Was Stride Really a JtR Victim?

[Jon Guy]

Hi Lynn

Ah, now I see what you mean--a bit of equivocation. "Squeal" meaning, in this case, "to inform."

So Liz informed on her assailant?

No, that`s not what I meant.

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

[lynn cates]

bottom line

Hello Errata. Thanks.

"He said she screamed, but not loudly, which doesn't make sense since a scream is by definition loud."

Right. And this is my bottom line.

Cheers.
LC

[curious4]

Liz Stride

I am not entirely convinced she was. I'd say I am around 75% of her being a victim of the whitechapel killer.

On a side note liz stride was my distant cousin. surprisingly enough I only found that out a few years ago. I had always had a fascination with the JTR killings for a large majority of my life.

Regards,
Dan

Hello Dan,

Fascinating to be able to speak to a relative of Liz. How are you connected? Strangely enough I have recently been wishing it was possible to speak to a relative. Following the doctor's remark that there was an unusual flow of blood, I put forward the idea that Liz could possibly have suffered from haemophilia type C, which means that the sufferer can be female and doesn't have problems with cuts and so on, only with operations, when they bleed much longer than normal. Do you happen to know if anyone in your family has had problems during surgery or has been diagnosed with this?

Of course even so this wouldn't prove Liz had it, but it would affect estimating the time of death, as her blood would stay liquid longer.

It must feel weird to have people discussing your relative's death so clinically, but I think that, on the whole, people are sympathetic and respectful.

Best wishes,
C4

P.S. I'd go for a 95% chance, myself.

[The Good Michael]

A "statement" (meaning something formal and official) is surely a sub-sort of testimony (which can also have technical meanings - i.e. testimony in a court of law) but which can be used loosely to mean bearing witness in any way - written or oral.

The word "statement" can also be used loosely and often is.

It is up to the person using the word to ensure that his meaning (and definition) is clear.

True of course, and I was clear in my initial post. People often want to hang on certain words in order to support some theory or non-theory, or because they are just being a pain. To the point, Schwartz' testimony to the authorities which most probably was given as evidence to the coroner in some form, doesn't prove or disprove anything about Stride's death, but it is logical enough that it shouldn't be dismissed as a false statement. If the exact time of the murder could be pinpointed, we might have something more. Alas, we don't.

Mike

Mike

[Phil H]

A "statement" (meaning something formal and official) is surely a sub-sort of testimony (which can also have technical meanings - i.e. testimony in a court of law) but which can be used loosely to mean bearing witness in any way - written or oral.

The word "statement" can also be used loosely and often is.

It is up to the person using the word to ensure that his meaning (and definition) is clear.

Who killed Stride and why? What is the most reasonable explanation?

In my view we do not have sufficient evidence to make a judgement. But that applies equally that Liz was a Ripper victim.

We are already assuming. Which is the most reasonable assumption?

I'd use a different formulation, I think. As I said in my earlier (longer) post in this thread, setting Stride aside (for argument's sake) - which is NOT an "assumption" - allows us to look at Eddowes killing in a different light and context. That in itself can be useful.

Assumptions, reasonable or not, as dangerous, because they almost always have some bias or prejudice involved (explicit or hidden). The person proposing the assumption, in my experience, often has an axe to grind or a conclusion already reached.

I am not arguing that we accept or reject any view - but "assuming" that Stride was a Ripper victim (when she MAY not have been) would distort our reading of the other events of that night. Eddowes is much more soundly based as a Ripper victim (I say that despite being aware of ther interpretations) and to give "Jack" free rein to focus on her - without having to rush from a distance away - might well throw up new food for thought.

Phil

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Simply...

Who killed Stride and why? What is the most reasonable explanation? We are already assuming. Which is the most reasonable assumption?

[The Good Michael]

Come on, really? Testimony vs statement are two entirely different things. Bridewell gives us all a great breakdown of each and it couldn't have been said any better than that. Although we may use them the same doesn't mean they are the same.

A good example would be me calling you a donkey or an ass (not that I ever would of course). Those have the same meaning yet are they really the same meaning?

Donkey and ass are the same thing. Just check you family pedigree.

Mike

[DRoy]

Mike,

Come on, really? Testimony vs statement are two entirely different things. Bridewell gives us all a great breakdown of each and it couldn't have been said any better than that. Although we may use them the same doesn't mean they are the same.

A good example would be me calling you a donkey or an ass (not that I ever would of course). Those have the same meaning yet are they really the same meaning?

Didn't think so and neither is statement and testimony. So please stop quibbling over such nonsense and lets get back to topic.

Cheers
DRoy

[Errata]

Do we need a definition of 'scream'?

That depends. But regardless, every dictionary has one.

[The Good Michael]

I try to limit "testimony" to people who gave evidence at the inquest (testimony = a sworn statement), otherwise what ever they said is only a statement to either the press or police.

Jon, they mean the same thing. Enough quibbling over such nonsense.

Mike

[Wickerman]

Do we need a definition of 'scream'?

[Errata]

Hello Errata. Thanks.

I'm wondering, then, if they are not loud, why bother describing them as such?

Cheers.
LC

I have to find a recording of this somewhere. but it is short and sharp like a scream, but lower in volume. He said she screamed, but not loudly, which doesn't make sense since a scream is by definition loud. I'm going to see if I can find this on Youtube or something.

[lynn cates]

redundant

Hello Errata. Thanks.

I'm wondering, then, if they are not loud, why bother describing them as such?

Cheers.
LC

[Errata]

Hello Errata. Thanks.

OK. But are these "noises" usually loud? Seems that Israel needed to qualify the screams with respect to loudness. Naturally, as screams are usually loud.

Cheers.
LC

No they aren't loud. Just above conversational level, loud-wise. Above normal speech, below arguing. But the "gasp of outrage" is the only thing I can think of that is scream-like, but not loud.

[Bridewell]

Thankyou Colin.
Two questions:
First, are you saying this is how it is done today, or even in the 19th century?
Second, does this "perjury declaration" also apply equally to voluntary statements?
I don't recall it being mentioned with Hutchinson's statement.

Thanks.

Hi Jon,

Both good questions.

First, that's how it was done in my time, possibly not so in the 19th century if I'm honest, as it's known as a CJ (Criminal Justice) Act declaration. The Act was (I think) 1972, but I'm not sure if that was simply an update of earlier legislation making the same requirement.

A Voluntary Statement, as understood by the police, is one made by a suspect wishing (or perhaps not!) to make a written admission of guilt. They were always attacked in court as having been made under duress (as some probably were). There were no paragraphs and no spaces allowed (to prevent insertions by the unscrupulous) and any errors or crossings out had to be initialled. They were more trouble than they were worth for all concerned and I can't recall the last time I heard of anyone making one.

The only documentation I've seen concerning Hutchinson's account is the General Report submitted by Sgt Badham which doesn't have such a declaration but, in that format, I wouldn't expect it to.

In short, my comments may have been anachronistic, so apologies for that.