Where is Liz Stride?

[Observer]

Hi DRoy

Mortimer stated that she stood at her door from 12:30 though, you're jumping to conclusions advancing her times by 5 minutes. Also Lave advanced into the street, the yard was so dark that he had to grope along the wall to find his way. If he had come out for some fresh air what would be the point of standing in a pitch black yard? He also reported that he saw nothing unusual, well he wouldn't in a pitch black yard, it's obvious he was referring to the street scene. Why then did Mortimer not see him?

Where are you getting 12:35 a.m. for Eagle's return, at inquest he said he returned at twenty to one. Why did Mortimer not see Eagle.

As I maintain there was no one to contradict Schwartz's statement, so why would the police think his account not worthy of the inquest?

Why did Mortimer not appear at inquest, did the police think her story not worthy of inclusion?

Regard

Observer

[DRoy]

Mortimer stated that she stood at her door from 12:30 though, you're jumping to conclusions advancing her times by 5 minutes. Also Lave advanced into the street, the yard was so dark that he had to grope along the wall to find his way. If he had come out for some fresh air what would be the point of standing in a pitch black yard? He also reported that he saw nothing unusual, well he wouldn't in a pitch black yard, it's obvious he was referring to the street scene. Why then did Mortimer not see him?

Observer,

You're right, i'm jumping to a conclusion. Is it not possible people were off in their times? You'd rather believe that every witness knew the exact times which also happened to be in 5 minute increments only? 12:30, 12:35, 12:40, 12:45, 1:00.

Where are you getting 12:35 a.m. for Eagle's return, at inquest he said he returned at twenty to one. Why did Mortimer not see Eagle.

I got 12:35 from this site.

As I maintain there was no one to contradict Schwartz's statement, so why would the police think his account not worthy of the inquest?

He didn't testify. Obviously there was a problem with his story.

Why did Mortimer not appear at inquest, did the police think her story not worthy of inclusion?

Nice try! What would she testify to? She didn't see anything. The only value she would have provided is to dispute Schwartz's story if he had testified. He didn't testify so Mortimer didn't need to.

Cheers
DRoy

[Wickerman]

If so, Jon, it means that Lawende, Harris and Levy each estimated a significantly different height for Eddowes' companion, the recognition of which is certainly consistent with the psychological research that has been conducted into the reliability of eyewitness descriptions.

Swanson was not wholly convinced, he wrote:
"I understand from City Police the Mr Lawende, one of the men, identified the clothes only of the murdered woman Eddowes, which is a serious drawback to the value of the description of the man".

Levy only said that the man was about 3" taller than the woman?
Lawende was cut short from making his description public, then sequestered away, so only Harris was available to offer an opinion.

Swanson's summary in the Gazette on the 19th?, was the first mention of the Duke St. man as having the appearance of a sailor. Where did this idea come from?

If Lawende could not see the man because the woman stood between them, as he claimed, then where did the detail come from about his appearance?

Swanson also commented:
"...... even Mr Lawende states that he could not identify the man, but also the woman stood with her back to him, with her hand on the man's breast, he could not identify the body mutilated as it was, as that of the woman whose back he had seen, but to the best of his belief the clothing of the deceased, which was black was similar to that worn by the woman whom he had seen, and that was the full extent of his identity."

There's possibly more icing than cake in the description attributed to Lawende. And, as a result it is quite possible the couple were not Eddowes & Co. at Church Passage.

.

[Observer]

Hi Droy

Hold on, you discount Schwartz's account on the premise that Brown also stated that he saw Stride at 12:45. 12:45 5 minute increment you know!

Look at the inquest report, Eagle stated he ruturned to the club about twenty to one.You state 12:35, another 5 minute increment, you must keep away from these 5 minute increments you know. However why did Mortimer not see him?

Lave entered the street, why did Mortimer not see him

And Mortimer did see someone she saw Goldstein, and she stated he carried a black shiny bag, was this not worthy of inclusion at inquest?

