Sequence of comings & goings - Stride

[Herlock Sholmes]

We can make it more exact (than the above), Michael. The Morning Advertiser wrote:
"I left home about half-past eleven on Saturday morning, and returned home exactly at one o'clock on Sunday morning. I noticed the time at Harris's tobacco shop at the corner of Commercial-road and Berner-street. It was one o'clock." So, when he passed the shop, (he saw) it was one o'clock, which means that when he turned into the yard, it was 1 o'clock and half a minute or so.

How does it contradict Fanny Mortimer's statements, Michael?

"It appears that shortly before a quarter to one o'clock she heard the measured, heavy tramp of a policeman passing the house on his beat. Immediately afterwards she went to the street-door, with the intention of shooting the bolts, though she remained standing there for ten minutes before she did so. During the ten minutes she saw no one enter or leave the neighbouring yard, and she feels sure that had any one done so she could not have overlooked the fact. The quiet and deserted character of the street appears even to have struck her at the time. Locking the door, she prepared to retire to bed, in the front room on the ground floor, and it so happened that in about four minutes' time she heard the pony cart pass the house, and remarked upon the circumstance to her husband."

Only if you'd insist that she came to her doorstep at 12:44/12:45 and went back in at 12:54/12:55, she would have heard the pony cart pass at 12:58/12:59 am. But, since she didn't see Kozebrodski leave the yard in search of a policeman, she didn't see the 2 Jews who found Spooner, she didn't see the 3 Jews or Spooner return to the yard a minute or 2 later, she didn't see Heshburg pass her door on his way to the yard, we can safely say that she only went to her doorstep at 12:46 or so, so she would have heard the pony cart at 1 am or half a minute after.

"Mrs. Mortimer, living at 36, Berner-street, four doors from the scene of the tragedy, says: I was standing at the door of my house nearly the whole time between half-past twelve and one o'clock this (Sunday) morning, and did not notice anything unusual. I had just gone indoors, and was preparing to go to bed, when I heard a commotion outside, and immediately ran out, thinking that there was another row at the Socialists' Club close by. I went to see what was the matter, and was informed that another dreadful murder had been committed in the yard adjoining the clubhouse, and on going inside I saw the body of a woman lying huddled up just inside the gates with her throat cut from ear to ear. A man touched her face, and said it was quite warm, so that the deed must have been done while I was standing at the door of my house. There was certainly no noise made, and I did not observe anyone enter the gates. It was just after one o'clock when I went out, and the only man whom I had seen pass through the street previously was a young man carrying a black shiny bag, who walked very fast down the street from the Commercial-road."

Only if you're taking the first "one o'clock" litterally and don't want to admit it could have been a minute (or a couple of) before one o'clock that she went back inside (just like the other statement indirectly says), then it would "contradict" Diemshutz's statement. But, otherwise, it fits quite well with Diemshutz.

I’d say that Spooner can safely be dismissed as a ‘contradicting’ witness too Frank:

“Stated that between 12.30am and 1.00am, 30th September 1888, he was standing with a young woman outside the Beehive public house on the corner of Christian Street and Fairclough Street. After talking for about 25 minutes...”

Which takes him up to 12.55 talking to the young woman before seeing men running. He’s only out by 10 minutes or so. Then...

“Spooner reckoned he was there for about five minutes before a constable (PC Henry Lamb) arrived.”

Which pretty much seals the deal. Another witness that was simply mistaken. After all, he was only estimating his time.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Then we have Hoschberg/Henschberg:

“It was about a quarter to one o'clock, I should think, when I heard a policeman's whistle blown,”

More guesswork. What reason would he have had to log the exact time? None I’d say. And we know that no policeman’s whistle was blown that early. So I’d say we have another mistaken witness here. No mystery all unless you want to find one.

[FrankO]

Then we have Hoschberg/Henschberg:

“It was about a quarter to one o'clock, I should think, when I heard a policeman's whistle blown,”

More guesswork. What reason would he have had to log the exact time? None I’d say. And we know that no policeman’s whistle was blown that early. So I’d say we have another mistaken witness here. No mystery all unless you want to find one.

I have little doubt that Heshburg 'mis-guessed' the time, Herlock, but there is reason to thiink he was in the yard earlier than Lamb: he saw only 2 or 3 people in the gateway (which is the same amount as mentioned by Mortimer). I think he may have come out after hearing commotion/calls for police instead of a whistle. Not certain, though.

[FrankO]

Which takes him up to 12.55 talking to the young woman before seeing men running. He’s only out by 10 minutes or so.

