|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
dlmaugie
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, January 28, 2005 - 1:11 am: | 
|
Looking at the Stride case a few things stand out to me. First, The Ripper moved fast and out of sight from anyone's view when doing the deed. He would not have attack Stride where anyone could have seen them. Also, He would not have yell out to at Schwarts. |
George Hutchinson
Inspector
Username: Philip
Post Number: 274
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 28, 2005 - 8:07 pm: |
|
Dave - STILL not registered?!
This is, of course, assuming Mr Broad Shoulders was the killer...
Also technically PN and CE weren't 'out of sight' - it's just there was no one around, but they were in open public spaces.
Of all of them, of course, you are right that ES is the least likely but I still think she is one of them. I just get a feeling it's become trendy amongst Ripperologists to say she wasn't!
PHILIP
Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd!
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3014
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 28, 2005 - 8:23 pm: |
|
I'd say the only thing that really points at the possibility of Stride being a Ripper victim is the coincidence with Eddowes' murder 45 minutes later -- and the fact that the women belonged to same class.
In my opinion Stride was not a Ripper victim, but in all probability a victim of a domestic dispute or a gang- or client-related murder.
If Mr Broad Shoulders were her killer -- and I can't see any reason to assume he wasn't -- it was certainly not Jack the Ripper who killed her. As "dlmaugie" points out, his behaviour is in no way a credible behaviour for an elusive serial killer, and I see the possibility of her being approached by another man or two in the remaining short time frame as microscopic (although not impossible, of course).
Besides that, we can argue until we're blue in the face; we will never be able to fully establish who were Ripper victims or not, with 100% certainty.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
George Hutchinson
Inspector
Username: Philip
Post Number: 276
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 28, 2005 - 8:37 pm: |
|
Hi Glenn
This is all true, but then the thing that has always been the side I take was it is also unlikely that 2 prostitutes of similar age should have their throats cut 10 minutes walk from each other within 45 minutes in similar circumstances.
Has anyone got records of how many prostitutes had their throats fatally cut at that time who weren't Ripper victims? I bet it wasn't many! It just seems too close to be a coincidence to me.
"Besides that, we can argue until we're blue in the face; we will never be able to fully establish who were Ripper victims or not, with 100% certainty" : I say to that "We can now be sure, with almost 100% certainty...".
We know who you've been reading recently, Mr Andersson. And it's not Patricia Cornwell. 
PHILIP
Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd!
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3015
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 28, 2005 - 8:53 pm: |
|
Hi Hutch,
"Has anyone got records of how many prostitutes had their throats fatally cut at that time who weren't Ripper victims? I bet it wasn't many! It just seems too close to be a coincidence to me."
I know what you mean, and I used to stress the same opinion myself in the past. And I am certainly not the one to dismiss that possibility entirely.
However, I do feel there are too many important facts that speaks against it in my view -- facts that adds up even weirder than the so called coincidence.
Coincidences can happen, and the same night we also had a domestic throat cut in Westminster. Sure, it was not a prostitute, but throat-cutting is was not a singular way of killing people at the time. It was actually very common.
Considering the witness testimonies, and whom they saw and did not see, all points to that it most likely was Mr. BS that killed her, which in my opinion would rule her out more or less. And if that's the case, the whole interruption scenario goes in the bin, and thereby also the real connection between Stride and the Ripper. I dont believe in coincidences, I believe in facts, and too many facts sets the Stride-Ripper-Interruption theory in a questionable light.
Still, for all we know she could have been a victim of Jack the Ripper, but I must admit that that solution gives us quite many problems to deal with.
"We know who you've been reading recently, Mr Andersson."
Well, watching, actually... Ah, it shows, does it...? 
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Paul Jackson
Inspector
Username: Paulj
Post Number: 288
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 28, 2005 - 9:04 pm: |
|
Oh Lord...here we go!
Hey Glenn...Hutch...
Glenn you know that if we are debating Stride, that ive gotta get in on it.
Hutch....that was a good call when you said that it was "fashionable" for ripperologists to dismiss Stride. Thats a Shame too.
As far as the records of homicide preceeding 1888,
I think there is a thread on the boards somewhere about that. Maybe Chris Scott pulled out some figures...Im not sure where it is exactly though.
Ive got a few more things to add, but iVe got a big fat cheeseburger waiting on me and I just got home from work. I know Glenn is a nightowl, so Im sure he'll be around in a few hours.
