Suspect Witnesses?

[Wickerman]

Which of these options above is the correct one?

Option 1,2 or 3?

Chris.
Using the four paragraphs again, for reference.
https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...875#post860875

The first paragraph tells us the sweetheart couple had been standing at a bisecting thoroughfare not 50 yds from where the body was found, and had been there for 20 minutes.
Whereas, your options 1 & 2 have this couple standing for 20 mins at the top of Berner St., a lot more than 50 yds away.

Paragraphs 3 & 4 do not allow the earlier couple to stand around for 20 minutes, yet this is the couple who walk into Commercial road.
So, in my view, neither option suits the evidence.

[Wickerman]

PC Smith described the man with Stride in Berner St. about 12:35 am.

A man, aged 28, height 5ft 8in, complexion dark, small dark moustache; dress, black diagonal coat, hard felt hat, collar and tie; respectable appearance; carried a parcel wrapped up in a newspaper.


Schwartz described the man assaulting a woman at Dutfields yard, about 12:45 am.

a man, aged about 30, height 5ft 5in, complexion fair, hair dark, small brown moustache, full face, broad shoulders; dress, dark jacket and trousers, black cap with peak.


Brown described the man (with the woman) on the corner of Fairclough, at 12:45.

The man was described as being about 5ft 7in tall and stoutly built, wearing a long overcoat which went down almost to his heels. He was wearing a hat, but Brown was unable to describe it.


The three witnesses who saw Stride, or a female they took to be the victim, all described a man wearing different coats.
Smith saw a man wearing a Cutaway, or diagonal coat.
Schwartz saw a man in a jacket.
Brown saw a man with a long overcoat, down to his ankles.

Smith and Schwartz also described a man wearing a different hat.
Smith saw a man wearing a hard felt hat (like a bowler, Derby or Widewake)
Schwartz saw a man wearing a peaked cap.
Brown saw a man wearing a hat, but could not describe it.

Therefore, whoever James Brown saw, the mans coat was different to the man who was verified to have been with Stride, by PC Smith.
We have no description of the sweetheart couple.

[The Rookie Detective]

Chris.
Using the four paragraphs again, for reference.
https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...875#post860875

The first paragraph tells us the sweetheart couple had been standing at a bisecting thoroughfare not 50 yds from where the body was found, and had been there for 20 minutes.
Whereas, your options 1 & 2 have this couple standing for 20 mins at the top of Berner St., a lot more than 50 yds away.

Paragraphs 3 & 4 do not allow the earlier couple to stand around for 20 minutes, yet this is the couple who walk into Commercial road.
So, in my view, neither option suits the evidence.

The quote of no more than "50 yards" appears in some newspapers as no more than "20 yards."

If the latter, then it implies the sweetheart couple were standing on the corner of Berner and Fairclough St for around 20 minutes.

The "20 yard" reference fits with the geographical layout of the street, whereas the "50 yards" reference makes no sense.

[seanr]

Hi Jon,

Not everybody was seen headed north with a black bag, an then headed south with a black bag. Goldstein acknowledged that he was the said person with the black bag, and offered an alibi that he was at the Spectacle Cafe, which was checked by police.

Detective to owner Spectacle Cafe: We're here to check if a Mr Goldstein was here on the night of the 30 September.

Owner Spectacle Cafe: Yes, I remember he called in to pick up some cigarette boxes.

Detective: How long was he here?

Owner: I don't know. It was a busy night and I just pointed him to where the cigarette boxes were stored.

A twelve minute round trip and a minute or two to ensure he was noticed. Not saying this is what happened. Just considering the possibilities.

Best regards, George

Do we know for sure the Police checked Goldstein's alibi with the owner of the Spectacle Alley café or do we just assume that as it would be common sense for them to do so?

And why would they simply believe this unnamed owner of the café? Was this persons character beyond reproach?

[GBinOz]

About what time do you suppose Goldstein headed north? Want to know if this scenario is compatible with James Brown seeing Stride.

I try not to deal in "times". They lack synchronisation and are often guesstimates and require the liberal application of the "about" modifier. I prefer sequences. Also, IMO Brown never saw Stride.

The problem as I see it, relates to 'Mrs Artisan' saying this:

I should think I must have heard it if the poor creature screamed at all, for I hadn't long come in from the door when I was roused, as I tell you, by that call for the police.