Indeed, Herlock. Spooner's timing of 12.55 AM is much more in line with Lamb's arrival at the scene than his timing of 12.35. As I've said before, if we'd go with his latter estimate, his account would raise quite some questions.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Your ‘selective and false’ quoting comment is a joke. The reason that I’ve mentioned it so often because it’s been systematically ignored by you and Michael to make points. It’s you that have been selective I’m afraid. This is was conspiracy theorists do.

Yet in #120 I indicate that 'it' is not being ignored - quite the opposite in fact. So your reason for complaining is now null and void.
However, as Fanny is not quoted in the report you refer to, we have to be cautious about its content, and the important principle here is...

A direct quote trumps a paraphrase, and a paraphrase trumps a synopsis.

Note that this does not mean the direct quote must be taken as gospel - it could be legitimately argued to be quite wrong - however, all other things being equal, the words spoken by an individual as captured by a reporter, must take precedence over the same, except reported as paraphrase or synopsis.

You systematically violate this principle, because you are a True Believer.

Your alternative is that Smith was lying or mistaken about what time he passed on his beat by 10 or 15 minutes after passing a clock? If you prefer to believe Mortimer over Smith then that’s your prerogative of course. A woman who, to one source, says that she was on her doorstep for almost the whole of the half an hour and yet, to another, says that she spent 10 minutes of 30 on her doorstep.

You keep on suggesting that I suppose Smith was badly wrong, or now, that he may even have been lying. LOL
I dare say it is not good forum etiquette to continually suggest another poster holds a particular position, without quoting them to that affect.
So go ahead and quote me stating that Smith was wrong (or worse), otherwise I'm going to suggest that you're talking out of the wrong end.

Ill go with the Constable and suggest that Mortimer was in error.

You're also going with Diemschitz. Even if Smith arrives at the top of Berner street 2 or 3 minutes after 1:00, it is not possible that Diemschitz could have seen the clock on the corner at 1:00, and pulled into the yard at 1:01. You have to choose - Smith or Diemschitz. You cannot have your cake and eat it too, even if no one else is willing to point out the absurdity of your position.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

.

[I]she heard the measured, heavy tramp of a policeman passing the house on his beat[/I] - means she can hear stuff on the street, from inside. That could well include things like; a man and woman quarrelling, a woman screaming but not loudly, a man yelling an anti-Semitic slur, a man with a knife shouting at another man, and possibly even a man running away, starting from down on the corner

Depends on what part of the house she was in I suppose but I’m guessing that you have ‘evidence’ that she stood with her ear pressed to the door for 20 minutes. Sometimes you pick up some sounds and not others it’s a fact of life. Oh and the horse and cart passed directly outside of her house of course.

It appears that shortly before a quarter to one o'clock she heard the measured, heavy tramp of a policeman passing the house on his beat.

I can't see any reference here to having an ear pressed to the door, most likely because the door was open, and if not completely, then ajar.

However, as I said, we have have to be cautious about this report. Why is that above sentence not simply...

Shortly before a quarter to one o'clock she heard the measured, heavy tramp of a policeman passing the house on his beat.

Is the reporter informing us of what Mortimer said, or is he doing his best to piece things together?
Phrases such as 'It appears that', and 'and it so happened that', suggest the later.
Most Ripper writers use this report to say "Fanny said..." - this or that. I don't think this is totally legitimate.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Then we have Hoschberg/Henschberg:

“It was about a quarter to one o'clock, I should think, when I heard a policeman's whistle blown,”

More guesswork. What reason would he have had to log the exact time? None I’d say. And we know that no policeman’s whistle was blown that early. So I’d say we have another mistaken witness here. No mystery all unless you want to find one.

I found one.

PC Lamb: When I got there I had the gates shut. …
I put a constable at the gate and told him not to let any one in or out.

Heshburg arrived before Lamb, which is why he was able to closely observe the victim (rather than being locked out).
He 'came down' (from further up Berner street), after hearing a 'policeman's' whistle.

Spooner also arrived prior to Lamb, and was also able to closely observe the victim.
He met Mr Harris on his way to the yard, who had come outside after hearing a 'policeman's' whistle.

There is a mystery to be solved...

[Joshua Rogan]

I found one.

PC Lamb: When I got there I had the gates shut. …
I put a constable at the gate and told him not to let any one in or out.

Heshburg arrived before Lamb, which is why he was able to closely observe the victim (rather than being locked out).
He 'came down' (from further up Berner street), after hearing a 'policeman's' whistle.

Spooner also arrived prior to Lamb, and was also able to closely observe the victim.
He met Mr Harris on his way to the yard, who had come outside after hearing a 'policeman's' whistle.