Paul
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3017
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 28, 2005 - 9:47 pm: |
|
Hi Paul,
I guess I just don't care about what's "fashionable" or not; as I see it, people have been drawing too easy conclusions in the past -- when it was more fashionable to include rather than exclude -- and mostly on more or less questionable assumptions without considering all angles.
In the end, Stride may have been a Ripper victim but then again she may not; there will always be different opinions about this, depending on the interpretations of the facts.
In my opinion, most indications speaks against it -- regardless of how much one would like to include her in the Ripper lineup -- and those facts have been debated inside out for the last ten or fifteen years. And needless to say, we will never know for sure even if we continue to play the game for another fifteen years.
Sorry, Paul, but it's 3:35 AM here, and I got to hit the sack.
Hope you enjoyed the cheeseburger.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
(Message edited by Glenna on January 28, 2005)
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Lindsey Millar
Inspector
Username: Lindsey
Post Number: 264
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 28, 2005 - 10:29 pm: |
|
Hi Guys,
I guess I just don't care about what's "fashionable" or not; as I see it, people have been drawing too easy conclusions in the past -- when it was more fashionable to include rather than exclude -- and mostly on more or less questionable assumptions without considering all angles
This I can't dispute, Glenn, but I am, and have been for many a day curious as to why Stride was considered a Ripper victim by the police - or hierarchy - at that time.
I remain undecided about Stride as a Ripper victim, but just have to ask that question.
In the end, Stride may have been a Ripper victim but then again she may not; there will always be different opinions about this, depending on the interpretations of the facts.
I guess so, dude.
Paul,
My, I could kill a big fat cheeseburger right now!
Hope you enjoyed it! I myself am having Ramen.. pay day is a long way off!
Bestest,
Lyn
"When a man grows tired of London, he grows tired of life" (or summat like that)
|
Phil Hill
Detective Sergeant
Username: Phil
Post Number: 82
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 3:25 am: |
|
I don't think it is "trendy" to give ear to evidence.
In recent years people have given more serious thought to the Ripper-killings and have subjected the cases to more rigorous scrutiny.
Stride raises questions that were not asked before and to some extent, on reconsideration, fails to meet the criteria of a JtR victim. In her case there is also a very serious contender for her killer (her "partner", Kidney).
As for coincidence, copy-cat killing are not unknown and Stride's killer may simply have sought to emulate the then notorious local murderer, in part of throw suspicion of himself (Kidney).
Stabbing apart (which need not be instantly fatal), to cut a throat is a pretty obvious way of attacking with a knife. And Jack had made people think about throat slittings.
Is it simply trendy - or good academic and intellectual practice - to question evidence and conclusions? I may not agree with the conclusions reached, but I find the debates on such things as whether MJK was a JtR victim, and whether Joe Barnett may have been Jack, or just killed Mary - healthy and fascinating.
Equally, the book that suggested there was no single Ripper, but that the concept of JtR was composed by the press of the day - unconvincing but refreshing. I certainly shook my complacency and made me think.
So I reject the word "trendy" on many grounds, and would encourage all to be open in their thinking about this case, even if we all in parallel, develop and hold our own pet theories!!
regards,
Phil |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3018
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 5:10 am: |
|
Hear hear, Phil!
A good post indeed.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
dlmaugie
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, January 28, 2005 - 11:34 pm: |
|
The M.O. just does not hold water on this one. The Ripper would not have tried anything unless, Stride realized he may had been the Ripper and was attempting to flee. Thats the only way I would buy in as her being a Ripper victim. |
Carolyn Caswell
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 10:03 am: |
|
This is my second post on the boards...
I have always been fascinated with Jack the Ripper, blah,blah,blah. BUT, I had always accepted the canonical five with no question, it was stated as fact. TILL, I found this website.
I agree with Phil, it is good to question evidence and conclusions. Not just accept things blindly from "people in the know". It is really sad to think how many people accept
Cornwell's theories just because she wrote a book.
I feel we all have our own different conclusions and these boards offer many different views.
Some in fun, some deadly (no pun) serious, all thought provoking, all making us think and giving us all new ideas to consider.
I don't believe
Stride to be a victim of J.T.R., too many things just don't add up for me. Right now it is just a feeling on my part. There is just something wrong with the whole scenerio.
Thank you,
Carolyn
c
|
dlmaugie
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 11:19 am: |
|
Philip
I have problem with the Ripper doing in Stride and going back to his place of residents and changing his clothes...Not to mention growing 2 to 3 inches. Then go out to do kill again. I am not totally discounting Stride as a Ripper victim. I am saying I think it is not likely.
