Who has the goods?

[DJA]

With regard to the pony and cart again, I seem to recall that there was another door to the rear building in the back in the actual yard. Is this the door Diemshitz was referring to as "outside the club door" as opposed to outside the kitchen door?

Cheers, George

Outside the club door (in the yard) is referring to the kitchen door.

[Coroner] What did you do with the pony? - I left it in the yard by itself, just outside the club door.

[DJA]

Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Elizabeth Stride's Inquest

[GBinOz]

With regard to the pony and cart again, I seem to recall that there was another door to the rear building in the back in the actual yard. Is this the door Diemshitz was referring to as "outside the club door" as opposed to outside the kitchen door?

Cheers, George

[DJA]

[GBinOz]

Hi,

Thanks to DJA for the info on the door's location (18 feet from the gate). I had misremembered it as being closer to the other end of the building. Also, the collection of carts all look to be roughly similar dimensions (close enough for our purposes), so I've shifted the pony and cart to be just beyond the door (indicated by the black square). Of course, it's also quite possible that it was shifted further into the yard as the evening went on, but I've placed it to give a rough estimate of where Diemshutz indicates he left it when he went in the club in response to a question from the coroner.

In Post #60, where George provides the transcript details about this, he also ponders "... I find myself wondering why the disposition of the pony and cart has any relevance to the case.", which I'm taking here to be wondering in reference to why the coroner asked about the pony and cart, rather than why we all now are considering their whereabouts. Obviously I can't know the thoughts of the coroner as I do not have the skills that some profess to possess, however I could see something like this prompting the coroner to ask about this. Diemshutz is testifying as to his actions upon arriving at the yard, which he stated was at 1:00, and after whip-prodding, and getting down and looking, and all those things he says he did, he eventually enters the club and alerts the people there. A group comes out, examines the body again, notes she's dead, and the search for the police begins.

The only time in Diemshutz's testimony is the 1:00 arrival (which he based upon a clock he passed not long before his arrival). In order to get a rough idea of the time line between when he states he first entered the yard, and made his initial observations, and when he then alerts people inside the club, etc, knowing what he did with the pony and cart would be important. If he spent a fair amount of time dealing with the pony and cart (blanketing the pony, unhitching the cart, and so forth), then we have a fair delay between his stated arrival and his entering the club, but if he just parked it up and went right inside (as he states), then we have very little delay.

So to me, the coroner's question makes sense as it establishes and gets on record the actions of Diemshutz and helps to understand the flow of the events, rather than seeing it as an interest in the pony and cart per se.

- Jeff

Hi Jeff,

Thanks for your comments on my query. A well thought out reply. Was the Coroner suspecting that, given the activity, the time interval between the horse shy and Lamb's given time of alert was too short for Diemshutz's 1AM time for turning into Berner St to be accurate?

I have to say that I also remembered the kitchen door being further towards the other end of the building. If we look at the source of the 18', this is the Coroner questioning William Wess:

[Coroner] Do you think it possible that anything can have been there without your observing it? - It was dark, and I am a little shortsighted, so that it is possible. The distance from the gates to the kitchen door is 18 ft.
[Coroner] What made you look towards the gates at all? - Simply because they were open.

Did Wess mean 18' from the opened gate? It's fairly trivial I know, being only about 4'6" difference, but it is my impression that the kitchen was in the back room, and the placement on your diagram just doesn't look quite right. Looking at Dave's map it shows the wall partition opposite the approximate centre of the toilet block so, if the kitchen was in the rear room, the door needs to be west of that partition.

Cheers, George

[JeffHamm]

Hi,

Thanks to DJA for the info on the door's location (18 feet from the gate). I had misremembered it as being closer to the other end of the building. Also, the collection of carts all look to be roughly similar dimensions (close enough for our purposes), so I've shifted the pony and cart to be just beyond the door (indicated by the black square). Of course, it's also quite possible that it was shifted further into the yard as the evening went on, but I've placed it to give a rough estimate of where Diemshutz indicates he left it when he went in the club in response to a question from the coroner.

In Post #60, where George provides the transcript details about this, he also ponders "... I find myself wondering why the disposition of the pony and cart has any relevance to the case.", which I'm taking here to be wondering in reference to why the coroner asked about the pony and cart, rather than why we all now are considering their whereabouts. Obviously I can't know the thoughts of the coroner as I do not have the skills that some profess to possess, however I could see something like this prompting the coroner to ask about this. Diemshutz is testifying as to his actions upon arriving at the yard, which he stated was at 1:00, and after whip-prodding, and getting down and looking, and all those things he says he did, he eventually enters the club and alerts the people there. A group comes out, examines the body again, notes she's dead, and the search for the police begins.

