The Schwartz/BS Man situation - My opinion only

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I can see your point, but in all probability the combination of all the above goes a long way to counter the laws of physics and space time.

Lave was clear that he didn't see anyone, despite going as far as the street. This was at a time when Stride was either there in the gateway, talking with another man, or already dead, and so his account is questionable.

Lave and Schwartz are the polar opposite and can't both be correct, because Lave didn't see any of the following...
BS Man
Pipeman
Schwartz
Grapeman
Parcelman
The other couple
PC Smith
Eagle
Goldstein
Stride

Based on his own account, he would have seen at least one of them.

Lave is certainly an interesting character, and in sense he is the anti-Schwartz, which explains why almost all Schwartz believers are very reluctant to discuss him, other than to dismiss him.

Mrs Diemschitz: Some twenty minutes previously a member of the club had entered by the side door, but he states that he did not then notice anybody lying prostrate in the yard. It was, however, very dark at the time, and he might, in consequence, have failed to see any such object on the ground.

If this is a reference to Eagle, then Lave must have gone back inside before this. How could he have missed Stride? Perhaps Lave, in saying he went as far as the street, actually wandered around Berner St, and missed seeing Stride and her companion go into the yard. Sound a little far-fetched but that's all that I can think of right now. This still would not explain why Lave does not see them when he returns to the club, unless they have gone down to the back of the yard. Hello, Yaffa?

It would be interesting for someone to C.G.I recreate the murder site, not just the bricks and mortar, but also the inclusion of every individual who claimed to have been there or witnessed something at the times they claimed to have been there..and then run it in real time, and then observe the chaos that follows.

Yes, that would be interesting.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Screaming would be made all the more difficult if Stride had Cachou in her mouth at the time

RD

Let me explain why I think that would not have been possible, even in theory.

Phillips: The left arm was extended from the elbow, and a packet of cachous was in the hand. Similar ones were in the gutter.

Blackwell: I can confirm Dr. Phillips as to the appearances at the mortuary. I may add that I removed the cachous from the left hand of the deceased, which was nearly open. The packet was lodged between the thumb and the first finger, and was partially hidden from view. It was I who spilt them in removing them from the hand.

That would seem to explain the cachous in the gutter. However, when Phillips was recalled, he was asked...

Does the presence of the cachous in the left hand indicate that the murder was committed very suddenly and without any struggle?

...and replied...

Some of the cachous were scattered about the yard.

Cachous scattered about the yard is very different from cachous in the gutter. So, what accounts for this scattering?

Foreman: Do you not think that the woman would have dropped the packet of cachous altogether if she had been thrown to the ground before the injuries were inflicted?
Phillips: That is an inference which the jury would be perfectly entitled to draw.

Imagine, for the sake of argument, that the foreman was referring to the victim's throwing to the ground by the BS man. If we infer that this would result in Stride dropping the cachous packet, we should expect to see cachous scattered about on the footway, outside the line of the gates, but there is no evidence for this. On the contrary, the evidence is for a momentary altercation in the yard, just prior to Stride being forced to the ground, in which some of the cachous are scattered around.

All the above suggests that the cachous packet does not make an appearance until Stride is in the yard. So, why then?

[Lewis C]

Lave is certainly an interesting character, and in sense he is the anti-Schwartz, which explains why almost all Schwartz believers are very reluctant to discuss him, other than to dismiss him.

Mrs Diemschitz: Some twenty minutes previously a member of the club had entered by the side door, but he states that he did not then notice anybody lying prostrate in the yard. It was, however, very dark at the time, and he might, in consequence, have failed to see any such object on the ground.

If this is a reference to Eagle, then Lave must have gone back inside before this. How could he have missed Stride? Perhaps Lave, in saying he went as far as the street, actually wandered around Berner St, and missed seeing Stride and her companion go into the yard. Sound a little far-fetched but that's all that I can think of right now. This still would not explain why Lave does not see them when he returns to the club, unless they have gone down to the back of the yard. Hello, Yaffa?



Yes, that would be interesting.

Hi Andrew,

In Jeff Hamm's timeline, he estimates that if the Schwartz incident happened, it would have begun no earlier than 12:48. Under that scenario, Lave would probably have been back in the club prior to the Schwartz incident.

