The Cachous

[lynn cates]

That's the one!

Hello Errata. Thanks.

"Or she landed in water not so much mud, and so that got obscured after her murder from her body lying on a wet street."

But only one side was wet.

"Or it never happened."

Now, you're talking.

Cheers.
LC

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

I also agree that Marshall might have seen Stride with her killer. However, he describes someone who was "mild speaking" and spoke like an educated man. And that's just not the impression I get of BS man, with his shouts of "Lipski" and unsubtle behaviour. In fact, I think Marshall's man would be more likely to say to Schwartz something like, "Be off with you my good man, before I'm compelled to give you a damned good thrashing!"

The difficulty I have with Brown's identification, and the couple seen by Mortimer, is that if they were just innocent bystanders, wouldn't they have come forward for elimination purposes? After all, Goldstein came forward and he might have been regarded as a strong suspect, particularly on account of his little black bag!

Hi JohnG
I don't know-there are any number of reasons why an innocent person might not come forward. many didn't in this case. maybe they didn't want to get involved, maybe they were not supposed to be out or together?

Or They might have been stride and the ripper, and Browns off on his description/and or times a bit. Strides response of "not tonight.." certainly is in my line of thinking of a reluctant Stride and a ripper trying to finagle her into a secluded spot. However, all things considered probably not stride and BS man IMHO.

Re Marshalls man. Any mild speaking man and/or educated man can lose his temper and yell out in a fit of anger surely? as someone has pointed before-same man different mood.
I would also add that what did marshal hear the man say?

"you would say anything, but your prayers" Rather ominous to me. And I would imagine it was preceeded by conversation along these lines:

Stride: "you are not the killer are you?" half jokingly(remember Best and Gardner describe a man and woman they encountered by saying to the woman who they thought was stride-"that's leather apron getting around you".)
Man: "you never know, darling"
Stride: "well then I better say my prayers"
Man: "you would say anything but your prayers".

Again, this sounds like a rather ominous response to me-with a hint of religious disdain and dislike for prostitutes.

And I have no problem with Schwartz saying she screamed but not too loudly. Surely there are can be different levels of loudness. I think stride probably didn't think at the time she was being attacked by the ripper, just a disgruntled punter, which is why she didn't scream bloody murder.

Also, much has been made of the fact that BS man was stumbling drunkenly. this is incorrect. there is no mention of it at all in the police report and the words used in the press account was walking tipsy or something along those lines. I have often felt that when Schwartz first saw BS man is the point where BS man has turned around after initially stormed off and has lost his temper and is going back to stride to confront/assault her. In this case, I could see someone walking erratically a bit as they are how one describes someone who is extremely angry-"shaking mad".

BTW-if you lend any credence to Dear boss/saucy jack being authentic and I think there is a good chance that it is. You have corroboration for some of the points I have just made:

"you would say anything but your prayers"-DB-Im down on whores.

"screamed three times but not loudly"-DB-first one squealed a bit

Plus-they were obviously written by an educated man-just like marshalls man-so its got that going for you! ; )

Also, I would just like to point out something Errata said. In one possible scenario-stride does not have the caschou in her hand when BS man assaults her. After he initially roughs her, she acquiesces to his desires and accompanies him to the yard, taking out the caschous. Now I find it unlikely that she would accompany a man who just assaulted her into the allyway for sex. But who knows? Maybe after she realized this man was NOT going to be her next Kidney(whom she just broke up with) that she might as well make the most of it and at least get out of it what she can. If he had bought her the caschou or the flower or drinks she knows hes got money on him.
And she might have finally just said, all right then dammit, I'll do it if it means that much to you, your a horny one and bit pushy! But its gonna cost you bit more!

Now I find this scenario unlikely, because like I said, I don't think a prostitute would do it after just being roughed up but who knows?

But at least it takes the dreaded caschous out of the picture.

[John G]

Sound isn't discreet packets of different levels, its a continuous distribution like a wave that either gets louder or lower. Different levels of pressure on the voice box will decrease a loud scream. Her scarf was tight around her neck. Why make this harder than it needs to be?

Oh let me guess... BSman can't do this... but NinjaMan can.

But this makes no sense. Schwartz said he heard Stride "scream". And a definition of a scream is a loud, piercing sound. That's what a "scream" is. This issue is about word definitions, not the acoustics branch of physics! And where is your evidence that Stride's scarf was tight around her neck at the time Schwartz heard the scream?

[Batman]

Yes, as I've said before, how do you scream, "but not very loudly". It's surely an oxymoron!

Sound isn't discreet packets of different levels, its a continuous distribution like a wave that either gets louder or lower. Different levels of pressure on the voice box will decrease a loud scream. Her scarf was tight around her neck. Why make this harder than it needs to be?

Oh let me guess... BSman can't do this... but NinjaMan can.

