Why No Stride Mutilations ?

[Sunny Delight]

Correction- Fanny Mortimer said she was at her door almost the whole time between 12:30am-1am. She couldn't have been though as she missed so many people going about. As I say we can be sure that sometime between Schwartz witnessing the assault on Stride and Leon Goldstein passing she came to the door and stood there for up to ten minutes.

[Sunny Delight]

I don't have time at present to dig out links, but my recollection is that Packer was shown a different body to try to catch him out, but he did not identify that body as Stride. He was then shown Stride's body and correctly identified her as the woman he had seen. As Jon said, Packer made an error on time and initially didn't want to be involved, but his sighting is corroborated by PC Smith. Macnaghten named three suspects and got everything wrong about all three, and yet he is still being used as an authority to justify the suspicions about Druitt as JtR. Why pick out Packer on the description of the flower? Everyone had a different description, and some didn't even see a flower. If you are going to dismiss Packer for inconsistencies in his story you would also need to dismiss Schwartz for the same reason.

Cheers, George

Packer went to identify Stride with the two Private Detectives not the Police. The report in the paper that covered this said he was shown Eddowes body first in an attempt to see if he identified her which he did not. He said it was nothing like the woman he had seen. Then he was shown Stride instead whom he identified. There is no co-orboration of this story and indeed one would ask why Packer was taken to identify Eddowes yet Lawende was only shown clothing. It is a report that is difficult to take seriously.

I have singled out no one as I haven't poster on the other thread but McNaghten's three suspects and the descriptions of them seems strewn with error. I am not picking out Packer because of the flower specifically but because of the inconsistencies is his statements. For someone not looking to get involved he was quite happy to milk the publicity once it came. How can that be reconciled?

I think some on here like to paint the man seen by PC Smith as someone lurking in Dutfields Yard as Stride was assaulted by B.S man. The idea being from what I can see that if Packer is to be believed and we move his statement to 12am-12:30am rather than his initial 11am-11:30am then it is likely the man seen by PC Smith was the same as Packer. Then a case can be made that this man was in her company for quite a while so it would make sense that he continued to walk with Stride over to Dutfields Yard. Rather than the other suggestion that the man was gone by the time Schwartz saw B.S man attack. That is why Packer is believed by some- in order to try and push a suspect rather than looking at the evidence we have and trying to reconcile it to events.

[GBinOz]

Packer never formally identified the body with the Police. If they had even remotely thought he had something to offer this would have been the first port of call. His story changed multiple times. It is obvious to my mind that his evidence is unsafe and we cannot use it. Contradictory and seemingly he enjoyed the notoriety. Nothing in the official record backs up Packers account. As for the flower it was red, Packer may have said white with red inside. I have seen accounts where he just said white. More contradicting.

I don't have time at present to dig out links, but my recollection is that Packer was shown a different body to try to catch him out, but he did not identify that body as Stride. He was then shown Stride's body and correctly identified her as the woman he had seen. As Jon said, Packer made an error on time and initially didn't want to be involved, but his sighting is corroborated by PC Smith. Macnaghten named three suspects and got everything wrong about all three, and yet he is still being used as an authority to justify the suspicions about Druitt as JtR. Why pick out Packer on the description of the flower? Everyone had a different description, and some didn't even see a flower. If you are going to dismiss Packer for inconsistencies in his story you would also need to dismiss Schwartz for the same reason.

Cheers, George

[Sunny Delight]

I'm not sure what you mean by that, all descriptions are vague, the age he gave, the height & attire are all consistent.


You will recall white petals were found scattered in the yard?
We also have a police statement where he described the flower as white outside, red inside.


In the same police statement he said he was taken to St. George's Mortuary, and identified the victim as the woman he saw.



Police today will tell you, a witness will often first claim to have seen or heard nothing, but under pressure will finally decide to tell the truth. It's often a case of not wanting to have anything to do with the matter.


