Suspect Witnesses?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Wick, you know as well as I do that is all in reference to the same couple. Two are hearsay, one is straight from the young woman's mouth. Incidentally, I believe this young woman was Charles Letchford's sister. It makes it all quite clear that there was no sweetheart on the street at 12:45 to 12:51. Had there been we're likely to have seen mention of them in Swanson's report as they would have reflected directly on Schwartz's statement. I say 'likely' because such accuracy is not 'certain' with these men. But the press would have been on top of any couple who had been standing near Dutfield's Yard around 1a.m. At the time the body was discovered there was, briefly, a belief that the murder had occurred closer to midnight.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

The proximity in time and space to both the murder and Schwartz's account of a couple at the board school corner, would have made them key witnesses in the investigation. Yet, we never hear from them or of them again. This is a crucial point. Their non-existence as a couple beyond those we know of, increases the chance that James Brown was the second or third-last person to see Liz Stride alive.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Mortimer said "they" spoke to her, both the man and the woman.

"A young man and his sweetheart were standing at the corner of the street, about 20 yards away, before and after the time the woman must have been murdered, but they told me they did not hear a sound."

We know Spooner and his girl were not standing on the corner by the Board School at any time, they had been stood on the corner of Fairclough and Christian streets, so Mortimer cannot have spoken to either of them.

The problem is that the woman in Couple 2 (#169) said they had been there for about 20 minutes. That places their arrival at just before 12:45. If their arrival is assumed to have been at the board school corner, I don't need to spell the problem out.

It is a curiosity at to what became of Spooner's lady friend, when Edward ran to Dutfield's yard. Did he just leave her on the street? Interestingly, we also have a couple referred to in the press, but we only hear from or a paraphrase of the words of the female member. She mentioned a period of about 20 minutes. In Spooner's testimony, he mentioned a period of 25 minutes - quite similar. Working out who the female member of the couple was, does not require mental gymnastics.

We have no certainty that the young woman ever spoke to the press herself. The phrase 'they told me', is just a matter of a reporter's hastily written notes.

That is the first 'sweetheart' couple not seen by Mortimer, Mortimer saw the second 'sweetheart' couple.

The exact location Brown gave for that couple would have them out of the sight of Fanny at her doorstep.

[Tom_Wescott]

When anyone refuses to accept the evidence as written, then any subsequent conclusions cannot be worth the paper they are written on.

The first 'sweetheart' couple is stated to have come and gone between 12:00-12:30 am, and never claimed to be anywhere near the intersection of Berner & Fairclough - there is no cause to dispute that.

The second 'sweetheart' couple was seen at the Berner & Fairclough corner, when the murder was discovered, and for the previous 20 minutes.

Both couples were clearly independent sightings, at different locations, at different times.
The distinction could not be clearer.




Neither appear as witnesses because, obviously, the first couple leaving the street at 12:30 am, saw nothing, and the second couple may not have lived in the street. So were not discovered in the house-to-house search.
The possibility also exists that this second couple had not noticed anyone coming or going from the street



Brown lived in the house-to-house sweep zone, its that simple.
He claims to have recognised the body, but the Coroner had doubts, asking Brown - "are you sure it was not her dress you recognised?"
y



Except, there is nothing whatsoever, about the couple seen by Brown that requires us to believe his female with 'no-flower', was Stride, who did wear the flower.
His belief that the body was the woman he saw is not reliable, others making the same claim have been proven wrong.
Which means, your conclusion is not inescapable.



I don't think he does, when the sentence begins with "if Schwartz is to be believed" . . that does not have a ring of confidence.
Swanson goes on to indicate the police report is not yet complete. Which suggests the police are still investigating Schwartz's story.
This is why Schwartz was not called to the inquest.

Wick, bless your heart! The young woman was interviewed by the press because she was hanging out with Mortimer in the street! Mortimer had simply spoken to her prior to the reporter doing so and we're getting a garbled version of the story from Mortimer and then a more reliable version from the woman herself. There are transparently not two different couples. As for the flower, Brown stated the man's arm was against the wall blocking his view of where there might have been a flower. But you know all this. You may not like all this, but you know. You're sounding like a Kosminski theorist! (though I know you're not)

On a side note, Wick, I've been reading very old threads on a variety of subjects lately and I must say some of the most interesting and well-sourced posts come from your good self.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

The proximity in time and space to both the murder and Schwartz's account of a couple at the board school corner, would have made them key witnesses in the investigation. Yet, we never hear from them or of them again. This is a crucial point. Their non-existence as a couple beyond those we know of, increases the chance that James Brown was the second or third-last person to see Liz Stride alive.

