Where is Liz Stride?

[DRoy]

Mike,

Agreed! I also think she would have stood out a bit more than most because of her dress. She probably looked great compared to most women walking around at that time whether she was soliciting or not. If she stood out then that could very well have been her downfall, no matter who her killer was.

Cheers
DRoy

[The Good Michael]

Usually, one goes home after a date.

So...on the way home from the date. On the way to a bar. On the way to solicit. Options, options, options. There seems to me to have been what seemed opportune times if there was someone who wanted to target her, or who happened to be about when she was passing by. Of course this is IF the killer was absolutely only targeting prostitutes and knew that she was one. I don't think he drew any kind of line there.

Mike

[lynn cates]

Turn out the lights, the party's . . .

Hello Michael.

"let's say she was on a date for some of the evening, why would that make her ineligible to be a Ripper victim? If he targeted only unfortunates, and she was certainly one of those, why could she not have been selected?"

Right. Try this. Where is she targeted? Let's say by someone in the crowd at a pub. She and her date walk about. He wishes to get frisky, she dusts him off "Some other night." He leaves.

Ah, the bugger's gone. Think I'll just pop round to the club here and have a listen to "Tum Balalaika."

Usually, one goes home after a date.

Cheers.
LC

[The Good Michael]

Hi Mike I dont know if file is the right word. It was a MEPO number regarding Schwartz's statement to police (4 pages) on National Archives website and you can order online. You have to get an estimate first.
I do like to look at original copies if I can. I just wished I lived nearer Kew.
I'll post details when I get them, but as I said I am sure there's nothing unknown.
Pat....................

Hi Pat,

Thanks. Do you have any idea if there is an MEPO file that contains James Kelly's confession? I know people have read it and I've seen a few paraphrased sentences from it, but don't think it's available yet. I'm hoping, however.

Mike

[Paddy]

How does one order a file.

Hi Mike I dont know if file is the right word. It was a MEPO number regarding Schwartz's statement to police (4 pages) on National Archives website and you can order online. You have to get an estimate first.
I do like to look at original copies if I can. I just wished I lived nearer Kew.
I'll post details when I get them, but as I said I am sure there's nothing unknown.
Pat....................

[The Good Michael]

One thing I'm not understanding on this thread (ok many things), let's say Liz wasn't soliciting this evening. I'm pretty sure she was as I've seen nothing against it that makes me think otherwise. I've seen some logical arguments for her being on a date, but not logical enough for me to see the leopard change her spots. Regardless, let's say she was on a date for some of the evening, why would that make her ineligible to be a Ripper victim? If he targeted only unfortunates, and she was certainly one of those, why could she not have been selected?

Please don't go into a lot of peripheral stuff on this question, because if you have to build a huge case for her ineligibility, it won't really hold water.

Mike

Hmm...let me simplify the question: What difference would it make to JTR whether Stride was soliciting this evening or not, if he saw an opportunity to strike?

[lynn cates]

attire

Hello Mike.

"I suspect she was either there for a date, or for work with someone still in attendance at the club"

Regarding the latter, does one usually "char" whilst wearing a flower?

"the weekend she is killed Jewish families were observing religious celebrations"

Which? I think Yom Kippur was over at this time.

Cheers.
LC

[The Good Michael]

Thanks Wickerman !
Interesting, but I would think it still doesnt involve pipeman.
More likely the fact that PC Smith's and Schwartz's sightings didn't match.
I suppose it could be that the police questioned Scwartz's sighting as pipeman could not be found to back it up?
Very interesting that the police did actually detain two men. One could assume that identifications took place.
I know that its all in the sourcebook but I have ordered Schwartz's file and will see if there is anything of interest.
Thanks again
Pat...........................

How does one order a file? I presume you have to go to Kew or something and check it out like a library book. Is this kind of correct?

Thanks.

Mike

[Paddy]

Make of that what you will.

Thanks Wickerman !
Interesting, but I would think it still doesnt involve pipeman.
More likely the fact that PC Smith's and Schwartz's sightings didn't match.
I suppose it could be that the police questioned Scwartz's sighting as pipeman could not be found to back it up?
Very interesting that the police did actually detain two men. One could assume that identifications took place.
I know that its all in the sourcebook but I have ordered Schwartz's file and will see if there is anything of interest.
Thanks again
Pat...........................

[Wickerman]

The one person that intrigues me is Pipeman.
This may have been mentioned before?
He stepped out of the corner pub? a few doors down from Dutfields yard, I believe?
Was he ever found? Surely he would have been fairly easy to trace?

In the matter of the Hungarian who said he saw a struggle between a man and a woman in the passage where the Stride body was afterwards found, the Leman-street police have reason to doubt the truth of the story. They arrested one man on the description thus obtained, and a second on that furnished from another source, but they are not likely to act further on the same information without additional facts.
Star, 2 Oct. 1888.

Make of that what you will.

[Paddy]

Pipeman

The one person that intrigues me is Pipeman.
This may have been mentioned before?
He stepped out of the corner pub? a few doors down from Dutfields yard, I believe?
Was he ever found? Surely he would have been fairly easy to trace?
He alone could verify Schwartz's story, so must have been of great interest to the police.
He bothers me as there is so little written about him.

Pat...................

[Michael W Richards]

Tell this to Mike Richards. His contention was that Stride didn’t dip into her sixpence to secure a bed because she had no intention of returning there that night. He argues that the sixpence went on her flower and cachous to make herself more attractive to the man she thought would be meeting her at the club and whisking her off somewhere. If there is evidence that she paid for a bed up front, fully intending to return after whatever business she had at the club, bang goes Mike’s theory. But the fact remains that she was penniless when found dead, and therefore entirely without funds for her next meal or drink, even if she had lined up a bed with her name on it.