I think you'll find Mortimer came to the door twice, there is a gap of several minutes between her first surveillance at the door, and her second.

The main issue with Packer is that he was confused between seeing Stride & the client roughly between 11:00-11:30, or 12:00-12:30.
We know the 11:00-11:30 time window had to be incorrect because Stride was seen at the Bricklayers Arms around 11:00pm, in the company of a male.
Therefore, Packer had to have seen Stride & Co. between 12:00-12:30, and the police would likely have known this too, but they cannot correct the witness, Packer had to do that himself. If Packer cannot figure it out he is not a valid witness for that incident, which is a shame because we have the evidence that shows the correct time he saw Stride, and it is confirmed by PC Smith.

Packer never formally identified the body with the Police. If they had even remotely thought he had something to offer this would have been the first port of call. His story changed multiple times. It is obvious to my mind that his evidence is unsafe and we cannot use it. Contradictory and seemingly he enjoyed the notoriety. Nothing in the official record backs up Packers account. As for the flower it was red, Packer may have said white with red inside. I have seen accounts where he just said white. More contradicting.

Mortimer is a difficult one because she said she was at the door in one account almost the whole time between 1:30am-2am. That could not be possible given the traffic through the street. What we know for sure is that she was at her door at 12:55am. Leon Goldstein backs this up as she saw him and he came forward. She said he was the only person she saw. We know Schwartz saw an assault at around 12:45am. So we know between those times she was at the door. I have speculated a possible timeline which to me makes sense.

[GBinOz]

What seems to be missing in all these scenarios is the possibility that Stride was not alone in the gateway.
Packer speaks to the time Stride arrives in Berner st., and accepting his times are not reliable, he does at least provide a sequence of events. Stride & her man buy some grapes from his shop on the west side of Berner st. They then cross the road and stand there for approx 30 mins, only to cross back to the club side, and stand there. This is where Packer looses sight of them.

Now, for an approx. time we only need look to the evidence of PC Smith, who described Stride at about 12:30-35 in Berner st. in the company of a man carrying a parcel. Stride was not alone, and if we retrace her steps backwards we find that from 11:00pm at least, she had been in the company of a man. So it is not too outrageous to accept that Stride was still standing in the gateway with parcel-man when BS-man & Schwartz approached the gateway from Commercial Rd.
It is Packer who placed Stride in the gateway in the company of a man, who must have been carrying a package of some kind.
We know the man she was with was not BS-man because Schwartz saw him arrive, he followed BS-man down Berner st., and he arrived alone.
Stride was with Parcel-man, standing in the gateway of Dutfield's Yard.

Schwartz being so focused on the altercation, he had not noticed Paecel-man standing in the shadows.

This then offers Parcel-man as the prime suspect in the Stride case.

Hi Jon,

I think that if Stride was being subjected to an assault her screams would have been very loud indeed. IF BS took her by the arm to attempt to pull her from the gateway and she protested and pulled away with a swivel motion just as he let go, she may very well have just fallen, rather than being "thrown", to the ground. Schwartz was crossing the road to avoid the situation so may have been just glancing back intermittently and filling in the gaps in his mind. I also agree with your assessment of Packer as a witness.

There has been endless discussion on whether and/or when the Schwartz incident took place but, as you say, Parcelman is usually forgotten. He seems to have been with her since 11PM, and was assuredly the man seen by Smith, and probably Packer allowing for the time error. If the Schwartz incident happened earlier, as suggested by Herlock, or didn't happen at all, as suggested by NBFN, then Parcelman is the last person with whom Stride was seen alive. There seems to be four possibilities for Parcelman after Smith continued on his beat.

1. He said goodnight to Stride and went on his way. Stride then proceeded to the gateway alone. Why? Maybe she was soliciting, or maybe she had acquired a cleaning job in the club after the meeting/party.

2. He went with Stride to the gateway to continue listening to the music and was standing in the shadows when the dispute with BS took place.

3. He went with Stride to the gateway and she waited for him while went into the yard for some purpose....perhaps to speak to someone in the print shop, or the club, or to use the lavatory in the yard.

4. The Schwartz incident was unrelated leaving Parcelman as the last person seen in the company of Stride.

For options 1 and 3 the possible suspects would be BS, Parcelman or someone else. For options 2 and 4, probably Parcelman.

Schwartz is favoured by many as Anderson's witness who supposedly identified BSman, but I don't recall anything that would preclude him having been presented with Pipeman and identifying him. Both men were in the vicinity and both should have been considered persons of interest by police.

Best regards, George

[FISHY1118]

This seems rather too far fetched. Firstly we have to believe Matthew Packer who seemingly contradicted himself and offered evidence that also seemingly described someone else. He described a woman wearing a white flower. He was never asked to identify the body. He had initially told Police he had seen no one in Berner Street on the night. There is no way we can take Packer seriously.

I often wonder if the person PC Smith saw Stride talking to was someone known to her. It seems that way from the brief description we have. She doesn't seem to have been propositioning him. Of course they may have modified their behaviour until the Policeman passed. Smith doesn't elaborate on whether they seemed friendly or like they knew each other- just that they were both sober.

I think a problem for those advocating another assailant is Fanny Mortimer. If she came to the door at say 12:49am then the assailant would have only had a few minutes to approach, be propositioned or proposition and take Stride into the yard after the B.S man incident. This is why I see events transpiring like this:

12:44-12:46am- Israel Schwartz witnesses B.S man assaulting Elizabeth Stride at the entrance to Dutfields Yard.

12:46- 12:48am- B.S man strangles Stride with her scarf and cuts her throat. He is spooked into fleeing and Fanny Mortimer hears him pass her house.

12:49-12:50- Fanny Mortimer goes to her door and stands there for 8-9 minutes. This means she is at her door from say 12;49am- 12:58am. She only sees one person in the street.

12:55am- Leon Goldstein passes by Berner Street. Fanny Mortimer sees him and this co- orborates her statement as he shows up to the Police station the next day to clear himself of suspicion.

1:00am- Louis Diemschitz returns to Dutfields Yard and find the body of Liz Stride.

Well done sunny ,the most probable solution to strides murder.

[Wickerman]

This seems rather too far fetched. Firstly we have to believe Matthew Packer who seemingly contradicted himself and offered evidence that also seemingly described someone else.

I'm not sure what you mean by that, all descriptions are vague, the age he gave, the height & attire are all consistent.

He described a woman wearing a white flower.

You will recall white petals were found scattered in the yard?
We also have a police statement where he described the flower as white outside, red inside.

He was never asked to identify the body.

In the same police statement he said he was taken to St. George's Mortuary, and identified the victim as the woman he saw.

He had initially told Police he had seen no one in Berner Street on the night.

Police today will tell you, a witness will often first claim to have seen or heard nothing, but under pressure will finally decide to tell the truth. It's often a case of not wanting to have anything to do with the matter.

I think a problem for those advocating another assailant is Fanny Mortimer. If she came to the door at say 12:49am then the assailant would have only had a few minutes to approach, be propositioned or proposition and take Stride into the yard after the B.S man incident.

I think you'll find Mortimer came to the door twice, there is a gap of several minutes between her first surveillance at the door, and her second.

The main issue with Packer is that he was confused between seeing Stride & the client roughly between 11:00-11:30, or 12:00-12:30.
We know the 11:00-11:30 time window had to be incorrect because Stride was seen at the Bricklayers Arms around 11:00pm, in the company of a male.
Therefore, Packer had to have seen Stride & Co. between 12:00-12:30, and the police would likely have known this too, but they cannot correct the witness, Packer had to do that himself. If Packer cannot figure it out he is not a valid witness for that incident, which is a shame because we have the evidence that shows the correct time he saw Stride, and it is confirmed by PC Smith.

[Sunny Delight]

What seems to be missing in all these scenarios is the possibility that Stride was not alone in the gateway.
Packer speaks to the time Stride arrives in Berner st., and accepting his times are not reliable, he does at least provide a sequence of events. Stride & her man buy some grapes from his shop on the west side of Berner st. They then cross the road and stand there for approx 30 mins, only to cross back to the club side, and stand there. This is where Packer looses sight of them.

Now, for an approx. time we only need look to the evidence of PC Smith, who described Stride at about 12:30-35 in Berner st. in the company of a man carrying a parcel. Stride was not alone, and if we retrace her steps backwards we find that from 11:00pm at least, she had been in the company of a man. So it is not too outrageous to accept that Stride was still standing in the gateway with parcel-man when BS-man & Schwartz approached the gateway from Commercial Rd.
It is Packer who placed Stride in the gateway in the company of a man, who must have been carrying a package of some kind.
We know the man she was with was not BS-man because Schwartz saw him arrive, he followed BS-man down Berner st., and he arrived alone.
Stride was with Parcel-man, standing in the gateway of Dutfield's Yard.

Schwartz being so focused on the altercation, he had not noticed Paecel-man standing in the shadows.

This then offers Parcel-man as the prime suspect in the Stride case.

This seems rather too far fetched. Firstly we have to believe Matthew Packer who seemingly contradicted himself and offered evidence that also seemingly described someone else. He described a woman wearing a white flower. He was never asked to identify the body. He had initially told Police he had seen no one in Berner Street on the night. There is no way we can take Packer seriously.

I often wonder if the person PC Smith saw Stride talking to was someone known to her. It seems that way from the brief description we have. She doesn't seem to have been propositioning him. Of course they may have modified their behaviour until the Policeman passed. Smith doesn't elaborate on whether they seemed friendly or like they knew each other- just that they were both sober.

I think a problem for those advocating another assailant is Fanny Mortimer. If she came to the door at say 12:49am then the assailant would have only had a few minutes to approach, be propositioned or proposition and take Stride into the yard after the B.S man incident. This is why I see events transpiring like this:

12:44-12:46am- Israel Schwartz witnesses B.S man assaulting Elizabeth Stride at the entrance to Dutfields Yard.

12:46- 12:48am- B.S man strangles Stride with her scarf and cuts her throat. He is spooked into fleeing and Fanny Mortimer hears him pass her house.

12:49-12:50- Fanny Mortimer goes to her door and stands there for 8-9 minutes. This means she is at her door from say 12;49am- 12:58am. She only sees one person in the street.

12:55am- Leon Goldstein passes by Berner Street. Fanny Mortimer sees him and this co- orborates her statement as he shows up to the Police station the next day to clear himself of suspicion.

1:00am- Louis Diemschitz returns to Dutfields Yard and find the body of Liz Stride.

[Wickerman]

In other words, there is nothing in the evidence that requires that B.S. gets Stride into the alley immediately after she's gone to the ground as per Schwartz (and the killed by another hypothesis requires that there be some time between those events). We just don't know what transpired, and while it may seem odd to suggest she stuck around and argued with B.S. after that initial throwing to the ground, given she doesn't yell very loudly, there's nothing to suggest she was terrified either (so really, nothing to suggest she would necessarily flee in any sort of panic).

What seems to be missing in all these scenarios is the possibility that Stride was not alone in the gateway.
Packer speaks to the time Stride arrives in Berner st., and accepting his times are not reliable, he does at least provide a sequence of events. Stride & her man buy some grapes from his shop on the west side of Berner st. They then cross the road and stand there for approx 30 mins, only to cross back to the club side, and stand there. This is where Packer looses sight of them.

