Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Schwartz/BS Man situation - My opinion only

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Harry D View Post
    Does no one else find it odd that a non-English speaking Jew (who were usually recalcitrant and distrusting of the authorities) willingly came forward to the police? Maybe Israel Schwartz was an honest guy, although I question that since he left a woman in distress and never searched for a policeman.
    I think that's very relevant Harry, because it seems clear by some of the investigative comments that many police had anti Semitic views. Anderson for one.
    Michael Richards

    Comment


    • The distrust between the immigrants and the Police, the anti-Semitic climate generally, the perception of the Socialists as Anarchists, all contributed to what I believe is a story that was intended to deflect suspicions about Liz Strides murderers ethnicity. Its why Israel adds "Lipski", it establishes the assailant as most probably gentile.
      Michael Richards

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Harry D View Post
        Does no one else find it odd that a non-English speaking Jew (who were usually recalcitrant and distrusting of the authorities) willingly came forward to the police? Maybe Israel Schwartz was an honest guy, although I question that since he left a woman in distress and never searched for a policeman.
        hi harry
        no I don't. he was a cowherd, but really no reason to question his honesty. especially since his peaked cap suspect is corroborated by a host of other witnesses that night.
        "Is all that we see or seem
        but a dream within a dream?"

        -Edgar Allan Poe


        "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
        quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

        -Frederick G. Abberline

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

          hi harry
          no I don't. he was a cowherd, but really no reason to question his honesty. especially since his peaked cap suspect is corroborated by a host of other witnesses that night.
          Sounds like a load of old bull, to me.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Harry D View Post

            Sounds like a load of old bull, to me.
            lol-meant to write coward.
            "Is all that we see or seem
            but a dream within a dream?"

            -Edgar Allan Poe


            "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
            quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

            -Frederick G. Abberline

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
              The distrust between the immigrants and the Police, the anti-Semitic climate generally, the perception of the Socialists as Anarchists, all contributed to what I believe is a story that was intended to deflect suspicions about Liz Strides murderers ethnicity. Its why Israel adds "Lipski", it establishes the assailant as most probably gentile.
              No, the addition of Lipski in Schwartz's statement implicated a Jewish offender because Schwartz's description is that Lipski was shouted at the offender's confederate. And as Jews and Gentiles did not commonly hang out together, that greatly raised the possibility of a Jewish offender as well - according to Schwartz.

              It was Anderson who tells us that Lipski was probably directed at Schwartz, and not pipeman, but Schwartz's telling implicates a Jewish confederate and therefore probably a Jewish offender.

              - Jeff

              Comment


              • Originally posted by JeffHamm View Post

                No, the addition of Lipski in Schwartz's statement implicated a Jewish offender because Schwartz's description is that Lipski was shouted at the offender's confederate. And as Jews and Gentiles did not commonly hang out together, that greatly raised the possibility of a Jewish offender as well - according to Schwartz.

                It was Anderson who tells us that Lipski was probably directed at Schwartz, and not pipeman, but Schwartz's telling implicates a Jewish confederate and therefore probably a Jewish offender.

                - Jeff
                bingo Jeff
                youd think if they were going to come up with a conspiracy they would get there story and there times straight. no what we have here are typical and innocuous witness statements in which not everything is clear and witness times are off. par for the course in a typical criminal investigation.
                thank god there are posters like you and others on here that realize this.
                "Is all that we see or seem
                but a dream within a dream?"

                -Edgar Allan Poe


                "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                -Frederick G. Abberline

                Comment


                • >>Maybe draw some attention to the growing antisemitism too. His "theatrical" bent might explain some aspects of the story. Fled incontinently might be one, who would admit to that when no-one saw them? Why say you peed your pants? To add drama.<<

                  Ah! I'm glad you explained, I can now see where your misunderstanding is coming from.

                  Deimshitz and many club members were an antisemites, in the original sense of the word, someone who despises Judaism, hence the riots against the club led by the Rabbis. If Schwartz was an Orthodox Jew as Abbereline implied, he would have a distinct disapproval of club members.

                  And the word "incontinently" has nothing to do with "incontinence".
                  Last edited by drstrange169; 11-14-2019, 10:49 PM.
                  dustymiller
                  aka drstrange

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Harry D View Post
                    Does no one else find it odd that a non-English speaking Jew (who were usually recalcitrant and distrusting of the authorities) willingly came forward to the police? Maybe Israel Schwartz was an honest guy, although I question that since he left a woman in distress and never searched for a policeman.
                    Hello Harry,

                    Whether Schwartz was a coward or not is completely irrelevant to the veracity of his story. As for searching for a policeman, he did not speak English remember?

                    c.d.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by drstrange169 View Post
                      >>Maybe draw some attention to the growing antisemitism too. His "theatrical" bent might explain some aspects of the story. Fled incontinently might be one, who would admit to that when no-one saw them? Why say you peed your pants? To add drama.<<

                      Ah! I'm glad you explained, I can now see where your misunderstanding is coming from.

