Who Died in Dutfield's Yard?

[Michael W Richards]

I'm trying to let it sink in, but it keeps floating - I need the lead-weight of evidence! How do you know that he did not encounter Spooner?

Perhaps because the current beliefs you have about the witnesses is just hot air? There is weight in numbers. The numbers say Louis was there in the passageway with other members 15-20 minutes before he claims he even arrived. So just carry the weight of the cumulative corroberated accounts that are not from people with vested interest in the club and youll have no problem moving forward with some other conclusions...1) That Louis must have lied about his 1am arrival. 2) That Louis and others were in the passageway between 12:40 and 12:45..meaning that both Lave and Eagle would have seen them too yet denied it. 3)That when Goldstein passed and looked into the passage there must have been people there...which he did not mention. 4) That Issac Kozebrodski is not the Issac[s] who goes out with Louis after 1, and his trip out and perhaps another 2 people who Spooner sees well before 1 were also not mentioned to the police.

And the piece de resistance...that Israel Schwartz lied to the police about seeing a woman on the street when she was seen at that same time by multiple other men dying in the passageway, none of whom saw or heard Israel, a BSM, or a Pipeman.

These conclusions dont address the Inquest lineup, or the witness order in the presentation, but they dont have to. They are only drawn from witness accounts, Perhaps the police did some fudging with the Inquest of their own here.

Like the thread is intended to address....why is someone allowed to make a claims that the dead woman is someone other than Elizabeth Stride nee Gustavsdotter from Goteborg when the police had supposedly already identified her as such through viewings?

[Kattrup]

"I went to look for a policeman at the request of Diemschitz or some other member of the club, but I took the direction towards Grove-street and could not find one. I afterwards went into the Commercial-road along with Eagle, and found two officers". Nowhere does he say he met anyone until Eagle.

Ah, the old e silentio-fallacy. Very common ‘round these parts, I’m afraid.

The fact that he does not mention seeing or meeting Spooner does not mean that he did not see or meet Spooner.

To exemplify, he does not mention wearing any clothes. Does that mean he was nude? Perhaps he removed his clothes to hide traces of blood?!? Otherwise he surely would have mentioned it.Wouldn’t he?
Sorry, no, we don’t get to decide what people 130 years ago should have remembered to mention for our convenience.

I’m sure if you go through your elaborate deconstruction of events with the old adage “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” in mind, you’ll find it a lot less cohesive.

[c.d.]

Hello Michael,

You seem to be operating under the assumption that every single individual who found himself in the extremely upsetting position of finding a dead woman on their doorstep late at night should have conducted themselves in the most logical and reasonable manner and have total recall of their actions while being 100% cognizant of the time down to the minute. I think that is extremely unrealistic. Could all of the individuals that you mention have lied? Absolutely. No question about it. But faulty memories, misstatements or contradictory, unsupported statements do NOT NECESSARILY indicate that a witness has lied. I think these witnesses should be cut a little slack before we automatically assign the label of liar to them.

c.d.

[Kattrup]

Perhaps because the current beliefs you have about the witnesses is just hot air? There is weight in numbers. The numbers say Louis was there in the passageway with other members 15-20 minutes before he claims he even arrived. So just carry the weight of the cumulative corroberated accounts that are not from people with vested interest in the club and youll have no problem moving forward with some other conclusions...1) That Louis must have lied about his 1am arrival. 2) That Louis and others were in the passageway between 12:40 and 12:45..meaning that both Lave and Eagle would have seen them too yet denied it. 3)That when Goldstein passed and looked into the passage there must have been people there...which he did not mention. 4) That Issac Kozebrodski is not the Issac[s] who goes out with Louis after 1, and his trip out and perhaps another 2 people who Spooner sees well before 1 were also not mentioned to the police.

And the piece de resistance...that Israel Schwartz lied to the police about seeing a woman on the street when she was seen at that same time by multiple other men dying in the passageway, none of whom saw or heard Israel, a BSM, or a Pipeman.