Now, for an approx. time we only need look to the evidence of PC Smith, who described Stride at about 12:30-35 in Berner st. in the company of a man carrying a parcel. Stride was not alone, and if we retrace her steps backwards we find that from 11:00pm at least, she had been in the company of a man. So it is not too outrageous to accept that Stride was still standing in the gateway with parcel-man when BS-man & Schwartz approached the gateway from Commercial Rd.
It is Packer who placed Stride in the gateway in the company of a man, who must have been carrying a package of some kind.
We know the man she was with was not BS-man because Schwartz saw him arrive, he followed BS-man down Berner st., and he arrived alone.
Stride was with Parcel-man, standing in the gateway of Dutfield's Yard.

Schwartz being so focused on the altercation, he had not noticed Paecel-man standing in the shadows.

This then offers Parcel-man as the prime suspect in the Stride case.

[Wickerman]

I was however reading about the Yorkshire Ripper. It was interesting. One of his victims was seen in Leeds City centre banging on the roof of a car and shouting expletives at the driver. On the face of it had someone seen this they would have assumed when she was found dead it was connected. It wasn't. Peter Sutcliffe was 100 yards away watching and as the woman began walking away he pulled his car up, propositioned and she got in- leading to her death. So of course 15 minutes is enough time for JTR if he was lurking to strike. So we have to be open to the possibility. I wouldn't subscribe to the view that is what happened but I wouldn't rule it out either.

Good that you brought this up. I could not remember the name of the victim, so had to get Sutcliffe's confession.

https://reprobatepress.com/2019/04/02/the-confession-of-peter-sutcliffe/

As it turns out this type of incident occurred twice with Sutcliffe.
The first victim that he came upon having an altercation with someone was Patricia Atkinson, in Bradford. As you say she was shouting obscenities and banging on the roof of a white mini, which pulled away at speed.
Sutcliffe watched, then drove up to her.

The next time was in Leeds, the victim was Marilyn Moore, he saw her walking along the street and a car pulled up, she rejected the prospective client, and Sutcliffe pulled up next to her.

As you rightly point out, it only took seconds for each victim to meet their killer directly following some type of altercation with another person.
Only circumstances separate the possibility that these women may have been seen rejecting someone, minutes? before they were murdered. It would only be expected that suspicion would fall on the rejected clients, and not some other stranger who no-one knew was present.

[Sunny Delight]

Should that not read his translator said this. I think we have to take his statement with a pinch of salt here. The fact is it is second hand, through someone else and printed in a newspaper. I reckon the chances of exaggeration are highly likely here.

Yes it was his translator but I am going by Donald Swanson's summary of Schwartz statement which he had sent to his superiors. Again yes it was a translator but this was face to face with the Police and one would assume clarity was sought on the word thrown. Assumptions of course are not certainties but we can be fairly sure clarity was sought on this by those investigating.

[Losmandris]

Throwing someone to the floor is an aggressive act. Pushing is less aggressive. I agree we don't know B.S man's motive or intent, we can only go on what Schwartz said he witnessed. His description is seemingly that of an assault. It is a loaded word I agree- it may have been a struggle although again what Schwartz describes is fairly one sided.

Indeed, I dare say assaults like this were commonplace. Abberline I am quite sure would have been totally disinterested in what appears on the surface to have been common assault. What changes things is that within 15 minutes of this assault taking place Elizabeth Stride is found dead at the same spot with her throat cut. Cut in an identical manner to other Ripper victims. We can't rule out that with a 15 minute lag Stride didn't meet someone else. In my view it is unlikely. In my opinion the Ripper that night was seen in the vicinity of his crimes twice- once at Berner Street and once at the entrance to Church Passage.

I was however reading about the Yorkshire Ripper. It was interesting. One of his victims was seen in Leeds City centre banging on the roof of a car and shouting expletives at the driver. On the face of it had someone seen this they would have assumed when she was found dead it was connected. It wasn't. Peter Sutcliffe was 100 yards away watching and as the woman began walking away he pulled his car up, propositioned and she got in- leading to her death. So of course 15 minutes is enough time for JTR if he was lurking to strike. So we have to be open to the possibility. I wouldn't subscribe to the view that is what happened but I wouldn't rule it out either.

