Which Schwartz interpretation is acurate ?

[Wickerman]

The description of Bricklayers-man given by Best strikes me as having a ring of truth, but the attributes Lewis/Kennedy ascribed to Britannia-man's gaze seem generic, with more than a whiff of the "madman" stereotype. "Strange character with unnatural glaring eyes" (Lewis/Kennedy) wouldn't look out of place in any penny-dreadful, but "Man with sore eyes and no eyelashes" (Best) seems rather more grounded in reality.

That could well be Gareth. Had you also noticed the similarity of description, even to the "round hat, but rather high"?


He was a short, pale-faced man with a black moustache. The man appeared to be about 40. His bag was not very large, about six or nine inches long. The hat he wore was a round hat, rather high - a stiff felt hat.
Sarah Lewis.

The man was about 5ft. 5in. in height. He was well dressed in a black morning suit with a morning coat....
He had a thick black moustache and no beard. He wore a black billycock hat, rather tall, and had on a collar.
J. Best.

If we content ourselves by eliminating suspects due to the differences of dress between all the men concerned in the Stride/Eddowes cases (those seen by Marshall, Smith, Brown, Schwartz and even Lawende), we might see a remarkable consistency between the Britannia-man & Bricklayers-man.

[Sam Flynn]

That could well be Gareth. Had you also noticed the similarity of description, even to the "round hat, but rather high"?

Indeed, Jon. Even down to the fact that both men were described as respectably dressed; Best even going so far as to remark that he was surprised to see a man thus attired in the Bricklayers' Arms.

If we content ourselves by eliminating suspects due to the differences of dress between all the men concerned in the Stride/Eddowes cases (those seen by Marshall, Smith, Brown, Schwartz and even Lawende), we might see a remarkable consistency between the Britannia-man & Bricklayers-man.

Which is both intriguing and frustrating, since the last man seen with the living Eddowes (almost certainly her killer, IMO) had a distinctly downmarket appearance compared to Britannia/Bricklayer-man.

[Wickerman]

... since the last man seen with the living Eddowes (almost certainly her killer, IMO) had a distinctly downmarket appearance compared to Britannia/Bricklayer-man.

I'm not so sure, afterall, we know that Eddowes body was not identified by Lawende, he could only suggest the clothes were similar.
Swanson acknowledged this as a problem too.

Then there is the timing issue. As we all know, Watkins discovered the body at 1:44am, but Lawende said he saw this couple at Church Passage about 1:30.
Fourteen minutes seems very tight considering they had to walk, presumably casually, a distance of about 160ft from Duke St. to the murder site.
In fact it may have been even less than fourteen minutes if we accept Levy's opinion.
"...We got up to leave at half-past one on Sunday morning, and came out three or four minutes later."

The time could be reduced to 10 or 11 minutes, max.

I think there is reasonable cause to doubt that the couple seen at the Duke St. end of Church Passage were actually Eddowes and her killer.

[moonbegger]

That could well be Gareth. Had you also noticed the similarity of description, even to the "round hat, but rather high"?


He was a short, pale-faced man with a black moustache. The man appeared to be about 40. His bag was not very large, about six or nine inches long. The hat he wore was a round hat, rather high - a stiff felt hat.
Sarah Lewis.

The man was about 5ft. 5in. in height. He was well dressed in a black morning suit with a morning coat....
He had a thick black moustache and no beard. He wore a black billycock hat, rather tall, and had on a collar.
J. Best.

If we content ourselves by eliminating suspects due to the differences of dress between all the men concerned in the Stride/Eddowes cases (those seen by Marshall, Smith, Brown, Schwartz and even Lawende), we might see a remarkable consistency between the Britannia-man & Bricklayers-man.

For arguments sake , if we take Schwartz out of the equation , That leaves Brown witnessing Liz & Jack ?

The man was described as being about 5ft 7in tall and stoutly built, wearing a long overcoat which went down almost to his heels. He was wearing a hat, but Brown was unable to describe it.

moonbegger .

[Sam Flynn]

For arguments sake , if we take Schwartz out of the equation , That leaves Brown witnessing Liz & Jack ?

Liz and her killer, perhaps. Whether Stride's killer was also Jack is another matter

[moonbegger]

Liz and her killer, perhaps. Whether Stride's killer was also Jack is another matter

Yes indeed Sam .. but I also think , along with others , that if Schwartz claim is false , or mistaken , then there is every possibility it could have been a Ripper killing that was interrupted .. elevating Browns man as a viable suspect . Especially when other witness descriptions are compared with Browns man .

He was a short, pale-faced man with a black moustache. The man appeared to be about 40. His bag was not very large, about six or nine inches long. The hat he wore was a round hat, rather high - a stiff felt hat.
Sarah Lewis.

The man was about 5ft. 5in. in height. He was well dressed in a black morning suit with a morning coat....
He had a thick black moustache and no beard. He wore a black billycock hat, rather tall, and had on a collar.
J. Best.

And Brown ..

The man was described as being about 5ft 7in tall and stoutly built, wearing a long overcoat which went down almost to his heels. He was wearing a hat, but Brown was unable to describe it.

If Brown had got a look at the mans face and described a Black moustache
would we still strike it down as coincidence ? but we will never know because he didn't .. but it doesn't mean it wasn't there .

Obviously we cannot be sure which witnesses actually witnessed the Killer , but it may be an idea to place identification similarity and consistence , before witness credibility , and see what pops up .

moonbegger

[J6123]

I do not believe that anyone could behave as BS Man did, and also successfully commit the murders of Nichols, Chapman, and Eddowes (and Tabram too, for that matter). The hallmark of the other crimes for me are the stealth of the killer. He killed under people's bedrooms, he killed near watchmen, he killed on routes regularly patrolled by police. In at least one case, he may have come within seconds of being seen by an oncoming witness.

I do not believe a rowdy brawler like BS Man could have done that. No matter what kind of hat he is wearing.

it's easy to rule B.S man out of being the Ripper, on the basis the Ripper would never have been that wreckless or oblivious to being caught. but then again, you could argue that a killer who kills under people's bedrooms, kills near watchmen, kills on routes regularly patrolled by police (In at least one case coming within seconds of being seen by an oncoming witness) - is very much wreckless and oblivious.

i do fully understand your point though, that B.S man's behaviour seems to fly in the face of what we would 'expect' from the ripper, and it does present a problem. as does the fact a different knife was used on Stride to that used on Eddowes.

[Wickerman]

If Brown had got a look at the mans face and described a Black moustache
would we still strike it down as coincidence ? but we will never know because he didn't .. but it doesn't mean it wasn't there .

It might help your argument if Brown had noticed the woman wearing a flower.
Stride certainly was wearing one before the Brown incident at the Bricklayers Arms, and after, when in Berner St.

I rather favor this couple seen by Brown was the courting couple which we know walked up and down Berner St. around this time.

[Jeff Leahy]

It might help your argument if Brown had noticed the woman wearing a flower.
Stride certainly was wearing one before the Brown incident at the Bricklayers Arms, and after, when in Berner St.

I've never been certain that Browns POV would have given him sight of the flower even if she was wearing it?

Remember the woman had her back to the wall and the man he saw was facing the woman in front of her.

Given the angle its doubtful Brown could have seen the flower as his veiw was blocked.

Trust you well

Yours Jeff

[caz]

it's easy to rule B.S man out of being the Ripper, on the basis the Ripper would never have been that wreckless or oblivious to being caught. but then again, you could argue that a killer who kills under people's bedrooms, kills near watchmen, kills on routes regularly patrolled by police (In at least one case coming within seconds of being seen by an oncoming witness) - is very much wreckless and oblivious.

I was thinking the same thing, J.

Also, there is no evidence that BSM knew anyone was watching until he had already begun to tackle Stride. Schwartz claimed to be behind BSM as they both walked towards the club from the direction of Commercial Road. In fact, if BSM shouted "Lipski!" at Schwartz, that would appear to be the moment of realisation that his 'assault' on Stride (or whatever we wish to call it) was being witnessed. If he was the ripper, he may have felt committed by then, at least to the kill.

i do fully understand your point though, that B.S man's behaviour seems to fly in the face of what we would 'expect' from the ripper, and it does present a problem. as does the fact a different knife was used on Stride to that used on Eddowes.

