Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sequence of comings & goings - Stride

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

  • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    Do you think I’m made of money?

    Did you win your quiz?
    Yes - if you manage to flog all those bags and shoes on ebay.

    And no - the virtual quiz was a shocker this time. Pop music from the last two decades? Forget it. Not a bit like our local monthly pub quiz, which we used to win so often it became embarrassing so we stopped doing it.

    Love,

    Caz
    X
    "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


    Comment


    • Originally posted by caz View Post

      Yes - if you manage to flog all those bags and shoes on ebay.

      And no - the virtual quiz was a shocker this time. Pop music from the last two decades? Forget it. Not a bit like our local monthly pub quiz, which we used to win so often it became embarrassing so we stopped doing it.

      Love,

      Caz
      X
      The curse of quizzes - current 'music,' so-called celebrities and reality TV.
      Regards

      Herlock



      Chairman of the National Society For The Prevention Of Cruelty To The Old Established Theories.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by caz View Post
        Another brilliant post, Frank!
        Thanks, Caroline!

        Mrs Mortimer comes across as your average decent witness, just giving her account of what she saw and heard and what she didn't, and how she believed the murder could have been committed with no witnesses. Moreover, her account gives ample independent support to Louis D's, who also comes across as an honest and decent witness, who had the considerable misfortune, along with his poor pony, to discover 'another' murder of a defenceless woman, whose presence in that location was, and remains, a mystery.
        Quite so. She may have added a bit and a bob here & there to make it seem more interesting and, therefore, it's a pity for us that she wasn't called as a witness at the inquest, but, on the whole, she comes across as an honest & decent witness.

        In the absence of enough information to ascertain what really happened in these cases, theorists have the luxury of making a liar or conspirator - or even a killer in one instance - of the first male witness on the scene.
        That's the unfortunate truth, indeed.

        I wonder what they'd have done with their time if the murders had all been discovered by women who had no reason to lie about the time or the circumstances, to protect themselves or anyone else?
        Maybe we could create a nice theory around that, Caz, or are we too much of a fringe folk for that?

        "You can rob me, you can starve me and you can beat me and you can kill me. Just don't bore me."
        Clint Eastwood as Gunny in "Heartbreak Ridge"

        Comment


        • Originally posted by FrankO View Post
          Thanks, Caroline!

          Quite so. She may have added a bit and a bob here & there to make it seem more interesting and, therefore, it's a pity for us that she wasn't called as a witness at the inquest, but, on the whole, she comes across as an honest & decent witness.

          That's the unfortunate truth, indeed.

          Maybe we could create a nice theory around that, Caz, or are we too much of a fringe folk for that?
          Looking at your avatar Frank I’d agree that yours was an excellent post especially for someone so young.
          Regards

          Herlock



          Chairman of the National Society For The Prevention Of Cruelty To The Old Established Theories.

          Comment


          • Comings....hunches about ghouls....goings....any semblance of common sense and reality.
            Michael Richards

            Comment


            • You’re the one utterly divorced from reality Michael. You refusal to accept the glaring obvious like the fact that witnesses can make errors or that poor people might not have owned clocks (or you just simply state that they do as a fact with zero evidence to back it up). You ask blatantly dishonest questions to try and bolster your case like the laughable request for evidence of interruption (give me strength!) Your entire case is based of 4 witnesses whose evidence is shaky at very best and, in Spooner’s case, can simply be dismissed. It’s just a scenario; unproven and baseless.

              What I would like to see though Michael, as you’re thinking on the case is only worthy of the highest echelons, is a list of people that agree with you that the killer of Stride came from within the club and that the body was discovered much earlier and that the club members got together on the spot to come up with the plan. I’m sure that there are quite a few
              Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 12-11-2020, 08:00 PM.
              Regards

              Herlock



              Chairman of the National Society For The Prevention Of Cruelty To The Old Established Theories.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by caz View Post

                Yeah, I don't get the logic here, Herlock. It was also late at night at the very end of September. Fanny's husband was indoors. Why on earth would their front door have been open or even ajar, except for when Fanny was at the door, watching nothing in particular?