The only time in Diemshutz's testimony is the 1:00 arrival (which he based upon a clock he passed not long before his arrival). In order to get a rough idea of the time line between when he states he first entered the yard, and made his initial observations, and when he then alerts people inside the club, etc, knowing what he did with the pony and cart would be important. If he spent a fair amount of time dealing with the pony and cart (blanketing the pony, unhitching the cart, and so forth), then we have a fair delay between his stated arrival and his entering the club, but if he just parked it up and went right inside (as he states), then we have very little delay.

So to me, the coroner's question makes sense as it establishes and gets on record the actions of Diemshutz and helps to understand the flow of the events, rather than seeing it as an interest in the pony and cart per se.

- Jeff

[Herlock Sholmes]

The amount youre willing to just assume in order to try and counter argue something is remarkable in and of itself, but, the above contains so many unestablished facts and provable errors that to cite them individually would just be tedious. If you can just assume that so and so just looked away at that very moment, and that policeman who are working their shifts based on being accountable for times are often off by 10 minutes or more in their estimations, that unbiased witnesses are unreliable and biased ones de facto accounts, that someone claiming to be somewhere at a specific time trumps multiple witness accounts who say that didnt happen, and to assume that on a deserted street after Smith left, confirmed by 3 unbiased witnesses, we suddenly have a thug, the victim, a passerby and someone watching from the sidelines appear....of of the fog I guess huh?,....and just as suddenly and noiselessly they all magically disappear again when a witness to the street returns to her door after taking what is apparently a very unfortunate time to step away.

How about you tone down your rhetoric and not suggest that anything is absolute or proven here. It isnt. You state that there was "obviously" no coverup when you are aware that multiple witness statements suggest the body was discovered earlier than stated by the discoverer... a biased party, which would leave some minutes before the activities around 1am transpire. Leaving minutes for the people employed by the club to discuss a story for the authorities...who would be suspicious of club involvement in this and possibly other murders. You sweep that away as if it would be unnatural, which to me only means you have no idea about the perceptions of immigrant jews, Socialists and anarchists by the authorities in London at that time. Even though you have quotes by a senior investigator hinting at the anti Semitic attitudes.

The amount of evidence you discard casually is another remarkable feat, but as I said and you constantly demonstrate, if you choose to believe something and that anything that challenges those beliefs are automatically incorrect, your not really investigating anything are you? So what is the deal? You get to be rude to people who cant see you?

Ill simply pass over the ‘being rude to people’ by pointing out how you called us all (Caz can confirm this) idiots for not believing your version of events so as ever it’s a case of pot/kettle/black. Some one gives out insults and then they try to shift blame to the person responding. A very old trick with some.

This is your theory therefore the onus should be on you to respond to the individual points that are made in criticism but you blatantly refuse to do. I’ve lost count of the amount of times questions have been put to you but you simply refuse to answer them and seek to change the subject. This hardly speaks of confidence does it?

Its also quite remarkable that a man with your experience and knowledge should find it so ‘impossible’ that witnesses making estimated could have made errors and that police man who don’t posses a watch can’t always be expected to get times exactly correct. They are human after all.

What you’ve done is that you’ve created a scenario which you believe fits and because you think that it fits you assume that it must be true (just like a former poster who did the same with another case) but that isn’t the case. We keep making long posts (I’m as guilty of this as anyone) so why don’t I try…..yet again….to tie you down to one question at a time and see if, for the first time ever you will answer? Here goes…

On the question of Spooner…. You are quite happy to use him to ‘prove’ that Diemschutz found the body earlier because he estimated that it must have been around 12.35. He admitted that he estimated this after talking to someone, walking a certain distance, and using pub closing times (I even think that you might have admitted the possibility of error in a previous post?)

So why do you persist in quoting this but you absolutely and completely ignore the fact that he said that he’d been at the yard 5 minutes before Lamb arrived. This supports the 1.00 discovery time. It’s massively more reliable than his 12.35 guess and yet you use the 12.35 one. This is what I mean about your very selective use of witness testimony and your habit of brushing the inconvenient under the carpet.

ok folks, let’s have a drum roll and see if there’s a meaningful response on the way?

[MrBarnett]

Charles was pushing forty with a large family of his own and his own job. He lived elsewhere. Why should we want to assume that he had access to his father-in-laws’ shops?

