6d. Did Liz spend it, or die for it?

[RivkahChaya]

Shift work of some kind would be a possibility.

It also depends on defining the 7th, 8th & 9th as the "beginning" of the month. They are less than halfway through, but the 8th and 9th are already in the second week of the month, and the 7th is still pretty late for what I personally think of as "beginning," not to mention that the 7th is Tabram in the first place.

It probably has more to do with intervals. One week was too soon. He was too nervous about getting caught, and "sated," or something, at any rate, so killing in less than a week wasn't very satisfying. On the other hand, by three weeks, he was a little "overdue," and maybe really itching to get out, darn the risks.

Phrasing that way is a little too cute-- what I mean is, that as time went on, the risk/benefit trade-off altered. The day after he'd just murdered, he probably didn't feel like doing it again right away, and he knew the police were on high alert. But with every day that passed, the urge got stronger than concerns about getting caught, and any other considerations he might have had-- if he had work or family obligations. You know, you can call in sick once a month, and probably get away with it, depending on what sort of worker you are, but once a week is going to get you called into the boss's office, no matter how much he likes you*.

There was probably a point, and it was probably pretty consistent, where he had to scratch the itch.

But circumstances may have changed things. A problem with the infrastructure at work giving him an unexpected day off may have led to him going on the prowl a week earlier than he might have otherwise done. A bad cold may have caused him to miss an opportunity. A chance to travel on someone else's dime may mean a victim some other place who still hasn't been connected to the Whitechapel crimes, and also a gap in the Whitechapel calendar.

But 1-3 weeks is still meaningful, albeit, the sample size is too small to be sure it's really a pattern. It probably means that the risk/benefit scale reached equilibrium at one week, and the itch got to "must scratch" at three.



*Just an example-- I am not proposing that JTR did anything in particular for a living, had a direct supervisor, who liked or did not like him, etc.

[Bridewell]

To suggest that a woman who couldnt afford her bed would buy sweets and a flower to entice a man of that ilk isnt really viable, economically or as an explanation for the accoutrements.

We don't know that Stride couldn't afford her bed and we don't know who bought the sweets and the flower. At least I don't, and I suspect that no-one else does either. Speculating upon her motives for buying something she may not have bought seems a little pointless.

[Wickerman]

Great post Colin and very informative!

I know it isn't statistics/probability but I have also been struck by another shall we say pattern:

Martha Tabram-Aug 7 (beginning of month)
Polly Nichols- Aug 31 (end of Month)
Annie Chapman- Sep 8 (beginning month)
Stride/eddowes- Sep 30 (end of month)
Mary kelly- Nov 9 (beginning of month)

They are all murdered in a pattern on weekends or holidays in the beginning or end of the month.

This is only half the story though, what is needed is the pattern of his failures to qualify the result. Should we build a theory on only half the story?

[Michael W Richards]

We don't know that Stride couldn't afford her bed and we don't know who bought the sweets and the flower. At least I don't, and I suspect that no-one else does either. Speculating upon her motives for buying something she may not have bought seems a little pointless.

We are speculating here Bridewell.... about whether her 6d cost Liz her life. My suggestion as to its whereabouts are the accoutrements she had with her when she died as an alternative theory. And by my eye a woman with sweets and a flower arrangement on her breast, one who is never described by anyone as in her "good" evening wear other than on that night, the lint brush, the suggestion by the left velvet that she was not returning that same night,...cumulatively my position seems well supported.

To Caz, your attempts at "elevating" Liz Stride seem to begin with either an assumption by the Ripper or with Liz actually soliciting,...which you have suggested on numerous occasions... of course supported by something someone that happened in some serial killer episode decades later .... my issue is that Liz Stride had no business having her life lumped into this Ripper business in the first place, and she didnt deserve to have her life up for scrutiny and judgement 125 years later. Ive pointed out how nice she appears to have been dressed and accessorized, that she appears as if ready for a social encounter with someone special, or a special occasion.

If you havent noticed Ive always defended Liz Strides morality and pointed out her work history up to and including that last day as a way of countering such suggestions. I believe that would be considered attempting to "elevate" Liz, not what you suggest, without proof, about her and the others.

Best regards

[Observer]

I believe that quote had more to do with Pollys upbeat mood than a thought she would entice business with the hat Observer.

