The Murder of Elizabeth Stride

[mariab]

Your reply is a bit confusing (or confused)

Hopefully not confused, but I haven't expressed myself well. I apologize.

It's not a question of 'THE official source'. All the police and Home Office reports are official sources and no single report should be described as 'THE official source'.

I shouldn't have referred to the Swanson report as “THE official source“ since we also have Abberline's memos.

I also do not understand the sentence, 'Unfortunately, the police reports are missing and we only have Abberline's memos.'

Again, silly of me to not clarify. I meant that Abberline's early handwritten reports about his interrogating Schwartz are missing (as in the Abberline report having survived about interrogating Hutchinson, for which it's clear that it's not the first, detailed one), and we only have Abberline's memos.

I'm so terribly sorry to insist, but has it been established who added the commentaries in the margins of the Swanson report?

[Stewart P Evans]

Annotation

...
Mr. Evans, might I please inquire if the hand who's written down the margins annotations in the Swanson report has been identified?
I'm also taking the liberty to add that the following quote totally cracked me up, as it's almost verbatim what Philip Gossett, my American boss favours to say about twice a year, when he's in a cranky mood (despite him knowing and frequently aknowledging that I'm a very good musicologist and researcher, as I've brought him many new sources at a frequent pace). In my boss' case, one needs only to substitute “the police procedure“ with “reading a full score“. The parallel quote made me smile. :-)

It is a Home Office annotation, probably by Lushington on behalf of Matthews. Are you suggesting that I'm 'in a cranky mood'.?

[Stewart P Evans]

Not a question of...

It's my impression that Tom has been expressing himself a bit unclearly in the post in question. Obviously there is no question whatsoever that the Swanson report is THE official source, esp. vs. the Star report! What I'm assuming that Tom is saying here and agreeing with is that, since Abberline was the investigative officer and the one to have interviewed Schwartz (at length and more than once), it's Abberline's expert opinion which should be taken at face value vs. a bureaucratic report prepared by Swanson and aimed for the Home Office, with the intention to make a good impression. (As discussed a few weeks ago in the JTRForums thread Schwartz: at the inquest or not?.) Unfortunately, the police reports are missing and we only have Abberline's memos.
...

It's not a question of 'THE official source'. All the police and Home Office reports are official sources and no single report should be described as 'THE official source'.

Your reply is a bit confusing (or confused) and I simply cannot agree with your interpretation of the various police reports and their nature. I also do not understand the sentence, 'Unfortunately, the police reports are missing and we only have Abberline's memos.'

[mariab]

The observation was
Since Abberline is the man who interviewed Schwartz at length and prepared the report from which Swanson based his summary, it {Abberline's memos} must be considered an official source, even trumping the Swanson report.
You say that you 'thoroughly agree' with that observation so, perhaps, you may like to explain what you mean by this.

It's my impression that Tom has been expressing himself a bit unclearly in the post in question. Obviously there is no question whatsoever that the Swanson report is THE official source, esp. vs. the Star report! What I'm assuming that Tom is saying here and agreeing with is that, since Abberline was the investigative officer and the one to have interviewed Schwartz (at length and more than once), it's Abberline's expert opinion which should be taken at face value vs. a bureaucratic report prepared by Swanson and aimed for the Home Office, with the intention to make a good impression. (As discussed a few weeks ago in the JTRForums thread Schwartz: at the inquest or not?.) Unfortunately, the police reports are missing and we only have Abberline's memos.

Mr. Evans, might I please inquire if the hand who's written down the margins annotations in the Swanson report has been identified?

I'm also taking the liberty to add that the following quote totally cracked me up, as it's almost verbatim what Philip Gossett, my American boss favours to say about twice a year, when he's in a cranky mood (despite him knowing and frequently aknowledging that I'm a very good musicologist and researcher, as I've brought him many new sources at a frequent pace). In my boss' case, one needs only to substitute “the police procedure“ with “reading a full score“. The parallel quote made me smile. :-)

You apparently do not fully understand the police procedures and how they reported and submitted reports.

[Stewart P Evans]

'Thoroughly agree...'

...
I thoroughly agree with the following though:

With profound apologies for the unsolicited comment.

The observation was, 'Since Abberline is the man who interviewed Schwartz at length and prepared the report from which Swanson based his summary, it {Abberline's memos} must be considered an official source, even trumping the Swanson report.' You say that you 'thoroughly agree' with that observation so, perhaps, you may like to explain what you mean by this.

[mariab]

unsollicited comment

The Star report is at total variance with the official versions (Swanson and Abberline) on this point.

