Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Point To Ponder : Was The Ripper The Second London S.K. In 1888 ?

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

  • prod

    Hello Adam. Thanks.

    Does prodding cause one to swap ends? Perhaps not?

    "I'm not sure what you're implying here? That Liz was assaulted and then murdered on the same exact spot? Then her body must have been dragged into the passageway? Or am I missing something?"

    Perhaps you miss much. I mean where her body made contact with the ground and was soiled by mud.

    "Do you mean to say that even if one of these witnesses had a case of mistaken identity, that all three of them must have been mistaken and seen the wrong person?"

    Must? I am saying merely that your pinch of salt must be applied here--a fortiori.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Lynn Cates View Post
      Hello Stevi. Thanks.

      "On the last occasion, just before I left the court, I mentioned to you that there were reasons why I thought the perpetrator of the act upon the woman's throat had caught hold of her chin. These reasons were that just below the lobe of the left ear were three scratches, . . ."
      Looks like:
      1. He is grabbing her by the face and leaving incidental scratches.
      or
      2. She is clawing against his hands, ligature or scarf to free herself from strangulation.
      But I wonder whether either is consonant with administration of ether?
      Ah I see your argument. OK so Jack may have caught hold of her chin or she may have clawed against his hands. But the point I was making is even if this was the case, then the scratches could have been caused by her scratching her skin after the effects of the ether on her skin.

      Originally posted by Lyn Cates
      Regarding "MJK"--perhaps her fish and chips purveyor were found? Could be he had little to contribute. A natural seller would be McCarthy.
      A thread might be appropriate.
      Cheers.
      LC
      Thanks, I`ve set up a thread on this - http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=23060 ... I like the idea (although I`m not 100% convinced) that the seller may have been McCarthy.

      Stevi
      Some people see things as they are and ask: "Why?"
      I dream of things that never were and ask "Why not?" - Kennedy

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Cris Malone View Post
        He would contribute to possible time of death if we go with what Bond speculated. And Bond seemed to imply that he had an idea when the food was ingested, without directly saying such.
        Thanks. This is my point. As such, and as suggested to Lynn, I`m going to set up a thread on "MJK`s Last Meal". maybe you`d like to add thoughts on the new thread which is up - http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=23060

        Stevi
        Some people see things as they are and ask: "Why?"
        I dream of things that never were and ask "Why not?" - Kennedy

        Comment


        • Birmingham

          Hello Stevi. Thanks.

          "the scratches could have been caused by her scratching her skin after the effects of the ether on her skin."

          Ether administered to the neck?

          Cheers.

          (PS, see you are from ELO country. Regards to Jeff Lynne.)

          Cheers.
          LC

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Lynn Cates View Post
            Hello Stevi. Thanks.
            "the scratches could have been caused by her scratching her skin after the effects of the ether on her skin."
            Ether administered to the neck?
            A side effect of ether is skin irritation, possibly from inhalation (i.e inside her throat thereby affecting her neck) or spillage (splashes).

            Originally posted by Lynn Cates
            PS, see you are from ELO country. Regards to Jeff Lynne
            .
            "ELO country?" Jeff played with the Wandering Willoughbys with George Harrison, produced The Beatles "Free As A Bird" track; Brummigum is home to Ozzy and Sabbaff.... the Midlands is where Bob Plant and John Bonham of Led Zep - oh the list goes on... anyway back to the threads....

            Stevi
            Some people see things as they are and ask: "Why?"
            I dream of things that never were and ask "Why not?" - Kennedy

            Comment


            • Hi Lynn,

              Does prodding cause one to swap ends? Perhaps not?

              At a guess, i'd imagine that Diemschutz and his IWMEC cohorts wouldn't have wanted to overstate their involvement with the dead body on their doorway, so it's hard to say just how much or how little the scene had been affected by them.

              Perhaps you miss much. I mean where her body made contact with the ground and was soiled by mud.

              Alas, my confusion continues, because I wonder just what that has to do with the assault Schwartz witnessed? I know i'm a bit thick but to me, we're talking about two seperate incidents here which are not intertwined: the murder of Stride in the almost pitch dark passageway into Dutfield's Yard, and the assault by BS man which was witnessed taking place on Berner Street. So what does the position of Stride's body have to do with the candidacy of Pipeman as a suspect?

              Must? I am saying merely that your pinch of salt must be applied here--a fortiori.

              Unfortunately, there are witnesses whose statements are....to put it mildly....questionable. Fanny Mortimer has been a particular target of mine for that reason over the years when it comes to Berner Street. However, speaking generally, the witnesses make up almost the entirety of evidence we have for helping to identify JTR, so we would do well to put a little more faith into them, especially when there's no legitimate reason to suggest that it isn't deserved (Hutchinson excepted).

              Cheers,
              Adam.

              Comment


              • errata

                Hello Adam. Thanks.

                "At a guess, I'd imagine that Diemschutz and his IWMEC cohorts wouldn't have wanted to overstate their involvement with the dead body on their doorway, so it's hard to say just how much or how little the scene had been affected by them."

                Indeed. I am assuming the truth concerning the body not having been moved. If her cadaver were moved from the street to the yard, by Eygle and Dimshits I stand corrected.

                "Alas, my confusion continues . . ."

                Agreed.

                ". .. because I wonder just what that has to do with the assault Schwartz witnessed?"

                Adam, either she fell as Schwartz stated or she did not. If she did, either she fell on the same spot of clothing or she did not. IF she had fallen on two spots, she should have multiple instances of heavy mud coverage. She did not. Hence, by Modus Tollens . . .

                By the way, how does PM get to be a suspect? He was last seen running away in company with Schwartz.

                "Unfortunately, there are witnesses whose statements are....to put it mildly....questionable."

                Yes, indeed. And I would begin with Israel Schwartz.

                Cheers.
                LC

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Lynn Cates View Post
                  Adam, either she fell as Schwartz stated or she did not. If she did, either she fell on the same spot of clothing or she did not. IF she had fallen on two spots, she should have multiple instances of heavy mud coverage. She did not. Hence, by Modus Tollens . . .
                  Hi Lynn

                  Are you saying there was mud on the ground everywhere ?
                  What is your source for this please ?

                  Comment


                  • Hi Lynn,

                    Indeed. I am assuming the truth concerning the body not having been moved. If her cadaver were moved from the street to the yard, by Eygle and Dimshits I stand corrected.

                    In fairness, I don't believe any member/s of the IWMEC knowingly moved Liz's body into the passageway, or indeed that they were involved in any way at all other than being unfortunate enough to be in the premises next to where the murder took place. Having said that, however, it IS possible that in the process of stumbling around in the dark or seeing if the woman was alive or drunk or what, Diemschutz or one of the members may have moved the body slightly and definitely contaminated the scene of the crime.

                    Adam, either she fell as Schwartz stated or she did not. If she did, either she fell on the same spot of clothing or she did not. IF she had fallen on two spots, she should have multiple instances of heavy mud coverage. She did not. Hence, by Modus Tollens . . .

                    As Jon asked, can you elaborate on this supposed evidence re mud coverage? Was Berner Street - following the rain - really so filthy as to dirty Liz's clothing beyond the point which would be considered normal for somebody of her class? (Genuinely curious, i've never heard the 'mud' argument before.)

                    By the way, how does PM get to be a suspect? He was last seen running away in company with Schwartz.

                    No. According to Schwartz, he couldn't tell whether he was deliberately following him - i.e. shepherding him - off the scene or whether he too was escaping. Schwartz fled to the railroad tracks and looked back but PM hadn't followed him so far.....which tells us what? Well, one of two things. That either PM had fled in a different direction, or he had returned towards the scene of the crime. I prefer the latter option.

                    Yes, indeed. And I would begin with Israel Schwartz.

                    Ahead of Matthew Packer?

                    Cheers,
                    Adam.

                    Comment


                    • preferences

                      Hello Adam. Thanks.

                      Other than having her head lifted, she was not moved. IF someone had stumbled against her, perhaps they would have left footprints (blood).

                      Regarding the mud. Yes, that was in the inquest testimony. She was covered in mud on her left side. It was wet and muddy, so IF she had fallen on her back or right side, there would be much mud there and wetness. There was not.