Dave |
George Hutchinson
Inspector
Username: Philip
Post Number: 279
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 1:35 pm: |
|
Woah there Phil & Glenn.
I said it was 'trendy' to discount ES. Which it is - currently popular. That wasn't meant to be taken as a personal slight! And that doesn't mean it's wrong. It just means it is becoming a popular view. The quintessential case here of the dangers of the possible misconstruction of the written word! If we didn't have the ambiguity of statement here exemplified we would all know what the 1888 reports meant and wouldn't be disagreeing over them.
Which leads me to my next point...
Dave - you of all people know the witness statements say Jack was everything! Rich, poor, old, young, tall, short, fat, thin, Jewish, Gentile etc etc etc etc etc.....
The clothes thing we cover often. If Stride was killed from behind there would have been no blood splatter except possibly a small amount on his hands (and we covered this on your APRON thread a couple of weeks ago). Most guys wore black clothes. Black clothes in darkness WILL NOT SHOW UP BLOODSTAINS!!!!!
I'm taking up the case for the defence here. I stand 60/40 to ES being a victim.
PHILIP
Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd!
|
dlmaugie
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 3:33 pm: |
|
Philip
ES was 100 % a victim. The million dollar question is if she was a Ripper victim. I was refering to Lawende's discripton in which I think is credible. He told the police and Press exactly what he saw No more No less. As for Schwartz's I think he can be reliably to extent in telling the truth. He was in a situation where he may seen things different as they really where. |
Phil Hill
Detective Sergeant
Username: Phil
Post Number: 88
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 3:46 pm: |
|
Philip - "trendy" obviously carries other connotations for me. I take your point.
dlm - ES was 100 % a victim. The million dollar question is if she was a Ripper victim.
Given that we all accept Stride was killed - where does the distinction lie? When we used the word victim, "JtR-Victim" was implied, i think. Am I missing something?
Phil |
George Hutchinson
Inspector
Username: Philip
Post Number: 283
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 4:19 pm: |
|
Hi Phil & Dave
Here we are again - exactly my point that the written word can be misunderstood. Of COURSE I meant I was 60/40 that ES was a RIPPER victim (Did you think i was inferring she committed suicide or had an unfortunate accident on a rather large splinter on the gate Dave?  ).
Yeah, 'trendy' wasn't meant in a derogatory way (but not a positive way either - it was meant to be neutral!)
Another interesting one here, Dave. If we accept that both witnesses were accurate (and I agree that both Schwartz and Lawende would have had better views than any other witness) we have to assume, for your theory that there were 2 killers to be true, that Lawende saw the Ripper. I have doubts that it was the Ripper with CE. We don't even know if it was CE that Lawende saw. He just saw a couple getting close at the top of Church Passage 9 minutes before Eddowes body was found. There is a whole SEA of possibilities between 1:30 and 1:44am and I have a feeling the written record may not be telling the whole truth. I'm cut 50/50 it was JTR & CE that Lawende and his 2 friends passed. I also think it is POSSIBLE that Watkins did not pass at 1:30 and 1:44am on his beat but was saving his own skin because he was having a sit down, possibly with George Morris!
In short, we find ourselves no wiser than before. There are far too many 'did this happen or did that happen'? To say we believe for the record that the timings and accounts are true but the suppositions that the accredited victims have changed is being a bit selective. I think we are too far from it to be able to do more than hypothosise. By that standard, I therefore put my primary trust in the records of the time (I know that appears to be a contradiction to what I have just written above, but I am only raising the possibility as means of illustration for personal theories rather than stating it as a conviction).
Cheers to you both!
PHILIP
Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd!
|
Phil Hill
Detective Sergeant
Username: Phil
Post Number: 90
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 5:23 pm: |
|
I think we can put more probabilities on it than that.
As with the PC who "missed" the apron fragment in Goulston St, I think it is highly probable that he and watkins were (separately) somehow "cheating" on their beats.
That is much more likely, IMHO, than Jack hanging around before dropping the cloth, or the extremely tight timescale otherwise required for the Eddowes killing. (A timescale so tight that to have achieved it, Jack would almost have to have known to the second when Watkins would appear. Even allowing for echoing hobnailed boots on cobblestones, I don't think that is likely.)
But assume the PCs are not being accurate about their movements, and drop the double-event (which reduces the need to assume Jack has limited time to find Eddowes and "woo" her) and one has a workable hypothesis for the night.
