What's the compelling feature?

[Guest]

As Im sure has been discussed ad infinitum, Elizabeth Stride is the only alleged Ripper victim that has a witnessed assault upon her person, 15 minutes prior to, and mere feet from the discovery of her death. Elizabeth is also the only alleged Ripper victim that has a single wound.

By the statements taken by Wess, Eagle, Mr and Mrs Diemshu(i)tz, Lave, and Fanny Mortimer, it would appear that other than Israel Schwartz at 12:45, no-one saw anything in front of the gates, or in the yard, from 12:40 until a pony shies at the entrance at 1am. Arriving shortly after 1:10, Dr Blackwell examined the woman as she lay, and by 1:16 by his own watch, proclaimed that the woman was cut within the last 30 minutes, perhaps as recently as 20 minutes prior to this conclusion. The doctor was a Senior Medical Man, and was attempting to set a time of a throat cut within a ten minute window, but within the past 30 minutes. I believe this would be within his skill set to do. Approximately. With a 10 minute window.

That evidence says Liz was cut no later than 12:56am, perhaps as early as 12:46, when Schwartz leaves the scene.

What is the compelling feature that allows this murder to be classified as a Canonical?

My best regards all.

[The Good Michael]

Michael,

You pose an excellent question here. From that standpoint, I would say that Stride doesn't fit. In order to put her in the canon, several things must be added together, and not least would be the hysteria of the moment. There isn't a single feature that stands out.


Mike (The Good One)

[Dan Norder]

Saying that Stride's murder couldn't have been interrupted because it was supposedly committed four minutes before Diemschitz showed up presupposes that any of the time estimates of the witnesses would have been accurate down to the second. You're simply fooling yourself if you think they are anything close to being as exact as that. Hell, all the things Diemschitz did between bringing the cart down Berner Street and the doctor making his estimate of time of death doesn't even seem at all likely to be able to fit within the mere minutes being described above.

Usually when people try to come up with timetables and arguments like this they are just so completely beyond realistic that it's not even funny. It's like the people trying to interpret the video of JFK being shot down to frame by frame, except without a video to work off of and no reason to think any of the times mentioned in reports would be accurate within five or ten minutes, let alone down to the minute.

[perrymason]

Michael,

You pose an excellent question here. From that standpoint, I would say that Stride doesn't fit. In order to put her in the canon, several things must be added together, and not least would be the hysteria of the moment. There isn't a single feature that stands out.


Mike (The Good One)

Thanks Mike, Im hoping the phrasing of this question is less prejudicial than some of my other posts regarding Ms Stride, and I believe its quite interesting once you really have to answer it.

Cheers Mike.

[perrymason]

I understand the point you make Dan, but not all we have to review is scientific data, there are estimated timings everywhere in these cases. Im not suggesting that Blackwell nailed the conclusion to the minute, just that he was probably capable of estimating the cut time based on the fact he is on scene within 30 minutes of it. Much different than estimating a TOD hours or a day later.

It appears that even if some accounts are a few minutes off, not all would skew towards creating a narrow window of only seconds from the cut to the cart. If he was interrupted, he had to only have just made that cut, because it seems he usually works quickly after that.

I think even with some times being estimated Blackwell had a watch, and Diemshu(i)tz had a time source. That they werent syncronized isnt a huge issue....we are talking about a 10 minute window by the medical estimate, and it ends minutes before 1am.

Had Blackwells watch and the Post Office clock been off by 10 minutes, an issue, but were probably talking about only a few minutes discrepancy, if any. It would seem her throat was cut before 1:00am no matter how you adjust the times. It had to be cut at, or just after 1 to allow for Diemshu(i)tz to interrupt...and that doesnt seem to be the case.

Best regards.

[Tom_Wescott]

In the event someone does not realize they are being hoodwinked by Perry Mason, I'll spend a couple of minutes to point out only a few of the reasons why Liz Stride was, is, and will be considered a Ripper victim. I will do this by comparing her murder to the one just prior to hers - Annie Chapmans.

Kill Zone: Both women were killed in a yard, in a dark corner, immediately next to the exit. Windows overlooked both sites.

Witness Evidence: Albert Cadosch, whom it's generally agreed overheard Chapman with her killer, reported hearing a quiet conversation, followed by a quiet 'no'. A moment later he heard a thud against the fence. Israel Schwartz reported seeing a man and woman talking quietly, the woman fell, uttered a quiet 'no'. Essentially, Cadosch heard what Schwartz saw, but with two different women.

The Murder: Both women were turned to their left sides before having their throats cut. The evidence of both wounds indicated skill and comfort with the knife. It was much, much darker in Berner Street, so the killer's vision would have been severely compromised. Neither victim struggled.

Crime Scene Evidence: Both women had personal belongings in their hand or near their person, as did Kate Eddowes. Annie Chapman was robbed of her rings, possibly before death. There's good reason to believe Stride was relieved of her money. Certain activity seems to have occurred before death in each of the three cases suggesting the same perpetrator.

