For what reason do we include Stride?

[Herlock Sholmes]

But how likely is it that the interruption occurred exactly before the killer could inflict any more damage? We know that the "true" Ripper was a fast worker, and I find it hugely improbable that the interruption happened, as it were, on the "b" of the "bang" (to quote Linford Christie).

I take your point Sam but I’d say that an interruption was as likely to happen at any one time as opposed to another. Couldn’t we also question the likelihood of another prostitute having her throat cut so soon after and located at a site that provides a reasonable time frame? If Eddowes had been killed say two hours later at the same spot it would have been far more problematical to attempt to connect the two. As I said, I’m undecided. Stride might very well not have been a ripper killing and it may be correct to say that, on balance, it might have been less rather than more likely. But I still say that it’s a reasonable possibility. Personally, I’d say that she was a more likely ripper victim than Tabram for example but we can’t categorically discount Tabram.

[Abby Normal]

But how likely is it that the interruption occurred exactly before the killer could inflict any more damage? We know that the "true" Ripper was a fast worker, and I find it hugely improbable that the interruption happened, as it were, on the "b" of the "bang" (to quote Linford Christie).

Hi sam
but what about nichols? Seems the ripper was disturbed also before starting the mutilation/ organ extraction. And surely nichols is a ripper victim.

[Sam Flynn]

But Sam isn’t that a case of viewing events almost as if the interruption was planned? Obviously that’s not what you’re suggesting but an interruption could have occurred at any time. Whether it was just after the killer had cut her throat once or 5 seconds later or ten seconds.

But how likely is it that the interruption occurred exactly before the killer could inflict any more damage? We know that the "true" Ripper was a fast worker, and I find it hugely improbable that the interruption happened, as it were, on the "b" of the "bang" (to quote Linford Christie).

[Herlock Sholmes]

I suppose my manner of responding is interpreted as some diss to anyone who believes in considering an interruption, its not, its readdress of a belief that has perpetuated the study for some time now.. by the majority of people no less. The obvious here is that Liz Stride was simply killed by knife. As was Mrs Brown. That people search for answers as to why a Ripper would kill like this isn't surprising, but I contend it appears by the evidence she died because someone wanted to kill her. He was not, apparently, preoccupied in the slightest about any additional activities...she was untouched after dropped there. In the previous 2 cases, less than 2 weeks apart, it appears by the evidence that the killer wanted a dead woman to cut into. The differing motivations suggest different types of killers. Strides killer may have killed in a quick fit of anger, the act may have taken 2 seconds by the medical testimony, Annies killer may have planned in advance what he wanted to cut.

Im at a loss to see why a fresh look at this inclusion isn't something most would consider logical, based on just the evidence, but to each his own.

There’s nothing wrong with a fresh look but that’s not what you’re saying as the passage quoted below shows:

Ive become tired of being diplomatic on this most obvious point all these years,so.... Liz was very clearly notkilled by a Ripper and many of the clubs senior staffers including the nights speaker definately lied about certain aspects of what actually transpired

The is the opposite of a call for open debate I’m afraid. You’re basically saying that this issue is black and white and that Stride inarguably wasn’t a victim of the ripper (and you may be correct or incorrect)

.He was not, apparently, preoccupied in the slightest about any additional activities...she was untouched after dropped there (or he could have been interrupted). In the previous 2 cases, less than 2 weeks apart, it appears by the evidence that the killer wanted a dead woman to cut into (and he might have with Stride but he was interrupted). The differing motivations suggest different types of killers (unless he was simply interrupted.). Strides killer may have killed in a quick fit of anger (very possibly, or he could have been interrupted), the act may have taken 2 seconds by the medical testimony (as he might have been interrupted), Annies killer may have planned in advance what he wanted to cut (so might Liz’ killer but he was interrupted)

Nothing in the evidence comes anywhere near to categorically proving that Stride wasn’t a ripper victim. She may or she may not have been. We’re clearly unlikely to ever agree on this Michael but the difference between our viewpoints is that I accept the possibility of both propositions because the evidence cannot furnish us with a definitive verdict.

Im undecided. You appear to believe that it’s a ‘given’ that she wasn’t. Abby appears to be strongly of the opinion that she was. Neither of you are idiots. You are both well versed in the case. And if we asked every ripperologists their opinion I’d guess at a pretty mixed bag of verdicts. At the very least this shows that this issue isn’t a done deal.

[Herlock Sholmes]

So, being "spooked" mid-cut doesn't explain Stride's somewhat lesser injury, and being "spooked" between the first cut and a subsequent cut a second or two later would require a ridiculously fine-tuned interruption. I don't buy either explanation, I'm afraid. I think it far more likely that Stride's killer did all he intended to do with her and was out of there well before Dymshitz arrived on the scene.

But Sam isn’t that a case of viewing events almost as if the interruption was planned? Obviously that’s not what you’re suggesting but an interruption could have occurred at any time. Whether it was just after the killer had cut her throat once or 5 seconds later or ten seconds.

[Michael W Richards]

There were two cuts to Nichols' and Chapman's throats, one less extensive than the other, so was the killer "spooked" into committing the shorter cut in either case? I don't think so, because he went on to make a longer, even deeper cut immediately afterwards... almost 100% certainly within a second or two of making the first cut.

So, being "spooked" mid-cut doesn't explain Stride's somewhat lesser injury, and being "spooked" between the first cut and a subsequent cut a second or two later would require a ridiculously fine-tuned interruption. I don't buy either explanation, I'm afraid. I think it far more likely that Stride's killer did all he intended to do with her and was out of there well before Dymshitz arrived on the scene.

I missed this at first, but nice to see some agreement for a change Sam.

[Michael W Richards]

If you are absolutely, inarguably correct in everything you postulate on this issue. And it really is so obvious. Would you consider it stupidity or dishonesty that causes most people to disagree with you?

I suppose my manner of responding is interpreted as some diss to anyone who believes in considering an interruption, its not, its readdress of a belief that has perpetuated the study for some time now.. by the majority of people no less. The obvious here is that Liz Stride was simply killed by knife. As was Mrs Brown. That people search for answers as to why a Ripper would kill like this isn't surprising, but I contend it appears by the evidence she died because someone wanted to kill her. He was not, apparently, preoccupied in the slightest about any additional activities...she was untouched after dropped there. In the previous 2 cases, less than 2 weeks apart, it appears by the evidence that the killer wanted a dead woman to cut into. The differing motivations suggest different types of killers. Strides killer may have killed in a quick fit of anger, the act may have taken 2 seconds by the medical testimony, Annies killer may have planned in advance what he wanted to cut.

Im at a loss to see why a fresh look at this inclusion isn't something most would consider logical, based on just the evidence, but to each his own.

[Sam Flynn]

And yet the killer of Chapman and Nichols did take the time to cut twice, when as you say one cut would have been enough. So why?

A question for another thread, perhaps. One cut was enough for Eddowes and Stride but they differed in extent.

[harry]

The person cutting Strides throat would have been working in almost complete darkness,so his actions would have been more by touch than by sight.Pehaps also there might have been slight resistence at the beginning,so two cuts,just to make sure,is a reasonable explanation.

[Joshua Rogan]

He didn't cut Eddowes' throat twice, so the "two cuts" thing is a bit moot if you ask me. That being the case, we're left with the "interrupted during/immediately after cutting the throat" scenario which, as I've pointed out, I find very hard to believe. To me, the sole purpose of the interruption hypothesis is to keep Stride within the Canon by explaining away the absence of mutilations, when the most parsimonious explanation is that her killer had no intention of mutilating her.

And yet the killer of Chapman and Nichols did take the time to cut twice, when as you say one cut would have been enough. So why?

[c.d.]

The difficulty from my perspective is that he would have to have been "spooked" in the middle of his thrust of the knife. I find this very difficult to believe for a man like JTR, who was by now well-practised in quickly delivering deep and extensive wounds to a woman's throat.

Hello Sam,

I think we are dealing with two concepts here. Paranoia and being "spooked." I would think that he would have been somewhat paranoid simply being out and about that night knowing that the police were out looking for him and that if he is caught he most likely will be hanged. Given that assumption simply being in proximity to the club where he could see lights and hear the people singing had to have ramped that up. You seem to be implying that the mutilations would have instantly begun after the cut to the throat. But if Stride struggled or called out or even if he wanted to assure himself of the situation, I can see a minute or two delay. Now this is where the "spooked"comes in if he hears a door open or some other type of noise or even if he decides the whole situation is just too risky. There are other women in Whitechapel and so he bolts.

c.d.

[Abby Normal]

He didn't cut Eddowes' throat twice, so the "two cuts" thing is a bit moot if you ask me. That being the case, we're left with the "interrupted during/immediately after cutting the throat" scenario which, as I've pointed out, I find very hard to believe. To me, the sole purpose of the interruption hypothesis is to keep Stride within the Canon by explaining away the absence of mutilations, when the most parsimonious explanation is that her killer had no intention of mutilating her.

hi Sam
ahh. I think I see what your getting at-after the neck cut and before he started the mutilations-its a short time, and odd that he would be interrupted at exactly that moment. got it. somewhat agree.

however, specifically with stride, I think the killer, the ripper, was perhaps having a hard time with her, trying to get her to a secluded spot and may have lost his temper and cut her throat in anger, before fleeing because of the commotion he caused and being seen by Schwartz.

[Sam Flynn]

Anyone making a second throat cut directly after the first is almost guaranteed to get blood all over their hands. Best to wait a few seconds until blood pressure has dropped right off.

He didn't cut Eddowes' throat twice, so the "two cuts" thing is a bit moot if you ask me. That being the case, we're left with the "interrupted during/immediately after cutting the throat" scenario which, as I've pointed out, I find very hard to believe. To me, the sole purpose of the interruption hypothesis is to keep Stride within the Canon by explaining away the absence of mutilations, when the most parsimonious explanation is that her killer had no intention of mutilating her.

[Joshua Rogan]

Anyone making a second throat cut directly after the first is almost guaranteed to get blood all over their hands. Best to wait a few seconds until blood pressure has dropped right off.

[Sam Flynn]

im afraid I don't know what your getting at sam. you seem to be contradicting yourself. if he didn't need two cuts, theres no in between. he merely got spooked and left after he cut her throat.

There were two cuts to Nichols' and Chapman's throats, one less extensive than the other, so was the killer "spooked" into committing the shorter cut in either case? I don't think so, because he went on to make a longer, even deeper cut immediately afterwards... almost 100% certainly within a second or two of making the first cut.

So, being "spooked" mid-cut doesn't explain Stride's somewhat lesser injury, and being "spooked" between the first cut and a subsequent cut a second or two later would require a ridiculously fine-tuned interruption. I don't buy either explanation, I'm afraid. I think it far more likely that Stride's killer did all he intended to do with her and was out of there well before Dymshitz arrived on the scene.