Why No Stride Mutilations ?

[Aethelwulf]

What hasn't really been mentioned is just how similar Schwartz and Lawende's witness descriptions were. This is what convinces me that B.S man was the murderer.

Schwartz: Man aged around 30, 5 ft 5 inches in height, fair complexion, dark hair, small brown moustache, well built- broad shoulders. Dark trousers and jacket. Cap with a peak.

Lawende: Man aged around 30, 5ft 7 or 8 inches in height, fair complexion, fair moustache, medium build, pepper and salt jacket(grayish color with shades of black), grey cap with a peak, red handkerchief tied around neck.

For two witnesses to see a man with victims so close to their time of death and for their descriptions to be similar in the way they are says to me this is the same man. The descriptions are not identical but no one should expect them to be. But if we look at it both say the man was about 30, he had a moustache, fair complexion, peaked cap, of a medium to strong build and similar in height. Clothing is slightly different however salt and pepper is not wholly inconsistent with dark clothing.....

There is a good analysis of Schwartz's eye witness account here (http://williambury.org/blog6/2018/11...itness-memory/) and the point by point comparison with Bury is quite telling (especially when you consider he is the only suspect with proven form for killing a woman in the early hours of the morning and mutilating her abdomen and genitals, who can be placed in the east end at the right time, known to visit and drink in Whitechapel, used prostitutes, carried one/possibly two knives, described by his habitually abused wife as 'cunning and hid his temper before people').

Should also be noted that Levy who was with Lawende and saw the same man described him as only slightly taller than the woman he was stood next to, which with a hat and boots would align closely with what Schwartz's estimate.

[Sunny Delight]

The questions that must be asked because identification issues are frought with danger

How dark was it?
how far away was the witness?
How long did the witness have the man in his view?
Had he seen the man before?
Did he know his name?
Had he seen him since?
would he recognise him again?
Anything distinct about the man?

It seems very few of these questions were asked of the witnesses

The description you refer to could have no doubt fitted half of the men living in Whitechapel

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

You are assuming these questions were not asked nor indeed pondered by the Police. A lot of material has not made its way to us and therefore we are at a disadvantage compared to those there at the time. We can answer some through looking at their witness statements and comparing that with the geography of the area for instance. By all accounts Schwartz had a decent view in not bad lighting. Not for very long. Lawende was quite close also and had a decent view in ok lighting. Again it was not for very long. Say for instance Lawende had described a man wearing a deerstalker hat- well the two descriptions would be incompatible. Or someone of slim build. How could you square off broad shoulders and slim. Or if Lawende had said the man was 40. Age can be a relative thing but such a big age gap would raise questions. Look at those statements. They are too similar to be coincidences.

[GBinOz]

It’s also not impossible that Schwartz could have been wrong about the time Harry. The incident could have occurred around 12.30 just before Smith passed along Berner Street and it might or might not have involved Stride. I don’t see anything far-fetched about someone looking back and getting an estimation of time wrong by 15 minutes. I reckon that we’ve all done it numerous times.

Its all speculation of course but Kidney might have been involved in a way. If he’d arrived drunk and seen Stride at say 12.30 outside the gates waiting for someone he might have tried to get her to come home with him. Hence the pulling and the confrontation (it might also explain why she didn’t scream very loudly…she was used to rough treatment from Kidney and didn’t feel in fear for her life). They then part company but Stride, for whatever reason doesn’t go far then returns to the yard where she meets her killer. Kidney at the Inquest has something of the ring of truth about him for me (which means next to nothing of course) when he describes drunkenly trying to get the police to do more to catch Stride’s killer and that he could have done a better job. Perhaps he had feelings of guilt about leaving her to her fate? And naturally he wouldn’t have wanted to admit to have seeing Stride just before she was killed so a lie at the Inquest would have been unsurprising.

No evidence for any of that of course but who knows?

Hi Herlock,

While we don't often agree, I was thinking along similar lines. With clock sync errors, the Schwartz incident could easily have taken place around 12:30. Suppose Stride was with Parcelman outside the gates, listening to the music when she spots Kidney approaching. She tells Parcelman to stand back in the shadows while she deals with him. The encounter proceeds as you suggest and Parcelman and Stride then cross the road to be seen by Smith. In this case, Schwartz's evidence is reduced in importance as a PC has seen Stride alive after the incident which was what it looked like to Schwartz - a domestic dispute.

