Motivation?

[DJA]

Xanthelasma

Severity varies.

Post 105 contains a link to Addison Gull Syndrome.

Autoimmune problem arising from rheumatic fever in Eddowes' case.
Strep takes over from good gut flora,disrupting digestion of lipids.
Also happens with neurasthenia,chronic fatigue syndrome,fibromyalgia,etc.Often causes myofascial pain due to lack of amino acids.

Research here in Oz copyrighted by ex Newcastle University professors.

Causes a dozen or more diseases.

"Prosector's" area of expertise.

[DJA]

There was no rain at the time Schwartz claims to have walked down Berner Street, but supposing there was, why doesn't Pipeman stay under his little shelter when Schwartz is walking by?

The bar owner is interested in stopping the manhandling of Stride.

Lipsky might have been Liz flee!

[Wickerman]

If anyone cares to read about the rain on the night, there is a dissertation covering this.

https://www.casebook.org/dissertatio...ostpacker.html

The author concludes that Packer closed up shop owing to the rain, but this around was at around 11.30pm.

It doesn't really matter what the dissertation says, Packer saw Stride with a man. We know from witness Best & Gardiner that Stride was outside the Bricklayers Arms about 11:00pm, so she wasn't buying grapes from Packer at 11:00pm.

Packer closed up at 12:30, while Stride was in Berner St. with a man carrying a package of grapes. PC Smith saw Stride at 12:35, with a man carrying a package.

Please provide a scenario that gets Schwartz out of trouble. This is important!

Why?

[DJA]

William Marshall reported a likely Stride sighting opposite 58 Berner Street ~ 11.45pm.

Tends to support Packer selling grapes ~ 11.30pm.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

It doesn't really matter what the dissertation says, Packer saw Stride with a man. We know from witness Best & Gardiner that Stride was outside the Bricklayers Arms about 11:00pm, so she wasn't buying grapes from Packer at 11:00pm.

Packer closed up at 12:30, while Stride was in Berner St. with a man carrying a package of grapes. PC Smith saw Stride at 12:35, with a man carrying a package.


Why?

Apart from the arrogance of dismissing Dave Yost's dissertation out of hand, in favour of his own interpretation, I find it interesting that Wickerman has now made the credibility of Israel Schwartz' story dependent on the credibility of .... Matthew Packer.

Remember, this all stems from the the simple point that Schwartz' second man cannot emerge from the doorway of the Nelson Beer House as he does in The Star account, as the place closed it's doors at midnight, and Schwartz is on Berner Street at 12:45.

There is no wind or rain at this time:

William Marshall: A juryman. - How long were you standing at the door? - From 11:30 to 12.
A juryman. - Did it rain then? - No, it did not rain until nearly 3 o'clock.

Dr Blackwell: It was a very mild night and was not raining at the time. There was no wet on deceased's clothing.

Yet Wickerman would have us believe that the second man (Pipeman) was sheltering from the rain (or wind and rain), near the beer house doorway, because Matthew Packer said he closed up shop because of the rain, therefore it must have been raining at the time of the Schwartz incident.

Perhaps the second man were actually the beer house proprietor (I believe his name was Louis Hagens), who had unlocked the doors and stood just outside them at 12:45.
DJA certainly seems to think so:

The bar owner is interested in stopping the manhandling of Stride.

Lipsky might have been Liz flee!

In that case, Schwartz' second man should have been very easy for the police to identify, but he wasn't.
That's the first big issue.

The second being; what the hell happens when the bar owner, carrying a knife, confronts the tipsy man who has assaulted Stride?
What happens to Knifeman? What happens to Tipsy Man? What happens to Stride?
Why doesn't Sarah Diemschutz hear the quarrel, as it is described in the Star? Or indeed, anyone else in the vicinity?

The third being?
If Knifeman walks toward Tipsy Man, and not Schwartz, why does Israel feel the need to flee a situation he is already well away from?

Once you've answered those questions to your satisfaction, can you (that is, anyone), tell me what happened to the man carrying the paper parcel?

[Wickerman]

Apart from the arrogance of dismissing Dave Yost's dissertation out of hand, in favour of his own interpretation, I find it interesting that Wickerman has now made the credibility of Israel Schwartz' story dependent on the credibility of .... Matthew Packer.

Dave Yost was a regular on Casebook back in the late 90's. Both he & I agreed over Packer, but disagreed over that 11:30 timing. Stride cannot be in two places at the same time.
I disagreed then and I disagree now, I have not seen any reason to change. If you cannot contribute anything new then what is there to discuss?

I asked about Schwartz because I have rarely ever mentioned him, I'm not altogether sure Schwartz was not mistaken that night, but I've never promoted his claim as any serious evidence, so I don't see a need for me to defend his claims.

