Schwartz and Brown

[c.d.]

Hi Lynn,

Liz might have closed up shop for the evening as you say and was not actively soliciting. But what if she were appoached by a customer? Was her financial situation such that she could pass up an opportunity? Maybe.

I understood your story and the immediate effects of anger. But let's not forget that we have no evidence that Liz had a lover at the time. Even if she left Kidney for someone else we don't know the status of the relationship at this point. We are also assuming that jealousy was a motive and that this jealousy just happened to have boiled over on the same night that Jack was out doing his thing.

c.d.

[lynn cates]

es geht immer weider

Hello CD. Thanks. Further:

"Liz was a prostitute, that we know. So yes, I am suggesting that she resorted to prostitution later that evening. I don't really consider that a big leap of faith. Women like Liz had to be practical to survive."

In fact, if only one of the C5 were a prostitute, it was Liz. She was registered (if I recall) as one in Sweden. And I daresay she turned many a trick near Whitechapel. But I am suggesting that she closed up shop for the evening. We all need time away from work.

"Your story was quite interesting to say the least. It is certainly possible that Liz's killer (if it was a domestic) made up his mind beforehand to cut her throat. Like so many other things associated with this murder, I am forced to go with what I think is more probable."

But my point was, that if she hurled an insult at his, well, you know, then he could have fallen into a fit of passion (not THAT kind, I mean rage) and cut almost impulsively.

"I am still not clear as to your point with regards to whether Liz was entering or exiting the yard. Do we have conclusive proof one way or another?"

Proof concerns deduction. Evidence concerns induction. So of course, we have no proof (and that would be so even if it were caught on tape).

Here's a fun (well, maybe) thing to do. If you are married or have a lady friend, try reenacting the Dutfield business. I have twice or thrice. It is a REAL eye opener! Don't forget the cachous and hence no scuffle or spinning.

The best.
LC

[c.d.]

Hi Lynn,

Liz was a prostitute, that we know. So yes, I am suggesting that she resorted to prostitution later that evening. I don't really consider that a big leap of faith. Women like Liz had to be practical to survive.

Your story was quite interesting to say the least. It is certainly possible that Liz's killer (if it was a domestic) made up his mind beforehand to cut her throat. Like so many other things associated with this murder, I am forced to go with what I think is more probable.

I am still not clear as to your point with regards to whether Liz was entering or exiting the yard. Do we have conclusive proof one way or another?

c.d.

[lynn cates]

questions

Hello CD. Great questions all.

"I agree that Liz's behavior tends to indicate that she was on a date but that is only earlier in the evening. Dates can go bad."

Are you suggesting that Liz got a bit soured and thought, "Well now, if that's how 'tis, I may as well turn a trick!"?

"Victorian gentlemen aside, and be it slaps, pu[n]ches etc., I would expect that there would have been a natural progression -- loud argument, blows to the face (that would have left a mark), more argument, and then the [t]hroat cut. Now it is certainly possible that her killer (if it were a domestic) went right for her throat but I find that idea less probable than a progressive escalation in anger."

Now this is CRUCIAL. I have agitated ze little grey cells without mercy. (Oops, that's Poirot. Sorry.) Why a sudden calm AND THEN the knife? I can only speculate from a real life instance. I know of a case (family related) where a lady decided to have sex with a rather rough date. (He actually carried a knife.) As soon as he undressed, she mocked his, umm, well, you get the idea. Then she commenced to laugh. He stabbed her (not fatally--she recovered). My point is this. Liz may have told her ex-lover (?) to bugger off and then made an insulting reference. (Perhaps a comparison to her new boyfriend.) I put it to you that something like that could have sent him over the edge.

"I am not quite sure how we know whether Liz was going into or coming out of the yard. Wouldn't the direction she was facing be a function of how she was laid down?'

It would indeed. But there can be no spinning movement ante mortem lest the cachous spill. If not for those, anything would have been possible and Jack, likely, would take the credit for this kill.

The best.
LC

[c.d.]

Hi Lynn,

I agree that Liz's behavior tends to indicate that she was on a date but that is only earlier in the evening. Dates can go bad. What if her date thought he was going to get a freebie and Liz starts talking money? End of date.

Victorian gentlemen aside, and be it slaps, puches etc., I would expect that there would have been a natural progression -- loud argument, blows to the face (that would have left a mark), more argument, and then the rhroat cut. Now it is certainly possible that her killer (if it were a domestic) went right for her throat but I find that idea less probable than a progressive escalation in anger.

I am not quite sure how we know whether Liz was going into or coming out of the yard. Wouldn't the direction she was facing be a function of how she was laid down?

c.d.

[lynn cates]

moreover

Hello CD. Your dictum:

"You mentioned that in Victorian times women slapped gentlemen. If that was the rule how do you account for battered women like Liz and the treatment she received at the hands of Kidney?"

1. I don't think Kidney (or LVP men in general) slapped. Yet they did batter. They used more violent techniques than slapping.

2. Kidney was no gentleman.

The best.
LC

[lynn cates]

points to be made

Hello CD. In order.

"I don't understand why you have trouble with the idea of Liz soliciting that night. Could you elaborate?"

1. She seems to have been with one man for over an hour and socializing with him. For the serious prostitute, time is money.

2. She seemed to expect something like a big date. Notice her arrangements. A. Not paying for her bed. B. Dressing up. C.Trying to procure a lint brush. D. A flower, etc. Surely supererogatory for a prostitute.

3. It looks like she may be turning down a client. "Not tonight . . ."

4. Location, location, location. Next the club on meeting night is not a good place to be. "But wait, Lynn, couldn't she get customers there? Isn't this like working a convention?" Possibly. And she MIGHT even take them to the dark 18' between the kitchen door and gates. And I might think this IF ONLY LIz were killed going INTO the yard. She wasn't.

Next.

"Here's something that occurred to me and for what it is worth -- Liz was allegedly seen in the company of men earlier in the evening. It seems a bit strange therefore that no alcohol was found in her body. I can't remember but she was a drinker was she not? Could she have had an upset stomach and therefore didn't want to make it worse by consuming alcohol? Dutfield's Yard had a privy. Do the math."

Would a lady with gastric distress spend a lot of time kissing and otherwise hanging all over her potential customers? But I waive that.

Right. So she has the spat with BS man. He leaves. Now she goes to the privy. Finishes. Comes out and then Jack attacks from behind. Where was he waiting? Now this would work fine IF he were a club member waiting at the door for a passing victim. Also, club member Jack would need, not only a lucky encounter with a female, but a moment when no other club member is around.

Likely?

The best.
LC

[jason_c]

Hi Lynn,

I don't understand why you have trouble with the idea of Liz soliciting that night. Could you elaborate?

Here's something that occurred to me and for what it is worth -- Liz was allegedly seen in the company of men earlier in the evening. It seems a bit strange therefore that no alcohol was found in her body. I can't remember but she was a drinker was she not? Could she have had an upset stomach and therefore didn't want to make it worse by consuming alcohol? Dutfield's Yard had a privy. Do the math.

c.d.

A bunch of cachous have turned her meeting into a hot date.

[c.d.]

Hi Lynn,

I'll address some of your questions. When I stated that no one heard an argument, I meant that no one heard an argument coming from the yard. Now it is possible that the singing drowned it out but it Mrs. Diemschutz and Morris Eagle were both very adamant that they believed they would have heard any loud sounds coming from the yard and they did not. Could it have been an argument in low tones as Fisherman has argued? It's possible but I see it as much more probable that if that argument ended in Liz's death that voices would have been raised.

You mentioned that in Victorian times women slapped gentlemen. If that was the rule how do you account for battered women like Liz and the treatment she received at the hands of Kidney?

c.d.

[c.d.]

Hi Lynn,

I don't understand why you have trouble with the idea of Liz soliciting that night. Could you elaborate?

Here's something that occurred to me and for what it is worth -- Liz was allegedly seen in the company of men earlier in the evening. It seems a bit strange therefore that no alcohol was found in her body. I can't remember but she was a drinker was she not? Could she have had an upset stomach and therefore didn't want to make it worse by consuming alcohol? Dutfield's Yard had a privy. Do the math.

c.d.

[harry]

Fisherman,
What I do say is that the man Brown saw,is the more likely to be the person fitting a description that could classed as in a friendly situation,inspiring confidence and trust.Brown states this person was in shadow with face turned away,and leaning on the wall,much the same as reported by Long and Lawende of the persons they saw.So Brown was not ,as he himself states,in a position to give any helpfull information of the person.However this person was in the vicinity,could have walked with,or followed Stride to Berner Street.Could have been Pipeman.Could,for those who fancy a killer already in the yard,have been there whenBS man came by.The opportunities existed.He could have been the Ripper.
Regards.

[Fisherman]

C.d writes:

"I did misquote you. Actually you said "a man with aspirations of becoming her spouse." But I think we can let that go."

We can, c.d!

"even if it was an argument (which it probably was), it doesn't necessarily indicate that the two knew each other.

True -and true again. It is not the argument bit that is the better pointer to this; itīs the dragging of Stride into the street and the cachous.


"We also don't know if Liz had a lover at the time. If not, the whole domestic argument would seem to lose a little steam."

To say the least, c.d! But this is much a matter of which order we recognize. To my mind, it is not as if we have to prove that she had a lover before we can go looking for confirmation of it - it is instead the built-in details of the case that seem to imply that she knew her killer well!

"I have NEVER argued that every killing in the East End was Jack's work ... But when you have a prostitute with her throat cut during this time period, it would seem reasonable to think Jack for starters."

It would. And it was. And they should. And they did. All rational thinking tells us not to dismiss Jack out of hand. But when we take the case on itīs own, when we learn about the respectable 5 ft 5 man, when we get aquainted with what happened in the yard, then we can clearly see that out of the five so called canonical cases, more or less ALL the deviations belong to one case and one case only - Stride.
When this insight sinks in, we need to ask ourselves: "Right - is there anything that conclusively points to the serial killer at loose? And both you and me know, c.d, that such a thing was never there in Dutfieldīs Yard.

So, a case full of deviations from the laid-down rules supplied by Jack in all other cases, and not a single shred of evidence about that tallies with his earlier work. Even the type of cut to the neck - the one thing that seems to tally on the surface - is different!

The conclusion is an inevitable one, c.d, Stride was in all probability not Jackīs. And as if this was not enough of a disappointment to those who follow the Ripper line of inquiry, an alternative scenario is written on the wall in BIG letters.

The best, c.d!
Fisherman

[lynn cates]

fit

Hello CD. Permit me.

1. Why is it necessary to go back into the yard to discuss things? Why not just do it on the street?

Indeed. it seems that Liz should not even be in the yard unless she were a club member. But she was. Does it make sense that she was soliciting at the gate and then went in AND came out before her contract was fulfilled? Nearly every scenario defies logic with Liz being in the yard, but soliciting and exiting?

2. Why does no one hear any argument?

Well, Schwartz did and I suppose pipe man did. Same with BS. Inside the club? Perhaps the music was loud.

3. If it was Kidney, why does he stick around Whitechapel after being seen by Schwartz and the Pipe Man?

Kidney? Not a good suspect, at least, not after questioning,

4. Why no marks on Liz's face indicating that she had been slapped as the argument escalated?

I don't mean to sound sexist, but I think the lady slapped the gentlemen in LV times.

[5.]To me, the domestic angle is pure speculation.

Absolutely. And it has its holes. But I cannot get to square 1 on the Ripper theory with Liz soliciting.

CD, I think you would do invaluable service if you could do a forensic reconstruction of Liz's murder from the point of view of the pro-Jack camp. Please take account of at least some of the items that Fisherman does, and see if you can wangle a fit. I swear I cannot.

The best.
LC

[c.d.]

Sorry, Fish I did misquote you. Actually you said "a man with aspirations of becoming her spouse." But I think we can let that go.

Schwartz may have told the interpreter that he thought they were arguing but that is all he could say because he didn't understand English and he was only there for a few seconds. And even if it was an argument (which it probably was), it doesn't necessarily indicate that the two knew each other.

We also don't know if Liz had a lover at the time. If not, the whole domestic argument would seem to lose a little steam.

I have NEVER argued that every killing in the East End was Jack's work. I have been on the boards for quite some time and I have NEVER heard anybody making that argument. It is a quite ludicrous argument and a total straw man. The only people who make it are the anti-Jack crowd who try to put words in other people's mouths. But when you have a prostitute with her throat cut during this time period, it would seem reasonable to think Jack for starters.

c.d.

[Fisherman]

C.d writes:

"With respect to marriage, in your post #119 you state "...a man with aspirations of becoming her wife." If I misinterpreted that, my aplogies"

A man with aspirations of becoming her ... wife??


You should have grown suspicious at that stage, c.d, really you should!

Once again - the level of his commitment is something we cannot know at this stage. He may have been married already for all we know, and just wanted an affair on the side. Who can say?
But I do think that people who are ready to kill for love are people who are seriously commited, c.d!

"Where did Schwartz state that he had heard an argument between the BS man and Liz? He didn't speak English so how could he testify as to what he overheard?"

Itīs a good thing there are interpretors then, c.d! And Schwartz stated that the two struck up some form of conversation, resulting in BS man grabbing her and subsequently throwing her to the ground. It would, I think, be a fair assumption to say that they were having an argument when this occurred.

"Easy with the chain of evidence argument there, Fish. You'll strain your rotator cuff patting yourself on the back. (insert smiley face). Of course it won't break since it is based on speculation and any perceived weak link will be bolstered by more speculation."

C.d, unless you have realized this, any murder investigation where the killer is absent is a chain of speculation, based on the evidence.

If a man is found with a hole in his forehead, we can speculate that he was stabbed. Or we can speculate that he was shot. But based on what we have before us, we speculate.
And the beauty of the scenario I am suggesting, is that it offers credible explanations to all the details involved - which is exactly what any investigator is looking for.

If Javk killed her, jumping her from behind; why was she preparing to munch on some cachous?? Would she not have other things on her mind?

If Jack was the one who pulled her into the street, why would he do such a thing?

If it was Jack, why was he up and about so early? If the oblong clots of blood on the back of her right hand corresponded to fingerprints - what was Jack doing with that hand of hers? If it was Jack throwing her to the ground, why would she keep her voice lowered when crying out? And why would she go with him into the yard afterwards? How did she manage to stay un-eviscerated? What was Jack doing in a district not known for itīs feeble prostitutes?
Why?
How?
What?
When?

My suggestion can only be a theory, lacking all sorts of tangible proof. But that does not tell it apart from any other suggestion. It does, however, offer credible explanations to all of the above points - if we believe in an aquainted killer.

If it is so easy to produce any sort of credible scenario, then tell me how you see Jack killing her? How do you explain all of these details without having to settle for some pretty wild speculating? Iīll tell you - you canīt, quite simply. But be my guest and try, c.d!

"As for Jack, yes, that argument is based on speculation as well. But at least if you believe that he killed Kate that night then we know he was out and nearby. That seems to put him in the lead over some imagined jealous lover."

How could it possibly do that, c.d - when we both know that none of the typical traits of a Ripper killing was about, and when we know that no law stated that only Jack was allowed to kill that night? Letīs just realize that this is all you have to nail Jack for the Stride killing - he was active that night at that approximate time and in that apprximate area. And BEFORE Stride is killed, you lay down the rules: No matter WHERE in Whitechapel/Spitalfields it happens, no matter WHEN it happens, no matter HOW it happens - if a woman is killed by way of knife, then it HAS to be Jacks work.
Itīs having the answer ready before the question is asked. It is doing it the wrong way. It is interesting - but not enough at any stretch.

The very best, c.d. You put up a brave and stylish fight, all other things aside, and I respect you for that!
Fisherman