Berner Street: No Plot, No Mystery

[FISHY1118]

Interesting...and illuminating. But, the facts are that the Schwartz story is indeed "alledged", it has always been, and it will always be. There is no secondary validation for anything he claimed he saw, people or activity. There is no official recognition of any of his statement in the records concerning the Inquest into this death. There are no reports of missing records which might have validated anything he said, nor are there any records that have been found that show us where his poor wife was actually moving from that afternoon. He is a ghost in the records.

So "alleged" is appropriate, when it comes to what Israel said happened. Its always surprising to me that people will argue points that should be beyond dispute, factual...empirical,.. and accept things that are without any secondary verification or validation as factual.

Here the real proof is in the numbers, not the pudding. With a limited amount of witnesses in total, having multiple corroborative accounts in terms of actions witnessed, times of events, and locations is vital information. Accounts that allign sequentially with others.

Recent pages here have revealed an interest in the supplementary characters comings and goings. Who was on the street walking this way or that, who could see who from the doorway, what times are acceptable with the great unwashed majority....all interesting sidebars.

My interest has always been about who we can verify was anywhere near the scene of the murder when it occurred. Israels characters dont fit that criteria, we dont even know if he was there, let alone BSM and Pipeman.....Goldstein may have been feet from the scene around the time the murder was committed..but a witness saw his progress past the entrance to the yard. So who was there out of sight from the street that we know was there?

When you find somebody who claims that they saw the attack on stride and its not what Schwartz claimed happened, you let me know . Until then its his statement and official eyewitness account, just as all the rest of the witnesses in this case . They could be all labeled "Alleged " if one doesn't like their version of what they saw or heard.

Schwartz is just as credible a witness as anybody who gave testimony that night, and the top brass at the time thought so as well..

[Herlock Sholmes]

Common sense, acceptance of timing issues, the avoidance of cherrypicking, the avoidance of an imaginary plot as a way of eliminating inconvenient witnesses, the avoidance of seeing mystery at every turn and phantoms behind each door and false witnesses allows us to take a reasoned view and see quite clearly that nothing mysteries went on. My new slogan “Free Ripperology From Fantasy.”

[Herlock Sholmes]

Here the real proof is in the numbers, not the pudding. With a limited amount of witnesses in total, having multiple corroborative accounts in terms of actions witnessed, times of events, and locations is vital information. Accounts that allign sequentially with others.

I couldn’t agree more. So we begin our chain at the strongest point, which in this case means the time given that was most likely to have been accurate. Few, if any, would dispute that this was a Doctor using his own pocket watch which he was almost certain to regularly check for accuracy; a watch that he deliberately checked on his arrival at the yard. Dr. Blackwell of course.

So we begin with the reliable time of Dr. Blackwell - 1.16.

Our next witness was a Police Officer with no watch but nevertheless was someone with no reason to lie.

PC. Lamb of course who said that he’d been at the yard for 10 minutes before Dr. Blackwell arrived; so - around 1.06.

And because we know that PC. Lamb had no reason to lie we can be absolutely certain that he did indeed go straight to the yard as soon as Eagle had told him about the body.

So I’d suggest that Eagle arrived no more than 30 seconds before they set off back to Dutfield’s Yard - around 1.05.

As we know how far it was from the yard to where Lamb was we can give an easy estimate of what time Eagle left the yard - around 1.03/04.

If we estimate that Eagle left the yard around 2 minutes after the discovery we get a discovery time of - around 1.01 (close enough to 1.00)

Spooner said that Lamb arrived around 5 minutes after he’d got there (Spooner had no reason to lie either) so - around 1.01.

James Brown, who also had absolutely no reason to lie, heard the men shouting for a Constable at..you guessed it - around 1.00

And what time did Gilleman inform Eagle about the body? Around 20 minutes after Eagle had returned (at 12.40) which gives a discovery time of, surprise, surprise - 1.00.


It simply couldn’t be more conclusive. Confirmed by Mrs. D, confirmed by Mila, confirmed by Minsky. And then after interviewing all of the members and the neighbours and the locals which discovery time did the police settle on….hardly surprising is it….1.00.

[c.d.]

Unfortunately, the fact that Schwartz's story has no secondary validation does not tell us whether it was true or not. It only tells us that there was no secondary validation. Period.

c.d.

[The Rookie Detective]

Interesting...and illuminating. But, the facts are that the Schwartz story is indeed "alledged", it has always been, and it will always be. There is no secondary validation for anything he claimed he saw, people or activity. There is no official recognition of any of his statement in the records concerning the Inquest into this death. There are no reports of missing records which might have validated anything he said, nor are there any records that have been found that show us where his poor wife was actually moving from that afternoon. He is a ghost in the records.

So "alleged" is appropriate, when it comes to what Israel said happened. Its always surprising to me that people will argue points that should be beyond dispute, factual...empirical,.. and accept things that are without any secondary verification or validation as factual.

Here the real proof is in the numbers, not the pudding. With a limited amount of witnesses in total, having multiple corroborative accounts in terms of actions witnessed, times of events, and locations is vital information. Accounts that allign sequentially with others.

Recent pages here have revealed an interest in the supplementary characters comings and goings. Who was on the street walking this way or that, who could see who from the doorway, what times are acceptable with the great unwashed majority....all interesting sidebars.

My interest has always been about who we can verify was anywhere near the scene of the murder when it occurred. Israels characters dont fit that criteria, we dont even know if he was there, let alone BSM and Pipeman.....Goldstein may have been feet from the scene around the time the murder was committed..but a witness saw his progress past the entrance to the yard. So who was there out of sight from the street that we know was there?

Excellent post Michael, fully agree with you on this.


RD

[Michael W Richards]

Yep. People at the club or in the cottages. We even have people at the club acknowledging that they, and others, were there. Even being there at the same time its odd that none seemed to see each other according to Eagle and Lave for example, or Lave not seeing Goldstein walk by, or no-one seeing Louis arrive. But there were men present on that site at the appropriate time and with appropriate access to the murder scene that we know.

My suggestion is one of those people, out of sight to the street, killed Liz Stride.

[Michael W Richards]

Hi R.D ,I really think you should refrain from using terms like ''Alledged'' when describing the attack on Stride as seen by Schwartzs. I get it ,you seem to think the whole event didnt happened, but just because you cant reconcile all the pieces doesnt mean we should have doubts about its authenticity.

Interesting...and illuminating. But, the facts are that the Schwartz story is indeed "alledged", it has always been, and it will always be. There is no secondary validation for anything he claimed he saw, people or activity. There is no official recognition of any of his statement in the records concerning the Inquest into this death. There are no reports of missing records which might have validated anything he said, nor are there any records that have been found that show us where his poor wife was actually moving from that afternoon. He is a ghost in the records.

So "alleged" is appropriate, when it comes to what Israel said happened. Its always surprising to me that people will argue points that should be beyond dispute, factual...empirical,.. and accept things that are without any secondary verification or validation as factual.

Here the real proof is in the numbers, not the pudding. With a limited amount of witnesses in total, having multiple corroborative accounts in terms of actions witnessed, times of events, and locations is vital information. Accounts that allign sequentially with others.

Recent pages here have revealed an interest in the supplementary characters comings and goings. Who was on the street walking this way or that, who could see who from the doorway, what times are acceptable with the great unwashed majority....all interesting sidebars.

My interest has always been about who we can verify was anywhere near the scene of the murder when it occurred. Israels characters dont fit that criteria, we dont even know if he was there, let alone BSM and Pipeman.....Goldstein may have been feet from the scene around the time the murder was committed..but a witness saw his progress past the entrance to the yard. So who was there out of sight from the street that we know was there?

