Broad Shoulders, Elizabeth's Killer ?

[Herlock Sholmes]

I think we have lots of parts to the Stride jigsaw. Not all the parts but I suppose we never have all the parts to any event. Of course the invention of moving photography gives us some 'real' images of past events but most of the time we have to rely on our own and others recollections. This is how we live all the time and it seems to work ok. If my son describes something he has seen whilst on holiday for example I tend to believe it, I accept there may be exaggerations or he may have interpreted things differently to somebody else but I generally accept his version as say 90 percent accurate.

As far as Schwarz is concerned it seems a never ending analysis of what he states he saw, whether his statement can be trusted and even whether he existed.

I think there is more than enough evidence that Schwarz was a witness to an event and that he reported it to the police through an interpreter. I think we just have to accept that and work with what he said. We can see if the other players fit in with his story. In my opinion (for what its worth) I think we should set aside timings. Well do us much work to fit things together without referring to the clock. Timings do play a very important part but maybe they shouldn't dominate what we think occurred.

Someone (I apologize cant remember who it was and its early in the morning) suggests Schwartz may have got the street wrong. I think its an interesting suggestion and quite possible especially if Schwarz had been drinking a bit too much but here I am not following my own suggestions and going off track.

So lets read carefully what witnesses actually say. Press reports will change wording a bit which we cant do anything about that and see if we can find another piece of that jigsaw.

Here's an example. There is some small mystery as to where Spooners lady/girl friend went to when Spooner went to the yard. On reading his inquest testimony he states that he was with his girlfriend outside the pub on Fairclough/Christian Street. But he then when describing going to the club with the men he says I and not we as if the girlfiend has gone. Would he have left her when there is a murderer on the lose.

We know that Spooner married a year later (I think) to a girl called Catherine Sullivan. It is possible that this was the girl he was with. Is there a Sullivan family living close by. Was Spooner in fact on his own when he joined the chase.

I dont know whether there is any relevance to solving this but its just an indication of all the research which still remains outstanding. I was amazed when I discovered that the witness Brown actually lived next door to the pub where Spooner said he was standing with his girlfriend! Brown sees a couple near the Board school but doesn't see Spooner and his girlfriend standing a few feet from his front door. Again I am still looking at this but although a few yards separate them are they in fact the same couple.

I think the Stride case is fascinating because we have so much to go on and the research by everyone is fantastic.

NW

Sensible stuff NW. We are never going to be able to put forward an exact timetable of events. This is just a fact. None of us can even say for certain that they know exactly what happened even though I feel that we can come fairly close to what happened (I have no way of verifying it of course) It appears unlikely that we’ll ever arrive at a consensus either.

The suggestion that Schwartz might have seen an incident in another street (like Batty Street) and mistaken it for Berner Street came from Wickerman and it’s a possibility imo just like my suggestion (although I can’t say that I was the first to suggest it) that he might just have got his time wrong in that he saw an unrelated incident at sometime before 12.30.

As I’ve said before, I think that your suggestion about Spooner and his girlfriend is a good one. Especially when we’ve always assumed which corner that Brown saw them on (Fairclough/Berner) As you suggested - how can we be sure that it wasn’t the corner of Fairclough and Batty (near the Board School)? We don’t know which pub in Commercial Road they walked from so we can’t say which direction they came from. If they came from a pub west on Commercial Road then might have turned down and walked along Batty Street instead of Christian Street. This would also explain why Fanny didn’t mention them, because she couldn’t see them. Also it makes it even more understandable why they heard nothing - because they were further away.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Can you name a member who believes both?

If Schwartz believers had 100% confidence in him, they would accept that some police had doubts, possibly including Swanson. Are you willing to take the risk that the Leman St report is legit?

I see Swanson exhibiting no doubt. I see Abberline exhibiting no doubt. I see the police acting on Schwartz information. I see no quote from a single police officer anywhere expressing any doubt about Schwartz.

On the other hand we get this one report (in just one paper?) saying:

In the matter of the Hungarian who said he saw a struggle between a man and a woman in the passage where the Stride body was afterwards found, the Leman-street police have reason to doubt the truth of the story.

So you weigh that favourably against Swanson and Abberline? For all that we know a single reporter spoke to Constable Plod in the pub and bought him a pint or three and Plod told him that ‘ a few of the lads don’t believe that Schwartz bloke. You can’t trust those Jews; they’re always up to something. Don’t put that in your paper though.’ And hey presto the police doubt Schwartz.

Aside from this vague article you have nothing so yes, I’ll go with the opinions of the men that were actually running the investigation.

[Herlock Sholmes]

The Star.

Thanks Dave.

[New Waterloo]

I think we have lots of parts to the Stride jigsaw. Not all the parts but I suppose we never have all the parts to any event. Of course the invention of moving photography gives us some 'real' images of past events but most of the time we have to rely on our own and others recollections. This is how we live all the time and it seems to work ok. If my son describes something he has seen whilst on holiday for example I tend to believe it, I accept there may be exaggerations or he may have interpreted things differently to somebody else but I generally accept his version as say 90 percent accurate.

As far as Schwarz is concerned it seems a never ending analysis of what he states he saw, whether his statement can be trusted and even whether he existed.