                      "No. According to Schwartz, he couldn't tell whether he was deliberately following him - i.e. shepherding him - off the scene or whether he too was escaping. Schwartz fled to the railroad tracks and looked back but PM hadn't followed him so far.....which tells us what? Well, one of two things. That either PM had fled in a different direction, or he had returned towards the scene of the crime. I prefer the latter option."

                      Why? Because you prefer PM as her killer?

                      Cheers.
                      LC

                      Comment


                      • Hi Lynn,

                        Other than having her head lifted, she was not moved. IF someone had stumbled against her, perhaps they would have left footprints (blood).

                        Unlike the other victims, Liz wasn't mutilated so if a member of the IWMEC had bumped against, say, her legs or side, where would the bloody footprints have come from?

                        Regarding the mud. Yes, that was in the inquest testimony. She was covered in mud on her left side. It was wet and muddy, so IF she had fallen on her back or right side, there would be much mud there and wetness. There was not.

                        The report from Swanson states that Schwartz said BS man pushed her down onto the footway, whereas the report in The Star stated only that BS man was trying to push Liz into the passageway. Other than that she uttered a few small screams, there's really not much else to go on - especially since Schwartz didn't testify at the inquest. I don't think that from this it would be accurate to guess just what sort of coverage of mud Liz would have sustained from making contact with the footpath of Berner Street as opposed to what she would have got in the passageway - which, being a path used by animals such as Diemschutz's pony, would surely have been far more dirty?

                        Why? Because you prefer PM as her killer?

                        Alas, no. Because if Liz was killed by JTR - and there is where I think our real disagreement lies, from which all other disagreement spawns - PM is a far more logical option than BS man.

                        Cheers,
                        Adam.

                        Comment


                        • Pinchin street torso, and the Whitehall mystery are most likely the same killer. Jack started first I believe.

                          Comment


                          • logical

                            Hello Adam. Thanks.

                            I agree that a bump of her legs, etc, would leave no trace--but neither would it disturb the placement of her body.

                            If Liz made contact with the pavement, she should be wet where she had fallen.

                            In a sense, I agree about BSM v PM. BSM is NOT a very logical choice. Nevertheless, IF he existed, he killed LIz.

                            Cheers.
                            LC

                            Comment


                            • Hi Lynn,

                              I agree that a bump of her legs, etc, would leave no trace--but neither would it disturb the placement of her body.

                              That's true, but again we come back to the point that if Liz was murdered in the passageway, then it's entirely irrelevant and seperate to how she was attacked on Berner St in the incident that Schwartz described. I have no real beliefs of any sort regarding what happened once she was in the passageway, other than that she possibly took out the cachous as a calming measure.

                              If Liz made contact with the pavement, she should be wet where she had fallen.

                              But she'd been out for the majority of the night in poor weather conditions, so wouldn't she at least be damp anyway? Despite her attempts to pretty herself up at the lodging house earlier that evening, i'd imagine that a woman of Liz's station in life probably wouldn't have had spotlessly clean clothes at the best of times.

                              In a sense, I agree about BSM v PM. BSM is NOT a very logical choice. Nevertheless, IF he existed, he killed LIz.

                              Herein lies the problem - we're on two completely different wavelengths. You think Schwartz as a witness is questionable, and that JTR didn't kill Liz - in fact, that JTR as we know him didn't exist. On the other hand, I think Schwartz is one of the better witnesses - certainly in comparison to others of the same night: Packer, Mortimer, Levy, i'm looking at you - and that JTR had at least six victims, of which Liz was one. Is it possible to reconcile these differences at all, or should we just call it a draw and move on?

                              Cheers,
                              Adam.

                              Comment


                              • if

                                Hello Adam. Thanks.

                                "But she'd been out for the majority of the night in poor weather conditions, so wouldn't she at least be damp anyway?"

                                But she was not. She was wet ONLY where she lay dead on her left side.

                                "The clothes were not wet with rain." [Dr. Blackwell.]

                                ". . . should we just call it a draw and move on?"

                                I think we should. And, as I have said before, my views are 60/40 on Schwartz and his story. However, I am clear on one thing, IF he told the truth, BSM killed Liz.

                                Cheers.
                                LC

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X