Throat-slitting and Stride

[Observer]

Hello (again) CD. Thanks.

"I expect after Tabram, Nichols and Chapman had been killed that she would have been suspicious of any client."

But the furor was dying down.

Cheers.
LC

More myth. The furore was anything but dying down

[Phil H]

How would he be able to achieve this and hold onto a parcel at the same time? Marshall did not see a parcel in the possession of the man.

Have you never held something and done something else at the same time? I have hugged people while holding something in one hand (scarf, book, hat) even in both.

People also have pockets. the parcel might have been in his other hand when Marshall saw him.

I don't see either issue you raise as insuperable.

On age - people can be mistaken. A moustache can age a man. It was dark, at best by gaslight.

I don't again see the points you raise as being impossible to counter.

In summation, you appear to be intent upon seeing Liz in the worst light, I in a better one. I doubt we'll ever agree - nor do I care.

Phil

[Observer]

[ I have hugged people while holding something in one hand.

I'm sure you have.

How would he be able to achieve this and hold onto a parcel at the same time? Marshall did not see a parcel in the possession of the man.

Have you never held something and done something else at the same time? I have hugged people while holding something in one hand.
(scarf, book, hat) even in both.

People also have pockets. the parcel might have been in his other hand when Marshall saw him.

I don't see either issue you raise as insuperable.

In his pocket? Come off it. The parcel was 18 inches in length, and 6 to 8 inches in width. And even if he held it in one hand and hugged Liz Stride with the other it would have been easily visible to Marshall. Your analysis holds no water.

On age - people can be mistaken. A moustache can age a man. It was dark, at best by gaslight.

I don't again see the points you raise as being impossible to counter.

In summation, you appear to be intent upon seeing Liz in the worst light, I in a better one. I doubt we'll ever agree - nor do I care.

Phil

Swapping posts with you can age a man! That's for sure. Lets disagree on the age difference.

Also

I see Liz Stride as being in the company of at least two different individuals that night. Consequently I believe she was soliciting, as the police did at the time. It's not a question of seeing her in the worst light. And believe me I care even less for your musings regarding the WCM.

Observer

[Phil H]

Your analysis holds no water.

And I could (do?) say the same of yours.

The difference between us is that I am simply playing with ideas in search of that illuminating insight - you actually (and rather pomposly) seem to believe you are RIGHT.

Do you have anything positive to contribute? If not, please GET OFF MY BACK!!

Phil

[c.d.]

Hello (yet again) CD. Thanks.

"So are you suggesting that when the police asked these people whether Liz ever solicited they only asked that question in relation to just one week?"

No, but was she soliciting whilst with Kidney?

By the way, how would these people know what Liz was about?

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

If I had to guess, I would expect that the police spoke to her friends and acquaintances as opposed to perfect strangers who didn't know Liz. Since the police report described her as a prostitute (or was it unfortunate), I would expect that that was the description given by those who knew her. I suppose it is possible that the people they spoke to described her as a nun or a shopkeeper and that somehow got changed in the police report to prostitute. Maybe by those pesky extra-terrestrials that seem to inhabit your posts.

c.d.

[c.d.]

Hello (yet again) CD. Thanks.

"So are you suggesting that when the police asked these people whether Liz ever solicited they only asked that question in relation to just one week?"

No, but was she soliciting whilst with Kidney?

By the way, how would these people know what Liz was about?

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

You ask the was she soliciting while with Kidney question as though you know the answer. I certainly don't know but I would not be surprised if that were the case, if only occasionally and maybe without him knowing it.

c.d.

[The Good Michael]

Maybe I can't find this information, or I haven't been willing to wade through all the tedious posts regarding this, but what does it matter if Stride was soliciting or not on the night of her murder? Is it the idea that JTR never would have approached her on that particular night? Or is it the belief that the victims actively solicited JTR and that led to their demise? Is it the belief that there was no JTR and this would be another feather in the cap of those few people who follow that path?

Mike

[Observer]

Your analysis holds no water.

And I could (do?) say the same of yours.

The difference between us is that I am simply playing with ideas in search of that illuminating insight - you actually (and rather pomposly) seem to believe you are RIGHT.

Do you have anything positive to contribute? If not, please GET OFF MY BACK!!

Phil

You what! It was you who stuck your nose in pal. I was replying to Mike Richards when you offered your opinion. Now, when I don't agree with you, you are throwing one of your infamous strops.

You can play around with your ideas all you like, it still doesn't put a large parcel wrapped in newspaper into the hand of the individual Marshall saw with Liz Stride on the night in question.

[Observer]

Jack The Ripper

Maybe I can't find this information, or I haven't been willing to wade through all the tedious posts regarding this, but what does it matter if Stride was soliciting or not on the night of her murder? Is it the idea that JTR never would have approached her on that particular night? Or is it the belief that the victims actively solicited JTR and that led to their demise? Is it the belief that there was no JTR and this would be another feather in the cap of those few people who follow that path?