I never did. The old boy had a shop and a boathouse down by the marina and I never had free reign of any of it.

I suppose the Lechmerian hope is that if enough weak links are forged, the chain will somehow become strong.

I’m making no such assumption. I’m simply suggesting that someone whose family occupy business premises is more likely to have access to business premises than someone whose family don’t.

You seem to be ignoring the fact that Joe Forsdyke died in late 1889 and at the time was suffering so badly from senility that it was recorded as one of the causes of his death. He had entered the workhouse in February of that year and was recorded as being destitute. Perhaps he had a lucid spell in September and was able to keep a close eye on both the premises he was linked to - 139 and 147 Cable Street. (Of course, just because those two addresses contained shops, it doesn’t necessarily follow that the Forsdikes ran those shops. People can live in rooms/flats above business premises without being involved in the businesses.)

At one stage my parents had a shop in Barkingside, not far from the Claybury Asylum. Occasionally, when they wanted to get away for a break, I ran it for them. If my father had been seriously ill or had died during the period they were running the shop, I would have stepped in to help my mother run it. If your father had become seriously ill while he ran the shop and boathouse is there any chance you might have stepped in and helped out?

It’s a shame that those who look objectively at this case are often demonised as ‘Lechmerians’ or ‘Diary Defenders’ etc in an apparent attempt to diminish their credibility.

[GBinOz]

If we accept that Smith was correct rather than Mortimer and that Diemschutz had absolutely no reason to lie then for me there is just no issue here. Smith passed at the time that he said that he did. Mortimer then spent her 10 minutes (possibly less) on her doorstep but went back inside before Stride arrived at the gates and was attacked with Schwartz passing.

Diemchutz arrived at the yard at 1.00 and discovered the body. All mention of him using the word ‘precisely’ is fairly desperate stuff IMO. FrankO did point out that if he’d seen the clock at 1.00 he’d have known that it would have taken him less than a minute to reach the yard. To be more accurate of course he perhaps should have said that it might have been 1.01 of course (or that the clock that he’d seen might have been fast or slow) but we descend to nitpicking if we go to these lengths. By seeing a clock Louis Diemschutz said that he reached the yard at 1.00 and there’s just no reason to disbelieve him.

PC Lamb admitted that he had no watch and was clearly estimating his time. Eagle said that he was first called to the body by Gilleman at around 1.00 (and yet Michael bafflingly continues to use this to claim an earlier discovery time) If I recall correctly Diemschutz wife and the club servants backing up this time. Eagle then goes for a Constable and is it was mentioned that it might have taken longer than suspected so he might have turned left into Commercial Road first before turning right? The time that Lamb arrived (approx 1.05) fits in just right with the time that Johnston was called which in turn dovetails into Blackwell’s arrival at 1.16.

So Fanny Mortimer is back inside for the Schwartz incident. Diemschutz discovers the body at 1.00. He goes for a PC and returns with Spooner around 1.02/3. Lamb arrives with Eagle around 1.05/6. Then James Brown’s here’s the cries of ‘police’ and’ murder’ at the time that Diemschutz would have passed.

….

To be honest George we can keep nitpicking forever but we should begin from the point there was very, very obviously no cover up. These are so easy to create of course when there are witnesses estimating times and making understandable errors. It’s flimsy ground to build a conspiracy around but a conspiracist will always find a way. The only real question for me is one that we can’t answer with the information that we have and that is “was Stride killed by Jack the Ripper or not?” That she was killed in Dutfield’s Yard is known. That she was killed between 12.45 and 1.00 is known.

Hi Herlock,

I can assure you that I am not even privy to content of the conspiracy to which you refer. I did wonder whether the Schwartz story may have been concocted (you may call that a conspiracy) to avoid a repeat of the anti-simitic riots over the Leather Apron story, which was also anticipated by Warren in Goulston St, but it appears that IF the police located and questioned Pipeman then the story must have some validity. I hope that you do not think that I am "nitpicking" over minutes. We seem to be on the same page with preferring Smith's times to Mortimers. But after you agree that Mortimer went inside just before the arrival of Schwartz at about 12:45, you overlook the fact that she heard Diemshutz pass 4 minutes later. This is in line with Lamb's times, who, while he didn't have a watch, he very recently passed the tobacconist clock. I completely discount times calculated from time distant clock sightings by Eagle, Brown and Spooner. The reason to disbelieve Diemshutz is that he is in conflict with Smith and Lamb and therefore, IMO, Diemshutz was mistaken.

