Who Died in Dutfield's Yard?

[Michael W Richards]

3 of the 4 corroborative witnesses I keep harping on came from inside the club and therefore they all had a clock to assess the current time by. Fanny Mortimer had access to a clock in her home. Very reasonable assumptions. Therefore, Louis didn't arrive "precisely" at 1 by Fannys clock, and he was off by as much as 20 minutes with the club clock.

I agree Jon that Defense mode is active, but not that it clouds open mindedness for contradictory arguments that make sense and don't discard evidence with corroboration for unsubstantiated singular stories.

[DJA]

In the 1950s we had two clocks.

The living room's was a coach clock Mum took pride in that she wound daily.
It kept excellent time and woe betide anyone who touched it.

The kitchen's alarm clock was a different matter,it gained time.
At times it was as much as 20 minutes "fast".
Not a big deal as in the morning as it got us off to work/school early.
We knew from the radio how fast it was running.

Adjusting the time meant winding a clock forward,as winding it back would break the mechanism.

I've seen businesses manipulated clocks to suit a purpose.
One pub kept their clock 5 minutes early to give them a bit more time to get customers off licensed premises at closing time.
South Molle Island used anti daylight savings,the idea being that guests would spend an extra hour in the bar rather than out in the sunshine.

[drstrange169]

Wick's comments is spot on.


>>1. What Diemshutz says is unproven until such time as it could be substantiated. There are no corroborative accounts.<<

There IS corroborative, you, for some reason, despite being repeatedly told, choose to ignore it

Diemshitz is reported as saying,

" I ... returned home exactly at 1 a.m. Sunday morning. I noticed the time at Harris's tobacco shop at the corner of Commercial-road and Berner-street."

Mortimer claimed,

"Locking the door, she prepared to retire to bed ... in about four minutes' time she heard the pony cart pass the house, and remarked upon the circumstance to her husband."

So, indisputably, we have a pony and cart going down Berner Street very close, "about four minutes" to the time Diemshitz claimed to drive down the street. It has been pointed out to you, but, you've conveniently ignored, the indisputable fact there was no universally synced time in 1888, even more so in the poverty stricken East End where expensive (accurate) clocks did not exist in the houses of the poor.

The time difference is understandable and acceptable to any unbiased serious researcher.



>> Direct Inquest quote from Spooner.."I believe it was twenty-five minutes to one o'clock when I arrived in the yard."<<

Note the words "I believe" in that sentence. He doesn't know, he's guessing.

But, yet again you ignore the actual evidence ... his other "direct inquest quotes",

"On Sunday morning, between half-past twelve and one o'clock, I was standing outside the "Beehive," at the corner of Christian-street and Fairclough-street, along with a young woman."

And very specifically on the subject of his accuracy in time keeping.

"The only means I had of fixing the time was by the closing of the public houses."

Indisputably, Spooner's evidence with regards to time is unreliable, so we have to cross reference what he said with other witnesses to see which time is the more likely.

Spooner claimed, on arriving,

"I put my hand under the chin and lifted it. The chin was slightly warm"

Mortimer said,

"A man touched her face, and said it was quite warm"

Since Mortimer didn't leave her house until some time past 1:am, her statement confirms Spooner's first claim about being outside the Beehive at 1:00 am.

Spooner went on to claim,

"I stood by the side of the body for four or five minutes, until the last witness arrived."

PC Lamb tells us,

"About one o'clock on Sunday morning last I was in Commercial-road, between Christian-street and Batty-street."

Lamb was with the PC who had just finished fixed point duty at 1:am, so we have another independent, reliable, corroboration of Spooner's first time estimate of 1:am.

Solid evidence.

Now let's look at Spooner's other time.

"I believe it was twenty-five minutes to one o'clock when I arrived in the yard."

According to your version, Heshburg arrived after hearing the police whistles, Kozebrodski was running around the streets yelling and crowd had gathered, yet Mortimer said,

"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."

And,

"The quiet and deserted character of the street appears even to have struck her at the time."

Her story of a quiet street, devoid of the things you claim were happening, is also corroborated by Goldstein, Charles Letchford's sister and James Brown.

This is all solid evidence.

Heshburg, who's admits he was guessing the time,

" It was about a quarter to one o'clock, I should think"

is provably wrong in his time estimate, as we know the police whistle he heard was blown
AFTER 1:00am. Heshburg's time is further disputed by Mortimer, Letchford, Goldstein and Brown who all saw and heard none of claimed noise and panic.



Since Issac uses only "I" when describing what happened when he went out for help..<<

Since you'd have us believe Issacs "I" inviable.
and in the next sentence claim Eagle's "I" is not, you'll understand why we use terms like cherrypicking.

[Wickerman]

Michael, you are clearly in defense mode, you're not listening to reason. you have a position to defend and that is all you are interested in.
Not caring how this makes you look is another matter altogether.

[Michael W Richards]

1. What Diemshutz says is unproven until such time as it could be substantiated. There are no corroborative accounts. Its is therefore not considered a factual account. It is a fact that he said what he said.
2. Fanny Mortimer directly contradicts Louis's contention that he arrived "precisely at 1". We know she was where she said she was because she saw Leon Goldstein just before 1. Since Louis has no corroborative evidence to support his claim, the verified eye witness account discredits his story.
3. Direct Inquest quote from Spooner.."I believe it was twenty-five minutes to one o'clock when I arrived in the yard."
4. Since Issac uses only "I" when describing what happened when he went out for help..."at the request of Diemshutz or some other member"..and since Issac Kozebrodski's account of where he was when is substantiated and verified by multiple eye witness accounts, he left alone around 12:40-12:45. Just like he said. There on the paper. For anyone to read.
5. Eagle was preoccupied with the policeman and may not have noticed Issac joining him, but then again if Issac and multiple other witnesses are correct about the times and events they recalled, then Eagle didn't tell the truth about what he saw at 12:40 when he got back and went into that passageway anyway.

The sources perceived credibility is all there is here. What the cumulative evidence suggests in the question of what time members first gathered around a dying woman in the passageway, its abundantly clear that the vast majority believed that time to be between 12:40-12:45. That's at least 15 minutes earlier than what Louis claimed, and smack on the time Eagle and Lave claimed they was also there. 4 witnesses say they were there, that Louis was there, and 4 corroborated stories vs 1 story unsubstantiated by any other evidence isn't even a fair match. Louis, Eagle and Lave said they were somewhere at a time when 4 other witnesses say a small group of men were already around a dying woman in that same location. They saw nothing..not even each other. Not credible considering the contradictory evidence and its ramifications.

[drstrange169]

>>You quote Diemshitz and suggests that's some kind of a factual baseline.."
What is a fact is that Diemshitz says he brought Spooner to the club"...<<

Again, you seem to have trouble with the definition of the word "fact". It IS a fact that Diemshitz says he brought Spooner to the club.


>> All along my contention is that Diemshitz is already provably wrong on his assertion that he arrived "precisely" at 1..his words. <<

Except you have NEVER proved Diemshitz's is time is wrong. He says it was the time he saw on Harris's clock. No other witness references Harris clock, so how can you, by definition of the word "provably" prove him wrong? Where is your evidence that Harris clock was synced to any other witnesses time?

As for the rest of your post you've simply avoided explaining why the "facts I've listed are wrong and your personal opinion trumps them.

A classic example, who blew the whistle Heshberg heard and why didn't Fanny, or anybody else, see and hear it?


>> Spooner says he was there with the other men around 12:40.<<

Again, you ignore the fact the he also said he was at the corner of the street at 1:00 a.m. Again, you ignore the fact that he said he didn't know the time and was guessing. I understand people with theories will cherrypick, but that doesn't alter the actual evidence available.


>>You presume Issac[s] is actually Issac Kozebrodski, yet Issac Kozebrodksi says he went out alone around 12:40-12;45<<

Can you quote me where he uses the word alone? No of course you can't. It's your inference, he simply doesn't mention who followed him out. By your logic Kozebrodski is a "proven lair" because, Eagle doesn't mention that Koze was with him when they met the policeman. Omission is not a statement of fact, it is simply an omission. Once again you are cherrypicking what you want and ignoring what contradicts it.


>>Issac doesn't say he met Spooner, or anyone else except Eagle on his way back.<<

And Eagle doesn't say he met anyone when he met the policemen, so bang goes your reasoning credibility.

[Abby Normal]

>> In that first Line Fanny Mortimer can only be used to invalidate Louis's claim he arrived "precisely" at 1, she doesn't confirm anything he said.<<

For someone who has been here so long, you don't seem to have grasped the notion that in the Victorian east end of London people didn't have mobile phones, televisions or radios. There was no such thing as universally synced time. Diemshitz gave the time on the tobacconists clock, Mortimer gave her own time. That they might vary to some degree is normal. What counts is that she did not see or hear the scenario you've invented, but she did hear Deimshitz pass after she went in. Therefore she validities Deimshitz's story. As do all the other sworn statements.

