Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Stride..a victim?

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

  • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

    But that would have meant him loitering in the areas he had selected and then reliant on a victim being able to be picked up in that same location. I doubt picking a victim up in another part of Whitechapel and walking a great distance would be in his best interests. What if his intended victim had been seen and perhaps spoken to by acquaintance en route when she was walking to his intended murder site he could then have been seen and later identified perhaps.

    A better explanation might be that some of the women knew the locations where they could take clients.

    We do not know who the killer was so your belief in his athletic attributes is pure conjecture

    www.trevormarriott.co.uk
    With due respect to my fellow posters I would speculate that 90% of things posted on this site are pure conjecture. As for my conjecture that he was treasonably fit and well-built, I don't think that's an unreasonable conclusion given what we know of the killings. Just getting from Berner Street to Mitre Square in the time available calls for reasonable fitness, particularly if he had had to exit Dutfield's Yard by climbing over walls at the end after having dispatched Liz Stride (assuming it's the same man). I've done it myself several times without any climbing and it calls for fairly brisk walking.

    Comment


    • .
      However, that Fanny probably went to her doorstep after Smith passes, does not preclude her from being on her doorstep before he passes
      I'd say that it certainly does preclude that. She supposedly heard Smith at just before 12.45. So you would be suggesting that she had been out and gone back in again between 12.30 and say 12.43/4? Is it really likely that she'd have gone in and out over such a short space of time?

      She also said that she'd heard Smith around 10 minutes after he himself said that he'd passed. So who was the likeliest to have been correct? A woman who might not even have owned a clock or a Constable on a regulated beat! I asked earlier if Smith had entered the street the same way that Diemschutz did (yes, my terrible sense of direction and geography) because if he did then he'd have passed the Baker's shop and seen the same clock that Louis did. Therefore it's likeliest that she came out of her house at around 12.35, stood for 10 minutes and then went back inside at 12.45 (missing Schwartz. BS man and pipe man episode) It would also mean that her 5 or 6 minutes was out by 10 minutes.

      Either way she spends no more than 10 minutes on her doorstep from 12.30 until 1.00.

      I don't see Fanny Mortimer as a very reliable witness.
      Regards

      Sir Herlock Sholmes



      “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

      “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

        It's difficult to see how we can put much weight on Mrs Mortimer. She tells the Evening News reporter that she heard the constable's footsteps just before 12.45 and she immediately went to her front door. This means that prior to that she wasn't at her front door but inside her house. If she's correct in her time then it's prior to 12.45 if Smith is correct it's prior to 12.35.

        She remained on her doorstep for 10 minutes during which time she saw Goldstein then she went back inside. So that's until either 12.45 (if Smith was correct) or 12.55 (if Mortimer was correct)

        5 or 6 minutes later she hears Diemschutz then the commotion from the yard (so she's still indoors) Or if Smith was correct then her 5 or 6 minutes was more like 16 or 17 minutes.

        So she was on her doorstep for 10 minutes only between 12.30 and 1.00.

        And if Smith was correct then she went back inside just as Schwartz arrived.

        You have her own words Herlock.."nearly the whole time". Why there is a tendency to imagine that she missed large chunks of time is beyond me. She didnt. She was at her door "off and on" for nearly the whole half hour. the last 10 minutes of the hour we can call The Vigil. Its a prolonged time at the door, unlike what she suggests are intermittent visits until that time. She sees nothing, no-one..save the young couple and Goldstein during that time.

        I think its a mistake to imagine that she happened to take a prolonged break from the door to allow for Liz, Israel, BSM and Pipeman to suddenly materialize then just as suddenly vanish. I see no possible ulterior motives from Fanny, other than her being able to toss in a few things that bother her about the club, and I do see lots of potential ulterior motives from Louis, Morris, Joseph and Mrs D.

        You say above "So she was on her doorstep for 10 minutes only between 12.30 and 1.00.", thats not what Fanny said. She said "nearly the whole time." A few minutes here and there going inside, not 20 minutes without a street view. 1 thing that is undeniable is that if she stayed at her door from 12:50 to 1 and didnt se or hear any cart or horse arriving, Louis was incorrect when he asserted he arrived "precisely" at 1, or he lied.

        I believe you and others are interpreting what you think the witnesses meant when they gave their stories, instead of understanding what is actually being said.

