Who has the goods?

[Fiver]

Personally, I don't think Jack could have been in the yard when Diemshutz arrived. Even if he was beside the gate in the darkest area, etc, I can't see how he could be missed as the cart goes past him.

I believe the gates opened inwards, so the killer could have hidden behind the the gate, then left when Diemshutz went into the club.

Alternatively, the killer could have hidden in one of the waterclosets on the other side of the yard.

[Fiver]

"Constable Henry Lamb, 252 H division, examined by the coroner, said: Last Sunday morning, shortly before one o'clock, I was on duty in Commercial-road, between Christian-street and Batty-street, when two men came running towards me and shouting.

"Shortly before one o'clock" is the time PC Lamb gave for when he was contacted. It is not the time he reached Dutfield's Yard and it is an estimate.

"Dr. Blackwell was the first doctor to arrive; he came ten or twelve minutes after myself, but I had no watch with me." - Constable Harry Lamb

"I consulted my watch on my arrival, and it was 1.16 a.m." - Dr Frederick Blackwell

That puts PC Lambs' estimated arrival at about 1:04 to 1:06am.

[GBinOz]

Hello George,

So it all comes down to whether Diemschutz had reason to lie. Could he have been mistaken as to the time? To be honest it’s difficult to see how. Could the clock that he saw have been wrong? Certainly. If he’d looked at the clock from an angle and a few feet away could he have been a minute or so out? Again, certainly. I’d say, and I’m guessing that you’d agree, that only Blackwell gave a time that we can pretty much take to the bank and even with him it’s not impossible that his watch could have been slightly out. Michael is suggesting a lie based on the 4 witnesses and Mortimer (another witness who gives more than one version of what she did)

Most of the times come with a ‘health warning’ of course. We have to make reasonable allowances and accept the possibilities of error.

Hi Herlock,

The view Diemshitz had of the tobacconist clock would certainly have been at an angle and at a distance of considerably more than a couple of feet - half the building width + half the width of Berner Street, at a minimum, in a dark street on a bumpy cart after a long day. So he could have been mistaken. Why would he lie? There was an air of extreme tension against the jews following the Leather Apron headlines with attacks having been made on jewish merchants. Warren removed the GSG on the fear of anti-semitic violence. I think that the members of the IWEC would have understandably had concerns about the reaction of the public to another victim being found next to a jewish club. But Schwartz narrating a story implicating gentile suspects and his being chased from the scene may have been considered as a blame shifter, but ran the risk of witnesses not corroborating his story. For his story to work Stride must have crossed to the yard immediately after Smith passed and just before Mortimer came to her door. If she stayed there for 10 minutes she would have gone inside just before Schwartz went by at about 12:45. Remember, Schwartz had come from Commercial Road and may have just passed the tobacconist clock. But if this scenario is accepted, she also said she heard the pony cart about 4 minutes later, making that about 12:48.

I think that the police and coroner probably noticed the time descrepencies and attributed them to time guesses, and the addition of estimates from the last sighting of an unsychronised clock, and relied on the police constables times.

Cheers, George

[Herlock Sholmes]

If we can question why the police didn’t think that Diemschutz didn’t discover the body at 1.00 as per the ‘4’ then we have to question the alleged plotters. The suggestion is that they immediately suspected that the police might have shut down to club for hosting a murder in their yard. Can we really think that this is reasonable? The murders were the news of the day so it’s unthinkable that the first thought wouldn’t have been that this was another ripper event (whether it was or wasn’t) Is it reasonable to assume that the club members might have assumed that the police would have blamed them for a ripper murder with no evidence that the killer was a club member? Of course not.

So we are being asked to believe that the plan that they came up with was based on the use of a word (Lipski) Is that really a plan that anyone would consider as valid over more glaringly obvious plans? Then, of all the people connected to the club whether directly or indirectly, they chose a man who couldn’t speak English and who still managed to make a hash of this simple exercise. Why for example did he introduce the unnecessary confusion of Pipeman? It makes no sense.