How could Lave have missed Stride is a fair question, but I think it's a fair question whether the Schwartz incident occurred or not.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Hi Andrew,

In Jeff Hamm's timeline, he estimates that if the Schwartz incident happened, it would have begun no earlier than 12:48. Under that scenario, Lave would probably have been back in the club prior to the Schwartz incident.

How could Lave have missed Stride is a fair question, but I think it's a fair question whether the Schwartz incident occurred or not.

Let's suppose that the 'window of opportunity' is the 5-minute period, 12:48-12:53. Suppose also that Diemshitz arrives just a few minutes earlier than the Harris clock suggested to him. Police timings would justify this supposition. Also suppose that Fanny locks up a few minutes prior to Diemschitz arrival. One press report supports that supposition. That would place the lock up at about 12:53. Realizing that she sees black bag man just before turning in for the night, results in a catastrophe of one sort or another. The simplest being that the Schwartz incident did not occur. A more intriguing one being that the identities of Israel Schwartz and Leon Goldstein, must collapse into one.

[Scott Nelson]

I can see your point, but in all probability the combination of all the above goes a long way to counter the laws of physics and space time.

Lave was clear that he didn't see anyone, despite going as far as the street. This was at a time when Stride was either there in the gateway, talking with another man, or already dead, and so his account is questionable.

Lave and Schwartz are the polar opposite and can't both be correct, because Lave didn't see any of the following...
BS Man
Pipeman
Schwartz
Grapeman
Parcelman
The other couple
PC Smith
Eagle
Goldstein
Stride

Based on his own account, he would have seen at least one of them.

It would be interesting for someone to C.G.I recreate the murder site, not just the bricks and mortar, but also the inclusion of every individual who claimed to have been there or witnessed something at the times they claimed to have been there..and then run it in real time, and then observe the chaos that follows.

You have to decide for yourself how reliable Lave and any others would have been at the scene. Personally, I would give Lave quite a bit of leeway timewise and he could have easily missed others who came on the scene. Was he, for example, inebriated and off on his time estimate by up to half an hour or more? This is just an example that could also apply to others (not necessarily drunkenness) who came into the yard or the street alone.

[Lewis C]

Let's suppose that the 'window of opportunity' is the 5-minute period, 12:48-12:53. Suppose also that Diemshitz arrives just a few minutes earlier than the Harris clock suggested to him. Police timings would justify this supposition. Also suppose that Fanny locks up a few minutes prior to Diemschitz arrival. One press report supports that supposition. That would place the lock up at about 12:53. Realizing that she sees black bag man just before turning in for the night, results in a catastrophe of one sort or another. The simplest being that the Schwartz incident did not occur. A more intriguing one being that the identities of Israel Schwartz and Leon Goldstein, must collapse into one.

In Jeff's timeline, Fanny locked up at 12:47, which would put Goldstein slightly before that. So if the Schwartz incident occurred after she locked up, there would be no conflict between those two.

[c.d.]

I believe you suppose the BS man went away, and JtR came along a few minutes later. What is it about the man's behaviour that suggests he would have gone away quietly? I regard his going away so that Jack can come along, unimpeded by his presence, as convenient supposition, because it sits uneasily with Schwartz's account of the man, in the police report.

Since I don't know the reason behind his encounter with Stride or what his intent was it makes it difficult to say. Perhaps he felt like he had made his point with something along the lines of don't make me come back here, bitch.

c.d.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

You have to decide for yourself how reliable Lave and any others would have been at the scene. Personally, I would give Lave quite a bit of leeway timewise and he could have easily missed others who came on the scene. Was he, for example, inebriated and off on his time estimate by up to half an hour or more? This is just an example that could also apply to others (not necessarily drunkenness) who came into the yard or the street alone.

Half an hour or more? That would put him close to the end of the club event, rather than close to the time of the murder. So, what about Eagle? He didn't see anything unusual either. How do you explain that away?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

In Jeff's timeline, Fanny locked up at 12:47, which would put Goldstein slightly before that. So if the Schwartz incident occurred after she locked up, there would be no conflict between those two.

Catastrophe avoided. The only problem is that 12:47 bears no resemblance to anything Fanny is quoted as saying or reported as saying. That might okay if the whole timeline were being pulled backward to base it on police time rather than Diemschitz time. Otherwise, it is just arbitrary.

[Lewis C]

Catastrophe avoided. The only problem is that 12:47 bears no resemblance to anything Fanny is quoted as saying or reported as saying. That might okay if the whole timeline were being pulled backward to base it on police time rather than Diemschitz time. Otherwise, it is just arbitrary.

