Sequence of comings & goings - Stride

[Herlock Sholmes]

The answer is very simple Herlock, she was at her door at 1am, and when she went in she would be in the front room of the house. Her sleeping quarters would be in the back of the house. Who can say whether she was back in her bedroom when Louis actually arrives.

Both you and Caz like to reimagine events to feel better about your conclusions, but one bit of evidence that you overlook should enlighten you about the veracity of some claims.....Louis provably did not arrive "precisely at 1" as he claimed. He was specific. And therefore provably wrong when considering a street eyewitness in the 10 minutes leading up to that time and including 1am...precisely.

Did he make a mistake? Or did he lie. Ive made my choice and have evidence for it, you have to prove Fanny wasnt capable of seeing or hearing a cart and horse arrive "precisely" at 1. Check.

Im surprised to say the least at that response Michael because I’ve previously suggested exactly the same thing in response to the question “why didn’t she hear the Schwartz incident.” So why is this a satisfactory explanation for her not hearing one thing but not a satisfactory explanation for not hearing another?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I haven’t mentioned Smith arriving before Lamb. In fact in the timeline I did I wrote:

“According to Smith he gets back to Berner Street around 1.00 but, as Lamb was already there it must have been nearer to 1.07”


My time 1.07 for Lamb’s arrival is not exact (my use of the word ‘around’ was the clue.) So it may have been slightly earlier.

Smith said that at 1.00 he went into Berner Street. But as we cannot be exact as to the time that he actually arrived it is possible at it might have been later. I also confirmed in my timeline that Lamb was already there when Smith arrived.


And the phrase should be ‘admirable humility’ not ‘admiral.’ This is a mistake. You should learn to recognise them before indulging in an ego-driven attempt to find them in others.

This is what you last said regarding Smith vs Mortimer's times...

I’ve also gone for Smith’s time of passing as opposed to Mortimer’s time of 12.45 on the grounds that Mortimer had no reason for accurately logging the time on (up until the disturbance at the club) a perfectly normal evening. We also can’t be anything like certain that she owned a clock. A Police Officer on a regulated beat passes the same landmarks at approximately the same time numerous times on any given day/night and so would have a better general idea of the time. It’s also possible that he passed a clock or clocks that aided him in calculating the time at any point. He would also, I assume, be ‘tuned in’ to the various chimes in the area (business clocks and churches). He also had a reason to be time aware (as opposed to FM) as he would have to make reports of serious incidents for which a time would be important. And so while we cannot be certain, Smith is fairly obviously the more likely to have been correct.

Fine, and these are good points you make.
Regarding his beat, Smith says:

It takes me from 25 minutes to half an hour to go round my beat.

This is your time for Smith passing Stride and companion...

PC Smith walks along Berner Street at around 12.33 and sees Stride with a man.

Now 25-30 minutes is going to return Smith to the same point at about 1am (when he next comes down Berner street).
So here are the arrival times you give for Lamb and Smith...

Eagle, Kozebrodski, Lamb and Collins arrive at around1.07.

According to Smith he gets back to Berner Street around 1.00 but, as Lamb was already there it must have been nearer to 1.07 (if he’d originally passed at 12.35 and his route could take 30 minutes or so then this is about right). He goes for an ambulance as Johnston arrived at around 1.13.

Smith must arrive a few minutes or more after Lamb and 426H (not Collins), because he does not hear any running or shouting...

I saw a crowd of people outside the gates of No. 40. I did not hear any cries of "Police." When I got there I saw constables 12 H R and 252 H.

So if Lamb arrives at 1:07 (as per your timeline), Smith is not getting there until 1:10 at the earliest, perhaps more like 1:12, but let's say 1:11.
Yet Smith is quite clear about his timings...

I was last in Berner-street about half-past 12 or 12:35. At 1 o'clock I went to Berner-street in my ordinary round.

There is no reason to suppose that Smith's last beat before going to the yard was outside of the normal time parameters.
Yet you have somehow managed to 'find' about 11 minutes.
That equates to about 40% of Smith's beat's mean timespan!
The only reason you give is that 'as Lamb was already there it must have been nearer to 1.07' - but that is not an indication that Smith took ~11 minutes longer than usual to go around - rather its an indication that you've made a mistake.
If you want to claim that Smith was delayed, you have to show evidence, but his testimony does not support this.

Timelines cannot be built by assuming anomalies in bobbies' beats, for which there is no evidence, simply to make things 'fit'.

[Michael W Richards]

It appears to be ok to ask “how come she heard the horse and cart at 1.00 and yet she didn’t hear the Schwartz incident?”

