For what reason do we include Stride?

[JeffHamm]

If so, then he started his attack in full public view, in a very obvious and vocal manner, with at least two witnesses he'd have known about. This really doesn't look like Jack the Ripper to me.

Hi Sam,

Fair point, but then, we don't know if he started the attack knowing Schwartz and Pipeman were present. That alone could be the "mistake" that made him uncomfortable enough to continue the sequence, but their fleeing gave him enough time to kill her before he left. That would mean he left before Deimshutz shows up. Again, it's workable either way because we have too few constraints due to the minimal information. Not claiming this is it, only suggestion "because this is both possible and plausible, it's a viable hypothesis", but I agree fully, a domestic is also both "possible and plausible" and so also a viable hypothesis that needs to be considered.

- Jeff

[Wickerman]

Dr Brown only describes a single cut - albeit a very deep one that extended down to the spine, leaving its mark on the intervertebral cartilage. The idea of a single, deep wound tallies with Foster's sketch of the body and the mortuary photograph taken before Eddowes' wounds were sutured up.

I don't think we can have it both ways Gareth.

To begin with Dr Brown does not say how many cuts ran across her throat, other doctors on other cases did.
That said, a superficial cut is one that only penetrates the top layers of skin, this is what he says:

"The throat was cut across to the extent of about 6 or 7 inches. A superficial cut commenced about an inch and 1/2 below the lobe and about 2 1/2 inches behind the left ear and extended across the throat to about 3 inches below the lobe of the right ear."

Due to the lack of punctuation it is difficult to be sure where this sentence should end and the next one begin.
However, Dr Brown then goes on to describe the deep wounds which are clearly not superficial.
This indicates a second cut.

"The big muscle across the throat was divided through on the left side side - the large vessels on the left side of the neck were severed - the larynx was severed below the vocal chords. All the deep structures were severed to the bone the knife marking intervertebral cartilages - the sheath of the vessels on the right side was just opened. the carotid artery had a fine hole opening the internal juglar vein was opened an inch and a half not divided."

That second paragraph describes deep wounds right down to the bone.
The first sentence describes a superficial slice across the neck not penetrating much below the skin.
Two cuts are described.

All Dr Brown is doing is describing the condition of the wound without suggesting how many cuts it would take to cause such contrary damage.

[JeffHamm]

I don't think we can have it both ways Gareth.

To begin with Dr Brown does not say how many cuts ran across her throat, other doctors on other cases did.
That said, a superficial cut is one that only penetrates the top layers of skin, this is what he says:

"The throat was cut across to the extent of about 6 or 7 inches. A superficial cut commenced about an inch and 1/2 below the lobe and about 2 1/2 inches behind the left ear and extended across the throat to about 3 inches below the lobe of the right ear."

Due to the lack of punctuation it is difficult to be sure where this sentence should end and the next one begin.
However, Dr Brown then goes on to describe the deep wounds which are clearly not superficial.
This indicates a second cut.

"The big muscle across the throat was divided through on the left side side - the large vessels on the left side of the neck were severed - the larynx was severed below the vocal chords. All the deep structures were severed to the bone the knife marking intervertebral cartilages - the sheath of the vessels on the right side was just opened. the carotid artery had a fine hole opening the internal juglar vein was opened an inch and a half not divided."

That second paragraph describes deep wounds right down to the bone.
The first sentence describes a superficial slice across the neck not penetrating much below the skin.
Two cuts are described.

All Dr Brown is doing is describing the condition of the wound without suggesting how many cuts it would take to cause such contrary damage.

Hi Wickerman,

Yes, but the description of Stride's cut, which we know was a single wound reads:

Stride:
Testimony of Mr. George Bagster Phillips, divisional surgeon of police, 2, Spital-square
"There was a clean-cut incision on the neck. It was 6in. in length and commenced 2½in. in a straight line below the angle of the jaw, ¾in. (note ½ in. is stated in Begg, Fido, and Skinner, 1996; Pg 351, but in all other respects the quote is identical) over an undivided muscle, and then becoming deeper, dividing the sheath. The cut was very clean and deviated a little downwards. The artery and other vessels contained in the sheath were all cut through. The cut through the tissues on the right side was more superficial, and tailed off to about 2in. below the right angle of the jaw. The deep vessels on that side were uninjured." (Evans and Skinner, 2000; pg 158).

And so a single cut made by drawing the knife across the throat will start superficially and become deeper, just as Eddowes appears to have. Also, Stride's cut is described as 6 inches, is deeper on the left than right, etc, as it Eddowes' (though hers is deeper overall, but effectively similar). I tend to suspect, given the details he provides elsewhere, that if there were two cuts made he would have stated that specifically, but that's an assumption which I accept can be validly questioned. Given the drawing shows a single wound, though, I think the combination of sources of information point towards Eddowes' only had her throat cut once, though the description from the testimony could be seen as a bit ambiguous when viewed in isolation.

