Sequence of comings & goings - Stride

[Wickerman]

Unless he went home via the railway arch

Which railway arch do you mean, going in the direction of Grove St.?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

This is quite simply untrue. The killer could have been interrupted. This is a fact.

Yes, but is this a definitely ascertained fact, or one of the another types?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Unless he went home via the railway arch

[Wickerman]

Also, it wouldn't make a whole lot of sense for Schwartz to be running towards Grove St. if he was on his way home as the story he gave indicates.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

The only reason I mentioned distance was that ‘a few seconds or more’ would equate to a sizeable distance between them (20 or 30 yards or more perhaps)

In the confusion, Kozebrodsky was possibly sent out to look for police by Diemschitz (or someone with authority in the club hierarchy), and when Louis finished giving instructions to someone(s) else, he runs in the direction that Isaacs took. Who knows what the distance apart could be at that stage, but apparently it was perceived as being far enough that it seemed as if one man was chasing the other, but not far enough that it seemed like separate events.

Could be that someone just conflated to two events. Schwartz/Pipeman at 12.45 and Diemschutz/Kozebrodski just after.

Only if all the related times and/or order of events work out, and of course Louis has to arrive home before he can start running anywhere.
That's the difficult part, of course. An easier question; how many chases up Fairclough street did Ed Spooner witness?

[Herlock Sholmes]

I didn't give a distance, although you did.
The point however, is that one man runs ahead of the other, by two or three yards, or two or three seconds - take your pick.
The essence of the matter is that this was misconstrued as one man chasing another - like Pipeman supposedly chasing Schwartz.
You might also note the time the event described in the Echo was said to have occurred - about a quarter to one o'clock on Sunday morning.

The only reason I mentioned distance was that ‘a few seconds or more’ would equate to a sizeable distance between them (20 or 30 yards or more perhaps)

Could be that someone just conflated to two events. Schwartz/Pipeman at 12.45 and Diemschutz/Kozebrodski just after.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Thats not what is says or even implies. It doesn’t mention the distance between them. This could mean two men running in the same direction but one just behind the other by a matter of two or three yards which led to an observer thinking that it was a chase.

I didn't give a distance, although you did.
The point however, is that one man runs ahead of the other, by two or three yards, or two or three seconds - take your pick.
The essence of the matter is that this was misconstrued as one man chasing another - like Pipeman supposedly chasing Schwartz.
You might also note the time the event described in the Echo was said to have occurred - about a quarter to one o'clock on Sunday morning.

[Herlock Sholmes]

The picture now presented, of two men running along Fairclough St. gives credence to an obscure press report which has often been attributed to the scene where Schwartz was running away with Pipeman in pursuit.

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?] [?] 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.
Echo, 1 Oct. 1888.

As we learn from other sources, the Secretary was William Wess, and if modern theorists are correct, Wess is believed to have been the interpreter called on by Schwartz to give evidence to police.

However, if this press report does indeed describe Schwartz fleeing "incontinently" away from the scene, then how is it that Wess does not claim to know the identity of the man being pursued? If William Wess was the interpreter then he would know the man running ahead was (a) not the murderer, and (b) was merely his client Israel Schwartz running away from the scene.

So, either Wess was not the interpreter used by Schwartz, or Schwartz (& Pipeman) were not the two men seen running along Fairclough St. towards Grove.

Contrary to the above mentioned theory, I believe the press report is a distorted record of Diemschitz & Kozebrodski running for a policeman along Fairclough St. as concluded in this thread.

Hi Wick,

To be honest this reads to me as if Wess had been told about this incident by the man giving chase and that the chaser was known to Wess but not very well as he couldn’t remember his name? Might this mean that West knew the identification of Pipeman? The problem is of course that there was no mention of a chase in the Schwartz story.

[Herlock Sholmes]

… a few seconds or more apart.

Thats not what is says or even implies. It doesn’t mention the distance between them. This could mean two men running in the same direction but one just behind the other by a matter of two or three yards which led to an observer thinking that it was a chase.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

… I believe the press report is a distorted record of Diemschitz & Kozebrodski running for a policeman along Fairclough St. …

… a few seconds or more apart.

[Wickerman]

The picture now presented, of two men running along Fairclough St. gives credence to an obscure press report which has often been attributed to the scene where Schwartz was running away with Pipeman in pursuit.

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?] [?] 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.
Echo, 1 Oct. 1888.

As we learn from other sources, the Secretary was William Wess, and if modern theorists are correct, Wess is believed to have been the interpreter called on by Schwartz to give evidence to police.

However, if this press report does indeed describe Schwartz fleeing "incontinently" away from the scene, then how is it that Wess does not claim to know the identity of the man being pursued? If William Wess was the interpreter then he would know the man running ahead was (a) not the murderer, and (b) was merely his client Israel Schwartz running away from the scene.

So, either Wess was not the interpreter used by Schwartz, or Schwartz (& Pipeman) were not the two men seen running along Fairclough St. towards Grove.

Contrary to the above mentioned theory, I believe the press report is a distorted record of Diemschitz & Kozebrodski running for a policeman along Fairclough St. as concluded in this thread.

[Herlock Sholmes]

My interpretation of the event, is that they ran a few seconds or more apart, rather than side by side

What a surprise. They pretty obviously left together in the same direction and so unless Diemschutz decided to give Kozebrodski a head start for some reason....

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Can you point out where he says he was sent out alone, or is this just your interpretation of his statement?

My interpretation of the event, is that they ran a few seconds or more apart, rather than side by side

[FrankO]

Excellent Frank, thankyou......and perhaps I can say a thankyou from Michael on his behalf.

You're welcome, Jon. And if Michael wants to thank me, too, I'll be here...
If not, that's all the same... to everyone his own.

[FrankO]

So Diemschutz describes Isaacs as a young, Tailor/Machinist and Isaac Kozebrodski is 19 and a machinist.

There can be no doubt that they were one and the same Frank

If we put it together with the newspaper snippets saying that Kozebrodski was commonly known as Isaacs, very little doubt, if any, remains for me. But it wouldn't surprise me if some would still say this means nothing, Herlock.