Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

For what reason do we include Stride?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by harry View Post
    If there was light in the yard when the killer and Stride entered,then it would have been possible for the couple to have been seen.Would the killer,under those circumstances begin an attack.?
    Its my understanding that there was a little light from the upstairs window Harry, but if they were behind the open gate, likely very little. Her feet were only inches from that gate door, and Eagle says he "couldn't remember' if he had to step around or over a dying woman, so its possible she and her killer might have been behind the gate, and came out slightly when she was killed. I can see her being poked in the chest behind the gate while being threatened, she turns to leave, her scarf is grabbed, her throat is cut while he held the scarf, and then dropped. That scenario does have some evidence that would support it...bruising on chest, scarf evidence, position in death,...maybe someone warned her about something, she, being a tough street woman... had a smart aleck remark, and it cost her her life.
    Michael Richards

    Comment


    • Daily News 1 Oct;

      "For a distance of 18 or 20 feet from the street there is a dead wall on each side of the court, the effect of which is to enshroud the intervening space in absolute darkness after sunset. Further back some light is thrown into the court from the windows of a workmen's club, which occupies the whole length of the court on the right, and from a number of cottages, occupied mainly by tailors and cigarette makers, on the left. At the time when the murder was committed, however, the lights in all of the dwelling-houses in question had been extinguished, whilst each illumination as came from the club, being from the upper storey, would fall on the cottages opposite, and would only serve to intensify the gloom of the rest of the court"

      Comment


      • Originally posted by natalie84 View Post

        Respectfully, I find it odd to think it more improbable that no such events would have occurred in the course of the killer's activities than that they would.

        Like… this was a murderer operating (usually) in public spaces in a majour metropolitan area, in a time and place where sex workers, drunks, police constables, vagrants and early morning labourers would all be out in the street. What strikes me as unusual and 'deux ex machina' isn't that the killer's activities might be interrupted by Schwartz, Diemschutz or even a sudden loss of lighting, but rather that this DIDN'T happen more FREQUENTLY.

        The killer was able to blend into the general tumult and chaos of Whitechapel, and to take advantage of it and its citizens desensitization to violence, conflict, screams, whatever, but he wasn't able to control or halt it. Unless we're talking about Tabram or Kelly, where he had privacy, sooner or later someone would stumble upon the scene.

        As a more general remark on the subject of the thread, my own opinion is that almost any one of the canonical and probable murders can be separated out from the others. The only two that have a "perfect" similarity were Nicholls and Chapman. We're not looking at a methodical serial killer who acted over a period of years and perfected a consistent modus operandi, but rather a sudden spree of unusual, and rapidly escalating, violence that appeared to terminate just as suddenly. It's not even that outlandish to think all the murders might have been the work of separate perpetrators, fuelled and obscured by the public hysteria over the previous murders. Unlikely, yeah, but still on the table. Why keep Stride in the picture? Because, at the very least, she's part of the phenomenon.
        Good post Natalie!

        Welcome to CB!

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

          Kate did have the double cut
          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.

          Kind regards, Sam Flynn

          "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
            Indeed but, in the case of Stride, the "interruption" would need to occur before he could inflict an extensive cut to the throat (and nothing else). That's possible, of course, but it would have been extremely unlucky - for the killer - if that's actually what happened.
            ive often wondered that perhaps her less extensive throat cut was due to the fact that it happened to not go as planned by the ripper. perhaps what Schwartz saw when BS mans hands went up to her shoulder area, it was actually him cutting her throat and schwartz didn't quite catch it.
            "Is all that we see or seem
            but a dream within a dream?"

            -Edgar Allan Poe


            "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
            quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

            -Frederick G. Abberline

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
              Daily News 1 Oct;

              "For a distance of 18 or 20 feet from the street there is a dead wall on each side of the court, the effect of which is to enshroud the intervening space in absolute darkness after sunset. Further back some light is thrown into the court from the windows of a workmen's club, which occupies the whole length of the court on the right, and from a number of cottages, occupied mainly by tailors and cigarette makers, on the left. At the time when the murder was committed, however, the lights in all of the dwelling-houses in question had been extinguished, whilst each illumination as came from the club, being from the upper storey, would fall on the cottages opposite, and would only serve to intensify the gloom of the rest of the court"


              ​​​​​​Dead wall! Thank you, Joshua I was wracking my skull trying to recall the term, but didn't feel like reading the entirety of Casebook or BNA to locate it. Add the claim that the Ripper could have been lurking on the site and gone unseen by Diemschutz, and I interpret that it was visibility "near zero" right there by the wall.
              I don't remember how wide the gates were, so I can't say how far up the yard she was - 6, 7, 8,... Only remember that she was beyond the width of the open gate, just as Michael pointed out.
              For me, this environmental factor comes into play when I question whether or not "everything that happened to Catherine" was meant for Elizabeth.