        Nearly the whole time, precisely, 4 men stating they were by the dying woman with other club members including Louis at 12:40-12:45, deserted street, no-one came out through the gates,.....these are very understandable comments and not needing any "what they really meant" philosophizing.

        I just thought of Monty Python when I wrote that, the "What I merely meant" sketch.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

          But that would have meant him loitering in the areas he had selected and then reliant on a victim being able to be picked up in that same location. I doubt picking a victim up in another part of Whitechapel and walking a great distance would be in his best interests. What if his intended victim had been seen and perhaps spoken to by acquaintance en route when she was walking to his intended murder site he could then have been seen and later identified perhaps.

          A better explanation might be that some of the women knew the locations where they could take clients.
          I agree, Trev. There's a first time for everything.

          By far the easiest and least risky way for a killer to engage with a potential victim was to behave like a regular punter and see if she would take him to where she usually conducted business, where he would then assess the suitability of the location for his plans, before parting with any money.

          Where I expect we will disagree is that I suspect the killer was a regular punter in the area, which would explain why he was able to get away with what he did each time. The difference would be that instead of both parties leaving the scene after a brief unwitnessed sex act, only the man would be walking away after an unwitnessed act of murder, leading to mutilation if the circumstances allowed.

          I would only expect things to go to plan for the killer on every occasion if he was right about the woman being 'available', and he was happy with the location they ended up in.

          Love,

          Caz
          X
          Last edited by caz; 11-25-2020, 12:11 PM.
          "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


          Comment


          • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

            You have her own words Herlock.."nearly the whole time". Why there is a tendency to imagine that she missed large chunks of time is beyond me. She didnt. She was at her door "off and on" for nearly the whole half hour. the last 10 minutes of the hour we can call The Vigil. Its a prolonged time at the door, unlike what she suggests are intermittent visits until that time. She sees nothing, no-one..save the young couple and Goldstein during that time.

            I think its a mistake to imagine that she happened to take a prolonged break from the door to allow for Liz, Israel, BSM and Pipeman to suddenly materialize then just as suddenly vanish. I see no possible ulterior motives from Fanny, other than her being able to toss in a few things that bother her about the club, and I do see lots of potential ulterior motives from Louis, Morris, Joseph and Mrs D.

            You say above "So she was on her doorstep for 10 minutes only between 12.30 and 1.00.", thats not what Fanny said. She said "nearly the whole time." A few minutes here and there going inside, not 20 minutes without a street view. 1 thing that is undeniable is that if she stayed at her door from 12:50 to 1 and didnt se or hear any cart or horse arriving, Louis was incorrect when he asserted he arrived "precisely" at 1, or he lied.

            I believe you and others are interpreting what you think the witnesses meant when they gave their stories, instead of understanding what is actually being said.

            Nearly the whole time, precisely, 4 men stating they were by the dying woman with other club members including Louis at 12:40-12:45, deserted street, no-one came out through the gates,.....these are very understandable comments and not needing any "what they really meant" philosophizing.

            I just thought of Monty Python when I wrote that, the "What I merely meant" sketch.
            But in the Evening News interview she goes into more detail on what she did that night so why do we need to cling to her 'short overview' version? Are we to believe that she spent the evening going in and out like a figures on a mechanical clock?

            The 10 minutes or The Vigil as you've called it began, according to what she told the Evening News reporter, at 12.45 but this is called into serious question by Smith who surely has to be considered a far more reliable judge of time?

            So for me this is pretty simple.

            1) Fanny​​ either stood on her doorstep between 12.45 and 12.55 (if she herself was correct on the time) or from 12.35 until 12.45 (if Smith was correct)

            2) Before this time she was inside the house because she heard Smith rather than saw him.

            3) After the 10 minute vigil she went back inside the house and was inside the house when Diemschutz passed because she heard him rather than saw him.

            Therefore:

            Fanny Mortimer spent at best 10 minutes out of 30 on her doorstep. She was wrong about the time that Smith passed which also meant that she was wrong about the gap of time between her going inside and Diemschutz's passing. And also, if Smith was correct (which I'd suggest is likely,) then Fanny was inside her house from 12.45 until after 1.00 when she heard the commotion at the club which meant that she'd have completely missed the Schwartz episode.