>> James Brown didn't see the street in front of the gates.<<

We don't know that, because he didn't say. What we do know, is that, like Fanny and Letchford's sister should have heard the commotion and they all should have seen Kosebrodski and they should have seen Spooner running around. Instead, Brown conirms these incidents happen 15 minutes later.

>>Among the witnesses you state were singing upstairs, 2 said that they were by Louis and others and the dying woman at 12:40-12:45, 1 who arrived aback at the club at 12:30 said the same. And Spooners estimate also puts him there at that time.<<

Facts, again facts! They were guessing the time. None gave a precise time or indication that they looked at a clock. weighed against speculation are all the other witnesses who weren't re-written by journalists, but stated under oath. Timings that only fit an after 1:00 a.m. scenario.

>>Easy to see why these cases cant be properly evaluated,.... myth, denial and presumptions. <<

Precisely so.

Speculation, tailored to fit personal theories over actual evidence, is the bane of this research.

no truer words have been spoken

[Michael W Richards]

Ive read the responses and Ill just say that Im very content with my post #199. You quote Diemshitz and suggests that's some kind of a factual baseline.."

What is a fact is that Diemshitz says he brought Spooner to the club"...All along my contention is that Diemshitz is already provably wrong on his assertion that he arrived "precisely" at 1..his words. So why would I presume he is accurate or truthful in other instances? Its just the documentation...that's all. You can argue that people couldn't tell time, that the club didn't have a clock that all could easily see,..that Fanny didn't have one in her home, that uncorroborated witness evidence is more likely to have been accurate than those from multiple corroborated sources, ...I don't know what the flavor of the day is for rewriting the evidence that is on page from that Investigation. The witness evidence clearly shows that 4 people believed that they were by Louis and the dying woman by 12:45. It also shows that Louis didn't arrive "precisely" at 1, by virtue of Fanny Mortimer at her door. Whistles heard, carts and ponies heard after 1, are not evidence of any one persons presence or usable to identify who or what made the sound. Other than the obvious...someone blew a whistle, someone rode a cart and horse by on the street. Since the source of the sounds isn't seen by anyone.

The suggestion is that the 4 corroborated stories directly contradict the ones given by people directly associated with the club, and receiving housing or income from it. Thereby creating motivation for this crime to be seen as having nothing to do with the club or its members.

You quote Louis saying he brought Spooner back, yet he also says this happened around 1:05. Spooner says he was there with the other men around 12:40. You presume Issac[s] is actually Issac Kozebrodski, yet Issac Kozebrodksi says he went out alone around 12:40-12;45 at the request of Louis who had summoned him to the passageway shortly after he arrived back at the club at 12:30. Issac doesn't say he met Spooner, or anyone else except Eagle on his way back.. Spooner doesn't say he met Louis...he said he met 2 jews from the club. Fanny didn't see Louis just after 1..she heard a cart and horse. No-one saw a policeman use a whistle from inside the club, but at least one heard a whistle. Just one person saw or heard a scuffle with the victim just outside the gates at 12:45, but 4 men saw the dying woman inside the passageway at that time. Eagle couldn't be sure a body wasn't there when he passed at 12:40ish. He didn't see Lave, who was at the gates he passed.

The statements you put faith in are the very same ones that have absolutely no secondhand verification from anyone. And you give me a hard time for pointing that out.

[drstrange169]

>>A factual Baseline.....4 witnesses say they were by Liz Stride as she is dying at 12:40-12:45. <<

How can it be a fact when they all acknowledge that only guessed the time? Clearly you have difficulty understanding what a fact is.

What IS a fact is that that Diemshitz says he was on a pony and cart driving down Berner Street at 1:00 o'clock according to Harris's timepiece.

What is a fact is that Fanny heard a pony and cart after she closed her door.

What is a fact is that Letchford claimed his sister was at her door at a time you claim chaos reigned at the club.

What is a fact is that Fanny says she heard none of the commotion at a time you speculate choas happening at the club.

What is a fact is that Spooner gave two times, one you constantly and conveniently pretend doesn't exist.

What a fact is that Spooner said PC Lamb arrived very quickly after his arrival.

