A Possible Reason Why Jack Didn't Mutilate Liz

[YankeeSergeant]

Folle a dex

Hi, i have posted a two killer scenario on my Folie a deux thread, it didnt gather many supporters though. Did you have your own theory in mind ?.

Not really I have no bias either way.

[Scorpio]

Assuming JtR was interrupted whilst killing Stride (I'm open to the idea of two killers), The question becomes with Eddowes, was she looking for a "client" when she was released from the police station? If she was she wouldn't have required a lot of chatting up.

Hi, i have posted a two killer scenario on my Folie a deux thread, it didnt gather many supporters though. Did you have your own theory in mind ?.

[YankeeSergeant]

Stride, Eddowes and interruption

Hi,

Peter, come on, you mean to tell me that you never tried to pick up a prostitute.

What I mean is alot of the theories involving a hansome cab depend on the fact that the Ripper would of had a hard time killing Stride and then finding Eddowes in such a short time span. If he was indeed scared away by Shwartz the ripper would have had 15 more minutes then if he was interupted by Diemschutz.

Hi cd,

I believe you are correct.

Your friend, Brad

Assuming JtR was interrupted whilst killing Stride (I'm open to the idea of two killers), The question becomes with Eddowes, was she looking for a "client" when she was released from the police station? If she was she wouldn't have required a lot of chatting up.

Hi Mike,

So do you think the Torso killer was a 2nd active serial killer in 1888? When you add in the known killers from around that period (eg, the wife killers - Bury and Chapman/Klosowsky plus the 14~ish you've posted previously) that proposing additional killers for Liz\Mary is possibly a step too far?

KR,
Vic.

Hi again Victor,

I do think the Torso killer was separate from The Ripper and that he was in fact a serial killer. I do think "Jack" was a multiple murderer, and I think that some other killers we know of killed... probably.... some of those 11-12 women that remained. I bet Sadler killed Coles for example....but I dont believe he was the Ripper. I think Kidney may have killed Liz....again, with the same codicil. I think its possible that Fleming or Barnett or both Barnetts killed Mary, maybe even McCarthy...but same conclusion regarding the Ripper. I believe 2 soldiers ended Martha Tabrams life, one using a dagger or bayonet a single time. Same Ripper conclusion.

Its my opinion that if we are looking at the murder of a woman by a man of comparable ages the first place you would look is into their relationships. Even when the crime seems beyond the capability of someone of sound mind. Both Liz Stride and Mary Kelly had very recently ended long standing relationships with men they had at times quarreled physically with while together. There are some questions I have regarding the true relationship that Kelly and Eddowes had.

Mary Ann was the signal of a new killer that went outside the realm of relationship woes....in other cases, the relationships of killer and prey may have been intimate or as client and service provider, but the guy who killed Mary Ann wanted to do what he did to her corpse...I dont see the act as personal. Nor do I see Hanbury that way.

Hope that provides a little insight into why I take these contrary positions so often.

All the best Victor.

[Victor]

Meaning.....I think there is a better foundation for a murder theory using a jealous rejected lover than a man who cuts strange women open while they believe they are soliciting a client....but I know of no facts that would indicate that Kidney should be considered her killer at this point.

Hi Mike,
I agree that Kidney is a viable suspect for Liz, but I too know of no facts that would make him a better suspect than Jack.

I hedge on names cause I dont have one name in mind for a Ripper, the man I believe killed Mary Ann, Annie, and likely Kate....but I do think some familiar names might be murders during that period, in that location. In fact we know some were. Maybe some killed a Canonical or 2.

So do you think the Torso killer was a 2nd active serial killer in 1888? When you add in the known killers from around that period (eg, the wife killers - Bury and Chapman/Klosowsky plus the 14~ish you've posted previously) that proposing additional killers for Liz\Mary is possibly a step too far?

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

What I had hoped was that youd see that if he makes the cut at the earliest time of the estimation made by Blackwell, he would hear the cart and horse already. Heading towards him, by virtue of its increasing volume.

