For what reason do we include Stride?

[Batman]

Good thinking Batman !!
I agree with the above.
Poor Liz may not have even seen the knife until it was too late.

It is clear from the evidence and lack of splatter down their front and by the way the blood pooled under them that they were all lying on their back before the slash was made, which was likely made immediately after they hit the ground.

Nichols' face was even described as possibly having been punched.

Nearly all of them had bruises on their faces which can't be explained by being pulled from the rear.

Schwartz description of the attack is pretty much how such an act would go down. The shoulder region of the body goes all the way to the front. He grabbed their shoulders and pulls them forward slightly closing his grab so that his wrists are almost together and their clothes tight around their upper chest neck region. They automatically flinch back and then he uses their momentum to push them back and down with a huge slam, his fists smashing while pushing into their jaw causing the bruising. In a flash the blade is out cutting their neck before they can even realize they are lying prostrate. They can't scream. All goes dark.

That in itself appears to be a JtR MO and why many of the attacks didn't alert people.

Nichols didn't alert people.
Chapman said 'no' and there was a bump on the fence. The person who heard it didn't even bother to look over the fence.
Stride gently yelled out a few times and Schwartz heard it but no one else appears to have heard it or investigated.
Eddowes was murdered next to a warehouse with the door recently opened and someone inside cleaning up who heard nothing.
Kellly's murder may have involved her shouting murder. However, JtR changed his MO for this one by throwing a sheet over her because she was already lying prostrate and he couldn't slam her down.

Schwartz saw the type of frontal blitz attack we expect JtR to do.

[Sam Flynn]

Good thinking Batman !!

I've been waiting to use that line, Jon, and you've beaten me to it. Curses!

[Darryl Kenyon]

He grabbed their shoulders and pulls them forward slightly closing his grab so that his wrists are almost together and their clothes tight around their upper chest neck region. They automatically flinch back and then he uses their momentum to push them back and down with a huge slam, his fists smashing while pushing into their jaw causing the bruising. In a flash the blade is out cutting their neck before they can even realize they are lying prostrate. They can't scream. All goes dark.

They could then scream out when he first grabbed them by the shoulders[ no sound from Polly even though people were nearby ] Also if they went down with a huge slam I am sure that would have echoed round Mitre Square, plus in the case of Liz the Doctors thought she had been laid down.

[Darryl Kenyon]

What seems to be forgotten is that if BS didn't see Schwartz or pipeman for that matter until after he had thrown Liz to the ground, then why go on and kill her? Why not leave and find another victim? Which incidentally he did. He wasn't on any timescale. And what would he have been guilty of with Liz? A drunken altercation? Hardly an unlikely occurrence in Whitechapel. I am sorry but to my mind, it beggars belief that he would go on to kill her after he knows he has been seen assaulting Liz, regardless if he was Jack or not.

[Abby Normal]

What seems to be forgotten is that if BS didn't see Schwartz or pipeman for that matter until after he had thrown Liz to the ground, then why go on and kill her? Why not leave and find another victim? Which incidentally he did. He wasn't on any timescale. And what would he have been guilty of with Liz? A drunken altercation? Hardly an unlikely occurrence in Whitechapel. I am sorry but to my mind, it beggars belief that he would go on to kill her after he knows he has been seen assaulting Liz, regardless if he was Jack or not.

who knows why he would go on to kill her? perhaps anger was taking over, or since they were strangers and didn't know his name it didn't matter.

one things for sure he certainly didnt take any further time in trying to mutliate her.

[Darryl Kenyon]

Hi Darryl

Good points. But I do wonder whether there was partial strangulation in this case. The doctors make no mention of it, and there were no marks suggesting this on her neck.

Also, BS Man only seems to notice Schwartz (who was behind him when the assault begins) when Schwartz is crossing the road alongside him, and BS Man shouts Lipski.

Hi, Jon see post above over my thoughts regarding Bs man and seeing Schwartz after he assaulted Liz.
I thought the scarf pulled tight around her neck could suggest she was partially strangled also the clenching of her hand.

[Batman]

What seems to be forgotten is that if BS didn't see Schwartz or pipeman for that matter until after he had thrown Liz to the ground, then why go on and kill her?

She can identify the man that assaulted her in the middle of a series of Ripper murders.

[Darryl Kenyon]

who knows why he would go on to kill her? perhaps anger was taking over, or since they were strangers and didn't know his name it didn't matter.

one things for sure he certainly didnt take any further time in trying to mutliate her.

Abby just because they were strangers doesn't mean Schwartz couldn't give a description of him to the police, [which incidentally he did if he was telling the truth] or pick him out at a later date [which incidentally he might have done if he was telling the truth].
Abby the point about mutilation has been done to death regarding the timescale/interruption. Its what the police thought then, and although you may disagree, which is your prerogative, its what some of us think today

[Batman]

They could then scream out when he first grabbed them by the shoulders[ no sound from Polly even though people were nearby ] Also if they went down with a huge slam I am sure that would have echoed round Mitre Square, plus in the case of Liz the Doctors thought she had been laid down.

Depends how drunk they are I would think.