The only tangible argument for excluding Stride is that she was not mutilated below the neck. Of course, this requires accepting that the Ripper would not leave a crime scene early to prevent being captured, although he seems to have done just this in Buck's Row. It also requires accepting that each of his victims should end up looking exactly the same, with the same extent of damage done to them, even though no two of the five cases are alike at all.

The Ripper killed Stride earlier in the evening than he did Nichols/Chapman/Kelly. Likewise, Eddowes was killed earlier in the evening. The one evening of the year the Ripper struck so early, an imitator also happened to strike? Or does it make more sense that the earlier start allowed for two victims?

If someone other than Perry Mason and the Swedes have read Perry's posts and read this one and are still just as convinced that Stride was NOT a Ripper victim, I'd be curious to hear why that is.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Mitch Rowe]

What is the compelling feature that allows this murder to be classified as a Canonical?

The fact that the two murders were commited something like an hour apart from each other gives me 99% assurety that they were commited by the same hand. This is far more than coincidence to me. Couple that with Diemschutz story. The fact that it seems the Ripper went out of his way to find Eddowes. And the fact that it seems JTR was moving back into the Rippers "territory" after killing Eddowes is more than enough for me to say I am 99.9% sure JTR killed them both. Not to even mention the victimology. Stride was the type of victim JTR was after. It seems as if Stride was taking a client into Dutfields yard for service.

All this stuff adds up to tell a reasonable tale of what happened that night.
Stride having been killed by some-one other than JTR that night dont make much sense.

[Tom_Wescott]

Good post, Mitch. It prompts me to add to my above list something I should have included in the first place:

Victimology: Women of the same age, same profession, living in the same vicinity.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Ally]

I am not convinced Stride was a Ripper victim. The arguments are not convincing on either side.

Saying that they were all the same profession, relative age and living in the same vicinity is not sufficient. Recently in Chicago a 15 year old student was shot walking to a convenience store, a couple of hours later, an 18 year old student was shot and killed walking home from classes. By the logic in the above posts, they both must have been killed by the same person.

If one presumes that JtR had sufficient control over himself, to be scared of being captured and therefore would have run off when he was interrupted, one has to wonder if he would have recovered sufficiently to try it all over again less than an hour later.

There is no proof on either side whether she was or was not a Ripper victim, therefore doubt of her inclusion is logical.

[c.d.]

If we assume for the sake of argument that the times are written in stone, it leads to an if A then B argument ---her killer had plenty of time to perform mutilations and since he did not then he was not Jack. The problem with that argument is that it naturally assumes that Jack was not interrupted. But consider that he is now in a situation where there are numerous people very close by unlike the previous locations. Is is logical to believe that he had the same confidence level here? Perhaps someone came out to relieve themselves or two people left the club at the same time only to stop and talk for a few minutes outside. An already nervous Jack might conclude that he has already had the thrill of the kill so why take the chance of being caught. He must have realized that Liz was not the only woman to be found on the street that night. Just move on and kill again later.

c.d.

[Tom_Wescott]

Saying that they were all the same profession, relative age and living in the same vicinity is not sufficient.

You're absolutely right, which is why that is only one among many more compelling points, some of which I've posted on this thread.

CD,

Good point. Personally, I think Jack may have intended to live up to his reputation by killing two women in the same night and therefore chose not to mutilate the first. It's only speculation, but as you pointed out in your post, Michael's timings, assuming we accept them as gospel (which they're not) still do not point towards a random one-time killer.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Ally]

Actually none of the points are very compelling. If they were, that would mean it was a case closed situation. It is not. One at a time:

Kill Zone: Both women were killed in a yard, in a dark corner, immediately next to the exit. Windows overlooked both sites.

This is the kind of "similarity" that is largely irrelevant. Comparing Stride to Eddowes is useless for inclusion in the canonical. Unless every single woman was killed in a yard, in a corner, immediately next to an exit with windows overlooking both sites, the similarity between these two locations is beyond pointless. Not to mention, if you are going to kill someone are you going to kill them in the brightly lit corner or the dark corner? As far as compelling evidences, this isn't.

Witness Evidence: Albert Cadosch, whom it's generally agreed overheard Chapman with her killer, reported hearing a quiet conversation, followed by a quiet 'no'. A moment later he heard a thud against the fence. Israel Schwartz reported seeing a man and woman talking quietly, the woman fell, uttered a quiet 'no'. Essentially, Cadosch heard what Schwartz saw, but with two different women.

So two women are murdered. Two witnesses hear a "no" and a thud of the body. Gee, I wonder what the likelihood is that the word "no" might accompany a situation in which a murder is about to occur and the likelihood that a "thud will arise when a body falls.... I am going to guess fairly high.

The Murder: Both women were turned to their left sides before having their throats cut. The evidence of both wounds indicated skill and comfort with the knife. It was much, much darker in Berner Street, so the killer's vision would have been severely compromised. Neither victim struggled.