              *And, I saw the word "gloom" used elsewhere, by a journalist who was slumming the murder sites in the wake of the attacks. In Mitre Square. This scribe was able to stand in that shadowed corner where Catherine was murdered, going completely unnoticed and unseen by people walking through the square.
              there,s nothing new, only the unexplored

              Comment


              • Originally posted by natalie84 View Post
                ...
                As a more general remark on the subject of the thread, my own opinion is that almost any one of the canonical and probable murders can be separated out from the others. The only two that have a "perfect" similarity were Nicholls and Chapman. We're not looking at a methodical serial killer who acted over a period of years and perfected a consistent modus operandi, but rather a sudden spree of unusual, and rapidly escalating, violence that appeared to terminate just as suddenly. It's not even that outlandish to think all the murders might have been the work of separate perpetrators, fuelled and obscured by the public hysteria over the previous murders. Unlikely, yeah, but still on the table. Why keep Stride in the picture? Because, at the very least, she's part of the phenomenon.
                I find it a little outlandish, Natalie, just based on all the control factors that 5 separate killers would have to keep in common to pull off such outrageous crimes in a city known for an extremely low social murder rate. Reading the newspapers of the times, murders were usually some family member went on a bender and stabbed her sister or shot his father or assaulted his wife or &c. And they tended to be resolved fairly quickly by the force. But, to have 5 individuals suddenly commit a spree of social murders (ie. in the sense of murdering 'a stranger' or person not known to him or her) on unfortunate women belies a conspiracy.

                As for control factors, most the crimes were committed cluelessly; other than a handprint on Polly's face, what are you truly left with? There's no bloody handprints in No. 13, no bloody footprints leading away from Mitre Square, no button torn from shabby genteel clothing in that backyard on Hanbury, &c. So, these 5 would have to share a particular criminal perfection amongst the lot. Then, I consider that 5 separate killers would mean 5 separate family, community or social groups that they returned to after committing the crime. Surely, not all 5 could have been equally meticulous that they went undetected by a wife, neighbor, cousin, minister, &c. And, 5 killers means 5 different personalities; meaning, one might have a big mouth and brag about his crime: another might be wrought with guilt that he confessed to a confidante: and so on and so on. And finally, Id like to believe that, if there had been 5 separate killers, the police would have at least been adept at catching 1 out of the lot.

                I can accept that there can be shared social phenomena. Notre Dame burns, and all I've been hearing since then is attacks on churches. So, I can accept that, in 1888, reports of the The Ripper murders may have had an affect on the maniacs and lunatics "out there", but I wouldn't be willing to put 5 killers "on the table".
                there,s nothing new, only the unexplored

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                  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.
                  He does say that the throat was cut across, he doesn't specify one cut anywhere Ive read. I recall someone stating there were 2 cuts, Ill find that quote.
                  Michael Richards

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Robert St Devil View Post



                    ​​​​​​Dead wall! Thank you, Joshua I was wracking my skull trying to recall the term, but didn't feel like reading the entirety of Casebook or BNA to locate it. Add the claim that the Ripper could have been lurking on the site and gone unseen by Diemschutz, and I interpret that it was visibility "near zero" right there by the wall.
                    I don't remember how wide the gates were, so I can't say how far up the yard she was - 6, 7, 8,... Only remember that she was beyond the width of the open gate, just as Michael pointed out.
                    For me, this environmental factor comes into play when I question whether or not "everything that happened to Catherine" was meant for Elizabeth.

                    *And, I saw the word "gloom" used elsewhere, by a journalist who was slumming the murder sites in the wake of the attacks. In Mitre Square. This scribe was able to stand in that shadowed corner where Catherine was murdered, going completely unnoticed and unseen by people walking through the square.
                    The gates were 2 doors that combined to just over 10ft in width. From the street the left one had a wicket in it. Both were swung in, and Liz's feet were about 6 inches from the gate that swung into the side wall of the club. There were people in the cottages opposite the wall that were awake at the time, one was Lave, and he went in around the same time Eagle says he arrived. There were cigarette makers in those cottages, and Leon Goldstein had a black bag that was full of empty cigarette cartons...was he headed for the cottages when he looked into the open gates, and then changed his mind?
                    Michael Richards

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
                      I recall someone stating there were 2 cuts, Ill find that quote.
                      It'd be useful if you find it, Michael. I seem to recall some ambiguity about the number of wounds, but the important thing as far as I'm concerned is that at least one of the cuts left an enormous gash in her throat, and penetrated all the way down to her vertebræ; a very similar, if not identical wound was sustained by all the other canonical victims, apart from Stride.
                      Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                      "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                      Comment


                      • I find it a little outlandish, Natalie, just based on all the control factors that 5 separate killers would have to keep in common to pull off such outrageous crimes in a city known for an extremely low social murder rate. Reading the newspapers of the times, murders were usually some family member went on a bender and stabbed her sister or shot his father or assaulted his wife or &c. And they tended to be resolved fairly quickly by the force. But, to have 5 individuals suddenly commit a spree of social murders (ie. in the sense of murdering 'a stranger' or person not known to him or her) on unfortunate women belies a conspiracy.