Hi Mike,

You suggested that the neck cut was "According to Dr Blackwell, its possible she was cut as early as 12:46am, and likely by 12:56am" but "Diemshutz pulls in at 1am.....so, perhaps 2-3 minutes before his arrival he might be audible? Thats 12:57am" which means that even at the latest estimate 12:56am is still a full minute before he can hear the cart.

he commences the kill and mutilation phase knowing full well that a cart and horse are approaching and few buildings on that street have gates and an open yard like Dutfields?

Erm...No. He starts (cuts throat) at least a minute before he can hear the cart.

I dont imagine that the killer in the backyard at 28 Hanbury knew of Cadosches habit of nightly visits to the yard privvy....for all intent and purpose, the yard was empty at a time when the inhabitants of that house and the surrounding ones were still sleeping or just waking.

Exactly, he starts attacking Annie and then hears Cadosche, but still waits around to extract her uterus. He waits for Cadosche to go back into the house, that's pretty daring and risky.

The premise must be, if this was Jack, that he willingly either accepted a scenario that only would offer him a kill, not mutilations,....or that he began the process that he felt would lead to mutilations while he hears a cart and horse approach. I dont see Jack in that premise myself.

Again, the cut comes before he hears the cart, and if he waits in the shadows or behind the gate once he hears the cart to see whether it turns in or passes, prior to starting to mutilate, then the timing works.

there is no way for us to know if he had any knowledge of the beat patrols that touched upon Mitre Square, only one PC actually enters it, and he was using a left hand beat that night....

I'm not suggesting he did necessarily, just that dutfield's yard with "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" isn't any more risky than Hanbury or Mitre Sq (which you accept as canonicals, and are also immediately prior and after dutfields)

Liz Strides murder, and possibly other Canonical murders suggest a profile of a man like you assume we seek...a risk taker who likes to kill, and cut.......but in actuality, using a smaller figure for his "spree", one that only includes obvious matches on MO and resulting injuries....that of Mary Ann, Annie and Kate Eddowes, we see a man that was cold and efficient....skilled with a knife.....set on mutilating after the kill stroke....capable of eluding street cops and resident patrols.....very quick in his activities on site.....and in the words of many investigators, a man that was "cunning".

As I hoped to show, Hanbury and Mitre Sq are equally risky as Dutfields, and I can't see that excluding Liz would materially affect the "profile"/"MO" of JtR.

That might well be a Leather Apron type, or a Tumblety type.....meaning street vagrant to semi educated toff-like type.....but it doesnt appear to be someone who commits acts of sheer madness and reckless behavior....there seems to be structure in the approach and throughout the kills I mentioned. he doesnt have to be bright to be consistent in that aspect...just methodical.

Best regards Victor.

I just can't see the differences in terms of "sheer madness and reckless behaviour" between Liz and Polly, Annie and Kate. Dutfield's doesn't seem to be any riskier than Buck's Row, Hanbury or Mitre Sq.

KR,
Vic.

Hi Michael,

I think Jack the Ripper killed Liz.

Some, including top published Ripper authors state in writing their opinion Michael Kidney got away with murder.

What exactly is your position? You've never made that clear, in all the thousands of posts you have on this subject.

Roy

Hi Roy,

I suppose thats because my opinions arent usually based on having a "better" suspect in mind, or even any other viable suspect.... they are mostly based on what I perceive is acceptable criteria for the inclusions in the first place. Its about the evidence read to me....not the story that can be woven around it...or in some cases , despite it.

In the case of Liz, I believe that the evidence suggests she was murdered by someone who did not meet with her to do so. I believe the man held no interest in cutting her open after the kill. I believe that certain aspects of the physical evidence...the cashous, the twisted and nicked scarf, the position of her head and feet, the less severe throat cut than Jack always uses, (excluding here if his kill), the fact she is found on her side,.......and the circumstantial evidence.....her better evening wear, the lint brush story, the flowers on her breast, the story she told a lodge mate indicating she would not be returning there that night.... with no indication of when she might return again, the fabric placed with same friend for "safe keeping" in her absence............I think all the above suggests that Liz was preparing to spend an entire evening with a man who was likely Jewish within days of her ending a multi year relationship with a man that we have documentation to show, was violent with Liz in the past, and who acts very strangely in the following days and at the Inquest.

Meaning.....I think there is a better foundation for a murder theory using a jealous rejected lover than a man who cuts strange women open while they believe they are soliciting a client....but I know of no facts that would indicate that Kidney should be considered her killer at this point.

