Suspect Witnesses?

[c.d.]

I would add that as for his wife leaving him, even if she hated his guts, how feasible would it be for a young woman with a small child, an immigrant new to the country who most likely did not speak English to move out on her own and find a respectable and safe place in Whitechapel?

c.d.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Wouldn't any doubts expressed by those at Leman Street have been passed along to Abberline? Was he so inept that he would have completely disregarded them or is it more likely that he questioned Schwartz in depth with respect to them in order to get clarification?

c.d.

Maybe it’s also worth pointing out that we don’t know the source for the newspaper story. Did the reporter just have a Constable that he gave a few pennies for the odd snippet and he just told him that the leads followed from Schwartz story hadn’t got anywhere so far?

The Star 1st Oct:

The police have arrested one man answering the description the Hungarian furnishes. This prisoner has not been charged, but is held for inquiries to be made. The truth of the man's statement is not wholly accepted.

One man had been arrested in connection to Schwartz statement and is currently still being questioned.


The Star, Oct 2:

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. They arrested one man on the description thus obtained, and a second on that furnished from another source, but they are not likely to act further on the same information without additional facts.

The police have their doubts about the details of the story as a whole. They had now arrested two men but, as it stood, they hadn’t been able to take the investigation any further.


Obviously we know nothing about these two men. Who was the ‘other source?’ We don’t know. Maybe just someone who saw someone in that area that matched the description of BS man? Maybe the guy that they had originally detained decided to throw a name at the police and the man turned out unconnected?

I think it’s possible that the Press misunderstood the origin of the ‘doubt.’ Additionally, do we think it possible that the Press might have jumped at the chance of pointing out how ‘clueless’ the police were?

[Herlock Sholmes]

As for the whole moving business yes, the wording is a little murky but I take it that they (not her) planned to move on a certain day but that the move was conditional for that particular day. Possibly they expected a friend or friends to help. Before phones Schwartz would not be able to confirm that the move had taken place and thus had to see for himself.

As for his wife leaving him and moving to a separate place would this have been a spur of the moment decision and she was simply waiting for an opportunity when he would be out? Or had she threatened to move out on her own? Moves take time and planning.

I see absolutely nothing suspicious here unless you are looking (and hoping) to find something suspicious.

c.d.

Totally agree c.d. I just don’t see any reason for suspicion and I do wish that Andrew would stop us having to indulge in a guessing game by simply stating in plain English what he suspects might have been going on.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I think we need to look at what we have. It could be suggested that the man seen by Best and his friend in the Bricklayers Arms is Parcelman. If (and I know some doubt this but I think its a reasonable suggestion as the pub was pretty close (the other side of Commercial Road) then Stride has had a pretty good evening with her 'date' because it does seem to be just that a date.

That would mean she was in his company some time. At least an hour and a half. My suggestion is that if Parcelman went into the yard for some reason and she waits at the gate way. To be honest he could just be having a look at the layout and he's just lucky that the comings and goings have died down. Remember he's standing with Stride watching the gateway when PC Smith sees him

The along comes BS man putting his foot in things. Parcelman decides to stay in the yard out of sight.

Its a little confusing what Schwartz actually sees. Is BS man trying to pull her away from the club (which is what I believe) or push her in. If BS man was Kidney he would be saying don't go in there come with me, if it was a half drunken punter he would be saying the same.

But Stride likes Parcel man, why wouldn't she, I believe she was corresponding with some man the other side of London (will look at that) perhaps it was him.

Anyway she goes into the yard after getting rid of BS man and Parcelman kills her as soon as it is quiet enough and people have momentarily gone away.

He always intended to kill her but he waited for his opportunity (which was very short) to carry it out in the yard of the Jewish Club for maximum effect.

NW

There was an outside toilet in that yard NW. I’d imagine that locals would have known about it.

[c.d.]

I also don't see how his wife leaving him or marital difficulties would impact his statement.

c.d.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Neither do I. I hate to say it but this reminds me of those that believe Cross was the ripper who believe that fact that he wore his work clothes at the inquest to be suspicious. Leaving the rest of us saying WHY?

[Doctored Whatsit]

The Star, Oct 2:

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. They arrested one man on the description thus obtained, and a second on that furnished from another source, but they are not likely to act further on the same information without additional facts.

Obviously we know nothing about these two men. Who was the ‘other source?’ We don’t know. Maybe just someone who saw someone in that area that matched the description of BS man? Maybe the guy that they had originally detained decided to throw a name at the police and the man turned out unconnected?