Diemshutz testified at the inquest that he had passed the body when his horse shied to the left. That would place what ever worried the horse on the right side between the body and the side door of the club, rather than the body itself. IMHO the scuffle between Stride and BSM was minor and over quickly, and Stride walked away towards the side door of the club and was murdered by Parcelman who was in the shadows, and disturbed by Diemshutz, at about 12:50. When Diemshutz alighted from his wagon he would have been blocking the murderers escape to the street so (speculation warning) he presumably crossed to the toilet block while Louis fumbled with his matches and made his escape when Diemshutz moved his horse and cart up to near the side door of the club.

Was Stride killed by the ripper? I am, as Franko phrases it, "on the fence" at this point in time.

Cheers, George

[Michael W Richards]

If we accept that Smith was correct rather than Mortimer and that Diemschutz had absolutely no reason to lie then for me there is just no issue here. Smith passed at the time that he said that he did. Mortimer then spent her 10 minutes (possibly less) on her doorstep but went back inside before Stride arrived at the gates and was attacked with Schwartz passing.

Diemchutz arrived at the yard at 1.00 and discovered the body. All mention of him using the word ‘precisely’ is fairly desperate stuff IMO. FrankO did point out that if he’d seen the clock at 1.00 he’d have known that it would have taken him less than a minute to reach the yard. To be more accurate of course he perhaps should have said that it might have been 1.01 of course (or that the clock that he’d seen might have been fast or slow) but we descend to nitpicking if we go to these lengths. By seeing a clock Louis Diemschutz said that he reached the yard at 1.00 and there’s just no reason to disbelieve him.

PC Lamb admitted that he had no watch and was clearly estimating his time. Eagle said that he was first called to the body by Gilleman at around 1.00 (and yet Michael bafflingly continues to use this to claim an earlier discovery time) If I recall correctly Diemschutz wife and the club servants backing up this time. Eagle then goes for a Constable and is it was mentioned that it might have taken longer than suspected so he might have turned left into Commercial Road first before turning right? The time that Lamb arrived (approx 1.05) fits in just right with the time that Johnston was called which in turn dovetails into Blackwell’s arrival at 1.16.

So Fanny Mortimer is back inside for the Schwartz incident. Diemschutz discovers the body at 1.00. He goes for a PC and returns with Spooner around 1.02/3. Lamb arrives with Eagle around 1.05/6. Then James Brown’s here’s the cries of ‘police’ and’ murder’ at the time that Diemschutz would have passed.

….

To be honest George we can keep nitpicking forever but we should begin from the point there was very, very obviously no cover up. These are so easy to create of course when there are witnesses estimating times and making understandable errors. It’s flimsy ground to build a conspiracy around but a conspiracist will always find a way. The only real question for me is one that we can’t answer with the information that we have and that is “was Stride killed by Jack the Ripper or not?” That she was killed in Dutfield’s Yard is known. That she was killed between 12.45 and 1.00 is known.

The amount youre willing to just assume in order to try and counter argue something is remarkable in and of itself, but, the above contains so many unestablished facts and provable errors that to cite them individually would just be tedious. If you can just assume that so and so just looked away at that very moment, and that policeman who are working their shifts based on being accountable for times are often off by 10 minutes or more in their estimations, that unbiased witnesses are unreliable and biased ones de facto accounts, that someone claiming to be somewhere at a specific time trumps multiple witness accounts who say that didnt happen, and to assume that on a deserted street after Smith left, confirmed by 3 unbiased witnesses, we suddenly have a thug, the victim, a passerby and someone watching from the sidelines appear....of of the fog I guess huh?,....and just as suddenly and noiselessly they all magically disappear again when a witness to the street returns to her door after taking what is apparently a very unfortunate time to step away.

How about you tone down your rhetoric and not suggest that anything is absolute or proven here. It isnt. You state that there was "obviously" no coverup when you are aware that multiple witness statements suggest the body was discovered earlier than stated by the discoverer... a biased party, which would leave some minutes before the activities around 1am transpire. Leaving minutes for the people employed by the club to discuss a story for the authorities...who would be suspicious of club involvement in this and possibly other murders. You sweep that away as if it would be unnatural, which to me only means you have no idea about the perceptions of immigrant jews, Socialists and anarchists by the authorities in London at that time. Even though you have quotes by a senior investigator hinting at the anti Semitic attitudes.

The amount of evidence you discard casually is another remarkable feat, but as I said and you constantly demonstrate, if you choose to believe something and that anything that challenges those beliefs are automatically incorrect, your not really investigating anything are you? So what is the deal? You get to be rude to people who cant see you?