There is a mystery to be solved...

The best we can say is that Heshburg arrived after Lamb's whistle and before the gates were closed. A fuller account of Lamb's words (briefly summarised above) from the Telegraph makes it clear that there was a delay between his arrival and their closure;

"When I blew my whistle other constables came, and I had the entrance of the yard closed. This was while Dr. Blackwell was looking at the body. Before that the doors were wide open. The feet of the deceased extended just to the swing of the gate, so that the barrier could be closed without disturbing the body. I entered the club and left a constable at the gate to prevent any one passing in or out."

This is confirmed by Dr Blackwell's assistant, Edward Johnson;

"The outer gates were closed shortly after I came."

Since we know Blackwell didn"t arrive until 1:16, Heshburg had a considerable window of opportunity to reach the gates after hearing Lamb's whistle and before the yard was closed.
It's possible that Lamb is confusing Blackwell with Johnson, but even so, there are still several minutes between whistle and closure. No mystery there. Unless you want one.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Yet in #120 I indicate that 'it' is not being ignored - quite the opposite in fact. So your reason for complaining is now null and void.
However, as Fanny is not quoted in the report you refer to, we have to be cautious about its content, and the important principle here is...

A direct quote trumps a paraphrase, and a paraphrase trumps a synopsis.

Note that this does not mean the direct quote must be taken as gospel - it could be legitimately argued to be quite wrong - however, all other things being equal, the words spoken by an individual as captured by a reporter, must take precedence over the same, except reported as paraphrase or synopsis.

You systematically violate this principle, because you are a True Believer.


You keep on suggesting that I suppose Smith was badly wrong, or now, that he may even have been lying. LOL
I dare say it is not good forum etiquette to continually suggest another poster holds a particular position, without quoting them to that affect.
So go ahead and quote me stating that Smith was wrong (or worse), otherwise I'm going to suggest that you're talking out of the wrong end.



You're also going with Diemschitz. Even if Smith arrives at the top of Berner street 2 or 3 minutes after 1:00, it is not possible that Diemschitz could have seen the clock on the corner at 1:00, and pulled into the yard at 1:01. You have to choose - Smith or Diemschitz. You cannot have your cake and eat it too, even if no one else is willing to point out the absurdity of your position.

Your use of the phrase True Believer is indicative of your approach to this case. Find an error/discrepancy and then erect a pile of drivel around it. Who can forget your ‘Mr Richardson the cellar brothel keeper’

Ive repeatedly expressed my doubts about whether Stride might not have been a victim but on you plough. If you made a serious attempt to look at he case without the excitement of a kid on Christmas Day because you constant think that you’ve uncovered a plot then you
might come to take a more reasoned viewpoint.

Can you be certain that every time a Journalist used quotation marks that he was quoting accurately? I doubt it. So you invest too much importance in how they presented their reports.

A couple of minutes here or there are virtually irrelevant in this case as we cannot be certain about the accuracy of timing at a time when the vast majority of people wouldn’t have owned watches or clocks.

[Herlock Sholmes]

.
I can't see any reference here to having an ear pressed to the door, most likely because the door was open, and if not completely, then ajar

Because the ‘ear pressed to the door’ part was sarcasm. I however can see no reference that her door was open or ajar? I’m sure that most people in that crime-free area simply left there front doors ajar.

[Herlock Sholmes]

It appears that shortly before a quarter to one o'clock she heard the measured, heavy tramp of a policeman passing the house on his beat.

I can't see any reference here to having an ear pressed to the door, most likely because the door was open, and if not completely, then ajar.

However, as I said, we have have to be cautious about this report. Why is that above sentence not simply...

Shortly before a quarter to one o'clock she heard the measured, heavy tramp of a policeman passing the house on his beat.

Is the reporter informing us of what Mortimer said, or is he doing his best to piece things together?
Phrases such as 'It appears that', and 'and it so happened that', suggest the later.
Most Ripper writers use this report to say "Fanny said..." - this or that. I don't think this is totally legitimate.

A perfect example of conspiracy thinking

Nothing can be read into the phrase ‘it appears that.’

It could easily be replaced with ‘according to witnesses.’

[Herlock Sholmes]

I found one.

PC Lamb: When I got there I had the gates shut. …
I put a constable at the gate and told him not to let any one in or out.

Heshburg arrived before Lamb, which is why he was able to closely observe the victim (rather than being locked out).
He 'came down' (from further up Berner street), after hearing a 'policeman's' whistle.

