Why No Stride Mutilations ?

[Wickerman]

... even if the Church Passage Couple wasn't Eddowes and JtR, it seems unlikely that JtR would be attacking Eddowes in Mitre Square until after the rain as well (probably sheltering)....

Hi Jeff.
Conversely, wouldn't you think the rain would offer him cover?, less likelihood of interruption. Especially if anyone was to pass through the square, they would be paying much less attention to their surroundings as they hurry passed someone in the corner.

[Wickerman]

Anyway, my point is, that even if the CPC isn't Eddowes and JtR I think the times we have still suggest the same timeline...

Jeff, surely if CPC are not Eddowes & JtR, then the only other contenders are the 'people' who passed through St. James Place at 1:30, which means the killer had something close to 10 minutes - 1:30 (Blenkingsop) -1:40 (Harvey), give or take a minute or two.
A much more comfortable timeline.

Blenkingsop's well-dressed visitor must have been a detective, we know Major Smith had charged his force with paying particular attention to couples out late at night. Which implies this man was following a couple (male & female) into St. James Place, so even if Blenkingsop could not be sure who passed him, there is a strong likelihood it was a man & woman, because the well-dressed man was apparently following such a couple.
Had the 'people' been anything other than a male & female, there wouldn't be any point in publishing the story, it had no value.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’m just wondering if the corner where the murder took place might have provided at least partial cover against the heavy rain that delayed the departure of Lawende and co? Also, perhaps their 3-5 minutes wait was a period of slowing down for the rain? So combined with any cover provided by the building they could have been in place at around 1.30 in what, to them, might have been very light rain?

[Parisi North Humber]

Hi Sunny, the appearance of a hanky connected with most of the victims has always piqued my interest also. In LVT period and prior there was a language of hankerchiefs (along the same lines as the language of fans). There was a resurgence in the 1980s homosexual community where it was known as "flagging". The position and colour of the bandana (hanky) demonstrated your sexual predilections.
so i've often wondered if the "red hanky" was a signal that said lady was available for business or perhaps the services on offer. I could be wrong (and often am) but I believe it was MJK (according to Hutch) who remarked to Aman that she had lost her hanky, I always thought it a strange opening gambit unless the mention of a lost hanky was "trade terminology".


Helen x

[GBinOz]

Jeff, surely if CPC are not Eddowes & JtR, then the only other contenders are the 'people' who passed through St. James Place at 1:30, which means the killer had something close to 10 minutes - 1:30 (Blenkingsop) -1:40 (Harvey), give or take a minute or two.
A much more comfortable timeline.

Hi Jon,

There was a reported sighting by a watchboy who saw a man and a woman leave Aldgate station, going towards Mitre-square, and the man returning shortly afterward alone. They might have walked to Mitre St and observed Watkins leaving Mitre square on his beat and, with a little local knowledge, expected they had nearly 15 minutes until he returned. That was the same night that Albert Bachert had his encounter with the strange man carrying a black bag in the Three Nuns pub which is adjacent to the station, and Eddowes was arrested in that vicinity earlier.

Cheers, George

[Scott Nelson]

I tend to dismiss the couple seen standing at the entrance to Church Passage as Eddowes and the Ripper. Reluctantly so, because it dismisses my formerly favored witness, Joseph Levy. I think the Ripper and Eddowes did watch Watkins from somewhere along Aldgate-High street, and then entered the Square after seeing Watkins exit. By the time Harvey came down Church Passage, the murderer had already left, being seen minutes before by Watkins as he was exiting St. James Passage.

[Wickerman]

Hi Jon,

There was a reported sighting by a watchboy who saw a man and a woman leave Aldgate station, going towards Mitre-square, and the man returning shortly afterward alone. They might have walked to Mitre St and observed Watkins leaving Mitre square on his beat and, with a little local knowledge, expected they had nearly 15 minutes until he returned. That was the same night that Albert Bachert had his encounter with the strange man carrying a black bag in the Three Nuns pub which is adjacent to the station, and Eddowes was arrested in that vicinity earlier.

Cheers, George

Hi George.

I do recall that story (I just looked it up again), I remember thinking where the watchboy was, you can't see Aldgate Station & Mitre Sq. from any one location.
If he saw the couple come out of Aldgate Station, he could have seen them turn into Duke St. or further down, turn into Mitre Street, which in either case is "towards Mitre Square", but also towards many other addresses too.
I wonder if there is a more detailed report that says the watchboy followed the couple?

[JeffHamm]

Hi Wickerman,

Hi Jeff.
Conversely, wouldn't you think the rain would offer him cover?, less likelihood of interruption. Especially if anyone was to pass through the square, they would be paying much less attention to their surroundings as they hurry passed someone in the corner.

I think to make that work one has to suggest a chance meeting while both were passing through Mitre Square rather than them going in together under the guise of a customer. My thoughts are that Eddowes would be more likely to want to wait out the rain. Also, given Lawende et co. were waiting it out, it seems to me it was probably fairly heavy, and I would think that would make for attacking someone harder, particularly if he initially strangles manually. I could be wrong, of course, but to me a heavy rain suggests that the attack, and their arrival at the crime scene, probably occurs after the rain (or was completed before it, but I don't think there's time for that option).

Jeff, surely if CPC are not Eddowes & JtR, then the only other contenders are the 'people' who passed through St. James Place at 1:30, which means the killer had something close to 10 minutes - 1:30 (Blenkingsop) -1:40 (Harvey), give or take a minute or two.
A much more comfortable timeline.

The only other contenders that we have reports of, although George does mention another (the man and woman seen heading away from Algate station). However, if Eddowes and JtR enter from Algate direction, then it may just be that nobody saw them (or at least, nobody reported their sighting). I agree, that from the information we have the CPC is the one that we have the most evidence in support of, but the evidence we have is not conclusive (identification by clothing alone) so I think it's best to consider if other options are available. Blenkingsop tells us there were people about, and we have another potential access route for which we really have no information, so there may have been people there too, or there may not have been. We, however, don't know which of those is true.

Blenkingsop's well-dressed visitor must have been a detective, we know Major Smith had charged his force with paying particular attention to couples out late at night. Which implies this man was following a couple (male & female) into St. James Place, so even if Blenkingsop could not be sure who passed him, there is a strong likelihood it was a man & woman, because the well-dressed man was apparently following such a couple.
Had the 'people' been anything other than a male & female, there wouldn't be any point in publishing the story, it had no value.

The story was in the newspapers, so the point of publishing it would be because it was a story. If Blenkingsop had said he saw a couple, or couples, then I would think that would have been mentioned. The fact it isn't points more towards him making the more vague statement of just "there were people about", leaving open the possibility there were couples, but it doesn't ensure there were couples. It's one step better than simply having the possibility there even were people about coming up from Algate along Mitre Street, but worse than the known couple spotted at the end of Church Passage.

Basically, I'm currently just focusing on what statements we have, and what options those leave us to have to consider. On the other hand, I tend to agree with you on the idea that a couple is better than people and people is better than nothing at all. I think we're sort of saying much the same thing actually, just placing emphasis at different aspects of the statements to interpretation process.

- Jeff

[Aethelwulf]

I'm not sure how useful this is as a comparison but it struck me as interesting in relation to the ripper's approach and actions of BS man. It is the case of Gordon Cummins aka the Blackout/Wartime Ripper. When spotted with his victims it seems like he approached them and then they agreed to go off to a quite spot/room air raid shelter etc. A bit like how we think the ripper operated. But for one of his later victims (who survived thanks to a disturbance - and guess what, he left the scene) the account sounds not unlike BS man/Stride (from wiki).

On the evening of 13 February 1942, Cummins accosted a young married woman named Margaret Heywood in Piccadilly. After sharing a drink and a sandwich at the London Trocadero, the two walked in the direction of Haymarket. Heywood later stated that at this point, Cummins became "unpleasantly forward" toward her: pushing her into a doorway near Piccadilly Circus and groping her waist as he attempted to persuade her to accompany him to a nearby air raid shelter. Heywood consented to a single kiss before informing Cummins she did not know of any nearby air raid shelters, stating, "In any case, I wouldn't go in one with you."^[76] Cummins then began fondling Heywood, who remonstrated against his actions as she struck at his wrists and pushed his hands away from her body, then attempted to leave. In response, Cummins seized her by the throat and pushed her back into the doorway.

Just because the ripper seems to have been a quiet and efficient killer most the time it is not unreasonable to think he got rough with Stride.

In this case there is also a very strong progression in violence from strangulation beating and stabbing to full on mutilation, which is not unlike the proposed scenario from say millwood onwards if you count those.

Just to stir the pot this chap also sounds familiar in some ways: quite young (28), married and asked wife for money to go out drinking, sexual pervert..

[Losmandris]

I realise that this post was to a post by George but….

I really don’t see why we should use any more caution when speculating on timing errors than we should apply to accepting timings? Any time mentioned could have been wrong to some extent. We should have a high level of confidence in Blackwell of course, as you say, but even for him a watch can be a minute or two out.