                        As for control factors, most the crimes were committed cluelessly; other than a handprint on Polly's face, what are you truly left with? There's no bloody handprints in No. 13, no bloody footprints leading away from Mitre Square, no button torn from shabby genteel clothing in that backyard on Hanbury, &c. So, these 5 would have to share a particular criminal perfection amongst the lot. Then, I consider that 5 separate killers would mean 5 separate family, community or social groups that they returned to after committing the crime. Surely, not all 5 could have been equally meticulous that they went undetected by a wife, neighbor, cousin, minister, &c. And, 5 killers means 5 different personalities; meaning, one might have a big mouth and brag about his crime: another might be wrought with guilt that he confessed to a confidante: and so on and so on. And finally, Id like to believe that, if there had been 5 separate killers, the police would have at least been adept at catching 1 out of the lot.

                        I can accept that there can be shared social phenomena. Notre Dame burns, and all I've been hearing since then is attacks on churches. So, I can accept that, in 1888, reports of the The Ripper murders may have had an affect on the maniacs and lunatics "out there", but I wouldn't be willing to put 5 killers "on the table".
                        It's not actually my intent to argue a Multiple Killers theory. It's not one I believe. It's just a way of making my point that Stride's particularly inhibited murder isn't any more separate from the others than, say, Kelly's particularly brutal one. Also, why are you asssuming that if it WAS 3-5 separate killers that they would all be murders of strangers? One could imagine one man killing Nicholls, Chapman and Eddowes, then Kidney killing Stride, and Barnett killing Kelly, for instance. And they don't get caught because the police, press, coroners and witnesses are all caught up in the Ripper Hysteria. Again, this is not my actual theory of what happened, I'm just making a point that the links between the canonical five are ALL at least a little bit up to questioning.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
                          So if there was no light in the passageway it would follow this would be an ideal place for Jack to strike, just let Liz lead him there. Yet if we are to believe BS man was Jack then why attack, and pull her into the street, doesn't make sense. Yet if BS was her killer and not Jack then how come Liz is found dead in the yard with no obvious signs of a struggle? It seems a bit square pegs round holes to me.
                          Regards Darryl
                          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.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                            Why not leave her alive, if all that had happened up till then was a bit of rough and tumble? Unless he knew that Stride would be able to identify him, of course, but even then it's possible that all she'd have against him was that he'd roughed her up.
                            Hi Sam,

                            If it's not JtR, then yes, a domestic fits, but if it is JtR, then he kills her because the initial rough and tumble wasn't just pushing about, it was the beginnings of an attack where he intended to kill her (he's a serial murderer and that's what he's out looking to do). Something, we don't know what but many suggestions have been put forth, causes him to abort the sequence. Interruption is the most common explanation that people hypothesize about, but it could be anything, such as the attack on Stride didn't go to plan and it wasn't satisfying to him.

                            Anyway, starting from either initial starting point (not JtR or is JtR) doesn't really cause major problems, just creates questions. As I say, I don't have strong views on either her inclusion or exclusion, and think rational explanations exist for both views.

                            - Jeff

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by JeffHamm View Post

                              if it is JtR, then he kills her because the initial rough and tumble wasn't just pushing about, it was the beginnings of an attack where he intended to kill her
                              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.
                              Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                              "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

                                Hi Jeff,

                                Well... Phillips, who saw 4 of the Five Canonicals first hand, saw dissimilarities with Eddowes and the previous victims, let alone with Stride. Kate did have the double cut, something which is unique enough to be considered as a signature or part of his MO, but Phillips still was unconvinced the cuts matched Polly and Annies.
                                Hi Michael,

                                Not sure about a double-cut on Kate. Here's the details I've extracted from the inquest testimony (as reported in The Times). I also reproduced the descriptions for the injuries to the throats for Nichols and Chapman (in post 413 of this thread all 4 are included).

                                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).

                                Eddowes:
                                Testimony of Frederick Gordon Brown, 17 Finsbury Circus, Surgeon of City of London Police Force:
                                "The throat was cut across to the extent of about 6 or 7 inches. A superficial cut commenced about an inch and ½ below the lobe and about 2½ inches behind the left ear and extended across the throat to about 3 inches below the lobe of the right ear. The big muscle across the throat was divided through on the left 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 hand a fine hole opening. The internal jugular vein was opened an inch and a half not divided. The blood vessels contained clot." (Evans and Skinner, 2000; pg 205/206)

                                It is not clear if the 2nd sentence (beginning with "A superficial cut...") is describing a 2nd, injury, or is describing that the cut that went 6-7 inches started superficially, and then proceeds according to the subsequent descriptions. It sort of reads like a 2nd injury, but the subsequent details are anything but superficial, and so must refer to the first 6-7 inch cut, and that produces a haphazard presentation of details that isn't consistent with a medical expert giving testimony.

                                To me, the description for the injuries to Stride and Eddowes sound very similar, only that Eddowes was more severe. If JtR was spooked, or for whatever reason decided that he wasn't sticking around, prior to cutting Stride's throat, then that's a more rushed situation with a resulting less extensive injury.

                                The difference between Eddowes and Chapman over all was in many respects with regards to anatomical knowledge, but given the sun was coming up for Chapman and it was extremely dark for Eddowes, the difference in that seems more situational to me than anything else. The overall pattern between Chapman and Eddowes links them in my opinion.

                                - Jeff

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X