For what reason do we include Stride?

[Darryl Kenyon]

It's so obvious.

What isn't obvious is why a man would pull a woman out into the street to try/kill her where all and sundry, anybody looking outside the upstairs socialist club front window for instance, and yes he BSM must have heard the noise emanating from the building from seeing him. Not forgetting the two witnesses of course. Was he trying to enter Victorians dumbest murderers?

[caz]

If he wasn't the killer, he made a great fall guy for whoever was. If Jack saw him manhandling Stride, and saw Schwartz watching this happen, he'd have been a happy Jacky.

Love,

Caz
X

[Abby Normal]

What isn't obvious is why a man would pull a woman out into the street to try/kill her where all and sundry, anybody looking outside the upstairs socialist club front window for instance, and yes he BSM must have heard the noise emanating from the building from seeing him. Not forgetting the two witnesses of course. Was he trying to enter Victorians dumbest murderers?

Maybe because he lost his temper trying for a long time to get her to a secluded area, and she wasn't going?

[Abby Normal]

Possibly Stride was not alone in the gateway, she was with Parcel-man. She was with him just minutes before, but on the other side of the street.

BS-man passed bye and suspected what they were up to, so he grabbed her pulling/pushing her down, as if to say 'we don't want your sort around here'.

This was the altercation witnessed by Schwartz, while Parcel-man was standing back out of sight in the shadows. Schwartz walked away diagonally across the road, his attention was on the scuffle unfolding in the gateway, not on anyone standing in the shadows.

If this is how events unfolded, Parcel-man may have been Stride's killer.

If BS-man was not her killer, then we have to believe a second man came on the scene unknown to everyone. Or, one of the men already present was the killer.
For me the choices are between Pipeman or Parcel-man. Yet we are told Pipeman followed Schwartz away from the scene, which leaves the question, what happened to Parcel-man, and was he the only man left with Stride?

so lets see
we have parcel man, pipe man or phantom man as Strides killer? Am I missing anyone?

oh yeah, BS man-the only one actually seen assaulting her right before she was killed. A man who fits not only the other witness descriptions including lawende later at the Eddowes murder sight, but also the rippers description generally.

only in ripperology. good grief.

[Abby Normal]

Hello Abby,

You are still using the term "assaulting." Are you sure that is correct?

c.d.

yes. if anyone pushes, grabs a hold of, and or throws someone to the ground its actually assault and battery. a crime even! clear as day.


not sure what your fixation on this is CD.

[Wickerman]

...
The most mysterious aspects surrounding her death (besides the obvious) are the blood clots on the back of her hand and that blood-stained abrasion under her right arm. I have no good suggestions for either. That the clots were oblong ( as posted here recently) may have been caused by drops of blood off the edge of his blade, dunno.

Hi Robert.

If you look at the testimony of PC Lamb, he makes two interesting comments that may help to explain the blood on the back of her hand.

He said:
"...I felt the wrist, but could not discern any movement of the pulse."

Apparently he held her wrist, so if he had blood on his hands, or fingers, then he was the cause of the blood transfer.

But where would he get the blood from?

He tells us:
"Some of the blood was in a liquid state, and had run towards the kitchen door of the club. A little - that nearest to her on the ground - was slightly congealed."

How would anyone know whether blood was liquid or congealed in total darkness?
Blood looks like oil in the dark, so the only way you can tell is to touch it, put your fingers in it.

The issue of her right hand being stained with blood only came up after PC Lamb had testified, so he was never asked if he had blood on his hands.

[Bridewell]

Why would he kill her after being seen by two witnesses?

Because he was a risk taker and thought he'd get away with it, as indeed (if he was the killer) he did.

[Bridewell]

Agreed, Observer. If you change attacked to pushed the incident can be seen in a whole different light. Whitechapel was a rough place filled with drunk workingmen. Is it really so far fetched that a woman out by herself late at night right after the pubs closed got hassled a bit by some drunk?

c.d.

Same woman got attacked twice in the space of about 5 minutes by two different men? Not impossible but rather unlikely.

[Bridewell]

yes. if anyone pushes, grabs a hold of, and or throws someone to the ground its actually assault and battery. a crime even! clear as day.


not sure what your fixation on this is CD.

Exactly. An assault is defined, in English law, as the use of violence or the attempt, threat or offer to do so. BS Man assaulted Stride. The only issue is whether or not that assault was such that it killed her. I believe that it was - because I don't recall ever hearing of any individual being assaulted twice in quick succession by two unconnected individuals. If an event is as improbable as that is I'm inclined to believe that it didn't happen so, on the balance of probabilities (for me) BS Man, whoever he was, killed Stride.

[Observer]

Same woman got attacked twice in the space of about 5 minutes by two different men? Not impossible but rather unlikely.

Where do you get the five minutes from?

[Bridewell]

Where do you get the five minutes from?

I get the about five minutes from the fact that the incident witnessed by Schwartz was about 12.45am and the body was discovered about 1am. That's a total time period of 15 minutes from start to finish. As the putative second assailant got clean away I think about 5 minutes is reasonable for the gap between the end of the first assault and the beginning of a second. That's my line of thought. If you think I'm a long way out, I'd be interested in knowing why.

How long did Blackwell think Stride had been dead when he arrived at 1.16am? (Sorry - don't have my copy of The Ultimate with me but wasn't it about 20 minutes?).

[Abby Normal]

I get the about five minutes from the fact that the incident witnessed by Schwartz was about 12.45am and the body was discovered about 1am. That's a total time period of 15 minutes from start to finish. As the putative second assailant got clean away I think about 5 minutes is reasonable for the gap between the end of the first assault and the beginning of a second. That's my line of thought. If you think I'm a long way out, I'd be interested in knowing why.

How long did Blackwell think Stride had been dead when he arrived at 1.16am? (Sorry - don't have my copy of The Ultimate with me but wasn't it about 20 minutes?).

No your not at all. As a matter of fact your one of the few people on this thread thats any near close in terms of rational thinking. Thank goodness.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Robert.

If you look at the testimony of PC Lamb, he makes two interesting comments that may help to explain the blood on the back of her hand.

He said:
"...I felt the wrist, but could not discern any movement of the pulse."

Apparently he held her wrist, so if he had blood on his hands, or fingers, then he was the cause of the blood transfer.

But where would he get the blood from?

He tells us:
"Some of the blood was in a liquid state, and had run towards the kitchen door of the club. A little - that nearest to her on the ground - was slightly congealed."

How would anyone know whether blood was liquid or congealed in total darkness?
Blood looks like oil in the dark, so the only way you can tell is to touch it, put your fingers in it.

The issue of her right hand being stained with blood only came up after PC Lamb had testified, so he was never asked if he had blood on his hands.

Well thats possible i guess.
But considering she was the only one known to have a bleeding wound and blood on her, i think the most reasonable way was she got in on herself without some kind of double blood tranfer.

As in her hand goes instinctively to the wound, blood oozes onto her hand.

[Wickerman]

Well thats possible i guess.
But considering she was the only one known to have a bleeding wound and blood on her, i think the most reasonable way was she got in on herself without some kind of double blood tranfer.

As in her hand goes instinctively to the wound, blood oozes onto her hand.

If you are startled by a slice to the throat, without thinking you would grab your neck with your hand. Any blood would then be in the palm of the hand. This was stated by Phillips to be on the back of her hand and on her wrist.
More consistent as evidence of transfer from another hand, the wrist is where you feel for the pulse.

[Wickerman]

Same woman got attacked twice in the space of about 5 minutes by two different men? Not impossible but rather unlikely.

Swanson, when making reference to the time between the assault and the body being discovered wrote:
".....the murderous action would I think be a question of so many minutes, five at least, ten at most, so that I respectfully submit it is not clearly proved that the man that Schwartz saw is the murderer, although it is clearly the more probable of the two"

Which was supplemented with a footnote (by Lushington?), which reads in part:
"...But the suggestion is that Schwartz' man may have left her, she being a prostitute then accosted or was accosted by another man, & there was time enough for this to take place & for this other man to murder her before 1.0"
Ultimate, pp.123/4.

As long as these sentiments are expressed by officials then modern students of the case should keep them in mind as viable solutions.