Nichols was very drunk. No sound.
Chapman wasn't very drunk. Said 'no' and the neighbour heard a slam against the fence.
Stride wasn't drunk. She shouted.
Eddowes was on a comedown from being very drunk and obviously still drunk. No sound.
Kelly was a different MO. Drunk but with a sheet thrown over her first maybe had time to scream.

In each case they were immediately silenced by severing the windpipe.

[Darryl Kenyon]

She can identify the man that assaulted her in the middle of a series of Ripper murders.

So I am assuming there were no assaults on women during the Autumn of 1888?
What was he guilty of? And what evidence did the police have against him?

[Batman]

So I am assuming there were no assaults on women during the Autumn of 1888?
What was he guilty of? And what evidence did the police have against him?

The thing is if she can positively ID the person who assaulted her then JtR has a problem when he goes out in that LE could be going around with her nightly to find the guy. It would be a huge lead. Forget Schwartz, Lewende and Hutchinson. Stride would be the best possible witness yet. Assaulted by a man a 15 min walk away from where a woman is then murdered.

[Joshua Rogan]

I've always been partial to the idea that Jack used a ligature/cord to strangle his victims (Dr. Brownfield's theory)
The difference between a top button being undone or being torn open may be nothing more than the difference between a tight or loose fitting top button.

I wouldn't rule out the victim being responsible for this, in a desperate attempt to remove the ligature. There doesn't seem to be a rationale need for the killer to do that, unless he was looking for a necklace?

The neck of Stride's dress was undone by Dr Blackwell's assistant, Edward Johnston;

"The dress was not undone, and I undid it to see if the chest was warm"

[Varqm]

>>But what is your basis that he was not lying or reliable.<<


Presumably this,


"In the matter of the Hungarian who said he saw a struggle between a man and a woman in the passage where the Stride body was afterwards found, the Leman-street police have reason to doubt the truth of the story."

Star Oct. 1-2 did not gave a reason why or who said there was doubt on his statement,on Oct.1 "The truth of the man's
statement is not wholly accepted. "- and was the doubt already there or after the Star interview,and on Oct.2 your post
"the Leman-street police have reason to doubt the truth of the story.".
These "doubts" were possibly based on an opinion/reason of a policeman or policemen or some talk in the station .

It's not clear either whether the Oct. 19 Swanson report that "the police report of his statement cast no doubt upon it' was based on "the report stood by itself with no negative comment" or "it was written in the police report that there was no doubt on Schwartz's story.".
At the very least there was a difference of opinion bewtween a policeman or policemen and the one who wrote the report.

It's not clear either whether the report Swanson was reading was based only on the Sept. 30 statement by Schwartz,before the Oct. 1 Star interview,or with additional info.

Schwartz was the most important witness,or his testimony was more important than Gardner/Best/Marshall,Smith/Eagle/Brown's testimony.Agreed?

Schwartz could talk to a reporter,so he had no gag order,and cetainly could talk to the Coroner.Agreed?

The coroner could summon him as a witness per Coroners Act 1887. Agreed?

Schwartz would have been forwarded by the police as an inquest witness because his testimony was important and per Swanson's OCt. 19 report
'no doubt upon it". Agreed?

Baxter would have known of Schwartz. Agreed?

If Baxter knew only the Sept. 30 interview/statement to the police,where there was 'no doubt upon it",Schwartz was legitimate and would be in the inquest.Agreed?

Why then would Baxter ignore him?

Baxter would have known of Schwartz's Star Oct 1 newspaper,the significant change of story - with the second man holding the knife and rushing forward as if to attack the intruder (BS man),at least before or on Oct. 23 when he put forth his inquest summation.Agreed?

I believe in Baxter,clearly correct just for the change in story,and maybe something else we don't know.He can't possibly trust that witness,if he put him in the inquest Schwartz might have a 3rd version of his story.Smith before then Brown was the last man to have seen Stride/man alive.There was no assault,domestic,BS man and Pipeman.

---

[c.d.]

But what is your basis that he was not lying or reliable.

---

Hi Varqm,

Only that I see no reason for him to lie and I think he would have been putting himself voluntarily into a serious situation if he had done so.

As for reliability, he did not speak English. That was a real disadvantage. I started the thread entitled "A Modern Day B.S. Man Liz Encounter" to illustrate a scene that I had witnessed in which the woman was actually the aggressor and was pulling on the man until he pushed her away. Had I not understood what was being said I would most certainly had concluded that it was the guy.

c.d.

[c.d.]

Hello CD,

Schwartz may have seen something, but if he wasn't lying, I think his version of events was greatly exaggerated and embellished.

Stride's murder has all the signs of a blitz attack. If Schwartz is to believed, Stride went into a pitch black yard with her assailant and let her guard down, or there was another attacker in a matter of minutes.

Hi Harry,

I find it very unlikely that after being pushed and after having the B.S. man threaten Schwartz that she would have voluntarily gone into the yard with the B.S. man. And if he did drag her then you have the problem of her holding on to the cachous while fighting for her life (after they already survived her being thrown to the ground). I think the B.S. man left the scene and her killer (Jack) arrived shortly thereafter.

Two attackers in a matter of minutes seems unlikely but if you consider that the first "attack" simply consisted of her being pushed it seems much more probable.

c.d.