Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A closer look at Leon Goldstein

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • NotBlamedForNothing
    replied
    Originally posted by Al Bundy's Eyes View Post

    If we had no reports at all that Goldstein had been identified and spoken to the police, we'd have another prime suspect, or another Schwartz like character. What we have, is an account from Fanny saying that Goldstein might have come from the club, and an account saying that the police were satisfied as to his movements that night. They're equally valid sources.
    By presuming that we'd have another prime suspect, or another Schwartz like character if there were no police reports re Goldstein, you are in effect conceding that Fanny did indeed see the man with the black bag walking in a direction that is not compatible with him walking down the street and around the board school corner. It was no hallucination after all.
    So why does the police report nullify any suspicions we might have, if that were the case?
    Are we really dealing with equally valid sources? The police at Leman street got there information from Goldstein and Wess - hardly neutral sources. How much did they know about Fanny Mortimer and her comments? There is a clue in Swanson's report:

    about 1 a.m. 30th Leon Goldstein of 22 Christian Street Commercial Road, called at Leman St. & stated that he was the man that passed down Berner St. with a black bag at that hour, that the bag contained empty cigarette boxes & that he had left a coffee house in Spectacle Alley a short time before. [Here there is a marginal note. - "Who saw this man go down Berner St. or did he come forward to clear himself in case any questions might be asked".]

    The individual asking the question wants to know who the corroborating witness was. How could Swanson have left the name of corroborating witness out of his report, concerning an event serious enough for the Home Office to be asking questions? Is it because Swanson didn't even know the name Fanny Mortimer, let alone have awareness of her Evening News interview? So if he didn't know, who did?

    Then of course there is question as to why Wess felt the (apparently sudden) need to take Goldstein to the station at all. Were the police looking for the man with the black bag? If yes, then why when he presents himself at the station, are they simply buying his story? Did anyone see the contents of the bag, on the night, for example? Even if they went to the coffee house to check up on his story, Mortimer's comments in the EN interview tell us that that was only half of the full story.

    It seems very odd to me that Walter Dew considered both parts of the story, but no else at the time did. Which goes back to the question of how much the duty officer at Leman street station that night, was aware of. So once again, I think Goldstein could have slipped through the cracks.

    If Fanny has Goldstein coming from Commercial Road, and also thinks she saw him again, possibly leaving the club, she's not made it clear to anyone.
    One of the purposes of this thread, is to deal with the ambiguities in all of her recorded comments.

    Any previous sighting of him leaving the club must have been well before the murder though? Or was his Commercial Road to Board School trip the earlier one?
    There are two ways to answer these questions. We could debate the meaning of 'previously', in context, or we could just listen to Fanny ...

    I only noticed one person passing, just before I turned in. That was a young man walking up Berner-street, carrying a black bag in his hand.

    Leave a comment:


  • Al Bundy's Eyes
    replied
    Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

    I wouldn't worry too much old chap. The idea that Fanny said "He might ha' been coming from the Socialist Club", because she saw a man whose direction of travel hinted that he might have been coming from the Socialist club, was never going to be taken seriously here. I knew that before I started the thread.
    Hi Andrew,

    You've made a valid enough point, Fanny definitely said what she said as far as we can tell. That can't be discredited on a whim, and it's worth keeping in mind that her alternative interview in the evening news is used when debating Schwartz and how long she was on her doorstep, so I don't see how this is too different.

    If we had no reports at all that Goldstein had been identified and spoken to the police, we'd have another prime suspect, or another Schwartz like character. What we have, is an account from Fanny saying that Goldstein might have come from the club, and an account saying that the police were satisfied as to his movements that night. They're equally valid sources.

    If Fanny has Goldstein coming from Commercial Road, and also thinks she saw him again, possibly leaving the club, she's not made it clear to anyone. Any previous sighting of him leaving the club must have been well before the murder though? Or was his Commercial Road to Board School trip the earlier one?

    It's not a lot to go on though, and unfortunately without any better surviving sources and her non appearance at inquest, it's something to muse over but we can't make anything more from it.

    ​​​​​

    Leave a comment:


  • NotBlamedForNothing
    replied
    Originally posted by Al Bundy's Eyes View Post
    Leman street were satisfied with Leon's story as to his whereabouts that night, presumably this involved checking out his Spectacle Alley alibi, so while Fanny's interview certainly raises a question as to what she meant by 'previously', it's not much to go on. Her words are outweighed by the fact that the police checked out Leon.

