Stride..a victim?

[FrankO]

Where did Mortimer or Goldstein give a specific time that he'd passed? I'm not saying it didn't happen I was just wondering where the statement was made?

Nowhere, Herlock. "About 1 AM" is as close as it gets. This is in Swanson's report. Mortimer just says she saw him pass without any estimate of timing.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Nowhere, Herlock. "About 1 AM" is as close as it gets. This is in Swanson's report. Mortimer just says she saw him pass without any estimate of timing.

Cheers Frank. So if we take the EN report and we take the judgement that PC Smith was likelier to have gotten his time correct then Mortimer could actually have seen Goldstein pass at 12.42 or 12.43 or 12.44. Things are much simpler without the 12.55 assumption.

[Scott Nelson]

Rarely were most clocks in sync. Even keeping them wound, they ran at different speeds.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Rarely were most clocks in sync. Even keeping them wound, they ran at different speeds.

Another good reason for caution Scott

[FrankO]

Cheers Frank. So if we take the EN report and we take the judgement that PC Smith was likelier to have gotten his time correct then Mortimer could actually have seen Goldstein pass at 12.42 or 12.43 or 12.44. Things are much simpler without the 12.55 assumption.

There are alternatives for putting stock in the EN report and the judgement that Smith was likelier to have gotten his time correct then Mortimer, Herlock.

Mortimer didn't necessarily hear Smith pass right before getting to her doorstep, although that, of course, would raise the question: who did she hear then? But Smith could still have passed the club at 12:30 - 12:35 am, while Mortimer only got to her doorstep around 12:45 am. Or, as I've written on the thread I started earlier (see link below), Smith may very well have been off on his estimate by 7-8-9 minutes. If we put stock in that, then Smith passed at around 12:43 and Mortimer went to her doorstep a few minutes later and saw Goldstein sometime during her 10 minute vigil just before 1 am.

http://forum.casebook.org/forum/ripper-discussions/victims/elizabeth-stride/747339-sequence-of-comings-goings-stride#post747339

[Herlock Sholmes]

There are alternatives for putting stock in the EN report and the judgement that Smith was likelier to have gotten his time correct then Mortimer, Herlock.

Mortimer didn't necessarily hear Smith pass right before getting to her doorstep, although that, of course, would raise the question: who did she hear then? But Smith could still have passed the club at 12:30 - 12:35 am, while Mortimer only got to her doorstep around 12:45 am. Or, as I've written on the thread I started earlier (see link below), Smith may very well have been off on his estimate by 7-8-9 minutes. If we put stock in that, then Smith passed at around 12:43 and Mortimer went to her doorstep a few minutes later and saw Goldstein sometime during her 10 minute vigil just before 1 am.

http://forum.casebook.org/forum/ripper-discussions/victims/elizabeth-stride/747339-sequence-of-comings-goings-stride#post747339

Wouldn't Smith have passed the same clock that Diemschutz took his time from though Frank? If that's the case wouldn't that make it likelier that hd was correct?

[FrankO]

Wouldn't Smith have passed the same clock that Diemschutz took his time from though Frank? If that's the case wouldn't that make it likelier that hd was correct?

I don't know if he looked at the same clock as Diemschutz, it's perfectly possible and maybe he did, but at the same time we have Blackwell who consulted his watch when he arrived in the yard and it was 1:16 am then, we have his assistant Johnson saying he arrived 3 or 4 minutes before Blackwell - so, at 1:12 or 1:13 am - and at that very same moment we have Smith leaving to get the ambulance. It, at the very least, seems that Smith hadn't been at the crime scene long before he was sent for the ambulance, which would put the time of his arrival at around 1:10 am. Even if we'd stretch his stay in the yard by a minute or 2, he'd arrive in the yard around 1:08, which, at best, would put the time that he arrived at the corner of Commercial Road & Berner Street around 1:07.

Also, if Smith was actually at the corner of Comm. Road & Berner Street at 1:00 am, why didn't Eagle find him instead of Lamb?

So, while what you say makes sense, Herlock, when we start counting back from Blackwell's timing, we arrive at a slightly other time. Maybe Blackwell's watch wasn't in sync with the clock seen by Smith.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I can't see why you keep quoting this ' nearly the whole time..' reference Michael and yet you ignore the other one. The above is a very general statement but the Evening News version of what she did is more detailed. Why is one more likelier than the other to have been true? If anything I'd say that the detailed one was more enlightening.