These conclusions dont address the Inquest lineup, or the witness order in the presentation, but they dont have to. They are only drawn from witness accounts, Perhaps the police did some fudging with the Inquest of their own here.

Like the thread is intended to address....why is someone allowed to make a claims that the dead woman is someone other than Elizabeth Stride nee Gustavsdotter from Goteborg when the police had supposedly already identified her as such through viewings?

Being mistaken about the time does not equal lying. Not mentioning things that you would have liked to see mentioned does not equal lying.
Did the police organize and decide the inquest?

[Wickerman]

"I went to look for a policeman at the request of Diemschitz or some other member of the club, but I took the direction towards Grove-street and could not find one. I afterwards went into the Commercial-road along with Eagle, and found two officers". Nowhere does he say he met anyone until Eagle.

No, no & thrice No!

Michael, because something is not mentioned does not mean it did not happen.
This is precisely what the aphorism, "Absence of Evidence, is not Evidence of Absence" means.
You are relying on something that is simply not true, the position you take is no basis for an argument.
Kozebrodski is not required to mention anyone he came across that night, he is only telling the interviewer what he did.

[drstrange169]

>>Issac Kozebrodski says he was alerted to the body around 12:40...<<

No, we don't know what Kozebrodski said. We only know what somebody else thought he might have said.

No direct quote exists.

What we do know is, according to the story attributed to him, he didn't know what time it was. He was guessing, "About 20 minutes to 1"

This is probably the shakiest evidence in the whole case. Why would anyone base a theory on it?


>> ... concurring with Gillen and Heschberg, and concurring with Spooner.<<

Both Hesberg and Spooner expressly said they guessed the time.

Heshberg,"It was about a quarter to 1 o'clock, I should think".

So he doesn't know, he admits he's guessing.

Fortunately, we have solid evidence about how far his guess was out.

Heshberg, "I heard a policeman's whistle blown, and came down to see what was the matter.",

Based on actual available evidence not wild speculation, Heshberg arrived after the police.


As for Spooner,

"Between half-past 12 and 1 o'clock on Sunday morning I was standing outside the Bee Hive publichouse..." seems a pretty clear statement, but we know he was confused about the time. So how did he estimate the time?

Again using actual evidence he tells us, "The only means I had of fixing the time was by the closing of the public houses."

Like Heshberg he too had no idea of an accurate time.

And these are the witnesses you want people to accept to bolster a theory that doesn't actually work?


On the other hand, we have sworn evidence from Diemshitz that he Identified the time by a specific clock. That timing, given the vagaries of people in the East End having access to accurate timekeeping, is supported by witnesses who have solid evidence to support them.

Mrs Mortimer's claims more or less support Diemshitz."... she heard Diemschitz's pony cart pass the house, and remarked upon the circumstance to her husband."
We have PC Lamb supporting Diemshitz. "About one o'clock on Sunday morning last I was in Commercial-road". (This evidence negates Heshberg's time estimate)
Even Spooner supports the this timing,"I stood by the side of the body for four or five minutes, until the last witness (Lamb) arrived.
We have, not just Diemshitz's wife, "Just about one o'clock"
but the maid. Mila, supporting Diemshitz. "Mila, the servant at the club, strongly corroborates the statement made by her mistress, and is equally convinced there were no sounds coming from the yard between 20 minutes to one and one o'clock."
We have Eagle supporting Deimshitz. Eagle is important because he was in a room full of people when Gilleman came in with the news around 1o'clock. "I had been there about 20 minutes when the man I mentioned-Gigelmann-came and said, "There is a dead woman lying in the yard."
Julius Minsky was one of those men in the room and he too confirms the time. "just after one o'clock, there were some 20 or 30 members in the club room upstairs."

This is all strong, cross checkable, evidence, most of it sworn under oath as opposed to dodgy, vague, square peg theorising. Sometimes commonsense has to apply.

