The Double Event

[John G]

Was it a coincidence that Schwartz picked a time (12.45) that none of the other witnesses could account for ?




Did Mortimer say she was at her door at 12.45 ?
Could she see the club gates from her doorway ?

Except perhaps for PC Smith, because I believe the evidence shows he was about 10 minutes out with his estimated timings, i.e. I think it likely he saw Stride with a suspect at 12:40-12:45, not 12:30-12:35.

[c.d.]

Well for all the Schwartz doubters he never said he saw Stride being killed. He might simply have been describing a not uncommon street scene between a drunk man and a woman on the street.

Harry, your point about the cachous is a good one but Fanny Mortimer was at her door off and on by her own admission. I think she simply missed what took place.

c.d.

[c.d.]

For those that want an angry B.S. man to be Stride's killer you need to come up with an explanation for why she was not killed where Schwartz last saw her. She had to have gone willingly or have been dragged to where she was found. It is hard to believe that she would have gone willingly with an angry drunk man who pushed her to the ground and who threatened Schwartz with harm. It must have occurred to her that it was not his intention to discuss the weather. If she were dragged she must have realized that at the very least she was in for a good beating or that she was being dragged to her death. In any case, you would expect her to try and fight off her attacker. Yet, the cachous, which were simply wrapped in tissue paper (and which had somehow already survived her being thrown to the ground and her getting up) never came out of her hand. Possible but still hard to believe. I think it indicates that she was at ease with her killer which hardly seems the case if it were the B.S. man.

c.d.

[Joshua Rogan]

Good points Harry. Plus there are newspaper accounts stating that the police had reason to doubt Schwartz's evidence.

Are you perhaps thinking of the Star 1st Oct?

"The police have arrested one man answering the description the Hungarian furnishes. This prisoner has not been charged, but is held for inquiries to be made. The truth of the man's statement is not wholly accepted."

Surely this refers to the man who was detained as the one who is doubted, rather than Schwartz. Or are you thinking of other articles?

[John G]

Are you perhaps thinking of the Star 1st Oct?

"The police have arrested one man answering the description the Hungarian furnishes. This prisoner has not been charged, but is held for inquiries to be made. The truth of the man's statement is not wholly accepted."

Surely this refers to the man who was detained as the one who is doubted, rather than Schwartz. Or are you thinking of other articles?

No, a follow-up report in The Star the following day:

"In the matter of the Hungarian who said he saw a struggle between a man and a woman in the passage where Stride's body was afterwards found, the Leman-Street police have reason to doubt the truth of the story. "

[Joshua Rogan]

Ah, ok, cheers John. I'd not spotted that one before.

[Harry D]

Well for all the Schwartz doubters he never said he saw Stride being killed. He might simply have been describing a not uncommon street scene between a drunk man and a woman on the street..

Except Schwartz identified the victim as Stride, and it's hard to believe there was an unrelated assault on a woman a few minutes before one is found dead in the same spot. Either Schwartz witnessed Stride with her killer moments before her death or he was lying.

Schwartz spun a good yarn but I see little reason to support his version of events and every reason to question them.

[Wickerman]

Schwartz spun a good yarn but I see little reason to support his version of events and every reason to question them.

Fair enough, but why do you think Swanson did believe Schwartz?

And, who do you think would have been tasked with investigating Schwartz's story, the police at Leman St. Stn. or the Detectives at Scotland Yard?

[c.d.]

Except Schwartz identified the victim as Stride, and it's hard to believe there was an unrelated assault on a woman a few minutes before one is found dead in the same spot. Either Schwartz witnessed Stride with her killer moments before her death or he was lying.

Schwartz spun a good yarn but I see little reason to support his version of events and every reason to question them.

Hello Harry,

Well there are assaults and then there are assaults. As I stated earlier, Schwartz simply could have witnessed a simple street hassle. So I see no reason to limit ourselves to saying that he either witnessed Stride with her killer or that he was lying. Even Swanson allowed for the possibility that what Schwartz saw was unrelated to her death.

c.d.

[c.d.]

Hello Harry,

What reason do you think Schwartz had for lying?

c.d.

[Harry D]

Fair enough, but why do you think Swanson did believe Schwartz?

And, who do you think would have been tasked with investigating Schwartz's story, the police at Leman St. Stn. or the Detectives at Scotland Yard?

