Who Died in Dutfield's Yard?

[Michael W Richards]

I took it you believed this story was Schwartz being chased by Pipeman?
William Wess was the club Secretary, wasn't he

"In the course of conversation (says the journalist) the secretary mentioned the fact that the murderer had no doubt been disturbed in his work, as about a quarter to one o'clock on Sunday morning he was seen- or, at least, a man whom the public prefer to regard as the murderer- being chased by another man along Fairclough-street, which runs across Berner-street close to the Club, and which is intersected on the right by Providence-street, Brunswick-street, and Christian-st., and on the left by Batty-street and Grove-street, the two latter running up into Commercial-road. The man pursued escaped, however, and the secretary of the Club cannot remember the name of the man who gave chase, but he is not a member of their body. Complaint is also made [?] [?] [?] there was experienced in obtaining a policeman, and it is alleged that from the time the body was discovered fifteen minutes had elapsed before a constable could be [?] from Commercial-road. This charge against the police, however, requires confirmation. There is, notwithstanding the number who have visited the scene, a complete absence of excitement, although naturally this fresh addition to the already formidable list of mysterious murders forms the general subject of conversation."
Echo, 1 Oct. 1888.

If you are correct, then Wess was not the interpreter.

That's a good quote for support on another point Ive been making Jon, which is that "there was experienced in obtaining a policeman, and it is alleged that from the time the body was discovered fifteen minutes had elapsed before a constable could be [?] from Commercial-road." That fits precisely with what is portrayed by the combined statements of Issac Kozebrodski, Abraham Heschberg, a Mr Gillen from the club, and Edward Spooner. It does not fit with Eagle, Diemshutz, Schwartz or Lave...or Goldstein, which do not fit with each others stories, let alone with the grander picture.

I believe that in one of Schwartz's versions its pretty clear he believed Pipeman chased him. There is after all only Schwartz, BSM and Pipeman there, correct? So the man chasing him is from a very limited selection. In Schwartz's story. Which directly contradicts what 4 independent and corroborated stories suggest.

Ay, theres the rub. When you have 4 people who independently give stories that match each other in time, in details, and you have singular uncorroborated stories from others, which are you going to put any faith in? Seems to me the inverse of logic has applied to this case since it happened, the stories most often relied upon are those singular, non-validated accounts. The story of a witness who wasn't even important to the question of how Liz Stride dies, though his statement to the police would have to be considered its most important clue in that investigation.

If you consider that all these unsubstantiated accounts are from witnesses that are directly involved in goings on at that club and in that yard, one then has to question whether stories that do not match the majority and that are self serving of a club eager to avoid suspicions for this murder...being immigrant Jews and all, (and Anderson assures us that they thought that's who was doing these killing's), and having some financial stake in the club remaining open, are ones that should be the accepted "truths".

[Wickerman]

>>I think its entirely possible that Wess believed he could not be recognized, that he felt that the copper didn't get a really good look.<<

And exactly how would the person Smith saw know whether Smith would or would not recognise him again? And how many guilty people would take that chance, if they knew they were bound to see Smith again? No, I'm sorry we'll have to disagree on this, human nature doesn't work that way.

Precisely the same argument applies to Kidney, if he was in any way involved, he isn't going to show up at the inquest on the chance of being recognised.

[Michael W Richards]

Precisely the same argument applies to Kidney, if he was in any way involved, he isn't going to show up at the inquest on the chance of being recognised.

Although I know your answer, George Hutchinson comes in 4 days after the fact and puts himself in the place of someone that the police were suspicious enough about to issue a Pardon For Accomplices in that murder. He placed himself at the centre of controversy. Voluntarily. I think you and others have a skewed idea about what risks there were for someone coming forward who may have been seen in general terms late at night by someone. Revist the statement of Smith, he doesn't even mention whether or not the man had facial hair. What PC Smith does suggest is that someone just about Wess's age.. dressed nicely, as Wess would have done, with a parcel approximately the size of an Arbeter Fraint is seen with Liz at 12:35 just outside the club, very near the time Wess himself says he was carrying literature.

[Trevor Marriott]

Precisely the same argument applies to Kidney, if he was in any way involved, he isn't going to show up at the inquest on the chance of being recognised.

