Schwartz and Brown

[Fisherman]

C.d writes:

"You both stated that she most likely didn't have the cachous in her hand when she fell to the ground. I agree 100% so I am completely at a loss to understand why Liz would take them out if still in the presence of the BS man."

But, c.d, I have explained this dozens of times! I have als pointes to the very real possibility that she was not thrown to the ground but instead fell, breaking loose from BS mans grip. Just back a few posts and you will find it - aplenty!

"I wouldn't pop those champagne corks just yet boys."

You have never read Axel Sandemose, I take it? "I always take my pleasures out in advance - if not, Iīm constantly deprived of them" ...

The best,
Fisherman

[c.d.]

Hi Fisherman,

You state:

"Each detail, in fact, lends itself admirably to the aqaintance perspective."

It does? Well, I'll be damned. Who woulda thunk it?

c.d.

[Ben]

Hi Fish,

..or just somebody realizing that his intention was not gonna work, and gave up on it.

In which case, what's wrong with just hurling her to the ground there and then? Why spin her around and throw her in the opposite direction from that which he originally intended to escort her? If that isn't a problem for you, and you don't think that's remotely strange, that's fine. I find it rather odd myself, which is why I'm inclined to the view that he never intended to take her into the street.

What I said was that since Schwartz said that she cried out three times BUT NOT VERY LOUD, he must have BELIEVED that she was not using her voice to itīs full capacity.

I don't think that necessarily follows. It's equally likely that he "believed" that Stride didn't have a particularly loud voice. I'm not convinced, incidentally, that people generally concentrate on the volume of their screams in order to ensure that they correspond precisely to the gravity of the situation.

...meaning what, Ben? That you do not agree? Sarcasm is all good and well, but it does not enlighten us much, does it?

How was that sarcastic? If I wanted to be sarcastic, I would have said. "Of course, Fisherman, your theory represents the dizzy heights of deductive brilliance to which we all aspire, and there's no way any of us mere mortals can possibly accuse it of "not adding up". As it happens, I registered genuine surprise at what I considered a rather thrusting and boastful warning not to challenge your theory. That's the opposite of sarcastic.

But are you not speaking of Smiths man here? I do not think that he is identical with Marshalls man/BS man.

I think he's very close to Marshall's man, personally. So someone else arrived on the scene in between the two visits from the Marshall/BS man? That must have been a very brief visit from Smith's man.

Nor am I in any way certain of BS man being "drunk", since that was something that was not reported in the police papers, but only in the Star.

So, by extension, you can't be "in any way certain" of BS man having a respectable appearance for precisely the same reason?

All the best,
Ben

[c.d.]

C.d writes:

"You both stated that she most likely didn't have the cachous in her hand when she fell to the ground. I agree 100% so I am completely at a loss to understand why Liz would take them out if still in the presence of the BS man."

But, c.d, I have explained this dozens of times! I have als pointes to the very real possibility that she was not thrown to the ground but instead fell, breaking loose from BS mans grip. Just back a few posts and you will find it - aplenty!

"I wouldn't pop those champagne corks just yet boys."

You have never read Axel Sandemose, I take it? "I always take my pleasures out in advance - if not, Iīm constantly deprived of them" ...

The best,
Fisherman

Hi Fisherman,

I agree that it is quite possible that she fell and I have pointed that out numerous times myself. But here is the problem and that is motive. It is generally assumed that the BS man's motive was anger possibly as a result of some slight on Liz's part. Those who hold to the anger theory point to Liz being thrown to the ground as a sign of that anger. If we remove that anger where does that leave us in terms of motive?

c.d.

[lynn cates]

motive

Hello CD. I thought that he was trying to get her to come away? At least, that was the hypothesis for motive.

The best.
LC

[c.d.]

Hi Lynn,

So are you saying that her refusal to do so made him take a knife to her throat?

c.d.