I don't really have time to post ATM, but let's at least get clarity on the details in each of Fanny Mortimer's so-called statements.
I say 'so-called', because the Evening News report that is so popular in this forum, is not a statement at all - it's just a description of the content of an 'important statement' supposedly made by Fanny Mortimer, and the journalist responsible did not deem it appropriate to even once quote her directly.
This must be regarded as odd, as this 'important statement' seems to have been made exclusively for the EN (the details appear in no other paper), and furthermore, in the same edition there actually is an extended interview with someone who surely is Fanny*, with details quite different to that in the descriptive report, and which appears earlier in the edition!

* The report begins 'Some three doors from the gateway'. These are; #40 - the club, #38 - the Kentorrich's, #36 - the Mortimer's.


Evening News, Oct 1:

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.

"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. Lewis, the man who looks after the Socialist Club at No. 40, was there, and his wife.

"Then I see a sight that turned me all sick and cold. There was the murdered woman a-lying on her side, with her throat cut across till her head seemed to be hanging by a bit of skin. Her legs was drawn up under her, and her head and the upper part of her body was soaked in blood. She was dressed in black as if she was in mourning for somebody.

"Did you hear no sound of quarrelling, no cry for help?" I asked.

"Nothing of the sort, sir. 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. But that was from the people as found the body. Mr. Lewis, who travels in cheap drapery things a bit now and again, had just drove into the yard when his horse shied at something that was lying in the corner. He thought 'twas a bundle of some kind till he got down from his cart and struck a light. Then he saw what it was and gave the alarm."

"Was the street quiet at the time?"

"Yes, there was hardly anybody moving about, except at the club. There was music and dancing going on there at the very time that that poor creature was being murdered at their very door, as one may say."

" I suppose you did not notice a man and woman pass down the street while you were at the door?"

"No, sir. I think I should have noticed them if they had. Particularly if they'd been strangers, at that time o' night. 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."

"Did you observe him closely, or notice anything in his appearance?"

"No, I didn't pay particular attention to him. 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."

That was all that my informant had to tell me. I wonder will the detectives think it worth while to satisfy themselves about that black bag?


Evening News, Oct 1:

A woman who lives two doors from the club has made an important statement. 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. During the ten minutes she saw no one enter or leave the neighbouring yard, and she feels sure that had any one done so she could not have overlooked the fact. The quiet and deserted character of the street appears even to have struck her at the time. 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.


Many papers, Oct 1:

Mrs. Mortimer, living at 36, Berner-street, four doors from the scene of the murder says:- "I was standing at the door of my house nearly the whole time between half-past twelve and one o'clock on Sunday morning, and did not notice anything unusual. I had just gone indoors, when I heard a commotion outside, and immediately ran out, thinking there was another row at the Socialists' Club, close by. I went to see what was the matter, and was informed that another murder had been committed in the yard adjoining the Club-house, and, on going inside, I saw the body of a woman lying bundled 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 that the deed must have been done while I was standing at the door of my house. There was certainly no noise made, and I did not observe anyone enter the gates. It was just 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 shiny bag, who walked very fast down the street from the Commercial-road. He looked up at the Club, and then went round the corner by the Board School. I was told that the manager or steward of the Club had discovered the woman on his return home in his pony cart. He drove through the gates, and my opinion is that he interrupted the murderer who must have made his escape immediately under cover of the cart. If a man had come out of the yard before one o'clock I must have seen him. 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. The body was lying slightly on one side, with the legs a little drawn up as if in pain, the clothes being slightly disarranged, so that the legs were partly visible."

[Herlock Sholmes]

I don't really have time to post ATM, but let's at least get clarity on the details in each of Fanny Mortimer's so-called statements.
I say 'so-called', because the Evening News report that is so popular in this forum, is not a statement at all - it's just a description of the content of an 'important statement' supposedly made by Fanny Mortimer, and the journalist responsible did not deem it appropriate to even once quote her directly.
This must be regarded as odd, as this 'important statement' seems to have been made exclusively for the EN (the details appear in no other paper), and furthermore, in the same edition there actually is an extended interview with someone who surely is Fanny*, with details quite different to that in the descriptive report, and which appears earlier in the edition!

* The report begins 'Some three doors from the gateway'. These are; #40 - the club, #38 - the Kentorrich's, #36 - the Mortimer's.


Evening News, Oct 1:

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.

"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. Lewis, the man who looks after the Socialist Club at No. 40, was there, and his wife.

