|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Monty
Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 280
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 11:44 am: |       |
Shannon,
Point of interest regarding how long it would take to get to the yard from Commercial st between Berner & Batty.
47 seconds.
Ive just ran it ! 
That put Lamb in the yard at the same time as Louis !!!!
Dont know how that fits in with your timeline but I enjoyed doing it.
Now Im off for a pint.
Monty
|
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 314
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 11:55 am: | |
A pint that is well earned, Monty. Excercise is good for you, they say...
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 315
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 12:12 pm: | |
Hi Leanne,
Interesting scenario. And I could buy it all if it weren't for the part where she lay down voluntarily. As Shannon points out, it was a rainy night and the cobble stones quite dirty and wet. Otherwise it sounds OK by me. But I suppose you mean that it was the attacker who had the knife, not Stride...?
I find the cachous quite disturbing either way. Otherwise one could suggest that he threw her to the ground before doing the first cut. But as Robert says, would she really hold on to the cachous? Frustrating, frustrating...
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 316
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 12:25 pm: | |
Hi Shannon,
Yes I admit my time schedule is somewhat challenging (although not impossible), and of course it would all be easier if one could accept Schwartz' man as her killer. But as I've stated before, I'm having a lot of problems with this man in that context; if he would kill someone after having made so much noise and made a spectacle of himself, and being observed by at least two witnesses, he would be a complete idiot. It has no logic to it.
Then all that remains -- besides a murder directly before Diemschutz arrival -- is that another man enters the stage immidiately after the assaulting fellow seen by Schwartz, but then we have Mrs Mortimer standing in the door-way to the street. That is also a problematic time-line, because she didn't see or hear anything unusual apart from some "foot-steps". So one is stuck either way. Tricky. 
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Jeff Hamm
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 79
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 4:57 pm: | |
Hi,
First, I want to make it clear that for this posting, I'm only considering theories which involve Jack as the murderer of Stride. By doing so, however, I do not wish to imply that this assumption is necessarily true. However, if we hold that assumption to be true, everyone pretty much agrees we must explain the lack of mutilations. This is usually done by suggesting "Jack" was interrupted and left the scene before he had the opertunity.
So, I want to present a brief (hopefully) list of "events", any of which could be included as the "interruption" that is often suggested as the reason for why Stride was not mutilated. In other words, in a broad classification of the "interruption" theory, what events do we know about that might qualify?
First, we'll start with the idea that Jack is the same as Stride's attacker. Based upon Schwartz's testimony, it's possible that the attacker was unaware of either Schwartz or "pipe man". Schwartz himself doesn't appear to spot "pipe man" until he himself crossed the street. Now, if Stride's attacker was unaware of either Schwartz or pipe man when he attacked Stride, then the notion of the assault taking place "in full view" of witnesses is not a problem because at the time the assault took place the attacker didn't know he was observed. Once, however, Schwartz is spotted by the attacker, he knows he's been spotted. Schwartz takes off, pipe man leaves, and now Jack is part way into a "kill". He's now in a state where there are two desires, one to kill and mutilate, and one to flee. So, he kills Stride and then flees. The "interuption", in this case is "being spotted" by Schwartz. Note also, in this highly speculative scenerio, the behaviour of "Jack" is all consistent with a rather disturbed individual. He attacks suddenly and without provocation, he's not really monitoring his environment (or he would have seen Schwartz behind him, or pipe man across the street, etc), he's not concerned about the busy club, etc. Also, he kills Stride because he's worked up and ready to kill. He is showing little control and taking huge risks. In other words, this possible sequence of events includes a consistent view of Jack's behaviour.
Now, let's say that's not the case and we dismiss the above scenerio. At some point after this assault, Stride is in the alley and murdered. Her killer may, or may not, be the same person as who attacked her initially. For the purpose of this posting it doesn't matter that much. But again, who ever kills her is "Jack". Now, Jack kills Stride but then Mrs. Maxwell opens her door in the allyway. Hearing the door open, he flees, but does so in a way that doesn't draw attention to himself. He walks away. Mrs. Maxwell hears his footsteps, but because it's dark, she doesn't see him. (I can't remember at what point Mrs. Maxwell reports hearing the footsteps; was it just as she came out or had she been out for awhile? Of course, we don't know how reliable her testimony is in that regards, so for now the footsteps are placed just after she steps outside). This kind of "Jack" is monitoring his environment more so than our previous "Jack". He flees if someone might be approaching. This is similar to leaving the scene of Polly Nichols as the carmen approached. It requires a certain amount of behavioural control in that he both leaves and does so in a mannor that doesn't draw attention to himself as he does so. Still, it's not a well planned murder as the location is extremely risky; but pretty much all the murder sites were.