I hedge on names cause I dont have one name in mind for a Ripper, the man I believe killed Mary Ann, Annie, and likely Kate....but I do think some familiar names might be murders during that period, in that location. In fact we know some were. Maybe some killed a Canonical or 2.

All the best Roy

[Roy Corduroy]

Hi Michael,

I think Jack the Ripper killed Liz.

Some, including top published Ripper authors state in writing their opinion Michael Kidney got away with murder.

What exactly is your position? You've never made that clear, in all the thousands of posts you have on this subject.

Roy

Hi again Victor,

A couple of rebuttal points...

.."And he must do it first"...referring to a kill cut.....of course thats true because as weve said, he couldnt very well take organs from women who were alive and struggling with him.....but all the death stroke is is a portion of a sequence that culminates with mutilations. There is no indication in any Canonical murder that the killing itself held any special interest for him.

"I do not know exactly how soon before the cart turns into the yard that it could be heard, but critically using your timings it shows that Liz was cut just before he could hear the cart. If Jack stopped and listened to check the coast was clear before intending to move the body into mutilation position on her back, then the interuption theory sounds more likely."

What I had hoped was that youd see that if he makes the cut at the earliest time of the estimation made by Blackwell, he would hear the cart and horse already. Heading towards him, by virtue of its increasing volume. So now we have a "Ripper" speaking directly to a witness, seen by 2 men accosting the woman he is about to kill so he can mutilate her abdomen, and he commences the kill and mutilation phase knowing full well that a cart and horse are approaching and few buildings on that street have gates and an open yard like Dutfields?

I think that Jack should be extended some credit when it comes to recklessness, and on his ability to control the "kill" impulse he has when mutilations cannot be guaranteed afterward.

"Less risky than Cadosche going to the loo on the other side of the fence?"

I dont imagine that the killer in the backyard at 28 Hanbury knew of Cadosches habit of nightly visits to the yard privvy....for all intent and purpose, the yard was empty at a time when the inhabitants of that house and the surrounding ones were still sleeping or just waking.

The premise must be, if this was Jack, that he willingly either accepted a scenario that only would offer him a kill, not mutilations,....or that he began the process that he felt would lead to mutilations while he hears a cart and horse approach. I dont see Jack in that premise myself.

"He does risk it again, Mitre square has regular police patrols."....referring to being a "risk taker" in the extreme........there is no way for us to know if he had any knowledge of the beat patrols that touched upon Mitre Square, only one PC actually enters it, and he was using a left hand beat that night....something else the killer would not likely know. If he takes Kate in after Lawendes sighting, he wouldnt hear Watkins leave....and he would have no knowledge that Harvey was to look into the square from Church Passage 7 or 8 minutes later.

If he had known, it sure would explain why this murder comes off like a staged play in terms of timings,... entrances and exits.

I believe that the reason that Jack the Ripper eluded the Police is because they include traits and characteristics in the killer profile that were based upon the assumption that certain murders that are uncharacteristically Ripper murders at best should nevertheless, be included. Liz Strides murder, and possibly other Canonical murders suggest a profile of a man like you assume we seek...a risk taker who likes to kill, and cut.......but in actuality, using a smaller figure for his "spree", one that only includes obvious matches on MO and resulting injuries....that of Mary Ann, Annie and Kate Eddowes, we see a man that was cold and efficient....skilled with a knife.....set on mutilating after the kill stroke....capable of eluding street cops and resident patrols.....very quick in his activities on site.....and in the words of many investigators, a man that was "cunning".

That might well be a Leather Apron type, or a Tumblety type.....meaning street vagrant to semi educated toff-like type.....but it doesnt appear to be someone who commits acts of sheer madness and reckless behavior....there seems to be structure in the approach and throughout the kills I mentioned. he doesnt have to be bright to be consistent in that aspect...just methodical.

Best regards Victor.

[Victor]

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.

Hi Mike,

"facilitator" and prerequisite, as in must be done first, but it could be minutes earlier or maybe hours with MJK.

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.

It also highlights the frustration of not completing the act, hence the 2nd murder that night?

