Throat-slitting and Stride

[crberger]

Prostitution

If she had to prostitute herself to put food on the table or have doss money does that make her a prostitute or merely surviving as best she can?

If the cost of a "knee trembler" was the same as a bed-which it seems to have been the case, then, has this discussion turned to "condemn the victim" rather than look for the killer?

I believe she had a product to sell and did the best she could to sell that product, yes I also believe the product was herself.

[Hunter]

The police did not limit their inquiries into Stride's past to the week before she died. They knew about her Thames Magistrate Court appearances. The coroner even brought them up at the inquest. It was the police (Inspector Reid) who settled the issue about Mrs Watts, finding her sister and determining who Stride had been married to and when he died. Thomas Stride was brought to the inquest to verify that after he was shown a photo of Stride taken at the mortuary.

Looks like the police did a pretty thorough job finding out about Elizabeth Stride. If there is a valid reason to question Swanson's assertion that Stride was a a prostitute, I haven't heard it.

[Wickerman]

Hello Jon. Thanks.

"It doesn't appear the police had cause to doubt whether the woman seen with these men was Stride, so seeing as how we do not have the same resources available to the police, why raise the question at all?"

Actually, the exact SAME argument could be leveled at our questioning ANYTHING about the WCM. So, by parity of reasoning, we should just accept that this is insoluble and take an extended nap.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn.

Look at this another way. The evidence we use is mostly derived from an Inquest, not a murder trial. What we have therefore is a limited sample of evidence.
The Police know far more than the Coroner, the Coroner only learns sufficient from the police in order to make his determinations.

The police investigated the 'history' of Stride through friends, associates, etc., then the police know far more about her than what we read through the Inquest.

If the police determined Stride was a prostitute, and was soliciting, based on their information, then what use is it to try raise a few details derived from the Inquest, to suggest she was not?

[lynn cates]

hypothesis

Hello (again) Jon. Thanks.

"If she was a prostitute before she met him, and now she is back on the streets after, what special pleading should we acknowledge to suggest she was a reformed woman?"

Reformed? Her calvinist tendencies mean little to me (heh-heh).

Seriously, the questions are:

1. Other than having a child out of wedlock at 16, was she a prostitute?

2. IF she were, was she soliciting the night she died?

"What limited their inquiries to this particular week?"

Because that was the week she was not with Kidney (recall your hypothesis).

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

nap time

Hello Jon. Thanks.

"It doesn't appear the police had cause to doubt whether the woman seen with these men was Stride, so seeing as how we do not have the same resources available to the police, why raise the question at all?"

Actually, the exact SAME argument could be leveled at our questioning ANYTHING about the WCM. So, by parity of reasoning, we should just accept that this is insoluble and take an extended nap.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

strategy

Hello Colin.

"What was his exit strategy, I wonder?"

Why must we assume he had one?

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Are you seriously suggesting that Stride was a prostitute whilst she cohabited with Kidney?

Hi Lynn.
Well, lets suppose she gave it up while with Kidney.
If she was a prostitute before she met him, and now she is back on the streets after, what special pleading should we acknowledge to suggest she was a reformed woman?

If not, were the police that well informed about Liz based on less than a week's movements as supposed by her "friends"?

What limited their inquiries to this particular week?

[Wickerman]

Hello Jon. Thanks.

"Does this include the three different men she was seen with in the space of 90 minutes?"

That would be number two. Notice I say "men" and "may," for we have no idea whether it was one or many. Indeed, I am not sure it was Liz at all.

But in for a penny, in for a pound.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn.
Yes, I took your No. 2 to be a vague reference to this, that is why I pushed you to be more specific.

It doesn't appear the police had cause to doubt whether the woman seen with these men was Stride, so seeing as how we do not have the same resources available to the police, why raise the question at all?

[Phil H]

To me easy - he may have known the house... perhaps he had slept on the stairs before, as we know men did.

But also, Chapman was killed in darkness, much earlier than is usually thought - before the house was astir.

Phil

[Bridewell]

Exits didn't seem to worry him - No 29 had none.

Hi Phil,

I agree. Why was that? What was his exit strategy, I wonder?

[Bridewell]

So Jack would have had to disengage. Since she was killed anyway, it's likely not Jack.

Why would he not kill her if that was the quickest way to disengage?

[lynn cates]

when?

Hello (again) Jon.

"Deciding on the social status of Liz Stride based solely on what has survived today may be convenient for some, but the police at the time had considerably more background information on the habits of Stride and were in much better position to know her true role that night."

Are you seriously suggesting that Stride was a prostitute whilst she cohabited with Kidney?

If not, were the police that well informed about Liz based on less than a week's movements as supposed by her "friends"?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

men

Hello Jon. Thanks.

"Does this include the three different men she was seen with in the space of 90 minutes?"

That would be number two. Notice I say "men" and "may," for we have no idea whether it was one or many. Indeed, I am not sure it was Liz at all.

But in for a penny, in for a pound.

Cheers.
LC

[Phil H]

I have written what I have written (as someone famous once said).

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

It is clear that you disagree, not only with myself on this issue, but with Stewart,

Oh dear! Is it now forbidden to disagree with Stewart? I hadn't heard (Frankly doesn't worry me.) I admire Stewart greately for his academic work on the files - his conclusions (as with Sugden) are his own.

and with the conclusions of Swanson,

No one could admire DSS as much as i do - but yes, i do question many aspects of the contemporary police investigation. Do you agree with EVERYTHING Anderson and macnaghten wrote?

as written at the time after he enquired "into her history", and interviewing her "friends, associates and anyone who knew her".

So entirely subjective. My reasoning is also - please note - based on contemporary testimony given by those who knew liz.

Phil

[Wickerman]

I've given you my view Wickerman - if you don't agree fine. I disagree with most of what you think.

My view is she was not seen with three men - but one. The descriptions are pretty consistent.

Phil

It is clear that you disagree, not only with myself on this issue, but with Stewart, and with the conclusions of Swanson, as written at the time after he enquired "into her history", and interviewing her "friends, associates and anyone who knew her".

Deciding on the social status of Liz Stride based soley on what has survived today may be convenient for some, but the police at the time had considerably more background information on the habits of Stride and were in much better position to know her true role that night.
Disagree all you like, we can only show the horse to water, but we cannot make him drink.