Did BS-man murder Liz Stride?

[lynn cates]

precaution

Hello CD. Thanks.

"She would have to identify him as the man who pushed her to the ground. Hardly a hanging offense."

Precisely. I think this simple fact needs to be remembered by any and all who hypothesise about BS killing her as a precaution.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

finis

Hello (again) CD. Your post #32 says it all. And your reasoning, it seems to me, is flawless.

I have been screaming and shouting about this for nearly four years. Perhaps someone will believe you?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

false

Hello DLDW.

"Well, one simple explanation is she wasn't pushed down."

In which case, the Schwartz story is false and may be discounted.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

bellyaching

Hello Strange.

"Given the postmortem makes no mention of bruising from a fall, I'm inclined to say she never fell. Which in turn raises a question mark over Schwartz's story as we have it."

Quite. And I've been bellyaching about this, too.

Cheers.
LC

[Cogidubnus]

As regards the killing, I make no secret of my strong suspicion that BS cut her throat as she went down...or an instant after...in his evident confusion and fear, and in the semi-darkness Schwartz may not have seen everything, or may even have misinterpreted part of what he saw...but that's only my gut feeling and there's no evidence for it...so I'll continue to struggle on trying to keep an open mind on the issue!

All the best

Dave

[lynn cates]

implications

Hello Investigator. One difference between the umbrella and the cachous is that the former is gripped in the palm (fist), the hand completely encircling the handle.

But in the latter, they were grasped tenuously between the thumb and forefinger.

Your time line is near perfect. Yes, I hope the implications sink in.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Did she know?

Hello Richard. Thanks.

I think I understand. But, even if he WERE the ripper, how could Liz have possibly known that? To her, she was merely undergoing assault by a bully.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

powers of observation

Hello DLDW.

Do you place much credence in Fanny's powers of observation?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

And now, without further ado, our feature act: Goldstein and Fanny!

Hello (again) DLDW.

"if Stride was discovered that early and there were all these people running about how would Goldstein and Fanny have missed it?"

Goldstein was late to the party. Fanny missed much.

Cheers.
LC

[Cogidubnus]

Do you place much credence in Fanny's powers of observation?

More to the point Lynn, do we have any real evidence to doubt them? Particularly since at least the last few minutes are corroborated by Goldstein? And do we ignore Brown as well?

All the best

Dave

[Phil H]

I think we have to remenber with Schwartz that:

a) he came upon a scene already in progress with no context;

b) multiple things were happening - BSM tussle with Lizzie/PSM;

c) our accounts are recollections not action replay.

In such circumstances I think any of us, after seeing a dramatic incident - an accident; something curious - try to make sense of it. We may unconsciously, mentally re-arrange elements of what we saw to make better sense of our confusion. We may, again in our mind, embroider what we saw - A was heavy-set; B looked frail. From a distance a passionate kiss may look like "vertical wrestling" - well you get my drift. Furthermore, memory may emhasise certain things and push others back. We may misinterpret motive, and apply some personal moral criteria - X was in the wrong; Y was innocent.

Yet again, did he try to fit what he recalled with what he later heard?

Have there not been numerous tests of witness recollections - even moments after an unexpected incident those who saw it cannot recall significant details or pick out those involved from a group.

Seeing the whole picture is also important - I recall a Guardian newspaper TV add many years ago (I think there were posters on the London tube too). ON TV we see firly close-up a skin-head (the then equivalent of a "hoodie") seeing to assault an innocent man standing at a bus-stop. The immediate response was to say "bloody hooligan".

Then you were shown the whole incident from a wider angle. You now saw that the skin-head had seen what the man had not - a heavy load falling from scaffolding above. The skinhead, at some risk to his own safety, was pushing the man out of danger. It was an act of selfless bravery intended to help and save a life - not an unprovoked attack!

The punch line was that The Guardian helps you see the full picture.

As a foreigner, would/could Schwartz have understood the context of what he saw; did he see the whole episode or just a part of it? And did he recollect it accurately - or did he intrepret it unconsciously, or in the light of subsequent reports?

Phil

[lynn cates]

BSM scuffle

Hello Dave.

"And to that extent they're backed up by Brown who was fetching his supper close to 1245 and didn't hear anything kicking off in the street until about 1am..."

Including the BSM scuffle?

Cheers.
LC

[Cogidubnus]

Context

Exactly Phil...my view too!

All the best

Dave

[Cogidubnus]

Including the BSM scuffle?

Clearly not Lynn,,,but it all seems to have happened quickly - so perhaps he was in the chandlers and therefore unsighted, or alternatively back in Fairclough Street getting ready to tuck in...

All the best

Dave

[lynn cates]

position

Hello (again) Dave.

"I make no secret of my strong suspicion that BS cut her throat as she went down...or an instant after. . ."

Well, someone did.

But the BSM "assault" seems all wrong. In such a confrontation surely they are face to face? But that is at loggerheads with his cutting her as she fell. that would necessitate his being at least slightly behind her.

Cheers.
LC