But not to ask “how come she heard a horse and cart at 1.00 but not at 12.35?”

The answer is very simple Herlock, she was at her door at 1am, and when she went in she would be in the front room of the house. Her sleeping quarters would be in the back of the house. Who can say whether she was back in her bedroom when Louis actually arrives.

Both you and Caz like to reimagine events to feel better about your conclusions, but one bit of evidence that you overlook should enlighten you about the veracity of some claims.....Louis provably did not arrive "precisely at 1" as he claimed. He was specific. And therefore provably wrong when considering a street eyewitness in the 10 minutes leading up to that time and including 1am...precisely.

Did he make a mistake? Or did he lie. Ive made my choice and have evidence for it, you have to prove Fanny wasnt capable of seeing or hearing a cart and horse arrive "precisely" at 1. Check.

[Herlock Sholmes]

DN, Oct 3:

Mr. W. Wess, Secretary of the International Working Men's Club, Berner-street, called at our office at midnight and made the following statement:-It having come to my knowledge that the man who was seen by Mrs. Mortimer, of 36, Berner-street, passing her house "carrying a black shiny bag," who walked very fast down the street from the Commercial-road about the time the murder was supposed to have occurred, was a member of the club, I immediately went with him, between 10 and 11 to-night, to the Leman-street Police-station, where he made a statement as to his whereabouts on Saturday evening which was completely satisfactory.

According to who, and about what time was the murder supposed to have occurred?

Is this the statement that had been used to suggest that Wess was possibly Schwartz interpreter or is there another reason for that suggestion?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

DN, Oct 3:

Mr. W. Wess, Secretary of the International Working Men's Club, Berner-street, called at our office at midnight and made the following statement:-It having come to my knowledge that the man who was seen by Mrs. Mortimer, of 36, Berner-street, passing her house "carrying a black shiny bag," who walked very fast down the street from the Commercial-road about the time the murder was supposed to have occurred, was a member of the club, I immediately went with him, between 10 and 11 to-night, to the Leman-street Police-station, where he made a statement as to his whereabouts on Saturday evening which was completely satisfactory.

According to who, and about what time was the murder supposed to have occurred?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

The leap of faith is when you try and deduce that the WVC wanted a reward offered because they believed that the killer was part of a gang and that one member might break ranks. In the quote it mentioned the killer having a ‘pal.’ Did the WVC ever state that they had suspicions that the killer was part of a gang? I’m asking the question? They might have done but I can’t recall reading about it.

DT, Oct 3:

A member of the Vigilance Committee informed our representative last night that a great deal of information about the state of the streets, and suspicious men who frequent them, had been collected by them, and they believed that at least some of it might turn out of value. Although many people think differently, he and some of his colleagues consider that the murders were not the work of one man, or, at all events, that he had associates. Their belief is that at least four or five men were engaged in the murderous plot, and it was in the hope of inducing one of them to turn informer that the committee were so anxious that the Home Secretary should offer a reward. This opinion, however, was formed when what is now known as the "medical requirement" hypothesis gained credence. Several members of the committee even thought they were on the track of the gang, but investigations have neither substantiated the theory nor led to the unravelling of the mystery. Nevertheless, the Vigilance Committee, under the presidency of Mr. George Lusk, continues to meet daily, and focus, as it were, the sentiments of the inhabitants.

[Herlock Sholmes]

How to turn a gang member into a whistleblower; offer a reward.
Simple psychology. No leap of faith required.

Speaking of gangs...

The leap of faith is when you try and deduce that the WVC wanted a reward offered because they believed that the killer was part of a gang and that one member might break ranks. In the quote it mentioned the killer having a ‘pal.’ Did the WVC ever state that they had suspicions that the killer was part of a gang? I’m asking the question? They might have done but I can’t recall reading about it.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Perhaps I just can’t take your constant leaps of faith seriously?

How to turn a gang member into a whistleblower; offer a reward.
Simple psychology. No leap of faith required.

Speaking of gangs...

Lipski, Kosminski, Cohen, Kaminsky, and Leather Apron, are the men that will not be blamed for nothing.

I think they were a gang, who committed the whitechapel murders.

The Baron

[Herlock Sholmes]

I see Joshua has already addressed the point, so thanks for that, Joshua.

Unfortunately we haven't, Michael. Or, at least, I don't.