It's because the young couple, as the woman herself stated, was long indoors before anything happened. As far as the historical record goes (which we can all agree is incomplete), Brown was the last person to see Stride alive other than her killer.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I believe that what you're getting at here is that the blood evidence gives us a time window for when the murder had to have occurred. Is that correct? If so, what is this time window?

If the body is assumed to have been discovered right on 1am, and blood has already trickled down to the side door, we can assume the murderer is long gone. Suppose then, we place the murder at 12:55, about 5 minutes after Brown is "almost certain" he sees Stride with Overcoat Man. The problem is that ~12:55 is the time usually given for Fanny seeing Leon with his black bag, and this is supposedly toward the end of a roughly 10-minute period at her doorstep. She would therefore be in prime position to see the murderer and victim enter the gates.

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

Something is obviously wrong. Perhaps Fanny actually witnessed Goldstein just prior to 12:50. That would place the 10-minute vigil between about 12:40 and 12:50, which is compatible with the story of a woman going to her doorstep immediately after hearing a policeman's footsteps.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

You've been disagreeing with me about the possibility of both Schwartz and Brown being reliable, but here you have Liz picking herself up after the Schwartz incident and going where Brown saw her.

Most members believe Schwartz's story, and most of those believe BS Man was the murderer. What I'm getting at is that if Brown is assumed to have been correct that he had witnessed Stride, then what Schwartz described could only have occurred earlier. Therefore, BS Man has left the scene before the murder. If it does not seem likely that another man could have come along to commit the murder, who was not the man responsible for the assault at the gateway, then "Houston, we have a problem".

While I'm not as adamant about this point as you are, I will agree that it's unlikely that the couple was at the corner for 20 minutes leading up to the murder. Brown saw them on his way home from the shop, but not on his way over. I doubt that Brown arrived at the shop prior to 12:40.

Or even 12:45. That is just another reason to suppose that the "board school couple" were never at the board school corner.

[Wickerman]

In the event someone (not you, Lewis) is fudging with Brown's timing, Brown's statement would have been corroborated with the chandler as to when Brown was there and for how long. Had there been a contradiction, it would have been put to Brown at the inquest either by Baxter or one of the inspectors in attendance.

Brown says he left his home about 12:45 a.m., went directly to the chandler shop on the corner of Fairclough and Berner, spent about 3 to 4 minutes inside, and left, crossing across the road towards the board school and passing the couple. Assuming his timing is accurate - which we have to do even though it probably isn't - this puts him walking past the couple at about 12:51 or 12:52 a.m. The murder would have happened somewhere between this time and her discovery at 1 a.m. Because her carotid was only partially severed, it would have taken minutes for her to bleed to death.

Like it or not Tom, there is plenty of elbow room with the stated times.
"About 12:45"
"three or four minutes"
"about quarter of an hour".

What is your definition of 'about'?

Most members have been around long enough know how inexact stated times can be, especially when most people didn't have a watch, and the common means of time-keeping was the local quarter-hour chimes from the nearest church bell.

Brown did say he had not looked at a clock in the chandlers shop (Telegraph). He also said he first came home at 10 minutes past 12, which seems sufficiently precise to suggest he may have had a clock at home, but that is of no help with sighting this couple.

Given the circumstances above, "about 12:45" could be 12:40-12:50, plus "3 or 4 minutes", could offer a time when passing this sweetheart couple at a minimum of 12:43 or a maximum of 12:54.
And we are in no position to determine what the exact time was when Brown saw the couple.

To me its irrelevant, as the woman was not Stride in my view.

[Wickerman]

People like Krantz, Diemschitz and Eagle. I wouldn't call that hear-say. These are first-party accounts of the police search, and not one of these men said anything about 12:45 - they all mentioned 1am.

I know what you getting at, but Krantz didn't see the men leave, he only learned about that when he came out of the print office.
Diemschutz could certainly have told Wess the next day, and Eagle did say he knew Diemschutz went with another member to find a policeman.
This only reinforces the likelyhood the 'chase' concerned Diemschutz and Kozebrodski.

The notion that Wess would then start talking about a murderer being chased at 12:45, which just happened to coincide with Schwartz's story, is fanciful.

Don't forget, the journalist is reporting a story by Wess, who was told by someone else.
For the reader, this is a third-hand story. We don't know where the "12:45" came from.

The members of the public are not identified, because the story is concocted

One thing I never do, is call witnesses liars.
If we can't deal with the evidence as is given, then we are creating our own fiction.