The first suggestion of course would have been to have moved the body using Diemschutz cart after first wrapping her in something. More obvious though would have been for Diemschutz to have said that he saw a man running from the gates with a knife as he pulled in. He could easily have added that the man shouted some abuse at him to get out of his way in some kind of accent. Irish, Scottish whatever. Or they could have had another member saying that they disturbed the killer on entering the yard with the killer pushing passed him saying “get out of my way you Jewish ……” These plans are hardly worthy of Moriarty but how could anyone fail to have come up with them as suggestions? How could anyone have favoured finding a false witness from outside the club and who’s evidence would be based on thd word ‘Lipski.’

So we have a plan with no reasonably valid motive. A plan that ignores better and more obvious plans. Then they forget to tell everyone about the ‘new’ discovery time leaving witnesses to contradict Diemschutz. Then they select a man that didn’t speak English and they cross their fingers and hope that no one was looking out of their window when Stride entered the yard with her killer.

Lets be honest. Is this even remotely plausible? And this has been ‘deduced’ from 4 witnesses estimating times plus Fanny Mortimer. Spooner gives 2 times in the same statement. Fanny Mortimer gives 2 versions of what she did. Hoschberg gives an estimated time that even contradicts Spooner. I don’t know how anyone can think that this ‘plan’ ever happened? What we do know is that it’s originator has a suspect for Nichols and Chapman but who cannot have killed Stride and Eddowes. So we have…Motive (to explain why Stride wasn’t killed by the suspect) Means (contradicting estimated times) Opportunity (threads) A long nurtured theory is a difficult thing to abandon and it’s why you get someone ranting about how everyone else is being unreasonable despite the fact that there’s possibly only one other person that agrees with them. Maybe it’s well to state a reminder that those that don’t see any cover up aren’t on any lunatic fringe. We’ve weighed up the evidence as the police did in 1888. They saw no cover up and neither do the overwhelming majority of us.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hello George,

There aren’t that many witnesses involved in the events in Berner Street. So if, as Michael keeps saying, they were 4 who’s suggested times for being at the yard are completely at odds with Diemschutz can we really believe that the police wouldn’t have noticed this? That they wouldn’t have mentioned it somewhere? That they wouldn’t have looked closer? Wouldn’t have double checked and assessed? The whole theory (and I realise that you’re not saying that you support any theory) is based on these times. How reliable are they? Spooner contradicts himself by giving two conflicting times within the same statement. One was estimated using walking times, standing talking times, and pub closing times. This is absolutely ripe for error. But we know that 12.35 isn’t in line by any stretch of the imagination to him getting to the yard 5 minutes before Lamb. So I can’t see how Michael can claim to assessing these times honestly if he plumps for the 12.35.

Likewise Michael uses Eagle and Gilleman. For the life of me I can’t see why he does this as Eagle quite clearly and unequivocally said that Gilleman called him to see the body around 1.00. Hoschberg offers up a complete guess ‘about 12.45 I should think.’ Could anything sound less confident? Likewise Kozebrodski was simply mistaken.

The police were fully aware of these witnesses. It surely can’t be the case that they didn’t notice these contradictions. Why did no alarm bells go off? The police had no need to back up a ‘dodgy’ time from Diemschutz. They were there at the time so they obviously discounted these timings. Would they have done it out of hand? Given the pressure that they were under to catch the ripper wouldn’t they have wanted to get it right? I’d suggest that the police dismissed these timings with good reason. That they were very obviously mistaken estimates.

……

So it all comes down to whether Diemschutz had reason to lie. Could he have been mistaken as to the time? To be honest it’s difficult to see how. Could the clock that he saw have been wrong? Certainly. If he’d looked at the clock from an angle and a few feet away could he have been a minute or so out? Again, certainly. I’d say, and I’m guessing that you’d agree, that only Blackwell gave a time that we can pretty much take to the bank and even with him it’s not impossible that his watch could have been slightly out. Michael is suggesting a lie based on the 4 witnesses and Mortimer (another witness who gives more than one version of what she did)

Most of the times come with a ‘health warning’ of course. We have to make reasonable allowances and accept the possibilities of error.

[GBinOz]

Hi Michael (Richardson),

I tend to agree with your times. It has often been suggested that I mindlessly agree with a theory of yours, the content of which I am still blissfully unaware. However, I have observed that opinions are seldom advanced by resort to personal attack.

