Who Was Anderson’s Witness?

[caz]

The Victimology? Is there any direct evidence that just as the 2 women who are assumed to be killed by Jack prior to Liz Stride that Liz was also actively soliciting? I suppose you consider that a trivial characteristic, when in fact it enabled the killer to have the women facilitate what he needed. Some modicum of privacy and time to cut. It allowed a stranger to get the victims into the dark, because thats where their trade takes place.

If you at least accept that it was probably Nichols and Chapman who chose their final destinations, if they were indeed both 'actively soliciting' and took their killer somewhere that suited their purpose, then it shouldn't take a lot of effort to accept that Dutfield's Yard was where Stride chose to be when she was murdered. That doesn't tell us what her purpose was in being there, nor what her killer supposed it might be. From his point of view, ripper or not, she could have been there in the hope of finding a paying customer, or to get work at the club, or even to meet a friend. We just don't know, and more importantly neither would he have known unless she spelled it out for him.

If Stride, together with her choice of final destination, would have been in any way unsuited to a successful ripper murder and mutilation - too many people around, too dark, victim not compliant - to name but three potential obstacles, it wouldn't have happened, regardless of where the ripper was when this woman breathed her last. If he was there in Dutfield's Yard with her, he'd have had no choice but to leave her alive or dead, but unripped.

If Stride's choice of location had been an ideal one for another ripper murder, and especially if she had mentioned to anyone an intention to solicit that evening, you would have had a much sounder argument for hers not being connected with the second murder that night.

As it is, you seem to be under the misapprehension that the ripper had only to snap his fingers and any woman out alone on the street could magically be transported to a location that perfectly suited his purposes, and therefore Stride wasn't killed by him, or she'd have ended up precisely where he needed her to be for another successful ripping.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Trev,

The 21st century gives us plenty of hindsight regarding real convicted killers - not robots - who did not leave identical wounds or injuries on each of their victims.

Do you still believe Colin Stagg stabbed Rachel Nickell 49 times on Wimbledon Common in 1992, for instance, because you cannot accept that one man, Robert Napper, could have inflicted such different knife wounds on two women - Nickell and Samantha Bisset, who was mutilated MJK style, the following year in her own home?

That's just one example of a violent offender not doing as he was told by the profilers and retired or armchair detectives who think they know better.

Real criminals give us the best insight into what real criminals are capable of.

Love,

Caz
X

Thank you for your input, but there is more to the Stride murder than just the throat cutting, which makes it different from the others and to me suggests a different killer.

and we shouldnt fall into the trap of comparing the crimes of modern day serial killers to those of 1888.

As to comparing the different murders of Robert Napper, Rachel Nickell was murdered outside in daylight, the other two murders were inside where he had more time with the victims.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’m always concerned when people say “the killer would have done this…” or “well he did x at the y crime scene therefore he must have done x at the z crime scene.” There can be traits of course but I’m wary of treating killers as if they are working to some kind of handbook. Circumstances change, unexpected things occur, so many things can lead to differences which might lead to erroneous conclusions.

[caz]

well that cuts both ways because you cant prove that Stride was a Ripper victim and the only point you seek to rely on to suggest she was related was having her throat cut and even that was not in line with the other murders,

I see you are still trying to prop up the same old same the old accpted theories, time to ditch those unreliable facts, the 21st century can now dispell them

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hi Trev,

The 21st century gives us plenty of hindsight regarding real convicted killers - not robots - who did not leave identical wounds or injuries on each of their victims.

Do you still believe Colin Stagg stabbed Rachel Nickell 49 times on Wimbledon Common in 1992, for instance, because you cannot accept that one man, Robert Napper, could have inflicted such different knife wounds on two women - Nickell and Samantha Bisset, who was mutilated MJK style, the following year in her own home?

That's just one example of a violent offender not doing as he was told by the profilers and retired or armchair detectives who think they know better.

Real criminals give us the best insight into what real criminals are capable of.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

cd, youre quick to rebut but my statement about the evidence that support one man that killed Liz then Kate, although you only acknowledged part of it, but it is true. There is not one single piece of hard evidence that suggests Liz Strides killer killed Kate Eddoes, and any presumptions about that are based on geography or timing. I wont even mention the sheer and baseless speculation that the non-ripped murder might have been an interrupted act...oops, guess I did anyway...because once again, there is not one single shred of evidence to support that contention either. Absence of an action is just that unless other evidence exists. It doesnt. So Liz Stride is just killed...thats it. One cut. There is no further intention or evidence of interruption in that...there is only a choice made.