I'm pretty sure that even the most neophyte newbie is aware of this fact.

I'm not quite sure what you think Abberline confirmed in The Star report that conflicted with what Swanson wrote. Below are extracts from the reports by Swanson and Abberline relative to the point.

I've already quoted one of these extracts from the Swanson report in my post #236. I'm not clear either on what Tom means when he's saying:

I believe the Star report has Pipeman taking off after Schwartz first, whereas Swanson’s version does not. This detail present in the Star is later confirmed by Inspector Abberline in his response to memos generated by Swanson’s Oct. 19th report. (...) However, I don’t recall if Swanson merely didn’t include that detail, or conflicted with it. Posting from memory here.

What on earth can “Pipeman taking off after Schwartz first“ mean? When one takes off after someone, he's running/walking “second“, not “first“. Or does this refer to an allegation of Pipeman having left the premises BEFORE Schwartz did?
Incidentally, the Star report (of October 1) states:
The Hungarian states positively that he saw a knife in this second man's hand, but he waited to see no more. He fled incontinently, to his new lodgings.

I thoroughly agree with the following though:

Since Abberline is the man who interviewed Schwartz at length and prepared the report from which Swanson based his summary, it {Abberline's memos} must be considered an official source, even trumping the Swanson report.

With profound apologies for the unsolicited comment.

[Stewart P Evans]

Procedures

...
This is 100% true, with one exception – I believe the Star report has Pipeman taking off after Schwartz first, whereas Swanson’s version does not. This detail present in the Star is later confirmed by Inspector Abberline in his response to memos generated by Swanson’s Oct. 19th report. Since Abberline is the man who interviewed Schwartz at length and prepared the report from which Swanson based his summary, it must be considered an official source, even trumping the Swanson report. However, I don’t recall if Swanson merely didn’t include that detail, or conflicted with it. Posting from memory here.
...
Tom Wescott

The Star report is at total variance with the official versions (Swanson and Abberline) on this point.

The Star states, 'A second man came out of the public-house a few doors off, and shouting some sort of warning to the man who was with the woman, rushed forward as if to attack the intruder [Schwartz]. The Hungarian states positively that he saw a knife in this second man's hand, but he waited to see no more. He fled incontinently, to his new lodgings.'

You apparently do not fully understand the police procedures and how they reported and submitted reports. I'm not quite sure what you think Abberline confirmed in The Star report that conflicted with what Swanson wrote. Below are extracts from the reports by Swanson and Abberline relative to the point.

[mariab]

Wow, always wanted to see the Swanson report in the original. Who are the annotations by?

[Stewart P Evans]

Yes we do...

...
If only we DID have the police report on the Stride murder! However, we’re left with little more than a very abbreviated version of events compiled by Swanson who was in mind to impress his superiors. Not trying to be nitpicky, just mentioning this for the sake of accuracy.
...
Tom Wescott

Yes we do have the police report on the Stride murder, written by Swanson on 19 October 1888, which is probably the best overall police report on the investigation of an individual Whitechapel murder to have survived (first three pages attached).

What we don't have is Schwartz's statement, but it is doing Swanson a disservice to describe his report as 'little more than a very abbreviated version of events', it is a decent overall summary and contains some good detail from Schwartz's statement.

[harry]

Thanks Tom,and if one goes back far enough on the boards,it will be found I have for many a year,favoured Pipeman and Brown's man as being one and the same.So only two suspects in the Stride killing,BS and Pipeman,and what are the chances of Stride being more comfortable with Pipeman,than with a person who had only minutes before,shown aggression towards her..As to whether either of the two were Jewish,well Schwartz didn't identify them as such,but can it be said he got a good look at either.

[mariab]

I think out loud and test new ideas here on the forums, and sometimes those ideas are picked up by others and promoted heavily until suddenly they’re accepted as damn near fact by some.

Do the “others“ refer to Lynn Cates and the “some“ to me? (Pertaining to Schwartz having possibly been connected to the IWEC.) Tom appears to be the sole Ripperologist to complain when others accept his theories.

Do I think Schwartz was known to William Wess and some of the clubmen? Yes, I do. Do I think he lied to the police? No, I don’t. Could a good argument be made that he did lie? Yes, it could, but not good enough.

If my research results (which are still pending until I'm finished) end up corroborating my suspicions, I might be able to present this “good argument“, and I promise that it'll be damned good enough.

