A Possible Reason Why Jack Didn't Mutilate Liz

[lynn cates]

direction

Hello Caz. It seems correct when you say:

"Again, how do you think Jack would have reacted if a prospective victim refused to dance to his tune, said she was expecting someone at any moment and threatened to call for a copper?

The answer is terrifyingly simple."

I think you will contend that out comes the knife, and, there he goes.

I completely agree with the plausibility of this. And this would explain Liz falling where she stood on Berner st.

But if BS man existed (given Schwartz's story), it seems the direction was away FROM the yard and outside the gates.

If the chap who got the brush off from Liz ("Not tonight, Ducky") did the job, again it seems to me that Liz would be dropped out on the street.

Perhaps I am looking past the obvious?

It could be that Jack, in arguing (scuffling?) with Liz, seized her by the neck scarf, just outside the gates and dragged her 9 ft into the yard and there finished with the knife. I'm not sure how much Liz weighed nor how much energy would need to be exerted. And, of course, he would likely be experiencing a nor-epinephrine "high."

Food for thought.

The best.
LC

[caz]

I don't have to 'paint' this murder as anything, Perry. The majority of us believe Liz was killed by the serial cut-throat, who went on to take his frustration out on another 'Liz'. The minority still has all the work to do to paint it otherwise.

My point wasn't addressed just to Sam, it was a 'quick reminder to all', as you quoted back at me. So feel free.

The point remains - if BS man killed Liz, he killed her where he encountered her, ie Dutfield's Yard, Berner St. If BS man took his leave and someone else took over, he killed her where he encountered her. In short, she didn't go off with anyone to a suitable place for mutilation, as other victims were believed to have done. So it's perfectly reasonable to argue that if Jack had been passing and seen Liz waiting alone outside the club after midnight, she would have struck him as a victim-in-waiting who would be only too pleased to accompany him somewhere quiet (where the two witnesses would no longer be a problem) if she thought there was sixpence in it for her. He was probably getting rather cocky by that point and couldn't imagine being turned down by any of these wretched specimens.

Again, how do you think Jack would have reacted if a prospective victim refused to dance to his tune, said she was expecting someone at any moment and threatened to call for a copper?

The answer is terrifyingly simple.

Love,

Caz
X

And a quick reminder to all - this would have been Jack's point of encounter, so there is no reason in the world to assume that he would have considered it a suitable place for a spot of mutilation. If we all accept that it was too busy, why wouldn't Jack have felt the same way?

Hi Caz,

I know this was addressed to Sam, but the point I emphasized above isnt necessarily correct. If Israel Schwartz saw what he says he did, then Broadshouldered Man has to be suspect # 1 here.....and that "point of encounter" was outside the yard, on the street.

Im not so sure Israel should be a go-to guy here for valid data, but if he was, then BSM is probably Liz's killer....which would add yet another uncharacteristic Ripper element...entering the scene drunk, being witnessed by 2 people "assaulting" the woman he will shortly kill.

Painting this as a Ripper murder is like building a boat from lead....you might make make it look like a boat, but for sure it aint gonna float.

Cheers Caz.

[caz]

As assumptions about a putative "Ripper" go, it's not a particularly bad one, Caz. Besides, even if one only assumes the killer wanted to cut her throat (we're on pretty safe ground there*), then the fact that he did so in such a half-arsed manner might point away from the Ripper in any case. I certainly see it that way.


* I use "pretty safe" advisedly. He might not have set out with the intention of cutting her throat in the first place, but things got out of hand.

Well, Sam, Jack needn't have set out with the intention of cutting Liz's throat in that location, but things would have got out of hand if he got angry because she refused to go off with him and this made her suspicious - especially if she said she was meeting someone there. Maybe he couldn't afford to leave her alive but couldn't afford to mutilate her if her chap was due any minute.

And a quick reminder to all - this would have been Jack's point of encounter, so there is no reason in the world to assume that he would have considered it a suitable place for a spot of mutilation. If we all accept that it was too busy, why wouldn't Jack have felt the same way?

But I can easily see a scenario in which Liz has already turned Jack down once that night, making the rejection sound less final by pretending she might be available another night. He follows her and sees her apparently looking for business at the club. Why wouldn't he see red and feel the knife burning a hole in his pocket, if she again refuses him and he doesn't buy her excuse for being there?

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Mike,

So assuming this masturbator had started, why is it not feasible he was interupted and prevented from finishing himself off?