[Wickerman]

Remember, this all stems from the the simple point that Schwartz' second man cannot emerge from the doorway of the Nelson Beer House as he does in The Star account, as the place closed it's doors at midnight, and Schwartz is on Berner Street at 12:45.

That argument is based on a false premise.
The police account describes a man "standing, lighting his pipe", the press version describes a man coming "out of the doorway", not out of the Beerhouse. There is no indication the Beerhouse was open, that is just a false assumption.

There is no wind or rain at this time:

I quoted from the weather conditions for Sept 30th, a chart created by Dave Yost. There was 0.27 inch of rain over Whitechapel.

All your subsequent questions are irrelevant as the basis for asking them was false to begin with.

[Joshua Rogan]

Louis had trouble lighting a match to see the body of Liz in the entrance to the club;

"It was rather windy, and I could only get a light sufficient to show that it was the figure of some person"

[Wickerman]

As we have no surviving police statement from Packer, only a few notes by Ass. Comm. Bruce, we have to use a press interview to gain the full story.

https://www.casebook.org/press_reports/evening_news/18881004.html

It is here where Packer told us the encounter with Stride & the client began about 11:45 pm:

On the 29th ult., about 11.45 p.m., a man and woman came to his shop window, and asked for some fruit.

How did he know the time?
Like anyone else, he estimated the time based on the closing of the pubs.

At last the couple moved from their position, and Packer saw them cross the road again and come over to the club, standing for a moment in front of it as though listening to the music inside. Then he lost sight of them. It was then ten or fifteen minutes past twelve o'clock, Packer, who was about to close his shop, noting the time by the fact that the public houses had been closed.

On Saturday night the public houses had to close by 12:00am, midnight.

There's nothing arrogant about restating the record as it has come down to us.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

That argument is based on a false premise.
The police account describes a man "standing, lighting his pipe", the press version describes a man coming "out of the doorway", not out of the Beerhouse. There is no indication the Beerhouse was open, that is just a false assumption.




I quoted from the weather conditions for Sept 30th, a chart created by Dave Yost. There was 0.27 inch of rain over Whitechapel.

All your subsequent questions are irrelevant as the basis for asking them was false to begin with.

The Star, Oct1:

It seems that he had gone out for the day, and his wife had expected to move, during his absence, from their lodgings in Berner-street to others in Backchurch-lane. When he came homewards about a quarter before one he first walked down Berner-street to see if his wife had moved. As he turned the corner from Commercial-road he noticed some distance in front of him a man walking as if partially intoxicated. He walked on behind him, and presently he noticed a woman standing in the entrance to the alley way where the body was afterwards found. The half-tipsy man halted and spoke to her. The Hungarian saw him put his hand on her shoulder and push her back into the passage, but, feeling rather timid of getting mixed up in quarrels, he crossed to the other side of the street. Before he had gone many yards, however, he heard the sound of a quarrel, and turned back to learn what was the matter, but just as he stepped from the kerb a second man came out of the doorway of the public-house a few doors off, and shouting out some sort of warning to the man who was with the woman, rushed forward as if to attack the intruder. The Hungarian states positively that he saw a knife in this second man's hand, but he waited to see no more. He fled incontinently, to his new lodgings.


No indication that the beer house was open?
My whole point is that the beer house was closed at the time. You know that, and so does everyone else.
You're starting to sound desperate. What's the problem?

[Wickerman]

You clearly assume the Beerhouse had to be open for a man to come "out of the doorway", yet you have not explained why that is.
Once again.....he came from the doorway, not out of the Beerhouse.

[Wickerman]

William Marshall reported a likely Stride sighting opposite 58 Berner Street ~ 11.45pm.

Tends to support Packer selling grapes ~ 11.30pm.

Wrong couple, walking the wrong way.
The man Marshall saw wore a cap, not a hat (with wide brim), Marshall saw no flower on her jacket.

Packer said Stride and the man came UP from the direction of Ellen St., Marshall said the couple walked DOWN towards Ellen St.
Different couple.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Louis had trouble lighting a match to see the body of Liz in the entrance to the club;

"It was rather windy, and I could only get a light sufficient to show that it was the figure of some person"

The Hungarian states positively that he saw a knife in this second man's hand, but he waited to see no more.

The second man had a knife, not a pipe, so the wind is irrelevant.
Unless, that is, you're referring to the 'pipeman' from Swanston's report, based as it was on the Sep 30 version of events.
In that case, we're dealing with this:

On crossing to the opposite side of the street, he saw a second man standing lighting his pipe. The man who threw the woman down called out apparently to the man on the opposite side of the road 'Lipski' & then Schwartz walked away, but finding that he was followed by the second man he ran so far as the railway arch but the man did not follow so far.