Hi Herlock,

Eagle, Brown and Spooner were all basing their times guesses on multiple estimates from unsynchronished clocks or events sometime before. Eagle and Brown even stated that thay were near a clock but didn't look at it. Lamb was a professional police constable who, according to Monty, had to be very aware of times. He had passed the tobacconist clock, only minutes before being alerted, on his way to the fixed point constable who was to be released at 1AM, so he should have had a very good idea of the time. Lamb's time also fitted Johnston's time recollection. If Smith's time of about 12:30 to 12:35 for seeing Stride is accepted, as you have often done, then Mortimer's 10 minutes + 4 minutes to hearing Diemshitz's cart also contradicts the later's 1AM arrival. It all points to Diemshitz being inaccurate in his 1AM time, but whether that be because he was just mistaken, or lying, or for whatever reason, cannot be deduced.

Cheers, George

[Herlock Sholmes]

"Constable Henry Lamb, 252 H division, examined by the coroner, said: Last Sunday morning, shortly before one o'clock, I was on duty in Commercial-road, between Christian-street and Batty-street, when two men came running towards me and shouting.

See, Your an ***hole Herlock. You keep denying what is on paper because you dont want to believe it, and you accept things that have zero corroboration. That alone doesnt make you the AH you are, its that you insult me for stating the bleeding obvious facts.

Its all very simple to you because you cant even follow the written word let alone actual evidence. If you were smart enough to read properly you would see the issues. So stick your attitude and address issue by facts ..instead of it isnt, it wasnt, he was wrong, she was right or its so simple....they are all your opinions and you have already demonstrated your lack of formulating those by using evidence. Opinions are only valid when the one who has them has established credibility and knowledge,... you havent.

Very very simple...for you thats just a self analysis, not an answer.

"You don’t have 4 witnesses. You have 4 very, very obviously mistaken witnesses making incorrect estimations. Fanny Mortimer certainly can’t be trusted because she gave 2 versions of what she did that night. Its all very, very simple. Ignore the minute or two or three here and there. It’s irrelevant. Diemschutz found the body at 1.00. Eagle saw it just after. Lamb got there around 1.05. It ties in exactly with the doctors. Diemschutz going for a Constable ties in exactly with Brown. Mortimer going onto her doorstep after Smith passed, just before 12.35, for 10 minutes has her back inside when Stride then Schwartz arrived."

You cant see that you just gave your opinion in the above? No facts to counter, no evidence, just your f****** BELIEF...which can be proven erroneous.... very, very simply.

Dummy out of the pram time again.

Conspiracist nitpicking. Diemschutz discovered the body at 1.00. He saw a clock. He had no reason to lie. Eagle said that he first saw the body around 1.00. Not 12.40! Brown heard them shouting for a Constable. If Spooner got there at 12.35 how the hell do you contort that to fit ‘5 minutes before Lamb?’ Lamb’s time ties in with the doctors. Minor discrepancies from locals without watches can be dismissed. It’s game over. It’s always been game over. But hey carry on. The fact that you’re the only person on the planet who believes this nonsense and yet calls everyone else idiots for not agreeing is simply gargantuan arrogance.

[Herlock Sholmes]

. See, Your an ***hole Herlock.

And you accuse me of being insulting.

Need I say more.

[Michael W Richards]

Lamb didn’t arrive before 1.00. He didn’t have a watch. He was told about the murder by Eagle and we know that Eagle first saw the body at 1.00. He said so at the Inquest (remember Gilleman told him about the body) We know that Eagle’s time lines up with Diemschutz time which in turn is confirmed by Brown hearing them call for the police.

You don’t have 4 witnesses. You have 4 very, very obviously mistaken witnesses making incorrect estimations.

Fanny Mortimer certainly can’t be trusted because she gave 2 versions of what she did that night.

Its all very, very simple. Ignore the minute or two or three here and there. It’s irrelevant. Diemschutz found the body at 1.00. Eagle saw it just after. Lamb got there around 1.05. It ties in exactly with the doctors. Diemschutz going for a Constable ties in exactly with Brown. Mortimer going onto her doorstep after Smith passed, just before 12.35, for 10 minutes has her back inside when Stride then Schwartz arrived.

No need for further discussion. It’s very simple. A child could see that there was no cover up. The motive for one doesn’t exist, the plan itself could have been bettered by a toddler. It’s an utter joke.

Why do we have to keep being bombarded by biased silliness on here?

