Does The Killer Scope Out Locations Before He Kills?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

The fact that Stride was located outside her murder site confirms that their (1) bs man is the killer (2) she was waiting for her killer there.
It was a designated meeting. Agreed by both parties, suggested by the killer (the degree of correlation that two consecutive victims each and independently suggested two Jewish-related sites of their murders is extremely unlikely), and both victims agreed, because they knew the man, at least they knew him well enough to agree upon meetings in "public places" (as a club is supposed to be), amidst the "autumn of terror"/leather apron scare.

I see you start with the assumption that BS man was definitely real, and that he was Stride's killer.
Okay, if you're so sure on these points, can you answer this one simple but critical question:

At what approximate time did Israel Schwartz see BS Man throw Liz Stride to the ground, outside Dutfield's Yard?

Your answer must be coherent with the following:

• PC Smith's traversal time along Berner street
• Fanny Mortimer's period(s) on her front doorstep
• Louis Diemschitz' arrival time to Dutfield's Yard
• Claimed arrival times of policemen and doctors

Don't be embarrassed if you find this overly difficult though - no one else in the world has yet worked it out.
However, that doesn't seem to stop people from wondering what BS man might have had for breakfast.

I do not know what he was thinking. But it makes sense if he wanted to create a scapegoat, and put a "scary" face on that faceless leaher apron, to employ Antisemitism. Not for political reasons, but for decoy reasons. Jews were always a target of the uneducated mob -- the roots of Antisemitism in Europe and Russia were deeply sowed by many different reasons (that is not the present topic of discussion), amids the lower classes and the wretched unfortunates.

If he wanted to scapegoat the Jews, the graffito means; I did this but the Jews are to blame
How could that be, though? You seem to be saying that this explanation makes sense 'because Antisemitism'.
As for the 'uneducated mob', have you noticed that even though the Berner street club membership was mostly Jewish, and that there was a Jewish synagogue near Mitre Square, and that the text of the graffito was printed in the papers, the lower classes did not respond by rioting?

The killer got to know the victims so as to infiltrate and exterminate. This was a brutal "clearing house" process. 'conspiracy' in this cased is used for the royal family bollocks and is usually reserved for flat-earthers and such scum, so i wouldnt like it related to what i am suggesting -- lets call it a scheme. As a retaliation to another (blackmail) scheme.

You make a good point - it is both far too common and easy to dismiss any sort of claims of scheming or nefarious activity as a 'conspiracy theory'.
Supporters of Charles Lechmere as the Ripper were recently referred to in this forum as 'Lechmere conspiracy theorists'.
Who knew a belief in a lone serial killer who told a few convenient lies, amounts to a conspiracy?
Probably someone who needs to keep a dictionary at hand.
At the other end of the spectrum however, there are wild conspiracy theories, and the crossover point seems to be when a large and possibly intricate web of secrecy needs to exist, to maintain the operation.
How close are you going to that with your blackmailers, landlords, hired-hand killer, and hand picked victims who all knew each other?

120 years later, suggestions, and speculations are what we can offer.
At least let's make em cohesive.

Awaiting your answer to the highlighted question...

[The Baron]

I struggle with the idea of the killer being too familiar with the locations though as this would introduce the added risk of being recognised.

Thats because you don't go deep enough with your ideas, and simply/usually stop at your first impression.

You speak of the added risk of being recognised, but then, will he keep killing at the same area, again and again and again and again and....... ?

You see, thats where your 'logic' turns against you.

And whether you struggle or not, you like it or not, the killer WAS in Whitechapel, he walked there, he talked there, he met women there, he killed there, and this is the only fact you would have!



The Baron

[Herlock Sholmes]

Thats because you don't go deep enough with your ideas, and simply/usually stop at your first impression.

You speak of the added risk of being recognised, but then, will he keep killing at the same area, again and again and again and again and....... ?

You see, thats where your 'logic' turns against you.

And whether you struggle or not, you like it or not, the killer WAS in Whitechapel, he walked there, he talked there, he met women there, he killed there, and this is the only fact you would have!



The Baron

Keeping up your usual standard I see Any excuse to disagree with me or insult me.