[rjpalmer]

I’m not saying this is the case, but on the face of it there could have been plenty of scope for CAL to store/dismember a body within a few hundred yards of Pinchin Street.

Charles was pushing forty with a large family of his own and his own job. He lived elsewhere. Why should we want to assume that he had access to his father-in-laws’ shops?

I never did. The old boy had a shop and a boathouse down by the marina and I never had free reign of any of it.

I suppose the Lechmerian hope is that if enough weak links are forged, the chain will somehow become strong.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I seem to recall that timings were discussed in a previous thread without resolution. I put a question to Monty on how accurate the police Bobbie needed to be on time and his reply was "very". If it is accepted that the police had a better idea of the actual time than residents or club members that rely on extimates then things tend to fall into place. Smith said he walked past Stride and Parcelman headed north at between 12:30 and 12:35, so let's adopt Michael's time of 12:33. Mortimer stated she heard Smith's footsteps at just before 12:45, so there is a clock sync error of about 10 minutes. If we apply this correction and Mortimer stayed at her door for ten minutes, as stated, that has her leaving her door just before 12:45 and consequentially just missing Schwartz, and if Stride went into the yard immediately after Smith passed, accompanied or not, then Mortimer would have missed them as well. She hears Louis and his cart passing 4 minutes after that, at corrected clock time of about 12:47.

Lamb says he was alerted at shortly before 1am. He had passed the tobacconist clock very shortly before this time and had every reason to look at that clock as he was headed towards Ayliffe who was to be released from fixed point duty at 1am. This time conflicts with Diemshitz's statement at the inquest that he passed this clock at precisely 1am.

At the inquest Diemshitz was asked by the [Coroner] Any person going up the centre of the yard might have passed without noticing it? - I, perhaps, should not have noticed it if my pony had not shied. I had passed it when I got down from my barrow. From this we know That it was dark enough for anyone to have missed the body and that the whip prodding episode took place when the cart was passed the body. The Coroner also asked specifically What did you do with the pony? - I left it in the yard by itself, just outside the club door. I find myself wondering why the disposition of the pony and cart has any relevance to the case.

When previously discussed I found the time of "a few minutes" from pony shy to Lamb's alert to be too short. Diemshitz makes it clear that after the pony shied there was no urgency on his part at all until he returns with the candle as he originally supposed that the female form may have been his wife.

I looked to see what the object was, and observed that there was something unusual, but could not tell what. It was a dark object. I put my whip handle to it, and tried to lift it up, but as I did not succeed I jumped down from my barrow and struck a match. It was rather windy, and I could only get sufficient light to see that there was some figure there. I could tell from the dress that it was the figure of a woman. I went into the club and asked where my wife was. I found her in the front room on the ground floor.
[Coroner] What did you do with the pony? - I left it in the yard by itself, just outside the club door. There were several members in the front room of the club, and I told them all that there was a woman lying in the yard, though I could not say whether she was drunk or dead. I then got a candle and went into the yard, where I could see blood before I reached the body.

If we add the time expended on the above to the time taken to locate Lamb it is obvious that the time of discovery of the body was well before 1am, with Diemshitz's polished up "exactly 1am" the only dissenting clock time.

Given the choice between times given by 4 witnesses and 2 police constables against that of a sleepy man on a cart at the end of a long day, I choose the former. I accept, with respect, others right to support Diemshitz's time.

Cheers, George

If we accept that Smith was correct rather than Mortimer and that Diemschutz had absolutely no reason to lie then for me there is just no issue here. Smith passed at the time that he said that he did. Mortimer then spent her 10 minutes (possibly less) on her doorstep but went back inside before Stride arrived at the gates and was attacked with Schwartz passing.

Diemchutz arrived at the yard at 1.00 and discovered the body. All mention of him using the word ‘precisely’ is fairly desperate stuff IMO. FrankO did point out that if he’d seen the clock at 1.00 he’d have known that it would have taken him less than a minute to reach the yard. To be more accurate of course he perhaps should have said that it might have been 1.01 of course (or that the clock that he’d seen might have been fast or slow) but we descend to nitpicking if we go to these lengths. By seeing a clock Louis Diemschutz said that he reached the yard at 1.00 and there’s just no reason to disbelieve him.