He's going by Dr. Blackwell time, but that only puts Diemschutz's arrival about 1 1/2 minutes before 1:00, so it doesn't change things very much. 12:47 seems a bit early for Fanny to be locking up to me as well.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Since I don't know the reason behind his encounter with Stride or what his intent was it makes it difficult to say. Perhaps he felt like he had made his point with something along the lines of don't make me come back here, bitch.

Difficult to say? Made his (inexplicable) point? These should be clues to you that something is not right.

The irony with this attempt is that sometimes the excuse offered for Stride standing in the gateway is that her male companion had business to do, either in the loo or in the club. So, she has to stand and wait just outside the perimeter of the yard, like she's a third-class citizen. Now you're telling me she's getting in big trouble for doing just that! The poor girl can't win.

Perhaps it's time to realize that the woman standing in the gateway notion, was just a convenient fiction.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

He's going by Dr. Blackwell time, but that only puts Diemschutz's arrival about 1 1/2 minutes before 1:00, so it doesn't change things very much. 12:47 seems a bit early for Fanny to be locking up to me as well.

I'm sure you're aware of the reference to Goldstein in Swanson's report:

about 1 a.m. 30th Leon Goldstein of 22 Christian Street Commercial Road, called at Leman St. & stated that he was the man that passed down Berner St. with a black bag at that hour, that the bag contained empty cigarette boxes & that he had left a coffee house in Spectacle Alley a short time before.

If Fanny locked up about 12:47, and saw black bag man just before this, then why doesn't Swanson's report reflect this? One possibility is that Goldstein misjudged the time by the same +15 minutes that Mortimer did (assuming the 12:47 scenario), which would be some coincidence. Another possibility is that Goldstein knew the time was about 12:45, but stated "about 1am" to the police, to make his statement as compatible as possible with Mortimer's press quotes.

Assuming the second scenario for the sake of argument, leads to a fascinating situation. Goldstein thought and was correct that he walked along Berner St at about 12:45, but lied out of self-preservation, and then we have a man going by the name of Israel Schwartz, who also thought he walked along Berner St at about 12:45, but to maintain his individual identity, it must be assumed he got the time wrong, and Fanny Mortimer even more so.

[Lewis C]

I'm sure you're aware of the reference to Goldstein in Swanson's report:

about 1 a.m. 30th Leon Goldstein of 22 Christian Street Commercial Road, called at Leman St. & stated that he was the man that passed down Berner St. with a black bag at that hour, that the bag contained empty cigarette boxes & that he had left a coffee house in Spectacle Alley a short time before.

If Fanny locked up about 12:47, and saw black bag man just before this, then why doesn't Swanson's report reflect this? One possibility is that Goldstein misjudged the time by the same +15 minutes that Mortimer did (assuming the 12:47 scenario), which would be some coincidence. Another possibility is that Goldstein knew the time was about 12:45, but stated "about 1am" to the police, to make his statement as compatible as possible with Mortimer's press quotes.

Assuming the second scenario for the sake of argument, leads to a fascinating situation. Goldstein thought and was correct that he walked along Berner St at about 12:45, but lied out of self-preservation, and then we have a man going by the name of Israel Schwartz, who also thought he walked along Berner St at about 12:45, but to maintain his individual identity, it must be assumed he got the time wrong, and Fanny Mortimer even more so.

Under this scenario, I think that Fanny is only off by 7 or 8 minutes, but otherwise I pretty much agree with this. If one wanted to use a scenario similar to Jeff's, I think it works better if Fanny and Goldstein are moved 3 or 4 minutes later. That would leave just enough time for the Schwartz incident, making it unlikely that there would be enough time for anyone but BS man to be her killer. So if someone thought that the Schwartz incident really happened but that BS man didn't kill Stride, he would want a different timeline.

[Scott Nelson]

Half an hour or more? That would put him close to the end of the club event, rather than close to the time of the murder. So, what about Eagle? He didn't see anything unusual either. How do you explain that away?

I've already said that, for those who had them, timepieces weren't accurately synchronized, and that people could have easily missed what others may have seen by a few moments or more, both before and after an event, like going outside or entering the club.

