Where is Liz Stride?

[DVV]

Yes, that's true.
But that Hungarian poster fled quicker than Pipeman.

[Michael W Richards]

Yes, that's true.
But that Hungarian poster fled quicker than Pipeman.

Ah,..David, but thats not to say that there is no merit to the idea that translations, either intentionally given or due to mistranslations, could change the story just enough to make it something quite different. I think I should mention that I did propose this idea for Israel Schwartz, I am not convinced the story is an outright lie myself. I think Israel attended that meeting or stopped by after it broke up, and whatever he saw happened as he was leaving. And, IF that minor tussle was seen as he left via the side door...then Liz would be roughly in the spot she was killed a few minutes later. No need to wonder why she went into the passageway after that scuffle on the street...she was already in it. No need to wonder why Fanny never sees Liz in front of the gates on the street....after 12:35.

If she was already in it....it would make sense if it was because she was with a member or waiting for one.

Best regards David, all.

[c.d.]

I just want to clarify my statement that the police might have been sympathetic to Schwartz's concern about retribution and therefore didn't force him to testify. I only throw that out there as a possibility. But if it were the case, it would only have been because they already had a statement from him and that they didn't think that his testimony at the inquest would help shed light on what really happened. If they thought his testimony would crack the case wide open, then no amount of sympathy would dissuade them from getting him to testify.

Also, Schwartz came forth voluntarily and the police needed the public's help in getting information. Disrespecting and brow beating a voluntary witness and a Jew to boot probably would not have been good public relations.

c.d.

[Wickerman]

I just want to clarify my statement that the police might have been sympathetic to Schwartz's concern about retribution and therefore didn't force him to testify. I only throw that out there as a possibility. But if it were the case, it would only have been because they already had a statement from him and that they didn't think that his testimony at the inquest would help shed light on what really happened.

That being the case, then why do you think his police statement was not read to the court by proxy? It is the jury who are required to hear all the evidence, not only the Judge.

[DVV]

Ah,..David, but thats not to say that there is no merit to the idea that translations, either intentionally given or due to mistranslations, could change the story just enough to make it something quite different.
Best regards David, all.

Hi Michael

Certainly. Problem is that I don't remember what was exactly said.
I have sometimes thought of that post, but since I can't recall in which thread it was, I really have no idea how to find it again.

Amitiés mon cher

[DRoy]

c.d.

The Coroner decided who would testify not the police. That's why I mention Baxter's thoroughness. How difficult would it be for the police to find their own interpreter within 25 days to verify Schwartz's story? It wouldn't have been difficult at all.

No, they also wouldn't have held Schwartz back because he was jewish or because Lipski was perhaps called out. They wouldn't have had to beat it out of him, as you said he volunteered the info in the first place. I believe he was trying to be helpful but something fell apart with his story.

I can't see any reason for him not to testify based on who else did testify and their reasons for being included in the first place.

Cheers
DRoy

[DRoy]

Ah,..David, but thats not to say that there is no merit to the idea that translations, either intentionally given or due to mistranslations, could change the story just enough to make it something quite different. I think I should mention that I did propose this idea for Israel Schwartz, I am not convinced the story is an outright lie myself. I think Israel attended that meeting or stopped by after it broke up, and whatever he saw happened as he was leaving. And, IF that minor tussle was seen as he left via the side door...then Liz would be roughly in the spot she was killed a few minutes later. No need to wonder why she went into the passageway after that scuffle on the street...she was already in it. No need to wonder why Fanny never sees Liz in front of the gates on the street....after 12:35.

If she was already in it....it would make sense if it was because she was with a member or waiting for one.

Best regards David, all.

Agreed Michael. Also consider that Goldstein was paranoid enough that he thought it best he better let the police know it was him that Mortimer saw shortly before Stride was found. Did he mention seeing anyone or hearing anything? No, but maybe because it was after the apparent assault. Point is he still showed up to try to prove himself innocent.