PC Lamb admitted that he had no watch and was clearly estimating his time. Eagle said that he was first called to the body by Gilleman at around 1.00 (and yet Michael bafflingly continues to use this to claim an earlier discovery time) If I recall correctly Diemschutz wife and the club servants backing up this time. Eagle then goes for a Constable and is it was mentioned that it might have taken longer than suspected so he might have turned left into Commercial Road first before turning right? The time that Lamb arrived (approx 1.05) fits in just right with the time that Johnston was called which in turn dovetails into Blackwell’s arrival at 1.16.

So Fanny Mortimer is back inside for the Schwartz incident. Diemschutz discovers the body at 1.00. He goes for a PC and returns with Spooner around 1.02/3. Lamb arrives with Eagle around 1.05/6. Then James Brown’s here’s the cries of ‘police’ and’ murder’ at the time that Diemschutz would have passed.

….

To be honest George we can keep nitpicking forever but we should begin from the point there was very, very obviously no cover up. These are so easy to create of course when there are witnesses estimating times and making understandable errors. It’s flimsy ground to build a conspiracy around but a conspiracist will always find a way. The only real question for me is one that we can’t answer with the information that we have and that is “was Stride killed by Jack the Ripper or not?” That she was killed in Dutfield’s Yard is known. That she was killed between 12.45 and 1.00 is known.

[GBinOz]

Great photos Dave. Thanks for sharing.

Cheers, George

[GBinOz]

Another unanswered question (to add to the others) is why didn't the vigilant Mrs Mortimer see Stride? She didn't just materialise in the yard she walked into it. So why didn't Fanny see her? Or wasn't Fanny on her doorstep for anything like as long as she said. I reckon she went onto her doorstep at around 12.33 and stayed there for 7 minutes or so. Back inside at 12.40. Didn't see Stride, didn't see Schwartz.

I seem to recall that timings were discussed in a previous thread without resolution. I put a question to Monty on how accurate the police Bobbie needed to be on time and his reply was "very". If it is accepted that the police had a better idea of the actual time than residents or club members that rely on extimates then things tend to fall into place. Smith said he walked past Stride and Parcelman headed north at between 12:30 and 12:35, so let's adopt Michael's time of 12:33. Mortimer stated she heard Smith's footsteps at just before 12:45, so there is a clock sync error of about 10 minutes. If we apply this correction and Mortimer stayed at her door for ten minutes, as stated, that has her leaving her door just before 12:45 and consequentially just missing Schwartz, and if Stride went into the yard immediately after Smith passed, accompanied or not, then Mortimer would have missed them as well. She hears Louis and his cart passing 4 minutes after that, at corrected clock time of about 12:47.

Lamb says he was alerted at shortly before 1am. He had passed the tobacconist clock very shortly before this time and had every reason to look at that clock as he was headed towards Ayliffe who was to be released from fixed point duty at 1am. This time conflicts with Diemshitz's statement at the inquest that he passed this clock at precisely 1am.

At the inquest Diemshitz was asked by the [Coroner] Any person going up the centre of the yard might have passed without noticing it? - I, perhaps, should not have noticed it if my pony had not shied. I had passed it when I got down from my barrow. From this we know That it was dark enough for anyone to have missed the body and that the whip prodding episode took place when the cart was passed the body. The Coroner also asked specifically What did you do with the pony? - I left it in the yard by itself, just outside the club door. I find myself wondering why the disposition of the pony and cart has any relevance to the case.

When previously discussed I found the time of "a few minutes" from pony shy to Lamb's alert to be too short. Diemshitz makes it clear that after the pony shied there was no urgency on his part at all until he returns with the candle as he originally supposed that the female form may have been his wife.

I looked to see what the object was, and observed that there was something unusual, but could not tell what. It was a dark object. I put my whip handle to it, and tried to lift it up, but as I did not succeed I jumped down from my barrow and struck a match. It was rather windy, and I could only get sufficient light to see that there was some figure there. I could tell from the dress that it was the figure of a woman. I went into the club and asked where my wife was. I found her in the front room on the ground floor.
[Coroner] What did you do with the pony? - I left it in the yard by itself, just outside the club door. There were several members in the front room of the club, and I told them all that there was a woman lying in the yard, though I could not say whether she was drunk or dead. I then got a candle and went into the yard, where I could see blood before I reached the body.

If we add the time expended on the above to the time taken to locate Lamb it is obvious that the time of discovery of the body was well before 1am, with Diemshitz's polished up "exactly 1am" the only dissenting clock time.

Given the choice between times given by 4 witnesses and 2 police constables against that of a sleepy man on a cart at the end of a long day, I choose the former. I accept, with respect, others right to support Diemshitz's time.

Cheers, George

[DJA]