[Herlock Sholmes]

I can accept that none of the timings may have been precise and that they all approximate timings

RD

I’d just add that if we acknowledge the potential inaccuracy of estimations then we should also acknowledge that possibility in regard to Schwartz. I think that it’s possible that he might have seen an incident which perhaps occurred prior to 12.30 and after hearing of the discovery of the body at 1.00 he convinced himself that it had occurred at around 12.45. Or perhaps he’d spoken to Wess about what he’d seen but with no certainty as to the time and Wess mentioned Eagle’s return around 12.35 (with there being no body there) and so he ‘placed’ the incident at around 12.45?

I think that any potential explanation of events is far likelier than Schwartz placing himself at a murder scene if he wasn’t actually there. I think that it’s also worth remembering that, whilst certainly not infallible, Abberline was an experienced and highly regarded officer and he appeared convinced of Schwartz honesty.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I'm guessing that standard police procedure would have been (as it still is) to question people individually to prevent confirmation bias.

Agreed Scott.

[Scott Nelson]

I'm guessing that standard police procedure would have been (as it still is) to question people individually to prevent confirmation bias.

[c.d.]

I can't remember if I asked this before but -- do we know whether club members were questioned individually or in a group? Is it possible that one member heard another give an approximate time and then thought yeah, that sounds about right and so that was their response as well.

c.d.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Both excellent attempts Herlock


But can we try a version based on the timings witnesses gave?

We need APPROXIMATE times based on the following..



Charles Letchford - 12.30am (12.25am-12.35am)

Pc Smith - 12.35am (12.30am-12.40am)

Lave - 12.30 - 12.40am (12.25-12.45am) went as far as the street. Accessed side door

Eagle - 12.40am (12.35am-12.45am) Accessed side door

Parcelman - there BEFORE PC Smith

Schwartz - 12.45am (12.40-12.50am)

Mortimer - ?

Miss Letchford - 12.50am (according to brother) (12.45-12.55am)

Goldstein - ?

Bs man - there BEFORE Schwartz

Pipeman - there BEFORE Schwartz


The other couple - ?

Packer - aware of a couple standing across the road for over half an hour

Brown - ?




I can accept that none of the timings may have been precise and that they all approximate timings

But any more than 5 minutes either side of a stated time is not realistic and is used just as an excuse to fit everything in.

Im afraid that facts show you to be wrong on this RD. Have you seen the table provided by Jeff showing how wrong witnesses can be in regard to time. It surprised me. In this case take Spooner for example, I’m absolutely certain that he estimated his time incorrectly. I don’t have an iota of doubt. He also said that he got there 5 minutes before Lamb so around 1.00. So his 12.35 estimate was a full 25 minutes out. Kozebrodski and Heschberg were also both provably wrong and that makes them 15 and 20 minutes out.

It's not the timing that's important, its the correct chronology first and the duration of timings second.


Does it not seem strange that if you omit the Schwartz assault, then everything else fits without having to doctor the timings.

We aren’t doctoring the timings. You can’t doctor an estimation.

Every attempt so far has been to cater for a witness who nobody saw, talking about an assault than nobody else saw, or heard and involving 2 men in BS man and Pipeman that nobody else saw arrive, at the scene or leave....and who nobody has been able to subsequently identify. Schwartz only exists as an entity during the murder of Stride.

And no one saw the killer of Polly Nichols…should we assume that he didn’t exist?

When you combine all the above, does it not seem likely that Schwartz lied and the assault never happened. This then indicates a clear timeline and solves the puzzle remarkably easily.

The issue is that those who still choose to believe Schwartz seem scared to at least consider it.

No it’s not. It’s because we’re not conspiracy theorists. Witnesses don’t just lie and place themselves at the scene of a murder with no one to prove that they themselves weren’t the murderer. It just doesn’t happen in the real world. How could Schwartz have known that there wasn’t someone in Berner Street at the time that categorically disproved that the incident occurred. Schwartz would have had to have been extraordinarily stupid to do this.

Theres no shame attached to the incompetence of the police at the time; they had next to no resources at their disposal.