"Then I see a sight that turned me all sick and cold. There was the murdered woman a-lying on her side, with her throat cut across till her head seemed to be hanging by a bit of skin. Her legs was drawn up under her, and her head and the upper part of her body was soaked in blood. She was dressed in black as if she was in mourning for somebody.

"Did you hear no sound of quarrelling, no cry for help?" I asked.

"Nothing of the sort, sir. 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. But that was from the people as found the body. Mr. Lewis, who travels in cheap drapery things a bit now and again, had just drove into the yard when his horse shied at something that was lying in the corner. He thought 'twas a bundle of some kind till he got down from his cart and struck a light. Then he saw what it was and gave the alarm."

"Was the street quiet at the time?"

"Yes, there was hardly anybody moving about, except at the club. There was music and dancing going on there at the very time that that poor creature was being murdered at their very door, as one may say."

" I suppose you did not notice a man and woman pass down the street while you were at the door?"

"No, sir. I think I should have noticed them if they had. Particularly if they'd been strangers, at that time o' night. 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."

"Did you observe him closely, or notice anything in his appearance?"

"No, I didn't pay particular attention to him. 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."

That was all that my informant had to tell me. I wonder will the detectives think it worth while to satisfy themselves about that black bag?


Evening News, Oct 1:

A woman who lives two doors from the club has made an important statement. 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. During the ten minutes she saw no one enter or leave the neighbouring yard, and she feels sure that had any one done so she could not have overlooked the fact. The quiet and deserted character of the street appears even to have struck her at the time. 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.


Many papers, Oct 1:

Mrs. Mortimer, living at 36, Berner-street, four doors from the scene of the murder says:- "I was standing at the door of my house nearly the whole time between half-past twelve and one o'clock on Sunday morning, and did not notice anything unusual. I had just gone indoors, when I heard a commotion outside, and immediately ran out, thinking there was another row at the Socialists' Club, close by. I went to see what was the matter, and was informed that another murder had been committed in the yard adjoining the Club-house, and, on going inside, I saw the body of a woman lying bundled 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 that the deed must have been done while I was standing at the door of my house. There was certainly no noise made, and I did not observe anyone enter the gates. It was just 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 shiny bag, who walked very fast down the street from the Commercial-road. He looked up at the Club, and then went round the corner by the Board School. I was told that the manager or steward of the Club had discovered the woman on his return home in his pony cart. He drove through the gates, and my opinion is that he interrupted the murderer who must have made his escape immediately under cover of the cart. If a man had come out of the yard before one o'clock I must have seen him. 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. The body was lying slightly on one side, with the legs a little drawn up as if in pain, the clothes being slightly disarranged, so that the legs were partly visible."

'So called' because the writer doesn't use quotation marks. Ok.

'Popular' of course implies that you see something amiss with this report being quoted?

....

What I see as amiss is the fact that this report appears to be dismissed out of hand and for absolutely no reason other than the fact that it contradicts others.

It's interesting that in the other Evening News report that you quoted she only speaks about occurrences from the time that the body was discovered whereas in the other one she talks about what she was doing prior to that. There's no mention of her being on the doorstep for most of the time from 12.30 until 1.00 for example. So the two reports don't contradict each other in that way. They are pre and post murder.

So if we take the Evening News report that you quoted (where FM describes events when the body was found) as reliable why should we take the report in the same paper (where FM describes what she did before the body was discovered) as less reliable?

[Herlock Sholmes]

I don't know if he looked at the same clock as Diemschutz, it's perfectly possible and maybe he did, but at the same time we have Blackwell who consulted his watch when he arrived in the yard and it was 1:16 am then, we have his assistant Johnson saying he arrived 3 or 4 minutes before Blackwell - so, at 1:12 or 1:13 am - and at that very same moment we have Smith leaving to get the ambulance. It, at the very least, seems that Smith hadn't been at the crime scene long before he was sent for the ambulance, which would put the time of his arrival at around 1:10 am. Even if we'd stretch his stay in the yard by a minute or 2, he'd arrive in the yard around 1:08, which, at best, would put the time that he arrived at the corner of Commercial Road & Berner Street around 1:07.

Also, if Smith was actually at the corner of Comm. Road & Berner Street at 1:00 am, why didn't Eagle find him instead of Lamb?

So, while what you say makes sense, Herlock, when we start counting back from Blackwell's timing, we arrive at a slightly other time. Maybe Blackwell's watch wasn't in sync with the clock seen by Smith.