Not really. We know that Lamb at a certain point whistled for assistance and we know that when Smith arrived, he saw Lamb and Collins. PC 426 H was about to re-arrive at that point with Johnson. Collins may have been the PC that James Brown spoke of in his statement. Daily Telegraph of 6 October:
"When I heard screams I opened my window, but could not see anybody. The cries were of moving people going in the direction of Grove-street. Shortly afterwards I saw a policeman standing at the corner of Christian- street, and a man called him to Berner-street."

All the best,
Frank

Cheers Frank. I was going to ask about the PC that Brown saw. As you say, this could well have been Collins.

[FrankO]

On Brown, I was going by his Inquest statement where he said:

“At that time I was going from my own house to get some supper from a chandler’s shop at the corner of Berner-street and Fairclough-street. As I was going across the road I saw a man and woman standing by the Board School in Fairclough-street.”

So he appears to be saying that he’d seen the couple on the way to the Chandler’s shop?

I see Joshua has already addressed the point, so thanks for that, Joshua.

Lamb did say PC 426 though - do we have a name for him Frank?

Unfortunately we haven't, Michael. Or, at least, I don't.

Do we know the circumstances of Collins arrival?

Not really. We know that Lamb at a certain point whistled for assistance and we know that when Smith arrived, he saw Lamb and Collins. PC 426 H was about to re-arrive at that point with Johnson. Collins may have been the PC that James Brown spoke of in his statement. Daily Telegraph of 6 October:
"When I heard screams I opened my window, but could not see anybody. The cries were of moving people going in the direction of Grove-street. Shortly afterwards I saw a policeman standing at the corner of Christian- street, and a man called him to Berner-street."

All the best,
Frank

[Herlock Sholmes]

Is that from the Times? This does seem to be the outlier, missing out the mention of being in the shop for a few minutes, and seeing them on his return, which most other papers report;

Daily News 6 Oct
James Brown, 35 Fairclough street, a box maker, said - I have seen the deceased in the mortuary. On Sunday morning last about 12.45 I went from my own house to get some supper from a chandler's shop at the corner of Berner street. I was in the shop a few minutes and then went home. As I crossed the road I saw a man and woman standing by the Board school in Fairclough street. I was in the road just by the kerb and they were up against the wall. I heard the woman say, "Not tonight, some other night." This made me look round at them.

Daily Telegraph 6 Oct
James Brown: I live in Fairclough-street, and am a dock labourer. I have seen the body in the mortuary. I did not know deceased, but I saw her about a quarter to one on Sunday morning last.

The Coroner: Where were you? - I was going from my house to the chandler's shop at the corner of the Berner-street and Fairclough-street, to get some supper. I stayed there three or four minutes, and then went back home, when I saw a man and woman standing at the corner of the Board School. I was in the road just by the kerb, and they were near the wall.



Morning Advertiser 6 Oct
James Brown deposed - I am a box-maker, and I live at 35, Fairclough-street. On Sunday morning last, about 12.45, I went from my own home to get something for supper at the corner of Berner-street, and was in the shop three or four minutes and then went back home. As I was going home I saw a man and woman standing against the wall by the board school in Fairclough-street. As I passed them in the road I heard the woman say, "No, not tonight; some other night." That made me turn round, and I looked at them.

Star 6 Oct
JAMES BROWN,
of 35, Fairclough-street, said that at about a quarter to one on Sunday morning he went out to get some supper at the corner of Berner-street, where there is a chandler's shop. He was gone three or four minutes, and as he returned he saw a man and woman standing by the Board School (which is just opposite the scene of the murder). They were up against the wall. As witness went past them he heard the woman say, "No, not to-night, some other night." That made him turn round and look at them.

Thanks Joshua. Yes I was using the Sourcebook so it was The Times.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Yes. Albert had been standing outside the Beehive Tavern, talking to Ed Spooner, and was dressed in drag (for the purpose of catching Jack, of course).
When Louis and Issacs came running back from Grove street, he gave his lantern to Ed, who then hastened to Berner street with the other two (being caught up to by Mr Harris, on the way).
Albert then ducked into Queen's Court, where he had his regular police attire stashed, and quickly got changed. He too then hastened to Berner street, while rubbing off his lipstick.

I asked a reasonable question because, unlike you, I don’t think that I know everything.

......

You gleefully thought that you’d somehow caught me out earlier. I pointed out your error. It’s noticeable that yet again you are unwilling to admit it. Why is this (as it’s not the first time that this as happened?) I’d suggest two reason, 1) you appear to be loathe to accept disagreement which you seem to take personally for some reason. And 2) it seems to me that you treat the subject as a kind of ego trip. An “I know more than you” or “I can quote you more than you” scenario.