Ooh, don't let Tom see you saying this. It is not a 'fact' that different knives were used. It could have been the same knife.

My previous post listed potential "pick-up points" for the other victims, rather than the venues of the murders. The "Canonical Four" I mentioned died in close proximity to main thoroughfares, where I presume they were solicited before being escorted the short distance to the places where they fell (or escorted the killer themselves). The same could be said of Martha Tabram.

In contrast, Stride seems to have stayed put in the relatively obscure Berner Street, following BS man's assault upon her. Not the sort of place I'd expect an opportunist killer to hang out on the off-chance of finding a victim.

Hi Sam,

Surely the club was only a short distance from Commercial Road, along which I dare say many a man would have picked up a prostitute on a Saturday night. I don't see a problem with either punters, prostitutes, or the ripper himself popping down the side streets on the off-chance of a more private encounter - or even perceived prostitutes if Stride wasn't actively soliciting that night. After all, there was this active club on Berner, and a chance to use their outdoor loos if nothing else. Jack had the same lavatorial needs as anyone else. He could have come out of the club privy to see Stride standing there, and bingo.

Love,

Caz
X

[Jeff Leahy]

not [/I]a 'fact' that different knives were used. It could have been the same knife.
X

Yep, theres no evidence a different knife was used. If I remember correctly its a confusion in the court records. The short bladed knife being a reference to another knife found close to the murder scene which was subsequently found not to be connected to the Stride Murder.

Happy Easter

Yours Jeff

[Scott Nelson]

Principally Dr. Blackwell's opinion.

[moonbegger]

Hello Caz ,

Also, there is no evidence that BSM knew anyone was watching until he had already begun to tackle Stride. Schwartz claimed to be behind BSM as they both walked towards the club from the direction of Commercial Road. In fact, if BSM shouted "Lipski!" at Schwartz, that would appear to be the moment of realisation that his 'assault' on Stride (or whatever we wish to call it) was being witnessed. If he was the ripper, he may have felt committed by then, at least to the kill.

Another thing Caz , The very fact that BSM did not scan his potential kill zone for the possibility of interfering witnesses has got to be detrimental to its inclusion as a Ripper murder , if committed by BSM .

moonbegger

[Jeff Leahy]

Hello Caz ,



Another thing Caz , The very fact that BSM did not scan his potential kill zone for the possibility of interfering witnesses has got to be detrimental to its inclusion as a Ripper murder , if committed by BSM .

moonbegger

Wouldnt that conclude that he 'DID' scan the kill zones at the other murder scenes?

We just don't know that. We don't even know how many other murder scenes there were for certain.

Yours Jeff

[moonbegger]

Wouldnt that conclude that he 'DID' scan the kill zones at the other murder scenes?

We just don't know that. We don't even know how many other murder scenes there were for certain.

Yours Jeff

Hello Jeff ,

I think we must conclude that if Jack and Annie showed up in the back of 29 Hanbury Street only to be greeted by Richardson fixing his lock , the murder would not have commenced there and then .. likewise if Jack and Polly had Paul and Crossmere loitering around them , I'm sure she would have not been found in Bucks row .. (ect ect )

The Thing is Jeff , There was no guarantees as far as , who was going to walk around the corner or into the back yard at any given moment , the Killer had no control over this particular element of his crime , but he could control who was around him at the moment of killing , after that initial few seconds he was in the hands of fortune and luck ..

So why , when it comes to Berner Street would this predetermined killer not give a rats ass about who was in his immediate area ? surely he would take a cursory glance to check on his precarious surroundings .. much the same way as a desperate man taking a pee in a public street today
No one wants to get caught for either offence .

And yes I know " Predetermined " is not a view held by many , but even a spur of the moment killer would be a little cautious as to who was over his shoulder .

cheers , moonbegger