If Smith originally passed the scene between 12.30 and 12.35, as he'd said, wouldn't this just mean that before he appeared in Dutfield's Yard he'd done another circuit of his beat Frank?

If this was the case then wouldn't this strengthen Smith's statement that he originally passed at 12.30/5 as a half an hour circuit would return him to the scene at just the right time?

[FrankO]

If Smith originally passed the scene between 12.30 and 12.35, as he'd said, wouldn't this just mean that before he appeared in Dutfield's Yard he'd done another circuit of his beat Frank?

The way I understand Smith's inquest testimony, is that, when he was about to turn into Berner Street from Commercial Road at about 1 a.m. (as he stated), he had indeed almost finished another round/circuit after seeing Stride & companion close to the club on his previous round.

[Michael W Richards]

Cheers Frank. So if we take the EN report and we take the judgement that PC Smith was likelier to have gotten his time correct then Mortimer could actually have seen Goldstein pass at 12.42 or 12.43 or 12.44. Things are much simpler without the 12.55 assumption.

Is that the goal now Herlock, make things easier to understand?,.... to find what youd like to see somewhere in there. Everyone seems to believe that "nearly the whole time from half past 12 until 1" is vague. Nearly the whole time. She was at her door more often than not, .... not the reverse. She said she stayed at her door from 12:50 until 1am and during that time she saw no-one but Goldstein. She estimated that was at around 12:55...about halfway through that last 10 minutes. For the issue of who had access to timepieces I realize there isnt any kind of definitive answer, nor is there assurances that any were synced with public access clocks about town. Though thats likely, at least the ones closest to the home. Its logical to assume a large clock in the club, with easy access, and its most probable Fanny based her time for Goldstein on what the time was when she came to her door to stay for a bit. Having seen the time inside.

The difficulty you and others are having dismissing the overwhelming majority of witness accounts that validate each other by virtue of the times estimated and the events witnessed, is because youve put too much stock in the ones that have no kind of verification at all. Even though they apparently have no perceived value by those tasked with running an Inquiry into how this woman dies. I can see why Fannys story isnt relevant in that regard, she saw and heard no-one essentially. Unless she missed Goldstein sliding a knife across her throat as he passed, unlikely as that might be.

But that Israel...the man that puts Liz back out on the street after having gone from it after 12:35, now with himself and 2 other men..none of who are seen and/or heard by Fanny who was at her door most of that half hour and stated she could hear sounds such as bootsteps in the street. So she just misses a small scream, a antisemitic slur and people in boots running on the cobbles,.... 4 pairs of them actually. Israels story is in no way attached to the formal Inquest, and by that omission one can safely assume that his story could not be proven, or was proven to be false. So.... why are you using him?

Virtually empty street after 12:35 and Smiths departure, only a young couple...seen by both Fanny and Brown, and a man carrying a bag that the witness estimates happened at around 12:55. Liz is not see on the street after 12:35. So, where is she? Is she in the place where she will die? It could happen within 10 minutes..so yeah, she could be. Is she alone? Apparently not. Even though both Lave and Eagle say nothing was there when they were there at 12:40 ish. Well, Eagle hedges that bet a bit...he couldnt be sure whether he stepped over a dying woman.

4 men that they were inside the passageway at around 12:40, which would be out of sight to Fanny had she been at her door then...."nearly the whole time".

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Geez, I'm trying to study!

'So called' because the writer doesn't use quotation marks. Ok.

Okay, let's put quotation marks around it...

Fanny Mortimer: "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. During the ten minutes she saw no one enter or leave the neighbouring yard, and she feels sure that had any one done so she could not have overlooked the fact. The quiet and deserted character of the street appears even to have struck her at the time. 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."

Is that better?

'Popular' of course implies that you see something amiss with this report being quoted?

A direct quote removes a layer of interpretation.
Can you really envisage FM saying; About four minutes after I locked the door, I heard Lewis's cart pass the house, and mentioned this to my husband.
Only people like Robert Paul talk in precise intervals like 'four minutes'.
The EN reporter is constructing a timeline of events, and we can have no confidence in what Fanny actually said to this reporter.
Consider this; did Fanny actually say things like "shortly before a quarter to one o'clock" and "I remained standing there ten minutes"?
Let's suppose the reporter already knows that Louis has claimed to arrive at 1am, from talking to him. EN:

The discovery seems to have been made at one in the morning by Lewis Diemschitz, the steward of the club.