She must be inside long enough for Goldstein to walk to the cafe, get his cigarette boxes, and walk back from the cafe and down Berner St.

The return trip, walking at a normal pace was about twelve minutes. Mortimer described the man with the black bag as walking very fast, so there and back with a couple of minutes to establish a presence... "about" 11 minutes???

Mrs Artisan is also quoted as saying:

I was just about going to bed, sir, when I heard a call for the police. I ran to the door, and before I could open it I heard somebody say, 'Come out quick; there's a poor woman here that's had ten inches of cold steel in her.' I hurried out, and saw some two or three people standing in the gateway.

This is where interpretation of time elapsed has to be given for phrases such as "I hadn't long come in from the door" and "I was just about going to bed". For example, "Locking the door, she prepared to retire to bed, in the front room on the ground floor, and it so happened that in about four minutes' time she heard Diemschitz's pony cart pass the house". In this case preparing to retire involves "about" four minutes. Then there is another "about" three minutes for Diemshitz to discover the body and raise the alarm. So "about" seven minutes creeps closer to "about" 11 minutes (from above).

These quotes do sound a lot like Mrs Mortimer:

I had just gone indoors, and was preparing to go to bed, when I heard a commotion outside, and immediately ran out, thinking that there was another row at the Socialists' Club close by.

This (Mrs Artisan) however, does not:

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.

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.

My initial 'solution' to this directional dilemma was to edit Fanny's reference to black bag man. From this:

... 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.

To this:

... the only man whom I had seen who had passed through the street previously was a young man carrying a black shiny bag, who walked very fast down the street from the Commercial-road.

Thus, hinting she had seen Goldstein twice.

"It was soon 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". While I appreciate your reading of this statement, my interpretation is that "Previously" refers to the time given rather than a previously observed event.

Hi Andrew,

There are some similarities in the narrations of the two women, as might be expected from women concluding their evening of snooping and heading for bed. However, can you explain how Mrs Artisan (wife of an Artisan) arrived at the yard when there were only "some two or three people standing in the gateway", including Diemshitz and his wife, when Mortimer (wife of a CarMan) said she saw a man touching the victim's face and saying it was quite warm. This was obviously Spooner, who said that there were about 15 people in the yard when he arrived, and Lamb said about thirty when he arrived. Of course, Spooner's action could be interpreted as having been a few minutes after she arrived, but it would be odd (imo) that she failed to mention Diemshitz leaving and returning with Spooner.

Do you find it odd that Mrs Artisan knew Diemshitz by name, and the fact that he was a hawker, and she spoke as though Diemshitz had told her what happened, where as Mortimer said only that "I was told that the manager or steward of the club had discovered the woman on his return home in his pony cart.".

Mrs Artisan about the man with the black bag walking UP Berner St: "He might ha' been coming from the Socialist Club."
Mortimer: "If a man had come out of the yard before one o'clock I must have seen him."
These statement don't seem compatible to me.

The third interview with a woman by the Evening News that day had the following:

Locking the door, she prepared to retire to bed, in the front room on the ground floor, and it so happened that in about four minutes' time she heard Diemschitz's pony cart pass the house, and remarked upon the circumstance to her husband.

She said she had spent ten minutes at her door after she heard footsteps in the street. Was she hearing the footsteps of the man Mrs Artisan saw?

All conjecture of course, as is necessarily the case in most of the discussion on JtR.

Cheers, George

[GBinOz]

Do we know for sure the Police checked Goldstein's alibi with the owner of the Spectacle Alley café or do we just assume that as it would be common sense for them to do so?

And why would they simply believe this unnamed owner of the café? Was this persons character beyond reproach?

Hi Sean,

There is a reference to the Police checking Goldstein's alibi with the owner of the Spectacle Alley café, but I can't locate it at present.

What choice did the police have but to accept it? Goldstein said he was there and the owner confirmed his presence, and Goldstein had the cigarette boxes. If the police did question how long he was there, and the owner said he didn't know, what resort did they have after that? The police would have had to have had evidence to show they were both lying.

Cheers, George

[NotBlamedForNothing]

That is how English works, implied statements are not stated.
If you accept they walked down Berner St., yet were able to see a man walk east to west along Commercial road. They had to be within sight. It was after midnight, so quite dark.