    Of course, it could be argued that Leon and Wess concocted a story and duped the police, but that's murky territory and works from the presumption that Fanny's press interview is acceptable at face value while reports of the police being satisfied as to Goldstein's actions are not.
    I wouldn't worry too much old chap. The idea that Fanny said "He might ha' been coming from the Socialist Club", because she saw a man whose direction of travel hinted that he might have been coming from the Socialist club, was never going to be taken seriously here. I knew that before I started the thread.

    Leave a comment:


  • Al Bundy's Eyes
    replied
    Leman street were satisfied with Leon's story as to his whereabouts that night, presumably this involved checking out his Spectacle Alley alibi, so while Fanny's interview certainly raises a question as to what she meant by 'previously', it's not much to go on. Her words are outweighed by the fact that the police checked out Leon.

    Of course, it could be argued that Leon and Wess concocted a story and duped the police, but that's murky territory and works from the presumption that Fanny's press interview is acceptable at face value while reports of the police being satisfied as to Goldstein's actions are not.

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    .
    Unless she saw him twice. Then it makes perfect sense. Otherwise, her Evening News interview just looks like gibberish.
    Our job as investigators is to make sense of the data, not sweep unwanted data under the carpet.
    Fanny Mortimer is a corroborated witness. Are we going to take her seriously?
    More to the point, late on the Tuesday evening, Wess decided to take her very seriously indeed. Why
    But equally our job isn’t to assume that every discrepancy has a meaning other than a simple error. A double-sighting explains the wording of course but it’s not the only explanation. We can’t get away from the fact that the police would have been extremely interested, so say the very least, in our mystery man carrying a black bag and hurrying past the club near to the time of the murder. And if there was the suggestion that Mortimer had already seen him pass earlier then alarms would have been going off. Some mention would have been made of this double sighting but there is none. So the only conclusion that we can draw is that there was more likely to have been no second sighting. The ‘up or down’ wording is just that, wording. This may even have been down to a reporters error.

    And so the ‘mystery’ is how she could have said that Goldstein might have been coming from the club. Maybe she didn’t, maybe she told the reporter that he might have ‘come from the club?’ That he looked Jewish and might have been a club member?

    Leave a comment:


  • drstrange169
    replied
    >> What is your point? <<

    My point, is that you seem to be wasting everybody's time.

    After all it was you who wrote,

    "I'm pretty sure Fanny was in the pocket of the club."
    Post #126,A Whip and a Prod thread






    Leave a comment:


  • NotBlamedForNothing
    replied
    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    There’s obviously an error of communication somewhere in all of this.
    As already suggested, that 'error' probably occurred at Leman street.
    When Wess dragged Goldstein's arse to the station, he gave them the original, Commercial Road to board school corner sighting.
    He also seems to have said that that occurred at about the time of the murder. So incredibly, the understanding of the approximate timing of the event, does not come from the corroborated witness herself, but rather from the interpreter who had to persuade Goldstein to go to the police to clear his name! How's that for a neutral opinion?

    If she said that he passed her house coming from Commercial Road then she couldn’t have said that he might have come from the club. It’s impossible.
    Unless she saw him twice. Then it makes perfect sense. Otherwise, her Evening News interview just looks like gibberish.
    Our job as investigators is to make sense of the data, not sweep unwanted data under the carpet.
    Fanny Mortimer is a corroborated witness. Are we going to take her seriously?
    More to the point, late on the Tuesday evening, Wess decided to take her very seriously indeed. Why?

    The fact that she didn’t mention seeing him twice nor did the police and it would certainly have been important enough to have mentioned shows that she very obviously didn’t see him twice.
    You're making a crucial error. What do you mean by 'him'?
    Do you mean the unrecognised man with a shiny black bag, or do you mean Leon Goldstein, member of the club?
    Fanny may well have told the police about the former, but at that point he had not been identified.
    When Goldstein and Wess went to the police, he was explained to be the man who was seen walking down from Commercial Road, as opposed to the man seen walking in the opposite direction, in the vicinity of the club. The duty inspector may well have only been aware of the first description, and as that did not amount to suspicious behaviour, he accepted the story. Goldstein and Wess leave happy and relieved.
    From that point on, people like Swanson knew the black bag man's name, and believed he had only made one trip along Berner street, leading up to the murder.
    Can you now see how Goldstein was able to slip through the cracks?

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post
    What was in Goldstein's bag?

    What was amongst Kate's possessions?
    Not cigarette boxes.

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    There’s obviously an error of communication somewhere in all of this. If she said that he passed her house coming from Commercial Road then she couldn’t have said that he might have come from the club. It’s impossible. The fact that she didn’t mention seeing him twice nor did the police and it would certainly have been important enough to have mentioned shows that she very obviously didn’t see him twice.