[Michael W Richards]

>>Issac Kozebrodski says he was alerted to the body around 12:40...<<

No, we don't know what Kozebrodski said. We only know what somebody else thought he might have said.

No direct quote exists.

What we do know is, according to the story attributed to him, he didn't know what time it was. He was guessing, "About 20 minutes to 1"

This is probably the shakiest evidence in the whole case. Why would anyone base a theory on it?


>> ... concurring with Gillen and Heschberg, and concurring with Spooner.<<

Both Hesberg and Spooner expressly said they guessed the time.

Heshberg,"It was about a quarter to 1 o'clock, I should think".

So he doesn't know, he admits he's guessing.

Fortunately, we have solid evidence about how far his guess was out.

Heshberg, "I heard a policeman's whistle blown, and came down to see what was the matter.",

Based on actual available evidence not wild speculation, Heshberg arrived after the police.


As for Spooner,

"Between half-past 12 and 1 o'clock on Sunday morning I was standing outside the Bee Hive publichouse..." seems a pretty clear statement, but we know he was confused about the time. So how did he estimate the time?

Again using actual evidence he tells us, "The only means I had of fixing the time was by the closing of the public houses."

Like Heshberg he too had no idea of an accurate time.

And these are the witnesses you want people to accept to bolster a theory that doesn't actually work?


On the other hand, we have sworn evidence from Diemshitz that he Identified the time by a specific clock. That timing, given the vagaries of people in the East End having access to accurate timekeeping, is supported by witnesses who have solid evidence to support them.

Mrs Mortimer's claims more or less support Diemshitz."... she heard Diemschitz's pony cart pass the house, and remarked upon the circumstance to her husband."
We have PC Lamb supporting Diemshitz. "About one o'clock on Sunday morning last I was in Commercial-road". (This evidence negates Heshberg's time estimate)
Even Spooner supports the this timing,"I stood by the side of the body for four or five minutes, until the last witness (Lamb) arrived.
We have, not just Diemshitz's wife, "Just about one o'clock"
but the maid. Mila, supporting Diemshitz. "Mila, the servant at the club, strongly corroborates the statement made by her mistress, and is equally convinced there were no sounds coming from the yard between 20 minutes to one and one o'clock."
We have Eagle supporting Deimshitz. Eagle is important because he was in a room full of people when Gilleman came in with the news around 1o'clock. "I had been there about 20 minutes when the man I mentioned-Gigelmann-came and said, "There is a dead woman lying in the yard."
Julius Minsky was one of those men in the room and he too confirms the time. "just after one o'clock, there were some 20 or 30 members in the club room upstairs."

This is all strong, cross checkable, evidence, most of it sworn under oath as opposed to dodgy, vague, square peg theorising. Sometimes commonsense has to apply.

An interpreter doesn't "guess" at what the person being interpreted is saying, so, on the very first point of a long rebuttal you are incorrect. You cite 3 people who all have the same times and presume they are all wrong because of some very weak objections, but when someone wants to believe something that can happen. You also haven't read the parts in my rebuttal that address almost all of the last half of the above, Ive never said Louis and Eagle did not leave until after 1. I think that's precisely when they did leave. I have said Louis is directly contradicted on his time of arrival by no less than 4 corroborating accounts....the only acounts that do match each other and the majority of the other witness accounts after Smith leaves, and yet for some reason people state otherwise anyway.

By the overwhelming majority of witness testimony the most probable scenario has Louis arriving around 12:40-45, people being sent out..at least one by himself....and then Louis and Eagle leave after 1. So...what do you think that they are doing from 12:45 until after 1? Attempting to revive the woman? Trying to get the bleeding stopped? Quick hand of poker? Or...trying to figure out how to present this to the authorities that limits the likelihood that they might be seen as the murderers..to protect a source of income if for no other more altruistic reasons.