                Mr Mortimer : Shut that bloody door, woman. There's a terrible draught in here and central heating hasn't been invented yet. I'll catch me death.

                Love,

                Caz
                X
                Except that "nearly the whole time" suggests your exception was the rule, and your rule was the exception. Poor Bill.

                As for watching nothing in particular, I don't think she was on her doorstep to watch, rather she was there to listen.
                In the post by Frank that you describe as brilliant, Fanny is quoted as saying...

                There was music and dancing going on there at the very time that that poor creature was being murdered at their very door, as one may say.

                That's another reason to suppose she kept the door open - to let the sound in.
                Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                  Are we at crossed purposes here?

                  What I’m saying is - yes the door would have been left unlocked during the day but it wouldn’t have been left open/ajar.
                  What has the day go to do with it?
                  We are dealing with the period immediately prior to Fanny locking up for the night, when she is on/off/on her doorstep.

                  Surely the same would have to apply to number 29 Hanbury Street.
                  John Davies: On the ground floor there is a front door leading into a passage, which runs right through to the back yard. There is a back door to this passage. Sometimes both doors are open during the night, and I have never known either of them to be locked. Anyone who knows where the latch of the front door is can open it and pass along into the yard. I cannot say whether the back door was latched on Saturday morning when I got down, but the front street door was wide open and thrown back against the wall. I was not surprised at that.

                  Apparently not, but as we all know, 29 Hanbury street is a special case.
                  Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

                    What has the day go to do with it?
                    We are dealing with the period immediately prior to Fanny locking up for the night, when she is on/off/on her doorstep.



                    John Davies: On the ground floor there is a front door leading into a passage, which runs right through to the back yard. There is a back door to this passage. Sometimes both doors are open during the night, and I have never known either of them to be locked. Anyone who knows where the latch of the front door is can open it and pass along into the yard. I cannot say whether the back door was latched on Saturday morning when I got down, but the front street door was wide open and thrown back against the wall. I was not surprised at that.

                    Apparently not, but as we all know, 29 Hanbury street is a special case.
                    It’s the word ‘open’ that I’m talking about. There’s no issue from me about ‘open’ meaning unlocked but not if it’s taken to mean wide open or ajar. I can’t see anyone leaving their front door wide open or ajar?

                    Regards

                    Herlock



                    Chairman of the National Society For The Prevention Of Cruelty To The Old Established Theories.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                      “Yes; I was one of those who first saw the murdered woman. It was about a quarter to one o'clock, I should think, when I heard a policeman's whistle blown, and came down to see what was the matter”

                      It sounds to me like he was upstairs in the club unless there are any other reports that suggest that he might have been elsewhere?
                      Here's the full quote of Heschburg in the Irish Times:

                      In the course of an interview with a witness shortly after 6 o'clock this morning Abraham Heshberg, a young fellow, living at 20 Berner street, said- "I was one of those who first saw the murdered woman. It was about a quarter to 1 o'clock, I should think, when I heard a policeman's whistle blown, and came down to see what was the matter in the gateway. Two or three people had collected, and when I got there I saw a short dark young woman lying on the ground, with a gash between 4 and 5 inches long in her throat. I should think she was 25 to 28 years of age. Her head was towards the north wall, against which she was lying. She had a black dress on, with a bunch of flowers pinned on the breast. In her hand there was a little piece of paper containing five or six cachous. The body was not found by Koster, but by a man whose name I do not know, a man who goes out with a pony and barrow, and lives up the archway where he was going, I believe, to put up his barrow on coming home from market. He thought it was his wife at first, but when he found her safe at home he got a candle and found this woman. He never touched it till the doctor had been sent for. The little gate is always open, or at all events unfastened, but I don't think the yard is one which is used by loose women. There are some stables in there - Messrs Duncan, Woollatt, and Cade I believe - and there is a place to which a lot of girls take home sacks which they have been engaged in making. None of these would be there though after about 1 o'clock on Saturday afternoon. None of us recognised the woman. I don't think she belongs to this neighbourhood. She was dressed very respectably. There seemed to be no wounds on the body About the club? Oh, yes, it would be open till 2 or 3 this morning. I suppose it is a Socialist club, and there are generally rows there. Both men and women go there. They have demonstrations up there, and concerts, for which they have a stage and plane. There was a row there last Sunday night. It went on till about 2 in the morning, and in the end two people were arrested."

