The Berner Street Con(spiracy)

[FISHY1118]

I wasn't aware we knew that




Otherwise people might end up believing the wrong thing

You do now.
.



There almost sure to if they read the reports that dont fit the facts.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

You do now.

You learn something new every day. Thanks Fishy!

There almost sure to if they read the reports that dont fit the facts.

Do you mean True Facts or Fishy Facts?

[FISHY1118]

You learn something new every day. Thanks Fishy!



Do you mean True Facts or Fishy Facts?

You know, the one ones that count , Inquest ones , not reporter ones

[NotBlamedForNothing]

You know, the one ones that count , Inquest ones , not reporter ones

So not Israel Schwartz ones?

[FISHY1118]

So not Israel Schwartz ones?

We have an Official Israel Schwartz one via Inspecter Swanson

[Harry D]

Well as far as im aware we dont have any witness testimony to say after the first assault that it continued all the way into the yard. If that was the case then yes i agree, where was all strides yelling ,kicking, and fussing .? So doesnt that make my suggestion just about right ?

She was clutching her cachous the moment her throat was cut, im not sure maybe she clinched her hands tightly due to the sudden shock, trauma. And in death they stayed in her grasp. Just a thought .

That's what I'm getting at. Was Stride clutching the cachous before, during and after the attack by "broad-shoulders?"

I can't imagine her stepping into a pitch dark yard with a stranger who's just accosted her.

I suppose one explanation is that broad-shoulders left momentarily and Stride thought the coast was clear. She went into the yard to freshen up, only for broad-shoulders to return and catch her off-guard.

But to be honest I don't feel comfortable with any of the scenarios posited for Stride's murder.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

We have an Official Israel Schwartz one via Inspecter Swanson

So did the coroner. Who didn't summon him. Not exactly a vote of confidence in his story.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

That's what I'm getting at. Was Stride clutching the cachous before, during and after the attack by "broad-shoulders?"

I can't imagine her stepping into a pitch dark yard with a stranger who's just accosted her.

I suppose one explanation is that broad-shoulders left momentarily and Stride thought the coast was clear. She went into the yard to freshen up, only for broad-shoulders to return and catch her off-guard.

But to be honest I don't feel comfortable with any of the scenarios posited for Stride's murder.

Do all the scenarios you're aware of, involve broad-shoulders?

Coroner: There were no signs of any struggle; the clothes were neither torn nor disturbed. It was true that there were marks over both shoulders, produced by pressure of two hands, but the position of the body suggested either that she was willingly placed or placed herself where she was found. Only the soles of her boots were visible. She was still holding in her left hand a packet of cachous, and there was a bunch of flowers still pinned to her dress front. If she had been forcibly placed on the ground, as Dr. Phillips opines, it was difficult to understand how she failed to attract attention, as it was clear from the appearance of the blood on the ground that the throat was not cut until after she was actually on her back. There were no marks of gagging, no bruises on the face, and no trace of any anaesthetic or narcotic in the stomach; while the presence of the cachous in her hand showed that she did not make use of it in self-defence.

Can you see any signs of BS, in the coroner's summing-up?

Why don't scenarios posited for Stride's murder, start with the findings of the inquest, rather than ignoring them in favour of the story told by a man who was not even called to give evidence?

[FISHY1118]

Do all the scenarios you're aware of, involve broad-shoulders?

Coroner: There were no signs of any struggle; the clothes were neither torn nor disturbed. It was true that there were marks over both shoulders, produced by pressure of two hands, but the position of the body suggested either that she was willingly placed or placed herself where she was found. Only the soles of her boots were visible. She was still holding in her left hand a packet of cachous, and there was a bunch of flowers still pinned to her dress front. If she had been forcibly placed on the ground, as Dr. Phillips opines, it was difficult to understand how she failed to attract attention, as it was clear from the appearance of the blood on the ground that the throat was not cut until after she was actually on her back. There were no marks of gagging, no bruises on the face, and no trace of any anaesthetic or narcotic in the stomach; while the presence of the cachous in her hand showed that she did not make use of it in self-defence.

Can you see any signs of BS, in the coroner's summing-up?

Why don't scenarios posited for Stride's murder, start with the findings of the inquest, rather than ignoring them in favour of the story told by a man who was not even called to give evidence?

Very simple ,the assault and the murder were two separate incidents.

The level of force that BS man threw stride down cant be determined as to whether or not her clothes were torn .

