Schwartz v. Lawende

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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]

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.

London had a population of 5.6 million in 1888, Whitechapel around 75000. However, in 1885 there were only 9 murders in the whole of London (8 in 1886; 13 in 1887; 17 in 1889.) So murder was comparatively rare for this period; and I would imagine that the vast majority of those murders would be domestic incidents, with an obvious perpetrator: like Sarah Brown, for example.

However, in 1888 the London murder rate more than doubled from the previous year, with 28 victims: hardly surprising, though, if a serial killer was on the loose!

[Tom_Wescott]

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.

Stride was one of only TWO women that night murdered the same way. I don't believe you (or many people, for that matter) are aware of how Sarah Brown was murdered. It was a sloppy attack of multiple stabbings and cuts, which is actually typical of knife murders. Stride was killed with a single cut to the throat. This is an exceedingly rare method of murder.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[John G]

Stride was one of only TWO women that night murdered the same way. I don't believe you (or many people, for that matter) are aware of how Sarah Brown was murdered. It was a sloppy attack of multiple stabbings and cuts, which is actually typical of knife murders. Stride was killed with a single cut to the throat. This is an exceedingly rare method of murder.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Excellent point, Tom. It seems to me that Stride's murder had none of the hallmarks of a more common domestic crime. In fact, all the evidence suggests an audacious murder, with the victim killed in a clinically efficient manner, i.e. caught completely by surprise, and therefore given no opportunity to call for help, resist, or attempt an escape.

And, despite the fact the murder took place next to a busy club, no one saw or heard anything suspicious, and the killer successfully effected an escape without attracting any attention towards himself whatsoever.

It also appears that the killer knew how to avoid getting bloodstained and, despite the stress and pressure you would expect him to be under, the piece of mind to take precautions:

Coroner: From the position you assume the perpetrator to have been in, would he have been likely to get bloodstained?

Dr Phillips: Not necessarily, for the commencement of the wound and injury to the vessels would be away from him, and the stream of blood-for stream it was-would be directed away from him, and towards the gutter in the yard."

[Wickerman]

Sounds like Cross!

Agree with the rest also.

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

The way the sentence is worded, we can't be sure if Sgt. White overheard Grand & Batchelor telling Packer they would take him to Scotland Yard, or whether they only told Sgt. White they were taking him to Scotland Yard.

Packer made no mention of where he went or who he saw, so the issue is questionable at best. What we do know is that Packer gave a statement to police on that same day, 4th Oct.
We can also infer the police had him back for a second interview for some reason, no prizes for guessing why.

[Wickerman]

Because none of the men Stride was seen with were holding grapes, nor was Stride.

Yes, Packer said he put the grapes in a bag, and PC Smith saw a man carrying a newspaper parcel.
You do know what a half-pound of grapes looks like?, you can't fit that in your pocket.
Market stallers often make a bag out of folded newspaper, its efficient, flexible, and cheap.
Packer doesn't command the size of business where he can afford to buy bags.
Once again, it isn't a case of evidence proving he sold them grapes, its more a case of nothing we read proves he couldn't have.

And that's nonsense about fruit stains on handkerchief having anything to do with grapes.

Well that's easy to say Tom, but good luck in explaining precisely why a woman wiping grape skins & pips from her lips with a handkerchief is, "nonsense".

Where were the seeds and skins?

On the pavement Tom, in the street.
Nobody looked, and by the 4th, it would have been pointless.

[DJA]

I I haven't seen the Tall Man, so that joke's lost on me.

You mean to say that you don't have a Clu

[Joshua Rogan]

Wasn't the newspaper parcel described by pc Smith said to be 18" x 6"?
That's an awful lot of grapes!

[DJA]

Could have been the latest hand gun.

Not kidding.

[Tom_Wescott]

Wasn't the newspaper parcel described by pc Smith said to be 18" x 6"?
That's an awful lot of grapes!

Same dimension as a stack of Der Arbeter Fraint.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Jeff Leahy]

Yes, Packer said he put the grapes in a bag, and PC Smith saw a man carrying a newspaper parcel.

Hi Jon

Been following this thread with interest and like most ripperologists have tended to dismiss Packer for obvious reasons..

However I think this is a very obvious and simple observation. Every time anyone mentions the parcel under his arm everyone altermatically assumes something sinister....but perhaps something more obvious makes sense..

For some time I've been convinced that the woman at least knew there attacker by sight and may have been bribed by their killer... I also can't help wondering if Stride spent more time with her killer than the others...

Not that I'm in any doubt that they were all prostitutes

Many thanks for this observation

Yours Jeff

[Rosella]

Didn't Packer say that he had put the grapes into a paper bag though, presumably a brown paper bag, not newspaper? The parcel could have been anything, but it's worth remembering that Astrakhan Man also carried a parcel.