Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Schwartz/BS Man situation - My opinion only

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

  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Fanny Mortimer says that between 12:30 and 1am that she was at her door "nearly the whole time". People need to stop re-interpreting what she said. She was clear. She didn't hear or see Israel Schwartz, Pipeman or BSM, she didn't see Louis arrive, she didn't see 2 men running for help, she didn't see Lave standing at the gates....interesting that all these things are statements that are not corroborated by anyone. Fanny did see the young couple...as corroborated by Brown, and she did see Goldstein pass, as corroborated by Leon himself. That's 2 separate sightings, both corroborated. She was at her door continuously from 12:50 until 1am, and in the most glaring contradiction of all, she did not see Louis coming down Berner Street at all, something he said he was certain of. " I arrived at the club at precisely 1am".

    Leave a comment:


  • c.d.
    replied
    Hello Garza,

    The whole question of whether Mortimer would have heard the yell of Lipski of course depends on whether or not she was actually at her door at the time. We do know that she had a sick husband and several children. Could she have been drawn away from the door by them for a few moments? The other question of course is how accurate was she with her times? But let's give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she was at the door at the time.

    We now have to determine if she could have heard a "yell." Schwartz's statement said the man he saw "called out" Lipski. How does a yell differ from calling out? I have no idea. I see no reason for the B.S. man to yell in the same way that someone shouting "fire" would yell or someone screaming for help. I would assume that he was looking directly at Schwartz with an aggressive look on his face and maybe an accompanying gesture. That should have been sufficient to get his point across. Did he really need to scream at the top of his lungs?

    Your point about lack of mud on her dress is a good one. I was under the impression that there was mud on her dress so I can't really comment further on that point. Lack of abrasions on her hands would bolster the idea that Schwartz only witnessed a little street hassle and not a violent attack. That her body showed no signs of a struggle does not conflict with Schwartz's testimony because he did not witness her death. To me, it seems to indicate that he only saw a street hassle and that her real killer came along later.

    c.d.

    Leave a comment:


  • Garza
    replied
    Originally posted by c.d. View Post
    Hello Garza,

    Except that they weren't right outside her door and we don't know if she was actually standing at her door at the time. Remember her testimony is that she did so "off and on" for part of the claimed time.

    c.d.
    C.D.

    It practically was right outside the door, Fanny Mortimer lived a couple of doors down from the socialist club - that's about 15-20 ft in a terraced housing street. I don't know if you have had the chance to walk down Berner/Henriques Street but it is narrow - and with two storey houses lining each side of it - it would have created an echo - like a lot of Victorian era terraced housing (I have lived in a lot of said terraced housing, still do but my street is way wider than Berner Street and even then people just talking at night is amplified, let alone a drunk shouting.)

    The echo is likely why Mortimer could hear and identify footsteps outside her door.

    Now, have someone yell Lipski in a street like that in the dead of night - I can assure you someone would have heard it - in fact almost the whole street should have heard it. I find it hard to believe that no-one collaborated Schwartz's story if the events went down as he said they did.

    Also lack of physical evidence as well. Schwartz said that Liz Stride was pushed down to the ground - the ground consisting of a wet and dirty East End street. Yet we see no dirt or grime on her backside or front, nor her hands where she would instinctively put out to break a fall. No slight abrasions on her hands that they might have to break a violent push the ground. Nor did she have a dirty handkerchief that she might have wiped her wet/dirty hands with. Not to mention it was stated the body showed no signs of the struggle at all.

    Police during the Ripper investigation received a lot of false testimony - it is not at all unfathomable that a few squeezed through the cracks and were taken seriously by the police. Schwartz might have been mistaken in the time, street, identity or hell he may have just morbidly wanted to see a dead body or some excitement of being the centre of attention instead of the duldrum and hardship of an East End life.

    But still, the fact that no-one can corroborate a fantastic and loud event as Schwartz described fills me with skepticism.

    Leave a comment:


  • c.d.
    replied
    Hello Garza,

    Except that they weren't right outside her door and we don't know if she was actually standing at her door at the time. Remember her testimony is that she did so "off and on" for part of the claimed time.

    c.d.

    Leave a comment:


  • Garza
    replied
    Originally posted by drstrange169 View Post

    Take Schwartz out of the equation and all the testimonies add up. Put him in and nothing makes sense. Including his two different versions of what he claimed happened.
    I just find it very unlikely that Mortimer who seemed to be able to detect and identify a policeman's footsteps walking outside her door would be unable to hear someone shout "Lipski" and Liz giving a startled cry right outside her door.