He doesnt show that he is interested in the killing specifically at all....he just does it.

And he must do it first.

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.

I do not know exactly how soon before the cart turns into the yard that it could be heard, but critically using your timings it shows that Liz was cut just before he could hear the cart. If Jack stopped and listened to check the coast was clear before intending to move the body into mutilation position on her back, then the interuption theory sounds more likely.

So he sits in the yard with the dying woman waiting for......? An opening to flee?

To see if the approaching cart is going to turn into the yard, or go past? Hiding behind the gate?

Isnt he risking Diemshutz closing the gates when he finds Liz?

Absolutely, but that didn't happen.

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.

Less risky than Cadosche going to the loo on the other side of the fence?

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?

He does risk it again, Mitre square has regular police patrols.

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".

All the indications from Liz are that whoever killed her was interupted from ensuring she was dead, and made a rapid and lucky escape.

Cheers Victor

Cheers Mike.

KR,
Vic.

Worth noting that it might not have been quite as abrupt as that, Lynn. The pair are seen talking, he with his arm over her head, and with his hand resting on the wall behind her. To me, their behaviour seems a little more familiar - "cozy", almost - than a transaction between a casual prostitute and a stranger.

Thats James Brown's statement isnt it Sam? Im pleased that you would place it there, and its part of the reason I suspect that Kidney might be a candidate....IF Israel did not tell his story entirely truthfully,.... including his time...starting with where the incident he witnessed occurred. My belief is if he did stray from the facts the yard might have been a likely spot for the real altercation of BSM and Liz...as Caz suggested might be the "spot" he gets hold of her.

Cheers Sam, all.

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
My point has always been, the difference in approaches between BS man, and Lawandes sighting.
We have hallmarks of rough and tumble with Stride, and much more relaxed behaviour with Eddowes, although the bruise on the latters hand, does indicate that she may have been grasped tightly by someone very recent.
We have reports of roughness regarding Nichols in the Brady street area[ if such reports can be believed], and a much more relaxed attitude witnessed by Mrs Long in Hanbury street.
With kelly we have a very respectable encounter[ almost gentlemanly] witnessed by our famous GH, which was interpretated differently by Mrs Coxs neice years later,, as they approached the passage.' all right my luv dont pull me along.
If one takes everything into account , we could paint a picture of someone who may have had very limited patience, and whilst initially have seemed ok, very soon gave himself away as a suitable spot for his deeds approached.
Regards Richard.

[lynn cates]

jealousy

Hello Sam. Thanks, as always.

Do you think it possible for a semi-regular client to fall in "love" with Liz and be jealous of her date?

Cheers.
LC

[Sam Flynn]

1. He approaches Liz for business.
2. She declines.

Worth noting that it might not have been quite as abrupt as that, Lynn. The pair are seen talking, he with his arm over her head, and with his hand resting on the wall behind her. To me, their behaviour seems a little more familiar - "cozy", almost - than a transaction between a casual prostitute and a stranger.

[lynn cates]

another possibility

Hello Caz. Another possibility occurs to me. Suppose brush off man and BS man are one and the same. So the one witness (Brown--if I recall) and Schwartz are describing one and the same event. Let's suppose further that this BS/BO man is Jack. Perhaps he is a past (or even present) client of hers.

SEQUENCE:
1. He approaches Liz for business.
2. She declines.
3. He walks away but comes back (here interpolate Schwartz).
4. He pulls her toward the street.
5. She falls (as in "tug of war.")
6. He pleads, "Lizzie." (swiped this from Fisherman)
7. Lizzie picks herself up and heads to the side door of the club for her date.
8. She is hurling invective over her shoulder.
9. Jack follows.
10. She turns and takes a step or two TOWARDS Jack and the gates (not uncommon for disputants. This is for, "And another thing, you . . .").
11. She draws breath and is facing Jack who is face towards the stables.
12. Liz turns slightly left and reaches in a pocket for the cachous.
!3. With her head slightly averted, Jack seizes her by the scarf and quickly slashes.
14. Drops her on left side, head towards stable, feet towards gate (quite natural).
15. Jack beats a hasty retreat to Mitre Square.

Is anything here inherently implausible?

But this feels a bit like a domestic row.

All the best.
LC