|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Glenn L Andersson
Police Constable
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 10
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 03, 2003 - 11:21 pm: |       |
Hello there, David.
I don't know if you'll read this, but I'll give it a shot anyway.
"I think the relevance is for those who think that it unlikely that there could have been two murderers working the same area, the same night. As you and Jon have said, it's coincidental that the Brown murder happened the night of the Double Event (about a couple of hours before the Stride murder). So if coincidence strikes once, why not twice?"
OK. I see your point. Well yes, who knows? I can't argue with that for sure. But I have my doubts, though.
No, actually things could be better in the land of "Charles XII". Sweden isn't what it used to be, I'm afraid. 
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
R.J. Palmer
Detective Sergeant
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 114
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 03, 2003 - 11:35 pm: | |
Stride is included out of tradition, nothing more. That, and the fact that the "Lipski" cry works well in conspiracy theories. IMHO. |
Glenn L Andersson
Sergeant
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 11
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 6:56 pm: | |
Hi Frank.
I must admit, that the more I read about the circumstances related to Sride's murder, I'm having some doubts of my own.
But the prime reason for why I don't want to exclude her that fast, is the one I've stated above. Namely that both Eddoes and Stride were killed so close to one another, both in time and in place (I wouldn't dismiss the time difference of less than an hour so easily), and that they´d been murdered just shortly before their bodies were dicovered. It is too much of a coincidence and would speak against all common sense.
That is my main objection to the exclusion of Stride as a Ripper victim, and to me it feels stronger than the signature of the murder and the MO. I know that (directed to Jon Smythe) one naturally must look at the facts. But how much thrustworthy facts have we access to? It is my belief, when we don't have any remaining physical to examinate, that we in most old cases also must use our intuition and common sense. And intuition as well as common sense tells me that the coincidence here is too reamarkable in Stride's--Eddows case. But that doesen't mean I claim to have an absolute answer; I'm simply saying that some theory sounds more realistic than others -- not to be absolutely true.
Regarding the agressive man seen by Schwartz:
Well, do we know that this man really is the killer in question? I've been investigating old cases concerning prostitutes for quite some time, and the scene described here -- that is, threats, abusive attacks and quarrels -- were quite common features in their daily life and their occupation.
In connection to the last two of your suggestions (the not so deep throat wound and the lack of mutilation), you overlook the more common comment to this, namely the presumed interruption, which could be an explanation.
You may have a point, though, regarding the circumstances and the site of the crime scene, but it necessarily doesn't have to mean anything.
BUT:
I am not really sure enough to say anything for certain, though -- in either direction.
However, what bothers me the most is -- assuming these facts are correct and valid -- if evidence really show that Stride's killer was right-handed while the other canonical Ripper victims were left-handed, as well as if the the wound really gives evidence of an attack with a smaller, round knife instead of a long pointy one.
If we really could establish these two arguments as reliable facts, then there absolutely could be a problem with Stride's incorporation with the other Ripper victims, I would agree.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Sergeant
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 12
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 7:03 pm: | |
Hey!
I see that I've become a "Sergeant" now! 
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 68
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 7:40 pm: | |
Hi Glenn.
".......if evidence really show that Stride's killer was right-handed while the other canonical Ripper victims were left-handed, as well as if the the wound really gives evidence of an attack with a smaller, round knife instead of a long pointy one."
You are going to love this, (a bit of 'Devils Advocat' here).
First.....it is not true that the medical evidence concerning the other victim indicates a left-handed person.
Second.....the weapon used on Stride could not be described as to type due to the fact that the cut was a slice, except to say that it was sharp.
The scarf around Stride's neck was frayed "as if by a sharp blade". But, because the weapon was not stabbed into her body in any place they were not able to tell the length or width of the blade or even if it was pointed.
The weapon used on Eddowes was approx 6" long, (due to depth of abdominal wounds), sharp (due to slicing), and pointed (due to stab wounds in face & abdomen).
Regards Jon.
P.S. "Devils Advocat", one who can momentarily view details from an opposing position.
|
Jeff Hamm
Sergeant
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 27
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 11:22 pm: | |
Hi,
I won't repeat it here, but under the "Victims\Elizabeth Stride\Liz Stride-The murder" thread I've listed what appear to be commonalities between the throat wounds to Stride and Eddowes. Whether or not these are informative or not (what I mean is clarified in my post) I don't know. But, if these commonalities are considered "common rare events", it might be enough to tip the scales towards Stride's inclusion. If they aren't, we're unfortunately no better off in our ability to decide one way or the other.