[richardnunweek]

Hello All,
Was BS JacK the Ripper?
If so then the Whitechapel killer was a brutal thug, to walk up to a woman standing at a entrance to a club, and grap hold of her. presumably by the hand or arm, to entice her away is hardly the way to charm even a prostitute.
I am getting the impression that here we have a man that would not take no for a answer, a person of great impatience, that would show accumulating violence as he approached the site of his kill.
I am drawn back to Nichols, and the witness reports, which indicate that she was initially attacked in Brady street, and sounds of running or of a chase...could that haved been Polly beiing dragged along by a hand.
I am drawn again by Eddowes bruise [ of recent origin] betweem thumb, and finger of her left hand... was this the result of a impatient killer, pulling her into the square.?
And we have coxs neice report, many years later, of her aunt hearing kelly say 'All right my luv . dont pull me along' as they emerged from the passage.
Again as the place of the kill was nearly reached so did the force.
What is to say that Annie Chapman., was not tugged through the passage, and that roughness encouraged Annie to say' No?
I know its all speculation again, but it might show what type of person we may be looking for.
Regards Richard.

[lynn cates]

scenario

Hello CD. Not a bit of it. The hypothesis, unless I am mistaken, is that BSM thought Liz was soliciting (or something of that sort) and so tried to get her to come away, pulling her. He yelled (and this is Fisherman's point), "Lizzie!" and here beginneth, more or less, the Schwartz business.

Later, they went into the yard, away from the public location on Berner, ostensibly to discuss the situation. Liz was exiting, after venting her spleen, and went for the cachous (like a smoker pauses to light up). Something infuriated BSM and he "saw red," yanked her over backward by the scarf (her grip tightening with the incipient choke), cutting her (and the scarf) as she was falling.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

hmmmm

Hello Richard. That is very interesting. Frankly, there is nothing to rule out the possibility that Jack had Liz as a girl friend, and did not initially intend to kill OR mutilate.

In fact, extrapolating from the case of Liz, we might assume that he had a relationship with just about all of the C5. If so, that could open up a great avenue of new research.

It would also answer a great many questions.

The best.
LC

[c.d.]

Hi Richard,

From my perspective, BS man as Liz's killer, has a number of problems. But let's just address Liz being thrown to the ground per Schwartz:

1. If the BS man did indeed throw Liz to the ground and then threaten Schwartz, is it not reasonable to assume that he was angry? Why then would a street veteran like Liz go off with him voluntarily and then decide that this was a good time to pop in a cachous?

2. If Liz's falling to the ground was accidental or unintentional and was not an expression of anger, why then does the BS man kill her? The anger must come later. That would make for one very volatile BS man and no argument was overheard.

It seems either way that there are some real problems here.

c.d.

[Fisherman]

Ben writes:

"In which case, what's wrong with just hurling her to the ground there and then? Why spin her around and throw her in the opposite direction from that which he originally intended to escort her? If that isn't a problem for you, and you don't think that's remotely strange, that's fine."

It is no problem at all, Ben. To begin with, what makes you think he did NOT throw her to the ground "there and then"? I think it would have happened a mere second or two after the botched attempt to drag her out into the street.
As for the spinning her round, you will be aware that it could be that she broke loose by spinning away from him - and subsequently fell. If, on the other hand, he DID throw her to the ground, why would we need to accept that he did so in the opposite direction of the street? He may have flung her to the side, and that would acount for the spinning movement!

"I don't think that necessarily follows. It's equally likely that he "believed" that Stride didn't have a particularly loud voice."
NO it is not. Not at all, actually. Then he would have used the extremely strange sentence: "She cried out for all she was worth, but she could only cry out at a low voice".
Silly suggestion, is it not? Which is why we have to acceptthat as Schwartz spoke of her keeping her voice down, IT FOLLOWS that her voice was at such a low level as to make him believe she had more to give. Letīs not leave rationality and sense behind, Ben, even if we find it hard to concede obvious points!

"I registered genuine surprise at what I considered a rather thrusting and boastful warning not to challenge your theory."

Well, Ben, then you were wrong. I welcome any alternative scenario, in order to have my own ditto thoroughly tested.

"I think he's very close to Marshall's man, personally. So someone else arrived on the scene in between the two visits from the Marshall/BS man? That must have been a very brief visit from Smith's man."

If you go through my posts, Ben, you will notice that I have left Smithīs man out. The reason is that I do not see him as being identical with the other three. We have argued over this before, and I remain at my stance that the PCīs man does not tally as well as the other do. And a PC would be a good judge, mind you.

"So, by extension, you can't be "in any way certain" of BS man having a respectable appearance for precisely the same reason?"

That is correct, Ben. But since we know that he was 5 ft 5 and sturdy and clad in dark clothes and a peaked cap, we know that he tallies well with Marshalls man and Best and Gardners ditto, and since they said the very word "respectable", I think most anybody would judge a guess that the Stars mentioning of the same word actually points to a hit a very well educated one.
Perhaps not you, though?

The best,
Fisherman

[c.d.]

Hello CD. Not a bit of it. The hypothesis, unless I am mistaken, is that BSM thought Liz was soliciting (or something of that sort) and so tried to get her to come away, pulling her. He yelled (and this is Fisherman's point), "Lizzie!" and here beginneth, more or less, the Schwartz business.

Later, they went into the yard, away from the public location on Berner, ostensibly to discuss the situation. Liz was exiting, after venting her spleen, and went for the cachous (like a smoker pauses to light up). Something infuriated BSM and he "saw red," yanked her over backward by the scarf (her grip tightening with the incipient choke), cutting her (and the scarf) as she was falling.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

I am not aware of anything on the record that shows the BS man yelled "Lizzie." There is nothing to indicate that the BS man and Liz knew each other. But if they did, who could the BS man be? Kidney? We know of no other man in her life. At least Kidney would have a motive since Liz left him. But he also has a track record of hard drinking and beating Liz. Would Liz really want to go back into a yard with him? Does he seem like somebody who could maintain a nice, quiet, reasonable "discussion?" So if it wasn't Kidney, we have to invent a lover for Liz (the man she left Kidney for?) and give him a motive. Jealousy perhaps? Maybe. But he was the winner in that Liz left Kidney for him. Did he not know that Liz was a prostitute? If you are going to be dating a prostitute, it really shouldn't come as a big surprise that she would be seeing other men. If he just found out, you would think that there would be a loud argument in which he demanded an explanation.

Seems like way too many questions to support the domestic argument.

c.d.

[Jon Guy]

I am drawn back to Nichols, and the witness reports, which indicate that she was initially attacked in Brady street, and sounds of running or of a chase...could that haved been Polly beiing dragged along by a hand.

Hi Richard

This was the incident where a woman was carried up Brady St to the London Hospital, and has absolutely nothing to do with Polly Nichols.

[Fisherman]

C.d asks:

" Those who hold to the anger theory point to Liz being thrown to the ground as a sign of that anger. If we remove that anger where does that leave us in terms of motive?"

My suggestion remains that the killers decision to kill was a very late one. I think he entered the yard with Stride in a mental disposition that was of such a character so as to allow for a feeling of ease on Strides behalf - thus the cachous, c.d!
I have thrown forward the notion that Stride was the one in the driving seat inside the yard; I think she told the man off for having acted the way he did outside the gates, and I believe that he was regretful and realized that he ran the risk of loosing her. But it was not until Stride confirmed this that he decided to kill. Like I said numerous times before, if this is correct, then it is the age-old motive of jealousy along the line "If I canīt have her, no-one else will either!" that we are looking at.
So, no anger brought into the yard, but instead a repentful mind and an anxiety and a waryness of possibly being given the slip.

This suggestion of mine should of course not be taken as word-by-word truth. It is a guideline, trying to show what kind of sentiments may have guided the developments inside the yard, c.d. But the general idea would not be far off the mark, I feel.

The best, c.d!
Fisherman

P S. On your post to Lynn Cates, saying: "There is nothing to indicate that the BS man and Liz knew each other" - have we really not gotten any further than this??

[c.d.]

Hi Fisherman,

But you are claiming that the BS man was someone other than Kidney are you not and that he and Liz had a relationship? Who was this man? You have created a character who may or may not exist and which we know absolutely nothing about. Therefore, you can make him do whatever you believe he would have done or not done in order to align with the facts. But if you are going to create a character why not jazz him up a little and give him a little pizzazz? Maybe make him the Ambassador to France or give him X Ray vision like Superman. You have total carte blanche here since you are calling the shots.

I guess we have not made much progress because I don't see any indication that the BS man knew Liz. It is just as probable that he was a disgruntled potential customer or somebody who simply took offense to her standing where she was. It is just as probable that he threw her down, cussed her out and went on his way.

c.d.

P.S. Leaving for the day. We will have to continue our discussion at a later time. Have a good weekend all.

P.P.S. These boards would be quite dull if everyone agreed on everything.