I wonder whether the second man arrested on information "from another source" could have been Michael Kidney, and his alibi was checked out, and found satisfactory.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I wonder whether the second man arrested on information "from another source" could have been Michael Kidney, and his alibi was checked out, and found satisfactory.

It’s possible Doc. It’s difficult to come up with a ‘source’ in the first place. They had Schwartz but we don’t know if they ever traced Pipeman. They talked to Goldstein but he turned up of his own volition. So the ‘source’ may have been someone that knew Stride and pointed the finger at Kidney. In fact, yours is possibly the likeliest suggestion.

[The Rookie Detective]

Maybe it’s also worth pointing out that we don’t know the source for the newspaper story. Did the reporter just have a Constable that he gave a few pennies for the odd snippet and he just told him that the leads followed from Schwartz story hadn’t got anywhere so far?

The Star 1st Oct:

The police have arrested one man answering the description the Hungarian furnishes. This prisoner has not been charged, but is held for inquiries to be made. The truth of the man's statement is not wholly accepted.

One man had been arrested in connection to Schwartz statement and is currently still being questioned.


The Star, Oct 2:

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. They arrested one man on the description thus obtained, and a second on that furnished from another source, but they are not likely to act further on the same information without additional facts.

The police have their doubts about the details of the story as a whole. They had now arrested two men but, as it stood, they hadn’t been able to take the investigation any further.


Obviously we know nothing about these two men. Who was the ‘other source?’ We don’t know. Maybe just someone who saw someone in that area that matched the description of BS man? Maybe the guy that they had originally detained decided to throw a name at the police and the man turned out unconnected?

I think it’s possible that the Press misunderstood the origin of the ‘doubt.’ Additionally, do we think it possible that the Press might have jumped at the chance of pointing out how ‘clueless’ the police were?

Both these Star reports taken in chronological tandem, are essentially telling us that the police realised pretty quickly that something was off about Schwartz's story, and was then disbelieved.

It's as simple as that.


It then explains why he just disappears and doesn't attend the inquest.


Whether Abberline believed and trusted Schwartz, it's clear that someone had leaked to the Star that Schwartz wasn't believed.

So if the Star was correct, then Schwartz wasn't being wholly truthful.

But why?

Why would a theatrical looking Jew who spoke no English go straight to the police (with an interpreter) and lie about claiming that he witnessed a drunk gentile assault the victim just yards from where she was later found murdered, and had also shouted an anti-semitic slur just a few yards from the entrance to a Jewish radical club?

One could be forgiven for suggesting that Schwartz was attempting to put the focus onto a gentile having assaulted Stride, and by proxy then rule out the idea that a Jew could have killed her.

It would be a ballsey thing to do by just lying directly to the police.

But if so, what kind of person would do that and risk implicating themselves?

Answer...

A paid actor.


Trust me, I would know.


Actors will do practically anything and take on the responsibility of playing any role, for the right money, acknowledgement and/or fame.


But where would that leave us if the Star were right and their comments about Schwartz were actually true?

It would remove Bs man, Pipe man, the assault, the anti-semitic slur, the chase, the running as far as a train line that doesn't exist.
It would then validate Brown's timings, allow Mortimer more time at her door like she stated, and then provide us with the last person seen with Stride; Parcelman.

Bearing in mind that Parcelman was the original suspect for the Stride murder.

It seems that it's only when Schwartz gives his statement, that it then lets whomever Parcelman was, off the hook.

Of course, Schwartz can't say he saw the murder, because that would be suicide for anyone who lied about what they saw, and the police would have sussed him out straight away.

Whereas by inventing an assault and providing us with the drunken gentile BS man as the assailant, the police would then likely automatically assume that BS man was the new prime suspect.

Schwartz was inserted into the game because the club needed to divert focus away from the idea that the killer was one of their own.

Stride wasn't hacked and butchered, she was assassinated and deliberately silenced.

[FrankO]

The timing suggestion I gave for Smith in #568 has him on the street at similar time to Eagle's arrival. So, we may only be dealing with a minute or two away from her door, in this period.

It’s good to see we agree that, at least when Eagle and Smith passed, Mortimer wasn’t at her doorstep. I, however, don’t agree that it would have been a matter of just a minute or two, but at the very least 3 and probably somewhat more.

According to Smith’s inquest testimony he entered Berner Street from Commercial Road as per his usual route after having been there before when he saw Stride & Parcelman. So, it’s fair to say that when he saw the couple he had also entered Berner Street from Commercial Road. But he also testified that when he saw the couple, he was on his way to Commercial Road. So, he must have entered Berner Street from the north, walked until he reached Fairclough Street, turned around back to the north and then saw the couple. From Commercial Road to Fairclough Street and back are 830 feet/250 metres.

