where's Liz?

[Fisherman]

Haha! Honestly, I think that Schwartz has a lot going for him. There are - at least to my mind - so many built-in elements in his testimony that speak of him being truthful, that I have always regarded him as the real McCoy.

The best,
Fisherman

[lynn cates]

experiment

Hello Fish. Have you ever tried the following experiment? Remove ALL the sightings of Liz from that night--except PC Smith's--and then see what happens.

Cheers.
LC

[Fisherman]

Hi Lynn! I have had an interest in the Stride killing in a quarter of a century. I have tried - I think - just about all experiments that can be tried, detracting and adding, allowing and disallowing, buying and selling. Throughout it all, I have always believed that the testimonies of Schwartz, of Marshall, of Smith, Mortimer, Spooner, Johnston, Blackwell, Phillips, Brown, were all given in good faith and with no wish to mislead the police. The one bit I dislike and will not use, is the Packer story.
I also believe that the fewer parametres you change among the different bits and pieces offered by the witnesses, the better chance you stand to reach a full understanding of what happened in Berner Street that night. That is not to say that one should not explore the different angles. Itīs just to point out that when the angles start to be too drastic before the Stride killing can be squeezed into a theorized scenario, one may need to take a step back and look at what was really said by the witnesses.

The best,
Fisherman

[mariab]

Fisherman wrote:
If Brown and Schwartz had been in place at the exact same time, they would reasonably have seen each other. So one (or both) were wrong about the timing.
Throughout it all, I have always believed that the testimonies of Schwartz, of Marshall, of Smith, Mortimer, Spooner, Johnston, Blackwell, Phillips, Brown, were all given in good faith and with no wish to mislead the police. The one bit I dislike and will not use, is the Packer story.
I also believe that the fewer parametres you change among the different bits and pieces offered by the witnesses, the better chance you stand to reach a full understanding of what happened in Berner Street that night. That is not to say that one should not explore the different angles. Itīs just to point out that when the angles start to be too drastic before the Stride killing can be squeezed into a theorized scenario, one may need to take a step back and look at what was really said by the witnesses.
Completely agree with everything you say here, Fisherman.

Fisherman wrote:
Honestly, I think that Schwartz has a lot going for him. There are - at least to my mind - so many built-in elements in his testimony that speak of him being truthful, that I have always regarded him as the real McCoy.
Do you care to elaborate on this? I'm curious of what you'd have to say.

[lynn cates]

sincerity

Hello Fish. I, too, think that most (not all) of the testimony was sincere and not concocted to mislead.

But is it possible to be both sincere and sincerely wrong?

Cheers.
LC

[mariab]

Lynn Cates wrote:
But is it possible to be both sincere and sincerely wrong?
I believe that people might have the most sincere intentions and still be completely wrong, Lynn. In fact, it bothers me totally how most people are completely incapable of giving accurate information, or giving street directions in a coherent way, etc.. It used to drive me crazy, but now I semi expect it anyway, and it's a very rare person who knows how to be accurate in his descriptions/when giving info.
Short surfing session today, due to my stupid toe hurting like hell, loosing tiny chunks of flesh, and bleeding non stop. This is not an exaggeration or an embellishment (like with the Whitechapel witnesses!). For some reason something's wrong with it since about 2 months. Do I have to consult a darn doctor? Bother...
Some really great surfers are in the lineup today, such as one of the Gudauskas brothers from SoCal.

[lynn cates]

agreed

Hello Maria. I agree. A good deal of evidence at the Stride inquest seems to suffer from such a phenomenon.

Cheers.
LC

[j.r-ahde]

Hello lynn!

Well, based on the crime magazines I've read, history repeats itself today as well!

All the best
Jukka

[c.d.]

If memory serves me, Sugden addressed the conflicting witness times and stated that few people in the lower classes had watches and relied on various methods for estimating the time. Hence the disparities that we see.

c.d.

[lynn cates]

explanation

Hello CD. Well, that's one explanation.

Cheers.
LC

[mariab]

1888 witness' times estimates

Obviously very few people had watches in 1888 Whitechapel, and people estimated time very creatively, mostly from trying to remember when was the last time that a church clock had struck.
By the way, I'm very much looking forward to reading Sudgen, which has arrived a few weeks ago. But I'm going to read some Examiners, Ripper Notes, and Paley first. Oh, the joys of being a newbie in Ripperology...