- Jeff |
Glenn L Andersson
Sergeant
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 13
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 05, 2003 - 2:57 pm: | |
Hi all.
Thanks for the information, Jon, as usual.
I got the data (about a right-handed killer versus a left-handed one and about the blunt rounded knife) from some dissertations by Scott Hannafield and Julian Rosenthal. They, in their turn, have most likely drawn their conclusions from the statements of Dr. Phillips and Dr. Blackwell at the Stride inquest.
However, now that I have studied the inquest and the post mortem (for a new-comer to the case, this jungle of documents are hard to get an over-all view of and to keep up with it), there seem to be nothing whatsover that verifies statements suggesting a certain kind of weapon that differs with certainty from what's been used in the case of the other victims (or at least no unambiguous points leading in such directions).
The blunt, round knife referred to was found near the murder site, but was actually discarded by both Phillips and Blackwell as being the probable murder weapon. The only remark to be found pointing towards a blunt, rounded knife is Dr. Phillips answer at the inqest: "[Cor.:] Was there anything to indicate that the cut on the neck of the deceased was made with a pointed knife? [Dr.Ph.:] - Nothing". However, this can not be enough to draw conclusions regarding the weapon or to verify Rosenthal's and Hannafeld's statements.
Furthermore, according to Sugden we necessarily can't assume that the same killer should use the same weapon at all occasions (2002, p. 211).
Then there is the problem regarding the murderer being right-handed or not. Appearently this is by some concluded (and regarded as facts) from Dr. Phillip's account for the description of the body, the position of the killer and the angle of the injury on the throat. According to the inquest and post mortem, there is nothing in Dr. Phillips testimony that clearly states that Stride's killer was right-handed, we can only make our own assumption based on the facts he's presenting. And as we study the differences of the throat wounds on Stride versus the other victims, Stride's gash actually was relatively deep as well, except from being slightly shallow on one side. But it was deep enough to sever the wind pipe and nearly all the vessels.
So there are actually no stronger evidence proving the murderer in Stride's case was right-handed or that a different knife was being used compared to the other victims.
Where that leaves us is another question; probably to the conclusion that we -- just don't know! And that is why I in my last message wrote "if evidence really show..." and "if the the wound really gives evidence of..." -- my remarks were merely questions and thoughts, rather than saying they indicated the truth.
And Frank, regarding the crime scene; I am not so sure it is so different from the other ones, if we compare it to the dark yards and sites where the others were killed. Hannafield states interestingly enough, that the "scene of Stride's murder simply does not fit a typical Ripper murder site" supposedly meaning that it was noisier and surrounded by people. Why? The body was lying in the yard, inside the gates, not in connection to the street, as far as I know.
Hannafield claims that Dutfields Yard was "well lit", especially as it would have been illuminated by the windows from the club. Now, this totally contradicts the witness testimonies, who say that the yard was very dark, and Diemschultz even had to light a match (and later take a candle from the club) to see anything at all. The noise from the club would , in addition, most certainly drown shouts or noise coming from the outside. So I'd say it's not a much worse a "Ripper spot" than on the other occasions.
As I see it, facts in this case are contradictory and not conclusive in any direction; the exclusion or incorporation of Stride as a canonical Ripper victim can merely be based on personal opinions and be regarded as 50-50 if we look at the odds. She may well be, then on the other hand, she may not. The question is whether facts (without consulting our insticts or common sense) here can tell us enough to make it possible to draw any real conclusions (which often in such old cases as this surely can be considered as most doubtful indeed).
All the best 
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Sergeant
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 14
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 05, 2003 - 3:14 pm: | |
Jeff!
I've read your piece about the throat wounds, and it was most informative and interesting.
For my part, I think it could show that the similarities are stronger than the differences in method.
But I am no expert either...
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Andrew Spallek
Detective Sergeant
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 60
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 05, 2003 - 3:41 pm: | |
Perhaps a word of clarification is in order concerning the coincidence of murders on the night in question. I believe it was not Glenn's intention, and I know it was not mine earlier, to suggest that Stride and Eddowes are the work of the same murderer merely because they happened on the same night. It is the combinaion of similaries, plausibilities, and reasonable explanations for differences that conncets them.