You can't be certain when the pony could first be heard, if it was after he had made the first cut, but before Liz was turned on her back, then that'd be the ideal time to leave wouldn't it?

As for the empty stables at the rear of the yard, he was prevented from getting there by Liz herself pulling him back to the gates.

KR,
Vic.

I guess I didnt make my point well enough Victor, because there is no reason to think that this "masturbator" would commence any kill without having some confidence he could achieve his objectives......which as many seem to forget, includes murder as a facilitator for mutilation of recently dispatched women. He doesnt have to kill....he has to kill so he can cut. Not too many victims would allow a man to cut a uterus free silently and without struggle while the victim is still alive I wound imagine.

My serial masturbator analogy was meant to suggest similar compulsion to perform the acts, but it was always meant to suggest that the person in question wouldnt participate in something that would likely only offer him foreplay. Its in the the culmination of the act that his/her compulsion is satisfied...like Jack....he kills so he can cut....killing is a step. Not a standalone thrill. He doesnt show that he is interested in the killing specifically at all....he just does it.

Pragmatically....we have a pony with horseshoes and a cart with wooden wheels or steel rim ones that are trotting along on cobblestones at almost 1am towards the killer. How early might he have heard the cart and horse turning onto Berner Street? Diemshutz pulls in at 1am.....so, perhaps 2-3 minutes before his arrival he might be audible? Thats 12:57am. According to Dr Blackwell, its possible she was cut as early as 12:46am, and likely by 12:56am,....so that means she is being or already is cut when the cart and horse can be heard. Yet no-one is seen leaving out the gates...the only exit from that site to Berner Street other than the front door...which Eagle says was locked by 12:40am. So he sits in the yard with the dying woman waiting for......? An opening to flee? Isnt he risking Diemshutz closing the gates when he finds Liz? Without the cart, its clear that many people are just upstairs singing and drunk, there is light on in some of the cottages and the kitchen door is open and he cannot see into the house from close to that wall with Liz. Light is shone out the second floor club window, and from cottage windows. That may still not allow for good visibility, but they could be seen as shapes.

If... as the senior medical authorities for Mary Ann and Annie suggest, that the killer was likely stopped from completing his extractions that he later completes with Annie because he was interrupted....sSince she is 3/4 of the way along that extraction road, and the sensitive nature of the venue, thats a fair guess I would think......then why would he risk that failure again?

Suggesting an interruption with free time on the clock for the killer, no signs of said interruption, and no indication that any further interest in the dead woman was expressed by the killer, isnt so "fair".

Cheers Victor

[Victor]

I see Jack this way cd......he's like a closet serial masturbator.

Would a closet serial masturbator even begin his self indulgence if he was be fairly sure he could not complete the act based on his available privacy?

My guess is no.

Hi Mike,

So assuming this masturbator had started, why is it not feasible he was interupted and prevented from finishing himself off?

You can't be certain when the pony could first be heard, if it was after he had made the first cut, but before Liz was turned on her back, then that'd be the ideal time to leave wouldn't it?

As for the empty stables at the rear of the yard, he was prevented from getting there by Liz herself pulling him back to the gates.

KR,
Vic.

But Perry, the man you seem to know so well was not operating on a desert island, nor was he psychic. Do you honestly believe he could have gone on committing successful mutilation murders in that area indefinitely, just because he said to himself: "I must include some kind of post mortem mutilation whenever I take my knife to a woman"?

Can you not imagine any circumstances in which he might have been unwilling or unable to do more than cut quickly and get the hell out?

Love,

Caz
X

I could easily see him forgoing any attacks if the venues that presented themselves didnt appear to be sound venues for his 5-15 minutes of cutting after the murder....I cant see him cutting a victim when he hears a cart and horse coming towards the gates, in a location that offered possible interruptions from the office of the Arbeter Fraint, it was occupied....from the cottages, they were occupied and the residents awake...from the kitchen door,.. which led to the 28 men singing indoors, and from the street and via the gates,... anyone could have walked in at any moment.

Bucks Row was deserted, the murder at Hanbury was when the occupants and neighbors were sleeping, not awake and singing..., Mitre Square was a nice quiet spot where he may not have realized how close he was to getting caught by either Watkins or Harvey, and room 13 was private, with a courtyard of people sleeping after 3am.

Dutfields Yard was a poor choice of venue for mutilations, and the murder that occurred there didnt suggest that any activity beyond murder was planned or intended.

All the best Caz

[Sam Flynn]

Why do people automatically assume that if Jack killed Liz it must have been in preparation to mutilate her?

