Likely Lipski Link

[GBinOz]

Could Pipeman have been the early whistle man who worked for the WVC?

The fact that he didn't CHASE Schwartz to try and apprehend him (with BS man putting the blame onto Schwartz for the assault on Stride and Pipeman following Schwartz) OR that he didn't apprehend BS man either, would suggest otherwise and I find it doubtful that Pipeman was one of the WVC.

Could Pipeman have whistled after Schwartz had run off but decided not to give chase and instead go back to Stride?...to either help her or kill her?

RD

Hi RD,

Some innovative thinking here. Might I suggest that the whistle was used to summon the help of police constables in the area to a crime scene. I think that when Pipeman emerged from the recessed doorway of the Nelson he took a quick look and wasn't sure what was going on. Even if he was WVC, this would not be sufficient cause to be summoning help from the police force. I think he attempted to approach Schwartz to find out what might have transpired but Schwartz panicked and bolted. This is a scenario where Pipeman is an innocent bystander. If he were JtR on the prowl, he would have wanted to scare Schwartz off so he could utilise his opportunities.

Might I take this opportunity to commend your out of the box thinking, and suggest that you persevere in the face of those who may not agree with your propositions, including myself.

Cheers, George

[The Rookie Detective]

Could Pipeman have been the early whistle man who worked for the WVC?

The fact that he didn't CHASE Schwartz to try and apprehend him (with BS man putting the blame onto Schwartz for the assault on Stride and Pipeman following Schwartz) OR that he didn't apprehend BS man either, would suggest otherwise and I find it doubtful that Pipeman was one of the WVC.

Could Pipeman have whistled after Schwartz had run off but decided not to give chase and instead go back to Stride?...to either help her or kill her?

RD

[GBinOz]

Just a point regarding that early whistle. I've always thought the idea of a man lighting a pipe was an odd detail for Schwartz to be recalling. Given names like Schwartz, Wess, and others, I was curious as to what the German translation of pipe might be. Microsoft Translator. Does 'Whistleman' have a nice ring to it?

Hi Andrew,

I don't recall if any conclusion was drawn on the "Whistling in Berner St" thread, but I recall discovering that the members of the Vigilance Committee were issued with whistles. IMO the phantom early whistler was Issacs (Kozebrodski) or Jacobs when they initially discovered the body.

Cheers, George

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Just a point regarding that early whistle. I've always thought the idea of a man lighting a pipe was an odd detail for Schwartz to be recalling. Given names like Schwartz, Wess, and others, I was curious as to what the German translation of pipe might be. Microsoft Translator. Does 'Whistleman' have a nice ring to it?

Hi Andrew,

Yes, they're basically the same. It's much like the nautical use of 'pipe' to refer to the sound made by a bosun's call.

Replace pipeman with a sailor holding a bosun's whistle, which to a German is called a pipe...

A man lighting his pipe in an age when most people smoked is probably quite mundane, but it's a curious coincidence that pipe and whistle are the same in German.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Thank you for that link; that is fascinating indeed and would indicate that there's more to the events of the night of the murder than we really understand, even after all this time.

The more we look, the more we are able to see.


RD

Just a point regarding that early whistle. I've always thought the idea of a man lighting a pipe was an odd detail for Schwartz to be recalling. Given names like Schwartz, Wess, and others, I was curious as to what the German translation of pipe might be. Microsoft Translator. Does 'Whistleman' have a nice ring to it?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Agreed, but I'll note that in most of the eyewitness sightings, darkness is an issue. It could be that the degree of darkness and Stride's orientation by the wall made Hershberg's view even more difficult than that of some of the other sightings. On the other hand, he probably looked at her longer than, say, Schwartz and Lawende were able to look at their suspects.

Hershberg seemed to know a lot and be very observant. He could the see the cachous, even claiming to know the approximate number of them. On the other hand, he said nothing about grapes. Were they real? Reading his quote, do you get the impression that he knew who Koster was? The name appears elsewhere in that edition.

[Michael W Richards]

I did chuckle at c.d. posting his rather random message directly after yours, as I always find that negative comments that miss the point of the thread merely stem from a place of jealously that someone has made more progress than they have in a comparitively short amount of time.

Hmmm....did I just get dissed here????

c.d.

Why should I be the only one.?

[Lewis C]

Interesting thoughts and I agree we should always keep the vagaries of eyewitness accounts in mind. In this case, I think we can 'forgive' Herschberg, given the darkness and orientation of Stride against the club wall.

Agreed, but I'll note that in most of the eyewitness sightings, darkness is an issue. It could be that the degree of darkness and Stride's orientation by the wall made Hershberg's view even more difficult than that of some of the other sightings. On the other hand, he probably looked at her longer than, say, Schwartz and Lawende were able to look at their suspects.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Thank you for that link; that is fascinating indeed and would indicate that there's more to the events of the night of the murder than we really understand, even after all this time.

The more we look, the more we are able to see.


RD

Thanks RD, and I agree with that.

The initial post was too long and wordy, but I think the thread contains some interesting info and interpretation.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Hi Andrew,

I notice that in your first post in that thread, Herschberg described Stride as being 25-28, when in fact she was 44. Yet there seems little doubt that the person that he saw was in fact Stride. Maybe this tells us something about how seriously we should take witnesses' estimates of people's ages. Or maybe because Stride was dead, it's a completely different situation from estimating someone's age who's alive, in which case it tells us very little.

Interesting thoughts and I agree we should always keep the vagaries of eyewitness accounts in mind. In this case, I think we can 'forgive' Herschberg, given the darkness and orientation of Stride against the club wall.

[The Rookie Detective]

Hi RD.

Regarding the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee, are you aware of the strange case of the early whistle?

Thank you for that link; that is fascinating indeed and would indicate that there's more to the events of the night of the murder than we really understand, even after all this time.

The more we look, the more we are able to see.


RD

[Lewis C]

Hi RD.

Regarding the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee, are you aware of the strange case of the early whistle?

Hi Andrew,

I notice that in your first post in that thread, Herschberg described Stride as being 25-28, when in fact she was 44. Yet there seems little doubt that the person that he saw was in fact Stride. Maybe this tells us something about how seriously we should take witnesses' estimates of people's ages. Or maybe because Stride was dead, it's a completely different situation from estimating someone's age who's alive, in which case it tells us very little.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Hi RD.

Regarding the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee, are you aware of the strange case of the early whistle?

[The Rookie Detective]

RD.

I don't think anybody ruled post 43 in or out. If you look at the date of that post compared to the next post, they are a little over two weeks apart. I did a lot of press trawling back then. Post 44 was related to that thread so I posted it regarding LeGrand, not knowing at the time there was a burglar with the name of Grant. Debs corrected me on that point and then I knew and so stated thanking her for the information that the burglar was NOT LeGrand.

As far as the Schmuss news article, I never really followed up on it, but I have never discounted it as a POSSIBILITY of being Charles LeGrand. It could also be William Grant (Grainger) or a host of other people using the alias Grant. I like the fact you took the time to think it out. Your post above was interesting and I'll have to think it through a bit. LeGrand used certain aliases during certain time frames it seems IIRC. Hopefully Tom Wescott produces his LeGrand book soon. He has a wealth of information on the man. Debs certainly knows her stuff about LeGrand as well. He is an interesting character in the scheme of things. I'm glad someone else has taken an interest in him.

Personally, I don't think Lipski was used as a racial slur but shouting a real person's name. Such as Phillip Lipski. One of those links I posted above includes a clip of a post card sent to Inspector Stroud at the Vine Street PS from Walter Selwyn giving his regards to Lipski and Abberline, the romancer. This was in 1892. Who was Lipski?

*I see you mentioned the two week gap. Sorry.

Thank you for your post.

I really appreciate and respect your views on this, as I am aware that my overall knowledge of the case is relatively minimal in comparison to most of the members on here and so I find getting a knowledgeable and reciprocal response from you very humbling. I am still learning a lot about the case, which is a double-edged sword in many respects.

Thank you for your time and guidance

RD

[jerryd]

Yes i agree, but that section of the thread reads as though you are both ruling out post number 43 which refers to Schmuss and connecting that post with the burglar Grant.

You're making my exact point in that while you correctly ruled out burglar Grant, post number 43 which refers to the correct Le Grand (Grant) comes across as though you're dismissing him also.

That may not be the case but because the thread runs concurrently, it reads as though you've connected post 43 with the rest.

At the time it may have read differently, but for someone reading the thread for the first time, it looks like the Schmuss post no.43 has also been considered not applicable to Le Grand, but that post is a good piece of evidence that proves Le Grand was involved in some way with the investigation into both Stride and Angel, which predates the WVC.

In other words, your post is more important than was realized at the time and because of the content of posts 44 -47, it distracts from the evidence that was right in front of you all along.

As a newbie to the thread, I thought that your comment in post 47 was also referring to post 43 and that you were trying to compare post 43 with the rest of the thread. It may contribute to the reason why as you say, nobody responded to post 43.
I personally think you stumbled on a brilliant piece of evidence without necessarily realizing its significance.

I can appreciate there was a 2-week gap between posts 43 and 44, but anyone reading the thread after that time may have incorrectly put them together, whereas in reality, of course, post 43 is separate and not connected to posts 44 through 47.


RD

RD.

I don't think anybody ruled post 43 in or out. If you look at the date of that post compared to the next post, they are a little over two weeks apart. I did a lot of press trawling back then. Post 44 was related to that thread so I posted it regarding LeGrand, not knowing at the time there was a burglar with the name of Grant. Debs corrected me on that point and then I knew and so stated thanking her for the information that the burglar was NOT LeGrand.

As far as the Schmuss news article, I never really followed up on it, but I have never discounted it as a POSSIBILITY of being Charles LeGrand. It could also be William Grant (Grainger) or a host of other people using the alias Grant. I like the fact you took the time to think it out. Your post above was interesting and I'll have to think it through a bit. LeGrand used certain aliases during certain time frames it seems IIRC. Hopefully Tom Wescott produces his LeGrand book soon. He has a wealth of information on the man. Debs certainly knows her stuff about LeGrand as well. He is an interesting character in the scheme of things. I'm glad someone else has taken an interest in him.

Personally, I don't think Lipski was used as a racial slur but shouting a real person's name. Such as Phillip Lipski. One of those links I posted above includes a clip of a post card sent to Inspector Stroud at the Vine Street PS from Walter Selwyn giving his regards to Lipski and Abberline, the romancer. This was in 1892. Who was Lipski?

*I see you mentioned the two week gap. Sorry.