                      Deimshitz and many club members were an antisemites, in the original sense of the word, someone who despises Judaism, hence the riots against the club led by the Rabbis. If Schwartz was an Orthodox Jew as Abbereline implied, he would have a distinct disapproval of club members.

                      And the word "incontinently" has nothing to do with "incontinence".
                      ?? I think Ive replied to your last post based on that line, but unlike other posters, I wont cover my eyes when you make them.

                      Michael Richards

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

                        bingo Jeff
                        youd think if they were going to come up with a conspiracy they would get there story and there times straight. no what we have here are typical and innocuous witness statements in which not everything is clear and witness times are off. par for the course in a typical criminal investigation.
                        thank god there are posters like you and others on here that realize this.
                        Abberline confirmed it was used regularly and derogatorily, if he called it to his "confederate" then he might just be pointing out that a Lipski has just walked up on him. Its pretty obvious though that it was directed at Schwartz, just as obvious that it was part of the story to deflect suspicion to a gentile assailant, as it is that Israels, BSM and Pipeman never had any encounter as Israel creatively described.
                        Michael Richards

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

                          Abberline confirmed it was used regularly and derogatorily, if he called it to his "confederate" then he might just be pointing out that a Lipski has just walked up on him. Its pretty obvious though that it was directed at Schwartz, just as obvious that it was part of the story to deflect suspicion to a gentile assailant, as it is that Israels, BSM and Pipeman never had any encounter as Israel creatively described.
                          It is to us, but Schwartz initially reported that he thought it was yelled to an accomplice. And that's what puts to rest the "club cover up" story - Schwartz's story doesn't direct attention away from Jewish offenders, it in fact accuses at least one of two offenders of being Jewish!

                          It doesn't matter that Schwartz was mistaken, and Lipski was more likely directed at him and not pipeman, that's Anderson's correction of a witness misunderstanding what it was they witnessed - it's certainly not the story the club would come up with as a way of accusing a gentile - you don't claim the offender was Jewish in order to direct police attention towards a non-Jewish offender.

                          Schwartz's story as he originally told it (so the version closest to what the conspirators put together as their "cover story") accuses a Jew as one of a pair of offenders. Therefore, Schwartz was not sent in with a story to direct police attention away from a Jewish offender.

                          - Jeff

                          Comment


                          • But if you take the report in The Star, 'pipeman' shouts 'a warning' to BS man, after coming out of a pub? This, apparently, is a first hand statement from Schwartz. Swanson's report and The Star both portray the same event, but with some devils in the details. Personally, I think Schwartz gave a true statement, he just either wasn't on Berner Street, or was, at an earlier time. Witnessing a barney in Cherry Tree Passage, then running down Backchurch Lane to the arches on Pinchin St maybe?
                            Just a thought.
                            Your evening of swing has been cancelled.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Al Bundy's Eyes View Post
                              But if you take the report in The Star, 'pipeman' shouts 'a warning' to BS man, after coming out of a pub? This, apparently, is a first hand statement from Schwartz. Swanson's report and The Star both portray the same event, but with some devils in the details. Personally, I think Schwartz gave a true statement, he just either wasn't on Berner Street, or was, at an earlier time. Witnessing a barney in Cherry Tree Passage, then running down Backchurch Lane to the arches on Pinchin St maybe?
                              Just a thought.
                              Sure, maybe, but that still isn't a club cover story. I'm not suggesting it makes Schwartz's story unquestionable, I'm saying that Schwartz's story contradicts the hypothesis it was set up as a cover story by the club, which is the basis for the whole club conspiracy theory - that whole idea ends up contradicting itself. If the club members decided to fabricate a story so that the murderer of Stride would be cast as a gentile, then Schwartz's story should have as characters in his story a cast of gentiles, but it doesn't - his original story is that "pipeman was referred to as Lipski - a Jew", therefore, his story cannot be a story designed to direct attention towards a gentile.

                              The fact that Anderson, through questioning of Schwartz, concludes that Schwartz was mistaken is irrelevant, and we have to set aside what we now know - that Lipski was a derogatory name used against Jews and was probably directed at Schwartz - that wasn't what Schwartz first said or conveyed. But it does sound like something someone less familiar with the English speaking people of the area might do, which adds a level of credence to his story. Whether that boosts it to credible or not is still open to interpretation.

                              - Jeff

                              Comment


                              • I'm not of the opinion there was a cover up/ conspiracy/ Schwartz was a patsy or such. I think he genuinely saw something and went to the police of his own free will after hearing of the murder.
                                But when all the witness statements are taken as a whole, they do build a picture of that nights events. Until you add Schwartz.
                                Hmm.
                                Your evening of swing has been cancelled.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X