The Cachous

[Abby Normal]

Perhaps. However, I would then expect to see even more soiling on the clothes. And, of course, that doesn't explain the lack of impact injuries after being thrown on the footpath.

Moreover, in your model why do you think this wasn't just a common domestic dispute?After all, as you pointed out yourself Stride was standing in the gateway, suggesting she was waiting for someone she knew.

Hi JohnG
A logical fallacy, I see time and again on these boards are when people expect a certain outcome, such as damaged cloths, spilled caschous, body in a certain position,blood not on the front of the clothes etc., and when they don't see what they think should happen come to a rock hard conclusion that something must happened or not happened. That's incorrect.

For example. No blood was found on strides front of clothes. So people draw the hard and steadfast conclusion that she must have had her throat cut while lying immobilized on her back. Actually, the only hard and steadfast conclusion you can come to is that people reported that there was no blood on her front. That's it.

Now, you can say they liklihood of finding blood on her front would be greater if she was killed standing up, and forensics experts would probably say the same.

But, there could be any number of reasons why it was reported there was no blood found on her front, other than she lying on her back when cut. For example, she may have leaning forward when her throat was cut and the spray didn't get on her cloths, she may have been standing upright but the tightened scarf acted like a tourniquet, or there was some blood on her front but not a lot and it was reported that there was none.

Just because something does or does not happen as you expect does not mean you can just throw out all the other possibilities. Especially making such a huge leap (2 leaps actually)by ruling out bs man as strides killer because she was holding caschous when found. She could have taken them out after the first assault, he could have placed then their himself after she was killed, or she held onto them through the attack. Any number of scenarios.

The only rock hard conclusion you can come to in this case is that she was found holding caschous when she was found. Everything else is just speculation. Period.

[Batman]

How do you explain why her scarf was so tight and although had a slice didn't have blood on it?

[Batman]

Maybe she was, maybe she wasn't.

Since nobody came forward claiming to be part of a domestic dispute, it seems unlikely. Also domestically this would indicate people who live near. The fact they didn't find any such to compromise Schwartz indicates he has a stronger witness testimony.

[John G]

Perhaps. However, I would then expect to see even more soiling on the clothes. And, of course, that doesn't explain the lack of impact injuries after being thrown on the footpath.

Moreover, in your model why do you think this wasn't just a common domestic dispute?After all, as you pointed out yourself Stride was standing in the gateway, suggesting she was waiting for someone she knew.

[Batman]

In your model the mud smearing on the left side was done by her simply lying down so how muddy do you think a yard with ponies and cart would be? Anyone equestrian minded knows the answer. Its complete sh*t, literally.

[John G]

It would still be a hard surface. I accept it had been raining but I doubt that Berner Street had been transformed into a swamp!

[Batman]

Wet muddy paths are slippery? Yes or no?

[John G]

I think some sort of physical damage, to the clothing and to Stride, would have been likely had her body been dragged. And I have think it would have been very likely, as a consequence of being thrown on to a hard surface.

[Batman]

Again the assumption there must be physical damage from dragging a few feet isn't supported by the primary material in pathology. However her handkerchief was tight around her neck. Why? I don't accept Lynn's proposition that someone with arm around her shoulder did it by pulling it down to the left. That' just an abrupt quick tug. Dragging something a few feet with it does tighten it using the persons own weight.

[John G]

The fact is if Stride were thrown to the ground, let alone dragged several feet, you would surely expect bruising or grazing of some kind. However, there were no bruises found on the body. In fact there were no abrasions of any kind. Moreover, there wasn't even any damage to the clothing.

Schwartz also states that Stride was standing in the gateway. That surely implies that she was waiting for someone. Now assuming that JtR's MO didn't involve asking victims to wait for him near busy clubs, I would conclude that she was waiting for someone she knew. And that person has to be a prime suspect if Scwartx's evidence is to be accepted.

[Batman]

Hello Batman.

"No the bruising doesn't indicate contact with the ground, it indicates a frontal assault."

Try using your head for just a moment. What kind of frontal assault would leave these marks?

1. Surely not just a shove?

2. If both shoulders are so marked, surely the assailant must have used both hands?

3. If both hands were used, the knife was NOT in one of them at the time?

Sheesh!

Cheers.
LC

Obviously you are completely oblivious to JtRs MO of rendering the victim semi unconscious through manual strangulation which involved both hands before the knife comes out. Like your demonstration though you have the knife out before she is even toppling over.

That's a big no no.

[Batman]

Yes, as I clearly demonstrated in my re-enactment. The pull of the scarf causes the hand to clench. That includes the fingers. And, yes, the cachous were retained as is clearly evident."

Cheers.
LC

Actually you can't see any of that all because your filming it from the back opposite side to where that alledged action takes place. So its just your memory.

Anyway if you claim pulling a scarf causes a hand to clench you have given every reason why a scarf drag around the corner would have her holding onto the sweets too. You have given BSman a way.

[Batman]

Declaring something doesn't make it so and adding ad hominems shows there is no argument against it.

The only reason you accuse some club members if not the whole lot is because that is near where the body was found. That's it.

John G has said you need a cool and calculating murderer to do it all silently but your club member conspiracy theory has them suddenly killing someone without planning (or else they could have carted off the body with ease).

Stranger killings are called stranger killings for a reason. So the anarchists turned prostitute murderers for a night is just like saying whoever discovers the body did it.

[lynn cates]

gibberish

Hello Batman. Thanks.

No, the argument is NOT the same. Although, when it comes to an argument and its proper conduct, you show you haven't a clue.

And I won't ask you to explain. By now, I can see that it is futile.

Might find someone to translate gibberish into English.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

empirical

Hello (again) CD. Ah! Someone FINALLY does some empirical experimentation.

I could kiss you! Well, maybe not. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC