For what reason do we include Stride?

[Jon Guy]

so basically after the initial assault in the street it basically continues as he forces her into the yard forces her to the ground and cuts her throat?

I don`t even think there was an initial assault in the street, Abby
I don`t recall Schwartz stating it took place in the street.
Both statements by Schwartz (both translated into English by different people) state that the assault took place in the passageway ( where the body is found)

Judging by the mud on her dress, it seems she was only thrown down once that evening, and that was when she was killed.
If BS Man had thrown her on the floor, and them she was thrown on the floor again by the phantom killer she would have more mud on her, or mud on her in other places that correspond with how she was lying

[Darryl Kenyon]

Following on from my last post. Liz then goes to the police says she was thrown to the ground on a night when nothing else happens. A known prostitute being assaulted by a prospective client. It probably would have been logged and a description taken. But that would have been with possibly, dozens more such incidents if indeed Liz would have gone to the police instead of just putting it down to one of the dangers of her profession.

[Darryl Kenyon]

Hi Batman I think the point should be made that he needn't have done anything after assaulting Liz, [neither kill her nor Kate]. He could have just gone home, cooled down realizing that he had been compromised and struck on another night, in a different area [let's say further west of Aldgate for instance]. Then there would be virtually nothing to connect him to Jack.

[Sam Flynn]

They would do what they always did with a suspect that they developed. Monitor them. Put plainclothed officers watching their every move.

In case he pushed someone else?

[Batman]

They would do what they always did with a suspect that they developed. Monitor them. Put plainclothed officers watching their every move.

They knew back then either they caught him in the act or a witness to a murder could ID him to testify so they could bring charges against him.

Also remember that investigators had noted the convergence in time between walking from Berner St., to Dukes St., and that it was possible Strides killer had happened upon Eddowes coming out of the drunk tank.

Anyway, they were monitoring people just on suspicion by getting tip-offs about them, let alone an actual attack.

[c.d.]

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

Given the frequency of misogyny against women in Whitechapel in general, I don't think the police are going to look at a woman being pushed and say by God that has to be our man drop all other investigations.

c.d.

[c.d.]

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.

Hello Batman,

But if Stride identifies the B.S. man as the man that assaulted her what is he charged with? Simply pushing a woman correct? Easy enough to make up a story to cover his actions. What would the penalty be? A small fine at best.

And how in the world could he be charged with Eddowes murder or even connected to it? That would seem to be a stretch.

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.

[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.

[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.

---

[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"

[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.

[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]

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]

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