Probably because they had precious few leads to go on?

Either way, Schwartz appeared to lose credence.

Well there are assaults and then there are assaults. As I stated earlier, Schwartz simply could have witnessed a simple street hassle. So I see no reason to limit ourselves to saying that he either witnessed Stride with her killer or that he was lying. Even Swanson allowed for the possibility that what Schwartz saw was unrelated to her death.

Not impossible but extremely unlikely.

Hello Harry,

What reason do you think Schwartz had for lying?

Schwartz was put up by the IWEC as damage control. After the fiasco with Leather Apron, and the general hostility towards the Jews and their 'activities', the last thing a Jewish socialists club wanted was a Ripper victim on their doorstep. They had to deflect suspicion away from themselves. Enter Schwartz with his antisemitic thug accosting Stride in the street.

[John G]

Fair enough, but why do you think Swanson did believe Schwartz?

And, who do you think would have been tasked with investigating Schwartz's story, the police at Leman St. Stn. or the Detectives at Scotland Yard?

Hi Jon,

Do you think the higher echelons of the police were more likely to be a group of wishful-thinkers- who were probably becoming more and more desperate for a breakthrough, as evidence by the faith placed in Lawende who, on the face of things, was a most uninspiring witness-than the local men on the ground, as exemplified by the boys at Leman Street?

[Wickerman]

Hi Jon,

Do you think the higher echelons of the police were more likely to be a group of wishful-thinkers- who were probably becoming more and more desperate for a breakthrough, as evidence by the faith placed in Lawende who, on the face of things, was a most uninspiring witness-than the local men on the ground, as exemplified by the boys at Leman Street?

Hi John.

I guess it can't be denied that there are always some officials, not directly involved in the day-to-day investigations, who are wishful-thinkers. I just wouldn't put Swanson in that group.
We do have police opinion on Lawende which provides a different picture of their expectations than the modern theorist has adopted.

I don't buy into the belief that Lawende saw Eddowes, whereas many use this witness as a foundation for their theories. The police were not as certain either.

With respect to Schwartz, we can't forget that it is the Coroner who decides on witness reliability not the police officials. It might be difficult for us today to believe that the police and the Coroner could have differing opinions, but it must have been the case on occasion.
We have mulled over this conundrum for years with no real consensus to explain why Schwartz did not appear, and why the opinion of the Leman Police seems to differ to that of Swanson.

That said, we do not know what the origin was for the published opinion from Leman St., was it a constable who was not fully informed?
Or, conversely, was Swanson's opinion written before the investigation of Schwartz was complete.

Swanson's report is dated Oct. 19th, but so is all the paperwork, which may only mean this was the date of completion/submission. The file included reports on Nichols & Chapman too, so it is unlikely he wrote all the reports on the same day.

[Jon Guy]

Except perhaps for PC Smith, because I believe the evidence shows he was about 10 minutes out with his estimated timings, i.e. I think it likely he saw Stride with a suspect at 12:40-12:45, not 12:30-12:35.

What evidence ?

[John G]

What evidence ?

PC Smith estimated that he arrived back on Berner Street at 1:00am. On that basis he suggested that he saw Stride and the suspect between 12:30-12:35, i.e. because his beat took him 25-30 minutes to complete.

However, he couldn't possibly have arrived back on Berner Street at 1:00am, because Louis D didn't discover the body until after that time and PC Lamb and another officer were already in attendance, having been alerted by the club members (in fact, PC Lamb estimated that Dr Blackwell arrived about 10-12 minutes after himself, indicating that he arrived at about 1:05, although I would have thought it was later than this because before his arrival Louis has to discover the body-around 1:02-alert club members, who then exit the club and examine the body, then they have to go in search of an officer and, having found PC Lamb, he has to make his way to the club.)

PC Smith then informs us that, "I saw that the woman was dead, and I went to the police station for an ambulance, leaving the other constables in charge of the body. Dr Blackwell's assistant arrived just as I was going away."

Now, we know that Edward Johnson arrived 3 to 4 minutes before Dr Blackwell, so about 1:12 to 1:13, indicating that PC Smith had arrived shortly beforehand, say, 1:10. This would mean that the timing of the Stride sighting would be between 12:40 and 12:45 and not 12:30-13:35.