Is the second man now huddled in the doorway, trying to escape the wind while trying to light his pipe? Who knows?
Perhaps a more pertinent question is; what was the first street Schwartz ran down on his way to the railway arch?
Was it Berner or Fairclough Street?
If the former, he must have gone past the B/F intersection by the time he begins running from pipeman.
That takes him straight past his Berner St address, or at least the one his wife had been moving out of when he went out for the day over 12 hours earlier.
If the later, he runs right by Edward Spooner and lady friend, standing outside the Beehive.
Spooner make no reference to this, so I guess Schwartz ran further down Berner St and past the old address.
In either case, we should get a pretty good idea of where pipeman lives, presuming he was just walking home when he spooked Israel.
So why wasn't he identified?
Regardless, I guess pipeman must have dealt with the wind in time for Schwartz to see him coming, and Mrs Schwartz must have managed to complete the move by 1am, so that Israel never needed to return Berner street. Imagine the surprise he would have got if he did though, seeing all those people outside the club!
But at least he got home safe to his wife, and what an understanding wife she must have been, letting him go out all day and half the night, while she moved house for both of them.
Gee, I just thought of something. I wonder if they had any kids?

[Wickerman]

Your problem is, you are trying to solve an issue for which we have no clear information.
- We don't know whether the 'Pipeman' was really a 'Knifeman', due to two different sources.
- We don't know if this man chased after Schwartz, or just ran behind him to avoid the same trouble.
- We don't know the true direction Schwartz claimed he ran.
- We don't know which address Schwartz's was running towards. However, the very fact 22 Ellen St. is noted on the statement by Swanson would indicate Ellen St. was the new address, the address where they could find him if required.
- Many rooms were rented fully furnished, so moving house may involve nothing more than his wife packing a few suitcases.

The Hungarian states positively that he saw a knife in this second man's hand, but he waited to see no more.

The second man had a knife, not a pipe, so the wind is irrelevant.
Unless, that is, you're referring to the 'pipeman' from Swanston's report, based as it was on the Sep 30 version of events.
In that case, we're dealing with this:

On crossing to the opposite side of the street, he saw a second man standing lighting his pipe. The man who threw the woman down called out apparently to the man on the opposite side of the road 'Lipski' & then Schwartz walked away, but finding that he was followed by the second man he ran so far as the railway arch but the man did not follow so far.

Is the second man now huddled in the doorway, trying to escape the wind while trying to light his pipe? Who knows?
Perhaps a more pertinent question is; what was the first street Schwartz ran down on his way to the railway arch?
Was it Berner or Fairclough Street?
If the former, he must have gone past the B/F intersection by the time he begins running from pipeman.
That takes him straight past his Berner St address, or at least the one his wife had been moving out of when he went out for the day over 12 hours earlier.
If the later, he runs right by Edward Spooner and lady friend, standing outside the Beehive.
Spooner make no reference to this, so I guess Schwartz ran further down Berner St and past the old address.

You've likely seen this map before.
The Green circle - Dutfields Yard.
Blue circle - 22 Ellen St.
Red circles - locations where railway tracks pass over, or run along side a road.



So, Schwartz ran towards the railway arches, which way did he run?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

So, Schwartz ran towards the railway arches, which way did he run?

I think I know, and I think I know why he apparently changes the story, almost overnight.

As for Pipeman running, I can't quite see a man running with a freshly lit pipe, and why would he anyway?
Is he working with BS Man? In what capacity?
Why not just let Schwartz walk by? He has already crossed the road and appears to have no interest in the assault outside #40.
Pipeman can't be working with Tipsy Man, 'cause the later just turned into Berner St ... tipsy. And now Pipeman is Knifeman, and is hostile to Tipsy Man.
So if the second man is just walking home (from where? the pubs closed at midnight), stops to light his pipe, and then 'follows' Schwartz down Berner St, then he quite possibly lives between Ellen St, Christian St, Pinchin St, and Backchurch Lane. Should be easy to track down.
Multiple arrests - no Pipeman.

No, we can't work this stuff out for sure, but we can reason about the scenarios.

For example, the change of address. Should take a couple of hours at most.
Why not help his wife do it before going out for the day? Or did he leave before 9am?
That's 16 hours ago - longer than Diemschitz is away at the markets.
And why does he suppose the wife might not be done by 1am the next morning?

It really seems like Schwartz needs an excuse to be on Berner St when he says he was, and another excuse to only be there very briefly.
House move > Pipeman. It's all so convenient.
Later that morning or maybe lunchtime, he speaks to the Star man. He then essentially exits history.
Where did he go? I think I know.