Both were East Enders killed in the East End, apparently by a stranger; both had their throats cut; there was sufficient time for a single killer to commute between the two sites but not so much excess time as to make waiting aroung implausible; lack of mutilation of Stride is easily and plausibly explainable. Now, had another East End prostitute been killed nearby by having her throat cut at nearly the same time this would have been a candidate for a third "event." However, the Brown murder was dissimilar, was miles away, and the police apparently had Brown in custody at the time at least of Eddowes' murder. The Brown murder obviously has no bearing on the case and it is a "red herring" even to bring it into the reasoning here. This murder is irrelevant to the question of whether Stride and Eddowes were killed by the same hand.
I also agree that it is unlikely that the man who pushed Stide in the street was JTR -- such clumsiness would be most out of character. But this does not preclude her having been killed by someone else shortly thereafter. It is also just possible that JTR just botched this one -- if he was the man who pushed Stride -- and that he may therefore have taken care to be extra quiet and careful with Eddowes.
With regard to the difference in knives and the question of right- or left-handedness, I don't find very convincing evidence. Forensics was in its infancy in 1888 and I don't think the examiners were skilled enough to make those determinations. They disagree on the dominant hand (as on the degree of medical knowledge possessed by the killer) and one of them admits that the wounds could have been committed with a long or short bladed knife.
Andy
|
Glenn L Andersson
Sergeant
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 15
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 05, 2003 - 4:40 pm: | |
Hi Andrew.
My points exactly (you understood my intentions perfectly). Naturally, it is "the combination of similaries, plausibilities, and reasonable explanations for differences that conncets them" that was the core in my contribution above.
Although you said it better -- and less complicated.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Saddam
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 6:04 pm: | |
"Stride is included out of tradition, nothing more. That, and the fact that the "Lipski" cry works well in conspiracy theories. IMHO."
But, RJ, how do you explain the other side of the matter--all the coincidental similarities with the murder of Eddowes? The time frame is right, the modis operandi quite close, the detectives all but one in agreement. What weighty argument have you really got against Stride? Tradition, shmadition, I say. Jack killed Stride.
You know who |
Frank van Oploo
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 05, 2003 - 7:06 pm: | |
Hi Glenn,
I agree with you that interruption could be an explanation for the absence of mutilation.
Let's - for a moment - assume that the broad shouldered man was Jack the Ripper and that he was interrupted. In that case he must have killed her only 1 or 2 minutes to 1 am. As we know that he was seen with Elizabeth Stride at about 12:45 am., this means that JtR - who was obviously already in an agressive mood when seen by Schwartz - must have been restraining for 13 or 14 minutes. This is possible of course, but it seems quite odd to me.
So, the way I see it, that leaves us with this scenario: the man with the broad shoulders leaves the scene, leaving Elizabeth Stride behind. Then enters JtR who kills her. In this situation 2 things remain to be considered.
First, the chance of Elizabeth Stride remaining on the scene. I can imagine, if the assaulting man had continued his agressiveness a couple of more minutes before leaving her behind (not unlikely), that Stride would have gotten the hell out of there.
Second, the chance of ES being assaulted a second time in about 10 minutes, this time with a fatal ending. I don't know the actual figures on that, but to me it doesn't seem quite probable for this to have happened.
According to the testimonies of Drs. Blackwell and Philips the time of death must be placed between 12:36 and 12:56 am. Dr. Philips also stated that the cut to the throat could have been accomplished in 2 seconds. This medical testimony alone makes it at least a bit doubtfull if the killer was interrupted because he must have killed Stride only 1 or 2 minutes to 1 am., leaving a gap of 2 or 3 minutes (if we stick to the latest time of death 12:56 am.).
And this isn't all. Although she didn't go to the police she makes an interesting though not very clear witness. Mrs. Fanny Mortimer, who lived a couple of doors from the crime scene, spoke to reporters and gave conflicting information about the events between 12:30 am and 1:00 am. You can read all about it under 'Dissertations' in "Elizabeth Stride: Her Killer and Time of Death".
What it might boil down to is this. At some point she heard an individual pass by with a 'measured heavy tread'. Immediately afterwards she went outside. One of the newspaper reports stated that these must have been the footfalls of a policeman walking by at ca. 12:35 am., but as she didn't see the Schwartz incident and others who where passing by before 12:45 am. it is quite possible that she actually heard the footfalls of the killer quickly walking by...
All the best,
Frank
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 248
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 11:03 am: | |
Hi RJ,
'Stride is included out of tradition, nothing more. That, and the fact that the "Lipski" cry works well in conspiracy theories. IMHO.'