- Jeff

[c.d.]

With regard to the number of cuts and their description we know one thing for certain and that is that the cut or cuts killed her. I have to assume that that was the killer's goal as opposed to trying to duplicate the cuts made on previous victims. The data pool of victims is quite limited so it is not surprising at all to see variation.

As for Stride being a domestic it seems strange that no one heard any argument after Schwartz left. In addition, Stride was not slapped around the face area and there are no frenzied stabs to the body which you would expect with a domestic. That seems a bit strange.

Since Swanson considered the possibility in his report of Stride's killer coming onto the scene post Schwartz it is a reasonable assumption that Schwartz was closely questioned as to whether Stride was alive when Schwartz ran off.

I still find it hard to accept that the B.S. man would go on to kill her after being seen by Schwartz and the Pipe Man. Why not simply run off if at that point all you had done was push a woman to the ground?

c.d.

[JeffHamm]

With regard to the number of cuts and their description we know one thing for certain and that is that the cut or cuts killed her. I have to assume that that was the killer's goal as opposed to trying to duplicate the cuts made on previous victims. The data pool of victims is quite limited so it is not surprising at all to see variation.

As for Stride being a domestic it seems strange that no one heard any argument after Schwartz left. In addition, Stride was not slapped around the face area and there are no frenzied stabs to the body which you would expect with a domestic. That seems a bit strange.

That's a good point. Like everything, it's not definitive, but it is a valid observation that needs to be considered when trying to weigh the options.

Since Swanson considered the possibility in his report of Stride's killer coming onto the scene post Schwartz it is a reasonable assumption that Schwartz was closely questioned as to whether Stride was alive when Schwartz ran off.

I still find it hard to accept that the B.S. man would go on to kill her after being seen by Schwartz and the Pipe Man. Why not simply run off if at that point all you had done was push a woman to the ground?

c.d.

Indeed, but again, if it's JtR (not saying it is for sure), then running off after having started on an attack he might follow through to the point of killing her. Even if it looked to be just pushing and pulling around, if it's JtR that's not what would be in his head with regards to what's going on, despite that being what Schwartz and Pipeman had in their head's as to what they saw. I suppose an argument could be made that because he went on to kill her despite having just been seen pushing her, that makes it more likely it's JtR. But, I think one could just as easily point out that a domestic could easily do the same, though your above observation might be suggested as a counter-point.

I think I find your last query of why to be most applicable to someone other than JtR who pushes/pulls Stride around in response to an unwanted proposition type thing. Someone who either has a personal connection to Stride (the domestic line of reasoning) or someone with murderous initial intent (the JtR inclusion line of reasoning), I think both offer explanations why that "cease and desist" failed to occur. Those seem to be the two most probable lines, placing Michael Kidney as the prime suspect for the former, and our unknown JtR as the latter.

If the case against Michael Kidney can be shown to be weak, that tends to tip the balance towards the alternative simply as these two options seem to be the best competing hypotheses (or one introduces a third option, such as the above stranger, but not JtR attack, but I think that to be improbable for reasons like you've mentioned - others may differ in that opinion).

There's a good write up here looking at the case against Michael Kidney, which I need to digest myself, so I'll just leave it for others to view at their leisure.

https://www.casebook.org/dissertations/exonerating-kidney.html

Anyway, from the discussions here, I'm starting to lean towards her inclusion, in part because I think the arguments for it being a random stranger other than JtR (i.e. why go on to kill her, etc) are working to convince me that line of thought is less probable than I was giving it credit for, and that it is really a choice between JtR and Michael Kidney.

I've leaned both towards and away on a number of occasions in the past, so this may not be the case tomorrow, and I reserve my right to waffle.

- Jeff

[c.d.]

Hello Jeff,

Don't you think that Kidney would have been asked for an alibi and if he failed to provide one that could be verified the police would have asked Schwartz to identify him?

c.d.

[harry]

I believe it may be a false assumption that it was an unprovoked attack by BS on Stride.The reality is that it is equally possible that Stride accosted BS, and that her fall was due to BS warding her off,as has been suggested by others.Schwartz is also claimed to have said he heard raised voices as he hurried away, which might suggest a vocal argument instead of a prolonged attack.If that is the case,it is probable that voicing his anger was all that BS can be accused of.

[Darryl Kenyon]

IF BS man was her pimp/bully boy she may have found herself with his knife at her throat on several previous (threatening) occasions and assumed this was just one more time she had displeased him; but this time he goes through with it. She is so taken by surprise that she clenches the small bag of treats in her hand and falls to the ground; her only physical reaction is to clench her fist, for her to do anything else it is too late.