I don't think so Mike, it's there in black and white. In that era the hat or bonnet was the pinnacle of femine dress, the finishing touch. The match girls at Bryant and May had hat funds. They woud each chip in a few coppers a week until they had enough money to buy a decent fancy hat, they would then take it in turns to wear the hat at week-ends. Through the eyes of the young Bryant and May girls the hat would attract the boys. Wether the laddo's felt the same way , well that's a different matter. No, in her naivety, I think it's safe to say Polly Nichols thought she had a better chance to attract a punter with her jolly new bonnet.

The highest rate of reported sexual diseases was within the occupation of Dockers, men who scaled fish all day, or lifted crates and boxes about, men whose hard physical work made them dirty and Im sure, less than fragrant. Those are the men that the East End Unfortunate women "served" most.

To suggest that a woman who couldnt afford her bed would buy sweets and a flower to entice a man of that ilk isnt really viable, economically or as an explanation for the accoutrements.


Cheers

But on the night of her murder Liz Stride was not in the company of such men Mike.

Best and Gardener

"The man was about 5ft. 5in. in height. He was well dressed in a black morning suit with a morning coat. He had rather weak eyes. I mean he had sore eyes without any eyelashes. I should know the man again amongst a hundred. He had a thick black moustache and no beard. He wore a black billycock hat, rather tall, and had on a collar. I don't know the colour of his tie."

William Marshal

"he was middle-aged and stout, about 5ft 6in tall, respectably dressed in a small black cut-away coat and dark trousers. He was wearing a small peaked cap, "something like a sailor would wear". He had the appearance of a clerk. The woman was wearing a black jacket and skirt and a black crape bonnet, but did not see the flower that was pinned to the jacket."

PC Smith

" He described the man as being about 28 years of age, 5ft 7in tall, wearing a dark overcoat and trousers. He also wore a hard felt deerstalker hat and was described as 'respectable' looking. The man was also holding a newspaper parcel, about 18in in length and 6 or 8in wide. He also noticed that the woman had a flower in her jacket"

Liz Stride initialy sighted with a middle aged man of clerkly appearence wearing a small black cut away coat, and then PC Smith spots her with a young man of 28 or so wearing a drak overcoat. She was soliciting Mike, it's obvious.

Regards

Observer

[Observer]

We don't know that Stride couldn't afford her bed and we don't know who bought the sweets and the flower. At least I don't, and I suspect that no-one else does either. Speculating upon her motives for buying something she may not have bought seems a little pointless.

Precisely

Regards

Observer

[RivkahChaya]

If you havent noticed Ive always defended Liz Strides morality and pointed out her work history up to and including that last day as a way of countering such suggestions. I believe that would be considered attempting to "elevate" Liz, not what you suggest, without proof, about her and the others.

Best regards

I think possibly you missed Caz's point; by suggesting that Stride's morality needs defending, you are suggesting that the morality of the other women was indefensible. Now, maybe you do feel that way, which is a whole 'nother thread, but you should realize that you are on the edge of coming across as blaming the victim in the cases of the other women, you know, "What were they doing out that late, alone, being all female and everything,*"

None of those women "deserve to have her life up for scrutiny and judgement 125 years later."


*Or, in the words of a friend of mine on using a rape victim's sexual history against her "How dare she have a vagina and not let me use it."

[Observer]

Ive pointed out how nice she appears to have been dressed and accessorized, that she appears as if ready for a social encounter with someone special, or a special occasion.

J Best

"It was raining very fast, and they did not appear willing to go out. He was hugging her and kissing her, and as he seemed a respectably dressed man, we were rather astonished at the way he was going on with the woman,who was poorly dressed"

Regards

Observer

[Observer]

I dont think Stride was solicitating that night. The evidence and circumstances seem to point she was with one man, lets call him peaked cap man, at least from witness Marshall on. Given that she had recently broken up with Kidney, seems to me if she was solicitating for anything, it was for a new boyfriend. Perhaps she even received some drinks (witnesses Best and Gardener-but they got the hat wrong) and the flower from him. Unfortunately for Stride, though, her new man was the ripper.

How about PC smiths sighting? I could live with Liz Stride looking for a new man in the pubs around Commercial Road on the night preceding her murder. I don't think she would have turned down a bit of business though. And it looks as though that was the case. Marshal and Smith described two different men in the company of Liz Stride that night.

Regards

Observer

[Abby Normal]

Shift work of some kind would be a possibility.

Thanks Bridewell
Had not thought of that. But what kind of shift work. Like a warehouseman? Watchman? Policeman?

