Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Stride..a victim?

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

  • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    1. If Smith passed the clock at just after 1.00, as you've accepted above, and Diemschutz passed it at 1.00 where is the issue?

    2. Despite the fact that routes were regulated what's to say that Smith didn't have to deal with some kind of incident on his route which slightly delayed his return to Berner Street?
    Also, didn't Smith say that he "went" to Berner Street at 1am, not that he arrived there then, or was in Berner Street by then?

    Love,

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


    Comment


    • Originally posted by caz View Post

      Also, didn't Smith say that he "went" to Berner Street at 1am, not that he arrived there then, or was in Berner Street by then?

      Love,

      Caz
      X
      He did Caz. I mentioned it in an earlier post and I think that it was suggested that this may have been an error. Maybe Joshua or Wickerman I'm not sure who.

      And of course we have Lamb saying that he'd seen the two running men at around 1.00.

      So we have 2 police officers both saying just after 1.00. Who do we believe to be more reliable on timings? Police Officers on regulated beats who have every reason to be time aware. Or blokes in a club (probably after a few drinks) who when hearing about a woman lying in the yard have absolutely no reason to log the time and so rely on guesswork when thinking back?

      Not really the most difficult of questions is it? Some prefer the 'bloke in the pub' opinion though.
      Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 12-09-2020, 10:28 PM.
      Regards

      Sir Herlock Sholmes



      "Tis but a part we see, and not a whole."

      ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

        So, if Louis isnt lying then the killer flees after 1am? We dont see Liz from 12:35 on, so where is she and what is she doing? Since Liz may have been cut as early as 12:45-46, why is her killer fleeing after 1am, and why isnt she mutilated? Or even moved since her throat cut? Whats he doing standing there for perhaps 15minutes?

        Ill make this easy, Louis arrives around 12:40, Lave is there at the gates, Louis calls for help upstairs, 3 members come down, 1 is Issac K, Louis or someone sends him out for help, 2 other Jews go out for help and meet Spooner on the way back. Eagle arrives back at the club. Eagle leaves for help after 1, so does Louis with someone who likely has a surname of Issacs.

        You dont need imagined interruptions or timings that explain why Fanny, who is at her door "nearly the whole time" from 12:30 until 1, just happens to miss seeing 3 men on the street and 1 assaulting Liz or anyone else leaving via the gates.
        Fanny also 'just happens to miss' seeing or hearing a horse and cart entering via the gates around 12.40.

        Convenient, isn't it? She managed to hear a horse and cart just after one, when she had locked up and retired for the night, and that's when she went back out and found the commotion going on. But she went temporarily deaf for Louis's arrival twenty minutes earlier, when she just happened to pop inside for a minute or two, during the half hour she spent at her front door "nearly the whole time"?

        Yet you have her back on sentry duty, by 12.45, seeing and hearing nothing of the incident described by Schwartz.

        So you need two horses and two carts, plus two young men known as Isaac or Isaacs, which are not supported by the evidence, in order to support this whacky conspiracy theory.

        Reminds me of the Blackadder episode, but t'other way round. A magical horse with eight legs and two heads turns out to be two horses, seen close together.

        The murderer fleeing unseen, just like in every other case, means that nobody was there to see the murder itself, or the few seconds before or after Stride's killer slit her throat, but the coast was never going to be clear for long, whether Louis returned at 12.40 or 1, was it? Therefore we cannot possibly know whether the killer had unfinished business or not.
        Last edited by caz; 12-10-2020, 11:32 AM.
        "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


        Comment


        • Originally posted by caz View Post

          Fanny also 'just happens to miss' seeing or hearing a horse and cart entering via the gates around 12.40.

          Convenient, isn't it? She managed to hear a horse and cart just after one, when she had locked up and retired for the night, and that's when she went back out and found the commotion going on. But she went temporarily deaf for Louis's arrival twenty minutes earlier, when she just happened to pop inside for a minute or two, during the half hour she spent at her front door "nearly the whole time"?

          Yet you have her back on sentry duty, by 12.45, seeing and hearing nothing of the incident described by Schwartz.

          So you need two horses and two carts, plus two young men known as Isaac or Isaacs, which are not supported by the evidence, in order to support this whacky conspiracy theory.

          Reminds me of the Blackadder episode, but t'other way round. A magical horse with eight legs and two heads turns out to be two horses, seen close together.

          The murderer fleeing unseen, just like in every other case, means that nobody was there to see the murder itself, or the few seconds before or after Stride's killer slit her throat, but the coast was never going to be clear for long, whether Louis returned at 12.40 or 1, was it? Therefore we cannot possibly know whether the killer had unfinished business or not.
          I dont know whats so hard to grasp. She said she was at her door nearly the whole time, but from 12:50 until 1 she was there. So, yeah, she might not have been at her door at 12:40 or 12:45. Thats 25 minutes of that half hour she could have stood there and still be there "nearly the whole time".

