Packer and Schwartz

[curious4]

Hello Gwyneth. Thanks.

"If his attentions were unwelcome I would say that she would turn away from him, so I imagine from behind,"

OK, this is before he threw her to the ground? So no cachous.

So AFTER she gets up, she turns round, stops for a cachou, and then . . . ?

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn

No, no, my whole point was that she wasn't thrown to the ground but forced down to her knees and then throttled. See earlier post. (A different interpretation of thrown to the ground).

Best wishes
C4

[curious4]

To clarify: the killer 1. With hands on shoulders forces Liz down to her knees. 2. Throttles her with her scarf, she is unconscious within from 10 to 18 seconds. 3. Picks her up and carries her in behind door. 4. Cuts throat. 5. Interupted by Diemschutz.

This only requires a shift in meaning of "threw down" to "forced down", which I believe there is room for in translation.

Pushed to her knees she would not drop the cachous, throttled her hands would clench, holding the cachous.

C4

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Jon,

Stride is with the Smith suspect?

No, I didnt say that. Stride is likely seen by PC Smith just before she entered the passageway, I have no idea where the man went. I assume he went out to distribute the papers he carried from the Arbeter Fraint.

She had it earlier at the Bricklayers Arms, whether she found it, bought it, or was given it, is anybody's guess.

It might explain where her 6d went after leaving the lodging house, as well as the cashous. The explanation as to why she would embellish her appearance and be concerned about her breath that night might likely include anticipated interactions with someone or people who would appreciate a clean and fresh smelling Liz.

Her usual attempt at looking presentable?


The actions Liz takes in the lodging house might be fairly referred to as preening. This activity would cost money, and if she intended to meet night crawling dockers to sell herself to, would be something completely unnecessary.

She intended to return?
(Leaving valuables in her room might only get stolen)

One would think her admission she did not know when she would return an indication that she had either made the decision to return but was unclear as to when that would be, or she had not made the decision where to stay as yet, and that she expected that would become clearer to her later that evening. A piece of velvet would be easy to carry.

Her own room?

Not her own room Jon, and she had been staying elsewhere for sometime before her return that week. After parting with her beau.

What Eagle said was:
"I dare say I did, but I do not remember them."
Which is not the same as saying he saw no woman.

Considering the fact that he also said he stayed close to the wall as he entered the yard, it would be nearly impossible to conceive of a lack of clarity on this point. He literally would almost have had to step over her.

She might not have been out had she not been single?

Perhaps she might not be out if it were not for her "work among the jews", since she is a cleaning lady who works for local jews cleaning houses and she is standing outside a jewish socialist club, after a meeting, and on the eve of the high holidays, after some 200 people had left what might be imagined as a great mess to be cleaned.

Would it be true to say you already have your own answers to those questions?

It would be true Jon to say that I have some ideas about answers that are based upon a trail or logical progression within the circumstantial evidence that does not lead to an unknown killer whose primary activity focus takes place after what happened to Liz Stride. Since there are no sound reasons to surmise an interrupted event, nor is there evidence that the victim was being prepared for further outrages.

Threadwise and Packer aside, Israel Schwartz is a suspect witness because we cannot identify his former residence even though he claims to be moving from it that very day, because it appears we have grounds to suspect he was a friend of a club someone special... potentially in a lot of trouble that night.....,and because his story for being there after a large meeting he would likely have been drawn to had ended seems contrived and not genuine, because his story is arguably the most favorable scenario for the club management and its members, and finally because there are no records that the story given by Israel Schwartz on Sunday night...a story with great significance to the question of the last few moments of her life...was entered as evidence at the Inquest in written form, was noted as submitted evidence orally, was declared as a witness account that is relevant to the proceedings by the authorities, or submitted in secret by the authorities. His story simply didnt matter...but based on its content, and if it was truly believed...that seems unthinkable.

Cheers Jon

[Abby Normal]

I was responding to your post, 271, which you might want to re-read and totally revise, referring to "a man who doesn't exist except in your own mind." As I have constantly argued that I believe Stride was most likely killed by PC Smith's suspect, the logical inference is that you were arguing that PC Smith's suspect doesn't exist!

Oh dear, no wonder I'm sinking into a well of dispair over this thread-would someone please hoist me back up!

It's of your own making then because you are having some seriouse difficulty in following simple logic in this thread. PC smiths man could be the same peaked cap man they all saw, including BS man seen by Schwartz. I've said it a million times . What can't you grasp about this.

No bruises on stride shoulders?Ok, pressure marks. LOL.
Maybe they were birthmarks.

[Abby Normal]

Hello John

Still in the throes of la grippe, but will do my best:

From JTR Sourcebook:

Dr Blackwell: There were some pressure marks on the shoulders",
A juryman "Do you know how these marks were likely to have been caused?"

Blackwell:"By two hands pressing on the shoulders".

