The Murder of Elizabeth Stride

[mariab]

Was Schwartz affiliated with this club?

I'm researching this in French spy reports about anarchist activity in Victorian Whitechapel. There's evidence, but still inconclusive. It'll be also cross-referenced with Der Arbeter Fraint.

[mariab]

Hello Wickerman.

I mean, there is nothing to get us from an assault in the gateway (A), to her body lying dead from a slice to the throat (B).There's "nothing" to get us from (A) to (B), we have "nothing", if we reject the man with the murder weapon.

Again, we're NOT rejecting Pipeman, we're just establishing that a newspaper report is less an accurate source than internal police reports. In the next issue of the Star (October 2), it said that the police were mistrusting Schwartz' testimony.
There HAS to be something (that we don't know about) to get us from an assault in the gateway to Stride's death by slice to the throat inside of Dutfield's Yard, because it HAPPENED. Perhaps BS and Pipeman worked in tandem. If not, Pipeman might have assaulted Stride after BS.

Are you suggesting Wess was the Interpreter who accompanied Schwartz?

Precisely. Wess accompanied Leon Goldstein to the same precint as an interpreter. A connection with the IWEC might explain why (according to the Star report of October 2) the police were initially having some doubts pertaining to Schwartz's story.
Incidentally, this is an hypothesis generated by Tom Wescott years ago.

[Wickerman]

Is it at all possible that, IF he lied, his motivation would have been to deflect possible blame from the club and its members?

Hi Lynn.
Was Schwartz affiliated with this club?

Jon

[Wickerman]

What do you mean “nothing“, Wickerman? She was found slain 15'min. later!

Hi Maria.
I mean, there is nothing to get us from an assault in the gateway (A), to her body lying dead from a slice to the throat (B).

There's "nothing" to get us from (A) to (B), we have "nothing", if we reject the man with the murder weapon.

There is the plausible possibility that Schwartz was “dragged by the scuff of the neck“ by William Wess to come along testify. See also Lynn Cates' post below.

Are you suggesting Wess was the Interpreter who accompanied Schwartz?

Regards, Jon S.

[mariab]

we are left with a man assaulting a woman, pulling or pushing her, casting her down, and then what...? - nothing!

What do you mean “nothing“, Wickerman? She was found slain 15'min. later!

we are left asking why did Schwartz lie to the police? Not that witnesses never lied, but Schwartz volunteered to go to the police, he was not dragged in by the scruff of the neck.

There is the plausible possibility that Schwartz was “dragged by the scuff of the neck“ by William Wess to come along testify. See also Lynn Cates' post below.

So here we have a woman who was murdered by a knife cut across the throat, and there we have a man running towards her, knife in hand, within minutes of her death..... and we reject him out of hand! (...) Just another detail we choose to ignore rather than face the question?

We're not at all rejecting Pipeman as Stride's killer or ignoring details, we're having reservations against Schwartz' statement to the Star (as it contrasts with the police reports), and we're examining the big picture.

Did the Star make it up, did Schwartz make it up? Did the police deliberately withhold this detail?

Very pertinent questions.

[lynn cates]

motive

Hello Jon.

"I don't like accepting it because we are left asking why did Schwartz lie to the police? Not that witnesses never lied, but Schwartz volunteered to go to the police, he was not dragged in by the scruff of the neck."

Is it at all possible that, IF he lied, his motivation would have been to deflect possible blame from the club and its members?

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

...
His report does conflict with the Star's version significantly as it places Pipeman across the street instead of in front of the Nelson with a knife. This was extensively debated recently over at the other forums with Stewart and myself taking the position that what Abberline and Swanson described as being the most accurate. I'm sure Stewart remembers this debate very well.

Yes Hunter, and this little inconsistency bothers me.

I don't like discarding it because if we do, we are left with a man assaulting a woman, pulling or pushing her, casting her down, and then what...? - nothing!

I don't like accepting it because we are left asking why did Schwartz lie to the police? Not that witnesses never lied, but Schwartz volunteered to go to the police, he was not dragged in by the scruff of the neck.

So here we have a woman who was murdered by a knife cut across the throat, and there we have a man running towards her, knife in hand, within minutes of her death..... and we reject him out of hand!

What I asked before was, "what made Schwartz run from the scene?"
A stranger shouting "Lipski" is not going to do it, but seeing a man produce a knife just might!

Did the Star make it up, did Schwartz make it up?
Did the police deliberately withhold this detail?

Just another detail we choose to ignore rather than face the question?

Regards, Jon S.

[mariab]

That makes 2 publications containing facsimili about which I had no idea.
But why is Tom entitled to say “memos“ instead of “reports“, and how come he uses plural, while there's only ONE Abberline report pertaining to the Stride case in The Ultimate? Are there more Abberline reports published elsewhere? I own SY investigates, but won't be able to properly read it before July.