I think the reference to the Yorkshire Ripper is very apt here. As someone in need of money asap it is possible that stride was able to compose herself pretty quickly after the incident and find someone else in a very short space of time. She probably couldn't afford not to. We have no idea how frequently Stride was involved in these kind of incidents, she may have been the aggressor or it could be a habitual response from some men who were approached by prostitutes. Taken altogether BS man being the killer is far from absolute in my opinion.

[Losmandris]

Schwartz does not say pushed. He said she was thrown to the ground. Now it could well be that he misinterpreted what he saw and indeed Stride was either pulling away or even slipped. However Schwartz used the word thrown. Trying to throw someone to the ground is not easy and would take a fair degree of force. Not excessive force I admit but certainly a fair degree. You keep using the word 'pushing' which is different to 'throwing'. Schwartz to my mind describes an assault.

Should that not read his translator said this. I think we have to take his statement with a pinch of salt here. The fact is it is second hand, through someone else and printed in a newspaper. I reckon the chances of exaggeration are highly likely here.

[Trevor Marriott]

As I say, I think everything you're suggesting is reasonable, I just think there are also reasonable alternatives that keep the possibilities open in pretty much all directions. Stride has always been a difficult one for me to make up my mind because it is so hard to find anything definitive, or even strongly pointing, in one direction or the other. Her case teeters on the edge of so many possibilities in my view.

- Jeff

There are several important factors in her murder which point to another killer other than JTR

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[JeffHamm]

Hello Jeff,

A very well thought out and I must say unbiased post by you. I would only add a couple of things. Whitechapel was a rough place and I have to believe that such events as Stride encountering the B.S. man were not an uncommon event. But in questioning Schwartz, I have to think the first order of business was to try to determine whether Schwartz saw a murder or just a street hassle. So the following questions were most likely asked. Was Stride on the ground or was she standing when you left the scene? Did you see that the B.S. man had a knife in his hand? Did you see Stride with her hand to her throat? Did you see any blood? Since Swanson allows for the possibility of another killer other than the B.S. man, it seems reasonable to assume that Schwartz told him that as far as he could tell Stride was still alive when he left.

From what we know, and making reasonable assumptions about what the police would ask Schwartz, I think it is fair to conclude that Stride was still alive when Schwartz left, at least as far as Schwartz was aware. Given the position he describes B.S. and Stride being in, and they don't correspond to where Stride was eventually found, I think that also seems to be correct.

Stride being thrown to the ground and then making her way to into the yard to seek help is reasonable but is also time consuming. I would hope that the B.S. man would have considered the possibility that Schwartz and/or the Pipeman were on their way to finding a P.C. So killing her at this point has always struck me as odd.

Yes, it is time consuming, but then so is B.S. leaving and another showing up. Also, given as you point out, the area was rough and such disturbances were not uncommon, B.S. could very well presume to know they were not going to get the police, but just get out of the area.

Also, as I'm not pushing for B.S. = JtR, if he's not, then at that time he may still not be planning on killing her - just "setting her straght", type thing.

If she did not have the cachous in her hand when thrown to the ground, and fearing for her life she is headed to the apparent safety of the club, would she really say to herself now would be a good time for a cachous. Seems unlikely. To me, the cachous in her hand indicate she was at ease at the moment. I don't see that with the possibility of the B.S. man still lurking around.

c.d.

Maybe, or maybe she got them out as a comfort thing after thinking her dispute with B.S. was over. Again, we could speculate on why she gets them out, but all that really matters is that it appears she did get them out around that time. Her motive will never be known to us, and I think we run some risks if we put too much stock in our guesses as to what they were.

As I say, I think everything you're suggesting is reasonable, I just think there are also reasonable alternatives that keep the possibilities open in pretty much all directions. Stride has always been a difficult one for me to make up my mind because it is so hard to find anything definitive, or even strongly pointing, in one direction or the other. Her case teeters on the edge of so many possibilities in my view.

- Jeff