If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Surely that's not a surprising conclusion to come to, if you argue from what's in the Star report?
Well Chris, I expected to open myself up to a degree of criticism here, as I have always been an ardent supporter of Swanson's summary that appears to place Pipeman opposite Dutfields Yard.
However, the caveat I have always held has been that Berner St. is too narrow 'not' to see a man standing opposite Dutfields Yard, long before you get to that point. So, although I accepted the report I tended to put my caveat down to a confusion in translation. Perhaps, instead of "where he saw a man lighting his pipe", the intended wording might have been, "where he had seen a man lighting his pipe.
Which has always left me wondering what was meant by the line in the Star report saying, "but just as he stepped from the kerb", Schwartz had already left the (westside) kerb.
Was it intended to mean, "just as he was steps from the kerb"?, referring to being almost at the eastside kerb?
Or, as I offered earlier, perhaps this subsequent kerb was that in Fairclough St. as he was walking southward on the eastside footpath of Berner St.?
Schwartz stepped from the kerb and noticed another man emerge from the 'diagonal' doorway, partially hidden from view.
I understand Abberline also mentioned those same words, "and that was a man on the opposite side of the road in the act of lighting a pipe".
But, once again the perspective can be called into question. Did Abberline mean, "opposite" Dutfields Yard, or "opposite" from Schwartz new location?
Abberline made no mention of Dutfields Yard so perspective from that point is only assumed. Therefore, because the subject of Abberline's referrence was Schwartz himself, then Abberline just might have written from Schwartz' perspective.
Hi Wick, by "opposite Dutfield's Yard", do you mean on the opposite side of the street, or literally opposite the club, which would have put him lighting his pipe in Schwartz's face?
With all the weird ideas being bandied about lately regarding the Berner Street cast, for all I know the latest interpretation puts Pipeman across from Dutfield's Yard with a semi-blind Schwartz not seeing him until his hat caught fire in the match flame.
Does anyone see the parallels between Schwartz and Hutchison?
Schwartz places himself at the scene of a crime just prior to her death (a point held against Hutchinson).
Schwartz alone witnesses a barney in the street, despite there being several people milling about (a barely credible account, often held against Hutchinson).
Is/was Schwartz Jack the Ripper? if not Schwartz, then was it Maxwell who again places herself in the vicinity and relays a barely credible account?
Hello Mac. Funny you should mention that. There is an old thread "Is Schwartz a Hassidic Hutchinson?"
Cheers.
LC
Was Schwartz the well dressed clerk who turned up for questioning looking like Quentin Crisp? He was hardly going to present himself in killer garb, and the old street vendor fellas used to sell a comedy, fake beard with every second bunch of grapes.
Given a choice between Schwartz and Hutchinson, I'd go 500/1 Schwartz; Hutchinson non runner.
The difference being that nobody reported seeing a theatrically dressed Jewish-looking man skulking opposite Dutfields Yards shortly before Stride was murdered, and Schwartz didn't come forward as soon as this detail was divulged at the inquest.
With all the weird ideas being bandied about lately regarding the Berner Street cast, for all I know the latest interpretation puts Pipeman across from Dutfield's Yard with a semi-blind Schwartz not seeing him until his hat caught fire in the match flame.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott
I thought he was at the Nelson, but each to his own I guess...
I thought he was at the Nelson, but each to his own I guess...
Regards, Jon S.
70/30 in favour of The Nelson side.
'On crossing the road.....'. This suggests present tense. In other words, he's crossing; he's making his way over.
From that point, 'the opposite side of the road' could mean either side.
But, when pressed, I'd go for the Nelson side, because 'on crossing' suggests it's more likely he has crossed than it is he is beginning to cross, and as he's relaying Schwartz's account he's likely speaking from Schwartz's position.
The difference being that nobody reported seeing a theatrically dressed Jewish-looking man skulking opposite Dutfields Yards shortly before Stride was murdered, and Schwartz didn't come forward as soon as this detail was divulged at the inquest.
But back to Stride.
Unless...?
Saw this and suddenly recalled that Schwartz himself was described by someone as having a 'theatrical' appearance. A theatrically dressed Jewish-looking man, no less - opposite Dutfields Yard shortly before Stride was murdered.
Comment