Liz Stride was not a Ripper victim, which makes Schwartz a non viable witness for Anderson. In fact it appears he wasnt even viable for the Inquest.

First of all, Michael, you quoted a post of mine and responded to it by addressing c.d.

Secondly, in the post I was responding to, you claimed there was no evidence 'at all' that one man killed both Stride and Eddowes - which is categorically untrue, simply from a quick look at the similarities described in the inquest testimony.

Now you change your argument to claim there is no 'hard' evidence to connect the two murders.

But then you go and spoil it all by claiming it as a fact that Stride was not a ripper victim, which cannot possibly be arrived at merely from your own perceived absence of 'hard' evidence that she was.

The choice made was to inflict a single fatal cut to Stride's throat and get out of that yard while the going was good. You can have no more idea than anyone else who her killer was or wasn't; what provoked the murder in that location; or whether this was the first time this individual killed anyone.

In short, you have no hard evidence that this had to be a different killer, yet you claim it as a fact.

[Varqm]

I think the ripper was spooked because a member of the IWEC choir suddenly sang a high note using falsetto.

[Herlock Sholmes]

A freudian slip on my part I meant to say Diemschultz with his horse and cart, he would have pulled off the road into the entrance and would have seen anyone exiting the yard or in the exact position of the body. So either the killer had left by then, or if he was disturbed where did he then go ceratinly not out of the main entrance.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

He could have escaped when Diemschutz went into the club.

[DJA]

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.

Dr Sequiera was the odd man out.Read his reply at the Inquest carefully.

Apart from his arrogance,Sequiera was linked to The London Hospital and therefore Henry Gawen Sutton.

Strongly suspect Sutton had a residence away from Sevenoaks,Kent at 6 Mitre Street.

[Trevor Marriott]

Schwartz would have walked past by then.

A freudian slip on my part I meant to say Diemschultz with his horse and cart, he would have pulled off the road into the entrance and would have seen anyone exiting the yard or in the exact position of the body. So either the killer had left by then, or if he was disturbed where did he then go ceratinly not out of the main entrance.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[GBinOz]

Smith saw Stride with Parcelman, who had probably been with her since 11pm at the Bricklayers. Shortly after Schwartz sees Stride, alone in to gateway, with BSMan trying to pull her away from the gateway. Have Stride and Parcelman said good night and Stride is waiting to start a cleaning job after the party, or is she waiting for Parcelman to return from the club premises or the toilets? Did Pipeman cease pursuit of Schwartz and return to warn off BSM?

We can't know what happened, but it seems to me that there were at least 3 men in the immediate vicinity who could have killed Stride.

Cheers, George

[c.d.]

she may have had her throat cut by bs man at any time during or after what schwartz saw. maybe schwartz interuption distracted bsman man enough that she was able to get away and run into the yard toward the voices and perceived help. he may have caught her in tje yard. at any time after cutting her throat the interuption by schwartz and or the noise coming from the club could have spooked him to take off before mutilating her.

I would accept after but very hard to believe during. Schwartz would have been questioned very carefully on that point. So either he missed so obvious a fact or he was lying. I think he simply saw a woman being pushed and no more.

c.d.

[Abby Normal]

Interrupted doing what? Pushing a woman? Stride was alive when Schwartz left the scene. Otherwise Swanson would not have allowed for another killer in his report.

c.d.

she may have had her throat cut by bs man at any time during or after what schwartz saw. maybe schwartz interuption distracted bsman man enough that she was able to get away and run into the yard toward the voices and perceived help. he may have caught her in tje yard. at any time after cutting her throat the interuption by schwartz and or the noise coming from the club could have spooked him to take off before mutilating her.

[c.d.]

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

Interrupted doing what? Pushing a woman? Stride was alive when Schwartz left the scene. Otherwise Swanson would not have allowed for another killer in his report.

c.d.

[Herlock Sholmes]

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

Schwartz would have walked past by then.

[Abby Normal]

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

not sure what your talking about, im talking about the attack schwartz witnessed in the street, and whos presence interupted the ripper to the point where he yelled a racial slur at him.