Why No Stride Mutilations ?

[Fiver]

Throat slashing seems like such an unusual choice in a dispute fueled by drunken rage and frustration: its not punishment, its a quick death.

George Capel Scudamore Lechmere did it.

[erobitha]

To answer the OP's original question. Simply because he was interrupted. London was a busy city and it didn't stop at 1am. In fact with the exception of Mary Jane Kelly, all the canonical victims have an element of interruption in them if all the witnesses are to be believed.

Liz Stride's murder has all the elements of the JtR MO but not his signature. For another killer to have JtR's MO be hunting that exact same night, in that exact same area, within the hour, with the exact same victimology is quite a lot of coincidences, far far likely Strides and Eddowes had the same killer, but was interrupted with Stride and went on to kill another. We have modern documentation of serial killers doing this if their first attack does not go as planned and he does not gain the "satisfaction" required attacks again that same night, Ted Bundy for example has done this.

This deserves a reciprocal amen.

[Garza]

To answer the OP's original question. Simply because he was interrupted. London was a busy city and it didn't stop at 1am. In fact with the exception of Mary Jane Kelly, all the canonical victims have an element of interruption in them if all the witnesses are to be believed.

Liz Stride's murder has all the elements of the JtR MO but not his signature. For another killer to have JtR's MO be hunting that exact same night, in that exact same area, within the hour, with the exact same victimology is quite a lot of coincidences, far far likely Strides and Eddowes had the same killer, but was interrupted with Stride and went on to kill another. We have modern documentation of serial killers doing this if their first attack does not go as planned and he does not gain the "satisfaction" required attacks again that same night, Ted Bundy for example has done this.

[Garza]

All based on a testimony of a man who has never been proven to exist.

No record exists of Israel Schwartz. The man who walked into give his statement to Abberline giving this name cannot be found in any record. Yet somehow a journalist in The Star found him (and his interpreter was home as well which was a tad fortunate). Swanson didn't have the right address. Who really was he and why should we believe him if we can't even find him? How do we know this is not a false statement?

I will say it again. Take Israel Schwartz out of the equation with all the things he supposedly saw and the timings. Then see how the scene plays out - it makes much more sense.

Been saying this for +10 years. Amen.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Hi Trevor,


And Chapman is the only one in a backyard, and Nicoles the furthest east, and Kelly the only one indoors, and Eddowes the only one in a square .... It's always possible to find something about a crime that is different from the others. They all have unique characteristics. Being south of Whitechapel Road just happens to be a unique aspect for Stride.

'Seems to me there is a pattern in that the murders progressed in terms of privacy at the location. From street to house back yard to yard with one entrance and not adjoined by neighbouring back yards to dimly lit square to house. That would suggest to me he wasn't getting the privacy he desired and it follows it's reasonable to suggest he was interrupted on more than one occasion.

I think initially he is taking an opportunity wherever it is presented but veers away from that because experience is telling him he is not going to satisfy his lust by doing that.

Like you, I don't believe location points towards a different murderer.

[Fleetwood Mac]

I reckon probably killed by the same man. Ultimately, it would be highly unusual for two men to be in broadly the same location at the same time cutting women's throats. I was under the impression that there was no definitive conclusion on whether or not the same knife was used during the other murders (as per doctors' statements). Ultimately, the cut to the throat was consistent with the other murders which to me speaks volumes. There are so many variables outside of the murderer's control that the murders were never going to display the same hallmarks, but the consistent cut/s to the throat is telling.

Assuming he did stop in Goulston Street to wipe his knife, it begs the question: why? There are all sorts of possibilities, and one is that perhaps he was heading back into the vicinity of the first murder and given he committed the first murder he was expecting a police search to be in operation.

In terms of timings and the like, as others have pointed out: at least some of the witnesses will have had their times wrong (for obvious reasons) and so I personally don't hang my hat on the times given. Dr Blackwell arrived at 1:16am, I think that can be taken as highly likely. I've always wondered whether it is reasonable to think that 16 minutes is sufficient time from the body being found to Dr Blackwell arriving and all of the activity in between, and as a result the body may have been found earlier.

As for there being no mutilations and whether or not Dutfield's Yard was too risky for him: I think this is a brazen opportunist of an individual who certainly took a risk with both Polly and Annie in terms of location, and he simply could not control who would turn the corner when. I would go with interrupted but not necessarily by Diemschutz.