Cheers, George

[FISHY1118]

Hi Herlock,

While we don't often agree, I was thinking along similar lines. With clock sync errors, the Schwartz incident could easily have taken place around 12:30. Suppose Stride was with Parcelman outside the gates, listening to the music when she spots Kidney approaching. She tells Parcelman to stand back in the shadows while she deals with him. The encounter proceeds as you suggest and Parcelman and Stride then cross the road to be seen by Smith. In this case, clock sync errors's evidence is reduced in importance as a PC has seen Stride alive after the incident which was what it looked like to Schwartz - a domestic dispute.

Cheers, George

Hi George , I guess i could [with out the eloquence and detail of a Jeff Hamm post type response] reiterate as ive already done ,the caution one needs to consider when useing the ''clock sync errors'' debate to invent new senarios where certain victims are concerned.

In Strides case moving the B.S incident back to 12.30am that might allow for a new synopsis , ,Schwartz, Morris Eagle , Diemschutz and Dr Blackwells version of events would all have to be no doubt dissmissed .

I just think thats a bit to much to ask for very obvious reasons . That is to say , all four of their accounts of the event that night ''Actually Fit''

1 Eagle enters the club via the yard through the gates at 12.40am , his in the club at 12.41/2 [No dead body]

2. Schwartz see the incident with Stride and B..S at 12.45am

3. B.S man kills Stride after Schwartz and Pipeman leave the scene 12.47/8

4 Diemschutz discovers the body at exactly 1.00am [ 'exactly' were his words , leaving ony 12mins without Strides body being discovered by someone else.Its surely reasonable to except that no one came into the yard befor Diemschutz? . The 12.30/5 time leaves an awful long time without Strides discovery given what was going on in and around the club [not impossible, but how likley?] .

5. Dr Blackwell consults his watch its 1.16am, he advises the body had been dead from 20 mins to half an hour . This fits almost exactly if indeed Stride was killed at 12.45/7




For me, as is the case with all the murders, id prefer to work with what is known than what is not . Just sayin. Cheers Fishy

[Trevor Marriott]

You are assuming these questions were not asked nor indeed pondered by the Police.

Assume nothing as far as Ripperology is concerned

By all accounts Schwartz had a decent view in not bad lighting. Not for very long.

There is no statement from Schwartz nor any inquest testimony so that is pure conjecture on your part and we do have to wonder why there was no statement, or why he wasnt called, the police had an address for him at 22 Ellen Street Whitechapel

Say for instance Lawende had described a man wearing a deerstalker hat- well the two descriptions would be incompatible. Or someone of slim build. How could you square off broad shoulders and slim. Or if Lawende had said the man was 40. Age can be a relative thing but such a big age gap would raise questions. Look at those statements. They are too similar to be coincidences.

But the descriptions as i stated could have fitted half of the men in Whitechapel you should read bth the coroners summing up and Swansons report regarding the identification issues

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[FISHY1118]

Never mind sunny there is a Schwartz statement, we all know that . So id just ignore such attempts to suggest otherwise.

[Sunny Delight]

Never mind sunny there is a Schwartz statement, we all know that . So id just ignore such attempts to suggest otherwise.

Yeah best not to go down that particular rabbit hole. We don't have a statement but we do have a very good summary of what Schwartz said. It isn't hard to work out where everyone stood and what the lighting would have been like. Added to that through the statement we can see that the incident lasted mere seconds. With Lawende possibly ten seconds or so.

[Sunny Delight]

But the descriptions as i stated could have fitted half of the men in Whitechapel you should read bth the coroners summing up and Swansons report regarding the identification issues

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Of course the same could be said for today. However the similar descriptions given of two men seen with victims one hour apart, within at most 10-15 minutes of their deaths- as I say there is nothing that one could point to in order to dismiss this. It is too easy to dismiss it as something generic that could describe anyone. You have to consider the context in which those descriptions were given. You also need to compare them to other descriptions of men that night. Not very similar to those or even other descriptions from other murders. You just like to dismiss things to try and be innovative. Nothing wrong with that but it can leave you chasing your tail......

[FISHY1118]

Yeah best not to go down that particular rabbit hole. We don't have a statement but we do have a very good summary of what Schwartz said. It isn't hard to work out where everyone stood and what the lighting would have been like. Added to that through the statement we can see that the incident lasted mere seconds. With Lawende possibly ten seconds or so.

The statement of course thats referred to is the Report made by Chief inspector Swanson from Schwartzs statement which is recorded and exist in the home office files .

[Sunny Delight]

The statement of course thats referred to is the Report made by Chief inspector Swanson from Schwartzs statement which is recorded and exist in the home office files .

Exactly. It is a very good summary of what Schwartz said and ties in well with the press statement. So yeah I won't be going there with Trevor. I think it is something often overlooked the similarities between B.S man and Lawende's suspect. To my mind it's the same person although of course we can never prove it as the killer was never caught.