Fanny may have mentioned to this reporter that she heard a policeman go by (from her front room on the ground floor), and that she soon after went outside "for about ten minutes", and then returned inside for the last time "a few minutes" before hearing the pony and cart.
Subtract 10 minutes and a few minutes from 1am, and your back at 12:45 (or close enough to), and thus 'shortly before a quarter to one o'clock' can be inferred by the reporter - Fanny may never have said words to that effect.

What I see as amiss is the fact that this report appears to be dismissed out of hand and for absolutely no reason other than the fact that it contradicts others.

It sort of contradicts the direct quotes in that Fanny is quoted as saying she is alerted to a commotion or cries for police, not long after going back inside, rather than hearing pony and cart go by. Otherwise, there is not much contradiction. However, it's clear that Fanny was out on her doorstep at least twice - the non-quoting report obscures that point (which is one of the reasons that report is popular).

It's interesting that in the other Evening News report that you quoted she only speaks about occurrences from the time that the body was discovered whereas in the other one she talks about what she was doing prior to that. There's no mention of her being on the doorstep for most of the time from 12.30 until 1.00 for example. So the two reports don't contradict each other in that way. They are pre and post murder.

The other one is pre and post murder.
By the way, here is more complete quote (the highlighted bit is extra):

Mrs. Mortimer, living at 36, Berner-street, four doors from the scene of the tragedy, says: I was standing at the door of my house nearly the whole time between half-past twelve and one o'clock this (Sunday) morning, and did not notice anything unusual. 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. I went to see what was the matter, and was informed that another dreadful murder had been committed in the yard adjoining the club-house, and on going inside I saw the body of a woman lying huddled up just inside the yard with her throat cut from ear to ear. A man touched her face, and said it was quite warm, so that the deed must have been done while I was standing at the door of my house. There was certainly no noise made, and I did not observe any one enter the gates. 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, who walked very fast down the street from the Commercial-road. He looked up at the club, and then went round the corner by the Board School. I was told that the manager or steward of the club had discovered the woman on his return home in his pony cart. He drove through the gates, and my opinion is that he interrupted the murderer, who must have made his escape immediately under cover of the cart. If a man had come out of the yard before one o'clock I must have seen him. 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. The body was lying slightly on one side, with the legs a little drawn up as if in pain, the clothes being slightly disarranged, so that the legs were partly visible. The woman appeared to me to be respectable, judging by her clothes, and in her hand were found a bunch of grapes and some sweets. A young man and his sweetheart were standing at the corner of the street, about twenty yards away, before and after the time the woman must have been murdered, but they told me they did not hear a sound.

That 'young man and his sweetheart' is one of two couples, Israel Schwartz and co. have to negotiate.

So if we take the Evening News report that you quoted (where FM describes events when the body was found) as reliable why should we take the report in the same paper (where FM describes what she did before the body was discovered) as less reliable?

Aside from the fact that one is a direct quote, and the other is (at best) a description of a statement, if two statements contradict, either one or the other must be at fault, or, they both are. The issue can't be resolved without further information.

It may well be that '12:30-1:00' is quite wrong, but not because the EN report suggests otherwise.
For example, if one doubts Louis' 'exactly 1am' arrival time (as I do), then the real period may have been more like 12:30-12:48.
That is, the 12:30 is Greenwich Mean Time, and the 1:00 is Louis Diemschitz Time.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Geez, I'm trying to study!



Okay, let's put quotation marks around it...

Fanny Mortimer: "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. During the ten minutes she saw no one enter or leave the neighbouring yard, and she feels sure that had any one done so she could not have overlooked the fact. The quiet and deserted character of the street appears even to have struck her at the time. 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."

Is that better?



A direct quote removes a layer of interpretation.
Can you really envisage FM saying; About four minutes after I locked the door, I heard Lewis's cart pass the house, and mentioned this to my husband.
Only people like Robert Paul talk in precise intervals like 'four minutes'.
The EN reporter is constructing a timeline of events, and we can have no confidence in what Fanny actually said to this reporter.
Consider this; did Fanny actually say things like "shortly before a quarter to one o'clock" and "I remained standing there ten minutes"?
Let's suppose the reporter already knows that Louis has claimed to arrive at 1am, from talking to him. EN:

The discovery seems to have been made at one in the morning by Lewis Diemschitz, the steward of the club.