Just because you feel that you’ve made a point it doesn’t follow that everyone will agree with you. As I’ve disagreed with you a fair few times in recent months you’ve decided to take this personally. Now you appear to spend your time sticking pins into a little Herlock doll.

Your ‘admiral (sic) humility’ comment I find surprising. Obviously you feel that I’m arrogant. What’s annoying is that no matter how many times I say things they systematically get ignored. I don’t know how many times I’ve said that most posters probably have a more detailed and up to date knowledge of the case than I do (due to me losing interest in the case for some time) So this makes me some kind of know-all? I also don’t know how many times I’ve stressed caution; stressed about being wary of stating opinion as fact; stressed caution about making assumptions. You yourself once called me boring for being so cautious. I’ve even been cautious on whether Stride was a victim or not and yet I’ve even been accused of trying to make her fit as a victim!? How does this weigh against the arrogant, know-all which you appear to think I am? How can I be more reasonable than I try to be. That said I’m not going stop commenting on things if I disagree. I’ve proved recently that I’m more than willing to be shown where I’m mistaken. I admit that I can be sarcastic but that’s hardly the greatest crime is it?

If you want to continue this back and forth sniping there’s nothing I can do about it. Or we can just discus the case?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Do we know the circumstances of Collins arrival?

Yes. Albert had been standing outside the Beehive Tavern, talking to Ed Spooner, and was dressed in drag (for the purpose of catching Jack, of course).
When Louis and Issacs came running back from Grove street, he gave his lantern to Ed, who then hastened to Berner street with the other two (being caught up to by Mr Harris, on the way).
Albert then ducked into Queen's Court, where he had his regular police attire stashed, and quickly got changed. He too then hastened to Berner street, while rubbing off his lipstick.

[Joshua Rogan]

Hi Joshua,

I don’t understand this. From the Inquest statement Brown is saying that he saw the couple on his way to the Chandler’s shop.

”At that time I was going from my own house to get some supper from a chandler’s shop at the corner of Berner-street and Fairclough-street. As I was going across the road I saw a man and woman standing by the Board School in Fairclough-street.”

Is that from the Times? This does seem to be the outlier, missing out the mention of being in the shop for a few minutes, and seeing them on his return, which most other papers report;

Daily News 6 Oct
James Brown, 35 Fairclough street, a box maker, said - I have seen the deceased in the mortuary. On Sunday morning last about 12.45 I went from my own house to get some supper from a chandler's shop at the corner of Berner street. I was in the shop a few minutes and then went home. As I crossed the road I saw a man and woman standing by the Board school in Fairclough street. I was in the road just by the kerb and they were up against the wall. I heard the woman say, "Not tonight, some other night." This made me look round at them.

Daily Telegraph 6 Oct
James Brown: I live in Fairclough-street, and am a dock labourer. I have seen the body in the mortuary. I did not know deceased, but I saw her about a quarter to one on Sunday morning last.

The Coroner: Where were you? - I was going from my house to the chandler's shop at the corner of the Berner-street and Fairclough-street, to get some supper. I stayed there three or four minutes, and then went back home, when I saw a man and woman standing at the corner of the Board School. I was in the road just by the kerb, and they were near the wall.



Morning Advertiser 6 Oct
James Brown deposed - I am a box-maker, and I live at 35, Fairclough-street. On Sunday morning last, about 12.45, I went from my own home to get something for supper at the corner of Berner-street, and was in the shop three or four minutes and then went back home. As I was going home I saw a man and woman standing against the wall by the board school in Fairclough-street. As I passed them in the road I heard the woman say, "No, not tonight; some other night." That made me turn round, and I looked at them.

Star 6 Oct
JAMES BROWN,
of 35, Fairclough-street, said that at about a quarter to one on Sunday morning he went out to get some supper at the corner of Berner-street, where there is a chandler's shop. He was gone three or four minutes, and as he returned he saw a man and woman standing by the Board School (which is just opposite the scene of the murder). They were up against the wall. As witness went past them he heard the woman say, "No, not to-night, some other night." That made him turn round and look at them.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Yes. And it is interesting that he didn't mention seeing them there on his way to the shop. Suggesting that they only arrived there in the few minutes while he was buying his supper.

Hi Joshua,

I don’t understand this. From the Inquest statement Brown is saying that he saw the couple on his way to the Chandler’s shop.

”At that time I was going from my own house to get some supper from a chandler’s shop at the corner of Berner-street and Fairclough-street. As I was going across the road I saw a man and woman standing by the Board School in Fairclough-street.”