Speculation. Not fact. The idea that the wounds indicate skill and comfort with a knife is one of pure speculation. How does one determine "skill" and "comfort with a knife"? The idea that it requires skill to slice a throat or the idea that anyone unfamiliar with slicing a throat will automatically leave hesitation marks or some other "tell" is not factual. Not to mention that even if there actual was skill in the cuts, that doesn't mean the skill was acquired the same way or by the same man.

Crime Scene Evidence: Both women had personal belongings in their hand or near their person, as did Kate Eddowes. Annie Chapman was robbed of her rings, possibly before death. There's good reason to believe Stride was relieved of her money. Certain activity seems to have occurred before death in each of the three cases suggesting the same perpetrator.

First the idea that two of the victims had personal belongings in their hand or near their person is relevant to victimology exactly ...how? Any two women murdered at any time is liable to have personal belongings in their hand or around their person. And again, you cannot point to isolated similarity in SOME of the victims and say that she must therefore be included. Either they all had a similar occurence and she had it too and so could be included, or she didnt'. But you cannot choose from isolated occurences where Stride had this in common with Polly and this in common with Annie and this in common with Kate, so therefore she was a common victim.

[Natalie Severn]

I am not convinced Stride was a Ripper victim. The arguments are not convincing on either side.

Saying that they were all the same profession, relative age and living in the same vicinity is not sufficient. Recently in Chicago a 15 year old student was shot walking to a convenience store, a couple of hours later, an 18 year old student was shot and killed walking home from classes. By the logic in the above posts, they both must have been killed by the same person.

If one presumes that JtR had sufficient control over himself, to be scared of being captured and therefore would have run off when he was interrupted, one has to wonder if he would have recovered sufficiently to try it all over again less than an hour later.

There is no proof on either side whether she was or was not a Ripper victim, therefore doubt of her inclusion is logical.

Hi Ally,
I must say I dont see it like that.I think thats the whole point about the Ripper,that he was able to control himself even in the throws of his "passion" .Its why he managed to escape from several tight situations. Diemshutz arrival on the scene probably did interrupt him.And unlike some killers who might well have been caught ,he was able to stop,pull himself together for however long it took to get away and make for Aldgate to "finish off".He would have known this was an area where he could bank on picking up someone looking for doss money at around the time he did.
In fact he badly needed to finish what he had started in Berner Street.Thats possibly why Kate"s murder seemed such a shoddy job to Dr Phillips---it wasnt planned that way-second best if you like.And it bore the marks of a rushed job.

[Ally]

In fact he badly needed to finish what he had started in Berner Street.

Sorry Nats, but that's the kind of fantasizing and pure speculation that occurs and has no more relationship to fact than saying Jack was beaten by his mother which caused his hatred of women. You are presuming you know his motives for killing the women, you are presuming to know what drove him and presuming to know how he would have behaved under a given circumstances. If he so badly needed to finish that he would risk capture twice in one night, then how could he have possibly been together enough to avoid capture in the first place? You paint conflicting views of a killer simultaneously ruled by his "evil instincts" and his need to carry them out and yet able to completely control them while under their influence (i.e in the middle of a kill) when the need arises.

[Tom_Wescott]

This is the kind of "similarity" that is largely irrelevant. Comparing Stride to Eddowes is useless for inclusion in the canonical. Unless every single woman was killed in a yard, in a corner, immediately next to an exit with windows overlooking both sites,

Eddowes was killed in a square, in a corner, immediately next to an exit, with windows overlooking. Close enough for you?

So two women are murdered. Two witnesses hear a "no" and a thud of the body. Gee, I wonder what the likelihood is that the word "no" might accompany a situation in which a murder is about to occur and the likelihood that a "thud will arise when a body falls.... I am going to guess fairly high.

The most significant factor of my point is that - time and again - the Schwartz scenario is dragged out to 'prove' that Stride couldn't have been killed by the Ripper because the Ripper would not have behaved that way. It's true that Cadosch didn't see anything, but he heard a remarkably similar scenario. Regarding the 'no' it's remarkable the women were so quiet about it. Would you be? I don't think so, unless the Ripper said 'do as I say or I'll cut you' and represented himself as a mugger, which is what I believe happened.

The idea that the wounds indicate skill and comfort with a knife is one of pure speculation.

In Ripperology, we call that 'professional medical opinion'.

First the idea that two of the victims had personal belongings in their hand or near their person is relevant to victimology exactly ...how?

It's not, which is why I titled it 'Crime Scene Evidence', which it most certainly was. Please read before nitpicking.

The bottom line is that Liz Stride was killed in precisely a manner and in precisely a place that the killer of Chapman and Eddowes would have chosen. She was killed with someone who possessed skill with a knife, and a very sharp knife. She was killed in the same manner most if not all of the other women were. She was killed within 45 minutes of time and 10 minutes of walking distance of a woman we consider a bonafide Ripper victim.

Two identical killers in the same neighborhood at the same time killing middle-aged prostitutes or just one?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott