|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Shannon Christopher
Sergeant
Username: Shannon
Post Number: 40
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 27, 2003 - 8:46 pm: |       |
Glenn, in case your wondering how I reached that conclusion... Liz's throat was cut on one side and not an immediate cause of death, so had the killer not obstructed her movement in some way she would have been clutching her throat as is the natural reflex to a cut in that area (see the Kennedy assination film) and since her left hand was behind her with the cachoes and her right was laying across her chest area she was already deceased or Louis would have seen her flailing about like a fish out of water...
Shannon |
Shannon Christopher
Sergeant
Username: Shannon
Post Number: 42
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 27, 2003 - 11:48 pm: | |
Saddam, first trap was in not communicating between the police stations causing the stir in Goulston street which the press had a field day with and resulted in the resignation of Sir Warren. Second, in the way the police ignored witnesses when their tertimony conflicted with the doctors, even though the eye witness were more credible than 19th century forensics. Third, if the police would have taken photographs of all the crime scenes they may have learned more at a later date when they were able to compare the photographs. This is a contributing factor as to why the murders were not solved, and why as you stated we have so little to go on today...
Shannon |
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 294
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 28, 2003 - 5:19 am: | |
Hi Shannon,
Well, I must say that I am impressed by your efforts regarding Dutfield's Yard. Building models etc. -- that is too much for me, and I am not good enough in natural science to do that kind of experiments. But it doesen't matter, really, since we don't seem to disagree on that the yard was small and narrow. What I was most interested in, regarding plans and other detailed schetches, was the positions of different windows, and to sort that out we would need plans over the buildings surrounding the yard. I have in the written material tried to find mentionings about "your" windows on the floor level, but I actually haven't succeeded. All I can see is statements about the "empty walls". In the Casebook's "Elizabeth Stride aka Long Liz" I once again read that "from the street to the side door of the Worker's Club you walk between the blind walls of buildings". Since you deliver an opposite opinion I would really have felt more at ease with studying the maps and plans over the premises, since I prefer to use original material in my studies before second-hand sources.
But once again, even if there were windows (and IF there were lights in them!), this light wouldn't be that much to brag about, since street lights and indoor lights during this time really didn't help that much (that's why I tried to point out the circumstances around the gas light problems, and I am a bit disappointed that you don't seen to consider or comment on it). The lit windows connected to the Club where the debate and singing took place were on the upper storey.
"Louis could see something ("I looked to see what the object was, and observed that there was something unusual, but could not tell what"), just wasnt sure until he hit the match. If it were as dark as you have indicated, he would not have been able to see anything at all."
Here I totally disagree with you. I have never said that he didn't see anything at all or that the yard was black as a piece of coal. I meant that it would be dark enough to perform a murder without being seen (in opposition to the false opinion that the yard was "lit up"). When it is so dark, that you only can see contours of things and have to strike a match too see any details, then I believe it is dark enough. Let's not split hairs.
Your conclusions regarding the throat cut are interesting and since our information is sparse, and I certainly am not an expert in forensics (although I have some very basic knowledge), I can't really with certainty argue with them.
But there is one thing to consider:
Blackwell didn't arrive at the scene until 01:16 and he himself concluded (if we are to believe his skills or opinion) that her dead occured between 24:46 and 24:56 (at the earliest!) -- Dr Phillips, who arrived much later, estimated the time of death a few minutes earlier. So it is not that far from Diemschutz' arrival. Most of the blood had also reached a liquid state when Blackwell arrived.
My belief is that it is unlikely that the killer left that much earlier, considering that Mrs Mortimer stood in the street door between 24:48 and just before Diemschutz arrival (otherwise she would have spotted the killer). I therefore think that he must have snuck out in between this or during the time Diemschutz examined the body, unless he made his exit through the premises of the yard instead, of course. We have also no statements saying that there were any people in the street at exactly that time, as far as I know, so it would be quite easy for him to get away while confusion stirred in the club and everybody went outside in the yard to look. I can agree, though, that "exactly the same time as Diemschutz arrival" maybe is to stretch it bit, there is also a possibility that he was disturbed by something else (a sound from the street or some loud noice or shout from the club) and then didn't managed to slip away until Diemschutz arrived.
"Kate did not walk the steets to get money for her bed, she walked the streets instead of taking the lodging and found refuge on the street."
