Did jack kill liz stride?

[Scott Nelson]

Guys,

Dirk wears White Sox.

He's wearing them now --Mr. Ant

[perrymason]

At least youve all found some people of like mind....some kind of victory there I think.

Since we are talking about 3 witnesses that could easily have been off around 5 minutes and would all still point to a time 20 minutes earlier than Louis says,.... none of which mention anyone in front of the gates near 12:45 and 1 of which has no known affiliation with the club,....the argument has to be would a block of time 5 minutes long feel just like one 20 minutes long to those men? Was the actual lapsed period 5 minutes long or 4 times that long?

The answer seems obvious to me anyway, Id certainly be satisfied giving all three leeway of 5 minutes and have the accounts timings still essentially match each other than rely on a single uncorroborated account of the Club Steward where the woman is murdered perhaps 15 to 20 minutes later,...and I certainly dont extend Israel any validated storyline status as I know full well no-one has ever found a record that says he was at the Inquest, and no-one has seen the original statement lost so long ago, and no record has been unearthed that suggests, as was the case with Lawende openly, his testimony was for any reason suppressed.

His witness testimony would have been the single most important witness sighting in all of the murders... as he says he witnesses her being assaulted within feet, and a minute or 2, of her earliest death stroke time. He would have been subpoenaed if he had refused to come forward.

Without his story, which may or may not have been fully or partially true, or a lie, ....there is no way of knowing for sure....thats why I dont use him.....there is no Gentile off site killer when virtually every man onsite was Anderson's quintessential "diagnosis for a Ripper" profile...and Liz doesnt have to be visible at all after 12:40-12:45....which as I said, aligns perfectly with the 3 separate witness accounts.....all of which say Louis is lying. And Louis is the senior Club man onsite...the one charged with its protection. And his story doesnt even match Issacs press account. And no-one saw him pull in.

Or of course, they couldnt tell 5 minutes from 20 minutes.

Best regards all

[Sox]

there is no Gentile off site killer when virtually every man onsite was Anderson's quintessential "diagnosis for a Ripper" profile...and Liz doesnt have to be visible at all after 12:40-12:45....which as I said, aligns perfectly with the 3 separate witness accounts.....all of which say Louis is lying. And Louis is the senior Club man onsite...the one charged with its protection. And his story doesnt even match Issacs press account. And no-one saw him pull in.

I'm sorry Michael but I am going to have to take you to task here. First of all, not everyone who used that club was a Jew, so you cannot possibly know that of the 20 or so people there, virtually all of them fitted Anderson's 'diagnosis'.

Secondly, nothing, at all, says that Diemschutz was lying. There are discrepancies in some of the times given by witnesses at Strides inquest, but as pointed out already, those people gave approximate times. None of which amount to Diemschutz telling lies, and some of which actually corroborate his version of events (including PC Lamb)

And if, as you claim, Diemschutz was trying to protect these people, then what possible reason could those same people have, for showing him to be a liar??? Diemschutz was a jewelry salesman and the club secretary, how exactly does that translate into him being 'the one charged with its protection'?

Please note too, that Isaac Kozebrodski is not called at Strides inquest, making his statement as unreliable as that of Schwartz & Packer.

[ditlew]

if the person seen assaulting liz was not the killer,how unlucky was long liz that night?

Personally I fell that, if the person that Isaac saw killed Liz, then she wasn't killed by Jack. The timeframe, her reaction to his 'assault', the fact that he was seen very clearly and that he knew he was seen, makes me think that the seen 'assult' was on a totally different topic than 'ripping'.

Best Regards,
Ditlew

[perrymason]

Hi Sox,

I find it easier to address all points in the following way....

I'm sorry Michael but I am going to have to take you to task here. First of all, not everyone who used that club was a Jew, so you cannot possibly know that of the 20 or so people there, virtually all of them fitted Anderson's 'diagnosis'.

We know that the singing upstairs was in Russian or Yiddish, we know the club was predominantly visited by disenfranchised local European Jews and Socialists, and that it is not at all improbable that the majority of the 28 or so people remaining had Immigrant Jew status. The meeting ended between 11 and 11:30, it was now 12:40am. Only members would be inside. And Anderson makes it clear that during this time the feeling was they were looking for a European Jew residing in the immediate area.

