Stride & Diemschutz

[c.d.]

What youve said before is that these women were all part time prostitutes....but were they? And even if you could prove that...which you cant by the way...youd still have to prove that was Strides story that night.

No you don't, Michael and this has been pointed out to you countless times. Whether Stride was soliciting or not that night is a moot point. Even if she was not actively soliciting that night we have no way of knowing her response if approached and offered money for her services.

So please drop that argument. It is easily refutable.

c.d.

[Michael W Richards]

The issue with your brand of logic is that it completely ignores the relevant part of the report on the final day of Stride's inquest, which appeared in The Times of 24th October 1888, and included the following observations:

'In the absence of motive, the age and class of woman selected as victim, and the place and time of the crime, there was a similarity between this case and those mysteries which had recently occurred in that neighbourhood. There had been no skilful mutilation as in the cases of Nichols and Chapman, and no unskilful injuries as in the case in Mitre-Square - possibly the work of an imitator; but there had been the same skill exhibited in the way in which the victim had been entrapped, and the injuries inflicted, so as to cause instant death and prevent blood from soiling the operator, and the same daring defiance of immediate detection, which, unfortunately for the peace of the inhabitants and trade of the neighbourhood, had hitherto been only too successful.'

Even if it was concluded that 'the whole operation' in Chapman's case was to obtain the organ that was taken, this clearly had no effect on the reasoning in Stride's case. It was concluded - and without Schwartz's influence - that this could very well have been 'another' murder of a defenceless street woman by the same man, who was prevented by the circumstances from doing any more than cutting her throat and getting safely away.

The line I highlighted above, that seem right to you? What the medical examiners actually concluded is the opposite, that there WAS knife skills evident in the cases of Polly and Annie..and as we know there are opinions on both sides of the fence with Kate. The "injuries" on Liz referred to amounted to a single throat cut, which neither Polly, Annie or Kate suffered. They all had double cuts. We also have evidence both prior victims confided to others the night they were killed that they were soliciting. Is there evience in Liz Strides case that was her situation that night? Flowers, cashous, boot top length skirt...sober.......

What youve said before is that these women were all part time prostitutes....but were they? And even if you could prove that...which you cant by the way...youd still have to prove that was Strides story that night.

Unless youre claiming that not only does he alter his whole methodology this night, but he also doesnt seek out the same kind of women who allow him to get them into the dark by virtue of their occupation at that moment.

Why not take a pragmatic approach, just use what evidence is there for that one murder, and stop inserting your ideas of how much this killer must have changed in order to have this fit and established pattern of behavior and victimology.

Why would Annies killer change anything? He apparently got what he was after, from whom he chose, and escaped scott free. Now he just wants a single cut...on a woman we have no proof was doing the same thing as Annie was when they met?

One question keeps coming up here caz...why do we have to imagine a previous killer when Strides kill is essentially nothing like the priors. Or subsequent victims for that matter.

Pretending only this Jack guy cuts throats at this time in that area is provably wrong anyway.

[caz]

The issue with that kind of logic is that it ignores what we learned to that point about the killer at large. So not only are you contemplating a change in his MO and savagery but also the very reason he killed previous women. The reason that the man who examined Annie stated. That the whole operation was to obtain the organ he eventually took. Based on that observation the murder itself is just an initial step, not the final one. All you have in apparent motivation in Berner Street is a demonstrated wish to inflict a single mortal wound. The man that killed Polly then Annie had an agenda beyond killing. The man that killed Stride killed Stride.

The victim information the hours prior to the murder does not match the priors, the physical evidence doesnt match, and the lack of the motive beyond murder sort of clinches the matter. The man who killed Polly then Annie had to do what he was doing, he had to act out these things and took great risks while doing so. That kind of killer does not abandon the core motivation for doing this in the first place. Its his Reason. Its his Signature.

And to my eye the only other Canonical who may have that same Core present is Kate.

The issue with your brand of logic is that it completely ignores the relevant part of the report on the final day of Stride's inquest, which appeared in The Times of 24th October 1888, and included the following observations:

'In the absence of motive, the age and class of woman selected as victim, and the place and time of the crime, there was a similarity between this case and those mysteries which had recently occurred in that neighbourhood. There had been no skilful mutilation as in the cases of Nichols and Chapman, and no unskilful injuries as in the case in Mitre-Square - possibly the work of an imitator; but there had been the same skill exhibited in the way in which the victim had been entrapped, and the injuries inflicted, so as to cause instant death and prevent blood from soiling the operator, and the same daring defiance of immediate detection, which, unfortunately for the peace of the inhabitants and trade of the neighbourhood, had hitherto been only too successful.'

Even if it was concluded that 'the whole operation' in Chapman's case was to obtain the organ that was taken, this clearly had no effect on the reasoning in Stride's case. It was concluded - and without Schwartz's influence - that this could very well have been 'another' murder of a defenceless street woman by the same man, who was prevented by the circumstances from doing any more than cutting her throat and getting safely away.

