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

[lynn cates]

tambien

Hello Michael. Thanks.

Nor yet I.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

finish line

Hello Jon. Thanks.

"When almost identical victims die from severed carotids, yes, it's a good place to start."

Identical? Ahem.

At any rate, I agree that it's a good place to start. I started there. But let's make bloody sure we don't end there."

Cheers.
LC

[curious4]

Leaking

Hello Curious,

I imagine somebody wanting to take a leak would go into the back yard rather than exit through the front.

c.d.

Hello CD ,

Maybe they went before they left home lol. I think though that a handy wall or the gutter would serve as well - for the men at least.

Cheers,
C4

[Jon Guy]

Hi Lynn

Why the ahem?!?

Most people here already know these similarities but for you I`ll copy and paste the victim similarities again:

45 year old resident of a common lodging house in Flower and Dean St murdered by throat cut (left carotid) in St George in the East. Last seen standing alone with a man in a peaked cap

46 year old resident of a common lodging house in Flower and Dean St murdered by throat cut (left carotid) in Aldgate, 40 minutes later. Last seen standing alone with a man in a peaked cap.

Of course they could have been killed by different people, but please, you must be in some kind of denial (perhaps it`s your constricting theories) if you can`t see the victim similarities.

[Michael W Richards]

I think one thing in this argument should be clarified....what is possible and what is probable. The latter relies on some kind of corroborative evidence to substantiate the claims being made, the former, does not.

Using that as the guideline then I would have to say that it is indeed possible that Liz Strides killer was interrupted and therefore unable to fulfill his objectives. In the same way that its possible the killer was a woman.

However, there is no reason within any known evidence to give either of those "possibilities" any credence, thus elevating them to "probable status".

It is however probable that Liz Strides killer intended to only kill her... in a momentary loss of self control, likely due to anger and/or alcohol. The Tabram murder suggests the same sort of anger and alcohol issue...but not Pollys murder or Annies. That killer was after innards.

The evidence such as it is suggests a sober woman with a flower on her breast and some cashous in her hand was attacked suddenly in the passageway of a private club,... likely using her scarf first, and within 1 or 2 seconds, is on the ground bleeding to death. There is no way to know if any sounds were made due to the open window and the singing upstairs, and there is no way of knowing at this point how the killer left the scene. There is however a very simple way to review the evidence to see if this is the same killer who mutilates after killing. Are there signs that is the case here...any signs?

The truthful answer must be no.

Therefore, lets just deal with the probabilities rather than the possibilities, which range from reasonable to ridiculous.

Cheers all

[The Good Michael]

There is however a very simple way to review the evidence to see if this is the same killer who mutilates after killing. Are there signs that is the case here...any signs?

l

Tons. Quick kill, throat cut, prostitute, not witnessed, knife, woman on the ground, London, same vicinity, late at night, dark,...just tons.

Mike

[lynn cates]

X X

Hello Jon. Thanks.

A similarity is not an identity.

But you are right, of course. All were female.

Cheers.
LC

[DRoy]

Mike,

Tons? Actually it was 10.

Here are 10 going the other way...well lit location, tons of people (okay, I mean about 30) around in all directions, no mutilation, Ripper now right handed, Liz was dressed nice, not strangled, fighting with her boyfriend, legs not parted, short knife, assulted 15 minutes before found dead...tons!

Cheers
DRoy

[Abby Normal]

Hello Jon. Thanks.

A similarity is not an identity.

But you are right, of course. All were female.

Cheers.
LC

Then why not ascribe a different killer for each of the C5? They were all different, no?

Nichols-cut thoat, abdoman mutilated, no organs taken
Chapman-cut throat, abdoman mutilated uterus taken
Stride-cut throat, no mutilations
Eddowes-cut throat, abdoman mutlated, kidney and uterus taken, facial mutilations
kelly-cut throat, abdoman mutilated, heart taken, face mutilated, breasts removed, cuts to arms and legs

by your reasoning then since all were slightly different, then they were all done by a slightly different man.

[lynn cates]

how

Hello Abby. Thanks.

"by your reasoning then since all were slightly different, then they were all done by a slightly different man."

Not a bit of it. Again, this focuses on WHAT. I am focused on HOW.

Cheers.
LC

[Abby Normal]

Hello Abby. Thanks.

"by your reasoning then since all were slightly different, then they were all done by a slightly different man."

Not a bit of it. Again, this focuses on WHAT. I am focused on HOW.

Cheers.
LC

Hi LC
So you mean the differences in how they were killed? As in how there throats we're cut differently?

[lynn cates]

scenario

Hello Abby. Thanks.

"So you mean the differences in how they were killed? As in how there throats we're cut differently?"

Yes. Try the following scenario. You are a police detective and have been called to a crime scene. A lady has had her throat cut, and a triangle carved into her left breast.

You release the following information to the press, name, age, physical description. Then you list cause of death as a cut throat, noting that a geometrical figure was carved into her left breast.

A second lady is killed within a week and, here, too, you find a cut throat and a triangle (roughly the same size) carved into her left breast. But the killer has also severed a finger. You release, roughly, the same information to the press as previously, adding that a finger was cut off. But, again, you mention ONLY that a geometrical figure was carved into the left breast.

Now, three weeks later you find yet another lady dead of a cut throat. Her finger is likewise severed. But a square is carved into her left breast.

How would you put these together? Well, there is a good chance that the severed finger story was found in the paper and so number three was following that story.

He may also have read "geometrical figure" and wrongly guessed square instead of triangle.

Cheers.
LC

[The Good Michael]

Mike,

Tons? Actually it was 10.

Here are 10 going the other way...well lit location, tons of people (okay, I mean about 30) around in all directions, no mutilation, Ripper now right handed, Liz was dressed nice, not strangled, fighting with her boyfriend, legs not parted, short knife, assulted 15 minutes before found dead...tons!

Not arguing with that. I was just saying what was similar because that was the question. What game are you playing?

Mike

[DRoy]

Mike,

Sorry, did not mean it that way at all. No disrespect. No game. Just pointing out what I would say are important differences. Your 10 reasons in my opinion don't match my 10 and I was just playing.

I've said it before, i'm not sold either way. I do however see problems with this murder being The Ripper.

Cheers
DRoy

[Michael W Richards]

Tons. Quick kill, throat cut, prostitute, not witnessed, knife, woman on the ground, London, same vicinity, late at night, dark,...just tons.

Mike

(1) Quick kill, certainly, but that is not evidence that Jack the Ripper killed her, after all, her throat is cut once, (2) Liz was was once a registered prostitute in Goteborg, Sweden as a teen..had herself stricken from the register due to "legitimate" work being found..known to have been a maid and a cleaning lady...occupied at the time of her death, for several months, as a cleaning lady, cleaned rooms her last day, (3) knife...well thats just the most convenient weapon for the times, lots of people carried knives, for all sorts of reasons..(4) Liz may have been killed while falling, and was found on her side, not her back, like other alleged Ripper victims, (5) London? ...you could have skipped that an gone to same vicinity for a better argument, but as it is she is the ONLY victim killed south of Commercial Street, and as such, her and Kate were not killed in the same "vicinity" as the others, which was Whitechapel/Spitalfield, (6-7) Late at night and dark? These are really silly and very weak Mike. But if you insist, She is killed earlier than any other alleged Canonical.

What you have done is list some "circumstantial" points that you believe suggest that the same killer killed Polly, Annie and Liz,... while ignoring the vast differences in the kills and objectives demonstrated in the actual evidence.

Im sure you would agree that evidence supersedes "belief" in Police Investigations at any time in history, why should this murder be any different?

Cheers Mike