Its not a ‘first impression’ it’s called common sense. A killer who wishes to avoid capture would be taking a greater risk in a area where he was known, for very obvious reasons. I’m not saying that he wasn’t an Eastender or from the Whitechapel area just that imo he would have been unlikely to have lived right next to Mitre Square for eg or somewhere which meant that he was in Berner Street every day.

And so yet again, I’m your rush to have a dig at me you’ve got it wrong.

[Aelric]

At what approximate time did Israel Schwartz see BS Man throw Liz Stride to the ground, outside Dutfield's Yard?

Your answer must be coherent with the following:

• PC Smith's traversal time along Berner street
• Fanny Mortimer's period(s) on her front doorstep
• Louis Diemschitz' arrival time to Dutfield's Yard
• Claimed arrival times of policemen and doctors

Don't be embarrassed if you find this overly difficult though - no one else in the world has yet worked it out.

Six words:

Read 'Ripper Confidential' by Tom Wescott.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Six words:

Read 'Ripper Confidential' by Tom Wescott.

Is that the book the claims the 'small oblong clots on the back of the hand', observed by Dr Phillips at the mortuary, were perceived as grapes removed from the hand, in Dutfield's Yard?

Is that the book that claims, without evidence, that Joseph Koster and Edward Spooner were one and the same person?

Is that the book that has a timeline with PC Lamb arriving at ~1:10, and thus (implicitly) PC Smith after that time - consequently putting Smith last on Berner street at close to 12:45 - when Israel Schwartz claimed to be there?
Is it therefore also the book that implies that at the same time or just after being assaulted by BS Man, Stride is seen by Smith as he walks by her as she talks quietly to the man with the parcel?
Is it also the book that quietly omits PC Smith from said timeline, even though he...

• witnessed the victim talking to a man, shortly before her death
• witnessed the deceased in Dutfield's Yard
• was called to the inquest

…presumably because he cannot be made to fit into the story?

No, that book does not have the answer to my question.
Nor do you.
Nor does anyone else.

Your six words are not enough.

[Curious Cat]

Is that the book the claims the 'small oblong clots on the back of the hand', observed by Dr Phillips at the mortuary, were perceived as grapes removed from the hand, in Dutfield's Yard?

Is that the book that claims, without evidence, that Joseph Koster and Edward Spooner were one and the same person?

Is that the book that has a timeline with PC Lamb arriving at ~1:10, and thus (implicitly) PC Smith after that time - consequently putting Smith last on Berner street at close to 12:45 - when Israel Schwartz claimed to be there?
Is it therefore also the book that implies that at the same time or just after being assaulted by BS Man, Stride is seen by Smith as he walks by her as she talks quietly to the man with the parcel?
Is it also the book that quietly omits PC Smith from said timeline, even though he...

• witnessed the victim talking to a man, shortly before her death
• witnessed the deceased in Dutfield's Yard
• was called to the inquest

…presumably because he cannot be made to fit into the story?

No, that book does not have the answer to my question.
Nor do you.
Nor does anyone else.

Your six words are not enough.

Where does Israel Schwartz say he was there at 12:45am?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Where does Israel Schwartz say he was there at 12:45am?

I didn't say 'say'.
The claim comes via CI Swanson's report, of Oct 19, in a section I'm sure you've read more than once...

12.45 a.m. 30th. Israel Schwartz of 22 Helen [sic - Ellen] Street, Backchurch Lane, stated that at this hour, on turning into Berner St. from Commercial Road & having got as far as the gateway where the murder was committed he saw a man stop & speak to a woman, who was standing in the gateway. The man tried to pull the woman into the street, but he turned her round & threw her down on the footway & the woman screamed three times, but not very loudly. 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.

If you don't agree with '12:45', go ahead and have a crack at answering the question I posed in #31...

[Curious Cat]

I didn't say 'say'.
The claim comes via CI Swanson's report, of Oct 19, in a section I'm sure you've read more than once...

12.45 a.m. 30th. Israel Schwartz of 22 Helen [sic - Ellen] Street, Backchurch Lane, stated that at this hour, on turning into Berner St. from Commercial Road & having got as far as the gateway where the murder was committed he saw a man stop & speak to a woman, who was standing in the gateway. The man tried to pull the woman into the street, but he turned her round & threw her down on the footway & the woman screamed three times, but not very loudly. 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.