Secondly, nothing, at all, says that Diemschutz was lying. There are discrepancies in some of the times given by witnesses at Strides inquest, but as pointed out already, those people gave approximate times. None of which amount to Diemschutz telling lies, and some of which actually corroborate his version of events (including PC Lamb)

I havent said he lied, I have said if they were correct he must have. What I propose has no bearing on when Diemshitz leaves the yard for help....he may well have done so at around 1:02-1:03am like his version of the story suggests. That does in now way confirm what time he arrived, only his word does...and Fanny hearing a cart and horse...that may have been leaving for overnight stabling not arriving. What Ive pointed out is that we have 3 people who had to be wrong by 20 minutes in their estimates or Diemshitz's statement is inaccurate. I suggest its inaccurate purposefully.

Isaac says he was sent by Diemshitz at just after 12:40 and after finding no-one in the street....he did not meet anyone and left by himself...he meets Eagle and the PC returning to the club....which means Isaac arrives in keeping with Louis's start time.....but Isaac was gone while they decided to start the arrival at 1:00am,....instead of the 12:40am-ish that 3 witnesses say was the case. His story would be given when Police were on the scene....so he said what happened, not when he was supposed to say it happened. Spooner had no reason to lie, and he had no reason to be confused as to what 5 minutes is and what 20 minutes is.

And if, as you claim, Diemschutz was trying to protect these people, then what possible reason could those same people have, for showing him to be a liar??? Diemschutz was a jewelry salesman and the club secretary, how exactly does that translate into him being 'the one charged with its protection'?

As I point out, Isaac was off the scene when the discussions would have been made, so he would know of no "agreed timing", that leaves Heshberg and Spooner. Heshberg may have been alerted when he says he was, and may NOT have stayed hanging around the dead body...he may have gone back inside....in which case any agreement on a arrival time being made by Eagle, Diemshutz and maybe some others remaining by the body would be unknown to him. Spooner has no reason to lie nor to be off on his time by more than 5 minutes either way....not 20 minutes.

Please note too, that Isaac Kozebrodski is not called at Strides inquest, making his statement as unreliable as that of Schwartz & Packer.

I believe thats the best point among this group. I can see that his statement correlates to that of Heshberg's and Spooner's very well, and that none of theirs meshes with Diemshitz's.....and I know that no witness saw Louis arrive, and I know that no witness to the front of the gates in addition to Israel says they saw anyone at all in front of the gates near 12:45,......including Israel.....so the weight of the evidence to me tips in favor of an arrival much closer to 12:45 than 1am.

Hope that addressed the issues.

Best regards

[perrymason]

Heres another press account of Spooners.....Northeastern Gazette, Oct 3rd...

"Edward Spooner, Fairclough street, horse keeper, said that about 12.30 on Sunday morning he was standing outside the Beehive public (house), at the corner of Christian street, when an alarm was given. He went into the yard at Berners street; a man struck a light; and witness lifted up the woman's chin, which was quite warm. Blood was coming from her throat. He could not say if anyone left the yard. He thought it was about 12.35 when he arrived at the yard. Witness was searched and gave his name and address before he left the place. "

Which would have him contrasting Louis by 25 minutes, not just 20.

In some accounts a member called Gilleman states that he went upstairs to tell everyone about the body in the passageway, that he was told to do so by the men by the body......which again points to Louis summoning someone first....as Issac says Louis did summon just him,....and after some elapsed time, sending word to let the members in the house know. By that time, Issac would be gone. Louis and whomever he leaves with would leave just after 1am and meet Spooner on their return...because Isaac says he saw no-one and that he was alone when he returned seeing Eagle and the PC heading towards the yard. Louis says Isaac was with him, which he could not have been to have met up with Eagle and the PC but not Spooner.

Ive not said that anyone lied...Ive said that if the early witnesses are correct that people from the Club did in fact lie at least about the arrival time of Louis. And that they are the witnesses that had a great impetus to appear uninvolved in any way. I also strongly doubt that Louis's statement that he left with Issac is accurate if Isaac knew enough to know whether he left the yard with anyone and who that may have been.

If that is correct, then Israel's Inquest absence makes perfect sense....because he could not have seen the woman found at around 12:40 or 12:45am inside the gates according to 3 witness, still alive outside the gates being assaulted by anyone at 12:45am.

Best regards

[Tom_Wescott]

Gilleman

Back in the earlier days of Ripperologist magazine, before Paul Begg became editor (and when it was a printed journal), Begg and Peter Turnbull (author of The Killer Who Never Was) had a very interesting exchange in the letters section that ran for a few issues. It was in reference to Gilleman. I haven't read the exchange in a couple of years, but should go back and do so since it is being discussed again.

The exchange was somewhat heated and as I remember I was not at all impressed with Turnbull's attitude or his stubbornness towards Begg, who demonstrated to my satisfaction that 'Gilleman' was a phonetic misspelling of a similar word (something like guilleman, maybe Sam Flynn could tell us) that means 'steward' or 'caretaker'. In any event, Begg pretty well demonstrated that 'Gilleman' was Louis Diemschutz.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[perrymason]

Back in the earlier days of Ripperologist magazine, before Paul Begg became editor (and when it was a printed journal), Begg and Peter Turnbull (author of The Killer Who Never Was) had a very interesting exchange in the letters section that ran for a few issues. It was in reference to Gilleman. I haven't read the exchange in a couple of years, but should go back and do so since it is being discussed again.

The exchange was somewhat heated and as I remember I was not at all impressed with Turnbull's attitude or his stubbornness towards Begg, who demonstrated to my satisfaction that 'Gilleman' was a phonetic misspelling of a similar word (something like guilleman, maybe Sam Flynn could tell us) that means 'steward' or 'caretaker'. In any event, Begg pretty well demonstrated that 'Gilleman' was Louis Diemschutz.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

It would be interesting to have read that exchange and what evidence it was that affected the verdict for Mr Begg. But in truth Gilleman or Diemshitz may just be a red herring anyway.....there is no real need to dramtically change anything Louis claims to have done after 1am....other than having Isaac accompany him out for help.

What is clear to at least myself is that Louis Diemshitz's story as relates to the time a dead body is discovered is directly challenged by the press accounts of 3 other witnesses, one of which Louis says joined him in the search for the Police after 1am. The witness however says he was sent alone by Louis just after 12:40am, that he did not meet any Spooner, and he saw Eagle and the PC heading towards the gates and joined. Since the witness is Isaac K and someone Louis knows well, its concerning.

Spooners times roughly match Isaacs, as does Heshbergs.

Coupled with the absence of corroboration for Louis's arrival time, the contrasting stories of Brown to Israel's about what was transpiring in front of the gates at 12:45...even if he hadnt seen Liz he didnt see anyone else near the gates...the absence of any evidence that confirms Israel Schwartz gave his statement at the Inquest, or that confirms what we have been told was verbatim from his actual statement which no-one alive has seen, ...and the fact that Fanny Mortimer who was at her door off and on from 12:30ish until 1am was only witness to one person near the gates at around 12:56 and provides only aural recollections of things she heard while indoors.....I think a sound case for a misrepresentation of facts on someones behalf is there.

Logically, people with the most to gain by stories that relieve suspicions on the club would be club members.

Since it happens to be the Club Steward himself with whom the major discrepancies lie....and a witness of dubious truths.....it does seem to address a few questions concerning those last 15 to 20 minutes....the possible interruption, from where the killer likely came and left, whether he was Club affiliated or not, whether he was more likely Jewish than Gentile....why Eagle and Lave seem to be in the yard without either one knowing it....why Eagle suggests the body "may have" been there when he arrived, he couldnt be sure but "felt" it wasnt, was this murder perpetrated with the intention of blaming the Jews, maybe for all these recent slayings......

The only truth here so far is that it has not been learned definatively.

Best regards

[Tom_Wescott]

Michael,

In case you're wondering why I haven't directly challenged your theory that Stride's body was discovered at 12:40am, it is because I don't believe anyone but you would believe it. Not even Lynn Cates, who seems to enjoy your kool-aid.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[perrymason]

Michael,

In case you're wondering why I haven't directly challenged your theory that Stride's body was discovered at 12:40am, it is because I don't believe anyone but you would believe it. Not even Lynn Cates, who seems to enjoy your kool-aid.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Precisely my point Tom....what people choose to believe without requiring any proof is what impedes progress in this study, not the questioning so-called truths that are documented by contemporary sources, and which have contradictory storylines offered by some germane witnesses in the press.

Since Liz could have been cut at 12:46 by the doctors estimate using his watch, if anyone of the witnesses I mentioned including Blackwell's estimate was off by a few minutes, all 3 witnesses and Blackwell's estimate would jive. Which would have a woman dying while according to Diemshitz, he and pony are not yet even at Berner Street.

I dont claim that any minute to minute event line is what we should buy, just that with allowances in timings Diemshitz is the only statement that doesn't work with the others....well, him and Israel of course. But I have 2 other witnesses whose times say there was no Israel Schwartz, Liz Stride or BSMan anywhere in front of the gates at around 12:45am....and I know he didnt give Inquest evidence. At least no-one's found any proof.

Again, Im always surprised when people choose to believe in unproven things like Elves and Bigfoot and a Canonical Group and Israel Schwartz....and when people come along and challenge the baseless beliefs they are accused of fantasizing.

My regards to the Flat Earth Society...and my regrets for not sending along a donation.