I would go as far as saying that the Schwarzists are close to becoming in the same league as those Lechmerians.

Sorry RD it’s the other way around. The whole subject is being overrun by people looking for plots on every corner, false witnesses, cover-ups and suchlike.

We also have the Hutchinsonarians who also believe that twaddle that Hutchinson came out with.

And your proof that Hutchinson lied is?

Why do we choose to believe in the likes of Schwartz, Packer, Hutchinson etc...

And yet ignore other witnesses that upset the apple cart by altering the picture

Which witnesses? Not one witness contradicts Israel Schwartz in any way at all. Not even remotely.

The Nichols murder is a prime example of that.


Does it not occur to anyone that perhaps the reason why the police didn't progress far, is because they chose to believe the wrong people and wrong information?

No. They believed the right people. The killer just got away, as killers sometimes do.

Did Schwartz have an interpreter or did he attend the station alone?



We know Goldstein went with Wess, but what about Schwartz?

He had an interpreter.

RD

We are all free to follow any avenue that we want to RD but from a personal point of view I’m a bit weary of the subject moving as a whole into the realm of plots and conspiracies. Many prefer and enjoy this approach but it’s not for me.

[c.d.]

I would go as far as saying that the Schwarzists are close to becoming in the same league as those Lechmerians.

That's kind of throwing down the old gauntlet there, R.D. Is it not? You seem to have put on Schwartz must have lied glasses.

I would say that the root of the problem stems from people trying to read way too much into the Schwartz incident. If you simply view it as a street hassle it makes things a lot clearer. In my opinion.

c.d.

[c.d.]

The issue is that those who still choose to believe Schwartz seem scared to at least consider it.

"scared?" Uh no. I can't speak for others but I am not scared to consider it. I simply see no reason to believe that he did. Is anyone scared to believe that Abberline lied or Swanson or Blackwell or Mortimer? I am not wedded to my conclusions and changing them will not change the fact that a poor woman in 1888 suffered a horrible fate. Schwartz's statement is what it is. If it doesn't fit conveniently into all these timelines then so be it. We have to deal with what we have convenient or not.

c.d.

[The Rookie Detective]

A pre-Mortimer incident.


12.30 - Charles Letchford walks north on Berner Street.

12.30.30 - Charles Letchford goes into his house. At around the same time Stride and Parcelman turn into Berner Street and begin to walk slowly south.

12.31 - Joseph Lave goes into the yard and stands at the gateway. He sees nothing and goes back into the yard toward the printing office (or maybe he used the outside loo?)

12.31.30 - PC Smith turns into Berner Street

12.32 - Stride and Parcelman stop opposite the club and stand talking.

12.33 - Smith passes the club and sees the couple talking.

12.33.30 - The couple move on.

12.35 - Morris Eagle returns to the club and goes inside. As he goes inside BS man enters Berner Street and walks south. Israel Schwartz is a few yards behind him.

12.36 - Stride and Parcelman part company and Stride heads north on Berner Street. She either stops to wait for someone or she ducks into the yard when she sees BS man approaching.

12.36.30 - BS man and Stride meet and the incident occurs.

12.37 - Schwartz and Pipeman have left the scene.

12.37.30 - BS man pulls Stride into the yard.

12.38 - BS man walks away not wishing to attract attention. He’s heard by Fanny who thinks that it’s the tread of a Constable.

12.38.30 - Fanny Mortimer goes onto her doorstep.

12.40 - James Brown goes for his supper. Crossing Berner Street takes seconds and Fanny doesn’t see him. Maybe poor lighting or maybe she was looking north when he passed?

12.41 - A couple arrive and stand just around the corner in Fairclough Street. Fanny can’t see them.

12.44 - Brown returns and sees the couple.

12.49 - Leon Goldstein passed.

12.50 - Fanny goes back indoors.

12.55 - Miss Letchford goes to lock up for the evening and sees nothing in the street.