If you don't agree with '12:45', go ahead and have a crack at answering the question I posed in #31...

It's not a matter of agreeing or not agreeing with the time. It's about the source for the time given. Nothing appears to corroborate Schwartz's account.

No-one in the club apparently hears any shouts or screams from outside around that time.

Joseph Love apparently doesn't see or hear anything similar while being in the yard around that time.

Fanny Mortimer here's no shouts of "Lipski!" or screams while she's stood at her door around that time.

Edward Spooner doesn't mention hearing shouts of "Lipski!" while still just round the corner around that time.


If what Israel Schwartz was the case at that time then there should be at least one of those corroborating what he claims.

We have to put Schwartz in a separate bubble, both for lack of corroboration and not appearing at the inquest.

[Michael W Richards]

Continuing to use a statement that has zero secondhand corroboration and from someone whose statement is not involved in the Inquest in any shape or form despite being given prior to said Inquest....(unlike Mr Hutchinsons absence from that Inquest records), ...is beyond reason. There was no BSM, there was no Pipeman, and if anything makes sense its that Israel attended the meeting.. if there at all.

Since we have evidence that Mr Israel Schwartz is recorded at a later date having links with this very club, one doesnt have to be a Pendergast (Preston/Childs) to figure out why he came forward at all. To provide an excuse for introducing antisemitism to this event, and misdirect the investigation into believing that the members, or attendees, were less likely to have committed the murder. On their property with only said members/attendees recorded as being there...with corroboration.

Perhaps Kates killer saw this coming...when he heard that club members were blaming a phantom mutilator for a single cut. He makes his remarks, and validates his crime with the apron section. Israel later validates his concerns.

[Lipsky]

I see you start with the assumption that BS man was definitely real, and that he was Stride's killer.
Okay, if you're so sure on these points, can you answer this one simple but critical question:

At what approximate time did Israel Schwartz see BS Man throw Liz Stride to the ground, outside Dutfield's Yard?

Your answer must be coherent with the following:

• PC Smith's traversal time along Berner street
• Fanny Mortimer's period(s) on her front doorstep
• Louis Diemschitz' arrival time to Dutfield's Yard
• Claimed arrival times of policemen and doctors

Don't be embarrassed if you find this overly difficult though - no one else in the world has yet worked it out.
However, that doesn't seem to stop people from wondering what BS man might have had for breakfast.

If he wanted to scapegoat the Jews, the graffito means; I did this but the Jews are to blame
How could that be, though? You seem to be saying that this explanation makes sense 'because Antisemitism'.
As for the 'uneducated mob', have you noticed that even though the Berner street club membership was mostly Jewish, and that there was a Jewish synagogue near Mitre Square, and that the text of the graffito was printed in the papers, the lower classes did not respond by rioting?


You make a good point - it is both far too common and easy to dismiss any sort of claims of scheming or nefarious activity as a 'conspiracy theory'.
Supporters of Charles Lechmere as the Ripper were recently referred to in this forum as 'Lechmere conspiracy theorists'.
Who knew a belief in a lone serial killer who told a few convenient lies, amounts to a conspiracy?
Probably someone who needs to keep a dictionary at hand.
At the other end of the spectrum however, there are wild conspiracy theories, and the crossover point seems to be when a large and possibly intricate web of secrecy needs to exist, to maintain the operation.
How close are you going to that with your blackmailers, landlords, hired-hand killer, and hand picked victims who all knew each other?



Awaiting your answer to the highlighted question...

There's a tone of self-indulgent arrogance in your remarks and questions. I am too old and too bored for such mentalities. Please respect the fact that we are just weirdos discussing psychopathic murders 120 years old. As Tati said to Tyra "Thankyew".

To the questions in hand: the whole eye-witness account can be fabricated or not.
Funny how everyone in this case who came forth to "speak out" may be lying or simply clueless?
As if the ineptude of the police chiefs at the time was not enough...

Frankly, the idea that socialites of "Pall Mall" fame came to Whitechapel for "a little bit of the action" is no conspiracy. It happened all the time.
Motive and method is all you need. Introduce a little madness, all too eager to strike, as it had provingly done, and voila.
James Kelly 's correspondence with his mother-in-law is the closest we have with a written documentation of a mind deranged and truly capable (and convicted, at that) of handling the knife and creating weird persona with ink and paper.