If, however, the footsteps heard by Mrs. Maxwell's are not Jack's, then he may simply have fled as she opened the door and she didn't notice. If so, we have no idea if he bolted, more like the highly disturbed "Jack" in scenerio 1, or if he walked "cooly away to avoid drawing attention to himself", like the slightly more in control Jack of scenerio 2.
The third possibility is sort of a catch bag for the "club noises" event. This is just the notion that given the busy club, some sound from within may have suggested someone was approaching and Jack leaves. Again, how he leaves is unknown, and exactly what that "club noise" might have been is left open to everyone's creative imagination.
Finally, we have Deimshutz, who is the "usual suspect". He shows up, Jack hides, and leaves either as Diemshutz lights his match to check what's in the way of his horse, or Jack leaves when Diemshutz goes into the club. This Jack has to be either very cool under fire, as it would appear he's killing Stride as Mrs. Maxwell is in the door or he's exceptionally disturbed and doesn't notice (or care) if Mrs. Maxwell sees him. This gives us two "extreme Jack's", very cool or very disturbed. The latter is probably more consistent with the risky nature of crime locations, the overkill, the extensive mutilations, the sudden assaults, etc that are normally associated with "Jack's killings". Of course, if the killing takes place after Mrs. Maxwell went back inside, then these two "extreme" Jack's aren't necessary to postulate.
Anyway, to summarise, the "Jack Interuptus" theories could reasonably suggest 4 events (or category of events).
1) realising he was spotted by Schwartz and pipe man but only after the assault already started
2) Mrs. Maxwell comming out of her door
3) something from the club (this can simply not be discounted, unfortunately, it cannot be proved either)
4) the arrival of Diemshutz and his pony
Any theory that involves Jack as the killer of Stride pretty much has to include one of these events as the reason for Jack to have left before mutilating Stride. And so any theory that does this could be called one of the "Interuption" theories.
- Jeff |
Shannon Christopher
Detective Sergeant
Username: Shannon
Post Number: 55
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 5:12 pm: | |
Monty, thank you. a pint well earned... |
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 706
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 5:23 pm: | |
G'day Robert,
Many prostitutes carried weapons to protect themselves. Haven't you seen that cartoon?
It was suggested, (I think on the old boards and not by me), that Stride was killed using her own knife. Maybe Liz let all customers know this, before she went to remote locations with them.
Hey, if her throat was sliced when she rolled over on her left side and was unable to cup her wound with her left hand, wouldn't that cause her to clench her fingers in desperation, thus holding onto her Cachous tightly?
LEANNE |
Shannon Christopher
Detective Sergeant
Username: Shannon
Post Number: 56
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 5:58 pm: | |
Cachoes; the piece of the puzzle that doesn't fit...
What if?
Liz is on her knees, servicing a client, and has the cachoes in her hand as a 19th century equivalent of mouthwash. She may not have like the taste of ...... and used them afterwards…
But, our client changes his mind in the middle of his pleasure and wants the “full monty” instead, only Liz is in her menstrual cycle and doesn’t want to (explaining the other conversations overhead by witnesses who saw her that night).
Our man pushes her from her knees backwards to the ground and attempts to have his way with her. Liz puts of a fight and in the process is smacked in the mouth (the swelling on her lip). Deciding it isn’t worth getting beaten up for. She relaxes on the ground believing it will all be over in a minute, not realizing she is about to have her throat cut…
Only problem with this scenario is that if this is what happened, it was not “Jack” but a displeased client, which could explain the reason why there is only one cut to the throat, and why it was done with the opposite hand.
Only hypothetical…
Shannon
|
Jeff Hamm
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 81
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 8:13 pm: | |
Hi Shannon,
I don't think Stride was killed with the "opposite hand". If she was on the ground when her throat was cut, then the right hand could have been used. Apart from one doctor's suggestion of a left handed killer (for Nichols I think), the consensus is that "Jack" was right handed; even Nichol's killer.
Your scenerio is, of course, possible but I would expect any attempt at intercourse to be made while standing. Laying on the ground is an unlikely position for a customer to desire as the ground would be filthy, especially after the rain. Even on top of Liz, this wouldn't be very comfortable either.