PC Lamb says he could see Dutfields Yard from Commercial road. He said he walked in Commercial road . . ."(to) the corner of Berner-street they pointed down and said, "There." I saw people moving some distance down the street."

So the reverse must also be true, from at least Dutfields Yard anyone passing along Commercial road might have been visible.
That suggests to me the couple were in Berner st., but between the yard and Commercial road.

Its just that if they were walking down towards the yard, they are facing south, so not able to see someone cross the top of the street, behind them.
Therefore, they should have been facing north, so walking towards Commercial road, or right at the end of Berner St. Which means they were on their way back, which justifies my "and back again" assumption.

It's simple. They saw the man when they got back the top of Berner St, from their stroll along Commercial Rd. Then they walked down to the young woman's residence and said their goodnight's. Thus, they saw the man "just before" that.

The man was probably a tipsy Israel Schwartz, looking for his wife.

Yes, it could be said, we have retired this first couple

They retired themselves at 12:30.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

PC Smith described the man with Stride in Berner St. about 12:35 am.

A man, aged 28, height 5ft 8in, complexion dark, small dark moustache; dress, black diagonal coat, hard felt hat, collar and tie; respectable appearance; carried a parcel wrapped up in a newspaper.

The Star, Oct 1: The policeman upon duty in the street states that as he passed along he noticed a man and a woman talking together not far from the yard, but as that was no unusual sight at that hour took no particular notice.

Therefore, whoever James Brown saw, the mans coat was different to the man who was verified to have been with Stride, by PC Smith.
We have no description of the sweetheart couple.

James Brown: I am almost certain this is not a young woman ...

Remarkably clear Photo enhancement of Liz Stride - Casebook: Jack the Ripper Forums

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Do we know for sure the Police checked Goldstein's alibi with the owner of the Spectacle Alley café or do we just assume that as it would be common sense for them to do so?

And why would they simply believe this unnamed owner of the café? Was this persons character beyond reproach?

From the Morning Advertiser, Oct 3

From 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."]

That is all we know.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I try not to deal in "times". They lack synchronisation and are often guesstimates and require the liberal application of the "about" modifier. I prefer sequences. Also, IMO Brown never saw Stride.


The return trip, walking at a normal pace was about twelve minutes. Mortimer described the man with the black bag as walking very fast, so there and back with a couple of minutes to establish a presence... "about" 11 minutes???


This is where interpretation of time elapsed has to be given for phrases such as "I hadn't long come in from the door" and "I was just about going to bed". For example, "Locking the door, she prepared to retire to bed, in the front room on the ground floor, and it so happened that in about four minutes' time she heard Diemschitz's pony cart pass the house". In this case preparing to retire involves "about" four minutes. Then there is another "about" three minutes for Diemshitz to discover the body and raise the alarm. So "about" seven minutes creeps closer to "about" 11 minutes (from above).

I understand your reluctance to deal with "times". However, the scenario you describe would seem to place the murder at about 12:45, just as Arbeter Fraint had "guessed".

Hi Andrew,

There are some similarities in the narrations of the two women, as might be expected from women concluding their evening of snooping and heading for bed. However, can you explain how Mrs Artisan (wife of an Artisan) arrived at the yard when there were only "some two or three people standing in the gateway", including Diemshitz and his wife, when Mortimer (wife of a CarMan) said she saw a man touching the victim's face and saying it was quite warm. This was obviously Spooner, who said that there were about 15 people in the yard when he arrived, and Lamb said about thirty when he arrived. Of course, Spooner's action could be interpreted as having been a few minutes after she arrived, but it would be odd (imo) that she failed to mention Diemshitz leaving and returning with Spooner.

I'm not convinced we are dealing with one woman rather than two, but can't this discrepancy be put down to a few people being observable in the gateway from #44, compared to a relatively larger number in the yard?

Evening News: Some three doors from the gateway where the body of the first victim was discovered, I saw a clean, respectable-looking woman chatting with one or two neighbours. She was apparently the wife of a well-to-do artisan, and formed a strong contrast to many of those around her. I got into conversation with her and found that she was one of the first on the spot.

This is odd, to be sure, but it was Sunday and there was big crowd on the street, so Fanny put on her Sunday best. Perhaps the clothes were second or third hand, from wealthier relatives.

Do you find it odd that Mrs Artisan knew Diemshitz by name, and the fact that he was a hawker, and she spoke as though Diemshitz had told her what happened, where as Mortimer said only that "I was told that the manager or steward of the club had discovered the woman on his return home in his pony cart.".

She speaks of "Lewis", but I don't get the impression that she necessarily spoke to him. Perhaps she spoke to Diemschitz's wife:

FM: It was almost incredible to me that the thing could have been done without the steward's wife hearing a noise, for she was sitting in the kitchen, from which a window opens four yards from the spot where the woman was found.

Mrs Artisan about the man with the black bag walking UP Berner St: "He might ha' been coming from the Socialist Club."
Mortimer: "If a man had come out of the yard before one o'clock I must have seen him."
These statement don't seem compatible to me.

They seem not to be! We could translate each statement to:

I saw a man whose movement on the street suggested he may have just exited the club, but I did not see him do so.

I was in a position to see a man exit the yard prior to 1am, and I didn't.

Is the second translation compatible with the first?

The third interview with a woman by the Evening News that day had the following:

Locking the door, she prepared to retire to bed, in the front room on the ground floor, and it so happened that in about four minutes' time she heard Diemschitz's pony cart pass the house, and remarked upon the circumstance to her husband.

She said she had spent ten minutes at her door after she heard footsteps in the street. Was she hearing the footsteps of the man Mrs Artisan saw?

All conjecture of course, as is necessarily the case in most of the discussion on JtR.

Cheers, George

My current mental model has Fanny at her door shortly after Smith passes through the street, then away from her door just after Brown sees a couple by the board school. Fanny then returns to her doorstep and stays there, virtually until the arrival of Diemschitz. It was when away from her door that Stride and murderer entered the yard. This scenario gives enough time the substantial blood loss noted by the earliest observers of the body. It seems to me that Overcoat Man is probably the best candidate for the murder, and thus a good candidate for JtR. Unfortunate that Brown did not get a good view of the man.

[The Rookie Detective]

"From twelve o'clock till half-past a young girl who lives in the street walked up and down, and STOOD 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 BACK 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."
Echo, 1st Oct. 1888.



"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."


"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."
Daily News, 1st Oct. 1888.





It is argued that paragraph 1 is referring to a different couple than paragraphs 2 and 3.

However, I believe they are all in reference to the same couple.

The couple in paragraph 1 are clearly standing at the top of the street at the junction with Commercial Road, when they see a man walk along the Commercial Road (from their static position) and see him walk towards Aldgate. They THEN say "Goodnight" and they then walk together BACK DOWN Berner Street for the man to escort her home, as she lives in the street.

The issue is that in paragraph 1, the time states from Midnight to Half past.

But the phrasing is misleading.

The couple meet at midnight, but after a short walk along Commercial Road, they are back at the corner of Berner and Commercial Road around 00.20am. As they're standing there they see a man walking along Commercial Rd heading towards Aldgate. They then say "goodnight" and then walk back down Berner Street around half past midnight.

But even though they've already said "goodnight" and instead of the girl going back home, the couple reach the corner of Berner St and Fairclough and turn left and stand around the corner by the board school.
The couple then stand talking for around 20 minutes, and are seen by Brown. They are there until they hear the alarm that someone has been murdered.

But crucially, as a young couple they are oblivious to anyone around them.
If for example they are kissing or acting in an amorous fashion, they would have little awareness of time frame, or anyone walking past them.

It's possible that they heard or saw nothing because they were too focused on each other.

So I am suggesting that there was only ONE sweetheart couple, but who were unreliable in terms of time approximations owing perhaps to their supposed intimacy.

The key thing is that none of the reports mention about the young girl going home, or the young man going home either.

But whether there were 1 or 2 couples isn't necessarily the key point, it's the question of where we're they standing?

Not forgetting that the couple in paragraph 1 walk BACK DOWN BERNER ST.

That means that if they're not the same couple, then both couples occupy virtually the same space.

And crucially it's space that's more relevant than time in this instance.

As we know, timings can be wildly inaccurate (time is of course relative) but literal/physical space offers a more accurate picture of what really happened.