devil in the details
Hello Jon.
"Given the repose of the body, it has always appeared to me that Stride was standing facing the wall, at which point she was attacked from behind."
I spent a good deal of time a couple years ago trying to get the forensic details to work out like this. My results were disappointing. (Problem, as usual, was the scarf.)
Perhaps you will be luckier. But, in your case, skill, perhaps.
Cheers.
LC
The Cachous
Collapse
X
-
Hold your hand out, knotty boy.
Hello Gwyneth. Thanks. (Lovely pun, by the way.)
Well, whatever kind of knot, it clearly had to be such that, by pulling it, it could have its radius decreased.
Cheers.
LC
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by curious4 View PostHello John
Eagle was of Russian descent, Schwartz Hungarian. Hungarians and Finns can understand each other, but I don't think a Russian and a Hungarian could chat together with ease.
C4
Yes, that's a good point. Russia is a Slavic language, whereas Hungarian clearly isnt. However, isn't Hungarian similar to Estonian? Could Eagle speak Estonian? However, realistically they would have needed an interpreter, which would have been risky.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by John G View PostHello Jon,
Maybe he didn't. However, there remains the possibility that he discussed the case with Eagle, and that there could have been a conspiracy to ensure that Schwartz gave a time which appeared to alibi Eagle and Lave. However, I personally think this is unlikely.
Eagle was of Russian descent, Schwartz Hungarian. Hungarians and Finns can understand each other, but I don't think a Russian and a Hungarian could chat together with ease.
C4
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by lynn cates View PostHello Errata. Thanks.
"Frankly I think we need to work backward. Start from how she was found"
Precisely! This I have tried to do.
Cheers.
LC
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Wickerman View PostHi John.
Interesting that you should interpret it that way, presumably from the Daily Telegraph?
In the Times, the Coroner asked the question directly.
The CORONER. - Was she wearing a flower when you saw her? -No.
The CORONER. - Were they talking quietly? -Yes.
The CORONER. - Can you describe the man?
Daily News:
I do not think she was wearing a flower in her breast when I saw her. She and the man were talking quietly together.
Perhaps it is the way the Daily Telegraph presented their version?
It was actually from Trevor Marriott's book, "Jack The Ripper: The 21st Century Investigation" (2005). I assumed it was from the official inquest record, as there is a detailed account of the inquest exchanges. However, I could be wrong. Maybe Trevor could enlighten us?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by John G View PostHello Jon,
Yes, but I think Marshall's response needs to be put into context. At the inquest Marshall noted that he'd seen Stride's body in the mortuary. The Coroner asked him how he knew she was then same woman. He replied: " I recognize her both by her face and dress. She did not then have a flower in her breast."
I think, therefore, he wasn't trying to imply that she may have been wearing a flower elsewhere on her person; he was merely drawing attention to a minor discrepancy between what he observed in the mortuary and the way the woman he saw on the night of the murder was dressed.
Interesting that you should interpret it that way, presumably from the Daily Telegraph?
In the Times, the Coroner asked the question directly.
The CORONER. - Was she wearing a flower when you saw her? -No.
The CORONER. - Were they talking quietly? -Yes.
The CORONER. - Can you describe the man?
Daily News:
I do not think she was wearing a flower in her breast when I saw her. She and the man were talking quietly together.
Perhaps it is the way the Daily Telegraph presented their version?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Wickerman View PostI do agree that the Marshall suspect resembles BS-man, superficially at least, but the woman seen by Marshall at 11:45 pm may not have been Stride. Marshall doesn't say that he didn't see a flower, he says, "she did not have a flower on her breast".
Stride was already wearing the flower, a dahlia, at 11:00 pm, when at the Bricklayer's Arms.
Yes, but I think Marshall's response needs to be put into context. At the inquest Marshall noted that he'd seen Stride's body in the mortuary. The Coroner asked him how he knew she was then same woman. He replied: " I recognize her both by her face and dress. She did not then have a flower in her breast."
I think, therefore, he wasn't trying to imply that she may have been wearing a flower elsewhere on her person; he was merely drawing attention to a minor discrepancy between what he observed in the mortuary, i.e. in respect of the deceased's dress, and the way the woman he saw on the night of the murder was dressed.Last edited by John G; 05-23-2015, 06:24 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by lynn cates View PostHello Jon.
"Marshall doesn't say that he didn't see a flower, he says, "she did not have a flower on her breast"."
You deserve a kiss for that. Well . . .
Cheers.
LC
c.d.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by John G View Post
It does appear that Stride was attacked whilst exiting the Yard. ........ Her killer, perhaps caught off guard initially, quickly responds; he follows her out, catching her from behind before she reaches the gates.
Given the repose of the body, it has always appeared to me that Stride was standing facing the wall, at which point she was attacked from behind.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Jon Guy View PostHi John
But when Schwartz gave his statement to the police on Sunday night how would he have known that all the people you mention above had just cleared the scene ?
Maybe he didn't. However, there remains the possibility that he discussed the case with Eagle, and that there could have been a conspiracy to ensure that Schwartz gave a time which appeared to alibi Eagle and Lave. However, I personally think this is unlikely.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by John G View PostI just think it's a little convenient that the incident happened, according to Schwartz, at 12:45: apparently just after Mortimer went in doors, whilst the couple seen by Mortimer had apparently left, and just after PC Smith, Eagle and Lave were in the vicinity.
But when Schwartz gave his statement to the police on Sunday night how would he have known that all the people you mention above had just cleared the scene ?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Wickerman View PostBear in mind, Annie Chapman had similar bruising on the front of her chest.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by lynn cates View PostHello John. Thanks.
OK. Whatever unsettled her came between the cachous coming out and her turning 180 and exiting. It also caused her NOT to insert one.
Cheers.
LC
Yes, I think in this scenario she enters the Yard, in a relatively relaxed state, with her killer. However, something occurs to make her feel unsettled and tense. Perhaps it's something the man said has he loomed behind her. Or maybe he did something-such as reach for the knife-and Stride sensed something wasn't quite right. Of course, the Yard was very dark, perhaps creating an eerie feel, and that in itself must have been a little unsettling.
Leave a comment:
-
Not that knot
Hello Lynn
Not an expert on such - but I don't think she would have tied a slip knot. Once over and through and once over and through again (whatever that's called). Not just the first, because that would leave it open for a quick snatch from a thief. Neither would he have to hold the knot. Experimented with my daughter's silk scarf, which she has been less than careful with (we were given one each after my son and wife visited China and wasn't going to ruin mine!). However, tied the knot, pulled the loop and the knot tightened, wherever I pulled.
Actually I wasn't clear, should have said pull and twist.
Although pulling would probably be enough - maybe.
So, knotty problem but I can(k)not agree.
Best wishes
C4Last edited by curious4; 05-23-2015, 03:08 AM.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: