Who Was Anderson’s Witness?

[Trevor Marriott]

hey herlock
the argument is even stupider than that because there actually is evidence he was interupted! schwartz evidence.

Surely if he was interrupted he would have been seen by Schwartz exiting the yard, where else could he go if disturbed?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Abby Normal]

And again, the interruption need not have been physical but simply a little paranoia and a voice saying this is not a safe place.

c.d.

exactly!!!

[Abby Normal]

And he might not have been interrupted. Stride might have been killed by a man that wasn’t the ripper. No one is ignoring this. All that’s been said is that it’s possible that the killer had been interrupted. Michael keeps making the same erroneous point though. He says that if the killer had been interrupted then there would have been signs of that interruption. Not ‘might’ have been signs but ‘would’ have been signs. And so, according to him, no ‘evidence’ of interruption means no interruption. This is obviously incorrect though because the killer might have been interrupted just as he cut her throat and before he’d begun to do anything else. He keeps saying that there should have been evidence though as if it’s a valid point to make which it obviously isn’t. How can you begin to debate when someone is trying to claim this as a valid point?

hey herlock
the argument is even stupider than that because there actually is evidence he was interupted! schwartz evidence.

[Doctored Whatsit]

Didn't bother him in the dark corner of Mitre Square with two police patrols.

Mitre Square wasn't that dark. The Coroner asked if there was sufficient light to carry out the disembowelling, and Dr Sequiera said that there was. In Dutfield's Yard however, Eagle said that he walked down the middle of the passageway 9 foot wide, and could not say for certain whether or not there was a body there in the darkness. Louis D said that when his pony shied, he saw something there but could not distinguish what it was, and tried to feel it with his whip. He needed to light a match to tell it was a woman. I don't think anyone could have disembowelled a woman swiftly and effectively given what those two say!

I am not saying whether the killer was JtR or someone else, I am merely suggesting that being unable to eviscerate to his satifaction is as likely a reason for it not happening as being interrupted.

Also if you look at past cases of successful serial killers, they vary the killing method far more than was seen in the c5,
So this 2 Vs 1 slashing of Strides throat dosent hold any water for me either.

I like the tenacity of the arguments for and against Stride being a ripper victim, and it seems damned unlikely to me that she wasn't.

All I can say is that if she wasn't and let's say police key witness was thst Schwaztz then if that was the case, that would have been very unlucky for the police, very very unlucky.

[DJA]

Didn't bother him in the dark corner of Mitre Square with two police patrols.

[Doctored Whatsit]

And again, the interruption need not have been physical but simply a little paranoia and a voice saying this is not a safe place.

c.d.

Or as I have said elsewhere, he could simply have realised that it was too dark to effectively and safely carry out his swift disembowelling which certainly required some light.

[c.d.]

And again, the interruption need not have been physical but simply a little paranoia and a voice saying this is not a safe place.

c.d.

[Herlock Sholmes]

It is foolish to ignore the fact that Stride was killed with one cut to the throat when most of the other victims were additionally subjected to abdominal wounds as well as having their throats cut, and I personally dont buy the same killer suggestion who was intrerrupted and then contiuned on to find another victim

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

And he might not have been interrupted. Stride might have been killed by a man that wasn’t the ripper. No one is ignoring this. All that’s been said is that it’s possible that the killer had been interrupted. Michael keeps making the same erroneous point though. He says that if the killer had been interrupted then there would have been signs of that interruption. Not ‘might’ have been signs but ‘would’ have been signs. And so, according to him, no ‘evidence’ of interruption means no interruption. This is obviously incorrect though because the killer might have been interrupted just as he cut her throat and before he’d begun to do anything else. He keeps saying that there should have been evidence though as if it’s a valid point to make which it obviously isn’t. How can you begin to debate when someone is trying to claim this as a valid point?

[c.d.]

If there had been say 19 victims all with two cuts and the 20th victim only had one then I would say yes, that seems to be significant. But the C5 is way too small of a data base to draw conclusions let alone a hard and fast conclusion. There could be a reason why he only made one cut. We simply don't know. But that one cut killed Stride. I would have to imagine that that was his primary goal as opposed to being consistent with the number of cuts.

c.d

[Trevor Marriott]

It’s pointless discussing the case with anyone that proposes the laughable suggestion that there should have been evidence of interruption. This isn’t a question of opinion or interpretation. It’s a case of a 100% undeniable inarguable fact. A fact that a child could understand. If the killer was interrupted just as he cut Stride’s throat there would have been zero evidence of interruption. What could be simpler? It’s truly embarrassing that we still have to waste time and effort trying to dispel this utter drivel. Can anything in this entire case be so obvious. So blatant. So simple to understand. And yet on we go. It’s a joke tbh but it’s embarrassing one rather than a humorous one and is indicative of the utter desperation that some will stoop to just to bolster a theory.

It is foolish to ignore the fact that Stride was killed with one cut to the throat when most of the other victims were additionally subjected to abdominal wounds as well as having their throats cut, and I personally dont buy the same killer suggestion who was intrerrupted and then contiuned on to find another victim

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

It’s pointless discussing the case with anyone that proposes the laughable suggestion that there should have been evidence of interruption. This isn’t a question of opinion or interpretation. It’s a case of a 100% undeniable inarguable fact. A fact that a child could understand. If the killer was interrupted just as he cut Stride’s throat there would have been zero evidence of interruption. What could be simpler? It’s truly embarrassing that we still have to waste time and effort trying to dispel this utter drivel. Can anything in this entire case be so obvious. So blatant. So simple to understand. And yet on we go. It’s a joke tbh but it’s embarrassing one rather than a humorous one and is indicative of the utter desperation that some will stoop to just to bolster a theory.

[c.d.]

Excuse me? One cut to the throat is clear indication that the killer never wanted anything further.

Oh, so you know the killer's intent is that it? My apologies, I had no idea that you have clairvoyant powers.

c.d.

[Michael W Richards]

Maybe the fact that Liz is only cut once is telling you that there was no plan to open her up as well......just like any evidence from that murder suggests anyway.

Sorry, but my only take away from it is that she was cut once. Your extrapolation lacks supporting evidence.

c.d.

Excuse me? One cut to the throat is clear indication that the killer never wanted anything further. My supporting evidence which apparently I extroplated on is the physical evidence in 4 murders of Five so called Canonicals. All 4 had multiple cuts after the double throat cuts. And in all those cases the abdomen was mutilated. Im prone to seeing 2 or 3 by the same person, but to each their own.

I know...that old "within the realm of possibility iterruption" you and others are so fond of. Lets just say that if you want to look at scenarios that have no evidence indicative of said speculation, then why not Liz fell on the boot scraper like AP Wolf once suggested. Its within the realm of possibility, and there is no evidence to indicate that happened, so its a perfect match for your "iterruption" theorizing. Although thats going down a path that is obviously off track and seems pointless to me, you go ahead and enjoy the imaginary views.