          You mocking me is rich...youd have unsubstantiated sources being correct, multiple corroborating stories as lies or errors, you have Ripper who doesnt rip, and you have an interruption that is in no way representative of any of the physical evidence. If fiction is what you want why post on boards that are attempting to deal with facts?

          As for the Issacs issue, by all means believe Diemshitz not Issac himself in his own words. Your choice. But dont critique those that call a spade a spade. Fantasy has been far too long a part of this study. Just remember that its a proven fact that Louis did not arrive when he said he did.

          Hell, people believe that Trump is of sound mind too.
          Michael Richards

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

            You win Caz. I’m just hoping that you take size 11 too?
            Who do you take me for, Herlock, Coco the Clown?
            "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


            Comment


            • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

              He did Caz. I mentioned it in an earlier post and I think that it was suggested that this may have been an error. Maybe Joshua or Wickerman I'm not sure who.

              And of course we have Lamb saying that he'd seen the two running men at around 1.00.

              So we have 2 police officers both saying just after 1.00. Who do we believe to be more reliable on timings? Police Officers on regulated beats who have every reason to be time aware. Or blokes in a club (probably after a few drinks) who when hearing about a woman lying in the yard have absolutely no reason to log the time and so rely on guesswork when thinking back?

              Not really the most difficult of questions is it? Some prefer the 'bloke in the pub' opinion though.
              Of course, if they did all glance up at a clock in the club, they'd have seen it showing the same time - and that clock could have been slow.

              Nah, never happens, does it? Not where people are having a good time and don't want the evening to end.

              Love,

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


              Comment


              • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                I'll go there again Michael and I'll keep going there because I'm afraid that you keep ignoring this possibility. Fanny gave a more detailed explanation of what she did on that night so why do you only repeat the 'nearly whole time' one?

                Anyway, the whole Schwartz, BS Man, Pipeman incident might have taken little more than 30 seconds and it was hardly a marching band going past.
                Nothing compared to a bleedin' horse and cart turning up - which Fanny didn't see or hear during her half hour vigil, but heard clearly enough later, when she had locked up and gone to bed with a nightcap and 'Walter's Secret Life'.

                I think our Michael may be suffering from selective hearing, don't you?

                Love,

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


                Comment


                • Originally posted by caz View Post

                  Of course, if they did all glance up at a clock in the club, they'd have seen it showing the same time - and that clock could have been slow.

                  Nah, never happens, does it? Not where people are having a good time and don't want the evening to end.

                  Love,

                  Caz
                  X
                  Again, everyone is wrong and the man who provably lied is right...I suppose so is the theatrical friend of Wess's. By the by, Issac arrived back at the club at 12:30 and said about 10 minutes later he was called out to the yard...took him over 20 minutes to get there huh?

                  I see that one member is publishing his "theory" about these crimes as non-fiction, which essentially means a fictional story woven around some facts. I think the premise is hysterical myself, but at least he is using some facts to support his tale of one killer.

                  You toss them aside as inconvenient for your own beliefs. Pushing choices youve made, not concerned about being accurate, is your goal I guess.
                  Michael Richards

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by caz View Post

                    Who do you take me for, Herlock, Coco the Clown?
                    Your the last person I’d call a clown Caz

                    Regards

                    Sir Herlock Sholmes



                    "Tis but a part we see, and not a whole."

                    ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

                      Again, everyone is wrong and the man who provably lied is right...I suppose so is the theatrical friend of Wess's. By the by, Issac arrived back at the club at 12:30 and said about 10 minutes later he was called out to the yard...took him over 20 minutes to get there huh?
                      What about the fact that two of the three papers which carried the story reported that Koz came into the club at six thirty, not twelve thirty?

                      Daily News 1 Oct
                      "I was in this club last night. I came in about half-past six in the evening."

                      Evening News
                      "I came into the club about which you are asking me at half-past twelve o'clock."

                      Irish Times
                      "I came in about 6.30 in the evening and I have not been away from it since."

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

                        "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. "

                        Evening News, October 1st.

                        How much time do you think had elapsed between that contentious half hour and the time of that interview. How much time elapses before we even hear of Israels Story. This had to be fresh in her mind when she made the remarks.

                        Another snippet from that interview.."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."

                        And..."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."

                        Fanny spoke with the young couple after the fact, who also, saw nothing out of the ordinary on a semi deserted street.
                        Fanny is talking about the pony cart she heard at or just after 1am. She heard no other. If we allow her to have been at her front door between, say, 12.48 and 12.58, thus seeing Goldstein pass by just before locking up, but knowing nothing about the incident described by Schwartz [because she had popped back in for a while after hearing PC Smith's tread around 12.35], her account makes sense. She saw no man coming out of the yard before 1am, during the entire ten minutes she was at her door, and nothing unusual or suspicious at all. So that's why she believed the murderer must have been interrupted by the pony cart she heard, and managed to escape [unnoticed by the still canoodling young couple Fanny had watched earlier - nosey so-and-so] while Louis went into the club for assistance and the alarm was raised.

