A Whip and a Prod

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Sitting "in" the barrow significantly increases the distance between driver and animal.

The man is sitting on a beam across the top of the framework. I would call that 'on', and not 'in' the cart.
That position would place him about 3¼' above ground. The London Costermonger has a whip that seems to extend from about hip to shoulder - 2 feet at most.
So even if Stride had ended up directly under the centreline of the barrow (that is, after being walked over by the pony), there is already the likelihood of a reaching deficit, even before the lateral offset is considered.

Also, while a costermonger barrow could be generically called a cart, it is actually part cart, part wheelbarrow. It has two legs.
The layout, balance, dimensions, and driving position are quite different to an ordinary cart, even though looking superficially similar to this cart photo (probably made by the same company). Apples and oranges.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Apparently your theory needs to be selective to work, here's the other picture I posted.

And in response to my theory, you apparently needed to post false evidence.
I posted a photo of a representative costermonger barrow, with dimensions. I also gave relevant dimensions for Dutfield's Yard, and the position of the victim.
In contrast, you posted a photo of a carriage whip, and a cartoonish drawing of a costermonger with pony and cart.
At least the drawing hints at one relevant fact, though - that the driving position was probably right down the front, close to the pony.

[DJA]

I used Google Images to reverse lookup this image. Link to the search result page
Currently, the first search result goes to a page on ebay...

Victorian Horse Carriage Driving Whip H/M Silver 1884 'G&J_ZAIR Makers London'

As you can see from the pictures, this is a high quality and fairly elaborately made whip.
I would suppose that 'H/M silver' means 'handle metallic silver'.
The dimensions are:
143cm shaft & handle
80cm lash
A 2cm width of the handle.

The ebay item title makes clear that this is a horse carriage driving whip - it is not a costermongers pony & barrow whip!
This was surely evident when the picture was posted, and described - ambiguously, given the topic of this thread - as a 'cart whip'.



The first point may have been true - not so the second.

Diemschitz (MA, Oct 2): I had a barrow, something like a costermonger's, with me. I was sitting in it, and a pony was drawing it. It is a two-wheeled barrow.

Sitting in it, as opposed to sitting on top of it, would have put Louis right up the front of the barrow - close to the pony's arse.
He could have almost reached out and tapped the pony with his hand, and that is reason enough suppose that he had a short whip, with a correspondingly short handle.

I did not get off the barrow, but I tried with my whip handle to feel what it was. I tried to lift it up, but I could not. I jumped down at once and struck a match ...

The notion that Louis was able to prod the 'object' on the ground with his whip handle, while still seated in the barrow, let alone try to lift it, is fanciful.

[DJA]

Posted in error,then reposted.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Sitting "in" the barrow significantly increases the distance between driver and animal.

Id say that the driver of this cart, if he reached over the side, would have been able to touch the wheel hub with little effort. Diemschutz could have prodded Stride with a reasonable sized cucumber.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I used Google Images to reverse lookup this image. Link to the search result page
Currently, the first search result goes to a page on ebay...

Victorian Horse Carriage Driving Whip H/M Silver 1884 'G&J_ZAIR Makers London'

As you can see from the pictures, this is a high quality and fairly elaborately made whip.
I would suppose that 'H/M silver' means 'handle metallic silver'.
The dimensions are:
143cm shaft & handle
80cm lash
A 2cm width of the handle.

The ebay item title makes clear that this is a horse carriage driving whip - it is not a costermongers pony & barrow whip!
This was surely evident when the picture was posted, and described - ambiguously, given the topic of this thread - as a 'cart whip'.



The first point may have been true - not so the second.

Diemschitz (MA, Oct 2): I had a barrow, something like a costermonger's, with me. I was sitting in it, and a pony was drawing it. It is a two-wheeled barrow.

Sitting in it, as opposed to sitting on top of it, would have put Louis right up the front of the barrow - close to the pony's arse.
He could have almost reached out and tapped the pony with his hand, and that is reason enough suppose that he had a short whip, with a correspondingly short handle.

I did not get off the barrow, but I tried with my whip handle to feel what it was. I tried to lift it up, but I could not. I jumped down at once and struck a match ...

The notion that Louis was able to prod the 'object' on the ground with his whip handle, while still seated in the barrow, let alone try to lift it, is fanciful.

Didn’t Diemschutz just say ‘whip” and not “my x inches long costermongers whip made by Messrs....etc?”

This is another massive non-issue in an attempt to prop up a non existent cover up.

[drstrange169]

These children would be the same distance as Diemshitz, if he was "in" the cart.

[drstrange169]

Carriage whips and carts.

[drstrange169]

Sitting "in" the barrow significantly increases the distance between driver and animal.

[drstrange169]

Apparently your theory needs to be selective to work, here's the other picture I posted.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Here's a cart whip made in 1884. The handle is 4 ft 9 ins long (143cms).

I used Google Images to reverse lookup this image. Link to the search result page
Currently, the first search result goes to a page on ebay...

Victorian Horse Carriage Driving Whip H/M Silver 1884 'G&J_ZAIR Makers London'

As you can see from the pictures, this is a high quality and fairly elaborately made whip.
I would suppose that 'H/M silver' means 'handle metallic silver'.
The dimensions are:
143cm shaft & handle
80cm lash
A 2cm width of the handle.

The ebay item title makes clear that this is a horse carriage driving whip - it is not a costermongers pony & barrow whip!
This was surely evident when the picture was posted, and described - ambiguously, given the topic of this thread - as a 'cart whip'.

Baxter and the jury would have known costermongers barrows and whip sizes, there is nothing odd or unusual in Diemshitz's description.

The first point may have been true - not so the second.

Diemschitz (MA, Oct 2): I had a barrow, something like a costermonger's, with me. I was sitting in it, and a pony was drawing it. It is a two-wheeled barrow.

Sitting in it, as opposed to sitting on top of it, would have put Louis right up the front of the barrow - close to the pony's arse.
He could have almost reached out and tapped the pony with his hand, and that is reason enough suppose that he had a short whip, with a correspondingly short handle.

I did not get off the barrow, but I tried with my whip handle to feel what it was. I tried to lift it up, but I could not. I jumped down at once and struck a match ...

The notion that Louis was able to prod the 'object' on the ground with his whip handle, while still seated in the barrow, let alone try to lift it, is fanciful.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Does this same guy have ties with local anti-Semitic violence....seems to indicate a strong hatred or resentment towards Jews to bring him out again to accuse them of something, would this be the first time we have seen this guys anti Jew sentiments?

Having thought about this some more, I now don't think the chalked message (I refuse to call it 'graffito') is anti-Jewish, in any sense.
Nor is 'Juwes' an acronym.
What the message refers to, is along a very different lines to that normally supposed.
Will tell you later, though.

Might be a clue that could lead to Kates killer.

Not only that.

[Michael W Richards]

I have to say that just the act of analyzing these statements here gives me some satisfaction, It seems like forever Ive been not only suggesting that Liz should not be a Canonical Five member but also that the club staff presented a story which was, at least in part, fabricated. The comings and goings with individual accounts don't work with other witnesses, who in multiples, recalled things quite differently.

Lets put it this way....if you could accept that the club staff covered up any improprieties or delays in responding with a story, then doesn't that make the fact that Jews are the subject of the GSG more intriguing? And make it more likely to have been put there after Kates killing when her killer left the cloth? The exact time is unclear, but it appears he would have had around 70 minutes between leaving Mitre and then leaving the apron section. Seems plausible to me. But that delay in time would suggest he had heard of Strides murder and went indoors after the kill....to drop the kidney in spirits?...then go back out with the apron and chalk. That's where Im stuck. Is it worth the risk of going back onto the streets where 2 murders have just taken place, carrying a piece of evidence from one of the crime scenes, just to insinuate that the Jews should be blamed for something? Does this same guy have ties with local anti-Semitic violence....seems to indicate a strong hatred or resentment towards Jews to bring him out again to accuse them of something, would this be the first time we have seen this guys anti Jew sentiments?

Might be a clue that could lead to Kates killer.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

In The Echo, Oct 1, Diemschitz gives 2 versions of his entry into the yard.

THE STEWARD REPEATS HIS STORY.

There are a pair of iron-studded and iron-capped gates at the entrance to the yard, in which are one or two cottage residences, besides stables. These on Sunday morning, at one o'clock, were open- as is usually the case during the night. The steward of the International and Educational Club reached the gate just as the clock struck one. "It was very dark," he said. "There is no light near here, and the darkness is consequently much more intense between these two walls" - pointing to the walls of the Club and a house on the other side of the yard- "than out in the street. The gate was pushed back, and the wheel of my cart bumped against something. I struck a match to see what it was, but the wind blew it out. However, the flash was enough to show me that the [a?] person was on the ground either asleep or dead.

DISCOVERING THE VICTIM.

I struck another match, and then (pursued the steward) the scene that burst upon me completely appalled me. Without stopping to take a complete survey of the body, I hurried into the Club to see my "missis." I saw her inside the door, and hurriedly called some of the members of the club, who at once came down. You know what we found, Sir. The poor creature's throat was horribly cut. Her head lay towards the yard, and her feet were pointing towards the street. There was a great pool of blood on one of the stones, and some of it had trickled down into that gutter" - pointing to a perforated stone grating.

In this version (which Diemschitz has apparently given previously), he implies that the right-side wheel of the cart collides with the victim.
A little later, he must have realized that this impact would have left a clear record of the event, on the victims body - a record which will not be apparent.
Therefore, he has to make up a somewhat more plausible story.

From the same edition of The Echo:

I drove into the yard, both gates being wide open. It was very dark. As I drove in my pony shied. When I looked down I saw something on the ground, and as I did not know what it was I tried to lift it up with my whip handle. As I could not do this I jumped down at once and struck a match.

So the story of the shying pony, and whip handle used to prod and then attempt to lift the object, were concocted late on the Sunday, or Monday morning.

The wheel bumping against 'something' story, is not feasible, because Stride was not found to have been injured from the force of the wheel of a pony-drawn barrow, running into her backside, and possibly continuing to roll right over her body.

On the other hand, the whip handle as probe story, is vaguely plausible.
In practice though, it doesn't work.
The body is displaced from the whip carrying arm, in 3 dimensions:

• vertical (above the ground)
• horizontal (across the lane)
• lateral (along the lane)

The whip and arm length combined, cover a little more than the first dimension.
There is still a few feet to go.
Diemschitz cannot lean that far, and on no occasion does he indicate making any effort to lean toward the body.

Diemschitz also claimed to arrive home, just after one o'clock.
Arbeter Fraint admitted the murder occurred at a quarter to one.
We have to face the reality that Diemschitz' story is probably a total concoction.

[Michael W Richards]

Im not quite sure why you don't understand what I post, but Im saying Louis did leave after 1 like he said, but actually arrived at 12:45ish. 4 people say he was there then, and 1 with a view of the street at 1am didn't see or hear him at all from 12:50 until 1am.

And it is a very simple matter without the inclusion of a mysterious ripper and an a supposed interruption, both of which are not in evidence in this murder.