            To be honest Michael I don't see how the above can be contested.
            Regards

            Sir Herlock Sholmes



            “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

            “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

            Comment


            • Hi Herlock,

              The mystery is how Fanny heard PC Smith's tread and Diemschutz's arrival while she was inside her house, yet while she was supposedly on the doorstep, watching the world go by [not] for nearly the whole of the remaining time between 12.30 and 1, she saw and heard nothing at all. I do find that rather hard to believe. Don't people normally only emerge from their homes at that time of night if something's going on? If she went out immediately after hearing PC Smith passing by, and found that all was silent as the grave, would she really have hung about outside for more than a couple of minutes?

              Love,

              Caz
              X
              "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


              Comment


              • Originally posted by caz View Post
                Hi Herlock,

                The mystery is how Fanny heard PC Smith's tread and Diemschutz's arrival while she was inside her house, yet while she was supposedly on the doorstep, watching the world go by [not] for nearly the whole of the remaining time between 12.30 and 1, she saw and heard nothing at all. I do find that rather hard to believe. Don't people normally only emerge from their homes at that time of night if something's going on? If she went out immediately after hearing PC Smith passing by, and found that all was silent as the grave, would she really have hung about outside for more than a couple of minutes?

                Love,

                Caz
                X
                Caz. Fanny didnt hear a policemans tread, she heard boots which she believed were policemans. And you insist on propogating an idea that Fanny missed most of what happened in that half hour instead of using her words that describe that half hour and her observances. Nearly the whole time isnt vague. Its almost all.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                  But in the Evening News interview she goes into more detail on what she did that night so why do we need to cling to her 'short overview' version? Are we to believe that she spent the evening going in and out like a figures on a mechanical clock?

                  The 10 minutes or The Vigil as you've called it began, according to what she told the Evening News reporter, at 12.45 but this is called into serious question by Smith who surely has to be considered a far more reliable judge of time?

                  So for me this is pretty simple.

                  1) Fanny​​ either stood on her doorstep between 12.45 and 12.55 (if she herself was correct on the time) or from 12.35 until 12.45 (if Smith was correct)

                  2) Before this time she was inside the house because she heard Smith rather than saw him.

                  3) After the 10 minute vigil she went back inside the house and was inside the house when Diemschutz passed because she heard him rather than saw him.

                  Therefore:

                  Fanny Mortimer spent at best 10 minutes out of 30 on her doorstep. She was wrong about the time that Smith passed which also meant that she was wrong about the gap of time between her going inside and Diemschutz's passing. And also, if Smith was correct (which I'd suggest is likely,) then Fanny was inside her house from 12.45 until after 1.00 when she heard the commotion at the club which meant that she'd have completely missed the Schwartz episode.

                  To be honest Michael I don't see how the above can be contested.
                  Thats mostly incorrect Herlock, that last part of scenario 1 isnt even possible because she saw Goldstein at 12:55, and Ive pointed of why using Fannys recorded remarks, she was at her door "nearly the whole time" for that half houir, and from 12:50 to 1 she spent at her door because we have her saying she was there until just after 1. We know she was there because during that period she saw Goldstein.

                  Diemshitz categorically then doesnt arrive as he says "at precisely 1". Fanny has gone in at 1 and hears a cart and horse, again the assumptions about whose cart and whose horse and which way they were travelling isnt proof of anything. She did not see Louis arriving at 1. Period.

                  Nearly the whole time doesnt mean 10 of 30 minutes in any sane version of events.

                  Louis maybe shouldnt have been so insistent on his timing, and maybe should have consulted at least 4 other people who saw him in the passageway at 12:40-12:45 so they could know he seems to have believed he arrived "precisely" at 1 as well.

                  Comment


                  • If you stop assuming what Fanny saw...and assuming what she thought she heard was what she heard, then this would be easier. Lets say she heard boots around 12:45 and a cart and horse after 1. Thats perfectly consistent with men going past at 12:40-12:45 to the passageway...4 men stated that was the time they were there,...and perfectly consistent with someone taking the cart and horse for stabling after 1.

                    Its not a given that 12:45 she heard Smith or that just after 1 she heard Louis...she didnt see the source of either of those sounds.

                    Comment


                    • . Thats mostly incorrect Herlock, that last part of scenario 1 isnt even possible because she saw Goldstein at 12:55, and Ive pointed of why using Fannys recorded remarks, she was at her door "nearly the whole time" for that half houir, and from 12:50 to 1 she spent at her door because we have her saying she was there until just after 1. We know she was there because during that period she saw Goldstein
                      I just looked on an old thread about the time that Leon Goldstein passed. You may have other info Michael but it appears from what I've read so far that the time of Goldstein's passing is based on Mortimer rather than Mortimer's presence being based on Goldstein. I can't see where Goldstein says "I passed at X o clock."