    Bless her, she seems like one of those nosy little bittys, but she is definitely the most reliable witness we have on Berner Street - her and Goldstein.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cogidubnus
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
    If you look at what Israel claims though, there is real reason to doubt the veracity. He claims he was returning from the market, so why is he on Berner Street instead of Brick Lane at 12:45 at night?
    Sorry Michael...When does Schwartz say he was returning from the market? What is it that indicates he should be on Brick Lane? In his statement to the Star reporter he merely says he's been out all day...perhaps he was at work, as befits an LVP man supporting his wife.

    why would his wife need 13 hours to move that? It was far more likely she would be at their new home at that time.
    The reasons for the move and details thereof aren't stated. We don't even know any family or other commitments they may've had...for reasons unknown to us, they may not've been able to move in until somebody else moved out...we simply DON'T know. You can bet your boots though that Abberline DID know all these things though...If you think he didn't ask, then I suggest you're seriously underestimating the man...

    Was he in one of the cottages inside the passageway? Was he a club member or regular? What was the nature of his acquaintance with Woolf Wess? What did he buy or sell that day..if he bought, where was that stuff? Did he attend the meeting that night? Why doesn't he come forward before Sun evening?
    There seems to be no reason for this suggestion of a connection with the club...It appears to be a purely speculative invention for which there is no firm evidence at all.

    Cheers

    Dave

    Leave a comment:


  • Scott Nelson
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

    You sound a tad more positive than the last opinion piece you wrote about him.
    Anything changed?
    It was tongue in cheek.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    "Healthy speculation...there may be something to it..."..seems like it was a generally positive piece Jon. I personally do not believe that 3 men worked in tandem killing, seems a tad far to go for answers that may be much closer at hand. I do think that the club staffers misled the investigation, I think one due to his role in charge there, and the other due to the fact that he had arranged to meet the victim that night.

    What Israel Schwartz offers is a tonic for their fears of discovery of their deception...whatever it was, ..some events like the initial discovery transpiring earlier than they said, protecting someone at the club who did the deed, protecting the club from further scrutiny....Israel and BSM give them an "aha" moment,...see officers, a gentile anti-Semite was assaulting the poor woman outside the gates just before she was murdered....

    If you look at what Israel claims though, there is real reason to doubt the veracity. He claims he was returning from the market, so why is he on Berner Street instead of Brick Lane at 12:45 at night? Surely no-one believes his story he was checking to see if his wife had finished moving...she had ALL DAY to move what likely was very little, he likely wouldn't have left her all day if it involved some heavy lifting. Immigrant Jews had nothing...no furniture to speak of, hardly any clothes, why would his wife need 13 hours to move that? It was far more likely she would be at their new home at that time. Where on Berner Street did he live as of that morning? Was he in one of the cottages inside the passageway? Was he a club member or regular? What was the nature of his acquaintance with Woolf Wess? What did he buy or sell that day..if he bought, where was that stuff? Did he attend the meeting that night? Why doesn't he come forward before Sun evening? Why doesn't Goldstein come forward before Tuesday evening...we already know Fanny saw someone. Why does Issac K claim he was sent out alone, by Louis, at around the same time Schwartz later says he saw the "altercation"? Why doesn't Louis mention that? If you have stories based on only the word of individuals vs the word of 4 corroborated accounts of events, which would you gravitate towards?

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post
    Randy Williams had this whole thing scoped out if you guys would only take heed.
    You sound a tad more positive than the last opinion piece you wrote about him.
    Anything changed?
    https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...928#post554928

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post
    Randy Williams had this whole thing scoped out if you guys would only take heed.
    I hadn't heard of the man Scott, but after looking him up I find his choice of suspects amusing, since Ive championed some mischief ideas about Louis here for what seems like forever now. Only in context of Stride though. I find a terrorism type motive as having possibilities for some of these murders, people seeking social upheaval is a possible source. In fact I believe that Stride may have bene mistaken for someone spying on the club.

    The characterization of Diemshitz and Kozebrodski, in that intro to Mr Williams theory, is perhaps a better angle to approach these club members. Having a bad reputation is one thing, a smoking gun is another. Liz Strides murder could have been that smoking gun. But why would Louis kill her there, presuming she was killed for the same reasons he says the three men killed all the women, essentially to cause dramatic change in the area and challenge laws?

    Leave a comment:


  • Scott Nelson
    replied
    Randy Williams had this whole thing scoped out if you guys would only take heed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Good post Josh, I don't recall seeing that though Im sure I have over the years. That cart and pony sound after Fanny has gone inside is admittedly difficult to reconcile with what I believe is the truth among the chaff in these stories, but if it was as narrow as he claims, they might have had to move it on out for beginning of the investigation. The stables were investigated that night and were unused, I dont recall any police observation of the cart after they were on the scene. My real problem here is that by far a majority of witnesses claimed to have been in that passageway over a dying woman, with very little variance.. at around 12:45. If we leave peripheral problems aside, like Schwartz and the question of Browns ID, and we presume some timings for Fanny, at her door "off and on" during this time period, there isn't really a huge problem accepting those 4 witness times. Eagle "couldn't be sure" whether a body was there at 12:40, and he walked right past the spot where Liz would be.