[JeffHamm]

Under this scenario, I think that Fanny is only off by 7 or 8 minutes, but otherwise I pretty much agree with this. If one wanted to use a scenario similar to Jeff's, I think it works better if Fanny and Goldstein are moved 3 or 4 minutes later. That would leave just enough time for the Schwartz incident, making it unlikely that there would be enough time for anyone but BS man to be her killer. So if someone thought that the Schwartz incident really happened but that BS man didn't kill Stride, he would want a different timeline.

Hi Lewis C,

While the times in the simulation are all estimates, I would hesitate to move Fanny Mortimer much later. There are a number of different press reports where she states different things about what she did and so forth. To try and make sense of her conflicting statements, I looked for reports where she talks about events that could be linked to other, more reliable events.

As such, I tended to fit her in based upon her statement that she went out onto her doorstep for about 10 minutes, after hearing the footsteps of a policeman go by. That would be PC Smith, on his patrol prior to the crime being discovered. PC Smith indicates he patrolled Berner street between 12:30 and 12:35, placing Fanny on her porch from 12:35 to 12:45. Those are the times as stated. I've looked into the reliability of witness statements with regards to estimating temporal durations, and we tend to overestimate short durations. Using the data from studies into duration reliability (i.e. Fanny's statement of being on her porch for 10 minutes), then 95% of the time if a witness says 10 minutes, the actual time falls between 3m 48s - 27m 00s! (We really are rubbish at this), with the average being 7m 56s (so on average, the true duration is shorter than stated, but there are some cases where the true time is much longer too; given the skewed pattern in the data, the median would be even less than 7m 58s, so it is more common to be less than 7m 58s than longer).

Anyway, after doing some other calculations, based upon PC Smiths beat, and such things, the times I suggest get adjusted to "Dr. Blackwell Standard Time - BST", which ends up with Fanny on her doorstep between 12:39 and 12:47 (BST). And if we compare BST with the witnesses stated times, we see that the differences are in terms of a matter of a few minutes, which is what one would expect given everyone is either estimating the time or basing it on different clocks. But nothing is out by an amount that is unsettling.

We also have James Brown, who testifies that around 12:45 he sees a woman he thinks is Stride (at the corner of Berner and Fairclough) and 15 minutes later (when at home) he hears the men from the club running past. So that places the "club search" around 1:00ish. A 15 minute estimated duration is (on average) an actual duration 12m 33s, and so after working out the BST for the club runners to go down Fairclough (where they find Spooner), I work backwards to place James Brown at the corner of Berner Street and Fairclough at 12:48, which I would say is hard to argue inconsistent with his stated time of 12:45.

Fanny never mentions James Brown, and her going inside just before 12:48, when James Brown then passes, easily accounts for that. I accept we could consider it unsurprising she never mentions him given he never goes into Berner Street itself, so she could easily have not noticed him down at the end of the street. But Fanny never sees Stride either, and if Brown's sighting is genuine, then the later Fanny is on her doorstep, the less time there is for Stride to get to where she's eventually killed. Again, perhaps that's not a problem, and one could adjust Fanny's times, which then impacts upon PC Smith's patrol times, and still get acceptable ranges of error. In fact, I don't doubt that one can adjust the times a few minutes from the ones I've used, as these are just simulations and I have to input specific values. If I had the time, it would be nice to be able to present things in terms of "ranges" of acceptable values, but that would require me programming an entirely new application.

Piecing everything together is not a matter of looking at individual statements, but one has to take everything into account at once, and then see if there is a coherent forest despite the trees. And if we think of all the events as if they are connected by strings, then if one focuses on one specific person (i.e. Fanny) and adjust them, the effect of that adjustment reverberates throughout the whole model, impacting upon the coherence between other statements (i.e. if we adjust Fanny, we also adjust PC Smith and James Brown, which could result in conflict with PC Smith and/or James Brown and some other set of statements, and so forth.

Anyway, I don't mean this to suggest that the times I have are the only ones, far from it. Rather, I'm just suggesting caution with making adjustments while focused on a specific point in the evening's events as the impact of those adjustments need to then be evaluated along all of the implications they create. A sort of butterfly effect.

The Stride case is, out of all the cases I've tried to create simulations for, the most complicated one because we have so many people involved. To be honest, when I started working on the Stride case I had expected that it would just be such a mess that there was going to be all sorts of conflict emerge and no real pattern would emerge. Surprisingly, tying things together by estimating travel times, and taking into account the errors associated with estimating durations, I was able to link almost everything back to get BST values. And those BST values tend to be within 5 minutes or less of the time the person states.

- Jeff