That is not to say I immediately drop all other possibilities, but the one I have sketched out seems much more likely and practical to me. The alternative with its minute by minute accuracy - pretty well impossible in an era of personal timepieces that required winding, and in a poor area where few possessed watches anyway - has always caused me problems. So out comes Occam's useful razor for me...
But, as I say, I remain open to most other theories too.
Phil |
George Hutchinson
Inspector
Username: Philip
Post Number: 286
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 6:02 pm: |
|
The apron business I had never believed that it wasn't there earlier. I've always been fairly sure myself that Long had missed it (and why would he be looking in the bottom corner of a door anyway?!).
I'm not too sure myself if Long was neglecting his duties, but I do think it was there all along. Watkins I think is just a possibility.
It's a good point you raise about watches being unreliable and showing different times - we find time and again most of the witnesses judge the time by having heard public clocks chiming an undisclosed period before the event that involves them.
It's going to take a lot more convincing to persuade me that ES isn't a Ripper victim, but I'm definitely with you on the other points!
PHILIP
Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd!
|
Howard Brown
Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 209
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 12:19 am: |
|
Dear dlmaugie:
Stride was murdered in similar fashion without the evisceration displayed 45 minutes or so later on Mrs. Eddowes...
There is no reason to take for granted or etched-in-stone as fact,as many do,the acceleration of physical damage to the victims of the Ripper. That assumption has more to do with comparing other crimes to the Ripper's crimes,NOT percieving or judging it as a crime of its own peculiar idiosyncrasies.
Subjectively, I have my own opinions on the crimes that aren't really the issue here. What is relevant is whether dismissing Stride because of assumed mutilations,a la Nichols and Chapman were in order...
We can't know the following:
1. Did Diemschutz "disturb" him ?
2. Did something else [like people on the street or noises ] disturb him?
3. Was there in fact a desire to eviscerate her?
Since we cannot know these things,we,as people will do, automatically presume that since some things did not transpire as we think or assume they should have[ the evisceration of Long Liz,in this case...],it was a case of an interrupted mutilation. This pattern of evisceration "seems" to be the pattern of the Ripper....just like the "outdoors" pattern of murders does...until November 9th..when that pattern was changed.
It is frustrating that this Berner Street murder has some factors that make us want to "dismiss" Stride. For us it would eliminate the potential "second throat slitting murderer" out and about on the street on the same night as Eddowes' killer was...
Regardless of p.o.v.,it remains and always will be one of the "mysteries within a mystery" in the WM..
Later...
How |
Phil Hill
Detective Sergeant
Username: Phil
Post Number: 92
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 2:40 am: |
|
Howard - the other element to the doubts about Stride which are important (I feel) are:
a) that like MJK there is another plausible suspect for the murder - Kidney. I do not think the evidence stacks up with Barnett, but it just might with Kidney who seems to have had motive and temperament;
b) the busy street and relatively "open" nature of the location separate it from other Ripper killings;
c) the location is well out of the main area of the murder scenes (Bucks Row; Hanbury St; Mitre Square and Dorset St)south of both the Whitechapel and Commercial Roads.
Enough I think to give me pause for thought. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4009
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 7:11 am: |
|
Hi all
Just a thought about Watkins sipping tea with Morris. Yes of course that's possible. But Morris seems to me a bit of a stickler for correctness - there was a case where he tried to have a man convicted of stealing a cardboard box, I believe. And at the inquest he mentions that he took charge of his premises again - even though the Square contained only police at the time.
Robert |
Howard Brown
Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 211
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 10:35 am: |
|
Phil....
You've proved the point on how frustrating the Berner Street murder is on paper...damn ye !
Same m.o. with Stride,sans evisceration...although Berner Street was,as you state,more or less not as busy a street as the other three[ forgetting Dorset St. for a moment..],there was the IWMEC right next to the yards and it was open...and,my man,Eddowes' murder was pretty close to the distance to Aldgate High Street as Stride's was to Commercial Road....all of what I say,by the way,proving nothing....
In any event,I hear what you are implying. Thanks for the reply...
How |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 291
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 11:26 am: |
|
I want to reinforce Phil's points above especially with regard to Berner Street. all of the other murders were "above" Whitechapel Road including Tabram.
I've never been there so I don't have a good ideas of how far apart the murder sites really are but looking at the (BTW) just super map I got for my birthday--the one advertised on this site-- it seems that Berner Street just pops out for its distance from the other secenes. To be fair, Buck's Row also seems rather far away compared to the others which seem to cluster around an oval centering near the intersection of Wentworth and Goulston Sts.