Fanny may have mentioned to this reporter that she heard a policeman go by (from her front room on the ground floor), and that she soon after went outside "for about ten minutes", and then returned inside for the last time "a few minutes" before hearing the pony and cart.
Subtract 10 minutes and a few minutes from 1am, and your back at 12:45 (or close enough to), and thus 'shortly before a quarter to one o'clock' can be inferred by the reporter - Fanny may never have said words to that effect.



It sort of contradicts the direct quotes in that Fanny is quoted as saying she is alerted to a commotion or cries for police, not long after going back inside, rather than hearing pony and cart go by. Otherwise, there is not much contradiction. However, it's clear that Fanny was out on her doorstep at least twice - the non-quoting report obscures that point (which is one of the reasons that report is popular).



The other one is pre and post murder.
By the way, here is more complete quote (the highlighted bit is extra):

Mrs. Mortimer, living at 36, Berner-street, four doors from the scene of the tragedy, says: I was standing at the door of my house nearly the whole time between half-past twelve and one o'clock this (Sunday) morning, and did not notice anything unusual. 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. I went to see what was the matter, and was informed that another dreadful murder had been committed in the yard adjoining the club-house, and on going inside I saw the body of a woman lying huddled up just inside the yard with her throat cut from ear to ear. A man touched her face, and said it was quite warm, so that the deed must have been done while I was standing at the door of my house. There was certainly no noise made, and I did not observe any one enter the gates. 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, who walked very fast down the street from the Commercial-road. He looked up at the club, and then went round the corner by the Board School. I was told that the manager or steward of the club had discovered the woman on his return home in his pony cart. He drove through the gates, and my opinion is that he interrupted the murderer, who must have made his escape immediately under cover of the cart. If a man had come out of the yard before one o'clock I must have seen him. 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. The body was lying slightly on one side, with the legs a little drawn up as if in pain, the clothes being slightly disarranged, so that the legs were partly visible. The woman appeared to me to be respectable, judging by her clothes, and in her hand were found a bunch of grapes and some sweets. A young man and his sweetheart were standing at the corner of the street, about twenty yards away, before and after the time the woman must have been murdered, but they told me they did not hear a sound.

That 'young man and his sweetheart' is one of two couples, Israel Schwartz and co. have to negotiate.



Aside from the fact that one is a direct quote, and the other is (at best) a description of a statement, if two statements contradict, either one or the other must be at fault, or, they both are. The issue can't be resolved without further information.

It may well be that '12:30-1:00' is quite wrong, but not because the EN report suggests otherwise.
For example, if one doubts Louis' 'exactly 1am' arrival time (as I do), then the real period may have been more like 12:30-12:48.
That is, the 12:30 is Greenwich Mean Time, and the 1:00 is Louis Diemschitz Time.

If you're so busy it's surprising that you can continue to invest so much time to write so many words in making excuses. In trying to dismiss the EN news report.

If you apply the same criteria to Mortimer that you were so insistant on applying to Richardson and Cadosch then you should be shouting from the rooftops that Mortimer is 'unsafe.' But as she's the crutch of a conspiracy then I assume that's not about to happen.

There is nothing that can dismiss the possibility that Mortimer went back inside just before 12.45 and missed Schwartz. This isn't just possible it's definitely possible. The only alarming thing is the level of over-confidence that's being displayed here when we are dealing with so many contradictions; so many possible variants; so many uncertain identifications.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

If you're so busy it's surprising that you can continue to invest so much time to write so many words in making excuses. In trying to dismiss the EN news report.

Lately I have missed replying to a bunch of posts replying to me, including your own.
However I am a generous man, including with my time. So here I am!

If you apply the same criteria to Mortimer that you were so insistant on applying to Richardson and Cadosch then you should be shouting from the rooftops that Mortimer is 'unsafe.' But as she's the crutch of a conspiracy then I assume that's not about to happen.

You didn't read the last two paragraphs of my last post very carefully, if that's what you really think.

There is nothing that can dismiss the possibility that Mortimer went back inside just before 12.45 and missed Schwartz. This isn't just possible it's definitely possible.

It's definitely possible you just contradicted the Evening News 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.

What are you Herlock, some sort of conspiracy theorist?

As was the case a couple of days ago, you're having two bites at the cherry.
You and friends can try to explain that away the contradiction of both believing and disagreeing with the EN report, and I will continue to see through the contradiction.

The only alarming thing is the level of over-confidence that's being displayed here when we are dealing with so many contradictions; so many possible variants; so many uncertain identifications.

Whereas in your case, you tend to believe Israel Schwartz' story (or at least one of them), but you're really not sure he was telling the truth, and are happy to admit as much?