What is a fact is that Lamb and another PC say they were in Commercial Road at the very least 15 minutes after you claim Spooner arrived.

What is a fact is that Diemshitz says he brought Spooner to the club.

What is fact is that you wrote Diemshitz never left the club until after 1:00.

What is fact is Brown's testimony that he heard no alarm until 15 minutes after he returned home.

What is a fact is that Heshburg says he was alerted by a police whistle and that he only guessed the time.

What is a fact is that all the facts support a 1:00 a.m. scenario and a 12:40 scenario is solely based on supposition.

[drstrange169]

>> In that first Line Fanny Mortimer can only be used to invalidate Louis's claim he arrived "precisely" at 1, she doesn't confirm anything he said.<<

For someone who has been here so long, you don't seem to have grasped the notion that in the Victorian east end of London people didn't have mobile phones, televisions or radios. There was no such thing as universally synced time. Diemshitz gave the time on the tobacconists clock, Mortimer gave her own time. That they might vary to some degree is normal. What counts is that she did not see or hear the scenario you've invented, but she did hear Deimshitz pass after she went in. Therefore she validities Deimshitz's story. As do all the other sworn statements.

>> James Brown didn't see the street in front of the gates.<<

We don't know that, because he didn't say. What we do know, is that, like Fanny and Letchford's sister should have heard the commotion and they all should have seen Kosebrodski and they should have seen Spooner running around. Instead, Brown conirms these incidents happen 15 minutes later.

>>Among the witnesses you state were singing upstairs, 2 said that they were by Louis and others and the dying woman at 12:40-12:45, 1 who arrived aback at the club at 12:30 said the same. And Spooners estimate also puts him there at that time.<<

Facts, again facts! They were guessing the time. None gave a precise time or indication that they looked at a clock. weighed against speculation are all the other witnesses who weren't re-written by journalists, but stated under oath. Timings that only fit an after 1:00 a.m. scenario.

>>Easy to see why these cases cant be properly evaluated,.... myth, denial and presumptions. <<

Precisely so.

Speculation, tailored to fit personal theories over actual evidence, is the bane of this research.

[drstrange169]

>>So he couldn't have touched her twice? Seems like a few people may have touched her doc.<<

There you go inventing scenarios again. where did Spooner say he touched twice? Why would he touch her twice? His testimony (fact not invention) is that PC lamb arrived 4 to 5 minutes after he did. Mortimer says she came out after 1:00 and Lamb says he was in Commercial Road at 1:00.So where is the 20 minutes you claim Spooner was at the club?

Spooner says two men told him about the murder. Diemshitz told the inquest he was one of those two men. In post #187 you clearly stated in bold underlined letters " Ive never said Louis and Eagle did not leave until after 1 " So by your own theory Spooner was not alerted until after 1:00 a.m.

[drstrange169]

>>What about the fact he says Louis sent him out alone? <<

Like Robert Paul?

[drstrange169]

>>.... inside the club, where almost certainly there was a clock. Issac used it to determine when he arrived back at the club.<<

And, presumably, the same clock 30 people knew the alarm was raised at 1:00. Whatever way you cut it, the facts support Diemshitz's time. And it's not just an odd fact here and there, it's the cumulative effect of all the facts.

[Wickerman]

You just posted him giving a time Jon. A Rough estimate yes, but a full 20 minutes before Louis says he even arrived. Is it your contention that Issac, who had checked the clock when he arrived back at the club 10 minutes earlier....he knew when he returned.... was off in his estimates by 20 minutes? What about the fact he says Louis sent him out alone? Selective acceptance of statements...or are all the statements of value. 4 match....that's hard to just brush aside with feeble sweeps.

It looks like you don't understand what in "quotes" means Michael.

[Michael W Richards]

A factual Baseline.....4 witnesses say they were by Liz Stride as she is dying at 12:40-12:45. All their stories match one anothers. NONE of the other stories have any corroboration, and by virtue of the corroborated ones, are provably wrong. Fanny Mortimer can be used to corroborate Goldstein, but cannot be used to validate what Louis says. If fact her statement invalidates his claim he arrived "precisely" at 1. What she heard after going back inside was a cart and horse, there is nothing on this earth that magically makes that Louis arriving. She didnt see anyone. Any other statements, like who said they were Wess at what time, or what these uncorroborated witnesses claimed..like Israel, are just hearsay and should be evaluated based on any self serving influences said witnesses might have. Like income.