The Cachous

[John G]

Hi John




Did he ?
He did say something about pulling the scarf back, but that can be done from the side (which is where Dr Phillips thought the killer stood)



Well, Stride screamed and no-one other than Schwartz heard, and Kelly may have cried out?



Would they know they were about to be murdered ?

Hello Jon,

I think it would be far easier to bring someone to the ground by pulling the scarf from behind, rather than the side. Moreover, Dutfield's Yard was very narrow, so I think an attack from the side would create difficulties in that location, for instance, a killer might risk getting tangled up with his intended victim.

Stride did scream, and the reason nobody heard is one of the reasons I doubt Schwartz's account. In fact, as I noted, the assault described by Schwartz appears to me to be far more consistent with the clumsy, somewhat amateurish, attack on Tabram than the other C5.

Kelly may have been asleep when attacked. There is little evidence that she cried out. Cries of "Oh murder" were heard, but they were common in that location. Moreover, I find it odd that three people heard those cries, but no one apart from Schwartz heard Stride's three screams, even though there were people in the vicinity.

They may not have known they were about to be murdered, but if they feared an assault, or the killer had given an indication he was about to attack, they would surely have attempted to defend themselves or call for assistance. In fact, that's exactly what Stride did, according to Schwartz.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi John




Did he ?
He did say something about pulling the scarf back, but that can be done from the side (which is where Dr Phillips thought the killer stood)



Well, Stride screamed and no-one other than Schwartz heard, and Kelly may have cried out?



Would they know they were about to be murdered ?

Hi John
What has to be borne in mind is that much of what Victorian Doctors stated way back then is now regarded by modern day experts as nothing more than guess work.

i.e. times of death, right or left handed killer etc etc.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[lynn cates]

money where the mouth is

Hello Batman. Thanks.

Oh, just show everyone and then there will be no need for your talking nonsense.

Cheers.
LC

[Jon Guy]

Hi John

Dr Blackwell suggested Stride had been attacked from behind. .

Did he ?
He did say something about pulling the scarf back, but that can be done from the side (which is where Dr Phillips thought the killer stood)

However, it just seems more likely to me. The fact is, there is a complete lack of evidence for the victims putting up any kind of struggle, or crying out for help; this suggests they were caught completely by surprise and therefore off-guard. .

Well, Stride screamed and no-one other than Schwartz heard, and Kelly may have cried out?

If the killer's strategy was to launch a direct assault, I think it would have be difficult for him not to give some sort of indication about his intentions, i.e. through body language. This would give the victim the opportunity to cry out and to put up some kind of defence, as seems to have happened in the case of Tabram.

Would they know they were about to be murdered ?

[Batman]

Frontal bruising aplenty on Stride in addition to her shoulders.

[John G]

Why a rear attack. Do you have evidence for this ?

And, why wouldn`t the victims cry out or defend themselves ?

Hello Jon,

I believe Donald Rumbellow speculated that Nichols had her throat cut from behind and, of course, Dr Blackwell suggested Stride had been attacked from behind. However, it just seems more likely to me. The fact is, there is a complete lack of evidence for the victims putting up any kind of struggle, or crying out for help; this suggests they were caught completely by surprise and therefore off-guard. If the killer's strategy was to launch a direct assault, I think it would have be difficult for him not to give some sort of indication about his intentions, i.e. through body language. This would give the victim the opportunity to cry out and to put up some kind of defence, as seems to have happened in the case of Tabram.

[Batman]

Hello Batman. Thanks.

"Draw any circumference. Mark a point outside of the circumference and call it the left side. Now pick a point anywhere on the circle. Can you spin the circle left OR right to end up with the point on the left side? If you can then you have falsified there is only one direction that causes the point/knot to end up on the left side rendering that argument redundant."

Once again, you have managed to miss the point. The knot being to the left in addition to its being tight. Just grabbing the scarf on the circumference would NOT leave it tight.

In my re-enactment, I grabbed a tail of the slip knot and pulled. This decreased radius AND shifted it left.

Why not try this and see?