                        But how can you trust Fanny if even she reckoned the killer was interrupted? She was also deaf as a post at 12.40, if that's when Louis actually arrived, but had her hearing aid in when the sound of your phantom horse and cart caught her attention later. Presumably her old man wasn't a snorer, or she'd have had ear plugs in instead, and missed the main event.

                        I'm surprised you haven't dismissed Fanny as a crazy mixed up old bat - as you dismiss me.
                        Last edited by caz; 12-10-2020, 12:28 PM.
                        "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by caz View Post

                          Fanny is talking about the pony cart she heard at or just after 1am. She heard no other. If we allow her to have been at her front door between, say, 12.48 and 12.58, thus seeing Goldstein pass by just before locking up, but knowing nothing about the incident described by Schwartz [because she had popped back in for a while after hearing PC Smith's tread around 12.35], her account makes sense. She saw no man coming out of the yard before 1am, during the entire ten minutes she was at her door, and nothing unusual or suspicious at all. So that's why she believed the murderer must have been interrupted by the pony cart she heard, and managed to escape [unnoticed by the still canoodling young couple Fanny had watched earlier - nosey so-and-so] while Louis went into the club for assistance and the alarm was raised.

                          But how can you trust Fanny if even she reckoned the killer was interrupted? She was also deaf as a post at 12.40, if that's when Louis actually arrived, but had her hearing aid in when the sound of your phantom horse and cart caught her attention later. Presumably her old man wasn't a snorer, or she'd have had ear plugs in instead, and missed the main event.

                          I'm surprised you haven't dismissed Fanny as a crazy mixed up old bat - as you dismiss me.
                          Well, lets start at the beginning....she said she was at her door from 12:50 until just after 1, not 12:58 as you said, Israel coming by would have been noticed dont you think by the men gathered inside the passageway with Louis at 12:40-45, what Fanny guesses isnt important to me...who owned the boots, whose cart and horse she heard,... what she does bring to the table is an eyewitness who had a direct view to that entrance "nearly" the whole time from 12:30 to just after 1. Validated by Browns sighting of the same young couple she saw and Goldsteins statement.

                          I dont think youre a crazy old bat, nor do I think Herlock is a dottering old fool. I think both of you however have ingrained beliefs about this murder that prevent you from accepting the majority of the witness statements that say Louis was there at 12:45, that other members were with him, and that they were standing around a fallen Liz Stride. Also taking Louis and his Isaac[s] remark as being Issac Kozebrodksi is patently untrue based on Issacs statement. Maybe Louis did mean an Issacs, but he could not have gone with Issac K after 1 because Issac K was returning around then, after meeting Eagle while coming back. By Issac K's own statement.

                          Notice that Eagle doesnt mention meeting Issac K on the way back, he also doesnt see Lave standing there at 12:40..or the other men that say they were there then, and he "couldnt be sure" that Liz wasnt there already. Another one of your trusted sources.

                          You wouldnt get some animosity from me if you would stop pretending some evidence can just be tossed because it doesnt support your Ripper Interruptus idea.
                          Last edited by Michael W Richards; 12-10-2020, 01:59 PM.
                          Michael Richards

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

                            What about the fact that two of the three papers which carried the story reported that Koz came into the club at six thirty, not twelve thirty?

                            Daily News 1 Oct
                            "I was in this club last night. I came in about half-past six in the evening."

                            Evening News
                            "I came into the club about which you are asking me at half-past twelve o'clock."

                            Irish Times
                            "I came in about 6.30 in the evening and I have not been away from it since."
                            Those are errors of reporting. Other ‘errors’ are actually truths on which we can base theories.

                            You know how it works Joshua.



                            Regards

                            Sir Herlock Sholmes



                            "Tis but a part we see, and not a whole."

                            ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by caz View Post

                              Nothing compared to a bleedin' horse and cart turning up - which Fanny didn't see or hear during her half hour vigil, but heard clearly enough later, when she had locked up and gone to bed with a nightcap and 'Walter's Secret Life'.

                              I think our Michael may be suffering from selective hearing, don't you?

                              Love,

                              Caz
                              X
                              Just a low tolerance for reading tripe posing as fact Caz, but thanks for the concern.
                              Michael Richards

                              Comment


                              • Just so the mistaken beliefs are perpetuated, conspiracies do exist, particularly when adverse consequences based on perceptions are on the table. Running in fear from a suggestion that club staff members phrased their comments based upon a fear of losing income or worse, being suspects in a murder case is very understandable to the average sentient person, most Ripperologists however dont fall into that category.

                                Only the Boogyman will do.
                                Michael Richards

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X