    A street cant be deserted, then suddenly populated, then suddenly deserted again in a most probable scenario, sure, it could have been like that, but seemingly orchestrated events for me reek of imagination rather than recollection. The "goods" in Louis's cart would have to be offloaded regardless of the goings on, and Im not sure how late he could have accessed George Yard to stable the horse. There might be some traction in that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Joshua Rogan
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
    From an earlier post of mine on a thread about this subject ".....
    Heres another question...although Im still hoping someone will address the issue of Israels address on Berner Street. Does anyone recall a mention of Louis's horse and cart being in that yard or passageway, or out on the street, once Spooner, then Johnson arrived? I would imagine that once Louis discovered the body he would then have to make some decision about where to leave his cart and horse before running into find Mrs D in the kitchen. The stables were unused. The passageway is too narrow for that cart and horse
    and the investigators and bystanders. The street, or the yard seem likely spots. Anyone recall a mention that they were left in either of those places? My point is,.....did Fanny hear a cart and horse arriving...or being led away to offload the merchandise in its stable on George Yard? Which is probably where Louis should have led his horse before going to Berner Street....so, why did he stop in at the Club when he still had to offload his cart elsewhere?"
    ​​​​​​Morning Advertiser 2 Oct
    "It is a two-wheeled barrow. The pony is kept at George-yard, Cable-street. I do not keep it in the yard of the club. I was driving home to leave my goods. I drove into the yard"

    "...By a Juror.-Was there room for you to have passed the body with your cart?-Oh, yes. Mine is not a very wide cart; it only took up the centre of the passage."

    "...I went into the club, and asked where my missus was. I saw her in the front room on the ground floor.
    What did you do with the pony in the meantime?-I left it in the yard by itself, just outside the club door."

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
    What Fanny heard while not at her door is subject to scrutiny, "bootsteps and cart and horse" does not identify anyone in particular, nor can we be sure of the direction she believed the sounds were going.
    Given that Mortimer lives on a police beat means she hears those bootsteps three or four times an hour all day and night. Which means she knows the difference between a female passing, a policeman, or any another working man. For her to say it sounded like a policeman is very relevant, she is able to make an informed decision because she hears it constantly, whereas we cannot.

    The sound of the horse & cart coming nearer or going further away is all that matters.
    In fact, Diemschutz stores the horse in Cable street, which is south of his yard. He arrived from Commercial Rd north of the yard (where he passed Mortimer's house), and, if he was leaving (as you say) would then turn south towards Fairclough street, which does not pass her house.

    So you are saying Mortimer may not have been able to distinguish between a horse & cart passing her house from Commercial Rd. as opposed to one not passing her house but taking the route south towards Fairclough.
    That's a tough argument to try sell.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
    [LEFT]"I was standing at the door of my house nearly the whole time between half-past twelve and one o'clock this (Sunday) morning, and did not notice anything unusual. I had just gone indoors, and was preparing to go to bed, when I heard a commotion outside, and immediately ran out, thinking that there was another row at the Socialists' Club close by."

    "It was soon after one o'clock when I went out, and the only man whom I had seen pass through the street previously was a young man carrying a black shiny bag, who walked very fast down the street from the Commercial-road...I was told that the manager or steward of the club had discovered the woman on his return home in his pony cart. He drove through the gates, and my opinion is that he interrupted the murderer, who must have made his escape immediately under cover of the cart. If a man had come out of the yard before one o'clock I must have seen him."


    Im not sure why that's unclear.
    There's nothing there I disagree with, except, that you know it's not true, and that she subsequently says she first went to her door "just before a quarter to one", and stood there for ten minutes. Why don't you include that statement?

    From an earlier post of mine on a thread about this subject ".....

    Heres another question...although Im still hoping someone will address the issue of Israels address on Berner Street. Does anyone recall a mention of Louis's horse and cart being in that yard or passageway, or out on the street, once Spooner, then Johnson arrived? I would imagine that once Louis discovered the body he would then have to make some decision about where to leave his cart and horse before running into find Mrs D in the kitchen. The stables were unused. The passageway is too narrow for that cart and horse..
    No mention is made, but why would moving the horse & cart further into the yard out of everybody's way be newsworthy?, I guess for the same reason we are not told the colour of the horse.

    My point is,.....did Fanny hear a cart and horse arriving...or being led away to offload the merchandise in its stable on George Yard?......
    You seem to have some issues with people being unable to differentiate the direction of a sound if they are not in a direct path of the sound,...
    No, it's quite simple. As the sound (horse & cart) comes towards you it gets louder, as it moves away it gets fainter.
    Very basic science lesson, which makes your plot redundant.
    You're challenge, is to explain why she wouldn't know the difference when it's a basic scientific fact.


    Leave a comment:

Working...
X