"Constable Henry Lamb, 252 H division, examined by the coroner, said: Last Sunday morning, shortly before one o'clock, I was on duty in Commercial-road, between Christian-street and Batty-street, when two men came running towards me and shouting.

See, Your an ***hole Herlock. You keep denying what is on paper because you dont want to believe it, and you accept things that have zero corroboration. That alone doesnt make you the AH you are, its that you insult me for stating the bleeding obvious facts.

Its all very simple to you because you cant even follow the written word let alone actual evidence. If you were smart enough to read properly you would see the issues. So stick your attitude and address issue by facts ..instead of it isnt, it wasnt, he was wrong, she was right or its so simple....they are all your opinions and you have already demonstrated your lack of formulating those by using evidence. Opinions are only valid when the one who has them has established credibility and knowledge,... you havent.

Very very simple...for you thats just a self analysis, not an answer.

"You don’t have 4 witnesses. You have 4 very, very obviously mistaken witnesses making incorrect estimations. Fanny Mortimer certainly can’t be trusted because she gave 2 versions of what she did that night. Its all very, very simple. Ignore the minute or two or three here and there. It’s irrelevant. Diemschutz found the body at 1.00. Eagle saw it just after. Lamb got there around 1.05. It ties in exactly with the doctors. Diemschutz going for a Constable ties in exactly with Brown. Mortimer going onto her doorstep after Smith passed, just before 12.35, for 10 minutes has her back inside when Stride then Schwartz arrived."

You cant see that you just gave your opinion in the above? No facts to counter, no evidence, just your f****** BELIEF...which can be proven erroneous.... very, very simply.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Lamb said he arrived in the yard BEFORE 1am, Spooners estimate might have been off due to the random nature of caluculating a casual stroll to get to the Beehive. In fact both parties stated that they were in the yard by the dying woman before 1am. How much before 1 can be ascertained by piecing together the other statements and reconciling with these 2....i.e. the witnesses I said stated they were by the body around 12:40 did not mention Spooner, so he might have come in a few minutes after that time, and Lamb 5 minutes later than him. Issac K says he returned with Lamb and Eagle, seeing them as he headed back himself. That rules out his going out with Louis, at the approximate time of a few minutes after 1 doesnt it? Even though almost everyone figures Issac K is actually Issac[s]. He apparently isnt. Who went with Louis then? And at what time?

My contention is that the discovery is stated to be much earlier by multiple witnesses...as much as 20 minutes earlier..than Louis says he arrived. Despite the fact that multiple witnesses say he was there at the approx 12:40 mark.

You and others just say the others were wrong, that Louis arrived just after 1 since Fanny didnt see him at one. Really? Do the math. How does Lamb arrive there, with Eagle and Issac, before 1am when according to Louis he discovers the body by himself just after 1am?

The real issue here is that there of course can be slight variances with witness times, its not like the Universe runs on synchronized timepieces or peoples accuracy when guessing. Issac K arrived back at the club at 12:30 and said 10 minutes later he was alerted to the body in the passageway. 3 other witnesses say they were there as well at that time. Fanny was at her door from 12:30 until 12:50 sporadically, but continuously from 12:50 until 1am. She sees Goldstein, who Tuesday night claims he passed by the gates at 12:55. She does not see or hear Louis arrive at 1am.

Lamb didn’t arrive before 1.00. He didn’t have a watch. He was told about the murder by Eagle and we know that Eagle first saw the body at 1.00. He said so at the Inquest (remember Gilleman told him about the body) We know that Eagle’s time lines up with Diemschutz time which in turn is confirmed by Brown hearing them call for the police.

You don’t have 4 witnesses. You have 4 very, very obviously mistaken witnesses making incorrect estimations.

Fanny Mortimer certainly can’t be trusted because she gave 2 versions of what she did that night.

Its all very, very simple. Ignore the minute or two or three here and there. It’s irrelevant. Diemschutz found the body at 1.00. Eagle saw it just after. Lamb got there around 1.05. It ties in exactly with the doctors. Diemschutz going for a Constable ties in exactly with Brown. Mortimer going onto her doorstep after Smith passed, just before 12.35, for 10 minutes has her back inside when Stride then Schwartz arrived.

No need for further discussion. It’s very simple. A child could see that there was no cover up. The motive for one doesn’t exist, the plan itself could have been bettered by a toddler. It’s an utter joke.