The cachous is an odd piece of the puzzle. Unfortunately we have only a few hints about exactly where the spilled ones where, how they were clutched in her hand (between thumb and forfinger I think, which is pretty detailed if I recall correctly). Anyway, going on these very sparse details, I still get a vague impression of this being a form of "post-mortem" posing of the victim.
Meaning, it starts to sound a little like she dropped the cachous during the assault, some spilled out, and after she's killed, her attacker puts them back in her hand for reasons known only to himself. IF, and this is a huge if, if this did happen it seems very similar to the description of some of Annie's belongings being arranged at her feet. Again, suggesting a bit of posing of the victim. Not "staging", where the crime is intended to look some a different crime (like where someone tries to make a murder look like a suicide, or an accident, etc).
Anyway, given how hard it is to figure out how the cachous remained in Stride's hand during an assault also suggests to me that maybe they didn't, but rather maybe they were put there after she's dead, or dying. This kind of action, this posing of the victim, would then be a similarity between Stride and other Ripper victims. Kelly, for example, looks like she's been placed in a very macabe rendition of a "women at rest"; laying on the bed, head turned to the door, left arm drapped causually across the stomach. Her legs, so widely spread, are in stark contrast to a simple repose, and produce a vulgar interpretation of an invitation for carnal pleasure. This kind of posing of the body, combined with the horrendous mutilations, makes the scene so very shocking and disturbing.
Anyway, I fully admit that there is just not enough information to be sure if the cachous were placed in Stride's hand. It's possible, and not hugely implausible, that she simply had them out and gripped them when attacked and never dropped the package. She may have kept them just under the wrist of her dress, when attacked, she made a fist as they fell out and ended up holding on to them as they fell (unintentionally, as they may only have come out part way for example). After grabbing them, she's not going to try and put them back and she's not going to worry about the fact she's got a grip on them. Etc.
Anyway, as can clearly be seen, I'm not convinced posing has to have occured, but it's a possibility that I've not really seen explored as much as maybe it should be?
As a final note, if one goes with the notion of "posing", this fits with a more "disturbed" or "disorganised" killer, which would probably suggest Jack. And such point would have to be considered in a "Jack killed Stride" theory in conjuction with the "interuption" scenerio chosen as well.
- Jeff
|
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 861
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 30, 2003 - 4:09 am: | |
Hi Leanne, Shannon
I suppose the cachous could have been clenched in her hand in a cadaveric spasm, although for her to be still holding them at that point I think she must have been forced to the ground with extraordinary speed and suddenness, or else she’d lain down willingly on the ground.
If it was a cadaveric spasm, then I understand that this would imply a sudden death, rather than bleeding to death for a couple of minutes.
I doubt if she was clutching the cachous in agony, because there were no reports of fingernail marks on her hand.
If she grabbed at her throat, I think she’d have grabbed with her right hand as I believe she was right-handed. It’s just that I doubt if she grabbed at her throat – there was blood only on the outside of the hand. And how came the hand to be lying on her breast?
Also, the cut was reported to "exactly correspond" with the border of the scarf when she was found. "Exactly correspond" suggests that the scarf border and cut were still overlapping or next to each other. Surely if she’d grabbed at her throat with her hand, the scarf’s position would have been disturbed?
Robert
|
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 862
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 30, 2003 - 4:16 am: | |
Hi Jeff
One of the doctors - I think it was Blackwell - said that he spilt the cachous (pointed out by Joan).
Interesting idea, Jeff, the posing. But surely if Stride was posed, this would tend to rule out the Ripper - would not this posing with the cachous have occurred after the mutilations? Surely the mutilations would have come first. But if he was interrupted, then bang go the posed cachous.
Robert |
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 322
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 30, 2003 - 7:24 am: | |
Hi Jeff,
Interesting post of yours (nr 79, Sept 29 - 4:57 pm).
Some comments to your 4 interruptions or events:
1) I do belive that (if he was the "Schwartz man") his "desire" and choice of action would be to flee -- not kill -- after been disturbed and seen by the witnesses. I can't possibly know this of course (I have to say this, or else I'll probably get shredded to pieces by some here), but my gut instinct and logic regarding human behaviour says this.
2) and 3). I think the possibilities that he's been disturbed by either Mrs Mortimer opening the street door or some sudden loud noise from the club (I have also myself raised this thought) are interesting and shouldn't be disregared, although I myself wouldn't dare to state them as more reasonable than other possibilities. But I think they are worth thinking about. I can't look away from the assumption that it was Jack's/the killer's foot-steps she heard. Regarding time-line and details of the witness statements, Mrs Mortimer's is somewhat of a dark horse here, I think, especially as she didn't appear with her testimony at the inquest, it was only heard of in the papers. So one wonders, even though it was moderately confirmed by another witness, how much reliability one can put into it, especially as far is the time frame is concerned...
4) The Diemschutz interruption theory I think is somewhat logical, but again, they time-frame here is quite problematic as many others have pointed out. It's a tricky one but not impossible.
Regarding your next post, about the "posing" I find this quite compelling myself and I have though along the same lines, not only regarding the cachous, but also the position of the body (I as well have found her "calm", almost rested appearence -- compared to how she died -- as somewhat disturbing and almost disgraceful), like it was somewhat of a part of a signature. However, we must not forget that the way we see her in the photo is -- as far as I've read -- how she is diplayed at the mortuary, and I also think Robert raised an important and interesting point, that if the killer was interrupted, is it realistic to consider the possibility of signature arrangements?
Questions, questions... Liz Stride doesen't make it easy for us, does she...?
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Alan Sharp
Sergeant
Username: Ash
Post Number: 34
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 30, 2003 - 8:26 am: | |
This may more properly be on the Annie Chapman subject but it relates to Jeff's mention of Annie Chapman's items arranged at her feet.
The whole "arrangement" subject seems to have come up originally because George Bagster Phillips said that Annie Chapman's possessions appeared to him to have been "arranged". There were only 3 items. How do 3 items appear arranged? There are no specifics as to what this arrangement was. Were they in a straight line, in a triangle equidistant from each other, how?
In any of these cases, if I saw three items laid down in such a way I would assume that the killer had placed them there rather than tossing them aside, but I don't think I would place any importance on the actual positioning so far as to describe them as arranged. If there were 5 or 6 of them maybe, but not with only 3. |
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 868
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 30, 2003 - 4:32 pm: | |
Hi Jeff
Re your very thorough post on interruption, I suppose one's opinion of how easily or otherwise Jack could be spooked, would partly depend on whether one believes that Jack was at work on Chapman while Cadosch was moving around in the yard next door. But here again we have the same choice you mentioned in your post - a Jack who could carry on while someone was in the yard next door might be super-cool, or simply so far gone mentally that he didn't know where he was.
I would tend to doubt if it was Jack's footsteps that Mrs Mortimer heard, because Morris heard no footsteps in Mitre square.
Robert |
Jeff Hamm
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 83
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 30, 2003 - 4:37 pm: | |
Hi,
Interesting comments all around. I didn't know that one of the doctor's claimed to have spilled the cachous. That seems to work against the idea of the being dropped in the first place.
As for exactly "when" the posing would occur, I too suspect it to be more of a "post" mutilation thing for the Ripper but it need not be. Since the Ripper didn't normally mutilate hands and arms, this suggested "posing" could easily have been done during some "preparation" phase say, as he's about to turn her over to her back to get at the abdomen? Anyway, it doesn't work all that well for the posing to occur first, as it clearly would have to in this case, but it may not be completely out of line. Still, from my readings, posing seems to occur as placing the "final touches", so perhaps if the cachous are "posed", it does point away from the Ripper?
As for Chapman's 3 items being "arranged", well, all I can point to is that they are so described. Something about the placement of them suggested that they were deliberately placed, or arranged. Perhaps they were all lined up, or somehow looked neatly placed. That level of detail is lost to us now, but something about them suggested they were not just dropped or scattered. Again, a bit of posing possibly? When were these things arranged? Perhaps before the mutilations (i.e., a sequence like strangle, cut throat, check for any money or trophies, pose the belongings while looking, mutilate, pose the body, leave). Obviously these "steps" can be re-arranged and/or some could be omitted in any specific case. So with Stride we might get up to the "sorting and posing of belongings". I know, I'm reaching here. ha!
Still, this is why I like these discussions. The idea of posing may be valid for Stride, but if it is, does it also invalidate "Jack"? In some ways, as pointed out to me, posing before mutilation may be very "un-Jack" like. Not definitive, but nothing is with this case. Thanks all, I'm enjoying this.