[Stewart P Evans]

Document Pack

...
The book: Jack the Ripper, the Casebook, by Richard Jones, has an excellent facsimile copy of Swanson's Oct. 19 report in it along with some other interesting copies of documents. Its a good book to have on hand for people unfamiliar with the case but would like a well illustrated short read.
...

A facsimile of the 19 October 1888 report by Chief Inspector Swanson is included, with other documents, in the Public Record Office document pack Jack the Ripper and the Whitechapel murders compiled with 12 page brochure by Stewart P Evans and Keith Skinner, London, Public Record Office, 2002.

The publication Jack the Ripper The Casebook by Carlton, 2008, was intended to replace the document pack and Keith and I were approached to write it. However, I declined and it was written by Richard Jones. It's a very nice publication and also contains, like the document pack, several facsimile documents.

[Tom_Wescott]

Ugh, I'll need to check later to see what i was talking about. But I seem to recall a detail present in the Star report that was not in Swanson's, but WAS corroborated by Abberline's memos, although I probably got the details wrong when posting last night. I'm definitely not up to my game if Leahy is agreeing with me and Stewart is not.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

Thank you so much, Hunter. I'm afraid this is the first time I'm hearing of JTR the Casebook by Richard Jones. Of course I own The Ultimate, which so far I've only used as a reference, but I'm planning to read it from cover to cover in the coming weeks and especially, I need to highlight it for quicker reference.
Thank you for stressing the importance of the Swanson report. Naturally I know about its discrepancies vs. the Star report of October 1. The debate with Mr. Evans started over a mystifying quote by Tom, about which it's unclear what he means:
Quote Wescott:
I believe the Star report has Pipeman taking off after Schwartz first, whereas Swanson’s version does not.

By the by, Hunter, your explanations on the different police sources have always been immeasurably helpful in my orienting myself.

[Hunter]

Hi Maria,

The book: Jack the Ripper, the Casebook, by Richard Jones, has an excellent facsimile copy of Swanson's Oct. 19 report in it along with some other interesting copies of documents. Its a good book to have on hand for people unfamiliar with the case but would like a well illustrated short read.

Swanson's report, in my mind, is the most important surviving official document of this case. He summarizes the evidence in the Stride murder in detail and goes on to explain the police investigation in a way that no other document has. This was the man would would have known more about the police efforts than anyone else and was still there long after Abberline had been recalled to the CO.

His report does conflict with the Star's version significantly as it places Pipeman across the street instead of in front of the Nelson with a knife. This was extensively debated recently over at the other forums with Stewart and myself taking the position that what Abberline and Swanson described as being the most accurate. I'm sure Stewart remembers this debate very well.

[mariab]

my misquoting the terminology

What, exactly, are 'Abberline's memos.'?

Profuse apologies again, I should have said “reports“ instead of “memos“, I'm just used to people mentioning them as “memos“ when discussing colloquially. I'm specifically referring to the Abberline report from Nov. 1 (is MEPO 52983 the correct way of referencing it?), transcribed by you on p. 141 of The Ultimate, and to Abberline having added the Star report as an attachment to Sergt. White's report from October 4 (MEPO 52983, transcribed on p. 145 of The Ultimate).

What exactly are 'Abberline's early handwritten reports about his interrogating Schwartz'?

Again, profound apologies, as I should have referred to these missing documents as “Abberline's statements about interrogating witnesses“ instead of “reports“. The sole statement having survived about Hutchinson is discussed in your old Ripper Notes article posted as a dissertation here: http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/rn-witness.html
I promise I'll work through the correct terminology for police reports, and I won't forget about “report“ vs. “memo“ and about “statement“.

I'm cranky period. It comes with age you know.

I'm very used to cranky. I'm not cranky myself right now, but my left eye's leaking tears and stuff, I was supposed to be running errands and working in the library, but I'm trying to rest for half a day. (With profound apologies for the confessional tone.)

[Stewart P Evans]

Posts

Oops, apologies, I should strike my last question from post #247. Thank you so much for the information, Mr. Evans. Going to read what it says, again, now that I know it's from the HO.
Absolutely not! And if you were, you are fully entitled to. My American boss (who's the SPE of 19th century opera research, and I'm probably sounding like a 5 year old now) is frequently in a cranky mood, but he's overworked and has pressures. (And has to deal with me too, on top of all else.:-))

Our posts crossed.

I'm cranky period. It's comes with age you know.

[Stewart P Evans]

What...?

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

What, exactly, are 'Abberline's memos.'?

What exactly are 'Abberline's early handwritten reports about his interrogating Schwartz'?

I normally do not respond to someone 'insisting' I answer. I've answered this one anyway.