Spooner also arrived prior to Lamb, and was also able to closely observe the victim.
He met Mr Harris on his way to the yard, who had come outside after hearing a 'policeman's' whistle.

There is a mystery to be solved...

How do you know that “came down” meant from further up Berner Street and not from inside the club?

[Michael W Richards]

The best we can say is that Heshburg arrived after Lamb's whistle and before the gates were closed. A fuller account of Lamb's words (briefly summarised above) from the Telegraph makes it clear that there was a delay between his arrival and their closure;

"When I blew my whistle other constables came, and I had the entrance of the yard closed. This was while Dr. Blackwell was looking at the body. Before that the doors were wide open. The feet of the deceased extended just to the swing of the gate, so that the barrier could be closed without disturbing the body. I entered the club and left a constable at the gate to prevent any one passing in or out."

This is confirmed by Dr Blackwell's assistant, Edward Johnson;

"The outer gates were closed shortly after I came."

Since we know Blackwell didn"t arrive until 1:16, Heshburg had a considerable window of opportunity to reach the gates after hearing Lamb's whistle and before the yard was closed.
It's possible that Lamb is confusing Blackwell with Johnson, but even so, there are still several minutes between whistle and closure. No mystery there. Unless you want one.

Johnson was there before Blackwell. Smith was there minutes after 1. Did you read Heschberg saying any officials were there? Did you read Spooner say that?

Nope. The facts of the matter remain to be disputed by you and many others because of your ingrained opinions or beliefs, but 4 witnesses say they were with Louis and others around the body no later than 12:45, ....the same time as Israel claims he saw Liz and 2 other men on the street. Since Louis provably did not arrive at 1, why didnt Smith see him just after 1? Spoiler alert....because he arrive earlier than he said.

All that you folks can do is exhaust me by forcing me to repeat ad nauseum the actual facts, you cant re-write any of it just because you want to.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Johnson was there before Blackwell. Smith was there minutes after 1. Did you read Heschberg saying any officials were there? Did you read Spooner say that?

Nope. The facts of the matter remain to be disputed by you and many others because of your ingrained opinions or beliefs, but 4 witnesses say they were with Louis and others around the body no later than 12:45, ....the same time as Israel claims he saw Liz and 2 other men on the street. Since Louis provably did not arrive at 1, why didnt Smith see him just after 1? Spoiler alert....because he arrive earlier than he said.

All that you folks can do is exhaust me by forcing me to repeat ad nauseum the actual facts, you cant re-write any of it just because you want to.

If you're case is based on those four witnesses that were obviously wrong then it's game over. Diemschutz arrived at 1.00 or just after. Anything else is fantasy.

Spooner said that he'd arrived 5 mins before Lamb. Therefore he should never, ever be mentioned again in terms of an earlier time. But you'll still trot him out.

You keep accusing people of having ingrained beliefs whilst maintaining an ingrained beliefs in a cover up for which there is no evidence and that no one but you and NBFN attach any weight to. I've shown that it would have been an utterly ineffective and useless plan but you still think that these club members would lie to the police to propagate it. They also forget to tell your '4' about the plan because they veered from the script. How careless.

[Michael W Richards]

Incorrect statement: If you're case is based on those four witnesses that were obviously wrong then it's game over. Diemschutz arrived at 1.00 or just after. Anything else is fantasy.

Fanny Mortimer was at her door until just after 1, Louis was not and did not arrive in her view. In fact using your logic, he arrives at a few minutes after 1, by Fannys recollections of a "cart and horse" which you imagine was Louis. Funny Louis arrives after the police had already been sought out huh?

Incorrect statement: Spooner said that he'd arrived 5 mins before Lamb. Therefore he should never, ever be mentioned again in terms of an earlier time. But you'll still trot him out.

He said "I believe it was twenty-five minutes to one o'clock when I arrived in the yard. he may have erred by 5 or 10 minutes, not 30 as you would have people believe.

You keep accusing people of having ingrained beliefs whilst maintaining an ingrained beliefs in a cover up for which there is no evidence and that no one but you and NBFN attach any weight to. I've shown that it would have been an utterly ineffective and useless plan but you still think that these club members would lie to the police to propagate it. They also forget to tell your '4' about the plan because they veered from the script. How careless.

The 4 witnesses would not lose jobs or be suspects if the police believed the club was responsible for Stridees death...Louis would have, Eagle would have, and Lave would likely have lost his cottage in the passageway.

So the people with the most to lose are truth tellers and the ones with nothing to lose boldy lied to the police. Interesting if not fascinating departure from any kind of logic known to man. But have it your way...its your ghoul, not mine.