Cheers.
LC

Doesn't matter the point still stands. You have no idea where the knot was or type of position it was in. Everything your pretending only a rear attack can do can also be explained by nearly any other action on this item. There is no single one way that you would like us believe.

[lynn cates]

behind

Hello John. There can be no doubt but that Liz was pulled by the scarf from behind and cut whilst almost on the ground.

Good show.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

try it

Hello Batman. Thanks.

"Draw any circumference. Mark a point outside of the circumference and call it the left side. Now pick a point anywhere on the circle. Can you spin the circle left OR right to end up with the point on the left side? If you can then you have falsified there is only one direction that causes the point/knot to end up on the left side rendering that argument redundant."

Once again, you have managed to miss the point. The knot being to the left in addition to its being tight. Just grabbing the scarf on the circumference would NOT leave it tight.

In my re-enactment, I grabbed a tail of the slip knot and pulled. This decreased radius AND shifted it left.

Why not try this and see?

Cheers.
LC

[Jon Guy]

. However, evidence suggests that they were rendered unconscious first, I.e. strangled/suffocated, and this may have occurred during a surprise rear assault.

Why a rear attack. Do you have evidence for this ?

And, why wouldn`t the victims cry out or defend themselves ?

[John G]

Hi John

JTR didn`t cut the victims throats from behind.
He would have to be lying underneath them if he did.

Their throats were cut whilst they were lying down, and the killer by their side.

I hope this helps, I know this info this will require you to re-evaluate everything you know about JTR.

Hi Jon,

Yes, I agree. I should have said that, in my opinion, they were assaulted from behind and then brought to the ground where their throats were then quickly cut, thus avoiding arterial spray. However, evidence suggests that they were rendered unconscious first, I.e. strangled/suffocated, and this may have occurred during a surprise rear assault.

[John G]

One has to be careful conflating behavioural analysis with the science of forensics which for obvious reasons in this case firmly rejects rear based knife attacks.

Dr Blackwell believed Stride had been attacked from behind. In other cases, I feel it may be inferred. For instance, in Eddowes case there were no signs of a struggle, which I would have expected had she been subjected to a full-frontal assault.

[Jon Guy]

Hello Jon,

Yes, I think that's likely. That is also the view of Keppel et al (2005). I also think that this strategy may have evolved as a consequence of the messy attack on Tabram. Thus, it would enable the killer to limit the risk of blood getting on to his clothing, and also have the advantage of catching his victims by surprise. With a direct assault, the victim is likely to be forewarned and put up resistance, as well as having the opportunity to cry out for help, which is exactly what happens in Schwartz's account of the assault on Stride by BS man.

If, therefore, victims had been attacked from the front I would have expected to see signs of a struggle, i.e. defensive wounds to the wrist, and witnesses hearing screaming or other alarm calls. I would also have thought some of the victims would have been able to take advantage of an opportunity to escape. However, throughout the series there is little evidence of this.

Hi John

JTR didn`t cut the victims throats from behind.
He would have to be lying underneath them if he did.

Their throats were cut whilst they were lying down, and the killer by their side.

I hope this helps, I know this info this will require you to re-evaluate everything you know about JTR.

[Batman]

One has to be careful conflating behavioural analysis with the science of forensics which for obvious reasons in this case firmly rejects rear based knife attacks.

[John G]

Are you saying JTR cut their throats from behind, John ?

Hello Jon,

Yes, I think that's likely. That is also the view of Keppel et al (2005). I also think that this strategy may have evolved as a consequence of the messy attack on Tabram. Thus, it would enable the killer to limit the risk of blood getting on to his clothing, and also have the advantage of catching his victims by surprise. With a direct assault, the victim is likely to be forewarned and put up resistance, as well as having the opportunity to cry out for help, which is exactly what happens in Schwartz's account of the assault on Stride by BS man.

If, therefore, victims had been attacked from the front I would have expected to see signs of a struggle, i.e. defensive wounds to the wrist, and witnesses hearing screaming or other alarm calls. I would also have thought some of the victims would have been able to take advantage of an opportunity to escape. However, throughout the series there is little evidence of this.