As assumptions about a putative "Ripper" go, it's not a particularly bad one, Caz. Besides, even if one only assumes the killer wanted to cut her throat (we're on pretty safe ground there*), then the fact that he did so in such a half-arsed manner might point away from the Ripper in any case. I certainly see it that way.



* I use "pretty safe" advisedly. He might not have set out with the intention of cutting her throat in the first place, but things got out of hand.

[Fisherman]

Likewise, c.d! As always! And I genuinely believe in the virtue of lending an ear to the other side no matter how convinced one feels about things - and, of course, when assessing the Stride case, it would be outright foolish to speak of any certainty at all...

The very best!
Fisherman

[c.d.]

You're right, Fisherman. I think we are well into dead horse territory here. Probably better to give this thread a rest. It has been fun arguing with you.

c.d.

[Fisherman]

C.d asks:

"Are the other four murders EXACTLY alike in every single detail? If not, are we then forced to assume four different killers?"

Are any TWO murders exactly alike, c.d? Of course not. But when we find four eviscerated victims in a very small area and over a short period of time, all with their necks deeply cut and displaying a schoolbook example of escalation, what do you suggest we do? Call it a coincidence?

"As for the time, if you believe that Jack killed Kate, then he was on the streets that very same night and a short distance and TIME away."

He was on the streets that very night, c.d - but so were thousands of other Eastenders. And he was quite possibly home, waiting for his hunting clock to strike, as Stride was killed.
The fact that he would have been reasonably near the Stride murder site in both time and space, c.d, does not detract anything at all from other peoples ability and willingness to apply violence. If Jack has sat in the Brown´s living room that evening, that still would not have made him the killer instead of Mr Brown himself.

We´ve covered this ground before, c.d, and I respect your wiew on things. I just don´t share it.

The best,
Fisherman

[c.d.]

Hi Fisherman,

Are the other four murders EXACTLY alike in every single detail? If not, are we then forced to assume four different killers?

As for the time, if you believe that Jack killed Kate, then he was on the streets that very same night and a short distance and TIME away.

c.d.

[Fisherman]

C.d asks:

"I think we are forgetting that Jack was a serial killer not a bank robber. Is it so unrealistic to think that the desire to kill might have sometimes overcome his better judgment?"

Once again, c.d: Where in the other four canonical deeds can we find even the smallest of hints that he would leave his agenda and all it involved? Where?
Of course it is in no way impossible that he could slip up on the security at some stage, but once we accept that, we run into the next problem: Why did he not cut in the same fashion?
Then you may ask "Is it so unrealistic to think that he may have gone about the cutting in a different manner just this once?"
And of course, it is equally not impossible that he did cut differently this time. But once we accept that, we run into the next problem: Why did he not eviscerate?
Then you may ask: "Is it so unrealistic to think ..."

You realize, of course, where I am headed. We have to pass all of the obstacles mentioned, plus a few more: the position of the body, the singing club crowd, the early hour etcetera.

Taken on their own, each change can be swallowed down. But taken together, they constitute far too big a bite for me! All I see is a tediously common crime, with none of the typical Ripper trademarks even near it. In fact, if Stride had been attacked by a knife-wielder who had never gotten round to cutting her, I would have regarded it a safer bet for Jack being the guy. In such cases we could speculate that IF he had cut her neck, he may have done so deeply. As it stands, the cutter left a totally differing calling card on Strides neck - as such, that makes up useful evidence of Jack never being there!

"how does the time of the killing cast doubt that it was Jack? Are we to assume that he had some sort of schedule tacked to his wall?"

Come on, c.d! Are we instead to reason that the fact that he preferred the wee hours between 2 and 5, roughly, was nothing but a coincidence? Are we to believe that he could just as well have chosen nine in the evening, since it was dark at that time too? Is the fact that he used empty streets at the deepest hours of the night something that tells us nothing about his way of reasoning?

The best,
Fisherman

[c.d.]

I think we are forgetting that Jack was a serial killer not a bank robber. Is it so unrealistic to think that the desire to kill might have sometimes overcome his better judgment?

Also, how does the time of the killing cast doubt that it was Jack? Are we to assume that he had some sort of schedule tacked to his wall? I can see him looking up from his newspaper "oh ****, it's time to kill. I better get going."

c.d.

[dixon9]

thanks for the reply,i am not convinced either why if Long Liz is a ripper victim,but just feel the times/location would not be some of question marks why not.
Thanks again for reply

Dixon9
still learning