Suspect Witnesses?

[Lewis C]

Are congratulations in order then Andrew? You appear to believe that you have disproven the ‘killer interrupted’ theory which the majority appear to favour and the police at the time also suspected. Perhaps you think that when a throat is viciously cut there’s some kind of time delay before the bleeding begins?

Agreed Herlock, and also, it's not hard to find people who believe that BS man killed Stride and also believe that Stride was a Ripper murder, which would mean that BS man was the Mitre Square killer. (Assuming that Eddowes was a Ripper murder, which almost everyone believes.)

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Also it had been raining, so water was probably flowing in the gutter, diluting the blood, and moving it fairly quickly.

The rain had stopped, therefore any flow of water along the gutter had stopped. All that's left is mud. Pooling of blood a significant distance from the wound is going to take more time than the interruption theory allows, if the blood has to flow over rocky, muddy ground, as opposed to blood being carried by a flow of water.

If we pin Diemschitz arrival at 1:00am, the murder is probably happening at around 12:50 or 12:55. One question then is what to do about Fanny. One option would be to have her momentarily away from her door when victim and culprit enter the passage. That would mean she was at her door intermittently, regardless of what she said or was reported as saying, to or by the press. Another option is that they entered the passage at an earlier point, and the murderer fled by scaling rooftops.

Neither of these scenarios is compatible with the BS man story, which is just a distraction - possibly intentionally.

[Herlock Sholmes]

The rain had stopped, therefore any flow of water along the gutter had stopped. All that's left is mud. Pooling of blood a significant distance from the wound is going to take more time than the interruption theory allows, if the blood has to flow over rocky, muddy ground, as opposed to blood being carried by a flow of water.

If we pin Diemschitz arrival at 1:00am, the murder is probably happening at around 12:50 or 12:55. One question then is what to do about Fanny. One option would be to have her momentarily away from her door when victim and culprit enter the passage. That would mean she was at her door intermittently, regardless of what she said or was reported as saying, to or by the press. Another option is that they entered the passage at an earlier point, and the murderer fled by scaling rooftops.

Neither of these scenarios is compatible with the BS man story, which is just a distraction - possibly intentionally.

I’ve presented a simple solution. Fanny goes back indoors around 12.55 and the incident occurs sometime between that time and Diemschitz arrival. Where is the issue?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I pointed out, the only address we have is the one in Ellen St. - neither the police nor the press give an address in Berner St.
And, judging by his actions, he made no attempt to access an address in Berner St.
Therefore, it is quite reasonable to question the statement by the press that he had an address in Berner St.

Calling on your expert knowledge of the period.

Assume it was true that Schwartz went out for the day, and the expectation had been that his wife would move during his absence. We all agree that her moving is not a logistics issue, so for her move to be expected but not certain, suggests the move was not finalised. I take that to mean that when Schwartz went out, the lease had not been signed.

He fled incontinently, to his new lodgings.

Now it has been signed. The question is, whose signature is on the lease? Could a woman sign a lease on behalf of a married couple, in that era? If yes, then I suppose that the scenario provided by the Star report is realistic, otherwise could it be the case that the new lodging arrangement did not require a formal lease?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I’ve presented a simple solution. Fanny goes back indoors around 12.55 and the incident occurs sometime between that time and Diemschitz arrival. Where is the issue?

Other than the blood issue, what is occurring at 12:45? I take it that most members prefer the notion of Fanny being at her front door for a single period, not intermittently. In that case, let's go with the relevant report.

It appears that shortly before a quarter to one o'clock she heard the measured, heavy tramp of a policeman passing the house on his beat. Immediately afterwards she went to the street-door, with the intention of shooting the bolts, though she remained standing there ten minutes before she did so.

So, there's your 10-minute period - 12:45 to 12:55. Whose footsteps did she hear between 12:40 and 12:45?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Other than the blood issue, what is occurring at 12:45? I take it that most members prefer the notion of Fanny being at her front door for a single period, not intermittently. In that case, let's go with the relevant report.

It appears that shortly before a quarter to one o'clock she heard the measured, heavy tramp of a policeman passing the house on his beat. Immediately afterwards she went to the street-door, with the intention of shooting the bolts, though she remained standing there ten minutes before she did so.

So, there's your 10-minute period - 12:45 to 12:55. Whose footsteps did she hear between 12:40 and 12:45?

I haven’t a clue what you’re referring to Andrew. My suggestion was that Fanny went onto her doorstep sometime between 12.35 and 12.40 (after Smith had passed and Eagle had returned) and stayed on her doorstep until around 12.55. And that the incident occurred between the time the she went inside and the arrival of Diemschitz.

This would have given her around 15/20 minutes on her doorstep, so reasonably in line with her “most of the time..” It would also be more in line with her stating that she came back out shortly after going inside after she had heard the commotion. While she was on her doorstep Goldstein passed and Brown went for his supper in Fairclough Street (either she didn’t notice him because she was looking in the other direction for the very few seconds when he would have been in view, or, she saw him as a man walking along Fairclough Street but never entering Berner Street and so unconnected to the case and not worth mentioning)

[Wickerman]

Calling on your expert knowledge of the period.

Assume it was true that Schwartz went out for the day, and the expectation had been that his wife would move during his absence. We all agree that her moving is not a logistics issue, so for her move to be expected but not certain, suggests the move was not finalised. I take that to mean that when Schwartz went out, the lease had not been signed.

He fled incontinently, to his new lodgings.

Now it has been signed. The question is, whose signature is on the lease? Could a woman sign a lease on behalf of a married couple, in that era? If yes, then I suppose that the scenario provided by the Star report is realistic, otherwise could it be the case that the new lodging arrangement did not require a formal lease?

Well, lets look at who McCarthy said owed the 29/- in unpaid rent, was it Barnet, or was it Kelly?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I haven’t a clue what you’re referring to Andrew. My suggestion was that Fanny went onto her doorstep sometime between 12.35 and 12.40 (after Smith had passed and Eagle had returned) and stayed on her doorstep until around 12.55. And that the incident occurred between the time the she went inside and the arrival of Diemschitz.

Once again, if Smith passed at 12:35, he is back at the top of Berner St, at 1am, as he told the coroner. If he passed shortly before 12:45, he is back at about 1:10. Our understanding of Berner St has to fit within these constraints, unless someone can make a good argument that Smith was outside of regulation, but failed to portray that to the coroner - otherwise known as lying under oath.

This would have given her around 15/20 minutes on her doorstep, so reasonably in line with her “most of the time..” It would also be more in line with her stating that she came back out shortly after going inside after she had heard the commotion. While she was on her doorstep Goldstein passed and Brown went for his supper in Fairclough Street (either she didn’t notice him because she was looking in the other direction for the very few seconds when he would have been in view, or, she saw him as a man walking along Fairclough Street but never entering Berner Street and so unconnected to the case and not worth mentioning)

When Fanny went to the yard, it appears Spooner is there. By Diemschitz time (as opposed to Smith time), she gets to the yard at about 1:05, or even later. In saying she had just gone indoors when she hears the commotion, it sounds to me like she has locked up very close to the arrival of Diemschitz. It therefore seems very unlikely to me that the murder occurs after she locks up, even if the blood was washed down the gutter with a bucket of water. I think Brown's man is a good candidate for murderer, partly due to the timing, partly due to his behaviour (he seems to be quietly encouraging the woman to do something). His behaviour also suggests he could be the Mitre Square murderer.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Once again, if Smith passed at 12:35, he is back at the top of Berner St, at 1am, as he told the coroner. If he passed shortly before 12:45, he is back at about 1:10. Our understanding of Berner St has to fit within these constraints, unless someone can make a good argument that Smith was outside of regulation, but failed to portray that to the coroner - otherwise known as lying under oath.



When Fanny went to the yard, it appears Spooner is there. By Diemschitz time (as opposed to Smith time), she gets to the yard at about 1:05, or even later. In saying she had just gone indoors when she hears the commotion, it sounds to me like she has locked up very close to the arrival of Diemschitz. It therefore seems very unlikely to me that the murder occurs after she locks up, even if the blood was washed down the gutter with a bucket of water. I think Brown's man is a good candidate for murderer, partly due to the timing, partly due to his behaviour (he seems to be quietly encouraging the woman to do something). His behaviour also suggests he could be the Mitre Square murderer.

This is getting silly Andrew.

12.35 + 30 mins = 1.05

I’ll ask again - where is the issue?

I realise that you’re desperate for a mystery but there isn’t one. No one lied, no one pretended to be anyone they weren’t, no one covered anything up. It was a bog standard murder.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Well, lets look at who McCarthy said owed the 29/- in unpaid rent, was it Barnet, or was it Kelly?

So, the lodging arrangement at 22 Ellen St was as informal as the arrangements at Miller's Court?

If yes, then why was the move said to be expected? If the move has been agreed to and the arrangement is informal, we move from expectation to virtual certainty. If no move has been agreed to, then how could Schwartz know where his new lodgings were located?

If no, then the implication is that Mrs Schwartz signed the lease.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

This is getting silly Andrew.

12.35 + 30 mins = 1.05

I’ll ask again - where is the issue?

I realise that you’re desperate for a mystery but there isn’t one. No one lied, no one pretended to be anyone they weren’t, no one covered anything up. It was a bog standard murder.

The issue is that Smith did not say 1:05, and that 1:05 does not make sense anyway, if Diemschitz is assumed to have arrived close to 1am. I'll go through it again ...

A 1:05 arrival for Smith, places him at the top of Berner St (where it meets Commercial Rd) at 1:03 - he walks down Berner at regulation pace, taking most of 2 minutes. When at the top of Berner, he looks down the street to see a crowd outside the gates. When he arrives, two PCs are already there, including Lamb. These PCs ran down Berner St, but Smith was unaware of this, as he was of cries of "police" from Eagle and whoever was with Eagle (probably Kozebrodski). That means the two PCs who preceded Smith ran down the street significantly before Smith sees the crowd at the gates.

So, how far was Smith from turning into Berner when Lamb and co. head to the yard, for Smith not see these 4 men running? At least a minute, I would say, and that is cutting it as close as possible. It could have been 2 or 3 minutes. The problem should now be obvious - Lamb cannot reach the yard at 1:01, that is, about 60 seconds after Diemschitz turns into Berner St.

[Wickerman]

So, the lodging arrangement at 22 Ellen St was as informal as the arrangements at Miller's Court?

If yes, then why was the move said to be expected? If the move has been agreed to and the arrangement is informal, we move from expectation to virtual certainty. If no move has been agreed to, then how could Schwartz know where his new lodgings were located?

If no, then the implication is that Mrs Schwartz signed the lease.

I'll go through East End 1888 by Fishman tonight, he touched on rents and the frequencies.

Mostly it was week to week, like in Millers Court, it didn't matter who paid the rent, male or female, and there was no deposit. This was one reason people changed their names, they owed rent all over town.

Mrs Schwartz could easily have signed up for the rent at the new address, or perhaps it was already paid by Schwartz the day before?
Schwartz didn't say his wife was supposed to go look for somewhere to move to, it was expected she was to conduct the move, so it looks like the new place was already established.
Unless we're reading too much into it, . . . like that would ever happen on here