Where is Liz Stride?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • c.d.
    replied
    Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
    Hello Roy. Thanks.

    "I have to agree with Lynn. There is no evidence at all that Liz was prostituting herself. She may have been but there is nothing but speculation to say she was."

    Thanks for that. You are absolutely right. For all we know, she might have been there thinking Thomas Hardy was to autograph her copy of "Far from the Madding Crowd."

    The prostitution angle is in place for one reason--to make her fit our expectations about "Jack."

    Cheers.
    LC
    So let's see. We have a known prostitute standing by herself late at night. It seems pretty damn reasonable to me that Jack might assume that she was soliciting. Of course, that doesn't fit the expectations of the non-Jack crowd.

    c.d.

    Leave a comment:


  • c.d.
    replied
    Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
    Hello David. Thanks.

    "By the way, even those who don't make her a ripper-victim can assume she was soliciting that night."

    Ah, a different logical fallacy. If I can collect just a few more samples, I can write my own text.

    Cheers.
    LC
    Seriously, the sarcasm is getting out of hand.

    c.d.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by DRoy View Post
    ..... For the 500th time, when someone releases a statement to the press... What does that mean? In Mortimer's case, i'd assume for it to mean it was her chance to tell her story which would be the earliest account and truthful account and the less influenced account. Anyone else think different?
    Hi DRoy.

    "Releasing a statement to the press"?

    We read that the witnesses gave a statement to the press in a number of cases. The press are hunting for sources, knocking on doors, asking if anyone saw or heard anything that night. The residents give an account if they heard or saw something and the reporter asks if he can use it.

    There's really nothing more to it than that.

    Detectives complained (Warren passed their complaint on the the Home Office), about reporters following them around. When a detective has finished interviewing, then a reporter knocks on the same door and conducts his own interview.
    Reporters used the police to locate sources, but equally, because there are far more reporters on the streets than detectives, the police also used the press in the same way.
    Because both sides needed each other there was a reluctant tolerance between the two.

    .

    Leave a comment:


  • Bridewell
    replied
    The $64,000 Question

    IF Schwartz is telling the truth, BS is the man.
    Who is the man if Schwartz is not telling the truth?

    Leave a comment:


  • Bridewell
    replied
    And as Abby points out, the similarity between BS and Lawende's man in sufficient to infer that they may have been the same person.
    I agree that they could be two different witnesses describing the same man, but it's a matter of perception. Some think the two descriptions are so much at variance that they have to be two different men.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bridewell
    replied
    Originally posted by Cogidubnus View Post
    Slightly adrift from this (but only very slightly) wasn't there a thread somewhere, where the two apparently conflicting Schwartz statements (the Police one and the Newspaper one) were compared, and it was established that the Hungarian words for "Pipe" and "Dagger" could sound very similar to a non-native translator? I vaguely recall it, but now can't find it...

    Would this not give a little more consistency, and therefore credibility, to the Schwartz account?

    All the best

    Dave
    Dave,

    I remember this too. The two words were very similar. I know it was a female poster who suggested it. Caz? Rubyretro? Can't recall.

    Leave a comment:


  • DRoy
    replied
    Greg,

    Since conspiracies are in the air let's extrapolate.
    I believe the only person to provide a theory is Michael. Once you get past calling it a conspiracy, you'll see he makes some very valuable arguments and valid points especially about the witnesses.

    Cheers
    DRoy

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    put it in a frame

    Hello Ben.

    "I always find it incredibly strange that anyone should feel the need to conjure up the existence of a second man arriving on the scene after broad-shoulders (supposedly) left. We have eyewitness evidence of an attack being perpetrated on the victim around the time she was believed to have been murdered. Unless Schwarz was lying, the likelihood that "BS" man was Stride's killer is so overwhelmingly and irrefutably large that any other possibility is extremely remote."

    This post is worthy of framing. IF Schwartz is telling the truth, BS is the man.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    Et expecto . . .

    Hello Roy. Thanks.

    "I have to agree with Lynn. There is no evidence at all that Liz was prostituting herself. She may have been but there is nothing but speculation to say she was."

    Thanks for that. You are absolutely right. For all we know, she might have been there thinking Thomas Hardy was to autograph her copy of "Far from the Madding Crowd."

    The prostitution angle is in place for one reason--to make her fit our expectations about "Jack."

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    dogmatically opposed to dogma

    Hello (yet again) Caroline. Thanks.

    "Why so dogmatic?"

    Hmm, are you dogmatically opposed to dogma? (heh-heh) Seriously, it seems obvious that this story is in place to implicate a non-Jew as Stride's killer--and that, even if the story is true.

    If you were walking down the street and saw a fight break out, and later found that one combatant were dead, whom would be your first suspect?

    And, once again, to be frank, I MUCH prefer Schwartz to be telling the truth--much easier for my ripperological Weltanschauung.

    What other person with a knife? PM?

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    Never on a Sunday.

    Hello Michael. Thanks.

    "Don't prostitutes sell? Not always mind you."

    So they can take a night off? Splendid! My point.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    Bevallom

    Hello (again) Caroline. Thanks.

    In which language would he have made this confession?

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    financial situation

    Hello Caroline. Thanks.

    "May I turn the question round and ask you why must Stride not have been in the market to earn a few pence in whatever way the buyer at that hour requested? She was completely without funds when found dead."

    Yes, but she had her doss for the night, right? And she could go back to Kidney at any time, right?

    "Why must this be interpreted to mean she already had her bed and breakfast sorted (feather pillows, scrambled eggs and smoked salmon, no doubt) courtesy of the new beau who so discourteously left her standing outside the club to become just 'another' murdered woman?"

    Don't understand this part. Sorry.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    sigh

    Hello Jon. Thanks.

    Conspiracy? Sigh.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • GregBaron
    replied
    Jewish Conspiracy Part XXI

    Hi boys,

    Since conspiracies are in the air let's extrapolate.

    If Schwarz fabricated or was coached to protect the Jews then 45 minutes
    later perhaps Lawende also fabricated for the same reason. Suppose Jack
    was recognized as a Jew by both parties and to prevent the inevitable
    pogrom the conspiracy was hatched......

    If this were correct, old papa Anderson was right.........!

    The problem with this is that the apron and graffito don't seem to fit...


    Greg

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X