Oh Glenn, I see what you mean about an instinct to flee when spotted. I agree, but then the "witnesses fled" first. That might just change things enough in Jack's mind, especially if he's mentally disturbed. If Stride's attacker is Jack, as this scenerio assumed, then the sudden attack in the open street without checking for possible witnesses does suggest a disturbed individual. But, I understand your reservations. I just think, like with so many things about Stride, it works both ways.
- Jeff |
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 869
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 30, 2003 - 5:07 pm: | |
Hi Jeff
Re "placing", "arranging' etc, it does seem to me that he didn't just scatter organs around with any of his victims. They seem to have been, at the very least, placed (in opposition to thrown). For example, the piece of detached intestine beside Eddowes's body.
Then there's the strange business with Kelly. She was fiendishly mutilated, of course, but from what I can make out the organs themselves weren't. It's as if he took each thing out and then lost interest in it.
But I'm wandering off topic!
Robert |
Jeff Hamm
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 85
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 30, 2003 - 6:21 pm: | |
Hi Robert,
Good point. And yes, organ placement does sound a bit deliberate. I've read suggestions that the placements may be a result of "pragmatics". When you pull out an intestine, for example, over the shoulder is where you would place it just to get it "out of the way". We would need to consider such alternatives because they would still produce "arranged", or "deliberate" placings of the organs without this being "deliberately posing" of the scene. I fully admit I have no idea how one could differentiate these two options with the information we currently have, and probably we can not. All I am sure of is that without looking at the information with all the alternatives in mind we won't be able to decide which alternatives work better than others.
- Jeff |
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 324
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 30, 2003 - 6:47 pm: | |
Hello Jeff,
Yes, I see what you mean as well, but I don't think the fact that the witnesses fled first matter that much. But, to be noted, it is of course a bit of a bummer that no other witness statements occur about Schwartz' assaulting man after this incident, or besides Schwartz and the pipe-smoker. That would probably have given us a mystery less to think about.
I think we can see "signature" arrangements in most of the Ripper murders, but -- once again -- if the killer in Stride's case was interrupted questions could be raised about how such features could have taken place, since signatures are done in the latest stage, after the murder is committed. But of course, the mutilations themselves, as we see them in the murders of Chapman and Eddows for example, would most probably be part of the signature ritual and the loss of these in Stride's case could on the other hand point at interruption in the middle of his work with the signature -- he just had time to arrange the body and the cachous, but never got around to the mutilations. Well, who knows...?
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Shannon Christopher
Detective Sergeant
Username: Shannon
Post Number: 57
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 30, 2003 - 6:50 pm: | |
Against being caught in the act:
1. Liz's hands are not against her throat in an attempt to stop the bleeding when the body is found. Left is clutching the cachoes, right is across her chest. Something or someone prevented this from happening until she was either dead or at a point where she could no longer move. Since she had blood on her right hand and no wound other than her neck, we know that she was able with at least one hand to reach the cut in an attempt to stop the bleeding. Question here, is why only one hand?
2. Gate was "wide open" according to Lewis when he came through with the cart. Why would the killer strike in an area that was open to both the street and back entrance to the club, and less than 9 feet from either when a number of people were still in the club, and on the street, each with a partial view to the yard?
3. If the killer was discovered in the act and ran into the area behind the open gate to hide, Lewis's cart and horse would have blocked his escape route. The gate would be about 4.5 feet in width (half the distance between the buildings) and the length of the horse and cart being approx 12 feet. So if Lewis stopped the cart anywhere within the first 16 or so feet and the escape route is hampered. With Lewis on the right side of the barrow leaning out to poke the object with his whip and then climbing down to strike a match to get a closer look, he would have seen or heard something if the killer tried to exit from around the gate and past the cart.
Possible that the killer would have waited until Lewis went into the club? With the gates wide open it is more likely the killer had already departed the area and if so the murder was complete; which raises the question, why no abdominal mutilation?
4. If another opened the gates and/or disturbed the killer before Lewis arrived, the killer would have attracted their attention if he ran past them and out into Berner street, and if the killer ran in the opposite direction into the yard, the above would still apply.
Shannon |
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 871
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 30, 2003 - 7:18 pm: | |
Hi Shannon
Nichols and Eddowes were killed on the street. This guy took risks, by the look of it.
Your scenario seems to imply that the killer cut Liz's throat, and then held both her hands in order to make her bleed to death. That's a very strange way for him to go about killing her, isn't it?