I think there is more than enough evidence that Schwarz was a witness to an event and that he reported it to the police through an interpreter. I think we just have to accept that and work with what he said. We can see if the other players fit in with his story. In my opinion (for what its worth) I think we should set aside timings. Well do us much work to fit things together without referring to the clock. Timings do play a very important part but maybe they shouldn't dominate what we think occurred.

Someone (I apologize cant remember who it was and its early in the morning) suggests Schwartz may have got the street wrong. I think its an interesting suggestion and quite possible especially if Schwarz had been drinking a bit too much but here I am not following my own suggestions and going off track.

So lets read carefully what witnesses actually say. Press reports will change wording a bit which we cant do anything about that and see if we can find another piece of that jigsaw.

Here's an example. There is some small mystery as to where Spooners lady/girl friend went to when Spooner went to the yard. On reading his inquest testimony he states that he was with his girlfriend outside the pub on Fairclough/Christian Street. But he then when describing going to the club with the men he says I and not we as if the girlfiend has gone. Would he have left her when there is a murderer on the lose.

We know that Spooner married a year later (I think) to a girl called Catherine Sullivan. It is possible that this was the girl he was with. Is there a Sullivan family living close by. Was Spooner in fact on his own when he joined the chase.

I dont know whether there is any relevance to solving this but its just an indication of all the research which still remains outstanding. I was amazed when I discovered that the witness Brown actually lived next door to the pub where Spooner said he was standing with his girlfriend! Brown sees a couple near the Board school but doesn't see Spooner and his girlfriend standing a few feet from his front door. Again I am still looking at this but although a few yards separate them are they in fact the same couple.

I think the Stride case is fascinating because we have so much to go on and the research by everyone is fantastic.

NW

[FISHY1118]

No, but I reckon they had uncovered some sinister plot. ha ha

Did anybody at Leman St. outrank Abberline with respect to the investigation?

c.d.

In respect to the investigation, No

[c.d.]

No, but I reckon they had uncovered some sinister plot. ha ha

Did anybody at Leman St. outrank Abberline with respect to the investigation?

c.d.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Do we know the basis for the apparent disbelief of Schwartz's account by Leman St.?

No, but I reckon they had uncovered some sinister plot. ha ha

George asked an important question a while back; In what order did the following occur?

- Schwartz's initial statement at Leman St
- Abberline's interviewing of Schwartz
- Schwartz comments to the Star man

I've always (rather thoughtlessly) believed that the above was the order. However, if the 2nd and 3rd points are swapped, the following question arises (at least it does in my mind). Was the initial statement closer to the press account, or the police account? By police account, I'm assuming that Swanson's report is a summary of Abberline's interview report. The Star says that "...the man's story was retold just as he had given it to the police". What if that is more true than not?

As I've suggested several times before, Anderson's reference to "the alleged accomplice" looks more like the Star account than what we read in Swanson's report. What is the source of Anderson's notion? Well, perhaps he got it from reading Schwartz's initial statement.

Was that disbelief set in stone never to change?

Hard to say how opinions changed over time. The failure to find a Lipski might have bothered the Home Office. What I find concerning is that we see no references to Schwartz after 1888. Decades later, Walter Dew remembered Fanny Mortimer, but apparently not Israel Schwartz.

Wouldn't Abberline have been aware of Leman's St.'s position and wouldn't he have addressed those concerns with Schwartz?

Quite possibly. As the Star tells us, the Leman St police "are not likely to act further on the same information without additional facts". Perhaps Schwartz was asked to supply those additional facts, but that implies the Star's follow-up report on "the Hungarian" is accurate.

[DJA]

Can someone remind me which paper and edition this came from please:


In the matter of the Hungarian who said he saw a struggle between a man and a woman in the passage where the Stride body was afterwards found, the Leman-street police have reason to doubt the truth of the story

The Star.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

How do you work that out?

Can you name a member who believes both?

If Schwartz believers had 100% confidence in him, they would accept that some police had doubts, possibly including Swanson. Are you willing to take the risk that the Leman St report is legit?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Can someone remind me which paper and edition this came from please:


In the matter of the Hungarian who said he saw a struggle between a man and a woman in the passage where the Stride body was afterwards found, the Leman-street police have reason to doubt the truth of the story

[FISHY1118]

Do we know the basis for the apparent disbelief of Schwartz's account by Leman St.?

Was that disbelief set in stone never to change?

Wouldn't Abberline have been aware of Leman's St.'s position and wouldn't he have addressed those concerns with Schwartz?

To your first sentence ... Apparently Not.

[c.d.]

Do we know the basis for the apparent disbelief of Schwartz's account by Leman St.?

Was that disbelief set in stone never to change?

Wouldn't Abberline have been aware of Leman's St.'s position and wouldn't he have addressed those concerns with Schwartz?

[Herlock Sholmes]

If Schwartz is to be believed, the Leman St report must be disbelieved

How do you work that out?

[The Rookie Detective]

Surstromming ?

Hamlet, Act One.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Give me something official from Lemans st in regards to the police there not believing Schwartz , or lets stop using them as excuse to disbelieve him

If Schwartz is to be believed, the Leman St report must be disbelieved