Why do we have to keep being bombarded by biased silliness on here?

[Michael W Richards]

While you’re here Michael, perhaps you might let us know why you accept it when Spooner estimated 12.35 but completely and utterly ignore when he stated that he’d been at the yard just 5 minutes when Lamb arrived. You may have missed the 59 previous times that I’ve asked you this question. As you’re apparently taking such an honest approach

Lamb said he arrived in the yard BEFORE 1am, Spooners estimate might have been off due to the random nature of caluculating a casual stroll to get to the Beehive. In fact both parties stated that they were in the yard by the dying woman before 1am. How much before 1 can be ascertained by piecing together the other statements and reconciling with these 2....i.e. the witnesses I said stated they were by the body around 12:40 did not mention Spooner, so he might have come in a few minutes after that time, and Lamb 5 minutes later than him. Issac K says he returned with Lamb and Eagle, seeing them as he headed back himself. That rules out his going out with Louis, at the approximate time of a few minutes after 1 doesnt it? Even though almost everyone figures Issac K is actually Issac[s]. He apparently isnt. Who went with Louis then? And at what time?

My contention is that the discovery is stated to be much earlier by multiple witnesses...as much as 20 minutes earlier..than Louis says he arrived. Despite the fact that multiple witnesses say he was there at the approx 12:40 mark.

You and others just say the others were wrong, that Louis arrived just after 1 since Fanny didnt see him at one. Really? Do the math. How does Lamb arrive there, with Eagle and Issac, before 1am when according to Louis he discovers the body by himself just after 1am?

The real issue here is that there of course can be slight variances with witness times, its not like the Universe runs on synchronized timepieces or peoples accuracy when guessing. Issac K arrived back at the club at 12:30 and said 10 minutes later he was alerted to the body in the passageway. 3 other witnesses say they were there as well at that time. Fanny was at her door from 12:30 until 12:50 sporadically, but continuously from 12:50 until 1am. She sees Goldstein, who Tuesday night claims he passed by the gates at 12:55. She does not see or hear Louis arrive at 1am.

[Herlock Sholmes]

The facts Im speaking of are statements made by witnesses at the scene or with a view of the relevant territory. You and others dont believe they are accurate, thats the only difference here, but when you folks speak of this in absolutes I get a little riled. You either believe the stories and approximate times given or you dont. Should you discard some because they challenge what you believe happened, then you have a belief system as the barometer used.

While you’re here Michael, perhaps you might let us know why you accept it when Spooner estimated 12.35 but completely and utterly ignore when he stated that he’d been at the yard just 5 minutes when Lamb arrived. You may have missed the 59 previous times that I’ve asked you this question. As you’re apparently taking such an honest approach

[Michael W Richards]

This is one of the most ironic things I've seen on this site.

Nobody is criticizing you theory based on their "belief system". The criticism come because your theory frequently contradicts both logic and the actual facts.

Nobody at the club had any reason to lie about when Stride's body was found. If they had a problem, it was where the body was found, and they did nothing to change that.

The facts Im speaking of are statements made by witnesses at the scene or with a view of the relevant territory. You and others dont believe they are accurate, thats the only difference here, but when you folks speak of this in absolutes I get a little riled. You either believe the stories and approximate times given or you dont. Should you discard some because they challenge what you believe happened, then you have a belief system as the barometer used.

[GBinOz]

It seems clear that Schwartz was referring to Pipeman in the report you quote above, as it goes on to say (on the next page) that "The Police apparently do not suspect the 2nd man whom Schwartz saw on the other side of the street & who followed Schwartz"

Hi Joshua,

That makes it clear that there was a second man, and his following Schwartz would have suggested as an accomplice to Schwartz, but would BSM be waiting to shout Lipski until Schwartz was starting to cross Fairclough St, which is when Pipeman first appeared?

Cheers, George

[Joshua Rogan]

I was puzzled by Schwartz's original statement. According to that statement, BSM's remark was delivered to the "man on the opposite side of the street", which was Schwartz, but did he mean Pipeman???.
Schwartz didn't actually say where Pipeman was in the street.

It seems clear that Schwartz was referring to Pipeman in the report you quote above, as it goes on to say (on the next page) that "The Police apparently do not suspect the 2nd man whom Schwartz saw on the other side of the street & who followed Schwartz"