Was Liz Stride a Ripper Victim?

[Kunochan]

Thank you to everyone who has responded so far. I'm definitely learning a lot.

[Kunochan]

Was interested that a few posters had doubts about Mary Kelly was a Ripper victim. I have never heard the reasons for the doubt as she seems the archetypal victim?

My understanding is that the idea that Kelly (or whoever actually died there, if you believe Kelly was seen alive the next morning) is based on an outmoded idea, that serial killers do not significantly change their MO. This has been demonstrated to be false.

Unlike the others, Kelly was killed indoors, and the mutilations were far more severe than before. So the argument is the MO was different.

In my view, the Ripper lucked into targeting the rare streetwalker who had her own room, and this gave him far more time for the mutilations. I believe she WAS a Ripper victim.

[Kunochan]

Statistical Probability of Another Woman Being Murdered by Throat-Cutting on the Same Night

To assess the likelihood of another woman being murdered by throat-cutting in Whitechapel on the same night as Catherine Eddowes (September 30, 1888), we need to consider historical crime rates, population data, and serial killer behaviour. ...

This is a very interesting breakdown, thank you for this.

[Lewis C]

I looked for previous discussions of this issue, and the only one I could find was from 2015.

I have an issue with the idea of "canonical" victims, since canonicity implies absolute truth. It seems very reasonable to assume Nichols, Chapman, and Eddowes (and in my personal opinion Tabram) were murdered by the same killer. I also personally believe Kelly was, but good points have been made to suggest she wasn't.

I'm pretty convinced Stride was not killed by the same murderer. Here are my reasons; if I make any factual errors please let me know, I'm new to this.

1.) The location where Stride was killed was very busy at the time of the murder; none of the other murders took place in such an active, public place, or so early in the evening.
2.) Stride was not mutilated. This is usually explained by saying the murderer was interrupted; but again, it would be a very dumb place to commit the murder, since Stride was discovered very quickly after death. (Nichols was discovered just after death, but that was on an empty street.) There was a group of people singing just a few yards away!
3.) Stride was seen arguing with a man just minutes before her murder. Certainly the Ripper may have been speaking with victims before luring them to more private locations. But would he fight with her and call attention to himself? Would he then go ahead and kill her, basically on the same spot, after making a scene? Isn't it more likely that this man, NOT the Ripper, killed Stride in a fit of passion, and then fled?

Of course the killer could have been the Ripper, I can't prove otherwise. But I wouldn't be the first person to suggest that Stride was included in the Ripper murders because a "Double Event" made for a sexy story in the press. It seems the police considered her a Ripper victim, which cannot be ignored. But I've noted elsewhere I don't think much of the Met in 1888.

Anyway, am I making a decent argument? Have I missed anything? I'm curious to know what you think.

Hi Kunochan, and welcome to Casebook.

There are good reasons to doubt that Stride was a Ripper murder, but I don't have any problem with the time of the evening. Eddowes was killed 45 minutes later, and if McKenzie was a Ripper murder, she was killed at about the same time as Stride.

The location was risky, but I don't think it was significantly riskier than the Chapman murder, which almost certainly took place as people were getting ready for work after dawn, and any number of people could have seen it if they had looked out their windows. I think the Stride location would have been an easier one to escape from too.

[Lewis C]

Thanks for starting this thread I always find this topic interesting. Like many my opinion of Stride being a victim can change from post to post never mind week by week.
My view Martha Tabram yes. Nichols and Chapman yes. Stride don't know yes/no. Eddowes and Kelly yes.
Was interested that a few posters had doubts about Mary Kelly was a Ripper victim. I have never heard the reasons for the doubt as she seems the archetypal victim?

Hi George.

I think that Kelly was a Ripper victim, but I do have some doubt about her, whereas I'm near certain that Nichols, Chapman, and Eddowes were Ripper victims. Reasons for doubt are that it would be the only indoor Ripper murder, and that the victim was much younger than the others. Also the gap between this murder and the previous one was much longer than any previous gaps. The attack on her was extreme too, arguably an over-the-top caricature of a Ripper murder, done by someone trying to disguise the murder as a Ripper murder.

[GBinOz]

"two independent throat-cutting murders happening within an hour, in the same small area, without being related, is effectively near zero."

Your example was a domestic incident indoors, at Regency Street, and it was almost a decapitation. Not exactly the same.

Sarah Brown and Liz Stride both had their throat cut, and maybe both were domestic incidents. That's what Schwartz thought was happening. If Brown is excluded due to her murder being indoors, where does that leave Kelly?

[Georgeb]

Thanks for starting this thread I always find this topic interesting. Like many my opinion of Stride being a victim can change from post to post never mind week by week.
My view Martha Tabram yes. Nichols and Chapman yes. Stride don't know yes/no. Eddowes and Kelly yes.
Was interested that a few posters had doubts about Mary Kelly was a Ripper victim. I have never heard the reasons for the doubt as she seems the archetypal victim?

[Patrick Differ]

Hi CF. .by Clarification I mean he possibly obtained a target the nights he hunted from a common area not far from his home, in this case the area near the concentration of Doss Houses that catered to these women. Nichols, Chapman, Stride and Kelly started their night journey from this general area. In the case of Stride and Kelly the likely killer initiated contact. Its not clear with regard to Chapman and Eddowes but he was evidently seen negotiating. ( He knew the streets and how to negotiate with these women. I dont belive they were pushovers, they lived too long on the streets).
I think he followed and sized up his prey and knew where the Victims would likely go to perform at some point.. Known prostitute frequent locations. He knew them too. Even Stride was working Dutfields Yard, a frequent location.
it does not mean this is how it happened but it's possible he always initiated contact. He did in 2 of the cases. Bucks Row is an outlier in terms of distance from the other locations. Nichols may have been followed as she moved East from Osborn Street from the Doss house area. It's hard to believe the killer happened to be in the Bucks Row or Berner Street area by chance, it seems more likely he was drawn there.

[Abby Normal]

I looked for previous discussions of this issue, and the only one I could find was from 2015.

I have an issue with the idea of "canonical" victims, since canonicity implies absolute truth. It seems very reasonable to assume Nichols, Chapman, and Eddowes (and in my personal opinion Tabram) were murdered by the same killer. I also personally believe Kelly was, but good points have been made to suggest she wasn't.

I'm pretty convinced Stride was not killed by the same murderer. Here are my reasons; if I make any factual errors please let me know, I'm new to this.

1.) The location where Stride was killed was very busy at the time of the murder; none of the other murders took place in such an active, public place, or so early in the evening.
2.) Stride was not mutilated. This is usually explained by saying the murderer was interrupted; but again, it would be a very dumb place to commit the murder, since Stride was discovered very quickly after death. (Nichols was discovered just after death, but that was on an empty street.) There was a group of people singing just a few yards away!
3.) Stride was seen arguing with a man just minutes before her murder. Certainly the Ripper may have been speaking with victims before luring them to more private locations. But would he fight with her and call attention to himself? Would he then go ahead and kill her, basically on the same spot, after making a scene? Isn't it more likely that this man, NOT the Ripper, killed Stride in a fit of passion, and then fled?

Of course the killer could have been the Ripper, I can't prove otherwise. But I wouldn't be the first person to suggest that Stride was included in the Ripper murders because a "Double Event" made for a sexy story in the press. It seems the police considered her a Ripper victim, which cannot be ignored. But I've noted elsewhere I don't think much of the Met in 1888.

Anyway, am I making a decent argument? Have I missed anything? I'm curious to know what you think.

hi kun
stride was most likely a ripper victim imho

same victimology
same area
same time frame
at night
same mo.. cut throat
most of the police at the time thought she was a ripper victim

the final straw for me is that most of the witnesses the night of the double event describe the same suspect.. a man wearing a peaked cap. schwartz, marshall at stride scene, the anon church st sighting, lawende and company at mitre square. plus peaked cap man made an impression on abberline, see my sig.

The narative makes complete sense too- being interupted and not being able to complete his gruesome fantasy of evisceration and organ removal with stride, that he established with previous victim chapman, he left and a short time later was able to finish with eddowes.

everything points to stride being a ripper victim.

[C. F. Leon]

Always a great topic. My personal belief is that Stride was a Ripper victim and was interrupted. Murdering Eddowes 45 minutes later could be an incredible coincidence but it's hard to deny that the entire sequence of events that night appear to be connected. Meaning what?
JtR hunted these women from Flower and Dean and Thrawl Street where virtually All of the victims had stayed if they were not on the Street. Nichols, Chapman, Stride started their journey the night of their murders that night ,as did Kelly, from this area. I do not believe that this killer just wandered the areas where they were murdered. This might explain how the killer ended up on Bucks Row and Berner Street. The most eastern and southern locations of the killings. Just my thinking.
...

Just to clarify this part: you are saying that Jack had a fixed-range "Hunting Ground", so to speak, and TARGETED his victims from the Hunting Ground, then followed them to another "Killing Spot" (perhaps of THEIR choice), rather than just encountering them more or so at random on the street, at the pub, wherever, and then being led to the Killing Spot.

Except for the Royal Conspiracy (RC), I have never heard of this idea. (And even the RC has the Ripper targeting the particular individuals, rather than a location.) This idea MIGHT explain a few oddities of the case/-s.

[Observer]

Or, just to prove the point, Stride is a JtR victim. Don't let crime stats, probability, and comparative serial killer psychology get in the way of your own agendas and bias.

I won't. The voice of authority then. Stride was a Ripper victim, many posting here would disagree with you

[Observer]

Oh dear.

Nice informative reply, I didn't expect anything less really

[erobitha]

Come now, you're not that naïve. The whole exercise of your mammoth delve into LVP knife crime in the East End of London was down to the fact that you're desperate to include Stride in the series. Without Stride the Diary collapses like a stack of cards in a hurricane

Or, just to prove the point, Stride is a JtR victim. Don't let crime stats, probability, and comparative serial killer psychology get in the way of your own agendas and bias.

[erobitha]

It wouldn't have made a bite of difference if you'd included "circa 12;45 in your post. The time difference between the Schwartz incident, and Diemshitz's arrival (according to witness testimony) clearly indicates that should Schwartz's BSM have been her killer, then he would have ample time to mutilate Stride. Of course as is the norm for Diary defenders, you are entirely at liberty to change the goal posts, and theorise that Maybrick entered the scene after BSM man had left leaving Stride intact. Do you want to plump for that?

Oh dear.

[Observer]

As you well know, exact timings cannot be established. Sorry, I did not put "circa 12.45"

It wouldn't have made a bite of difference if you'd included "circa 12;45 in your post. The time difference between the Schwartz incident, and Diemshitz's arrival (according to witness testimony) clearly indicates that should Schwartz's BSM have been her killer, then he would have ample time to mutilate Stride. Of course as is the norm for Diary defenders, you are entirely at liberty to change the goal posts, and theorise that Maybrick entered the scene after BSM man had left leaving Stride intact. Do you want to plump for that?