[Tom_Wescott]

....what people choose to believe without requiring any proof is what impedes progress in this study,

There is ample proof that Stride had not been murdered by and discovered at 12:40am. There is literally zero proof that she was killed at 12:40. Hence, you're alone in subscribing to this theory.

Since Liz could have been cut at 12:46 by the doctors estimate using his watch, if anyone of the witnesses I mentioned including Blackwell's estimate was off by a few minutes, all 3 witnesses and Blackwell's estimate would jive. Which would have a woman dying while according to Diemshitz, he and pony are not yet even at Berner Street.

But this doesn't make sense. If Stride was discovered at 12:40, how could she die 6 minutes later? You'll have to scratch Blackwell off your list of those supporting your theory and add him to the bulging list of conspirators, right after PC Smith.

And I paid you genuine compliments yesterday which you snubbed your nose at. That was uncharacteristically cold of you, Michael.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[perrymason]

There is ample proof that Stride had not been murdered by and discovered at 12:40am. There is literally zero proof that she was killed at 12:40. Hence, you're alone in subscribing to this theory.

But this doesn't make sense. If Stride was discovered at 12:40, how could she die 6 minutes later? You'll have to scratch Blackwell off your list of those supporting your theory and add him to the bulging list of conspirators, right after PC Smith.

And I paid you genuine compliments yesterday which you snubbed your nose at. That was uncharacteristically cold of you, Michael.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

I mentioned several times in several posts that exact times by anyone are likely unavailable until Blackwell checks his watch, so a few minutes here or there using 5 witness accounts.....Isaac, Spooner, Heschberg, Fanny...saw no-one anywhere near the gates....Brown...saw no-one near the gates at approx 12:45am...to me is hardly a lack of suggestive evidence that Israel was not where he said he was, he didnt see what he says he saw, and at least,....and that Louis may have lied by approx 15 minutes about his arrival time.

If they all ended up at the body closer to 12:45...then its one minute off Blackwells earliest guess...and well within Phillips suggested time. For you to have your view be accurate....Fanny had to miss seeing the altercation or hearing it, Brown must have been wrong in his time because he didnt see any altercation or people in front of the gates, Isaac must have forgotten it was actually after 1am and he was with Louis, not alone when he says he left at 12:40, and Heschberg must also be off by 20 minutes, and Spooner confused 25 minutes of loitering with 45 minutes.

As to the remarks you made on a personal note, Im not likely to react positively to one remark in the midst of spurious rebuttals and insults. I can also assure you that you havent seen "cold" yet.

How you choose to see my remarks is up to you Tom...I assure you they are intended for actual students to assess and consider not for people who assume they already know. I could care less about changing any opinion of anyone within the "Ripperology" machine...they have clearly taken to heart what is not proven in any shape or form already.

I cant save the cultists....but maybe one fresh mind who asks questions so as to arrive at reasonable logical conclusions.

Best regards

[Tom_Wescott]

I mentioned several times in several posts that exact times by anyone are likely unavailable until Blackwell checks his watch

Other than Diemschutz, but of course he's part of a grand conspiracy, or Stride's murderer, or the Black Dahlia Avenger, I'm not sure.

How you choose to see my remarks is up to you Tom...I assure you they are intended for actual students to assess and consider not for people who assume they already know.

You mean me and Anderson?

As to the remarks you made on a personal note, Im not likely to react positively to one remark in the midst of spurious rebuttals and insults. I can also assure you that you havent seen "cold" yet.

You take this **** way too seriously. You should check yourself before you wreck yourself. It's your choice to be a flighty crackpot, I'm just trying to offset the nonsense for these 'fresh young minds' you're messing with.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[perrymason]

It's your choice to be a flighty crackpot, I'm just trying to offset the nonsense for these 'fresh young minds' you're messing with.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Thats just what the boards are based on...senior investigators and researchers like yourself who think by using obviously flawed data long enough it suddenly somehow becomes valid....and newer people to the study who ask what the hell is going on with this supposed scholarly pursuit of truth?

Belief without any proof is just Faith. Which is the state of the study....the whole Ripper industry faithfully subscribes to theorizing that is illogical and unproven as if its gospel. Im sure that will go a long way when assessing what are actual facts.

I hope you get your book out before the world ends on Dec 21st, 2012......lots of folks have faith the world as we know it will end on that day. Wonder if they are the same ones that panicked when the computers almost tried to destroy us at midnight on Jan 01, 2000.

Anyway....have faith....all will be revealed at some point.....and likely none of it will look anything like what Ripperologists having been shoving at us.

Best regards

[perrymason]

If Im not mistaken Tom you mentioned some details about the Arbeter Fraint paper itself recently...was that earlier in this thread?

Just wondering about PC Smith.

Best regards