Rewgards

Observer

[DRoy]

Hold on, you discount Schwartz's account on the premise that Brown also stated that he saw Stride at 12:45. 12:45 5 minute increment you know!

Again, nice try! Brown didn't see Liz in Berner Street.

Look at the inquest report, Eagle states he ruturned to the club about twenty to one. Why did Mortimer not see him?

About twenty to one. Did he run into Lave?

Lave entered the street, why did Mortimer not see him

Mortimer said she saw people from the club but the only person she saw passing through the street turned out to be Goldstein.

And Mortimer did see someone she saw Goldstein, and she stated he carried a black shiny bag, was this not worthy of inclusion at inquest?

No it wasn't valuable. Once Goldstein was identified the bag was useless.

Cheers
DRoy

[Observer]

Again, nice try! Brown didn't see Liz in Berner Street.

I didn't say he did. He saw her by the wall of the Board School in Fairclough Street. The point is you use his time of the sighting 12:45 (a five minute increment) to discredit Schwartz, you strictly adhere to that 12:45 timeframe used by Brown, a procedure you admonish me for! No room for manouvre regarding the time here? As I said you want your cake and eat it.

About twenty to one. Did he run into Lave?.

Ah, you reaslise your error regarding Eagle then? Lave left the club approx 12:30 returning at approx 12:40. It's obvious therfore that Eagle returned nearer to 12:40 than 12:35. or he would have bumped into Lave. I'd say Lave re-entered the club at 12:39. with Eagle shortly after at 12:40. Put it this way if Eagle stated that he returned at about tewnty to two, I'd say he meant nearer to twenty to two than 12:35. a time when (according to you) Mortimer was at her door. Why didn't Mortimer see Lave and Eagle?

No it wasn't valuable. Once Goldstein was identified the bag was useless.

You're making it up as you're going along mate. So Mortimer was not called to inquest because

a) Goldstein was identified, thus Mortimer's sighting of him was irrelevent

b) Schwartz's statement was not believed by the police, thus he did not appear at inquest. Consequently there was no need for Mortimer to contradict him, she of course maintaining that she stood at her door the whole time. And even if she did momantarily retire indoors during the time of the assault she could still put a spoke in the works of Schwartz's story on the grounds that she did not hear Liz Stride scream.

Ok mate. Dream on

Regards

Observer

[DRoy]

I didn't say he did. He saw her by the wall of the Board School in Fairclough Street. The point is you use his time of the sighting 12:45 (a five minute increment) to discredit Schwartz, you strictly adhere to that 12:45 timeframe used by Brown, a procedure you admonish me for! No room for manouvre regarding the time here? As I said you want your cake and eat it.

What? I don't care about Brown's time at all other than to show he said he saw Liz at the same time Schwartz said he did. Strictly adhere? It doesn't matter to me if it was actually 12:42 or 12:47. Admonish you? No, i'm saying not every witness got the time exactly right so there is room for people to have missed other people.

Ah, you reaslise your error regarding Eagle then? Lave left the club approx 12:30 returning at approx 12:40. It's obvious therfore that Eagle returned nearer to 12:40 than 12:35. or he would have bumped into Lave. I'd say Lave re-entered the club at 12:39. with Eagle shortly after at 12:40. Put it this way if Eagle stated that he returned at about tewnty to two, I'd say he meant nearer to twenty to two than 12:35. a time when (according to you) Mortimer was at her door. Why didn't Mortimer see Lave and Eagle?

Mortimer said she was outside from 12:30, so it isn't according to me. In my opinion she probably actually went outside at around 12:35 since she didn't see Smith. But again, maybe Smith was actually there at 12:33 and Mortimer at 12:34. I've answered your question about Mortimer not seeing Lave or Eagle...she said she saw members of the club, she didn't see anyone passing through the street. Members of the club being Lave and Eagle.