How did you reach this conclusion? What do you base it on? I myself have studied the lives and life conditions of low-class city women and prostitutes in Sweden and Denmark during the 19th and early 20th century now for almost ten years, and I can assure there are no grounds for stating such an assumption as an absolute fact. And once again, what was she doing on Mitre Sqare?
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 295
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 28, 2003 - 5:36 am: | |
Regarding the discussion here about how the police handled the case, I think we can conclude that the police of the time did as well as they could, considering the total lack of experience in cases like this. In many cases here in Sweden as late as in early 1900 and 1910, they still didn't take photographs or made appropriate efforts at the crime scenes. The technical opportunities in taking photo shots and sealing off crime scenes was existing in the late 19th century but not the knowledge or experience of how to use them in a proper way.
There are numerous things the police at the time could have done better, but far too many have wrongly accused the police of the time for this and that. Looking upon it in the light of its time, I think we see a police investigation that reveal nothing less than we can expect. Missing out on witnesses, political prestige and failing in recording the crime scenes also happens today!!!!!!!!
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Shannon Christopher
Sergeant
Username: Shannon
Post Number: 44
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 28, 2003 - 7:20 pm: | |
Glenn: " have in the written material tried to find mentionings about "your" windows on the floor level, but I actually haven't succeeded."
Stride inquest:
[Wess] "The club premises and the printing-office occupy the entire length of the yard on the right side. Returning to the club-house, the front room on the ground floor is used for meals. In the kitchen is a window which faces the door opening into the yard."
[Wess] "...the yard is only lit by the lights through the windows at the side of the club and of the tenements opposite. As to the tenements, I only observed lights in two first-floor windows. There was also a light in the printing- office, the editor being in his room reading."
Shannon |
Shannon Christopher
Sergeant
Username: Shannon
Post Number: 45
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 28, 2003 - 8:39 pm: | |
From the inquest:
[Dr. Blackwell] “The deceased was lying on her left side obliquely across the passage, her face looking towards the right wall. Her legs were drawn up, her feet close against the wall of the right side of the passage. Her head was resting beyond the carriage-wheel rut, the neck lying over the rut. Her feet were three yards from the gateway.”
[Dr. Blackwell] “The right hand was open and on the chest, and was smeared with blood. The left hand, lying on the ground, was partially closed, and contained a small packet of cachous wrapped in tissue paper.”
[Dr. Blackwell] “The incision in the neck commenced on the left side, 2 inches below the angle of the jaw, and almost in a direct line with it, nearly severing the vessels on that side, cutting the windpipe completely in two, and terminating on the opposite side 1 inch below the angle of the right jaw, but without severing the vessels on that side.”
[Dr. Blackwell] "The appearance of the face was quite placid. The mouth was slightly open."
Anatomy of the murder:
1. Liz was approx 9 feet inside the gate (half way between the gate and the door to the club), lying on the ground with her feet near the wall of the workingman’s club and her head in the road lying across a wagon rut.
2. Her throat had been cut; but, not while she was standing up or there would have been a large amount of blood on the front of her dress from the spray.
3. A cut to the throat (same as choking) causes an involuntary reaction whereby the hands clutch the throat. Liz’s hands were not on her throat nor was there blood on the left one. It was holding the cachoes.
4. Liz died from blood loss which would have taken at least a minute or two from the time the incision was made. During this minute or so she should have clutched her throat and moved into a near fetal position from the pain (a cut from a knife or razor regardless of location of the body stings and burns like hell), instead of being in a prone position.
5. When Louis entered the yard, he saw something, but wasn’t sure what it was until he illuminated the area with a match to get a closer look. He tried to move her with his whip handle and there was no movement from Liz indicating she had died prior to his arrival.
Hypothesis - She was not attacked from behind, nor was her throat cut while standing up, so, she had to have entered the yard willingly with her attacker who struck in the darkened recess half way between the gate and door to the club. No commotion or alarm was sounded (or was noticed) which possibly indicates that she knew her attacker and saw no threat in being with him. If the murderer had been disturbed before Liz was deceased, she would have been found with her hands clutching her throat; which she was not.
All these factors lead to the conclusion that her murder was not disturbed in the act of killing her. If he was not disturbed, and there were no abdominal mutilations, it does not appear the motive for her death was the same as the other victims. Noting that the cut to her throat was from an insertion and pull (versus a place the blade against the esophagus and force the blade downward exhibited on the other victims), it is questionable that she was killed by the same hand, or for the same reason as the others.
|
Shannon Christopher
Sergeant
Username: Shannon
Post Number: 47
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 12:02 am: | |
Glenn: [Shannon Christopher]"Kate did not walk the steets to get money for her bed, she walked the streets instead of taking the lodging and found refuge on the street."
How did you reach this conclusion? What do you base it on? I myself have studied the lives and life conditions of low-class city women and prostitutes in Sweden and Denmark during the 19th and early 20th century now for almost ten years, and I can assure there are no grounds for stating such an assumption as an absolute fact. And once again, what was she doing on Mitre Sqare?"
From the Eddowes inquest: "[Coroner] Did you know why she was locked up?" - [John Kelly] "Yes, for drink; she had had a drop of drink, so I was told. I never knew she went out for any immoral purpose. She occasionally drank, but not to excess. When I left her she had no money about her. She went to see and find her daughter to get a trifle, so that I shouldn't see her walk about the streets at night.
[Coroner] What do you mean by "walking the streets?" - [John Kelly] "I mean that if we had no money to pay for our lodgings we would have to walk about all night. I was without money to pay for our lodgings at the time."
Kate told John that she was on her way to her daughter's house in Bermondsey (which I believe). If you look on a street map, Mitre Square is on the way from BPS to Bermondsey via Lloyd Street and the London Bridge.
There is a similiar discussion on the Catharine Eddowes board...
Shannon
|
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 304
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 1:59 am: | |
Hi Shannon,
"Returning to the club-house, the front room on the ground floor is used for meals. In the kitchen is a window which faces the door opening into the yard."
Yes, but where was the kitchen window? Was it before or after the door, if one came through the gates? And do we know it was lit? All windows and doors after the club door (and after the spot where the murder took place) are totally irrelevant, since they don't light up the the spot in question. Once again, the printing office was evidently sited further back in the yard.
"...the yard is only lit by the lights through the windows at the side of the club and of the tenements opposite. As to the tenements, I only observed lights in two first-floor windows."
I've read this passage as well, but I believe the "windows at the side of the club" referred to, are the ones on the upper storey, where the meeting took place, and we can be sure of that they didn't light up the yard at all (I just think Wess mentioned them just the same). The text indicate nothing else. The only interesting items I see here are the two windows of the tenements, but there obviously are no record of where on the tenements wall they were placed.
There still is nothing that contradicts the information saying "from the street to the side door of the Worker's Club you walk between the blind walls of buildings". This is important, because the corner in which the murder was committed, behind the gates and close to the wall of the Club building, must have been very dark, considering
1) no windows or light did light up that exact spot;
2) the court was very narrow, which makes spots and corners unhit by light particulary dark;
3) the fact that indoor gas or candle light doesn't light up anything at all outside, not to such an extent that would make a significant change to the yard.
-------------------------
I don't know why you're bothering to list all the postmortem data, since I naturally already have read them and your conclusions of them are totally hypothetical. Once again, Dr Blackwell didn't arrive until 01:16, and your hypothesis that someone automatically reaches for the throat with her hand when the throat is slit is totally ungrounded -- this is not always the case at all. I don't know where you've got this idea. And have we really proof of that she wasn't smuthered or stunned at all? I believe not, even though there are no visible marks on her throat.
"...she had to have entered the yard willingly with her attacker who struck in the darkened recess half way between the gate and door to the club"
Interesting. Now you say "darkened"... 
I belive all the Ripper victims were willingly leading the killer into relatively secluded and dark spots, on their own free will. This is a nature of their business, if they would want any customers. No commossion or alarm were heard in the cases of the other Ripper victims either (unless an occasional cry of "murder!" that can't be verified they've come from the victim). Does this have to indicate they knew their killer? Absolutely not. Why? Because they were victims of blitz attacks, and either strangled first or would be unable to scream due to the cutting of the throat.
I don't think the MO or the medical data is strong evidence enough to exclude Stride from being a Ripper victim. You can't expect a serial killer to act exactly in the same manner like after a textbook in every situation. His MO is dependent on the circumstances on the site and the behaviour of the victim. I think conclusions as such has been drawn too far by too many people. If Liz was smothered or stunned enough to make her unconcious before her throat was cut (we can't with certainty exclude this possibility -- visible marks aren't always present), that would explain why she was life-less duting Diemschutz's arrival. I don't believe she was in any concious state whatsoever.