Love,

Caz
X

She left the lodging house with 6d and without flowers on her breast and any cashous that we hear of...and later she is found without that money and with the flower arrangement and the cashous. So, hardly conjecture without any foundation. Which of course suggesting a Ripper for this killing would be. I would be very surprised if the cost of those 2 items at the time exceeded 6d.

And for the record Caz, I suspect she was either there for a date, or for work with someone still in attendance at the club...this of course based on her statement that she had been at work "among the Jews" for a few months leading up to this date, and the fact that the weekend she is killed Jewish families were observing religious celebrations. Oh...and the fact that most of the men in attendance that night were Jewish.

Again,....speculation based on existing evidence...rather than fanciful exploration of theories without foundation in the Berner Street murder evidence.

You suggest I insert a lot of theory when I make a post Caz, when in fact anything that I have proposed has foundation somewhere in the accepted evidence. Your choice of a dramatic variance in MO for the Berner Street Killer, (since you assume this killing was done by the same person who killed the first 2 Canonicals), and your belief that Liz Stride was a street prostitute...are 2 theories which are both purely speculatory and without provenance in any known evidence.

Im not the one whose is constantly injecting purely subjective thinking Caz...

Cheers

[DRoy]

Caz,

I don’t know why you think I consider Schwartz to be ‘such an important witness’ that he should have testified at the inquest. I’m not even completely sure we know whose decision it was, Schwartz’s or the authorities, that he didn’t attend. In any case, he did come forward to give his statement to the police on the day of the murder, and he only claimed to witness a minor assault, which clearly wasn’t the cause of death. If he knew anything about the recent murders (Tabram, Nichols and Chapman), he nevertheless didn’t consider Stride to be in mortal danger from BS man, or he would surely have roped in Pipeman to help prevent another tragedy, or if he was too scared he could at the very least have run to fetch the nearest policeman.

I've argued before that if Schwartz didn't see anything of value for the inquest then I find it odd Baxter would have had 5 inquest sessions with over 20 witnesses over a 3+week period. He seemed to invite everyone yet not the last person to see her alive and just minutes after being assulted. It's a double edged sword...either invite everyone and extend an unnecessary inquest to determine the who, how, when, what, where or determine the cause of death. If they wanted just the cause of death, couldn't they have figured that out by asking a doctor or two within 10 minutes?

Which half am I in then, because I don’t believe BS man had to be the killer, nor do I believe he couldn’t have been. I’m open to both possibilities equally. The police obviously didn’t know either way, but they were best placed to judge the value or otherwise of what Schwartz claimed to witness, 15 minutes before the murder was discovered. Whether the tale was invented or he told the truth as he saw it, he wasn’t the last person to see Stride alive. He apparently fled incontinently, leaving BS with Stride, and Pipeman free to return to the scene if he chose to do so.

If BS Man existed. The only person who saw him was someone who didn't testify.

In looking at the entire situation from 12:30 on, its not that I am calling Schwartz a liar or covering for the club or anything else. But nobody saw or heard any of Schwartz's version which is either coincidental or it didn't happen. What sold me was Schwartz not testifying. That tipped the scales for me. For some reason his story didn't go further than his statement. Why? No idea but it didn't. None of the senior police or officials hint to Schwartz having something of value. That would lead me to conclude BS Man and Pipeman became non suspects and Schwartz discredited for some reason.

Cheers
DRoy

[Wickerman]

Hi Caz.

I’m not even completely sure we know whose decision it was, Schwartz’s or the authorities, that he didn’t attend.

I'm not sure you could avoid a 'summons to appear' just because you choose not to go. 'They' would come and get'cha!

Which half am I in then, because I don’t believe BS man had to be the killer, nor do I believe he couldn’t have been. I’m open to both possibilities equally.

Seems like your the one sat on the same fence as me. I am interested in both sides of the argument, while not being convinced by either.

Earlier in the thread, Ben argued that it was so unlikely for Stride to have been manhandled by one man then murdered by another within 15 minutes,..

This was the East end, anything was possible.
If a person can be kicked and beaten one minute, then while he lay bleeding be robbed by another passerby today, which has been the case more than once. Then certainly Stride could have been one of these unlucky ones, assaulted twice in 15 minutes, not impossible.

At 12.45, when BS man was supposedly manhandling Stride, her killer could in theory have been ten minutes’ walking distance away

He could equally have been inside the yard out of view to Schwartz. By this I mean, we have always assumed Stride was in the gateway alone, though we have no good indication of this.
Stride had never been seen alone that night up to this point, she was always with someone. So who is to say she was not with a man in the shadows of the gateway when BSman staggered passed?
Was this the reason for the aggravation, BSman saw her with another man?

[DRoy]

Caz,

Yes that article isn't quoted though when there are two from the same paper the same day that are quoted and it is there she said she was outside almost the entire time between 12:30 - 1:00. I trust her own quotes more than i do the summary story.

You're right though, she didn't see Stride. Neither did Lave or Eagle nor apparently did Goldstein or anyone since Smith. Unless you accept Schwartz. But why accept him when he didn't testify?

I find it odd so many claim to see Stride when nothing had happened to her yet when an apparent assult on her happens (Schwartz's story) nobody saw anything. The murder itself was in a place she was hidden enough to avoid being seen so it makes sense nobody saw that.

Cheers
DRoy