You're making it up as you're going along mate. So Mortimer was not called to inquest because

a) Goldstein was identified, thus Mortimer's sighting of him was irrelevent

b) Schwartz's statement was not believed by the police, thus he did not appear at inquest. Consequently there was no need for Mortimer to contradict him, she of course maintaining that she stood at her door the whole time. And even if she did momantarily retire indoors during the time of the assault she could still put a spoke in the works of Schwartz's story on the grounds that she did not hear Liz Stride scream.

Yes! What would she testify to? Why bring in a witness who saw nothing? No matter how much you believe Schwartz, it is not going to change the fact he didn't testify. Schwartz isn't mentioned in memoirs or anywhere else as being a great witness. Something happened to his story and it wasn't a good thing or else he would have testified. Mortimer didn't testify because she had nothing of value to say, the same can be said of Schwartz.

Cheers
DRoy

[Observer]

What? I don't care about Brown's time at all other than to show he said he saw Liz at the same time Schwartz said he did. Strictly adhere? It doesn't matter to me if it was actually 12:42 or 12:47. Admonish you? No, i'm saying not every witness got the time exactly right so there is room for people to have missed other people.

Ehhh??? If the witnesses timings were open to speculation how in the hell do you know Brown saw Stride at the same time as Schwartz! Come on man get a grip. By your reasoning Brown could have been mistaken regarding the hour he saw Stride, as could Schwartz. So how can you rule out Schwartz's account on the grounds that Brown acclaimed to have spotted Stride at the same minute as Schwartz?

Mortimer said she was outside from 12:30, so it isn't according to me. In my opinion she probably actually went outside at around 12:35 since she didn't see Smith. But again, maybe Smith was actually there at 12:33 and Mortimer at 12:34. I've answered your question about Mortimer not seeing Lave or Eagle...she said she saw members of the club, she didn't see anyone passing through the street. Members of the club being Lave and Eagle.

I don't beleive it.

No she did not see members of the club, you're wrong, the only person she saw was Goldstein, passing through the street She did not say that she saw Eagle and Lave. And if she had been on the street at 12:35 she would have seen both Lave and Eagle. I'd be surprised if Mortimer was at her door earlier than 12:50, the footsteps she heard were in all likelyhood those of Eagle returning to the club. And you've yet to point me in the right direction to the press report that mentions Mortimer hearing the cart of Deimschutz returning to the club. One thing is certain she wasn't at her door during the period in which Scwartz saw Stride being assaulted by BS man.

Yes! What would she testify to? Why bring in a witness who saw nothing? No matter how much you believe Schwartz, it is not going to change the fact he didn't testify. Schwartz isn't mentioned in memoirs or anywhere else as being a great witness. Something happened to his story and it wasn't a good thing or else he would have testified. Mortimer didn't testify because she had nothing of value to say, the same can be said of Schwartz.

What would she testify to? Come off it, she went into ther yard and veiwed Stride's body, Spooner was called to the inquest for precisely the same reason. Not all witnesses were called to inquest. Ok, if something happened to Schwartz's story what do you think happened for the police not to call him to inquest? Nobody could contradict his story, certainly not Mortimer, and it remained on the police files.

Regards

Observer

[The Good Michael]

No matter how much you believe Schwartz, it is not going to change the fact he didn't testify. Schwartz isn't mentioned in memoirs or anywhere else as being a great witness. Something happened to his story and it wasn't a good thing or else he would have testified. Mortimer didn't testify because she had nothing of value to say, the same can be said of Schwartz.

Mortimer seems to have had nothing of value to say. It was probably because, when compared to other testimony, she came off as clueless. She could have been an attention seeker. Whatever reason, this cannot apply to Schwartz. Schwartz probably didn't testify because he had given all the information he could and logistics with translation and the time it would take to translate back and forth would have made the process unwieldy and would have provided little value. It seems as if all the testimony from all cases provided little value as they were only coroner inquests and gave no new information as far as I can tell

Mike

[DRoy]

Ehhh??? If the witnesses timings were open to speculation how in the hell do you know Brown saw Stride at the same time as Schwartz! Come on man get a grip. By your reasoning Brown could have been mistaken regarding the hour he saw Stride, as could Schwartz. So how can you rule out Schwartz's account on the grounds that Brown acclaimed to have spotted Stride at the same minute as Schwartz?