                      Aren't you just assuming 12.55 because you believe that she was on her doorstep at that time? Is it written anywhere where Goldstein says specifically what time he passed? If it isn't then Goldstein might have passed at 12.40 or 12.42?
                      Regards

                      Sir Herlock Sholmes



                      “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

                      “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

                      Comment


                      • .
                        Nearly the whole time doesnt mean 10 of 30 minutes in any sane version of events.
                        So we ignore the inconvenient, more detailed version that she told to the Evening Star?
                        Regards

                        Sir Herlock Sholmes



                        “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

                        “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

                          I just thought of Monty Python when I wrote that, the "What I merely meant" sketch.
                          More like ......


                          Monty Python - Lumberjack Song - YouTube

                          Comment


                          • .
                            Louis maybe shouldnt have been so insistent on his timing, and maybe should have consulted at least 4 other people who saw him in the passageway at 12:40-12:45 so they could know he seems to have believed he arrived "precisely" at 1 as well
                            I don't get this Michael?

                            First, how did they check their times? We know how Diemschutz checked his.

                            And secondly, if Fanny was correct in her PC Smith time then Diemschutz would have arrived at precisely the time that she heard the cart.

                            Those others appear to have been wrong.
                            Regards

                            Sir Herlock Sholmes



                            “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

                            “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                              I just looked on an old thread about the time that Leon Goldstein passed. You may have other info Michael but it appears from what I've read so far that the time of Goldstein's passing is based on Mortimer rather than Mortimer's presence being based on Goldstein. I can't see where Goldstein says "I passed at X o clock."

                              Aren't you just assuming 12.55 because you believe that she was on her doorstep at that time? Is it written anywhere where Goldstein says specifically what time he passed? If it isn't then Goldstein might have passed at 12.40 or 12.42?
                              Fanny was in her home, presumably she had a clock to access. Which is why she gives times for events. She also says she was at her door for almost that entire half hour, but we can assume she wasnt at around 12:40-12:45, because she says she heard boots. We know when Goldstein passes she is at her door, she gives that time as being around 12:55-56, again, presumably because she had checked the time while inside. She says she was at her door until just after 1. She does not see or hear any cart, horse or Diemshitz arrive at 1. She hears a cart and horse just after retiring, after 1.

                              3 of the 4 witnesses that say they were alerted to the body came from inside the club, one estimated that since his return at 12:30 he spent 10 minutes inside before being summoned. All three had access to a clock inside the club, and all 3 give their time of first being aware as 12:40. Spooners story allows for the same approximate time he follows the "2 jews", who are never identified adequately.

                              This means she didnt see Goldstein at 12:40, remember..she hears boots at around that time. She is inside momentarily. As men are gathering around the body apparently.

                              This all stems from trying to rework or cast aspersions on Fannys statements, which for me is ridiculous. She gave times and events, and had no reasons to lie or embellish. The fact that she says the boots were a policemans is something she could not have known, nor is whose cart passed by after 11 and which way it was headed. She couldnt have known that for certain. So theres a human nature issue,,,she presumes about what she has heard. Like you and others do.

                              She doesnt need to presume about what she sees. Or at what time it was.

                              And that is....nothing but the young couple from 12:35 until 12:55, and only Goldstein at that time. She doesnt see or hear anyone arrive at 1. Like Louis says he did "precisely".



                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                                I don't get this Michael?

                                First, how did they check their times? We know how Diemschutz checked his.

                                And secondly, if Fanny was correct in her PC Smith time then Diemschutz would have arrived at precisely the time that she heard the cart.

                                Those others appear to have been wrong.
                                Its rare that singular unsubstantiated hearsay from people whose jobs depend on police perceptions of this event are superseding multiple corroborative accounts that came from witnesses who were indoors with clock during the relevant time period...and had no stake at all in how the police saw this event.

                                Israel story has zero corroboration, neither do Morris and Lave even though they both claimed to be in the same place at the same time, and there is a direct refutation for Louis's so called precise arrival time by 4 witnesses and Fanny at her door until 1. You would think at least that last point would hit home. He lied, or was wrong...yet you choose to believe him, and Israel, over group of corroborated accounts. And people suggest Im the one imagining.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X