By the way, Shannon, none of the other Ripper victims were killed standing up either -- no spurting of blood on the premises or on the front of their clothes. And no sign of struggle.
--------------------------------
Yes, I know there are a similar Kate discussion on her board, and I don't want to let her intrude on this thread. But since you started mentioned it, I just have to say one thing; I think it is an important point to make from a scientific view:
Shannon, we can say with certainty that some of the relatives and friends weren't telling the thruth regarding the victims' occupation. It was a delicate matter, not only for their deceased friends but also for themselves.
Are you really willing to take John Kelly's word for it, and base your entire argument upon this?????
I wouldn't if I were you... Once again, the social conditions speak for themselves.
"Kate told John that she was on her way to her daughter's house in Bermondsey (which I believe). If you look on a street map, Mitre Square is on the way from BPS to Bermondsey via Lloyd Street and the London Bridge."
Yes, but that was evidently before she got drunk and put in prison. She had already been there and didn't succeed in finding her daughter. What was she then doing on Mitre Square after she was let out of prison? She herself indicated, on the police station, that she was on her way home. It doesen't add up.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Shannon Christopher
Sergeant
Username: Shannon
Post Number: 49
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 3:38 am: | |
Glenn: "I've read this passage as well, but I believe the "windows at the side of the club" referred to, are the ones on the upper storey, where the meeting took place..."
His testimony specifically states the windows of the tenements are on the FIRST floor.
The only interesting items I see here are the two windows of the tenements, but there obviously are no record of where on the tenements wall they were placed.
OPPOSITE the club as stated in the testimony. When you are talking about a building approx 18 feet front to back, location of the windows wouldn't matter since there were two of them.
I don't know why you're bothering to list all the postmortem data, since I naturally already have read them and your conclusions of them are totally hypothetical.
The post mortem data was provided for those reading the board and unfamiliar with the case...
Glenn: "...with her hand when the throat is slit is totally ungrounded -- this is not always the case at all.
Please provide one case where the victim didn’t reach for their throat when they were either shot or stabbed in the neck region if possible? (If you can I will demand a refund from the University where my daughter graduated with a degree in forensic science).
And have we really proof of that she wasn't smuthered or stunned at all?
Yes, had she been smothered, her heart would not have been pumping and the blood in her system would have gravitated to her lower back/buttocks and not flowed from her neck making a path all the way to the door.
Glenn: "Interesting. Now you say "darkened"...
Yes, darkened, not "Extremely dark."
Glenn: "I don't think the MO or the medical data is strong evidence enough to exclude Stride from being a Ripper victim. You can't expect a serial killer to act exactly in the same manner like after a textbook in every situation. His MO is dependent on the circumstances on the site and the behaviour of the victim."
True, but going from left handed to right, from slice to stab, and then back to left handed, and back to slice in less than an hour. Very questionable.
Glenn: "I don't believe she was in any concious state whatsoever."
That would pretty much make her dead now wouldn't it? Unconscious, throat slit, and a trail of blood approx 5 - 6 feet long (figuring her feet were 9 feet from the gate and the total distance to the door is 18 feet minus the 4.5 feet in height from her feet to her neck) with an average human having 6 pints of blood and death occurring with the loss of approx 4 pints and accepting that part of the blood flow would have collected under her and been absorbed by her clothing and the ground.
By the way, Shannon, none of the other Ripper victims were killed standing up either -- no spurting of blood on the premises or on the front of their clothes. And no sign of struggle.
One thing we agree on; however, all the other victims were strangled prior to having their throats cut and even then the throats were sliced downward with the left hand and not stabbed and sliced in the opposite direction by the opposite hand.
Yes, I know there are a similar Kate discussion on her board, and I don't want to let her intrude on this thread. But since you started mentioned it, I just have to say one thing; I think it is an important point to make from a scientific view:
Shannon, we can say with certainty that some of the relatives and friends weren't telling the thruth regarding the victims' occupation. It was a delicate matter, not only for their deceased friends but also for themselves.
Are you really willing to take John Kelly's word for it, and base your entire argument upon this?????
I wouldn't if I were you... Once again, the social conditions speak for themselves.