Observer,

I don't know if Brown saw Schwartz at the same time or not. This entire argument is stupid. You forget the reason of me even bringing Brown's timing up. I was trying to show you couldn't take their times so literal because if you did then either Brown or Schwartz must have been wrong. That's it. No conspiracy, not having my cake and eating it too.

No she did not see members of the club, you're wrong, the only person she saw was Goldstein, passing through the street She did not say that she saw Eagle and Lave. And if she had been on the street at 12:35 she would have seen both Lave and Eagle. I'd be surprised if Mortimer was at her door earlier than 12:50, the footsteps she heard were in all likelyhood those of Eagle returning to the club. And you've yet to point me in the right direction to the press report that mentions Mortimer hearing the cart of Deimschutz returning to the club. One thing is certain she wasn't at her door during the period in which Scwartz saw Stride being assaulted by BS man.

Her quote is "Yes, there was hardly anybody moving about except at the club" (London Evening News October 1). Like i've said before, nobody passed through the street except Goldstein. As per October 1 The Evening News: "...And so it happened that in about four minutes' time she heard Diemschitz's pony cart pass the house and remarked upon the circumstance to her husband."

What would she testify to? Come off it, she went into ther yard and veiwed Stride's body, Spooner was called to the inquest for precisely the same reason. Not all witnesses were called to inquest. Ok, if something happened to Schwartz's story what do you think happened for the police not to call him to inquest? Nobody could contradict his story, certainly not Mortimer, and it remained on the police files.

Yes, what would she testify to? She saw the body, she saw Goldstein, saw nothing else. You're making it sound like Goldstein is important for some reason. When he read Mortimer's account in the papers, he went to the police to say it was him that passed through the street with the bag. The police accepted his story and that was it.

I already gave many possible scenarios why Schwartz didn't testify. If you are asking my personal opinion, I think it likely there was miscommunication when he gave his statement and a follow-up interview confirmed it. His story no longer held the clout it once did. I'm not however sold on Schwartz or those from the club all lying.

Cheers
DRoy

[DRoy]

Mortimer seems to have had nothing of value to say. It was probably because, when compared to other testimony, she came off as clueless. She could have been an attention seeker.

Compared to other testimony she came off as clueless? Who's testimony would that be? Can't be Schwartz, he didn't testify. Nothing she says is discounted by anyone's testimony.

Whatever reason, this cannot apply to Schwartz. Schwartz probably didn't testify because he had given all the information he could and logistics with translation and the time it would take to translate back and forth would have made the process unwieldy and would have provided little value. It seems as if all the testimony from all cases provided little value as they were only coroner inquests and gave no new information as far as I can tell

Schwartz didn't testify. If you can show a reason why he didn't other than his story somehow becoming no longer of value then i'll believe it. Suggesting that he didn't testify because the pain it would have been using a translator is not going to change my mind. Why would Schwartz's story be of little value if it were true? He would have been the last person to see her alive after her being assulted and only minutes before her body was found!

Cheers
DRoy

[The Good Michael]

Why would Schwartz's story be of little value if it were true? He would have been the last person to see her alive after her being assulted and only minutes before her body was found!

Because the testimony was already given. These coroner inquests were for determining probable cause of death, not to find the culprits. As such, they seem to have been a regurgitation of statements in a simple, Q and A format. I suspect that anyone with a good excuse not to be there didn't have to work hard to get a dismissal. There's too much reading into all these inquests.

Mike

[DRoy]

Mike,

Surely Schwartz apparently seeing Liz being assulted about 15 minutes before her death would be important enough to determine the cause of death. Otherwise why not just have doctors attend, they would be the ones deciding the cause of death anyway. Saying Schwartz didn't need to be at the inquest is just silly if his story were truly accepted.