What do mean, only one man returned? Spooner ran around to the club with the two members he had stopped for information, and Mr Harris was right at their tale. That's 4 men. This is nothing like the story of a man pursued escaping.

What I was referring to was, only one man who set out actually returned to the yard, that was Diemschutz.
Spooner came with him yes, but he was not one who set out. This is the man "who was not a member", in the story.
Kozebrodski, though he set out, did not come back to the yard, he ran up to Commercial Rd. to find Eagle.

Did any other paper make the same 'reasonable' conclusion?

I don't remember the press speculating on the time of death.

Yes, the men passed Spooner and very soon after doubled-back. No one escaped.

It's clear whomever first told the story had not spoken to those involved in the chase. Which suggests, the story did not originate by members of the Club.
There was another person seen by Brown, who tells us when he looked out his window, looking for whoever was shouting "police" and "murder", there was a man opposite who called for the policeman who had just appeared at the end of Christian St.
This man told the policeman he was wanted, in Berner St.
Maybe he saw the 'chase', but was not aware of the circumstances.

[Wickerman]

It means close to 100% certain.

No different to Mary Malcolm then, and we know how that turned out.

As you know, the man's arm was against the wall, and he was close to her. The flower could easily have been obscured.

Yes it could, no question.

J. Best: I have been to the mortuary, and am almost certain the woman there is the one we saw at the Bricklayers' Arms.

Not certain, then?

You seem to have missed what John Gardner said:

John Gardner, labour, 11 Chapman-street, corroborated all that Best said respecting the conduct of the man and the woman at the Bricklayers' Arms, adding "before I got into the mortuary to-day (Sunday), I told you the woman had a flower in her jacket, and that she had a short jacket. Well, I have been to the mortuary and there she was with the dahlias on her right side of her jacket.

No question about it.

[Wickerman]

The proximity in time and space to both the murder and Schwartz's account of a couple at the board school corner, would have made them key witnesses in the investigation. .

Schwartz?, do you mean Mortimer?
You can't make a strawman argument, they were not key witnesses.

Yet, we never hear from them or of them again. This is a crucial point. Their non-existence as a couple beyond those we know of, increases the chance that James Brown was the second or third-last person to see Liz Stride alive.

It isn't crucial at all, the couple was not in a good position to see anything.
They did not see the murderer, or the victim, or anything that led up to both coming together.
Also, we cannot say the police never found them. Witness statements taken by police have not survived.

[Wickerman]

The problem is that the woman in Couple 2 (#169) said they had been there for about 20 minutes. That places their arrival at just before 12:45. .

Not really, it depends when Mortimer spoke to them.
Mortimer would not have walked over to the corner, she became too preoccupied with the body in the yard.

More likely, once the commotion transpired, that second 'sweetheart' couple came over to the yard and spoke with Mortimer.

If you recall, Mortimer said she eventually came out after 1:00am, and Diemschutz said he passed the Tobacconists clock at the top of the street at 1:00 am.
So it was a minute or two after 1:00 when he pulled into the yard. He had to go in the club and raise the alarm, then the commotion began.
Mortimer heard the cart arrive, she heard the commotion, so it must have been near 1:05 by the time she came out.

If you want to be precise about the "20 min" estimate, then 12:45 to 1:05 is 20 minutes.
The sweetheart couple could have just arrived as James Brown entered the Chandlers shop. He only saw them on leaving the shop.

There is no problem in that scenario.

It is a curiosity at to what became of Spooner's lady friend, when Edward ran to Dutfield's yard. Did he just leave her on the street?

Agreed, we just don't know.

Interestingly, we also have a couple referred to in the press, but we only hear from or a paraphrase of the words of the female member. She mentioned a period of about 20 minutes. In Spooner's testimony, he mentioned a period of 25 minutes - quite similar. .

Spooner thought he arrived at the yard at 25 to 1.00, thats 10 minutes before the sweetheart couple arrived at the corner.
(He was wrong about the time of course.)

We have no certainty that the young woman ever spoke to the press herself. The phrase 'they told me', is just a matter of a reporter's hastily written notes.

Possibly, but the female said she heard nothing, which is why we read nothing more about them.

The exact location Brown gave for that couple would have them out of the sight of Fanny at her doorstep.

Now you are trying to dismiss them by pretending Brown was being geometrically, exactly, precise in placing the couple. I'll just assume you are joking.
All Brown said was the couple were "on the corner", and "by the wall".

[Wickerman]

Wick, bless your heart! The young woman was interviewed by the press because she was hanging out with Mortimer in the street! Mortimer had simply spoken to her prior to the reporter doing so and we're getting a garbled version of the story from Mortimer and then a more reliable version from the woman herself. .