There were approx 70,000 people in the Whitechapel area, of those half were at or below the poverty level in 1888. That makes it about 35,000 and of those about half were women. So by your "social conditions" theory there would be about 17,500 prostitutes in the area? According to the police records there were about 60 known brothels and about 1,200 "ladies of the evening." Now we know the police estimates are low, so lets quadruple those estimates. That still only adds up to about 5,000 prostitutes out of 17,500 possible candidates. I am betting that Kate was in the 70% who were not a prostitute VS the 30% who were. Odds are in my favour at 3 - 1.
Shannon
|
Shannon Christopher
Sergeant
Username: Shannon
Post Number: 50
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 4:53 am: | |
Glenn,
Reay and Eisele's 1983 article in the American Journal of Forensic Pathology:
The most valuable resource we have for living are our instincts. Reflexes are part of our innate survival package. They are specific movement patterns which optimally are triggered at certain developmental stages and in particular situations.
There is, when one’s throat has been slit, a strange moment in which one is not yet dead but clearly dying, in which one can feel the blood and air rushing out fatally. Typically at such a moment, one is compelled to clutch at one’s throat, although very often that instinct is hindered by some bond or other that restrains the hands. Be that as it may, one feels an intense need to quell the flow of blood, and so one reaches for one’s throat with the idea that a firm hand may in fact stave off the inevitable.
In reference to your question whether Liz could have been choked: Forensic literature says that if you are going to kill a person by interrupting blood flow to their brain, you need to hold pressure for minimum two minutes, although the person may blackout much sooner. Holding her throat for two minutes while you cut off all blood flow would have left a mark and since non was visible in her post mortem, the answer would appear to be no she was not strangled or suffocated.
Shannon
|
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 694
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 5:38 am: | |
G'day Shannon,
Do you think Stride's killer would have started his assault on her with the yard gates wide open?
If not, how do we explain the fact that they were wide open when Deimshutz drove in, who opened them and why?
Maybe Elizabeth Stride prefered to service customers one way, and the other victims prefered the other way. (If you know what I mean)! And so the Ripper was forced to compromize.
OK if her killer was not disturbed in the act of slicing her throat, what about before he could perform his post-mortem mutilations?
I thought everyone read my earlier post when i pointed out that the 2 victims before Stride and the one after were found lying on their backs, while Elizabeth Stride was found on her side. Her killer stuck a knife in the lowest edge of her neck (her left) and pulled it upwards. He had no way to force the blade downward!
I see your debating with someone about windows on the 'first-floor'. I'll just point out that 'first-floor' to British/Australian people, is the 'ground-floor' to Americans. I believe the American 'first-floor' is the British 'second-floor'. Does this help?
LEANNE
|
Shannon Christopher
Detective Sergeant
Username: Shannon
Post Number: 52
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 6:11 am: | |
Leanne, Thank you for the explaination. Found this...
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000.
first floor
NOUN:
1. The ground floor of a building.
2. Chiefly British The floor immediately above the ground floor.
Didn't realize there was more than one way to count the number of floors above ground in a building.
Shannon
|
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 307
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 6:16 am: | |
Hi Shannon,
"His testimony specifically states the windows of the tenements are on the FIRST floor."
Yes, but regarding that specific detail we were talking about the windows on the "side of the club" here, wasn't we -- not the tenements opposite. Or am I a victim of language problems here?
"OPPOSITE the club as stated in the testimony."
Yes, I knew that, but that is not what I meant.
"When you are talking about a building approx 18 feet front to back, location of the windows wouldn't matter since there were two of them."
Here we finally get to my crucial point. And I naturally disagrees with you. Surprised? My living romm is about 20 feet long and I can tell you that if it is night, and a narrow court is badly lit, then it is absolutely important where the windows are placed. If none of them are close to the part of the walls near the gates, that would make the murder site very dark. That's why I wondered if the tenements windows were at the far end of the wall; noone has ever mentioned them being close to the gate.
Well, you do belong to a very small minority to claim that the yard wasn't dark enough, and I assume that we'll never agree on this. I for my part is willing to accept that fact.
"Please provide one case where the victim didn’t reach for their throat when they were either shot or stabbed in the neck region if possible?"
Hold your horses! I must be man enough here to give you right on this point. I think I went a bit too fast and therefore my answer came out totally wrong (that's what comes out of being stressed for time and writing long messages -- a deadly combination...), since I actually know from my old police handbooks that this is a chracteristic sign. Sorry about that.