    Leave a comment:


  • NotBlamedForNothing
    replied
    What was in Goldstein's bag?

    What was amongst Kate's possessions?

    Leave a comment:


  • NotBlamedForNothing
    replied
    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    Then we would have to ask why this isn’t mentioned anywhere by anyone?
    I take it you mean; other than in i Caught Crippen

    The second last sentence of #31: Now we get to a critical question; when Wess and Goldstein arrived at Leman street, was the duty officer aware of the Evening News interview?

    Perhaps that had something to do with it.

    Goldstein would have been someone that the police would have been keen to speak to and to find information on. Is it likely that Fanny Mortimer wouldn’t have specifically mentioned seeing that mystery man previously? Why was he walking past the scene of a murder twice? The fact that no one mentions Goldstein passing twice (Fanny or the Police) is surely the strongest evidence that he didn’t?
    As you can see from #24, the Home Office had questions. Did they ever get any answers?

    I asked previously if Mortimer said that Goldstein actually passed her on Berner Street as she was on her doorstep or did she just mention the direction in which he was walking and we’ve assumed that he passed her? It would appear so because how could she have being saying first, that he passed her walking from the direction of Commercial Road and then second, that he might have come from the club? Why would she make such an obviously conflicting statement?
    A very obvious question. Yet there is no conflict, if she sees him twice. She remembered him, even though she didn't recognise him. Why single him out, if there were other people in the street at different points (Eagle, Lave, board school couple, etc)? Why didn't she say, for example ...

    The only man I had seen with a woman previously, was a young man standing by the board school corner, talking with his sweetheart.

    Surely a man with a woman is of more interest than a man with a black bag. So why has she focused on Goldstein?

    This is why I asked if it was possible that when FM went onto her doorstep she looked to her right and saw Goldstein who was somewhere adjacent to the club (after already passing her door) before he crossed the road toward the Board School? This might explain her describing the direction that Goldstein was walking (south) and why she speculated that it was possible that he’d just come from the club?
    That doesn't gel with the report in the Morning Advertiser ...

    W. Wess, secretary of the International Club, Berner-street, called at our office at midnight, and stated that, it having come to his knowledge that the man who was seen by Mrs. Mortimer, of 36, Berner-street, passing her house with a black, shiny bag, and walking very fast down the street from the Commercial-road at about the time of the murder, was a member of the club, he persuaded him last night, between ten and eleven o'clock, to accompany him to the Leman-street station, where he made a statement as to his whereabouts on Saturday evening, which was entirely satisfactory. The young man's name is Leon Goldstein, and he is a traveller.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrBarnett
    replied
    There is another Goldstein mystery in relation to Berner Street. There is evidence to suggest that an Israel Goldstein was the caretaker of the club. Why do we hear nothing about him?

    Leave a comment:


  • MrBarnett
    replied
    Does anyone believe that Fanny’s statements were reported verbatim?

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Then we would have to ask why this isn’t mentioned anywhere by anyone? Goldstein would have been someone that the police would have been keen to speak to and to find information on. Is it likely that Fanny Mortimer wouldn’t have specifically mentioned seeing that mystery man previously? Why was he walking past the scene of a murder twice? The fact that no one mentions Goldstein passing twice (Fanny or the Police) is surely the strongest evidence that he didn’t?

    I asked previously if Mortimer said that Goldstein actually passed her on Berner Street as she was on her doorstep or did she just mention the direction in which he was walking and we’ve assumed that he passed her? It would appear so because how could she have being saying first, that he passed her walking from the direction of Commercial Road and then second, that he might have come from the club? Why would she make such an obviously conflicting statement?

    This is why I asked if it was possible that when FM went onto her doorstep she looked to her right and saw Goldstein who was somewhere adjacent to the club (after already passing her door) before he crossed the road toward the Board School? This might explain her describing the direction that Goldstein was walking (south) and why she speculated that it was possible that he’d just come from the club?

    Leave a comment:


  • NotBlamedForNothing
    replied
    Originally posted by drstrange169 View Post

    >>No, for two reasons. Firstly, it didn't need it to be explained to me. I had read the relevant evidence before I started the thread. It was I who quoted Swanson mentioning Spectacle Alley, in relation to Goldstein. That was not some revelation to me.<<

    You might want to read the Goldstein thread again. Mention of Spectacle Alley in any of your posts and reasoning is absent until I pointed it out to you in post #7.
    What is your point? My initial post was long enough, with plenty enough quoting to get the ball rolling.
    That Spectacle Alley was the location Goldstein had come from before turning down Berner street, is not the central issue - which is, on how many occasions did Fanny Mortimer witness Goldstein in the half hour or so leading up to the murder, and where was he moving to and from, at the time?
    You seem to be attempting to make out that I have denied or still deny Goldstein had been at the Spectacle Alley coffee house, but why would I do that? I need Goldstein to have walked down Berner street, to make my argument coherent.
    As mentioned, it was I who quoted Swanson re Goldstein, and I did not achieve that by copy & paste, having failed to find the relevant passage on Casebook. Consequently I took the trouble to retype the text from the JtR Sourcebook.