[Errata]

Hello Errata. Thanks.

"who runs into Poles other than texting pedestrians?"

Why, Sir Robert, of course. But the Pole was low class (sorry, couldn't resist).

If her gluteus maximus had hit the ground, why no mud there?

"But her body tells us the truth."

Hear, hear!

Cheers.
LC

The sidewalk might still have been relatively mud free, where the streets would not be. It was a light rain, not a flood. The sidewalk would have been dirty, but not necessarily muddy.

Or she didn't land on her butt. Or she landed in water not so much mud, and so that got obscured after her murder from her body lying on a wet street. Or the color of her coat masked the wet spot and the sidewalk crud. Or it didn't rate a mention in the ME report because it had been raining a bit so wet spots were not considered significant, especially if they were on the butt, the back, or the knees.

Or it never happened.

[lynn cates]

truth

Hello Errata. Thanks.

"who runs into Poles other than texting pedestrians?"

Why, Sir Robert, of course. But the Pole was low class (sorry, couldn't resist).

If her gluteus maximus had hit the ground, why no mud there?

"But her body tells us the truth."

Hear, hear!

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

focus

Hello Batman. Thanks. (Well, if the tirade was intended for me . . . )

Ninja man? You, perhaps? (heh-heh)

Knots to the left? You never did answer my concerns--but I don't blame you. You haven't a leg to stand on.

Oh, and if you put your money where your mouth is (which, of course, might require a considerable sum), and do a re-enactment, just focus on the cachous, will you?

Cheers.
LC

[John G]

Possible.

But if it's true we know she was thrown or pushed. People are pushed from the front and fall backward tend to reach forward to catch the person who pushed them. It also happens if you say, run into a pole, but that happens less often because who runs into poles other than texting pedestrians? So she may have done that and just hit with her butt. Or she was thrown and got few steps in before falling, and that arrests the momentum, but also causes people to sort of fold at the legs. So they sink down sort of instead of falling. Or she hit the fence before going down, and that usually results in sitting down hard.

I mean there's a lot of things that could have happened. And lets just all accept that the account given by Schwartz is one of the least descriptive accounts ever given that still uses descriptive language. Screaming softly three times? What the hell is that? We know the condition of the body, assuming of course the coroners got it right. Because of the condition of the body we know she didn't scrape herself up, we know she wasn't dragged, we know that she was essentially upright shortly before she was attacked.

Schwartz's story is an interesting story. And I personally think it's true (though I'm not wedded to the idea). And those men may have been her killers. I personally don't think she was a Ripper victim. But her body tells us the truth. And if the story contradicts the condition of her corpse, then the story isn't true. Or we aren't interpreting it correctly.

Yes, as I've said before, how do you scream, "but not very loudly". It's surely an oxymoron!

[Errata]

Hello Errata.

"So either she didn't catch herself with her hands at all, or she didn't catch herself with her hands in any meaningful way, meaning she caught herself say, with her knees from a slow fall and placed her hands on the ground."

Or that the story was made up?

Cheers.
LC

Possible.

But if it's true we know she was thrown or pushed. People are pushed from the front and fall backward tend to reach forward to catch the person who pushed them. It also happens if you say, run into a pole, but that happens less often because who runs into poles other than texting pedestrians? So she may have done that and just hit with her butt. Or she was thrown and got few steps in before falling, and that arrests the momentum, but also causes people to sort of fold at the legs. So they sink down sort of instead of falling. Or she hit the fence before going down, and that usually results in sitting down hard.

I mean there's a lot of things that could have happened. And lets just all accept that the account given by Schwartz is one of the least descriptive accounts ever given that still uses descriptive language. Screaming softly three times? What the hell is that? We know the condition of the body, assuming of course the coroners got it right. Because of the condition of the body we know she didn't scrape herself up, we know she wasn't dragged, we know that she was essentially upright shortly before she was attacked.

Schwartz's story is an interesting story. And I personally think it's true (though I'm not wedded to the idea). And those men may have been her killers. I personally don't think she was a Ripper victim. But her body tells us the truth. And if the story contradicts the condition of her corpse, then the story isn't true. Or we aren't interpreting it correctly.

[John G]

Apparently NinjaMan's Dad is bigger than BSman's Dad, so NinjaMan can bring a woman down with cachous in hand and not spill a single one. BSman can't do that because his Dad isn't as big as NinjaMan's Dad.

Anything BSman can't do, can be done by NinjaMan because NinjaMan's Dad says so.

Especially turning knots to the left.

As a note. If I was going to put my money where my mouth was I certainly wouldn't do it with a camcorder from a behind angle that doesn't capture any of the forensics some people says it does i.e - cachous in hand, knife on scarf and then ask people to trust my memory. Oh yeah about that bloodless scarf and shoulder bruising and mud on each side. NinjaMan strikes again right?