[Varqm]

But we dont know if Stride was prostituting herself at that location if she had have been she would likely as not have accosted almost every manv who she came upon, and besides 15 mins is a long time for her to be hanging around that location without a specific purpose, that in itself shows a propensity towards prostitution. Which is what Swanson suggests in his report.

The man seen pushing her to the ground could have been someone she propositioned who took exception to it and pushed her aside to go on his way.

Staying with that report there is one part that causes me concern in relation to Kidney being looked upon as a suspect. I quote from the report "It may be shortly stated that the enquiry into her history,did not disclose the slightest pretext for a motive on behalf of friends or associates, or anybody who had known her"

Clearly they had not done their investigation thoroughly otherwise the charge she brought against Kidney for assaulting her would have flagged up as would their history of their alleged torrid relationship and he would have needed to be investigated further. a missed opportunity

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

But not knowing the exact circumstances,surely, it had to be included in a report,which the inquest was in a big way.Barring a trial it was the only legal report.

[Wickerman]

Jerry, yes the story broke due to the detectives inducing Packer to go public.
I'm just not sure if you are suggesting the detectives invented the story, your wording is a little vague.

The first paragraph tells the reader they were after the 'reward', most likely Lord Montague's £100.
The facts unearthed by the two were the discovery of the grape stalk, the flower petals, & two witnesses; Rosenfield & Harstein.

Packer witnessed an event but chose to stay quiet, it was the two private detectives who induced Packer (by their exertions) to 'go public'.

As the article suggests, and what we already know, it was the two detectives who took Packer to the mortuary, to the police, and to the Evening News, it was their discovery of the grape stalk & other witness statements.

This case has nothing to do with blackmail, blood-money is street-talk for seeking a reward. Likely the same reward offered by Lord Montague in early Sept. - £100., which they failed to earn.

There's nothing in that article that we don't already know.

[jerryd]

I knew this had the scent of Tom Wescott, he told me how he was sure Grande was behind some conspiracy.

My last post began by asking if Tom Wescott was behind this idea, then I removed the line.
Yes, that story merely tells us Grande & Batchelor were after the reward money (the blood-money), not blackmailing anyone. Blood-money is being paid for offering someone up to justice - a reward. Thats what they were after.

LeGrand a conspirator? Never! The thought of it.

That article I posted actually has a lot of nice little LeGrand nuggets in it, though. And Batchelor too. I wasn't thinking about Tom's ideas when I posted it. Legrand and Batchelor discover breaking news and pass it on to the Evening News intending to sell the story. That is where the story originates. Then, as the article goes on, it is printed by nearly all local and provincial papers. The reporter said they were after blood money. His idea. And maybe they were, but the story broke from them was the point of posting the article.

[Wickerman]

Not blackmail, though he was good at it, or not so good depending on your view.

More like directing attention away from someone. Where and when did the Batty Street Lodger story originate? Tom Wescott ties this all together very well, imo.

I knew this had the scent of Tom Wescott, he told me how he was sure Grande was behind some conspiracy.

My last post began by asking if Tom Wescott was behind this idea, then I removed the line.
Yes, that story merely tells us Grande & Batchelor were after the reward money (the blood-money), not blackmailing anyone. Blood-money is being paid for offering someone up to justice - a reward. Thats what they were after.

[jerryd]

Hi Jerry.

You're talking about Grande & Batchelor, are you suggesting they planned to blackmail someone?
The article only suggests that Packer's story reached the Evening News due to the participation of those two private detectives, which I think we see in the surviving evidence. It was Grande & Batchelor who brought Packer to the Mortuary & to speak to police.

Not blackmail, though he was good at it, or not so good depending on your view.

More like directing attention away from someone. Where and when did the Batty Street Lodger story originate? Tom Wescott ties this all together very well, imo.

[Wickerman]

Hi Jerry.

You're talking about Grande & Batchelor, are you suggesting they planned to blackmail someone?
The article only suggests that Packer's story reached the Evening News due to the participation of those two private detectives, which I think we see in the surviving evidence. It was Grande & Batchelor who brought Packer to the Mortuary & to speak to police.

[jerryd]

Regarding the origination of the Packer Story.

London Evening News and Post
June 28, 1889

[Sunny Delight]

We don't have a direct statement from Packer himself, it's either a press article, possibly embellished, or Sgt. White telling us what Packer said, or A.C.B. summarizing his account. We know the police wanted him to identify the body, Sgt. White was told to make that happen. A.C.B. wrote that Packer had identified the body, and we have a press statement saying that he did just that, outside of his own press story. So there is no basis for claiming otherwise.