[GBinOz]

Hi George , I guess i could [with out the eloquence and detail of a Jeff Hamm post type response] reiterate as ive already done ,the caution one needs to consider when useing the ''clock sync errors'' debate to invent new senarios where certain victims are concerned.

In Strides case moving the B.S incident back to 12.30am that might allow for a new synopsis , ,Schwartz, Morris Eagle , Diemschutz and Dr Blackwells version of events would all have to be no doubt dissmissed .

I just think thats a bit to much to ask for very obvious reasons . That is to say , all four of their accounts of the event that night ''Actually Fit''

1 Eagle enters the club via the yard through the gates at 12.40am , his in the club at 12.41/2 [No dead body]

2. Schwartz see the incident with Stride and B..S at 12.45am

3. B.S man kills Stride after Schwartz and Pipeman leave the scene 12.47/8

4 Diemschutz discovers the body at exactly 1.00am [ 'exactly' were his words , leaving ony 12mins without Strides body being discovered by someone else.Its surely reasonable to except that no one came into the yard befor Diemschutz? . The 12.30/5 time leaves an awful long time without Strides discovery given what was going on in and around the club [not impossible, but how likley?] .

5. Dr Blackwell consults his watch its 1.16am, he advises the body had been dead from 20 mins to half an hour . This fits almost exactly if indeed Stride was killed at 12.45/7

For me, as is the case with all the murders, id prefer to work with what is known than what is not . Just sayin. Cheers Fishy

Hi Fishy,

One of the things that is definitely not known is accurate times. Have a look at the second post here:

https://www.jtrforums.com/forum/the-crime-scenes/8950-a-matter-of-timing-berner-street-witness-time#post120389

The clocks of the era were doing well to be plus or minus 10-15 minutes on GMT - if one clock were running fast and another running slow there could be 20-30 minutes difference. Times like that of Eagle were pure guesses. Eagle says he returned at 12:40, when Kozebrodski said he was standing over the body of the person Brown said he saw in Fairclough St at 12:45. Diemshitz says he turned into Berner St at "exactly' one o'clock, when Lamb says he was being summoned to the murder site by Eagle. Blackwell's pocket watch was not synced with the press reports of his house clock as stated by Johnson, and the press reports disagreed with each other.

Accurate to the minute times are unrealistic for this era. They only became possible studying CC footage a hundred years later. Stick to sequences.

Cheers, George

[GBinOz]

Exactly. It is a very good summary of what Schwartz said and ties in well with the press statement. So yeah I won't be going there with Trevor. I think it is something often overlooked the similarities between B.S man and Lawende's suspect. To my mind it's the same person although of course we can never prove it as the killer was never caught.

Trevor's right. Modern studies using CC camera footage have shown that eye witness testimony is unreliable. Press statements even more so.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi George , I guess i could [with out the eloquence and detail of a Jeff Hamm post type response] reiterate as ive already done ,the caution one needs to consider when useing the ''clock sync errors'' debate to invent new senarios where certain victims are concerned.

In Strides case moving the B.S incident back to 12.30am that might allow for a new synopsis , ,Schwartz, Morris Eagle , Diemschutz and Dr Blackwells version of events would all have to be no doubt dissmissed .

I just think thats a bit to much to ask for very obvious reasons . That is to say , all four of their accounts of the event that night ''Actually Fit''

1 Eagle enters the club via the yard through the gates at 12.40am , his in the club at 12.41/2 [No dead body]

Eagle’s return isn’t affected by my suggested scenario. If the Schwartz incident occurred earlier there would still have been no body for Eagle to have seen.

2. Schwartz see the incident with Stride and B..S at 12.45am

But we have absolutely no way of confirming that time. He might have been correct in his suggested time of course but have no way of knowing how he had arrived at it. For example he might have heard a distant bell 30 minutes before the event but misheard whether it was the quarter past or half past bell. Again, I’m not stating anything as a fact but, at a time when most poorer people didn’t own watches or even clocks timing errors are to be expected.

3. B.S man kills Stride after Schwartz and Pipeman leave the scene 12.47/8

But we can’t know for certain that BS man killed Stride. It might be the likeliest conclusion but it can’t be a certainty and if the incident had occurred at 12.30 that would have given ample time for someone else to come on the scene.

4 Diemschutz discovers the body at exactly 1.00am [ 'exactly' were his words , leaving ony 12mins without Strides body being discovered by someone else.Its surely reasonable to except that no one came into the yard befor Diemschutz? . The 12.30/5 time leaves an awful long time without Strides discovery given what was going on in and around the club [not impossible, but how likley?] .