[Scott Nelson]

For timings of the Berner Street murder, see Gavin Bromley's "Smith's Beat" in Ripperologist no. 70 (August 2006) and "Taking a Stride Down Berner Street" in Ripperologist no. 71 (September 2006).

[Lipsky]

It's not a matter of agreeing or not agreeing with the time. It's about the source for the time given. Nothing appears to corroborate Schwartz's account.
No-one in the club apparently hears any shouts or screams from outside around that time.
Joseph Love apparently doesn't see or hear anything similar while being in the yard around that time.
Fanny Mortimer here's no shouts of "Lipski!" or screams while she's stood at her door around that time.
Edward Spooner doesn't mention hearing shouts of "Lipski!" while still just round the corner around that time.
If what Israel Schwartz was the case at that time then there should be at least one of those corroborating what he claims.
We have to put Schwartz in a separate bubble, both for lack of corroboration and not appearing at the inquest.

I dont see how anyone else should have "necessarily" listened to "Lipsky" to make Israel's account more credible.
These inquests were attended by people who came forth afterwards... or were not attended by people who should have.
And were most probably attended by the killer.
This proves nothing.

"Just around the corner"/"from inside the club" -- this is not some silent church yard.
This is whitechapel, where people minded their own business ---
Or did they?

[c.d.]

I dont see how anyone else should have "necessarily" listened to "Lipsky" to make Israel's account more credible.

I agree. I don't see any reason for the B.S. man to have yelled it especially if it was accompanied by a menacing look and gesture.

c.d.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

It's not a matter of agreeing or not agreeing with the time. It's about the source for the time given. Nothing appears to corroborate Schwartz's account.

Okay fine, although you did ask about the time, so I thought you thought that was the issue.

No-one in the club apparently hears any shouts or screams from outside around that time.

Joseph Love apparently doesn't see or hear anything similar while being in the yard around that time.

Fanny Mortimer here's no shouts of "Lipski!" or screams while she's stood at her door around that time.

All valid points.

Off topic re Joseph Lave - https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...221#post152221

Edward Spooner doesn't mention hearing shouts of "Lipski!" while still just round the corner around that time.

I wouldn't call Grove street 'just around the corner'.
On the other hand, if he really were standing outside the Beehive, there are two obvious questions:
If the Beehive was closed at the time, what is the point of standing outside it?
If the Beehive was still open at the time, what is the point of standing outside it?

Our Ed Spooner is a very interesting character. I wonder if he also had a drink at the Bricklayer's Arms that evening, while he was on Settles street?

If what Israel Schwartz was the case at that time then there should be at least one of those corroborating what he claims.

We have to put Schwartz in a separate bubble, both for lack of corroboration and not appearing at the inquest.

As long as that bubble is not a quarantine, and this is kept in mind (also from Swanson's report):

Upon being taken to the mortuary Schwartz identified the body as that of the woman he had seen...

Perhaps it was all just a big prank. In that case, it might pay to give Mr Schwartz a visit.
He lives at:

22 Ellen Street, Backchurch Lane

If you can't find him there, try:

22 Backchurch Lane, Ellen Street

That's the street the Star man 'found' him in, just before he permanently disappeared.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

For timings of the Berner Street murder, see Gavin Bromley's "Smith's Beat" in Ripperologist no. 70 (August 2006) and "Taking a Stride Down Berner Street" in Ripperologist no. 71 (September 2006).

'Smith's Beat' goes to extraordinary lengths in an attempt to prove that Louis Diemschitz really did arrive at the yard at 1am, as he stated.
In doing so, it (like 'Ripper Confidential) has Smith last on Berner street at 12:45 or just after.
Smith sees Stride safe and sound, talking quietly with a man.
Remember also, that Fanny Mortimer goes outside again, presumably after hearing Smith's 'measured, heavy tramp', until just prior to the arrival of Diemschitz.
She sees nothing remotely like the incident described by Schwartz.
So when was Schwartz there?
No use talking about the man with broad shoulders, or the man with the pipe, until you can answer that question.

As for the other article, I will read it asap. Thanks.