As people have talked about coincidences here, for good measure should we perhaps consider the coincidence that someone chose to call out the name of a man who had in recent times achieved notoriety for murdering a woman, shortly before a man actually succeeds in - murdering a woman?
Might this suggest the cry of Lipski was made by someone with the murder of women very much on his mind? If the ripper was making plans and living for the City, and nowhere near Berner Street at this point, was Michael Kidney making plans to do away with Liz that night, or was he more likely cutting up rough with his knife on a Saturday night because his woman was playing up? If the latter, we have ourselves another little coincidence.
I'm just looking at how far one can reasonably stretch coincidence. My money's on Stride being a ripper victim but I'm ready, willing and able to be swayed by a good argument for yet another coincidence in this infuriating case.
Love,
Caz |
Glenn L Andersson
Sergeant
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 22
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 11:33 am: | |
Hi Frank.
Thank you for your very valid observations. There are a few points to consider in what you say, so I'm afraid I have to catch up with my reading a bit on those details and get back to you later. Is that OK?
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Sergeant
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 23
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 11:36 am: | |
Hey Caz.
Great and interesting scenarios you paint on the canvas here.
My money's on Stride as Ripper victim as well, but -- anything's possible...
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Andrew Spallek
Detective Sergeant
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 62
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 1:30 pm: | |
Let's also not jump to the conclusion that it was the actual arrival of Diemschutz's cart that interrupted Stride's killer. My hunch is that he was gone by then. With the murder site so close to what seems to have been a rather active street (lots of people coming and going) the killer was probably very nervous to begin with. He may have been frightened by any of a number of sounds, including but not limited to the sound of Diemschutz's pony and cart approaching while still well down the street. The killer may, in fact, have had immediate second thoughts about this "event" and aborted his plot immediately after cutting Stride's throat -- or even decided to abort before he did the cutting, only killing her to avoid being identified.
Andy
|
Glenn L Andersson
Sergeant
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 24
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 3:23 pm: | |
Hi Andy.
We seem to think in the same directions on this matter; I was actually having exactly the same thoughts.
However, I'll continue to study the circumstances that Frank pointed at nevertheless, just to make sure. 
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
R.J. Palmer
Detective Sergeant
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 115
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 5:46 pm: | |
Caz--I must confess that my previous post was (more or less) an inside joke. Theoretically, the cry of Lipski could be connected to the message left in Goulston Street.
The Stride murder doesn't look to me like a Ripper crime. The murder has a unity of time & place with the rest of the series, but not of action. Schwartz describes a drunk tottering up to Stride. Is this likely to be a man that remarkably escapes detection twice in forty minutes? Here's a question. Why was Stride milling around with the same bloke for upwards of an hour? Are these the actions of a typical East End prostitute with a punter? I don't think so. Call me naive, but it doesn't look to me like Liz is prostituting herself. The attack has the appearance of the classic love triangle.
So try this: Stride has split with Kidney and has a new beau. They mingle in Berner Street. Friend of Kidney (the bloke in Fairclough Street) runs into Liz and leads her off for a short talk around the corner. He pleads his friend's case, but she wants none of it. ('No, not tonight.') Stride returns to Berner Street, but her new beau, fed-up with the situation, has fled the scene. Stride waits for him, upset. Old beau (Kidney) comes staggering from a pub in Commercial Road ---(no doubt he's been tipped off by the friend from Fairclough Street). At that moment Schwartz enters the scene, all hell breaks loose. A street assault, yells, shouts, and a racial threat.
The great puzzle of the Stride murder is that she shows no sign of having attempted to defend herself. Why? Is it the action [or rather, inaction] of a woman who has been abused before, but, out of fear withdrew the charges? |
Jeff Hamm
Sergeant
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 28
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 9:38 pm: | |
I keep drifting back and forth on Stride. I think the frustrating thing is that Stride's murder can be explained just as easily as being "by the Ripper" as it can be explained as being "not by the Ripper". The lack of mutilations, and the fact that when she was found it appears she was only just killed (blood still flowing, not clotted yet; I'm pretty sure Diemschutz is recorded somewhere as saying the blood was still flowing towards the steps when he found her?) does allow for the notion of "interrupted Jack".
