Who really witnessed Jack the Ripper?

[John G]

Hi Jon

I don't think that either. I think Schwartz needed to be investigated.
He said he witnessed Stride being attacked by a man. I know he said he was threatened, chased whatever, but why not report it to the police or someone else?
After all there had been 2 previous murders.

There may well have been enough time, but again why not report what he saw? Unless he was the killer.

Hi Natasha,

I wonder if the reason why he didn't initially report what he'd witnessed was because, being an immigrant and unable to speak English, he was the type of person to be naturally wary of the police or authority in general? This might be especially true if he came from a country where it was common to be distrustful of the police.

Regarding the assault, although murder was very uncommon in Whitechapel- well, at least until 1888!- common assault was perhaps more of a regular occurrence. If so, he maybe didn't consider what he'd witnessed to be particular unusual, at least in that neighbourhood

[The Good Michael]

He was in Grove Hall until February and thence to Banstead--almost a year.

Of course, EVEN if he were out and about it would be near impossible for him to have done the poor knife work on Kate. Some things are habitual for some of us.

Grove Hall was a private asylum, right? If so, who paid for it, and is it possible, because/if it was private, patients could go home on weekends, or for one day if desired by family? What would restrictions have been at a private asylum? As far as Eddowes goes, I believe the person who killed her showed a great deal of practice.

Mike

[Natasha]

Hi Natasha.
I'm sorry, I am not understanding your question, what didn't he report?

Hi Jon

He didn't raise the alarm that a woman was being attacked. The fact that there had been a few murders in the area and the fact that a man had chased him away from the scene, would make one think it most important to raise the alarm.
He may have had 15 or so minutes, but that may have been enough time to save Stride.

What makes me wonder about Schwartz was the fact he IDed Stride in great detail. Why would Stride's attacker allow him to linger for more than a moment?

Why step forward to ID her?
Now I suppose people will say if he did it, then why step forward to ID her? My answer would be that maybe he was seen or questioned by someone maybe a family member and he thought it would be a good idea to give his version of events.

It is most strange that he was not involved in the inquest. Also Anderson's report mentioned Schwarzt giving testimony at the inquest which was contradictory. It has been suggested that Anderson made a mistake, or the police were keeping info back, to help aid the case, but I think something very fishy was going on.

What do I base this on;

1: Is it not strange that there is a very small selective amount of info has 'survived'. And if it is legit, it is either contradictory, or possibly incorrect, as if planted to make what has been unearthed seem viable. Maybe to cover something up.

2: Some newspaper reports are missing

3: Alot of researchers, including myself, are finding it increasingly difficult to trace Kelly's life, ID etc. Every time I check aspects of Kelly's life (checking infirmary records etc and alot of ideas that could possibly relate to Kelly) I come across 'page no longer exists', error etc.

4: We don't have photos of Abberline, now I know alot of people will say, "maybe because it hasn't been discovered" etc, but if we can find a pic of Chapman, why not Abberline? Surely the police most definitely would have one.

[Wickerman]

Hi Jon

I don't think that either. I think Schwartz needed to be investigated.
He said he witnessed Stride being attacked by a man. I know he said he was threatened, chased whatever, but why not report it to the police or someone else?
After all there had been 2 previous murders.

There may well have been enough time, but again why not report what he saw? Unless he was the killer.

Hi Natasha.
I'm sorry, I am not understanding your question, what didn't he report?

[Harry D]

Schwartz described "pipeman" as almost 6 foot tall, wearing dark overcoat and black, hard-felt wide-brimmed hat. Lawende described his suspect as "5 ft 7-8 ins" wearing a loose jacket and grey-cloth, peaked cap, with a red kerchief around his neck, resembling a sailor. No comparison at all. And given the distance and short time between the sightings, I don't see the killer taking the time to change his clothing, especially since he would have no reason to do so.

John ("Bugs") Watson

Hello John,

Good points, but let's consider that Lawende wasn't much of a witness, given that he stated he wouldn't be able to recognise the man in question again. And a matter of a few inches between the two suspects' heights is negligible.

For me, "BS" simply couldn't have been our man. He just doesn't match the MO of the Ripper, dragging women onto the street and slapping them about without any attempt at subterfuge. And he certainly would've taken off the moment he was spotted.

So either "BS" wasn't the Ripper, or if he was the killer then Stride wasn't a Ripper victim because his behaviour was so uncharacteristic of the man who stealthily butchered the other four. As I posted previously, Pipeman's actions are quite suspicious, insomuch that he was happy to watch a woman being mistreated and did nothing about it, not even reporting to the police afterwards. And when he did finally act, it was to stalk Schwartz, I say 'stalk' because Schwartz certainly felt that the man meant him harm, whoever he was. Furthermore, there wasn't any gossip regarding the incident, so Pipeman must have kept schtum about that night. If anything he's a very interesting witness and it's curious that nothing was ever garnered about him.

[lynn cates]

year

Hello Michael. Thanks.

He was in Grove Hall until February and thence to Banstead--almost a year.

Of course, EVEN if he were out and about it would be near impossible for him to have done the poor knife work on Kate. Some things are habitual for some of us.

Cheers.
LC

[The Good Michael]

Lynn,

Is there a daily or weekly account of Isenschmid's incarceration? I remember that Kosminski was let loose after a short stay, only to be committed again. Any possibility Isenschmid was let out for a month or so and then recommitted?

Mike

[Steve S]

I...Will go for Mrs. Long's "foreign-looking" type........

[The Good Michael]

Eddowes is the only problem for me, but I like Isenschmid. There's something that fits with him...even Blotchy works with a pinch of imagination.

So..I'm putting him in my top 3 of revolving suspects who I can never settle on.

Mike

[lynn cates]

Indeed?

Hello Michael. Thanks.

Are you serious or in jest? Many balk at having Kate out of the series. Do you see that as a problem?

Cheers.
LC

[Natasha]

Schwartz may not have seen the murder.
Swanson admitted there was enough time (10-15 mins?) after Schwartz left for another man to appear on the scene.

Hi Jon

I don't think that either. I think Schwartz needed to be investigated.
He said he witnessed Stride being attacked by a man. I know he said he was threatened, chased whatever, but why not report it to the police or someone else?
After all there had been 2 previous murders.

There may well have been enough time, but again why not report what he saw? Unless he was the killer.

[The Good Michael]

Hello Sir john. Thanks.

"As Isenschmid was described as early 40's about 5ft 7"tall, very ferocious looking with ginger hair and a normally powerful build, now shrunken with starvation, it would be a fair assumption to say that Isenschmid was the man who called into Mrs Fiddymont's pub."

Now you're talking.

You know Lynn, I'm really beginning to warm to this Isenschmid guy. I still like Kelly, and have no issues with Kosminski save for the misremembering of things by a few folks, but Isenschmid is a workable suspect...very workable.

Mike

[lynn cates]

J I

Hello Sir john. Thanks.

"As Isenschmid was described as early 40's about 5ft 7"tall, very ferocious looking with ginger hair and a normally powerful build, now shrunken with starvation, it would be a fair assumption to say that Isenschmid was the man who called into Mrs Fiddymont's pub."

Now you're talking.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Yes Jon, It was stated by a witness that she was out after 11:45, that witness did not live in the courtyard or at 26 Dorset, and no-one from that address saw her alive after 11:45pm....it was also stated by a witness that she spoke with someone at around 8:30am, that witness was told before she gave her testimony that her statement disagrees with the other facts in this case..like the est. TOD.

As we know well from these cases, a witness statement does not a fact make.

Yes Michael, but any single witness statement is just as viable as the next, unless, it can be proven, or at least demonstrated, to be incorrect.
Maxwell's testimony although supported by M. Lewis, is demonstrated to be incorrect by the medical evidence.

We have nothing that proves, or even demonstrates, that the 2:00am, or even the 3:00am sightings were incorrect.
Lets challenge these witness sightings with rational evidence as opposed to bias opinion.

[Dr. John Watson]

As to moving Schwartz's sighting to 12:15-17, that would conflict with PC Smiths sighting at 12:35, a time that can hardly be moved due to the timing of the constables beat. He will have known from pure habit where he would be at any given time, which makes any adjustments by modern theorists very limited.

Sorry about that. I meant to write the times of Schwartz's sighting as 12:45-12:47. I must have been half asleep when I submitted that post.

Sleepy John