1.00 - Fanny hears a horse and cart pass (Louis)

1.02 - She hears the commotion from the club.


A post-Mortimer incident


12.28 - Joseph Lave goes into the yard. He goes to the gateway and sees nothing and goes back inside the yard (maybe he uses the outside loo?)

12.28.30 - Charles Letchford walks north along Berner Street. At the same time Stride and Parcelman enter Berner Street and stroll south.

12.29.30 - PC Smith enters Berner Street walking south.

12.30 - The couple stop opposite the gate and talk.

12.31 - Smith passed the club and sees the couple.

12.31.30 - The couple exit the street.

12.33 - Eagle returns to the club.

12.33.30 - After hearing him pass Fanny Mortimer (who either heard Smith or Eagle [mistaking his tread for a PC]) goes onto her doorstep.

12.41 - James Brown goes for his supper.

12.42 - Fanny sees Leon Goldstein pass.

12.42.30 - The couple arrive on the corner of Fairclough Street

12.43 - BS man enters Berner Street with Schwartz not far behind him.

12.43.30 - Fanny goes back indoors. Brown passes and sees the couple. After he passes they move on.

12.44 - Stride arrived at the gateway.

12.44.30 - The incident occurs and by 12.45 Schwartz and Pipeman are gone.

12.45 - BS man has killed Stride and leaves the scene.

12.46 - Miss Letchford goes onto her doorstep before locking up and sees nothing.

1.00 - Fanny hears a horse and cart (Louis)

1.02 - She hears the commotion from the yard.


So many possibles. None requiring lies or plots or false witnesses.

Both excellent attempts Herlock


But can we try a version based on the timings witnesses gave?

We need APPROXIMATE times based on the following..



Charles Letchford - 12.30am (12.25am-12.35am)

Pc Smith - 12.35am (12.30am-12.40am)

Lave - 12.30 - 12.40am (12.25-12.45am) went as far as the street. Accessed side door

Eagle - 12.40am (12.35am-12.45am) Accessed side door

Parcelman - there BEFORE PC Smith

Schwartz - 12.45am (12.40-12.50am)

Mortimer - ?

Miss Letchford - 12.50am (according to brother) (12.45-12.55am)

Goldstein - ?

Bs man - there BEFORE Schwartz

Pipeman - there BEFORE Schwartz


The other couple - ?

Packer - aware of a couple standing across the road for over half an hour

Brown - ?




I can accept that none of the timings may have been precise and that they all approximate timings

But any more than 5 minutes either side of a stated time is not realistic and is used just as an excuse to fit everything in.

It's not the timing that's important, its the correct chronology first and the duration of timings second.


Does it not seem strange that if you omit the Schwartz assault, then everything else fits without having to doctor the timings.

Every attempt so far has been to cater for a witness who nobody saw, talking about an assault than nobody else saw, or heard and involving 2 men in BS man and Pipeman that nobody else saw arrive, at the scene or leave....and who nobody has been able to subsequently identify. Schwartz only exists as an entity during the murder of Stride.

When you combine all the above, does it not seem likely that Schwartz lied and the assault never happened. This then indicates a clear timeline and solves the puzzle remarkably easily.

The issue is that those who still choose to believe Schwartz seem scared to at least consider it.

Theres no shame attached to the incompetence of the police at the time; they had next to no resources at their disposal.

I would go as far as saying that the Schwarzists are close to becoming in the same league as those Lechmerians.

We also have the Hutchinsonarians who also believe that twaddle that Hutchinson came out with.


Why do we choose to believe in the likes of Schwartz, Packer, Hutchinson etc...

And yet ignore other witnesses that upset the apple cart by altering the picture

The Nichols murder is a prime example of that.


Does it not occur to anyone that perhaps the reason why the police didn't progress far, is because they chose to believe the wrong people and wrong information?


Did Schwartz have an interpreter or did he attend the station alone?

We know Goldstein went with Wess, but what about Schwartz?



RD