Tom, the above sounds like you are talking about a different pair of press reports to what I mean.

This is the interview with the female who was on the corner with her manfriend.

When the alarm of murder was raised a young girl had been standing in a bisecting thoroughfare not fifty yards from the spot where the body was found. She had, she said, been standing there for about twenty-minutes, talking with her sweetheart, but neither of them heard any unusual noises.

Mortimer refers to her (and her manfriend)

A young man and his sweetheart were standing at the corner of the street, about twenty yards away, before and after the woman must have been murdered, but they told me they did not hear a sound.

The above two accounts refer to the same couple, my Couple #2.


The earlier couple is mentioned in this next report, my Couple #1.

It is established almost beyond doubt that the poor creature met her death some time between twelve and one o'clock. And yet no one seems to have heard a struggle, or a groan, or the slightest indication of what was going on. From twelve o'clock till half-past a young girl who lives in the street walked up and down, and within twenty yards of where the body was found, with her sweetheart.

"We heard nothing whatever," she told a reporter this morning. "I passed the gate of the yard a few minutes before twelve o'clock alone. The doors were open, and, so far as I could tell, there was nothing inside then." "I met my young man (she proceeded) at the top of the street, and then we went for a short walk along the Commercial-road and back again, and down Berner-street. No one passed us then, but just before we said "Good night" a man came along the Commercial-road; and went in the direction of Aldgate."

As for the flower, Brown stated the man's arm was against the wall blocking his view of where there might have been a flower. But you know all this. You may not like all this, but you know. You're sounding like a Kosminski theorist! (though I know you're not)

Yes, I know the flower could have been obscured, but that is conjecture. The fact remains Brown said he did not see a flower in her jacket.

On a side note, Wick, I've been reading very old threads on a variety of subjects lately and I must say some of the most interesting and well-sourced posts come from your good self.

Nice of you to say so, I wonder which 'very old' threads they are.
Now I'm looking at the number of posts, almost 15,000 good grief, I've probably written a book and don't realize it.


A sign of a miss-spent retirement, as well as a miss-spent youth.

Anyway, I'm hoping this exchange over the 'sweetheart' couples has just been a bit of a misunderstanding.

[Lewis C]

If the body is assumed to have been discovered right on 1am, and blood has already trickled down to the side door, we can assume the murderer is long gone. Suppose then, we place the murder at 12:55, about 5 minutes after Brown is "almost certain" he sees Stride with Overcoat Man. The problem is that ~12:55 is the time usually given for Fanny seeing Leon with his black bag, and this is supposedly toward the end of a roughly 10-minute period at her doorstep. She would therefore be in prime position to see the murderer and victim enter the gates.

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

Something is obviously wrong. Perhaps Fanny actually witnessed Goldstein just prior to 12:50. That would place the 10-minute vigil between about 12:40 and 12:50, which is compatible with the story of a woman going to her doorstep immediately after hearing a policeman's footsteps.

I think that's one possibility, that the murder occurred shortly after Fanny closed her door. It would mean that Goldstein passed prior to 12:55, but I see no problem with that.

[Lewis C]

Most members believe Schwartz's story, and most of those believe BS Man was the murderer. What I'm getting at is that if Brown is assumed to have been correct that he had witnessed Stride, then what Schwartz described could only have occurred earlier. Therefore, BS Man has left the scene before the murder. If it does not seem likely that another man could have come along to commit the murder, who was not the man responsible for the assault at the gateway, then "Houston, we have a problem".

If we polled the entire forum, it might be true that most of those who believe Schwartz' story think that BS man was Stride's killer, but I think there are at least 4 in this discussion that that's not true of. Herlock, Tom, and Wick can correct me if I get their position wrong, but I think Herlock agrees with my position, which is maythat the Schwartz incident happened, but BS man may or may not be Stride's killer. I think Tom's position is that the Schwartz incident happened, but BS isn't Stride's killer. I think Wick is saying that Schwartz did his best to give accurate testimony, but may have been mistaken about what street he was on. In that case, BS man wouldn't be Stride's killer because the woman he assaulted wouldn't have been Stride.

Right now it does seem more likely to me that the Brown sighting happened after the Schwartz incident, but suppose Brown passes the couple at 12:50. What Brown heard suggests that they might be just about to part, so maybe they did that just after Brown passed. That would leave almost 10 minutes for the Schwartz incident and the murder, which I think is enough time.

[c.d.]

Hello Lewis,

Count me in among those who believe Stride was killed by the Ripper and that the B.S. man was not the Ripper.

c.d.