Maybe you prefer the hand of poker? I don't know. But everything is right there, and the only way it magically disappears is if you claim it doesn't matter. Well...4 accounts that have times that match within 5 minutes of each other vs individual statements that not only have no corroboration at all but also directly contradict the majority of the statements isn't even a fair match. If the 4 were correct, and I see no reason for that not to be true other than by using non-validated information as the presumptive, then the men without any corroboration all lied or were dramatically off in their times and activities recalled. If the 4 were correct...Louis was there at 12:45 but did not personally leave for help until after 1, Issac K and perhaps others were sent out to look for help, Issac K didn't see anyone so its possible another group was sent..the ones who meet Spooner, Eagle would have been sure that a body was there at 12:40, Lave would have seen Eagle and vice versa, and Israels encounter would have been heard and seen by multiple sources in the passageway at that time.

This club had been designated an anarchists club by the local police, which means at the very least they were keeping an eye on it and others, neighbors spoke of "low men" seen there, and noisy gatherings in that same passageway after meetings on Saturday nights until well after 1am. A murder occurred on their property right under their noses, while police were focusing on immigrant jew suspects for the local killer at large..as per Anderson, if you or anyone else cant see or understand their predicament I cant help you more than that. It was what it was, a tight spot for that club... and the men whose stories don't match anyone elses knew that very well.

[Wickerman]

One other point I made previously, which seems to have been sidelined is, that the press reports which give "12:40" or "twenty to one", like the Daily Mail, Times, etc. are all paraphrase, not given in direct quotes from Kozebrodski. The only report published in "quote" is that given in the London Evening News where we read:

"...I came into the club about which you are asking me at half-past twelve o'clock. Shortly after I came in Diemschitz asked me to come out into the yard, as he saw there was something unusual had taken place there....."

No time given, in other words Kozebrodki did not say "12:40" or "twenty to one", all he said was "shortly after".

[Michael W Richards]

One other point I made previously, which seems to have been sidelined is, that the press reports which give "12:40" or "twenty to one", like the Daily Mail, Times, etc. are all paraphrase, not given in direct quotes from Kozebrodski. The only report published in "quote" is that given in the London Evening News where we read:

"...I came into the club about which you are asking me at half-past twelve o'clock. Shortly after I came in Diemschitz asked me to come out into the yard, as he saw there was something unusual had taken place there....."

No time given, in other words Kozebrodki did not say "12:40" or "twenty to one", all he said was "shortly after".

"About twenty minutes to one this morning Mr. Diemschitz called me out to the yard." Daily News, Oct 1st

[Michael W Richards]

No, no & thrice No!

Michael, because something is not mentioned does not mean it did not happen.
This is precisely what the aphorism, "Absence of Evidence, is not Evidence of Absence" means.
You are relying on something that is simply not true, the position you take is no basis for an argument.
Kozebrodski is not required to mention anyone he came across that night, he is only telling the interviewer what he did.

No, Im relying on common sense, commonly used English and the complete absence of any quote from young Issac that he went with, or encountered anyone, before seeing Eagle return.

Youre making the same kind of argument that people use for Schwartz's obvious Inquest absence...or an interruption at Berner Street. Youre saying that because someone doesn't say specifically they had company that we mustn't infer that they didnt. Hogwash. Issac says he went out alone...and that's not specific enough for you?

[drstrange169]

>> An interpreter doesn't "guess" at what the person being interpreted is saying <<

There is nothing written anywhere about an interpreter. That's a fiction you've just invented, let's stick with the actual facts. Kozebrodski spoke imperfect English, not no English. The Newspaper quotes are in perfect English, meaning they are the journalists words not direct quotes from Kozebrodski. Meaning in turn, that we cannot rely on accuracy.Your claim that it is a proven fact Diemshitz lied, using Kozebrodski as proof is clearly nonsense to any unbiased reader of the facts available.

>>Ive never said Louis and Eagle did not leave until after 1. <<

Fair enough.


>>By the overwhelming majority of witness testimony the most probable scenario has Louis arriving around 12:40-45<<

Can you name any one of those witness who referenced 12:40-45 by a clock? If not there is no credible case against Diemshitz.