What I reacted to was that you took for granted that she couldn't have been senseless before the throat-cutting and I have also heard of people dying of shock during such an event, and therefore would have no time to react in this way. I must say, though, that one argument against instant death in Stride's case would be the fact that her eyes should possibly be wide open (which is a common sign of this), as in Polly Nichol's case. So I can give you that much.
But I don't feel that necessarily should explain why she didn't move when Diemschutz poked on her; there could be a number of reasons for this. And no matter how we turn this thing around (she could be weak, she could be in shock, Diemshutz maybe didn't notice it etc.), the circumstances are mysterious and we have no evidence of anything. But it is my belief that the murder occurred somewhere after 00:55 rather than in connection with the Schwartz man. Blackwell's statement regarding the time of death also makes this possible, although not water-proof.
"...but going from left handed to right, from slice to stab, and then back to left handed, and back to slice in less than an hour. Very questionable."
I'm not so sure. And the thing about the left- and right-handed killer is still under debate. This hasn't really been stated for certain. I am sure you claim to be sure about this, based on medical evidence, but I have actually talked to a couple of forensics about it, and they had conflicting opinions! So has also some authors on the field, as many contributors on the board. So not myself being an expert of forensics I prefer to not take sides regarding that detail and too deep go into that discussion. That would be a mistake.
"There were approx 70,000 people in the Whitechapel area, of those half were at or below the poverty level in 1888. That makes it about 35,000 and of those about half were women. So by your "social conditions" theory there would be about 17,500 prostitutes in the area? According to the police records there were about 60 known brothels and about 1,200 "ladies of the evening." Now we know the police estimates are low, so lets quadruple those estimates. That still only adds up to about 5,000 prostitutes out of 17,500 possible candidates. I am betting that Kate was in the 70% who were not a prostitute VS the 30% who were. Odds are in my favour at 3 - 1."
So we're talking odds here? I did the same calculation a couple of years ago and I came to the same conclusion as you did regarding the numbers. But looking at other factors as well, I have no trouble at all putting her into the category. You are speaking of known prostitutes and of those who worked with it full-time (here I include also those who the police didn't know about, of course). But you also have to narrow the number down to unmarried and single women; I haven't come across that many cases with married women occupying themselves with this. Then the number of women in Whitechapel doesen't end up on 17,500. In my experience a majority of unmarried women in the poorest districts in the cities did soliciting, either full-time or just occasionally when the need for money was desperate enough (that's what I meant with social conditions) -- this latter category can hardly being considered as professional prostitutes, but they did it just the same. What was their alternatives? I believe Kate belonged to those; and we have no proof on or reason to belive the opposite. Whether John Kelly knew about it or not I cannot say, but there is a clear pattern regarding the other victims, namely that hardly anyone of their relatives or friends wanted to admit the fact that they were prostitutes (and that is not unique for London) -- I think that should tell us something. We also know that many ordinary "trades" really were nothing else but nick-names for prostitution.
Our differences aside, interesting that your daughter has a degree in forensic science. I must say I envy you on that one; I only have some contacts on the matter, not a close person in possesion with such abilities (I don't think you should claim back your refunds, though...). Is she going to work in the field? I'm afraid I wouldn't have the stomach for it...  I'm the typical desk-rat and bureaucrat. But the subject and occupation is interesting.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 308
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 6:22 am: | |
Regarding the "first floor" confusion.
As you being an American I nevertheless assumed you meant the ground floor, Shannon, but it is true that this can be confusing. In Denmark "1:e sal" (first floor) means the second storey, in Sweden it means the ground floor.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 698
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 6:42 am: | |
G'day,
I'm glad the building didn't have an elevator to the first-floor!
LEANNE |
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 313
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 6:55 am: | |
G'day!
I have one in my house. It starts from the cellar floor! 
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Shannon Christopher
Detective Sergeant
Username: Shannon
Post Number: 53
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 7:21 am: | |
Glenn,
Time line on this is the hard part. Louis says he came into the yard at exactly 01:00 by the clock on the corner; but Constable Henry Lamb, (252 H division) said: "Last Sunday morning, shortly before one o'clock, I was on duty in Commercial-road, between Christian-street and Batty-street, when two men came running towards me and shouting."