Another suggestion….. could Pipeman and Parcelman have been one and the same? We all know about how inaccurate witness identification can be. Schwartz mentioned no parcel of course but the man was in a doorway in the dark and how sure can we be that he didn’t simply put the parcel under his arm while he was lighting his pipe and Schwartz just didn’t notice?

So scenario mk2…… the Schwartz incident occurs at 12.30 - Schwartz and BS man leave the scene - Stride crosses over to near the corner of Fairclough Street and Pipeman goes over to ‘check that she’s ok’ - Smith passes and sees them talking - they move around the corner where Brown sees them - they return to the gates (perhaps just intending to pass them on the way to somewhere else?) but Pipeman pulls her into the yard and kills her?

I always wonder about pipeman. Out of all the characters involved in this incident to me he is the most suspicious. I think he is there all the time, watching things. He makes his appearance after the BS 'attack' acting as the knight in shining armour as it were. He is very chatty with Stride, they end up in the yard, where she is so comfortable with him she offers him a cachous just before he kills her.

I think the earlier timeframe is entirely feasible.

[FISHY1118]

I always wonder about pipeman. Out of all the characters involved in this incident to me he is the most suspicious. I think he is there all the time, watching things. He makes his appearance after the BS 'attack' acting as the knight in shining armour as it were. He is very chatty with Stride, they end up in the yard, where she is so comfortable with him she offers him a cachous just before he kills her.

I think the earlier timeframe is entirely feasible.

Your forgetting one thing . Pipeman leaves the scene after Strides attack, so theres no way of knowing if he came back at all to kill her.

[Losmandris]

Your forgetting one thing . Pipeman leaves the scene after Strides attack, so theres no way of knowing if he came back at all to kill her.

Can we be certain just how far he goes? Did he just emerge from the shadows and walk in the direction of Schwartz? If Schwartz was doing a runner, it may have been difficult for him to tell!

[Losmandris]

I'm not sure how useful this is as a comparison but it struck me as interesting in relation to the ripper's approach and actions of BS man. It is the case of Gordon Cummins aka the Blackout/Wartime Ripper. When spotted with his victims it seems like he approached them and then they agreed to go off to a quite spot/room air raid shelter etc. A bit like how we think the ripper operated. But for one of his later victims (who survived thanks to a disturbance - and guess what, he left the scene) the account sounds not unlike BS man/Stride (from wiki).

On the evening of 13 February 1942, Cummins accosted a young married woman named Margaret Heywood in Piccadilly. After sharing a drink and a sandwich at the London Trocadero, the two walked in the direction of Haymarket. Heywood later stated that at this point, Cummins became "unpleasantly forward" toward her: pushing her into a doorway near Piccadilly Circus and groping her waist as he attempted to persuade her to accompany him to a nearby air raid shelter. Heywood consented to a single kiss before informing Cummins she did not know of any nearby air raid shelters, stating, "In any case, I wouldn't go in one with you."^[76] Cummins then began fondling Heywood, who remonstrated against his actions as she struck at his wrists and pushed his hands away from her body, then attempted to leave. In response, Cummins seized her by the throat and pushed her back into the doorway.

Just because the ripper seems to have been a quiet and efficient killer most the time it is not unreasonable to think he got rough with Stride.

In this case there is also a very strong progression in violence from strangulation beating and stabbing to full on mutilation, which is not unlike the proposed scenario from say millwood onwards if you count those.

Just to stir the pot this chap also sounds familiar in some ways: quite young (28), married and asked wife for money to go out drinking, sexual pervert..

Strange that she had the cachous in her hand though. I imagine the killer being completely calm and chatty and then out of no where striking, thus taking the victim totally unawares. This for me at least is another reason I think Stride was most likely a ripper victim, potentially the same MO as the others.

[FISHY1118]

Can we be certain just how far he goes? Did he just emerge from the shadows and walk in the direction of Schwartz? If Schwartz was doing a runner, it may have been difficult for him to tell!

Either way he still left the scene , no one knows if he returned to killed stride, for all we know he could have gone home .

[GBinOz]

Can we be certain just how far he goes? Did he just emerge from the shadows and walk in the direction of Schwartz? If Schwartz was doing a runner, it may have been difficult for him to tell!

Hi Tristan,

I agree. There is no evidence from Schwartz that he followed him anymore than a couple of steps. He reached the arches before he looked around and Pipeman wasn't there. I also agree with your shining knight theory.

Cheers, George