[Damaso Marte]

In the museum in Florence where Michaelangelo's David is displayed, the hall that leads the visitor to David is lined with incomplete sculptures by Michaelangelo. Some are nearly complete, some are just big chunks of marble where you can barely see the start of a human shape. Michaelangelo always intended to sculpt something, but sometimes something got in the way. Sometimes, of course, it was an interruption: maybe a new commission came in, or maybe there was another family or personal obligation to attend to. Sometimes, I'm sure, it was because he was unsatisfied with his initial few hours of chiseling and decided to restart entirely with new marble.

[Michael W Richards]

It is also possible that the Ripper killed Stride and then decided not to mutilate her for reasons other than being interrupted. Perhaps the double event was entirely premeditated and the Ripper decided that mutilating the first victim would be unnecessary. Perhaps something other than the approach of another person made the Ripper think "nah". It is not interruption or not Ripper, there are other possibilities.

The issue with that kind of logic is that it ignores what we learned to that point about the killer at large. So not only are you contemplating a change in his MO and savagery but also the very reason he killed previous women. The reason that the man who examined Annie stated. That the whole operation was to obtain the organ he eventually took. Based on that observation the murder itself is just an initial step, not the final one. All you have in apparent motivation in Berner Street is a demonstrated wish to inflict a single mortal wound. The man that killed Polly then Annie had an agenda beyond killing. The man that killed Stride killed Stride.

The victim information the hours prior to the murder does not match the priors, the physical evidence doesnt match, and the lack of the motive beyond murder sort of clinches the matter. The man who killed Polly then Annie had to do what he was doing, he had to act out these things and took great risks while doing so. That kind of killer does not abandon the core motivation for doing this in the first place. Its his Reason. Its his Signature.

And to my eye the only other Canonical who may have that same Core present is Kate.

[Damaso Marte]

It is also possible that the Ripper killed Stride and then decided not to mutilate her for reasons other than being interrupted. Perhaps the double event was entirely premeditated and the Ripper decided that mutilating the first victim would be unnecessary. Perhaps something other than the approach of another person made the Ripper think "nah". It is not interruption or not Ripper, there are other possibilities.

[Herlock Sholmes]

No it’s not.

[Michael W Richards]

Ok forgive if this has been asked before but it's said that Diemschutz was the one that found Stride's body and that her blood was still flowing from the wound, her body was cold in some places but warm in others. The common belief is that the Ripper was either interrupted before he could do his thing with Stride's body or that Stride wasn't a Ripper victim at all. When I think "interrupted" I think, ok someone is coming, let me run off, Stride was discovered at about 1am but if the dockworker is to be believed that he saw Stride just 15 minutes earlier telling someone "not tonight, maybe some other night," I mean that's just 15 minutes for crying out loud. That would lead me to think that the Ripper heard something or someone coming and took off but was wrong but better safe than sorry. My question is, first Stride is mostly considered a victim of the Ripper but what's the proof of that other than area and timing; or is that the gist of it? Does it say anywhere that Diemschutz actually saw anyone walking away or anything? I mean I know it was super dark but still.

The answer is its purely presumptive linkage based on the geography and historical timing. The physical evidence would not indicate a serial abdominal mutilator to anyone who had investigative training, so its about presuming interruptions mostly. Diemshitz actual arrival time is disputed by several statements by men in attendance at the club.

[etenguy]

Given the thread title - is anyone aware of any theory citing Diemshutz as Stride's killer? (that's what I thought this thread might be before I clicked in.)

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

You're not from around here, are you?

Several very lengthy, twisty turny 'was she or wasn't she' debates have been going on for what seems like decades.

Here's a suggestion, clark. Before you start a new thread, just take a look at all the existing ones to see if your question has already been discussed ad nauseam.

Have a safe and relaxing weekend.

Love,

Caz
X

Well, DJA Dave has most subtlety encouraged Clark along these lines. He does it in his most dry and peculiar way, but essentially the message was "use the search function"

Correct me if I'm wrong Dave.

[caz]

Ok I take it there was a big debate over Stride being a Ripper victim once upon a time?

You're not from around here, are you?

Several very lengthy, twisty turny 'was she or wasn't she' debates have been going on for what seems like decades.

Here's a suggestion, clark. Before you start a new thread, just take a look at all the existing ones to see if your question has already been discussed ad nauseam.

Have a safe and relaxing weekend.

Love,

Caz
X

[c.d.]

The debate has never ended.

That is putting it mildly!

c.d.

[erobitha]

Ok I take it there was a big debate over Stride being a Ripper victim once upon a time?

The debate has never ended.

[clark2710]

We doing this again are we?

She was.

Ok I take it there was a big debate over Stride being a Ripper victim once upon a time?

[clark2710]

After discovering Strides body, Diemschutz left it for a moment to go and alert the club about the murder. If her killer was hiding in one of the dark spots in the yard, this would present a window of opportunity to escape. So I would guess the Ripper heard Diemschutz approaching went to hide in the shadows of the yard out of sight. When Diemschutz left momentarily, the Ripper fled. Diemschutz himself said there were areas of the yard he couldn't see.

That sounds pretty risky because it would offer little that he could do if they were to come looking. But sounds legit to me. So the Ripper may have been literally only a few feet away at the time