Mike

The fact is Michael those so called open minded individuals who post here, who like to believe they look at all angles fairly in order to arrive at (in their minds) an approximation of the truth, are invariable those with an agenda. They feel compelled to argue that Liz Stride was not soliciting on the night of her murder. Lord forbid if she was, for then there is a good possibility that she fell victim to Jack The Ripper. And we can't have that. He didn't exist you know.

I have never stated that I am 100 per cent certain that Liz Stride was a victim of Jack The Ripper. What I have argued is that I firmly believe she was soliciting on the night of her murder, as did the police at the time.

As you imply, even if she was not soliciting on the night of her murder there is no reason why Jack The Ripper would not have approached her. The Whitechapel murderer was out and about that night, as was Stride, who spent the best part of an hour and a half in and around the Berner Street area. It's possible she fell foul of Jacks knife.

Regards

Observer

[Lechmere]

Some people romanticise about the victims and don’t want to believe they were prostitutes.
To them, if they were prostitutes then they might be deserving their fate in some small way and so that possibility must be resisted.
Of course, whether they were prostitutes or not, their fate was not deserved. In fact their prostitute status is or should be irrelevant so far as that aspect is concerned.
Other people might wish Stride not to have been acting as a prostitute so they can play creative ‘what if’ games…
What if she was hanging around waiting to start her cleaning shift at the Berner Street Club.
What if she was a spy reporting back to Okhrana and she was eliminated by a Jewish Anarchist.
What if she was waiting to have her portrait painted by Toulouse Lautrec.
What if she was waiting for her literature class with Lewis Carroll.
Etc etc etc

[deadstrings1969]

First post,
I feel deeply that Liz was a victim of opportunity and was attributed to to the killer.The press at the time stirred up so much interest with detail in the case that anyone with a grudge against a woman could have been a copycat. I feel she had her throat slit only was due to the media of the time and not just because he was interrupted. The timing of the what I believe to be a journalists letter about the ear clipping is just opportunistic. Meanwhile the killer who lived in the center of this carnival atmosphere was a short distance away working on his evolving "art". Not W.S. I truly believe that Jacob Levy was the guy. Not just because of the Sherlock game though it made me investigate more deeply into him as a serious suspect.

Love all of you for caring about a horror 125 years old that we WILL solve eventually.
Yours truly deadstrings1969

[Phil H]

Welcome deadstrings1969. Enjoy Casebook.
A thoughtful first post - though I don't agree your conclusion.

I hope to see many more posts from you.

Phil

[Phil H]

If I had to guess, I would expect that the police spoke to her friends and acquaintances as opposed to perfect strangers who didn't know Liz. Since the police report described her as a prostitute (or was it unfortunate), I would expect that that was the description given by those who knew her. I suppose it is possible that the people they spoke to described her as a nun or a shopkeeper and that somehow got changed in the police report to prostitute. Maybe by those pesky extra-terrestrials that seem to inhabit your posts.

But in many cases we know of in that autumn, the friends and associates of the woman concerned, tried hard to put a good gloss on the reputation of the deceased - Chapman and Eddowes are good examples.

So I would expect a positive "spin" from those the police interviewed, and what do we see - many accounts that Stride was a clean woman, who tried to make her way charring etc.

Indeed, if anything she seems to have had a side career as a con-woman of some talent!

No one is arguing - at least I am not -that Stride was not a prostitute at some time. My point is that I believe the evidence strongly suggests that she was NOT soliciting that night.

And the point is important - not only were most of the other victims (Nichols, Chapman, maybe Kelly - Eddowes I am unsure of) working the streets on the nights they died, but that seems to have been the type "Jack" sought out.

When she died Stride was carefully dressed, had a flower and cashous - quite different, I think, from the dudge-like and scruffy Polly, Annie, and Kate.

Phil

[Phil H]

It was you who stuck your nose in pal. I was replying to Mike Richards when you offered your opinion.

Observer - as caz wrote yesterday (I think): These are public boards and public discussions. I'll continue to stick my elbow in as and when I see fit, irrespective of bullies like you.

Your snide remarks even appeared in the east End pics thread - and I note from the e-mail version sent to me automatically that you removed a highly personal comment from it! I think that was advisable.

So don't come all holier than thou, perlease!!!

Someone has to stand up to you.

Phil

[The Good Michael]

No one is arguing - at least I am not -that Stride was not a prostitute at some time. My point is that I believe the evidence strongly suggests that she was NOT soliciting that night.

To my question then: What does it matter? Do you think if Liz had not been soliciting that particular night, it wasn't JTR's handiwork? And would that mean that you believe the victims sought out Jack and not the other way around? If that is the case, does it end there, i,e, someone else killed her end of story? Or do you have an angle in mind?

Mike