Dr George Baxter Phillips:"over both shoulders, especially the right, and under the collarbone and on front of the chest there was a blueish discolouration, which I have watched and seen on two occasions since."

Forcing her to her knees would only get mud on the hem area of her clothing, which must have been fairly mud-spattered anyway and that he carried her into the yard is not, in my opinion, extremely far-fetched: "no sign of a struggle", "looked as though she had been quietly laid down." (Not up to chasing ref for the last two quotes, but that was said.

My scenario fits - up to and including the cachous. She did cry out but was throttled after Schwarz shot past (ok, walked and then ran.) if, of course Schwarz made it all up, of course, all this is irrevelant, but it beats me that perfectly good witnesses on this site are found to be lying by posters (for their own agendas), while definitely dodgy ones (Maxwell) are now found to be credible. It is agreed that the police did not share information with the press, but suddenly the police in Leman street are quoted as saying that Schwarz' evidence wasn't taken seriously. I wonder why? Could it have anything to do with protecting a witness?

As I said, my theory fits, cachous and all, despite all of the dancing around with wives/girlfriends and scarves, other people's don't (as far as I can see), as to getting Liz from the street to behind the doors. Why shouldn't he have just lifted her up post choking and placed her where he wanted her?

That's all, I can feel my temp rising again.

Best wishes
C4

Makes perfect sense to me.

Except about the police not taking Schwartz seriously. We're did that come from? There is no evidence, zero, that his story or his credibility was questioned.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hello Jeff. Thanks.

"And a velvet skirt glides easily over wet slats"

And since they were wet, her dress should have been wet.

Cheers.
LC

Her dress was damp was it not?

Jeff

[curious4]

Makes perfect sense to me.

Except about the police not taking Schwartz seriously. We're did that come from? There is no evidence, zero, that his story or his credibility was questioned.

Hello Abby

Apparently "someone" at Leman police station was reported as saying that they didn't have much faith in Schwarz' statement. Or words to that effect.

Cheers
C4

[lynn cates]

natural

Hello Gwyneth. Thanks.

But if she is forced to her knees, would not throttling from the FRONT be natural? And much easier than circling her.

Also, knees of dress were not wet. Moreover, the BSM confrontation happened on the pavement, not in the yard.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

unconscious

Hello (again) Gwyneth. Clarification helps.

"Pushed to her knees she would not drop the cachous, throttled her hands would clench, holding the cachous."

But she is STILL holding on whilst being carried unconscious?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

I 'ave me doubts.

Hello Abby.

"There is no evidence, zero, that his story or his credibility was questioned."

Not so. Leman st coppers questioned it.

Now, if you claim they were mistaken, that's fine. But they most certainly doubted his story.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

leftwing

Hello Jeff. Thanks.

"Her dress was damp was it not?"

Absolutely. But it was damp on left side ONLY.

Cheers.
LC

[curious4]

Hello Gwyneth. Thanks.

But if she is forced to her knees, would not throttling from the FRONT be natural? And much easier than circling her.

Also, knees of dress were not wet. Moreover, the BSM confrontation happened on the pavement, not in the yard.

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn

Ah, I can see you wear your kilt short. A long, fullish skirt would fold down on itself, with the hem at the bottom, she would be kneeling on several layers, so only the hem would be muddied. And that would have been muddy anyway. Tested this myself with a rolling pin and a teacloth to make sure.

Didn't one of the doctors say her hand would have gradually relaxed? The cachous had to be "prised" out of her hand, spilling some in the process.

Best wishes
C4

[curious4]

Hello Gwyneth. Thanks.

But if she is forced to her knees, would not throttling from the FRONT be natural? And much easier than circling her.

Also, knees of dress were not wet. Moreover, the BSM confrontation happened on the pavement, not in the yard.

Cheers.
LC

Hello again Lynn,

No, I think the Thugees throttled from the back, and it would work better, more pressure on the windpipe. And not being much taller than Liz, I think it would be an advantage to have her lower down. Don't know why, never had occasion to throttle anyone.

Best wishes
Gwyneth

[curious4]

Hello Lynn once more

Yes, on the pavement, which is why he would have to carry her into the yard.

Cheers
Gwyneth

[Jeff Leahy]

Hello Jeff. Thanks.

"Her dress was damp was it not?"

Absolutely. But it was damp on left side ONLY.

Cheers.
LC

It had been raining on and off all evening. Clearly her clothes were NOT sodden but I think damp is fair... what we can't know is how damp..

My point is that if pulled over the slats ( And my understand was that the slats and ground depicted in Philip Hutchinsons photograph were as was in 1888)

Then someone being dragged would glide fairly smoothly without leaving such a trace....

Just on another subject I noted with interests 'wicker mans' theory on the marks to the shoulder, being connected to her profession. If she was with different men that night it would make sense.

I've know idea how these women plied their trade in 1888, but I think they were all pretty much full time prostitutes.

Yours Jeff