[mariab]

I believe the Star report has Pipeman taking off after Schwartz first, whereas Swanson’s version does not. This detail present in the Star is later confirmed by Inspector Abberline in his response to memos generated by Swanson’s Oct. 19th report. Since Abberline is the man who interviewed Schwartz at length and prepared the report from which Swanson based his summary, it must be considered an official source, even trumping the Swanson report. However, I don’t recall if Swanson merely didn’t include that detail, or conflicted with it. Posting from memory here.

Didn't conflict with it. The Swanson report states:
(...) then Schwartz walked away, but finding that he was followed by the second man he run as far as the railway arch but the man did not follow so far.

[Tom_Wescott]

The King and the Mac Daddy

I would fully agree that Pipeman is more likely. But how likely does that make him? Not very, because BS man is simply so unlikely due to the cachous in hand. Also, no other witnesses see a tall man with the victims.

And yet, most of the police suspects were tall, some even taller than Pipeman – Tumblety, Le Grand, Grant, Ostrog, Druitt, D’Onston, etc. Me thinks they knew something we don’t.

We have the police reports on the Schwartz incident and we have the Star version.

If only we DID have the police report on the Stride murder! However, we’re left with little more than a very abbreviated version of events compiled by Swanson who was in mind to impress his superiors. Not trying to be nitpicky, just mentioning this for the sake of accuracy.

If you abandon the official version in preference for the press version you either have some personal idea or theory to pursue (that the press version better fits) or you do not realise the quality of historical evidence. Either way you might as well give up on ever reaching a well-founded conclusion.

This is 100% true, with one exception – I believe the Star report has Pipeman taking off after Schwartz first, whereas Swanson’s version does not. This detail present in the Star is later confirmed by Inspector Abberline in his response to memos generated by Swanson’s Oct. 19th report. Since Abberline is the man who interviewed Schwartz at length and prepared the report from which Swanson based his summary, it must be considered an official source, even trumping the Swanson report. However, I don’t recall if Swanson merely didn’t include that detail, or conflicted with it. Posting from memory here.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

You and I might be the only two people alive who see the connection between Brown’s man and Pipeman, but I’m damn glad someone else came to this conclusion on their own.

Incidentally, this is an idea promoted in the JTRForums by Jeff Leahy and currently discussed in the Wiggishness and the anti Anderson lobby thread there.
(Good thing that I just happened to wake up and check casebook just now.)

[Tom_Wescott]

an unsolicited response to Harry Mann

Theory versus evidence.Obviously the latter is preferable,but where evidence is lacking,it is common sense to theorise where evidence may be gained.It is then a matter of proving the theory.In the case of Stride ,theory must be predominent,as what evidence there is,is little and confusing.

Actually, I’ve felt blessed in researching Stride because there is more information on her movements than with the other victims, and most of it is really not conflicting at all once it’s researched properly by writers, which it rarely is. 80% of the ‘conflict’ or ‘confusion’ comes from modern day writers and posters, not from the press or records. And I’m just as guilty as the next guy (probably more so) because I think out loud and test new ideas here on the forums, and sometimes those ideas are picked up by others and promoted heavily until suddenly they’re accepted as damn near fact by some. Do I think Schwartz was known to William Wess and some of the clubmen? Yes, I do. Do I think he lied to the police? No, I don’t. Could a good argument be made that he did lie? Yes, it could, but not good enough.

My theory is that Pipeman was more likely to have been her killer.That he was also the man seen by Brown in the company of Stride.

You and I might be the only two people alive who see the connection between Brown’s man and Pipeman, but I’m damn glad someone else came to this conclusion on their own. Ha ha. A press report I found some time back contains an interview with the girl who spoke to Fanny Mortimer and claimed to have been standing with her man at the corner when the murder was committed. As you know, many, many writers have suggested this was the couple Brown saw. However, the girl told the reporter she was back at home by 12:30am, well before Brown came along, so it’s most likely that Brown did indeed see Stride, though of course that doesn’t mean he saw her with her killer. But the similarity in dress between Brown’s man and Pipeman is compelling.

That he was a person,who having shown no harm minutes before in another location,was a person she would have trusted after the incident with BS. A person who could take her by surprise,and the element of surprise,I theorise,played an important part in her death.But how to prove it?

If we take the stance that BS Man and Pipeman were unknown to each other, then this is a very likely premise. Another possibility would be that Pipeman took off after Schwartz, thinking him the man who pushed Stride down when BS Man called out. He returned to the scene to find Stride dead and split, not wanting to explain why he was so near Tiger Bay at that time of night. Of course, if we take the stance that they DID know each other, then that still leaves Pipeman firmly in frame as Stride’s killer and as Brown’s man.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott