, who happened to be carrying a lethal blade on him, would have risked the gallows by using it on Stride to swift, efficient effect for no better reason than she 'upset' him somehow.

JtR doesn't need a reason. He cuts strangers' throats (and more when he gets the chance) just for jolly.

Love,

Caz
X

[Phil H]

To the point, Schwartz' testimony to the authorities which most probably was given as evidence to the coroner in some form,

Michael - can I please ask the basis on which you make that statement?

Phil

[The Good Michael]

Yet you can't get from three not very loud screams to a bit of squealing?

Where there's no will there's no way, right?

A little shocked you brought Lynn's boudoir antics into the equation. I mean the book isn't even out yet.

Mike

[caz]

Hello Jon. Thanks.

"I think it means three screams that were not very loud."

Oxymoron.

Not sure how we get from an oxymoron to a squeal?

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

If I may interrupt here, wasn't it you who suggested Schwartz could have been giving some recipe or other for all we know, since we rely solely on his interpreter for what the witness was actually claiming?

Yet you can't get from three not very loud screams to a bit of squealing?

Where there's no will there's no way, right?

Love,

Caz
X

[The Good Michael]

No offense intended, but when I think of someone crying out or screaming, but not loudly, I think of...maybe Gene Wilder in a deadpan voice saying, No. Stop Don't." like from Willy Wonka.

Mike

[Jon Guy]

He wouldn't, but who could contradict him if he made the claim?

Actually, Schwartz could.

[Jon Guy]

He wouldn't, but who could contradict him if he made the claim?

So it was pure chance?

[curious4]

Screamed

Or "cried out".

C4

[Jon Guy]

Hi Lynn

"I suppose it could have been someone connected to the Star."

Good thinking.

Not really. As I went on to explain, highly unlikely.

If the Star concocted the story why send it to the Central News Agency and not their own offices?
Why is it not mentioned in the Star on the 2nd Oct, the day after it was received at the CNA?
When do the Star eventually write about Saucy Jack ?

Highly unlikely that Saucy Jack was written by a pressman.

"But they didn't track Schwartz down until early evening on Sunday at best."

For the interview? Agreed. But when would "The Star" first have become aware of the story?

When Schwartz walked out of Leman Police station early on Sunday evening after giving his statement to the police.
I guess the Star had a reporter hanging around outside Leman St Police station following developments.