You have to realise that if Stride was a victim of a domestic assault she was probably killed in a spontaneous moment of anger and not preplanned, and so the perpetrator might not have been aware of what else, or who else was in the location to see him before or after the murder.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Wickerman]

Although I know your answer, George Hutchinson comes in 4 days after the fact and puts himself in the place of someone that the police were suspicious enough about to issue a Pardon For Accomplices in that murder. He placed himself at the centre of controversy. Voluntarily. I think you and others have a skewed idea about what risks there were for someone coming forward who may have been seen in general terms late at night by someone. Revist the statement of Smith, he doesn't even mention whether or not the man had facial hair. What PC Smith does suggest is that someone just about Wess's age.. dressed nicely, as Wess would have done, with a parcel approximately the size of an Arbeter Fraint is seen with Liz at 12:35 just outside the club, very near the time Wess himself says he was carrying literature.

How on earth can you compare Hutchinson to Kidney, Barnet maybe, but not Hutchinson.
Besides, I thought you said you had no theory to promote?, you're certainly pushing this like it's yours to take home...

[Simon Wood]

If Stride was the victim of a domestic incident, the perpetrator must have been mightily chuffed to learn that he [or she] had got away scot free. Not only was the murder being blamed on someone called Jack the Ripper; there was also a signed postcard in the newspapers to prove it.

[c.d.]

If Stride was the victim of a domestic incident, the perpetrator must have been mightily chuffed to learn that he [or she] had got away scot free. Not only was the murder being blamed on someone called Jack the Ripper; there was also a signed postcard in the newspapers to prove it.

Hello Simon,

This theory surfaces from time to time but I am afraid it is faulty. The police had no name attached to the person of Jack the Ripper. Hence they couldn't rule out anybody as being the murderer.

c.d.

[Simon Wood]

Hi c.d.,

The perpetrator of the domestic incident would know that he [or she] was not the character known as Jack the Ripper, did not murder Catherine Eddowes and was not the author of the letter and postcard which appeared in Monday's newspapers.

All of which makes the actual Stride perpetrator a dangerous person; someone who could potentially blow the JtR story out of the water.

If this scenario is what actually happened, the Stride perpetrator would have to be dealt with in order for the JtR story to work.

Hope you're staying safe.

Simon

[c.d.]

You lost me completely here, Simon. Are you saying that those who (for God only knows whatever reason) were perpetuating the Jack the Ripper myth would be looking to find Stride's killer so they could shut him up before he revealed that he was not Jack?

Stay safe as well.

c.d.

[Simon Wood]

Hi c.d.,

Basically, yes. That's it in a nutshell.

Regards,

Simon

[drstrange169]

>>Revist the statement of Smith, he doesn't even mention whether or not the man had facial hair.<<


PC Smith, "He had no whiskers".

Woolf Wess was always photographed with a moustache.

[c.d.]

>>Revist the statement of Smith, he doesn't even mention whether or not the man had facial hair.<<


PC Smith, "He had no whiskers".

Woolf Wess was always photographed with a moustache.

Wow. Wouldn't a camera have been a lot easier?

c.d.

[drstrange169]

You know how wacky those Victorian inventions were!

[Wickerman]

>>Revist the statement of Smith, he doesn't even mention whether or not the man had facial hair.<<


PC Smith, "He had no whiskers".

Woolf Wess was always photographed with a moustache.

Whiskers are sideburns, they extend down from the ear.
You're thinking of a cat

Don't bother checking Google, that depends on modern beliefs. To find out what whiskers actually were in the 19th century check the press.

Here are some descriptions consistent with the times being discussed.

"height 5ft. 6in., complexion dark, no whiskers, dark moustache. Dress: Black jacket, vest, and trousers, round black felt hat. Respectable appearance. Can be identified."

"Age, about 30, height, 5ft, 3in. Complexion and hair dark, with moustache and false whiskers,..."

"about fifty-five years old, tall and rather heavy, and looks as if he painted his cheeks and dyed his hair, heavy mustache and side whiskers.."

"I think he had short whiskers coming a little below the ears and a slight moustache..."

Whiskers are long (extended) bushy sideburns, not a moustache.

Aside from that, Wolf Wess, by his own admission was long gone from Berner St. by the time PC Smith came by.

[drstrange169]

Good point! Although, whiskers are still facial hair.

Not only had Wess gone, he had gone with two witnesses accompanying him.