The coroner is taking about the murder, not the assault on Stride. so Schwartz eyewitness account is valid . See simple .

[FISHY1118]

So did the coroner. Who didn't summon him. Not exactly a vote of confidence in his story.

Inspecter Swanston did, and so did the police at the time. But weve been through all that havent we ?

[FISHY1118]

That's what I'm getting at. Was Stride clutching the cachous before, during and after the attack by "broad-shoulders?"

I can't imagine her stepping into a pitch dark yard with a stranger who's just accosted her.

I suppose one explanation is that broad-shoulders left momentarily and Stride thought the coast was clear. She went into the yard to freshen up, only for broad-shoulders to return and catch her off-guard.

But to be honest I don't feel comfortable with any of the scenarios posited for Stride's murder.

''I suppose one explanation is that broad-shoulders left momentarily and Stride thought the coast was clear. She went into the yard to freshen up, only for broad-shoulders to return and catch her off-guard.''

I totally agree with this part.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Very simple ,the assault and the murder were two separate incidents.

The level of force that BS man threw stride down cant be determined as to whether or not her clothes were torn .

The coroner is taking about the murder, not the assault on Stride. so Schwartz eyewitness account is valid . See simple .

What I see is someone making it up as he goes. In the Goldstein thread, you said ...

Or this , At 12.45 am Schwartz saw Strides killer try to drag her into the street, but turned her around and threw her down on the footway

Dr Blackwell arrived at the Murder scene and consulted his watch at 1.16 am



[Coroner] Did you form any opinion as to how long the deceased had been dead? - Dr Blackwell From twenty minutes to half an hour when I arrived.






Bang on time for Strides assault and subsequent Murder , Dont think for a minute someone else came along and Murdered Stride after that event ..........Ludicrous.


Guess what ? The man who threw Stride to the ground and called out Lipski to Schwartz was more likey than any other person to be her killer. Anything else is Speculation and Conjecture .


Goldstein .?

Was the assault and subsequent murder, bang on time or not? If these occurred at 12:45, one after the other, and at the hands of the same man, then they are not "two separate incidents". On the contrary, they become part of a single incident.

You seem to believe that BS man killing Stride, would hide evidence of an assault immediately prior. Why would it? On the contrary, I would suggest that the murder would have the effect of freezing the evidence of the assault in place, thus becoming evident to investigators at the scene of the crime. Yet nothing about the victim or the crime scene, supports the idea that there was a man roughing-up Stride, moments before he killed her.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Inspecter Swanston did, and so did the police at the time. But weve been through all that havent we ?

We have, and the consensus reached was that Swanson probably kept his own opinions out of his report. So stating that Swanson believed Schwartz, given his comments on Schwartz in said report, is probably not valid.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

''I suppose one explanation is that broad-shoulders left momentarily and Stride thought the coast was clear. She went into the yard to freshen up, only for broad-shoulders to return and catch her off-guard.''

I totally agree with this part.

What did this freshening-up, consist of? Did her breath require some attention? What about her clothes - did they need a bit of a brush down? If so, why would this first require her to enter the intense darkness of Dutfield's Yard? That seems rather counterintuitive. Was she looking for a mirror, perhaps?

[Harry D]

Do all the scenarios you're aware of, involve broad-shoulders?

Coroner: There were no signs of any struggle; the clothes were neither torn nor disturbed. It was true that there were marks over both shoulders, produced by pressure of two hands, but the position of the body suggested either that she was willingly placed or placed herself where she was found. Only the soles of her boots were visible. She was still holding in her left hand a packet of cachous, and there was a bunch of flowers still pinned to her dress front. If she had been forcibly placed on the ground, as Dr. Phillips opines, it was difficult to understand how she failed to attract attention, as it was clear from the appearance of the blood on the ground that the throat was not cut until after she was actually on her back. There were no marks of gagging, no bruises on the face, and no trace of any anaesthetic or narcotic in the stomach; while the presence of the cachous in her hand showed that she did not make use of it in self-defence.

Can you see any signs of BS, in the coroner's summing-up?

Why don't scenarios posited for Stride's murder, start with the findings of the inquest, rather than ignoring them in favour of the story told by a man who was not even called to give evidence?

Take Schwartz out of the equation, and yes Stride's murder is no longer problematic. However, can we dismiss Schwartz's account just because the pieces don't fit?