[Abby Normal]

That the letter was a hoax is a possibility, arguably a probability, but a certainty it is not. I don't understand the argument which says that the "Dear Boss" letter must be a hoax because the investigators at the time believed it so to be, but then decrees that Stride cannot be a Ripper murder despite what the police thought at the time. It doesn't strike me as a consistent line of argument. Either you place weight on contemporary police opinion or you don't, surely?

Thank you.
That the dear boss letters were a definite hoax is probably the biggest misconception in ripper world today.

And to add that if they were a hoax we can still be pretty positive that at least
Tab ram, Nichols , chapman and eddowes were probably solicitating.

[Abby Normal]

This is only half the story though, what is needed is the pattern of his failures to qualify the result. Should we build a theory on only half the story?

Hi wick
Oh I would imagine that the ripper was probably pretty successful when he put his mind to it. Example-double event.

And again it does not seem likely he would only be unsuccessful on middle of the month nights.

[Abby Normal]

How about PC smiths sighting? I could live with Liz Stride looking for a new man in the pubs around Commercial Road on the night preceding her murder. I don't think she would have turned down a bit of business though. And it looks as though that was the case. Marshal and Smith described two different men in the company of Liz Stride that night.

Regards

Observer

Hi observer
Smith described a man with a peaked cap. A deerstalker. Close enough in my book. IMHO I think stride was turning down a bit of business that night. Which perhaps is why she ended up with only a cut throat and not a ripped out abdomen.

[Wickerman]

Hi wick
Oh I would imagine that the ripper was probably pretty successful when he put his mind to it. Example-double event.

But that's another assumption, isn't it?

And again it does not seem likely he would only be unsuccessful on middle of the month nights.

Accounts suggest these streets were not as empty as some tend to believe. Accosting a prospective victim and trying to get her into a quiet spot where he might get 10-15 minutes uninterrupted time with her could be a challenge in these overcrowded backstreets.

It is not the same as finding a quiet corner to engage in a 'quickie', because anyone stumbling on them engaged in sex, or hearing them in the dark, will make themselves scarce trying to look the other way. Not so if someone stumbles on a murder in progress, no-one is going to ignore that.

The killer may have been out every night, or several nights a week, and not always with murder in mind. We cannot surely assume that every time he steps outside at night he is only considering murder?

Isn't it more likely that something triggers his need to kill, than assume he always kills when out, and he is only out at the end of the month, or beginning, or whatever?

This is really what I was getting at.

[RivkahChaya]

"It was raining very fast, and they did not appear willing to go out. He was hugging her and kissing her, and as he seemed a respectably dressed man, we were rather astonished at the way he was going on with the woman,who was poorly dressed"

Oh my gosh! if that's the back cover copy, I really wanna read that book!

That the dear boss letters were a definite hoax is probably the biggest misconception in ripper world today.

And to add that if they were a hoax we can still be pretty positive that at least Tab ram, Nichols , chapman and eddowes were probably solicitating.

I think Bridewell's point is not whether or not the letter was a hoax, but that it's inconsistent to say the police opinion is of vital importance in judging whether or not a letter was a hoax, but worthless in determining whether or not Stride was a victim of JTR.

It's a good point, inasmuch as people who argue for contemporary investigation priority usually do so on the basis proximity to the events-- the were aware of everything, not just what has been passed down to us, but thousands of little details that they probably considered and discarded, because they weren't useful, but we'll never get to make that judgement ourselves.

However, there can be other arguments: the police were probably well acquainted with hoaxes in general. It's not impossible they recognized the handwriting, or something else that made them strongly suspect someone who had written hoaxes about other crimes. I don't know that; I'm just saying proximity in time is not the only argument favoring police opinions.

How common were hoax letters or false confessions? I don't think hoax letters of the JTR type are very common, but unprovoked false confessions to famous crimes are pretty common. It may not be a huge jump from a false confession to a hoax letter, and once there's one, it could open the gates.

On the other hand, what exactly convinced police that Stride was a victim of the Ripper? police opinions change, and were varied at any rate. They first considered that Tabram and Nichols had been killed by the same person, but revised that to exclude Tabram. The "C5" was a later development, and as far as I know, no one ever surveyed the police at the time to see how many actually agreed with it.

I'm not entirely convinced that there was a consensus of opinion among police that the Ripper had "five victims, and five victims only." If someone else can point me toward contrary evidence, though, I'm not married to that opinion. I'd be interested in knowing on what basis police believed one thing or the other, though.