    >>Secondly, my argument that Mortimer had seen Goldstein twice... So it is you who is being more than a little ingenuous.<<

    In which case you will have no trouble pointing out the exact quote where Mortimer says she saw Goldstein twice ... yes?

    I thought not.
    Don't give up so easily dusty! It's a little more complex than just presenting a single quote. We have to look at everything Mortimer says, and use a bit of intelligence to work out what happened. So here we go ...

    I was standing at the door of my house nearly the whole time between half-past twelve and one o'clock this (Sunday) morning, and did not notice anything unusual.

    So Fanny was at her doorstep on more than one occasion, in the period 12:30-1:00.
    Now we listen to her speaking about being in the yard, subsequent to being on her doorstep on the final occasion ..

    A man touched her face, and said it was quite warm, so that the deed must have been done while I was standing at the door of my house. There was certainly no noise made, and I did not observe anyone enter the gates.

    Now we come to Fanny's critical doorstep observation ...

    It was just after one o'clock when I went out, and the only man whom I had seen pass through the street previously was a young man carrying a black shiny bag, who walked very fast down the street from the Commercial-road. He looked up at the club, and then went round the corner by the Board School.

    So let's be clear about this. Fanny does not say ...

    ... the only man whom I had seen in the street ...

    Nor does she say ...

    ... the only man whom I had seen in the street previously ...

    Nor does she say ...

    ... the only man whom I had seen pass through the street ...

    She does say ...

    ... the only man whom I had seen pass through the street previously ...

    So the criteria is twofold. One: the man passes through the street. Two: he did so previously.

    One reason this is important to spell this out, is that it implies that Fanny may well have seen other men, such as Eagle and Lave, but they did not fit the criteria. So we are obliged to ask; why was that Fanny's criteria? Why not refer instead to the only man who wandered out onto the street briefly, as Lave did? Well, did she imply she saw other men? Evening News:

    "Was the street quiet at the time?"

    "Yes, there was hardly anybody moving about, except at the club."


    Yes she did. So why did she choose the above criteria? Was it arbitrary, or was there something special about Goldstein? Why did Fanny not simply say ...

    ... the only man whom I had seen was a young man carrying a black shiny bag, who walked very fast down the street from the Commercial-road. He looked up at the club, and then went round the corner by the Board School.

    So we need a complete handle on the two criteria. The first is clear, the second requires an understanding of the context of the word 'previously'.
    That is given by ...

    ... the deed must have been done while I was standing at the door of my house. There was certainly no noise made, and I did not observe anyone enter the gates.

    The context is on her doorstep, not after locking up. If it were the later, then the word 'previously' would be redundant, and to be consistent, she might have said ...

    There was certainly no noise made, and I did not previously observe anyone enter the gates.

    She did not say that, because for Fanny, that was not the previous period she subsequently refers to.

    So it becomes clear after a little analysis, that by 'previously' Fanny is referring to a prior period on her doorstep.
    We can now make sense of the Evening News interview, which without this interpretation of 'previously' cannot be properly understood.

    "I suppose you did not notice a man and woman pass down the street while you were at the door?"

    "No, sir. I think I should have noticed them if they had. Particularly if they'd been strangers, at that time o' night. I only noticed one person passing, just before I turned in. That was a young man walking up Berner-street, carrying a black bag in his hand."

    "Did you observe him closely, or notice anything in his appearance?"

    "No, I didn't pay particular attention to him. He was respectably dressed, but was a stranger to me. He might ha' been coming from the Socialist Club., A good many young men goes there, of a Saturday night especially."


    From Fanny's doorstep point of view, Commercial Road was to her left, and the board school was on the opposite side of the street.
    From Fanny's doorstep point of view, the Socialist Club was to her right, and on her side of the street.
    Fanny Mortimer followed the convention of regarding Commercial Road as the top of Berner street, and thus walking from that direction means walking down the street, and in the opposite direction means walking up the street.
    Fanny Mortimer saw Leon Goldstein, twice.
    Last edited by NotBlamedForNothing; 05-24-2021, 12:06 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X