                      For the interviewer, it must have seemed like they were listening to another investigative journalist.
                      Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

                        What you're suggesting here, is that no constable was immediately put on the gates, and also that prior to both Lamb receiving backup, and the arrival of Ed Johnston, there was a significant period of time when a constable was on the gates, Lamb was inside the club, and the victim was left unattended. Would it not be a breach of police procedure to leave the victim?
                        No I'm not. Lamb himself states that the gates weren't closed until a doctor was onsite. There's no indication that he went inside the club before that, so no I'm not suggesting that the body was left unattended. If he's correct that it was Blackwell who was examining the body when he had the gates closed, then I would suggest that Inspector Pinhorn (who apparently arrived immediately after Blackwell) would have assumed control and this was when Lamb went into the club.

                        The situation would seem to have some parallels with the Coles case, when PC Thompson almost came face-to-face with the killer, but procedure required him to stay with the victim.

                        Did that not occur in Dutfield's Yard?
                        It's not a direct parallel with Coles' murder. When Thompson found her she was still (barely) alive, so that was why he felt his duty was to stay with the victim. And as stated above, there's no indication that Lamb left Stride's body until sufficient backup had arrived.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                          It’s the word ‘open’ that I’m talking about. There’s no issue from me about ‘open’ meaning unlocked but not if it’s taken to mean wide open or ajar. I can’t see anyone leaving their front door wide open or ajar?
                          Let's look at this in another way...

                          Presumably you're fine with Fanny hearing the 'measured, heavy tramp of a policeman passing the house on his beat'?

                          Okay, so let's look at the two Schwartz accounts, with sounds highlighted.

                          12.45 a.m. 30th. Israel Schwartz of 22 Helen [sic - Ellen] Street, Backchurch Lane, stated that at this hour, on turning into Berner St. from Commercial Road & having got as far as the gateway where the murder was committed he saw a man stop & speak to a woman, who was standing in the gateway. The man tried to pull the woman into the street, but he turned her round & threw her down on the footway & the woman screamed three times, but not very loudly. On crossing to the opposite side of the street, he saw a second man standing lighting his pipe. The man who threw the woman down called out apparently to the man on the opposite side of the road 'Lipski' & then Schwartz walked away, but finding that he was followed by the second manhe ran so far as the railway arch but the man did not follow so far.

                          It seems that he had gone out for the day, and his wife had expected to move, during his absence, from their lodgings in Berner-street to others in Backchurch-lane. When he came homewards about a quarter before one he first walked down Berner-street to see if his wife had moved. As he turned the corner from Commercial-road he noticed some distance in front of him a man walking as if partially intoxicated. He walked on behind him, and presently he noticed a woman standing in the entrance to the alley way where the body was afterwards found. The half-tipsy man halted and spoke to her. The Hungarian saw him put his hand on her shoulder and push her back into the passage, but, feeling rather timid of getting mixed up in quarrels, he crossed to the other side of the street. Before he had gone many yards, however, he heard the sound of a quarrel, and turned back to learn what was the matter, but just as he stepped from the kerb A SECOND MAN CAME OUT of the doorway of the public-house a few doors off, and shouting out some sort of warning to the man who was with the woman, rushed forward as if to attack the intruder. The Hungarian states positively that he saw a knife in this second man's hand, but he waited to see no more. He fled incontinently, to his new lodgings.


                          How does she not hear any of these sounds, yet managed to hear Smith walking slowly by?