Time to move.

[drstrange169]

>>So...what do you think that they are doing from 12:45 until after 1?<<

Diemshitz was on his way home at 12:45, arriving some time very close 1:00 a.m as confirmed by Fanny Mortimer,

"... she heard Diemschitz's pony cart pass the house, and remarked upon the circumstance to her husband."

Eagle was in a room with 20 to 30 witnesses, singing until some time very close to 1:00 a.m.

"just after one o'clock, there were some 20 or 30 members in the club room upstairs." Julius Minsky

Woolf Wess was at his home by 12:30 with at least two witnesses to corroborate his journey home, his brother and Lewis Selzi. He shared the house with two women, presumably they also could have also corroborated his story.

On the other hand, a very confused Spooner gave two differing times at the inquest.

First version,

"Between half-past 12 and 1 o'clock on Sunday morning I was standing outside the Bee Hive publichouse..."

This version is confirmed by Fanny Mortimer who did not see or hear anyone prior to her claim of Diemshitz's cart arriving around 1:00 a.m.

Charles Letchworth's sister was at her door further up Berner St. and she also heard and saw nothing usual.

It is also confirmed by James Brown, who was in the street at 12:45 and saw and heard no sight or sound of commotion. The first commotion he heard was at 1:00.a.m..

Spooner second version,

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

Is not only disputed by Mortimer, Letchford, Brown, Deimshitz, Eagle, Minsky at.al., but PC Lamb who according to Spooner, arrived within minutes of him. PC Lamb's sworn testimony is that he was still in Commercial Road at 1:00 a.m.. A discrepancy of some 15 minutes.

And so it goes on.

[drstrange169]

A better question would be, what was Spooner during from 1:40 to 1:00 ? Since Mortimer who didn't leave her house until after 1:00 saw Spooner touching Mrs Strides head, something Spooner says he did as soon as he arrived.

[Wickerman]

"About twenty minutes to one this morning Mr. Diemschitz called me out to the yard." Daily News, Oct 1st

Like I said, the Daily News is paraphrase, no quotes are used. You putting them in doesn't change the fact the original is not in quotes.

A young Russian Pole named Isaac M. Kozebrodski, born in Warsaw, who speaks the English language imperfectly, gave the following information:-I was in this club last night. I came in about half-past six in the evening. About twenty minutes to one this morning Mr. Diemschitz called me out to the yard. He told me there was something in the yard, and told me to come and see what it was. When we had got outside he struck a match, and when we looked down on the ground we could see a long stream of blood. It was running down the gutter from the direction of the gate, and reached to the back door of the club. I should think there was blood in the gutter for a distance of five or six yards. I went to look for a policeman at the request of Diemschitz or some other member of the club, but I took the direction towards Grove-street and could not find one.

Kozebrodski is not quoted as giving a time.

[Michael W Richards]

>> An interpreter doesn't "guess" at what the person being interpreted is saying <<

There is nothing written anywhere about an interpreter. That's a fiction you've just invented, let's stick with the actual facts. Kozebrodski spoke imperfect English, not no English. The Newspaper quotes are in perfect English, meaning they are the journalists words not direct quotes from Kozebrodski. Meaning in turn, that we cannot rely on accuracy.Your claim that it is a proven fact Diemshitz lied, using Kozebrodski as proof is clearly nonsense to any unbiased reader of the facts available.

>>Ive never said Louis and Eagle did not leave until after 1. <<

Fair enough.


>>By the overwhelming majority of witness testimony the most probable scenario has Louis arriving around 12:40-45<<

Can you name any one of those witness who referenced 12:40-45 by a clock? If not there is no credible case against Diemshitz.

Time to move.

The fact the interview is in perfect English doesn't mean the interviewer took the liberty of deciding what issac meant, its far more likely someone who knew both languages helped. 3 of the witness that said 12:40-12:45 came from inside the club, where almost certainly there was a clock. Issac used it to determine when he arrived back at the club.