Robert |
Shannon Christopher
Detective Sergeant
Username: Shannon
Post Number: 59
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 30, 2003 - 11:30 pm: | |
Robert, no, not if you look at the additional facts of the case not mentioned above. Besides only having blood on one hand and not the other, there were two equally spaced "bruises" or reddened areas on her shoulders that occured very close if not at the time of death. I belive the killer was on top of her, had one hand holding her left hand above her head and his knees pinning her to the ground, using the open hand to slice her throat. Given this, Liz would have had one free hand, which she did, and the one free hand had blood on it, indicating she was able to reach the wound with it.
She had mud on the left side of her face and hair and a swollen lip (but only on the right side), indicating that Liz was alive, awake, and fighting with her attacker after she landed on the ground.
Question is, how did she go through all this and still have the cachoes in her hand unless her killer had her hand clutched in his so that she couldnt hit him, or let go of the cachoes?
And, if this is the case the only way she would not have been able to let go of the cachoes or use the hand in self defense is that the killer didnt let go of it till she was dead. since the hand had the cachoes in it, she was dead or very near it given that it would only take a minute for her to bleed to death from the wound.
Shannon |
Jeff Hamm
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 86
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 01, 2003 - 12:52 am: | |
Hi Glenn,
It's round and round and back and forth when it comes to Stride especially. Everytime I feel I'm close to making even the slightest decision about her case, I find some alternative and plausible explanation that negates it. This murder is so in the balance of could be could be not that I have no idea what to think apart from I think I'm sure I don't know! ha! Anyway, it's obvious we're both in similar situations that way since we counter each others uncertainties with our own uncertain rebuttles. It's quite clear we're both well versed in academia I'm afraid! ha!
- Jeff |
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 872
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 01, 2003 - 6:19 am: | |
Hi Shannon
Thank you for that explanation.
Leaving aside the cachous for a moment, a number of points occur to me :
1. The absence of reports of mud on Stride's left hand, and on the back (as opposed to sides) of her clothes. But perhaps this isn't terrifically important, since one would expect there to be SOME mud on Liz's hand whatever happened, and it's a grey area as to where the back of a dress ends and the left side begins.
2.The placid appearance of the corpse.
3. The seemimgly unmoved position of the scarf border relative to the cut.
4. The absence of spurting.
5. The position of her bonnet only a few inches from her head, tending to suggest that there was no trmendous struggle.
6. The position of the body when found. He must have moved the left arm down from above her head to beside her body, and then rolled her over onto her left side, the right hand then coming to rest on her breast. I suppose it's a bit odd that he would move the left arm down to a position beside the body, but let's suppose he did this. I find it strange that there was no blood on Liz's left cheek, only mud, for he must have rolled her over into the blood that had escaped from the wound.
Robert |
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 326
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 01, 2003 - 6:56 am: | |
Hi Jeff,
You're absolutely right. And oh yes, to be versed in academia can sometimes be a bit of a curse. Ha!
----------------------
Hi Shannon,
Regarding the lip deformation, some of us have had that discussion on another thread, and there really is no actual evidence of her swollen lip to occure from a struggle or blow. It could of course, but then it is strange that it's not mentioned by Dr. Blackwell or Dr. Philips among her injuries, either at the inquest or in other documents (although some could be missing, of course). This deformation could just as well be a result of her syphilis (as she was treated for it during her spell back in Sweden), and appearently Kidney is also supposed to have suffered from this desease at one point. So I wouldn't jump to any conclusions about it in this context.
I for my part don't see any sign of struggle at all in the Stride case, and I do believe she was killed in complete surprise, as the other Ripper victims -- there are no real indications showing otherwise, I think.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Robert Clack
Detective Sergeant
Username: Rclack
Post Number: 127
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 01, 2003 - 10:50 am: | |
Hi all
Just an idea, and I apologise if this has already been mentioned (I haven't read all the posts, and Leanne mentions a similar possibility on the 'just a thought' thread). The idea is couldn't Elizabeth Strides killer have had his back to the wall in Dutfields Yard, Elizabeth Stride on her knees in front of him about to perform a service, when he takes out his knife and quickly cuts her throat. If he lets her just fall to the ground it would explain the position she was found in, the lack of struggle, the cachous in her hand which she would soon be using. I am not sure whether he would get any blood on himself, being in such close proximity he may have done, I suppose it depends on the angle of her body when it was done, a slight angle might make a difference.
Just an idea though.
All the best
Rob |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