Still, the whole scenario at Dutfield's yard just seems too public and sloppy for JTR>
Mags
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4012
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 11:35 am: |
|
Hi Mags
But then, how about the back yard of a very full lodging house in a busy street, sun just coming up, and a bloke moving about on the other side of the fence?
Robert |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 294
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 2:30 pm: |
|
In Berner Street, we have the social club with a couple of dozen people partying, and a door that opens into the alleyway. Schwartz was there, Pipe Man was there. The killer drew attention to himself by shouting "Lipski" (or something like it, I believe it was "Lizzie!").
Certainly the killer took risks at all the murder sites.In Hanbury St.though, there was no one around when the couple went into the building. Cadoche came out into his yard after the two were in the back of No.29, and presumably right after the initial attack.
Mags
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4014
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 2:56 pm: |
|
Yes Mags, Berner St was riskier than Hanbury (though I don't believe the killer was Broadshoulders). In Hanbury, though, he actually goes ahead despite Cadosch's comings and goings, just spitting distance away.
Robert |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 295
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 3:13 pm: |
|
I think it was too late to stop. Cadoche heard a "thump", probably the body bumping against the fence after she had been strangled. I'm assuming here that he strangled them then laid them on the ground to slit their throats.
Jack may not have heard Cadoche,though or maybe just didn't want to stop. I think Mr. C. was lucky NOT to have looked over the fence, or who knows what might have happened. Then we'd be running around in circles arguing about why JTR killed women and Men!
Mags
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4015
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 3:25 pm: |
|
Hi Mags
Yes, he seems to have been either
1. Super-super cool
2. Desperate to mutilate
3. A complete nutter
The weird thing is, he seems to have broken off his attack in Buck's Row when he heard someone coming up the street, but here he continues it with someone on the other side of the fence. I think he's trying to make it hard for us. 
Robert |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3031
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 8:10 pm: |
|
"The weird thing is, he seems to have broken off his attack in Buck's Row when he heard someone coming up the street, but here he continues it with someone on the other side of the fence. I think he's trying to make it hard for us."
Easy, Robert.
He probably had no idea there were anybody at all on the other side of the fence.
As for your three alternatives, I actually believe -- in my mind -- that he were a combination of all three.
If you add those three together you'll end up with a character that in many ways fits a paranoid schizofrenic perpetrator -- although I would maybe replace "super-super cool" with "relatively cool dude when the circumstances demanded it".
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Howard Brown
Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 214
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 8:26 pm: |
|
Dear Pot Roast Killer Giordano:
...The distance from Bucks Row to Hanbury to Berner looks as equally "distant" from Mitre Square. Your last sentence is the crux of the argument....you feel or sense a sloppiness in the Ripper's work.
That,my fellow experimenter ladyfriend,would be based on the epithet spewing schnook and no eviscerations,wouldn't it?
Yours truly...Polyurethane Killin' Brown
|
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 299
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Monday, January 31, 2005 - 9:59 am: |
|
It were already dead when I done for it!
I wish I believed in geographical profiling-- how tempting to look at that piece of real estate north of Aldgate/Whitechapel roads and west of Brick Lane.But I firmly accept Nichols as a victim so, another cozy theory down the tubes.
I'll agree at least with your points 2&3.I also agree with Glenn's diagnosis although-Please God- let's not get into too much psychobabble or citing irrefutable sources!
I'm going to have to scrape together my pennies and someday take Hutch's tour.
Mags
|
jeff Tonna
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 6:49 am: |
|
Hi Guys, My name is Jeff, am new to this site. I read some of your arguments against Stride as a Ripper Victim.I disagree that she wasnt as the facts are quite clear. She had her throat cut while lying on the ground as did all of the Ripper victims. now this would be a huge coincedence that a) 2 women get murdered on the same night within 45min of each other and both are killed by cutting the throat, rather deeply from left to right, and b) that both victims exhibited buises on there collars or neck area. This could possibly explain how the Murderer was able to get these women to lay down,( if you press the artery in the neck you can render someone unconcious in seconds)This you must agree to be a very specialised skill? Also the placement of the body is similiar. And also one more point, it has been stated by the autopsy Doctors that by cutting the throat while the victim lays down will mean the killer would have little or no blood on himself.Perhaps these points make sense to you guys?? |
dlmaugie
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 2:04 am: |
|
I agree with your post on all your points. I would not totally discount her as a Ripper victim for the fact there is no evidence to prove otherwise. However, I would be closer to discount her if I can get past the part of your Left hand holding the small packet of cachous wrapped in tissue paper. That tells me she was attack sudden and she was not prepared which is a Ripper M.O.