Did Pipeman or BSM do the same? Unless they were partners, they both would be suspects. But only one of them. If it was Pipeman who killed Liz, why wouldn't BSM come forward? Sure he pushed her to the ground but he didn't kill her. He would have been a valuable witness though. What if it was BSM who killed her, why didn't Pipeman come forward? He didn't do anything wrong. Why would Goldstein who did nothing but walk by feel the need to go to the police when Mortimer gave such a small description of him? Why didn't Pipeman or BSM come forth in the same fashion? Maybe because it had nothing to do with Liz a/o it didn't happen the way Schwartz said it did? His story did change of course in The Star but was that badly translated or did his story evolve like Packer's or was it embellished by the reporter, etc?

Cheers
DRoy

[Michael W Richards]

Some good points DRoy..... I am reminded that Goldstein is also a member....and he has with him a black bag full of empty cigarette cartons as he passes by the open gates....and there are cigarette makers awake at that time in the cottages. And that Goldstein glances in towards the club as he passes...at around 12:55 or 12:56...a time at which Liz Stride is likely cut already or being so. Which would mean her murderer is in the passageway with her....and Fanny is at her door until 1am...so, he doesnt leave via the gates before 1am.

I believe its possible that his translator, or Leon himself, removes what likely was the case when the story is provided, that he was bringing the cartons to the cigarette makers and that when Leon looked in the passageway he saw members gathered and quickly shooing him off. Fanny stated that he walked past hurriedly.

These of course are speculative remarks...but Id like to think they are logically contrived.

Cheers

[Jon Guy]

The piece of velvet fascinates me actually But something she obviously is holding onto for some reason.

Perhaps, she was planning to make that cleaning apron out of it, Mike ?

[curious]

Perhaps, she was planning to make that cleaning apron out of it, Mike ?

Don't you wonder, Jon, what the green velvet was about? where she got it? when? why? was there enough for a new dress. Perhaps she was waiting until she got enough funds to have it made up?

don't you wonder, Jon?

curious

[Phil H]

One possibility for the piece of velvet, is that it had been given to her by her new "beau" - it seems special.

Given that Victorian dresses were very full and used a LOT of material (yards and yards) I doubt there was enough for a dress - I don't think that much material would count as a "piece".

But were not the Kosminski's makers of "mantles" or capes (House p38ff) that might have used a piece of velvet of this size - or from which this might be a remnant? Such pieces,. too small for re-use might have been given as "perks" to employees.

I make no suggestion that a Kosminski was "dating" Liz but there may have been many other Jewish men engaged in the clothing trade. I offer it simply as an observation.

A nice piece of silk velvet would have been out of the range of someone like Liz and thus a nice present - it might make a collar for an older coat, trimming for a bonnet, or maybe a bodice depending on its size.

I believe that velvet of the sort made and used in Victorian times would have marked easily - hence perhaps, Liz Stride's care of her "piece".

Phil

[Jon Guy]

Don't you wonder, Jon, what the green velvet was about? where she got it? when? why? was there enough for a new dress. Perhaps she was waiting until she got enough funds to have it made up?

don't you wonder, Jon?

Yes, I have wondered, I have thoughts on the subject.


What do you wonder, Curious?

[Cogidubnus]

I seem to recall - maybe from the earlier boards -a discussion about Schwartz's evidence, where a poster who knew Hungarian made some interesting and specific suggestions about how words might have been misunderstood by the translator.

Any other long-standing member recall that thread. I think it might have had to do with the word for pipe....?

Phil

Hi Phil

I too remember that thread - it was a comparison of the two slightly differing Schwartz accounts, the one to the police, and the other to the papers. As I recall the conclusion reached (backed up by a reference to the inrternet site "Forvo") was that an unskilled (or Non-native) Hungarian - English translator might've confused the Hungarian word for "Pipe" with that for "Dagger", (they sound pretty alike - just a slight differerence in inflexion as I recall) thus explaining how the one transmogrified into the other.

I think it was assumed that the police got the more accurate translation but can't recall why...It was definitely on the current boards because I've seen it and my membership is relatively recent - damned if I can find it now though!

All the best mate

Dave

[lynn cates]

pipe

Hello Dave.

This it?

Cheers.
LC

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?p=223629&highlight=pipe#post223629

[Bridewell]

It is indeed, Lynn. I'd been looking for it too. I'll bump the translation comparison which Debra was kind enough to attach:

http://translate.google.com/?tl=hu&q=undefined#auto/hu/dagger%0Apipe