That puts the PC at the end of Berner street and Comercial and over a block or so towards Batty Street; depending on where he was when the men approached him. From there to the yard is a couple of minutes run at speed.
Question is Was the PC accurate in his time? If so, it means Louis actually arrived in the yard before 01:00 because he found the body, went to the club to see his wife and returned to the body before someone went to get the PC.
Leanne,
No, I dont believe the killer would have done the murder with the gate wide open which is why I believe Liz was already dead and the killer departed the area before the cart came into the yard.
The time of death was determined (approx) to between 12:45 - 12:55. If Israel, was correct in seeing Liz with someone at 12:40 it is possible he really did see the killer. Timeline on this one is too close. The reason I side more with Israel's man being the killer is that with the gate open and the cart in the middle of the road, Louis should have been able to at least hear someone pass him and go out into Berner Street. Had the killer been hiding behind the open gate he would have had to come around the gate, past the cart without spooking the horse and avoid being seen when Louis struck the match.
The possibility does exist the killer was hiding behind the gate, but if the gate is wide open, why? Your not going to open the gate and then hide behind it near the dead body.
If the gate was closed, why not use the "trap door" built in to the one side to make a getaway to Berner instead of swinging both doors open and possibly revealing the crime?
Shannon |
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 700
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 8:14 am: | |
G'day,
How's this?:
Elizabeth Stride voluntarily laid on the ground for her client and he knelt down on her right side, with the gates shut,
She thought of the Cachous in her pocket, pulled them out of her left pocket, with her left hand, then turned over to get ready to pop one in her mouth.
Knowing that she had a knife in her pocket, he snuk it out while she was looking the other way and quickly shoved it in the lowest part of her neck so he could drag the blade toward him.
But it wasn't enough to kill her, and she just managed to put her left hand up to her wound.
He then pulled her hand off, to clear the way for a second cut, and it landed on her breast.
But before he could cut again, he heard an approaching cart and hid further down the dark yard, and waited for the first opportunity to escape, which came as soon as Diemschutz went into the club!
LEANNE |
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 701
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 8:16 am: | |
G'day,
I suppose he had to open the gate, so they wouldn't see the need to search the yard!
LEANNE |
Harry Mann
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 6:29 am: | |
If we take into account the large number of females who were children under the age of fifteen,the proportion who were married women of good character,the percentage that were of of an aged or infirm situation,then the number left is quite small.If we deduct from that small number those that the good citizens of Whitechapel abley led by the various religous denominations who were opposed to any sexual activity outside of marriage,and who labeled such activists as whores of the worst kind,then the unfortunates remaining
are indeed unfortunate in the descriptions ascribed to them.
Forget statistics and apply common sense.Forget the sexual angle in these killings.Even if it were a factor,there is nothing gained in persuing it.For even if there were twelve hundred women of easy virtue,there were a hell of a lot more male customers,and how do you separate the perpetrator from that lot. |
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 702
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 8:36 am: | |
G'day,
On second thoughts to open the gates to prevent the need to search the yard, was probably too clever for a psychopath to work out. Perhaps he opened the gates a little to make his escape as soon as he heard a noise, then seeing Diemschutz was much too close for him not to be seen, he swung around, ran up the yard and the gates opened fully themselves.
LEANNE |
Shannon Christopher
Detective Sergeant
Username: Shannon
Post Number: 54
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 9:24 am: | |
Leanne, Might work if not for the rain that evening.
My take, Liz is walking in front of the IWES, picks up a client, they go around the back heading for the stable. She does the deed with her client who was disappointed in her service and took it to the extreme trying to get his money back.
Given this scenerio, Liz is walking towards the street to get another client, Israel sees her in the argument, he leaves, Liz take another step and is grabbed by the scarf, dragged backwards and thrown to the ground, pinned by the killer, robbed, fights back, and in the process takes a knife in the throat...
Argument with an old boyfriend? (not sure I buy this one because if Michael Kidney were the killer, Israel would have picked him out at the inquest when questioned about the man he saw her with)
Shannon |
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 852
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 9:30 am: | |
Hi Shannon
All this happens to Liz and she still keeps hold of her cachous?
Robert |
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 853
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 9:32 am: | |
Hi Leanne
What makes you think that Liz had a knife?
Robert |
Monty
Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 279
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 11:28 am: | |
Ooooh Robert,
You are awful....but I like you !
Monty
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