Hello Batman,

You obviously think Chapman is a strong suspect, but do you really think that BS man resembles Chapman, particularly as regards his unsubtle, and somewhat uncouth, behaviour? Wouldn't Chapman be much closer to the man described by Marshall?

[John G]

Thanks again JohnG-no worries.

I too think that Stride was a ripper victim, but I think that BS man was more than likely her killer and the ripper.

The final straw for me in that regard is this:

The witnesses that night-marshall, PC Smith, Schwartz and lawende all describe a man wearing a peaked cap who was seen with both Stride and eddowes. Not only that there was a report in the papers that before any of these descriptions were made public a man was seen acting suspicious in Church st. wiping his hands, trying to hide his face, about the time inbetween the murders of stride and eddowes. and you guessed it-wearing a peaked cap.

Its too much of coincidence for me and ties it all together. The ripper was wearing a peaked cap that night.

And in regards to the witness Brown (his man NOT wearing a hat)-I don't think he saw stride and the ripper. I believe he probably saw the young lovers that mrs. Mortimer referred to.

Hi Abby,

I also agree that Marshall might have seen Stride with her killer. However, he describes someone who was "mild speaking" and spoke like an educated man. And that's just not the impression I get of BS man, with his shouts of "Lipski" and unsubtle behaviour. In fact, I think Marshall's man would be more likely to say to Schwartz something like, "Be off with you my good man, before I'm compelled to give you a damned good thrashing!"

The difficulty I have with Brown's identification, and the couple seen by Mortimer, is that if they were just innocent bystanders, wouldn't they have come forward for elimination purposes? After all, Goldstein came forward and he might have been regarded as a strong suspect, particularly on account of his little black bag!

[Batman]

Apparently NinjaMan's Dad is bigger than BSman's Dad, so NinjaMan can bring a woman down with cachous in hand and not spill a single one. BSman can't do that because his Dad isn't as big as NinjaMan's Dad.

Anything BSman can't do, can be done by NinjaMan because NinjaMan's Dad says so.

Especially turning knots to the left.

As a note. If I was going to put my money where my mouth was I certainly wouldn't do it with a camcorder from a behind angle that doesn't capture any of the forensics some people says it does i.e - cachous in hand, knife on scarf and then ask people to trust my memory. Oh yeah about that bloodless scarf and shoulder bruising and mud on each side. NinjaMan strikes again right?

[Abby Normal]

Hello Abby,

Thanks. I was feeling guilty about my overreaction, which I apologize for again, particularly as you're obviously such a nice person and I'm sure we agree on so many other points. I find so many of your posts highly informative.

I suppose it comes down to instinct at the end of the day. I instinctively believe that Stride was a JtR victim, but I just don't see BS man as JtR, which is why I feel compelled to argue against BS man at all costs!

Thanks again JohnG-no worries.

I too think that Stride was a ripper victim, but I think that BS man was more than likely her killer and the ripper.

The final straw for me in that regard is this:

The witnesses that night-marshall, PC Smith, Schwartz and lawende all describe a man wearing a peaked cap who was seen with both Stride and eddowes. Not only that there was a report in the papers that before any of these descriptions were made public a man was seen acting suspicious in Church st. wiping his hands, trying to hide his face, about the time inbetween the murders of stride and eddowes. and you guessed it-wearing a peaked cap.

Its too much of coincidence for me and ties it all together. The ripper was wearing a peaked cap that night.

And in regards to the witness Brown (his man NOT wearing a hat)-I don't think he saw stride and the ripper. I believe he probably saw the young lovers that mrs. Mortimer referred to.

[John G]

Hi JohnG



I'll Take it!!

and I think that's as close as were going to get, so will leave it at that. and like I said, I think that it is very possible she WOULD have dropped them also.



That's very gracious of you John. I apologize to you also.

Hello Abby,

Thanks. I was feeling guilty about my overreaction, which I apologize for again, particularly as you're obviously such a nice person and I'm sure we agree on so many other points. I find so many of your posts highly informative.

I suppose it comes down to instinct at the end of the day. I instinctively believe that Stride was a JtR victim, but I just don't see BS man as JtR, which is why I feel compelled to argue against BS man at all costs!

[Abby Normal]

Yes, I accept it's theoretically possible. Yes, I accept my response was a little hypocritical, although perhaps intentionally so, because after a bad start to the day I suddenly remembered I believe in free speech- as I said to Jon I have never reported a post and I never will. So, yes, on that basis I hypocritically broke my own code of conduct. And so yes, on that basis I feel I should apologize. So I apologize.

Hi JohnG

Yes, I accept it's theoretically possible

I'll Take it!!

and I think that's as close as were going to get, so will leave it at that. and like I said, I think that it is very possible she WOULD have dropped them also.

So I apologize

That's very gracious of you John. I apologize to you also.