Schwartz v. Lawende

[Abby Normal]

There are 3 factors about how Liz Stride behaved on that night that suggest she was indeed putting uncommon effort into her appearance..particularly when clientele for her street work would not care about any of them.

The lint brush request. The cashous. The flower arrangement. Its also clear that she had on a skirt that, as she lay on her side, only revealed the tops of her boots.

Liz Stride was gainfully employed regularly in the weeks leading up to her death, according to her conversation with the landlady. Liz Stride is also the ONLY Unfortunate that we know of within all the Unfortunates who were murdered without a known assailant that at one time had herself, by request, removed from an active list of prostitutes in Goteborg. Proving that when she had found legtimate work, (as a nanny in Goteborg), she preferred not to solicit at all.

Other Canonicals do not show that same resolve. Polly likely only solicited for her money, as did Mary. Kate went hopping in the summers, she didnt stay in the city to solicit, and Annie had a benefactor off and on.

There is also the fact that Liz was seen with other men that night but we have no account that these were "working" opportunities.

Bundled together its far more likely that Liz was there either to perform work she regularly did for her money, (she also spoke Yiddish), or that she had a social engagement.

well you got part of it right anyway.
She cared about her appearance because she had broken up with kidney and was out looking for a good time and probably a new boyfriend/sugardaddy.


She was with the same man over a period of time (peaked cap man).

so obviously not actively prostituting.

She was "there", at the club, because that's where her wanderings with peaked cap man took her. It was by chance the club had anything to do with where her body was found.

But I agree with you in general-I don't think that just because once a prostitute- always prostituting. I doubt mary Kelly was actively solicitating the night of her murder either.

[John G]

There are 3 factors about how Liz Stride behaved on that night that suggest she was indeed putting uncommon effort into her appearance..particularly when clientele for her street work would not care about any of them.

The lint brush request. The cashous. The flower arrangement. Its also clear that she had on a skirt that, as she lay on her side, only revealed the tops of her boots.

Liz Stride was gainfully employed regularly in the weeks leading up to her death, according to her conversation with the landlady. Liz Stride is also the ONLY Unfortunate that we know of within all the Unfortunates who were murdered without a known assailant that at one time had herself, by request, removed from an active list of prostitutes in Goteborg. Proving that when she had found legtimate work, (as a nanny in Goteborg), she preferred not to solicit at all.

Other Canonicals do not show that same resolve. Polly likely only solicited for her money, as did Mary. Kate went hopping in the summers, she didnt stay in the city to solicit, and Annie had a benefactor off and on.

There is also the fact that Liz was seen with other men that night but we have no account that these were "working" opportunities.

Bundled together its far more likely that Liz was there either to perform work she regularly did for her money, (she also spoke Yiddish), or that she had a social engagement.

John Best stated that she was "poorly dressed", which is hardly suggestive of someone who has put "uncommon effort into her appearance." And the flower might have been bought for her, i.e. by her killer.

We do not know that she was with a number of men on the night she was murdered: some of the witnesses may have been describing the same man, or misidentified Stride as the woman they saw.

There is no evidence that she had a "social engagement" at the club: in fact, had a club member exited the club at the relevant time it would surely have been noticed, and reported, by other members. And if you believe this is something that the club would have covered up, then why did both Lave and Eagle admit leaving, and returning, to the club during a period when Stride may have been murdered?

Stride may have been soliciting that night, but then so may have the other C5 victims, plus Tabram. Moreover, there is no reason to believe that JtR only targeted prostitutes: Sutcliffe certainly didn't. In fact, it's much more likely that he was simply an opportunist.

[Michael W Richards]

The third murder that you refer to was that of Sarah Brown. However, this much more common domestic murder had little in common with the Whitechapel crimes: the victim was killed in her own home, which was not in Whitechapel, or even the East End, but in Westminster. Moreover, it wasn't an unsolved crime, either: the victim's husband walked straight into a police station and told the officer on duty, "I have stabbed my wife." He was subsequently found guilty but insane.

So throat cuts have to be categorized by district to be counted? It was the third throat cut, which was mentioned to counter your idea that they were rare in London. Knife attacks were by far the most prevalent means of attack with weapons, the only time we need to look closer at a cut throat is when it is followed by abdominal mutilation. In Strides case, its an attack with a knife...like loads of others. Slit throat, stabs, slashes ...all knife attacks are what they are unless they are only a part of the complete act.

Liz Strides murder was a completed act.

[Michael W Richards]

There are 3 factors about how Liz Stride behaved on that night that suggest she was indeed putting uncommon effort into her appearance..particularly when clientele for her street work would not care about any of them.

The lint brush request. The cashous. The flower arrangement. Its also clear that she had on a skirt that, as she lay on her side, only revealed the tops of her boots.

Liz Stride was gainfully employed regularly in the weeks leading up to her death, according to her conversation with the landlady. Liz Stride is also the ONLY Unfortunate that we know of within all the Unfortunates who were murdered without a known assailant that at one time had herself, by request, removed from an active list of prostitutes in Goteborg. Proving that when she had found legtimate work, (as a nanny in Goteborg), she preferred not to solicit at all.

Other Canonicals do not show that same resolve. Polly likely only solicited for her money, as did Mary. Kate went hopping in the summers, she didnt stay in the city to solicit, and Annie had a benefactor off and on.

There is also the fact that Liz was seen with other men that night but we have no account that these were "working" opportunities.

Bundled together its far more likely that Liz was there either to perform work she regularly did for her money, (she also spoke Yiddish), or that she had a social engagement.

[John G]

The fact that the knife was used to slit a throat means that Liz was one of three women on that same night who suffered the same fate. The fact that only 2 murders within the Canonical Group were on public property is indicative that the idea these were "public" murders is incorrect.

The third murder that you refer to was that of Sarah Brown. However, this much more common domestic murder had little in common with the Whitechapel crimes: the victim was killed in her own home, which was not in Whitechapel, or even the East End, but in Westminster. Moreover, it wasn't an unsolved crime, either: the victim's husband walked straight into a police station and told the officer on duty, "I have stabbed my wife." He was subsequently found guilty but insane.

[Abby Normal]

Fixed

Hi DJA
please don't do that. you could give people the wrong idea about what I said who don't see my original post.

[Michael W Richards]

Murdering victims in a public area, by slitting their throat, was an exceptionally rare crime, at least for the Whitechapel area!

The fact that the knife was used to slit a throat means that Liz was one of three women on that same night who suffered the same fate. The fact that only 2 murders within the Canonical Group were on public property is indicative that the idea these were "public" murders is incorrect.

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi all
IMHO packer is a more useless and obfuscating a witness than Mortimer.

I should think so, since Mortimer is proved accurate and Packer is proved the opposite. Mortimer did seem to not mind the attention she was receiving, but the most sensational part of her story - the man with the black bag - turned out to be completely true, so that means we can't ignore her.

Where were you in the 1960s....apart from watching The Tall Man on TV

Waiting until the next decade to be born. I haven't seen the Tall Man, so that joke's lost on me.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[John G]

Hi all
IMHO packer is a more useless and obfuscating a witness than Mortimer.

Both gossipy busybodies looking for their 15 minutes of fame.
All they do is add confusion-Do yourself a favor and forget them.

Or perhaps they might make good candidates for the ripper?

Hi Abby,

I agree about Packer, but Mortimer's testimony makes sense-well, the second version anyway! In fact, it gels very nicely with PC Smith's evidence, based upon a more realistic time line.

[DJA]

IMHO packer is a more useless and obfuscating a witness than Cross.

Fixed

[Abby Normal]

Hi all
IMHO packer is a more useless and obfuscating a witness than Mortimer.

Both gossipy busybodies looking for their 15 minutes of fame.
All they do is add confusion-Do yourself a favor and forget them.

Or perhaps they might make good candidates for the ripper?

[DJA]

Hippy meant to protrude, I believe.

Where were you in the 1960s....apart from watching The Tall Man on TV

[Tom_Wescott]

Sincerely doubt that.

Your point about Fat Lip Liz is taken though.

Welcome back

Hippy meant to protrude, I believe. She was also known as Epileptic Annie because she'd fake seizures and fainting. I've often wondered if that's not what she did with the Ripper - faked fainting because she thought she was being robbed, but instead he cut her throat. I doubt that's the case, but possible. It's also possible she fainted for real. But most likely he choked her unconscious.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Did a little deeper.....why would two private eyes want to take him to Scotland Yard to see/not see Warren?

No one took Packer to see Warren, but I believe others have pointed that out to you by now.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[DJA]

Three men, and not two, identified Stride as the woman they saw at the Bricklayer's Arms. So either all three were lying, all three were mistaken, or all three were telling the truth. I see no reason to suppose they were lying or mistaken. Unlike Tabram and Chapman, Stride did not have a common face.

Sincerely doubt that.

Your point about Fat Lip Liz is taken though.

Welcome back

Edit. Maybea not