Schwartz and Brown

[lynn cates]

cachous

Hello Mike. Quite right--those bloody cachous again. And they figure prominently in any scenario to forbid any movement except an extremely rapid take down.

It seems, then, that there could have been no turning of the body or pulling it or other struggle ante mortem. No. It must be as was said at the inquest--a quick take down, likely by the neckerchief, and she must have contracted her fists when seized. Only that, I think, can account for the cachous.

But all this suggests EXITING the yard, given the placement of the body. And it does no good to suggest a post mortem turning of the body 180 degrees. At least, not to my mind.

The best.
LC

[perrymason]

Hello Mike. Quite right--those bloody cachous again. And they figure prominently in any scenario to forbid any movement except an extremely rapid take down.

It seems, then, that there could have been no turning of the body or pulling it or other struggle ante mortem. No. It must be as was said at the inquest--a quick take down, likely by the neckerchief, and she must have contracted her fists when seized. Only that, I think, can account for the cachous.

But all this suggests EXITING the yard, given the placement of the body. And it does no good to suggest a post mortem turning of the body 180 degrees. At least, not to my mind.

The best.
LC

I think youre right Lynn....the only explanation that can work with those cashous is one that has Liz not on her guard at the moment she is attacked. If it was the scarfgrab-pulloffbalance-slitwhiledropping that Blackwell suggests, thats 2 seconds.....she must have been in a state of mind that did not anticipate an attack...at least not that quickly.

Could BSM, based on the altercation that Schwartz says he saw...outside the gates.....have soothed Liz enough in the few minutes that they would have had after that fall and his helping her up to have her completely at ease again and thinking of fresh breath? I dont know. Would his yelling at a bystander in a threatening manner scare her a bit more than the altercation? I dont know.

But I do feel that the secene described in the altercation that Schwartz says he saw occurred between 2 people who were either strangers or not familiar with each other.....and Browns to me suggests the opposite.

In which scenario would she likely have cashous in her hand... after an altercation with a stranger that caused her to fall....or one that involved a quiet chat with perhaps a friend, and seemingly with no threat to her at all implied or exhibited?

You know where Im leaning.

Cheers mate

[lynn cates]

questions, questions

Hello Mike. There can be no doubt but that she was not expecting what happened, nor was she preparing for a "customer." No. It was sudden and swift. Hence, 2 conjectures seem likely.

1. It was someone known to her and with whom she felt comfortable.

2. It was someone of which Liz was unaware. On the "Jack" scenario, he would be hiding up the yard and then he sprang on her.

But on scenario 2, there is a burning question. What on earth was Liz doing IN the yard and why is she now going out?

The best.
LC

[Sam Flynn]

his arm may have blocked her passage

... I don't get the impression that he was that close to her

[perrymason]

Hello Mike. There can be no doubt but that she was not expecting what happened, nor was she preparing for a "customer." No. It was sudden and swift. Hence, 2 conjectures seem likely.

1. It was someone known to her and with whom she felt comfortable.

2. It was someone of which Liz was unaware. On the "Jack" scenario, he would be hiding up the yard and then he sprang on her.

But on scenario 2, there is a burning question. What on earth was Liz doing IN the yard and why is she now going out?

The best.
LC

Conjecture alert.........I think its possible that Liz saw who she was waiting for enter the yard at around 12:40am, and either entered the yard by herself after she loses the man with the arm blocking her "passage".....count on Sam ......or is followed into it....maybe by the same man who she was speaking with. He bugs her again, now she is getting a little wary of this guy so she starts to head back outside the gates for some streetlight when she is grabbed from behind by the scarf.

Maybe there is a man already in there as she enters, and she thinks twice about staying in there with him, she turns and starts for the gates, he grabs her......

What I'm looking for is a way to justify the cashous, the fact she is in that yard at all, and the probable state of her emotionally just prior to the murder. If she saw someone she was waiting for enter the yard at 12:40....with the anticipation that he would be back out to get her within minutes, might she excuse herself from the friendly-ish conversation Brown saw and head into the yard to wait, maybe getting out some mints in anticipation of close conversation with someone shortly?

Someone could either be already in the yard, or enter it after her, she gets the feeling she might be better off with more street light....only a bit too late.

Just thinkin aloud Lynn.

All the best


Ill just add this.....Morris Eagle left the building after the meeting ended to take his date home, somewhere around 11-11:30pm. At 12:40am he returns to the club. He is a paid speaker, maybe returning for his pay....or to have a few songs with the boys......or.... maybe he has a second date that night, one that the lady in question expected to last all night long.

[lynn cates]

useful

Hello Mike. There is much in your post that is useful and gives me some ideas. Of course, the very good idea that she is starting to become wary is a bit problematic for stopping to take cachous. But perhaps she has been quarreling with someone she knows and then stopping to get one of the cachous might be natural. She might be walking away and then he does the take down.

I think your notion of how the take down occurred is dead on. She seems to be walking away and I can visualize his left arm pulling on the neckerchief, tightly, stifling her scream. Perhaps the cut by his right hand came next, as the coroner conjectured. This would lead to his depositing the body on the left side (How did it go? Gently laid down?) And then leaving the yard.

Thanks.

The best.
LC

[perrymason]

Hello Mike. There is much in your post that is useful and gives me some ideas. Of course, the very good idea that she is starting to become wary is a bit problematic for stopping to take cachous. But perhaps she has been quarreling with someone she knows and then stopping to get one of the cachous might be natural. She might be walking away and then he does the take down.

I think your notion of how the take down occurred is dead on. She seems to be walking away and I can visualize his left arm pulling on the neckerchief, tightly, stifling her scream. Perhaps the cut by his right hand came next, as the coroner conjectured. This would lead to his depositing the body on the left side (How did it go? Gently laid down?) And then leaving the yard.