Yes, but "raining very little" is not "no rain at all", that is a very Black & White issue, it either did rain, or it didn't. The fact we are told her clothes were not "wet with rain" must mean they were not soaking wet. PC Smith said "it rained very little", which means it rained, right?, big or little, it rained, just like Packer said.

Dr's. Blackwell & Johnston, Diemschitz, Kozebrodski, Spooner, Mortimer, etc. were all still hanging about after 1:00 right?, Blackwell arrived about 1:16, so do you think it very likely they were all still in the yard investigating this murder by 1:30?
Of course they were, the gates were closed, the assembly taken into the club and interviewed.
Lawende said it was chucking it down at 1:30, which kept him & his buddies from leaving the club.
Did anyone in Berner st. mention the rain while investigating Stride's murder?
No.




I didn't see a question there.
Regardless, I agree, at first he didn't want to get involved, but as he got used to the attention he seemed to revel in it. Whether his story of two men who visited him claiming to know the killer was true or not, Packer said the photo they showed him did not look like the man he saw buying grapes on the night of the murder.
So, I'm not sure why we should blame Packer for that story when he himself put the dampers on it by rejecting the supposed mystery man.



If the case was simple, it would have been solved, we know there were complications, we just do not know the extent of those complications.

Fair enough I was unaware he had formally identified the body with the Police present.

Packer said in his interview that it was raining heavily as he remarked to his wife that he couldn't believe they were standing in such heavy rain eating the grapes. That is difficult to reconcile with little rain or Stride's clothes not being wet with rain.

I am unsure what your point is in regards no one mentioning the rain in Berner Street- rain that had kept Lawende and co from leaving the Imperial?

Again another one difficult to reconcile. A man reticent to get involved and tells Police he saw nothing and no one and had shut early due to rain(heavy rain had stopped at half 11, if he really did see the couple it must have been then, but Stride's clothes should still have been wet) then all of a sudden is never out of the papers so to speak. He tells his story to numerous journalists and as I say then concocted another story once the original one began to wain in popularity. To my mind this man was someone revelling in the 5 minutes of fame and gaining a few shillings extra for the trouble. It doesn't matter if the photo was the guy or not- what matters is he sold the story.

I should have said how many extra complications do we need to add. Parcelman was obviously a person of interest being seen with Elizabeth Stride so close to her murder. That the Police were looking for him was quite right and good Police work. He had to be eliminated from enquiries. From the info we have he never was but the info we have is limited. For me B.S man and Lawende's man are eerily similar and quite likely the same person. We can never ever prove it was and I am 100% sure as someone once said- when we get to the afterlife and someone asks Jack the Ripper to step forward we will look at his name and say- Who???

[JeffHamm]

Hi Trevor,

I know we all weigh things differently, but here's some things to consider:

Hi Jeff
I have to disagree I think they are important enough to point to a different killer for Stride

The Time of the murder, much earlier than the rest of the murders

Eddowes is less than 1 hour later.

The crime scene location a few steps off a main street where people were still moving about

I don't think Berner Street is really a main street is it? Commercial was, but the crime scene is quite far from there. Otherwise, Buck's Row is quite close to Whitechapel Road, and at a time when people were moving about (i.e. Cross/Lechmere & Paul to name but two). Even Mitre Square isn't far off main roads.

The only murder committed south of the Whitechapel Road

And Chapman is the only one in a backyard, and Nicoles the furthest east, and Kelly the only one indoors, and Eddowes the only one in a square .... It's always possible to find something about a crime that is different from the others. They all have unique characteristics. Being south of Whitechapel Road just happens to be a unique aspect for Stride.

No mutilations
It is believed a much smaller knife was used than with the other victims

The description of the wounds to Stride and Eddowes throat are so similar it is clear the same knife could have been used in both cases.

If JTR killed Stride then he did something not seen in any of the other murders and that is allowing himslf to be seen with the victim, if it is believed that one of persons described by the various witnesses was in fact her killer.

There's the possibility that he was seen prior to Chapman's murder, and prior to Eddowes, and prior to Kelly's. Possibly being seen isn't unique to Stride.

Her murder has all the hallmarks of a domestic murder

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

The two I think are important are the lack of mutilations, and as you say, it could be domestic. The former gets discussed a lot and there are clear arguements why that alone isn't sufficient to rule out JtR. The latter, though, tends to be because of the lack of mutilations, and so if the first falls so does the second.

Again, as I say, I'm not convinced Stride was killed by JtR, and I'm not arguing she must have been, just not sure the case against that is strong enough to go with it as a conclusion.

- Jeff