Hi The trouble I have is would you go into a darkened passageway with someone who has just assaulted you? And would you kill someone when you have at least one witness seeing you assault the victim seconds before? And if Liz did have a pimp who had roughed her up on several occasions wouldn't Kidney have mentioned this to the police?

[JeffHamm]

Hello Jeff,

Don't you think that Kidney would have been asked for an alibi and if he failed to provide one that could be verified the police would have asked Schwartz to identify him?

c.d.

Hi c.d.,

Yes, I do, I just haven't seen any police reports saying they verified and cleared. Although, in Tom Wescott's write up that the link points to, near the ends, states "...Swanson reports that, ‘The numerous statements made to police were enquired into and the persons (of whom there were many) were required to account for their presence at the time of the murders & every care taken as far as possible to verify the statements.’, and points out that Kidney was one of those "many" suggesting his whereabouts were accounted for.

So, unsurprisingly, it does appear that Kidney was investigated and cleared, though I would be more comfortable if we had more details on that other than him being included in a sweeping claim of checking everyone and as far as they could and verified their statements. It would be nice to plug all the holes in terms of the how they checked out Kidney and what they found (this information may be available, I've just not seen it). The police were not incompetent, and a partner whom she had just left (and not for the first time), would be an obvious person of interest, so I'm left to have to assume they did check him carefully - I would just like to know.

So, given Kidney appears to have been clear, the case for Stride's inclusion is probably stronger than the alternative - random stranger attack but not JtR. I think there's still room for some caution, but unless some other known acquaintance of Stride can be shown to exist, and for whom there would be reason to suspect them, I think it's a choice between "stranger murder by JtR, known to be active that night in relatively close proximity of time and place" or "stranger murder by other person who happened to kill someone relatively close in time and proximity to JtR." Adding in what I see as very similar usages of the knife to commit murder on that night, it's looking to me very much like Stride should be included, others may weigh all of that differently.

- Jeff

[JeffHamm]

I believe it may be a false assumption that it was an unprovoked attack by BS on Stride.The reality is that it is equally possible that Stride accosted BS, and that her fall was due to BS warding her off,as has been suggested by others.Schwartz is also claimed to have said he heard raised voices as he hurried away, which might suggest a vocal argument instead of a prolonged attack.If that is the case,it is probable that voicing his anger was all that BS can be accused of.

It might have been, in which case Stride was killed by someone else who comes along after BS leaves, and is attacked a second time in the same location. And, of course, if it's not the case, and BS is JtR, then he was not just pushing her about, but perhaps his attack did not go as smoothly as it had on other occasions. We don't know either way.

- Jeff

[JeffHamm]

Hi The trouble I have is would you go into a darkened passageway with someone who has just assaulted you? And would you kill someone when you have at least one witness seeing you assault the victim seconds before? And if Liz did have a pimp who had roughed her up on several occasions wouldn't Kidney have mentioned this to the police?

Maybe she fled into the alley way towards the door, he panics thinking she'.ll get help and he'll be pursued, he grabs her scarf, she falls, and he kills her then and there and flees, having been spotted by two people.

Hmmmm, and if so, does that really mean it has to be JtR? Sigh, I might be waffling already.

- Jeff

[Harry D]

Unless you take Schwartz and his imaginary antisemite out of the equation. Then you've no need to reconcile BS Man and the cachous with the murder scene.

[JeffHamm]

Unless you take Schwartz and his imaginary antisemite out of the equation. Then you've no need to reconcile BS Man and the cachous with the murder scene.

What makes you think Schwartz was making up what he reported seeing? I believe someone has posted details suggesting that pipeman may have been identified and interviewed (and cleared of involvement).

[harry]

There was no second attack if the first encounter was instigated by Stride.

[Harry D]

What makes you think Schwartz was making up what he reported seeing? I believe someone has posted details suggesting that pipeman may have been identified and interviewed (and cleared of involvement).

First of all, it doesn't mesh with the murder scene. Stride clutching the cachous as she's manhandled to the floor, dragged into the yard and silenced. Unless we're supposed to believe that Stride went willingly into pitch darkness with her assailant or retreated into there, which is equally improbable. There were no signs of a struggle. No signs she was taken against her will. Hard to believe the killer swooped in mere moments after BS Man roughed her up.

We all know that the antisemitism was a powder-keg at the time. Last thing the jewish anarchists wanted was a Ripper victim on their doorstep. They had to do something to deflect any suspicion from them. Too risky to be caught moving the body. Enter Schwartz, stage right. A supposed outsider, Schwartz may have been walked past the club that night, he may have even seen Stride with a bloke, but I think the incident with BS Man was a load of...