Thanks.

The best.
LC

He scarf was also twisted tightly Lynn, to me that signals possibly that he steered her to fall to his left, nearer to the wall...so he easily could get his right hand and knife across her throat. And youre right in pointing out...she falls, and doesnt move,..nor does he move her.

It was an instant that cost Liz her life....to me that smacks of hatred and/or anger, something I wouldnt expect from someone who doesnt even know her. Maybe something a jilted boyfriend might do if he's trying to accuse her of seeing someone else now....days after he was given the boot.

I see a motive for Kidney if Liz is waiting for a date with a Jewish socialist and he finds out, maybe thats what broke them up.....but thats all I can say about him....theres no evidence he was there. But it would explain an anti semetic remark if he was seen with her too, and maybe why she felt comfortable enough to be handling cashous....I just think a motive is what we need for Liz, and some way to explain her dropping her guard....particularly if she was assaulted by BSM.

Cheers again Mate

[lynn cates]

gust of anger

Hello Mike. I agree. It looks very like a sudden gust of anger. Moreover, Kidney had motive and, perhaps, opportunity. My only problem with Kidney is that--his silliness notwithstanding--I don't think he was psychologically adept enough to restrain his guilty feelings at the inquest. But I could be wrong.

The best.
LC

[perrymason]

Hello Mike. I agree. It looks very like a sudden gust of anger. Moreover, Kidney had motive and, perhaps, opportunity. My only problem with Kidney is that--his silliness notwithstanding--I don't think he was psychologically adept enough to restrain his guilty feelings at the inquest. But I could be wrong.

The best.
LC

He sure comes off like a loony at the Inquest, so who knows what kind of man he is.....and what comments like "I believe she liked me better than any other man"..meant to him when he made them.

Cheers Lynn

[lynn cates]

dissociated

Hello Mike. He might have been so dissociated that he was in denial. It is possible. That might explain his silliness.

I favour a client who was becoming attached to her (falling in love?) and hence jealous.

Cheers.
LC

[perrymason]

Hello Mike. He might have been so dissociated that he was in denial. It is possible. That might explain his silliness.

I favour a client who was becoming attached to her (falling in love?) and hence jealous.

Cheers.
LC

Thats an interesting take as well Lynn...hadnt really run that one up the flagpole myself.

Either way it seems both you and I can agree that whomever was her company in the seconds before she was grabbed it was probably someone she felt comfortable enough with. The cashous, unless placed in her hand after she is on the ground, seem to indicate unpreparedness for a struggle with anyone as being imminent. And it appears she turns her back to her assailant and thats why he can grab her scarf from behind.

We dont know precisely why Liz and Michael split just days before this final act...and we dont know why much of her demeanor and dress suggests she was out on personal business that night...the flowers, the cashous, her lodgemate saying she was wearing her "good" evening wear, her request for a lint brush......all these things would not be something she would feel the need for to solicit what were probably dirty, smelly, very poor men. And they would cost money...money she might rent a bed with.

Yet she had that doss money, and instead suggests that she would not be returning that night....nor did she know when she might. Maybe she thinks she's running off with someone that night...or having a weekend tryst?

Either way, speculation aside, its hard to reconcile a calm and unthreatened demeanor after being pulled into the street and falling by someones hand who she apparently did not know....and who seemed like a bully by the way he verbally bullies the witness.

Browns tale does not have that issue.
Cheers mate

[Tom_Wescott]

There is a wealth of information that suggests strongly Michael Kidney DID NOT kill Liz Stride. There's not one iota of evidence to suggest that he did. Just a reminder since I see Perry Mason is on his soap box again.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[perrymason]

There is a wealth of information that suggests strongly Michael Kidney DID NOT kill Liz Stride. There's not one iota of evidence to suggest that he did. Just a reminder since I see Perry Mason is on his soap box again.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

A recently jilted lover is a far better suspect for this murder than a post mortem mutilator Tom...based on the actual evidence of course.

Motive.......a single slit of a throat does not fit with Jack the Rippers assumed motives, in that, he distinguishes himself by whats done after the murder...not by merely killing.

Someone wanted Liz dead and killed her. Thats the whole story, thats all of the evidence....and a jilted lover beats a ripping stranger anytime as a suspect based only on that simple principle.

At least the premise on which I stand has some logic attached....a serial mutilator post mortem of women deciding as he hears a cart approach to just cut once and only kill then wait for a chance to slip out the gates.....now thats fantasy.

Cheers Tom


edited to add.....you said a "wealth" of information exonerates Kidney.....what exactly do you feel is this evidence? The fact they interviewed him and didnt arrest him?

[Tom_Wescott]

you said a "wealth" of information exonerates Kidney.....what exactly do you feel is this evidence? The fact they interviewed him and didnt arrest him?

I said no such thing. I said there's a wealth of information that strongly suggests Kidney did not kill Liz. Not the same thing as 'exonerating evidence'. But damn close. Since I'm not sure anyone else really cares to know this stuff, I"ll save myself the time of posting it all. I am at work, you know. No computer at home these days.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Fisherman]

Tom Wescott writes (once again!):
"There is a wealth of information that suggests strongly Michael Kidney DID NOT kill Liz Stride. There's not one iota of evidence to suggest that he did."

There is a wealth of information that suggests that Michael Kidney could have killed Liz Stride. There´s not a iota of evidence to suggest that he did not.

Now, this is exaggerating things à la Wescott. But there you are ...!

The best,
Fisherman
(who does not have Kidney as the prime suspect - but still enjoys proportionality and common sense)