As for acceleration of physical damage I would say the situation dictated the depth of the mutilation(i.e. Mary Kelly).
The acceptance of Stride as a Ripper victim for many depends on their favorite suspect. Where as most would agree on Nichols,Chapman and Eddowes are without a doubt fall under his hand. I think personnally those are the area where to concentrate on.
Dave |
dlmaugie
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 4:25 pm: |
|
Yes, Phil We where talking about Stride as a Ripper victim. I see it as she was or was not and there is no middle ground.
I was having fun with Philip.We communicate on a regular basis and I respect/Value his viewpoints.
Dave |
Jeff Flowers
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 2:17 pm: |
|
How do we know, then, there was a "Jack the Ripper"? |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4017
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 31, 2005 - 10:27 am: |
|
Hi Glenn
Yes, quite possibly a combination of the three. But if he didn't hear Cadosch at all, then it would tend to mean that he was so engrossed in what he was doing that he was oblivious to his surroundings. Yet we seem to see evidence of his being aware of his surroundings in other crimes - Nichols and also Eddowes (Morris's door opening? Watkins's boots approaching?) I won't mention Diemschutz and Stride because it's in dispute.
Actually, a deaf Ripper would be quite a novelty : "Dear Boss, I keep on not hearing that the police have caught me...."
Robert |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3035
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 31, 2005 - 11:34 am: |
|
"Actually, a deaf Ripper would be quite a novelty : "Dear Boss, I keep on not hearing that the police have caught me..."
Hahahaha... good one, Robert.
Well, I can very much believe that he was in a rather obsessive state of mind when he performed the murders, but probably came to his senses before and afterwards. That would fit a paranoid schizofrenic quite well; the murders clearly show someone quite disorganized during the actual mutilation process. I am not at all sure he necessarily would have heard Cadosh, and we don't know how much noise Cadosh made either.
But that is of course only speculation -- we can't know this.
Just thinking out loud here.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
P.S. Is it true that you may not coming to the Conference??? What??? what????
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4018
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 31, 2005 - 3:09 pm: |
|
Hi Glenn
No, I fear that I won't be at the conference - unless I'm called in to identify Diddles the cat.
"What??? what????" Don't tell me you're going deaf too!
Robert |
Jane
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 211
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Monday, January 31, 2005 - 6:18 pm: |
|
Hi All,
Just popped in to render my tuppence worth.
I always thought that Stride was a victim of JtR but have revised my opinions to some extent. I have to say that there is a possibility that she was not. Glenn's point above is very much my thoughts. Jack left all sense of reality when he began his attacks. He had no idea of where he was or what he was doing, the only reality was the victim in front of him and the power he had over them. I believe that he lost time and only snapped out of it when he was forced to become aware of an outside influence, i.e someone coming along or a noise which alarmed him.
In Liz's case I kept thinking that something didn't feel quite right. I wondered initially why he didn't take her further into the yard. There was a great deal of cover further back where he could have worked without fear of being seen. Why kill her right by the kitchen door and just inside the gate?
The throat wound was shallower, which might be explained by his haste. Perhaps he realised that he had made a mistake in choosing that location and just killed Liz to silence her. I really am very torn on this one.
I might have to agree with Philip on this one 60 - 40 in favour of her not being a Ripper victim.
Someone put me out of my misery and convince me one way or the other!
Jane
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3039
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 31, 2005 - 6:31 pm: |
|
Jane,
"I might have to agree with Philip on this one 60 - 40 in favour of her not being a Ripper victim.
Someone put me out of my misery and convince me one way or the other!"
I don't know if I can put you out of your misery, but 60 - 40 in favour of her not being a canonical Ripper victim is exactly my personal estimate as well.
Besides that, I think neither of us (if we're realistic) will ever be fully convinced either way. This is a mystery within the Jack the Ripper mystery itself.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3040
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 31, 2005 - 6:35 pm: |
|
Hi Robert,
"'What??? what????' Don't tell me you're going deaf too!"
Actually, about a year from now I will probably receive a hearing aid, so you're suspicions are not all wrong. And I am not joking. My hearing is terrible.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4021
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 31, 2005 - 6:39 pm: |
|
Ah well, Glenn, if we meet up in London a year from now, I'll be blind and you'll be deaf - what a glowing testimonial for two Ripper sleuths!
Robert |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3042
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 31, 2005 - 7:09 pm: |
|
Robert,
At least we will complement each other nicely ...
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
extendedping
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, January 31, 2005 - 8:13 pm: |
|
I guess ignoring the obvious makes the mystery more fun...was Stride a ripper victim? Na...It’s too obvious.
Hey Hutchinson I agree it does seem fashionable to discount Stride even thought the similarities of her demise to that of other JRT victims greatly outweigh any differences.
Glenn I almost always disagree with your postings but still find them well written and insightful. However when you say "the only thing that really points at the possibility of Stride being a Ripper victim is the coincidence with Eddowes murder 45 minutes later -- and the fact that the women belonged to same class” I must take issue. First off there is the general location of the crimes, the fact that they were both committed on the street, the fact that in both cases a knife was used, the fact that they were done at night and the fact that in both cases the prostitutes throats were cut. Don't these points count as well? Also to say "The only thing that points to Stride being a Ripper victim" and then outline the 2 points that you did shows just how much you are trivializing these vital points as they relate to the inclusion/exclusion of Stride as a Ripper victim. Aside from the fact that they are not the "only" points toward Stride's inclusion, the word "only" should not be used in conjunction with these points in my opinion. The class/occupation combined with the proximity of the victims are vital and telling clues. Your use of the word “only” to describe these points is like someone saying "The only thing I see that points to this being a duck is the fact that it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck". Finally I like the way you argue with your assumption already in place..."the coincidence with Eddowes' murder 45 minutes later" is only a coincidence if you ignore the obvious...that the murders of the 2 women are in fact not coincidences at all. Again Glenn I think you are very insightful and a very thoughtful poster, but I totally disagree with your reasoning on this one.
|
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 305
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 01, 2005 - 3:17 pm: |
|
Hi, Ping--
I have to disagree with your idea that there are great similarities between Stride and the other victims.
Yes, her throat was cut. What ways are there to kill people? You can use a knife, a cosh or your bare hands to throttle. Knife is much more efficient and throat cutting the most efficient way of knifing--don't commandos still do it today even with all the high tech stuff at their disposal?
But as to the difference. First the throat wound was judged to be made of a shorter ,different kind of knife than the other victims.
Stride had apparently been having a good day. She was paid for having done some cleaning work, met a clerkly looking man and had a good evening with him, drinking, being treated to grapes.
Mr. Broad Shoulders,if he was the killer, assaulted her in view of at least two people and probably three if you count the "clerk" who apparently decided to run away when the trouble started. The assault happened at some time between 12:30-12:45 and Mr. D found her at 1:00. If the assault was at 12:45 that gave the murderer MORE TIME than the 10 minutes he's figured to have had with Eddowes. So, why only the throat slashing?
Here's my real question,though---even though I don't really thing Stride was a victim--- if the police could make a credible case for Stride being killed by ANYONE other than the Ripper why didn't they? The people were in an uproar, the newspapers were hounding them, they were being pilloried from all sides, why treat this as part of the series if they didn't have to?
Why not act as they did in the Frances Coles murder?
And that's not a rhetorical question--I would like to hear anyone's thoughts on it.
Mags
|
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1312
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 01, 2005 - 3:29 pm: |
|
Hi,
To repeat myself the attack on Stride by Broad shoulders fits the attack on Nichols[ if witnesses are to be believed?] it also fits the apparently clumsy assault on Chapman ie. falling against the fence heard by Cadosch. it could also fit the 'Dont pull me along luv' apparently uttered by kelly as witnessed apparently by Mrs Cox.
The one time it does not fit is the calm situation witnessed by Lawande and company, however the bruise on Eddowes left hand of recent origin suggests that after Lawande had left the killer proceeded in his forceful approach , either that or the killer was not that man and she encounted him shortly after.
Richard.
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3050
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 01, 2005 - 3:40 pm: |
|
"extendedping",
Thanks for the nice words, although you donät agree with me.
As I said, we could argue until Kingdom Come whether my fellow country-woman Stride was a Ripper victim or not, and neither one of us will never ever know the real truth. I am not the one here who have made my mind up.
"Finally I like the way you argue with your assumption already in place"
Assumptions in place? Did you read what I wrote above? "In the end, Stride may have been a Ripper victim but then again she may not; there will always be different opinions about this, depending on the interpretations of the facts."