                          One possibility: door open (Smith) > door closed (Schwartz)

                          Except that that possibility has been rejected.
                          Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

                            Here's the full quote of Heschburg in the Irish Times:

                            In the course of an interview with a witness shortly after 6 o'clock this morning Abraham Heshberg, a young fellow, living at 20 Berner street, said- "I was one of those who first saw the murdered woman. It was about a quarter to 1 o'clock, I should think, when I heard a policeman's whistle blown, and came down to see what was the matter in the gateway. Two or three people had collected, and when I got there I saw a short dark young woman lying on the ground, with a gash between 4 and 5 inches long in her throat. I should think she was 25 to 28 years of age. Her head was towards the north wall, against which she was lying. She had a black dress on, with a bunch of flowers pinned on the breast. In her hand there was a little piece of paper containing five or six cachous. The body was not found by Koster, but by a man whose name I do not know, a man who goes out with a pony and barrow, and lives up the archway where he was going, I believe, to put up his barrow on coming home from market. He thought it was his wife at first, but when he found her safe at home he got a candle and found this woman. He never touched it till the doctor had been sent for. The little gate is always open, or at all events unfastened, but I don't think the yard is one which is used by loose women. There are some stables in there - Messrs Duncan, Woollatt, and Cade I believe - and there is a place to which a lot of girls take home sacks which they have been engaged in making. None of these would be there though after about 1 o'clock on Saturday afternoon. None of us recognised the woman. I don't think she belongs to this neighbourhood. She was dressed very respectably. There seemed to be no wounds on the body About the club? Oh, yes, it would be open till 2 or 3 this morning. I suppose it is a Socialist club, and there are generally rows there. Both men and women go there. They have demonstrations up there, and concerts, for which they have a stage and plane. There was a row there last Sunday night. It went on till about 2 in the morning, and in the end two people were arrested."

                            For the interviewer, it must have seemed like they were listening to another investigative journalist.
                            I agree that Heshburg probably wasn't a member of the club, based on his response to being asked about it, and so came from his home at no. 20. There's no sense of inclusion when describing the club, nor approval. And his mention of seeing the gates first (rather than the yard or the body itself) matches Fanny's description of her approach in the Evening News; "I hurried out, and saw some two or three people standing in the gateway."

                            Plus there's this from the Irish Times interview with Barnett Kenterich;
                            ' "....I do not think the yard bears a very god character at night, but I do not interfere with any of the people about here. I know that the gate is not kept fastened. The club is a nasty place." In this view Mrs Kenterich, who had come from the underground kitchen to take part I the colloquy thoroughly agreed, and both she and her husband, in reply to further questions, corroborated Heshburg's statement as to women and girls being taken to the club and as to the disorder which sometimes took place there'

                            Having said all that, there is at least one report that says he was in the club;

                            ELO 6 Oct
                            "Neither Morris Eagle, a Russian Jew, Isaac M. Kazebrodski, a Russian Pole, or Abraham Heshburg, who were in the International Working Men's Club at the time, Barnett Kentorrich, whose house (No. 38) adjoins the yard on the south side, Mrs. Mortimer of 36, Berner-street, who was standing at her door between half-past twelve and one o' clock, Charles Letchford, who passed through the street at half-past twelve, or Mrs. Deimschitz, wife of the steward of the club, who was preparing tea and coffee in the kitchen about a dozen yards away at the time, either heard or saw anything unusual in Berner-street."

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

                              I agree that Heshburg probably wasn't a member of the club, based on his response to being asked about it, and so came from his home at no. 20. There's no sense of inclusion when describing the club, nor approval. And his mention of seeing the gates first (rather than the yard or the body itself) matches Fanny's description of her approach in the Evening News; "I hurried out, and saw some two or three people standing in the gateway."