Cheers
DRoy

[Michael W Richards]

Hi all,

I have to address a few comments made in my absence;

1. There is no reason within the known evidence to support that Broadshouldered Man left the scene at all for one, and there is no reason to surmise that anyone came on the scene after BSM may have left. As has been said, the reasonable assumption concerning the alleged assault in Israel Schwartz's statement is that if it is a legitimate account, then BSM is more than likely the killer.

2. Jon's point that the people seen by the Three Wise Men outside Mitre Square may not have been Kate and her killer is a good one....the timing from that sighting to the killers departure is so short that one needs to question whether he could have accomplished all he did with Kate in that amount of time, in addition to getting her to the murder site.

3. Observers point that Fanny Mortimers statement has been proven faulty is inaccurate and misleading. The reason she likely didnt appear at the Inquest is because her evidence isnt necessary unless it corroborates or discounts another statement, and with Israels statement also absent, her story could only offer an empty street prior to the murder. Hardly worth putting someone on the stand who says "I saw nothing but someone passing by the club around 12:56", unless of course it deals with other evidence for that same time.

4.Observers comment that both Brown and Schwartz could be truthful seems to ignore the fact that only 1 of those stories was presented at the Inquest, and that Brown likely didnt see Liz Stride anyway based on his own story. He also didnt see or hear the supposed altercation that would have spilled into the street he was on at the time.

5. To clarify some timings....Lave said he was in the passageway and at the gates from 12:30 until 12:40...yet he didnt see what PC Smith saw at 12:35, nor did he see Morris Eagle return to the club at 12:40. Eagle didnt Lave either. Brown saw his couple at 12:45, the same time Schwartz claims he saw and heard the altercation in front of the club. Brown did not see any color on the woman...Liz dies with white and red flowers on her breast. Fanny Mortimer, who claims to have been at her door, off and on, from 12:30 until 12:50...when she spends the last 10 minutes of the hour at her door continuously...doesnt see or hear Lave, or Eagle, or Schwartz, or BSM, or Pipeman, and in that last 10 minutes at her door until 1am, she doesnt see Louis Diemshutz arriving. Spooner says he saw 2 men running into the street around 12:40am, and thats when he went with them to the passageway. His story conflicts directly only with Louis's.

6. Leon Goldstein did have potential value to the proceedings, if there could have been a link established between him and the black bag of empty cigarette cartons and the cigarette makers living in the passageway cottages who were awake at the time. I believe a decent amount of tobacco related business may have taken place in those cottages.

7. In a traditional Inquest held to determine the cause of death the most important witnesses would be the people that discover the murder, the people closest to the victim, and the people closest to the murder site near the time of the murder. In the case of Liz Stride, the people most responsible for the site on which the murder occurred are first to speak....confirmed by the fact that the first witness runs the paper onsite and is influential in the clubs operations, but in terms of his relevance to the proceedings, he says he left the scene 15 minutes or more before Liz is even attacked.

I would really prefer to have the arguments based on some reality so we can see if this exercise has any real value, I mean every aspect of this murder has been looked at multiple times over the years. What I hope can come from another go round is a realization by some that many of the accepted stories here are without any substantiation.

The real story created by the cumulative accounts isnt realistic, and doesnt work. Too many people miss supposed events happening. What it is though is a very neatly timed exit and entrance history for the club members, the people closest to the victim when she is killed, and the only people who had anything to lose by having the guilt placed on them.

Best regards,
Mike

[The Good Michael]

Surely Schwartz apparently seeing Liz being assulted about 15 minutes before her death would be important enough to determine the cause of death. Otherwise why not just have doctors attend, they would be the ones deciding the cause of death anyway. Saying Schwartz didn't need to be at the inquest is just silly if his story were truly accepted.

It was an official process. Have you actually read these inquests? There's a bit of pomposity from the coroner at times and nothing else of any importance. The broad question of murder or suicide is easily answered without Schwartz' testimony. If you think the inquest is some sort of investigation of any depth, you are sorely mistaken. Read the inquests here and tell me what nuggets of brilliance came out of them that would be different from a written statement. After that, you can call me silly, Mr. Logic.

Mike