Stride Bruising

[lynn cates]

bloody convenient

Hello Jon. Thanks.

"These are the cautious words of an official who recognises that the police were unable to confirm his story, yet making it clear that neither were they able to refute it."

Indeed. So there was hesitation from the start?

"It is interesting that the press appeared to pick up on some reticence at Leman St. with respect to the story told by Schwartz."

Quite. Perhaps they indeed doubted Israel's story? And why? Perhaps for the same reasons I have difficulty assenting--the story, replete with a bully ejaculating racial slurs, is bloody convenient for some.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

not obvious

Hello David. Thanks.

Not obvious to me, although possible.

"It's not an easy thing to do, for an immigrant who can't speak English , to go to the police (and confess he did not help the woman)."

If that, in fact, happened. Sadly, we don't have his words--only the translators.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Hello Dave. Thanks.

It is interesting that DSS begins his ruminations much as I do--"If he is telling the truth . . ."

Of course, he follows up with a quick, "And I see no reason he should not be believed."

Cheers.
LC

These are the cautious words of an official who recognises that the police were unable to confirm his story, yet making it clear that neither were they able to refute it.
It is interesting that the press appeared to pick up on some reticence at Leman St. with respect to the story told by Schwartz.

[DVV]

Hi Lynn

I agree with Donald on this. To me it's obvious that Schwartz was telling the truth. It's not an easy thing to do, for an immigrant who can't speak English , to go to the police (and confess he did not help the woman).

Lekhayim !

[lynn cates]

if

Hello Dave. Thanks.

It is interesting that DSS begins his ruminations much as I do--"If he is telling the truth . . ."

Of course, he follows up with a quick, "And I see no reason he should not be believed."

Cheers.
LC

[Cogidubnus]

Excellent Colin!

Dave

[Bridewell]

Hello Roy.

"If Schwartz is such a good witness that he had to give his testimony in camera, how many times is he referenced to in any official documents, memoirs, newspapers, police officials like Abberline never mentions him again, etc."

Will Swanson do?

Cheers.
LC

Absolutely. (Except to those who suffer from the delusion that Swanson was a "superannuated filing clerk").

[Cogidubnus]

Will Swanson do?

Good point Lynn...in fact very good point...

All the best

The other Dave

[Bridewell]

They thought BSM and Sailor Man were one and the same, and imo they were right.

And in my opinion also.

[lynn cates]

D S S

Hello Roy.

"If Schwartz is such a good witness that he had to give his testimony in camera, how many times is he referenced to in any official documents, memoirs, newspapers, police officials like Abberline never mentions him again, etc."

Will Swanson do?

Cheers.
LC

[DVV]

DRoy, since Warren wrote in an official report that Schwartz gave his evidence at the inquest, that must be the case. Or let's say, that could well be true.
Clearly, after the double event, the police thought they were onto something : for the first time, the killer's face had been seen. And perhaps seen twice.
The police, I know, had already issued a description of Sailor Man, but this had soon been considered a mistake, as proven by the intervention of the City solicitor at the inquest. That would explain why Schwartz didn't give his evidence publicly (+ the fact that he couldn't speak English).

As for :

If Schwartz is such a good witness that he had to give his testimony in camera, how many times is he referenced to in any official documents, memoirs, newspapers, police officials like Abberline never mentions him again, etc.
DRoy

...I must say I'm a bit surprised. Official documents indicate, on the contrary, that he is, good or bad, an important witness.
Some researchers even think that it was he, and not Lawende, who has been called to identify the Seaside Home suspect. In any case, the question has been debated at length.

Have a look at the Sourcebook index, my friend : Lawende is referred to in 6 pages, Schwartz : 12.

All the best

[DRoy]

Hi DRoy,

well, perhaps I'm mad and stupid, in which case SPE, Warren, etc, are equally mad and stupid.
Is Warren the kind of man to write in an official report that Schwartz gave evidence at the inquest, if Schwartz did not ?
Once again, remember Lawende and his (non) description of the suspect at the Eddowes inquest.

Dave,

You aren't mad or stupid, you are someone i've respected and learned from over the years. I however disagree with you this time.

Like Jon hinted at earlier, once the first report came out it was assumed it was legit when it clearly wasn't. Everyone followed what they were told and reported the same, but it doesn't make it fact.

If Schwartz is such a good witness that he had to give his testimony in camera, how many times is he referenced to in any official documents, memoirs, newspapers, police officials like Abberline never mentions him again, etc.

Cheers
DRoy

[The Good Michael]

"Schwarz probably did not appear at the inquest because he spoke hardly any English and required an interpreter. The coroner had the authority to accept written statements in lieu of a witness actually appearing."

This could be another explanation.

hey that's what I've been saying and was called silly! Who's silly now. naysayers?

Mike

[DRoy]

The thug's name was Cachous Clay.
Hence the bruises.

Haha awesome!

DRoy

[DVV]

The thug's name was Cachous Clay.
Hence the bruises.