Walking that distance at a speed of 3 mph, it would have taken Smith 3 minutes and 6 seconds to cover that distance. If he walked at a speed of 2.5 mph, it would have taken him 3 minutes and 45 seconds. Seeing that, at least, Smith apparently didn’t see Eagle, we’d have to add some time for him to have stayed out of Smith’s sight. This, of course, is only if we’d assume that Smith and Eagle were very close behind each other in Berner Street.

Now if Lave does go onto the street and we are entitled to ask why Mortimer does not see him, are we not obliged to ask why Lave doesn't see Stride and Parcelman?

Why should we be obliged to ask that? Mortimer said she was at her door nearly the whole half hour, so she should have seen them, but this doesn't go for Lave. It's exactly because Lave doesn't mention the couple that we should think that they weren't there when he was in the street. Seeing a man and a woman close to the yard, especially one that could very well have been Stride, would have been important information for the police and the press alike.

Another thing to keep in mind here, is that Smith only saw the couple on his way back to Commercial Road, not on his way to Fairclough Street, so they must have appeared in the street after he’d passed the spot where he later saw them standing on his way down the street. Since Smith didn’t mention seeing anybody in the street but the couple, there’s reason for us to think Lave wasn’t there when Smith passed Mortimer’s house and the club and, therefore, didn’t see Stride & Parcelman as they hadn’t arrived yet.

According to Smith, they were standing directly across from the Mortimer residence (as you mentioned). How could he have missed them, or thought them unworthy of comment? Something is not right here. Perhaps the couple's location was not quite as Smith recalled.

See above.

You seem to have missed my point. It's not that the nearly all of that half hour is preferable to 10-minutes in terms of total time. The issue is that it's precisely because the quote is vague that it affords flexibility of interpretation. A fixed 10-minute period does not. Not only that but the single fixed period doesn't even make sense. If it starts immediately after Smith passes, the time is not a few minutes to 1 when it ends.

It makes no sense if you start at the wrong end, Andrew, which you do. It’s very clear from her own interview that she got indoors just before one o’clock and then, after hearing the commotion, went out just after one o’clock. This fits with the other evidence of when Diemshutz arrived and when the commotion started. This is the right end of the 10-minute vigil to start with. So, it ended a few minutes before one am and, therefore, it must have begun 10 minutes – give or take a minute – before that, which would be around 12:47.

I don’t have any problem with the ‘immediately after hearing a policeman pass by’ being a minute or two afterwards instead of just seconds afterwards.
Mortimer is also quoted as saying:”Ihad 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. I went to see what was the matter, and was informed that another dreadful murder had been committed in the yard adjoining the clubhouse, and on going inside I saw thew body of a woman lying huddled up just inside the gates with her throat cut from ear to ear. A man touched her face, and said it was quite warm,…”

So, she heard the commotion, ran ‘immediately’ to the yard where she saw Stride lying and a man touching her face. Who was that man? I should say probably Spooner. So how ‘immediately’ after the commotion did she come out? It was only after Diemshutz had returned with Spooner.

Okay, so you're not happy with the 10-minute report, either. In my opinion, Mortimer would have been familiar with the sound of the plod, but let's consider two possibilities - the footsteps were of Smith or Eagle. If Eagle, then the report's shortly before 12:45 timing is close to the 12:40 timing given by Eagle. So, the 10 minutes starts then, and continues through until nearly 12:55. No sign of Schwartz and co. If Smith, then we might start a little earlier, but we are still making it to at least 12:50 with no sign of Schwartz and co. Perhaps they came along when, as the 10-minute report states, "she prepared to retire to bed, in the front room on the ground floor". Strange that she managed to hear those passing footsteps, but none of the events described by Schwartz, don't you think?

If one sees it the way you do, then yes, it would be strange. But, as I explained above, I don’t see it that way. The 10 minutes are roughly between 12:47 and 12:57 with a gap between 12:42-43 and 12:47.

Presumably this man did not pass Letchford's sister. Perhaps he came from the board school corner?

I would say he wouldn’t have passed when Letchford sister and/or Fanny Mortimer were at their doorstep. So, either before or after.

[c.d.]

Bearing in mind that Parcelman was the original suspect for the Stride murder.

It seems that it's only when Schwartz gives his statement, that it let's whomever Parcelman was off the hook.

Of course, Schwartz can't say he saw the murder, because that would be suicide for anyone who lied about what they saw, and the police would have sussed him out straight away.

Whereas by inventing an assault and providing us with the drunken gentile BS man as the assailant, the police would then likely automatically assume that BS man was the new prime suspect.

Schwartz was inserted into the game because the club needed to divert focus away from the idea that the killer was one of their own.

Stride wasn't hacked and butchered, she was assassinated and deliberately silenced.

It doesn't seem that killing poor ole' Mr. Occam was good enough for you, R.D., you now seem intent on killing off his descendants and even his ghost.

A paid Jewish actor? Seriously? And what is his defense if found out by the police as to his role in this? I was just playing a part?

c.d.

[c.d.]

Actors will do practically anything and take on the responsibility of playing any role, for the right money, acknowledgement and/or fame.

So will lawyers for that matter.

c.d.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Both these Star reports taken in chronological tandem, are essentially telling us that the police realised pretty quickly that something was off about Schwartz's story, and was then disbelieved.

It's as simple as that.

It’s certainly nothing like as simple as that. You are assuming that you know what these reports were based on. Were they reliable sources within the police? Was it just one Constable talking about a station rumour?

It then explains why he just disappears and doesn't attend the inquest.

The reason that he wasn’t at the inquest is obvious. He wasn’t required. He was a non-vital witness in terms of the stated aims of an inquest.

Whether Abberline believed and trusted Schwartz, it's clear that someone had leaked to the Star that Schwartz wasn't believed.

So why do you believe that unknown person (whose character, knowledge or access to information we know nothing about) instead of the man in charge of the investigation on the ground? A man for whom there has never been a suspicion of dishonesty.

So if the Star was correct, then Schwartz wasn't being wholly truthful.

But why?

We can come up with no remotely valid reason why Israel Schwartz would lie and stupidly place himself at the scene of the murder with no other person to back him up or to confirm that Schwartz himself wasn’t the killer.

Why would a theatrical looking Jew who spoke no English go straight to the police (with an interpreter) and lie about claiming that he witnessed a drunk gentile assault the victim just yards from where she was later found murdered, and had also shouted an anti-semitic slur just a few yards from the entrance to a Jewish radical club?

The answer is obvious Chris….he wouldn’t have done. He told the truth.

One could be forgiven for suggesting that Schwartz was attempting to put the focus onto a gentile having assaulted Stride, and by proxy then rule out the idea that a Jew could have killed her.

It would be a ballsey thing to do by just lying directly to the police.

Not ballsy…unbelievably stupid.

But if so, what kind of person would do that and risk implicating themselves?

Answer...

A paid actor.


Trust me, I would know.


Actors will do practically anything and take on the responsibility of playing any role, for the right money, acknowledgement and/or fame.

You don’t even know that he was an actor. You can’t tell an actor by his clothes.

But where would that leave us if the Star were right and their comments about Schwartz were actually true?

It would remove Bs man, Pipe man, the assault, the anti-semitic slur, the chase, the running as far as a train line that doesn't exist.
It would then validate Brown's timings, allow Mortimer more time at her door like she stated, and then provide us with the last person seen with Stride; Parcelman.

No one would make up something like that. If he was trying to pin the blame on an assailant like BS man he’d have put the knife in his hands. Schwartz was clearly telling the truth as he saw it.

Bearing in mind that Parcelman was the original suspect for the Stride murder.

Was he? How?

It seems that it's only when Schwartz gives his statement, that it then lets whomever Parcelman was, off the hook.

Of course, Schwartz can't say he saw the murder, because that would be suicide for anyone who lied about what they saw, and the police would have sussed him out straight away.

Whereas by inventing an assault and providing us with the drunken gentile BS man as the assailant, the police would then likely automatically assume that BS man was the new prime suspect.

Schwartz was inserted into the game because the club needed to divert focus away from the idea that the killer was one of their own.

Stride wasn't hacked and butchered, she was assassinated and deliberately silenced.

Conspiracy theorist stuff again I’m afraid. It’s spy thriller, Michael Richards-type fiction.

There are two possibles.

1. That events occurred as stated by Schwartz.

2. That events occurred as stated by Schwartz but they occurred earlier in the evening, some time before 12.30, and was just an unconnected domestic-type incident.

The police never believed that Schwartz had lied.

He didn’t appear at the inquest because he couldn’t add anything of value.

There was no plot…no plan….no one lied….

[Lewis C]

Then let's hear an alternate scenario.

After picking herself up off the ground, she went somewhere else and met with her killer, and they went into the yard together.