                              Plus there's this from the Irish Times interview with Barnett Kenterich;
                              ' "....I do not think the yard bears a very god character at night, but I do not interfere with any of the people about here. I know that the gate is not kept fastened. The club is a nasty place." In this view Mrs Kenterich, who had come from the underground kitchen to take part I the colloquy thoroughly agreed, and both she and her husband, in reply to further questions, corroborated Heshburg's statement as to women and girls being taken to the club and as to the disorder which sometimes took place there'

                              Having said all that, there is at least one report that says he was in the club;

                              ELO 6 Oct
                              "Neither Morris Eagle, a Russian Jew, Isaac M. Kazebrodski, a Russian Pole, or Abraham Heshburg, who were in the International Working Men's Club at the time, Barnett Kentorrich, whose house (No. 38) adjoins the yard on the south side, Mrs. Mortimer of 36, Berner-street, who was standing at her door between half-past twelve and one o' clock, Charles Letchford, who passed through the street at half-past twelve, or Mrs. Deimschitz, wife of the steward of the club, who was preparing tea and coffee in the kitchen about a dozen yards away at the time, either heard or saw anything unusual in Berner-street."
                              I have seen that report, and suspect it is an error, but who can be sure?
                              Having said that, I think Heshburg is a lot more interesting than people realize. For e.g....

                              The body was not found by Koster, but by a man whose name I do not know, a man who goes out with a pony and barrow...

                              Right, so he knows of Diemschitz, but he personally knows the man who supposedly found the body, according to an early report.
                              Who came up with this BS story, and why was is fed to the press, and what is the relationship between this Joseph Koster character, and Heshburg?
                              Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

                                Let's look at this in another way...

                                Presumably you're fine with Fanny hearing the 'measured, heavy tramp of a policeman passing the house on his beat'?

                                Okay, so let's look at the two Schwartz accounts, with sounds highlighted.

                                12.45 a.m. 30th. Israel Schwartz of 22 Helen [sic - Ellen] Street, Backchurch Lane, stated that at this hour, on turning into Berner St. from Commercial Road & having got as far as the gateway where the murder was committed he saw a man stop & speak to a woman, who was standing in the gateway. The man tried to pull the woman into the street, but he turned her round & threw her down on the footway & the woman screamed three times, but not very loudly. On crossing to the opposite side of the street, he saw a second man standing lighting his pipe. The man who threw the woman down called out apparently to the man on the opposite side of the road 'Lipski' & then Schwartz walked away, but finding that he was followed by the second manhe ran so far as the railway arch but the man did not follow so far.

                                It seems that he had gone out for the day, and his wife had expected to move, during his absence, from their lodgings in Berner-street to others in Backchurch-lane. When he came homewards about a quarter before one he first walked down Berner-street to see if his wife had moved. As he turned the corner from Commercial-road he noticed some distance in front of him a man walking as if partially intoxicated. He walked on behind him, and presently he noticed a woman standing in the entrance to the alley way where the body was afterwards found. The half-tipsy man halted and spoke to her. The Hungarian saw him put his hand on her shoulder and push her back into the passage, but, feeling rather timid of getting mixed up in quarrels, he crossed to the other side of the street. Before he had gone many yards, however, he heard the sound of a quarrel, and turned back to learn what was the matter, but just as he stepped from the kerb A SECOND MAN CAME OUT of the doorway of the public-house a few doors off, and shouting out some sort of warning to the man who was with the woman, rushed forward as if to attack the intruder. The Hungarian states positively that he saw a knife in this second man's hand, but he waited to see no more. He fled incontinently, to his new lodgings.


                                How does she not hear any of these sounds, yet managed to hear Smith walking slowly by?

                                One possibility: door open (Smith) > door closed (Schwartz)

                                Except that that possibility has been rejected.
                                I just think that it’s unlikely that someone would have left their front door open especially in such an area. If we started a clock from a second before the quarrel and stopped it a second after the shout of ‘Lipski’ it would likely have been a matter of seconds so it’s not impossible or unlikely that Mortimer might have been at the rear of the house.
                                Regards

                                Herlock



                                Chairman of the National Society For The Prevention Of Cruelty To The Old Established Theories.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X