Who's the one with "ready assumptions" here, really? The one who puts her in doubt but keeps the door open to some extent, or the one who calls her inclusion "obvious"?
"First off there is the general location of the crimes, the fact that they were both committed on the street, the fact that in both cases a knife was used, the fact that they were done at night and the fact that in both cases the prostitutes throats were cut. Don't these points count as well?"
No, not really, not in my view.
1) We are talking East End here -- an area over-populated, poor and rather inviting for criminal activities to occur. The location in Berner Street is in some ways off from the other Ripper murders, and the location as such is no proof whatsoever. We also know that gangs operated in the area and probably also other mutilating killers (the torso murders, the slaying of Emma Smith etc.)
2) The area was littered with prostitutes, and prostitutes do not only have one of the world's most hazardous occupations, they also attract other criminal elements, which every night puts them in a very dangerous and vulnerable situation. And the attacks on prostitutes were hardly reported in the old days, since these street women themselves wanted to have as little to do with the police themselves.
3) News flash. Prostitutes merely work at night, so why is it surprising that they should be attacked at night? In what way does the time of night even suggests an extraordinary connection to the Ripper murders? Do you really in your head believe that the Ripper was the only one attacking prostitutes, working in the possibly most dangerous occupation in the world?
4) Throat cutting was not an unusual way of killing people, which several other victims display (unless we want to count them all -- like Frances Coles, for example -- as Ripper victims). And the same night as the double event we had a throat-cutting event in Westminster, perpetrated by the husband of a wife. And this was not even liked to prostitution.
Throat-cutting in itself is certainly no proof of that the Ripper did it, and Stride's didn't have the same magnitude as the others.
So yes -- the only thing in my mind that seems understandable to link her murder to the Ripper is the Eddowes murder 45 minutes later.
But stranger coincidences than that has happened.
And as has been stated earlier, if we are to accept her inclusion, we have to accept that the murderer was interrupted and in that case there are several facts that doesen't add up, not least regarding the witness statements.
I can be wrong -- Stride could have been a Ripper victim, and we will NEVER know for sure, not you, not me -- but in my mind her murder (seen in relation to the Schwartz incident) seems to point at a domestic quarrel or a client-related assault. And if that's the case, I believe the Eddowes murder was a terrible coincidence. But unlike you I don't claim things to be "obvious".
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3051
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 01, 2005 - 3:46 pm: |
|
Richard,
"To repeat myself the attack on Stride by Broad shoulders fits the attack on Nichols[ if witnesses are to be believed?] it also fits the apparently clumsy assault on Chapman ie. falling against the fence heard by Cadosch."
No, it does not. That is not even in the same league.
The murderer of Chapman and Nichols did NOT assault in full view on an open street, with people looking on and shouting things to people on the other side of the street. This is not the behaviour of a serial murderer who have eluded the police and disappeared without a trace.
The murder in the Hanbury yard was risky but it was not clumsy in the same way as the Mr BS assault on Stride.
If Stride was a Ripper victim or not can be debated, but Mr Broad Shoulders was most certainly not Jack the Ripper.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1313
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 01, 2005 - 4:24 pm: |
|
Hi Glenn.
let me explain myself.
if one takes the case of Tabram, she was found on the first floor landing at George yard buildings.
Question. If she entered that building with a client for convience to get off the streets why climb to the first floor to give her favours , why not just inside the entrance?.
Is it not possible that she tried to evade her attacker by entering the first building she found, rather like a woman in that position would do so nowadays.
But was pursued and caught as she reached the landing.
In the case of Nichols, there are various reports that support a theory that she was originally attacked [ Mayby Brady street] and ran for her life until fatally put down in Bucks Row.
In the Case of Chapman, there was a report of what could be described as a violent noise in Number 29, as witnessed.
In the case of stride, there are witnesses although only one confirmation of a forceable attack on that victim.
In the case of Eddowes, although not a violent approach was witnessed by Lawande and company, there is still the medical reports that a bruise of recent origin was on Eddowes left hand, which could pinpoint to the killer of that woman grasping her by the said hand, and pulling her to a spot of his choice.
And finally in the case of kelly, we have reports of Mrs Coxs neice describing how her aunt heard Kelly state to a client 'All right my love , dont pull me along ' as they entered the passage to the court.
The above facts regardless of circumstancial in some cases leeds me to believe that the attack on stride runs parallel with the others.
Regards Richard. |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