I think that you’ve misunderstood my speculated scenario Fishy? I’m wasn’t suggesting that Stride was killed at 12.30. My suggestion was that the Schwartz incident might have occurred at around 12.30 but it didn’t result in Stride’s death. I suggested that after the incident BS man left the scene and Stride was still very much alive. Stride was then killed some time after Eagle’s return and before Diemschitz returned.

5. Dr Blackwell consults his watch its 1.16am, he advises the body had been dead from 20 mins to half an hour . This fits almost exactly if indeed Stride was killed at 12.45/7

I’d just stress again Fishy that I’m not strongly promoting this scenario. I was simply making a suggestion for discussion. That scenario wouldn’t clash with the events unless we insist on exact times which I’m wary of doing. Except for Blackwell of course.


For me, as is the case with all the murders, id prefer to work with what is known than what is not . Just sayin. Cheers Fishy

I realise that this post was to a post by George but….

I really don’t see why we should use any more caution when speculating on timing errors than we should apply to accepting timings? Any time mentioned could have been wrong to some extent. We should have a high level of confidence in Blackwell of course, as you say, but even for him a watch can be a minute or two out.

Another suggestion….. could Pipeman and Parcelman have been one and the same? We all know about how inaccurate witness identification can be. Schwartz mentioned no parcel of course but the man was in a doorway in the dark and how sure can we be that he didn’t simply put the parcel under his arm while he was lighting his pipe and Schwartz just didn’t notice?

So scenario mk2…… the Schwartz incident occurs at 12.30 - Schwartz and BS man leave the scene - Stride crosses over to near the corner of Fairclough Street and Pipeman goes over to ‘check that she’s ok’ - Smith passes and sees them talking - they move around the corner where Brown sees them - they return to the gates (perhaps just intending to pass them on the way to somewhere else?) but Pipeman pulls her into the yard and kills her?

[FISHY1118]

Hi Fishy,

One of the things that is definitely not known is accurate times. Have a look at the second post here:

https://www.jtrforums.com/forum/the-crime-scenes/8950-a-matter-of-timing-berner-street-witness-time#post120389

The clocks of the era were doing well to be plus or minus 10-15 minutes on GMT - if one clock were running fast and another running slow there could be 20-30 minutes difference. Times like that of Eagle were pure guesses. Eagle says he returned at 12:40, when Kozebrodski said he was standing over the body of the person Brown said he saw in Fairclough St at 12:45. Diemshitz says he turned into Berner St at "exactly' one o'clock, when Lamb says he was being summoned to the murder site by Eagle. Blackwell's pocket watch was not synced with the press reports of his house clock as stated by Johnson, and the press reports disagreed with each other.

Accurate to the minute times are unrealistic for this era. They only became possible studying CC footage a hundred years later. Stick to sequences.

Cheers, George

So i guesss if ''Time'' is to used one way or the other for any senario of these murders, then Everyone could be correct ,or incorrect including brown,lamb kozebrodski . Ill stand by the one ive mention as the most likely of them all.

[FISHY1118]

I realise that this post was to a post by George but….

I really don’t see why we should use any more caution when speculating on timing errors than we should apply to accepting timings? Any time mentioned could have been wrong to some extent. We should have a high level of confidence in Blackwell of course, as you say, but even for him a watch can be a minute or two out.

Another suggestion….. could Pipeman and Parcelman have been one and the same? We all know about how inaccurate witness identification can be. Schwartz mentioned no parcel of course but the man was in a doorway in the dark and how sure can we be that he didn’t simply put the parcel under his arm while he was lighting his pipe and Schwartz just didn’t notice?

So scenario mk2…… the Schwartz incident occurs at 12.30 - Schwartz and BS man leave the scene - Stride crosses over to near the corner of Fairclough Street and Pipeman goes over to ‘check that she’s ok’ - Smith passes and sees them talking - they move around the corner where Brown sees them - they return to the gates (perhaps just intending to pass them on the way to somewhere else?) but Pipeman pulls her into the yard and kills her?

''Another suggestion….. could Pipeman and Parcelman have been one and the same'' Yes



However given that Pipeman followed Schwartz who ran as far as the Railway Arch but Pipeman didnt follow as far. [ how far is the arch from where Schwartz started his run . ? How far do we estimate Pipeman got befor he stopped? , what problems now come into play if he had to double back to kill Stride ?. Its just possible also that Pipeman never returned to the spot where Schwartz originally saw him after finished following him .