The big problem is that we really can't know if Stride's killer was even going to mutilate her. If it was Jack, then we can assume he was, but if it was not Jack, well, the exact same series of events could have occurred, although Diemschutz's showing up wouldn't be described as "being interrupted" simply because this "not Jack" killer wasn't going to mutilate her. But the pony and cart could still have arrived at the same "point in time" (or whatever event one wishes to use as their reason for Jack not mutilating).
In other words, for every plausible scenerio that includes Jack, we can simply replace "Jack" with "John", or "James", or "Joe" (hmmmm, bad choice of names there really, since we have John's, James's and Joe's as Jacks by other names!)
Anyway, at the moment, it seems to me that the one "event" that might tell us if the same person was involved in both Stride's and Eddowes' murders is the one event in common that we know their killers must have done. And that is the wounds to the throats. If this line of inquiry doesn't get us anywhere, I'm worried we may be stuck with an unanswerable question. Until research uncovers some new, and as yet unknown, bit of information like post-mortem reports, maybe some new testimony or police files, the current information we have is just not enough to really decide.
Of course, I may only believe this because the comparison has become a pet project of mine now.
- Jeff |
Frank van Oploo
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 4:14 pm: | |
Hey Glenn,
I can't help but making one last remark regarding the crime scene: the only (important) way in which it was different from the crime scenes of the other canonical victims, even that of Martha Tabram, is that it was right next to a building full of people who were wide-awake. In other words, if all had been dark and quiet in that building that night, it would have been quite like the other spots.
What stands out is that not one or two, but four (or maybe even five) crime scenes were in that way different. And that to me is a very significant difference, certainly if you consider that Jack the Ripper at least to some extent must have done some pre-crime planning (an example of which might be that he took a knife with him).
And hi there Andy,
It's a good point you made about Stride's killer possibly not being interrupted by Diemschutz's cart, but by some other sound or concern.
The only problem with this is the story Mrs. Mortimer told some newspapers. Although she gave somewhat conflicting information about the events between 12:30 am and 1:00 am., one thing remains certain. And that is that she had certainly spent some time at her front door after Schwartz had left the area, so after about 12:45 am. During that time the only person she saw was a man (Leon Goldstein) carrying a shiny black bag. She saw no enter or leave Dutfield's Yard before going back inside a couple of minutes to 1 am..
So, following your hunch and assuming that this part of Mrs. Mortimer's story is accurate, the killer must have left the scene after the Schwartz incident (which is logical, because Elizabeth Stride was still alive then) and before Mrs. Mortimer went outside...
Regards,
Frank |
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 74
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 07, 2003 - 8:46 pm: | |
I am still of the opinion that it is only 'time' which connects Stride with Eddowes, and hence, with JtR.
Stride's murder is more similar to Coles & McKenzie, and not many researchers are willing to include Coles & McKenzie in with the rest of the JtR victims.
If Coles had been murdered in place of Stride that night then we would be discussing Coles as a potential JtR victim not Stride.
Therefore, it is only 'time', not location, not style, MO or, call it what you will, that connects Stride with JtR. 'Time', and of course, the 'Dear Boss' communications. And, if it were not for those inferences (letter/postcard) then we may not seriously be considering Stride at all.
One thing though, I have to admit, that concerns me......those bruises.
The bruises on the upper chest of Liz Stride (below collarbone) are in a similar location to those found on Annie Chapman. Is that significant?, well, its the only detail that has me wondering.
(did you know about those bruises Glenn?)
Best Regards, Jon
|
Saddam
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, August 07, 2003 - 2:30 pm: | |
Mr. Palmer,
It is hard for me to discern an economy in how you deal with the objective evidence of the case above.
1. Stride has a new beaux.
2. She mingles with a beaux in Berner Street.
3. Kidney has a friend who wants to help him with his woman trouble.
4. Various enterings, posturings and exitings of dramatis personae in Berner Street.
We find no evidence for any of the four above. It seems you are willing to make heavy forward investments in hypotheses, but never cash them back out at a break even point. If all you do is lay your money out but never get any back, how do you realize a satisfying investment? If you are going to proceed as you do, it seems to us you would need to solve the case, say whodunnit in a manner consistent with your hypotheses, and the solution you give thereupon would have to explain the whole of the evidence--it would have to tell us many things we never knew before.
Otherwise, your broker sends you a regrettable investment report.
Food for thought, point to ponder, question is the answer.
Saddam
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 254
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 08, 2003 - 4:48 am: | |
Hi RJ,
I'm not sure any actions by Stride can determine whether her killer was Jack or not.
You ask: 'Why was Stride milling around with the same bloke for upwards of an hour? Are these the actions of a typical East End prostitute with a punter?'
Why is this relevant?
You say: 'Call me naive, but it doesn't look to me like Liz is prostituting herself.'
Again, why is this relevant? We know Liz was a prostitute, and to Jack she could have appeared like she was prostituting herself that night, whether he had seen her before or not. Would it fit your observations about Liz's behaviour if Jack encountered her, thought she was selling herself, and finding otherwise attacked her anyway, either in frustration or panic? Perhaps it was only a prostitute's assent to have sex with him that condemned her to being ripped up after death.
'The attack has the appearance of the classic love triangle.'
Well, I wouldn't know about that one. 
Naturally we both need speculation to make sense of it all. But I have no strong views either way. I just don't think you can use anything Stride did to conclude her killer was or wasn't Jack. I think you could turn the argument around and say she was actually more likely to defend herself against Kidney, if she already knew him to be abusive and that he was on the warpath because she had done him wrong. Maybe she had seen her killer before and had no reason to think he posed any great threat to her life. I just don't know. But that killer could still have been Jack.
There are lots of ways at looking at this, and I wouldn't like to exclude any of them. But knife murder was a rare event, even at that time and in that area among the lowest of the low. So, on balance, I think there should be very good reasons for wanting to eliminate Jack from involvement in Stride's murder, and wanting to find Kidney guilty of it.
Have a good weekend all.
Love,
Caz |
Glenn L Andersson
Sergeant
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 39
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 08, 2003 - 4:53 am: | |
Hi Frank.
Regarding the crime scene:
"it was right next to a building full of people who were wide-awake. In other words, if all had been dark and quiet in that building that night, it would have been quite like the other spots."
Well I'm sorry, Frank, but I don't see that as especially important. The main thing that connects this crime scene with the others is that it was dark, which I think was most important for him; by strangling his victims or slashing their throats, he silenced them fast and effective. And it happened in the yard, not out on the street -- it was the club that was crowded with people, not the yard or the street so I beieve, that if he hadn't interrupted, I believe he could worked realtively undisturbed.
No, I don't believe he did much pre-planning -- as I don't see ol' Jack as a killer who planned his attacks but someone who acted on impulses and instict (and probaly temporary insanity), I just think he took the chance whenever it came up. I also believe his victims were randomly chosen.
Frank, but I'm afraid I need more time to comment on your witness/time problem. Sorry that it's taking so long, but I haven't studied that detail more thoroughly before so I want to get my facts straight before i discuss it -- and I've been totally buried in work lately. But I'll hopefully get back to you on that.
Jon,
Yes you're right; it is mainly the time factor that connects Stride with the Eddoes murder. I feel, however, that the "Dear Boss" communication has nothing to do with it; it may have had in the past, but since we now probably can assume that these letters were hoaxes anyway, their importance is overrated.
Yes, I knew about the bruises, if you refer to the bood-stained ones that was discovered under the the right clavicle.
But, as Caz says, nothing can be ruled out here.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Frank van Oploo
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, August 08, 2003 - 8:32 pm: | |
Hi Glenn,
In some of your posts on other threads I had already read that you think that Jack was an 'unorganized' killer, and I must admit that if you look at it from that viewpoint, the fact that the murder scene was right next to a building full of singing and discussing people can indeed be regarded as not especially important.
Although I see your (view)point, of course I'm not willing to give in and with regard to this particular crime scene I have to 'defend'  mine, which is that I'm more inclined to think that Jack was a cautious man who at least to some extent planned his crimes.
To that end I want to add some things to the features of the scene: the gates to Dutfield's Yard were open at the time of the murder, the gateway was 9'2" (ca. 2,75 m) wide, Elizabeth's feet were about 3 yards (ca. 2,75 m) from the street and there was a side-door leading from the Club into the yard which was about 18' (5,4 m) from the street and 8'10" (2,65 m) past the spot where she stood when she was attacked.
My point here is that someone could have been coming out or wanting to come in by the side-door at any moment (several people had actually done that shortly before 12:45 am.) and it also would not have been strange if people came out of the Club's street door only to loiter a bit in front of the gateway before really going home. Although the alleyway was very dark, there was every chance of the killer being noticed then. As I see it now I have the feeling that Jack wouldn't have wanted to take these avoidable risks, the risks he wouldn't have felt taking at all the other crime scenes.
That's it for now, I'm off to bed.
Goodnight,
Frank 
|
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
