Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Berner Street: No Plot, No Mystery

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    It works perfectly RD and I could write others that work perfectly too. These events aren’t even approaching impossible. They can be easily explained. No mystery needed.
    Charles Letchford stated his sister was at the door at "10 minutes to one"

    But you state that it was 12.55am.


    Does that mean that she was at her door for 5 minutes between 12.50am to 12.55am?

    But saw nobody.


    When we list specific times like 12.42am (for example) we also need to account for time spent at the door.

    In other words; to be at the door at a set time, we must then cover the time spent at the door itself.

    The same applies to the incident involving Bs Man allegedly assaulting Stride.

    If it happens at a specific time of 12.42am (for example) we also need to factor in the time before and after the attack.

    ​​​​​​BS man can't just appear from thin air, assault Stride, and then leave the scene by vanishing. It takes time for him to come and go AND crucially NOT be seen at any point of his arrival and departure from the scene.

    BS man walking down Berner Street to then be seen by Schwartz as he goes over to Stride to assault her, the subsequent shout of "Lipski" followed by Schwartz leaving, pipeman leaving and BS man also leaving, without ANY of them being seen OR heard..in under a minute...is simply improbable.

    In reality, these things take time.

    So rather than saying a time of 12.42am, we need to give a time frame

    It is when we apply the necessary time frame, that it all begins to fall apart.



    Has anyone ever created a 3D CGI version of the incident, who can perhaps construct the scene in real time and see how it runs.



    RD
    "Great minds, don't think alike"

    Comment


    • Originally posted by The Rookie Detective View Post

      Charles Letchford stated his sister was at the door at "10 minutes to one"

      But you state that it was 12.55am.


      Does that mean that she was at her door for 5 minutes between 12.50am to 12.55am?

      But saw nobody.


      When we list specific times like 12.42am (for example) we also need to account for time spent at the door.

      In other words; to be at the door at a set time, we must then cover the time spent at the door itself.

      The same applies to the incident involving Bs Man allegedly assaulting Stride.

      If it happens at a specific time of 12.42am (for example) we also need to factor in the time before and after the attack.

      ​​​​​​BS man can't just appear from thin air, assault Stride, and then leave the scene by vanishing. It takes time for him to come and go AND crucially NOT be seen at any point of his arrival and departure from the scene.

      BS man walking down Berner Street to then be seen by Schwartz as he goes over to Stride to assault her, the subsequent shout of "Lipski" followed by Schwartz leaving, pipeman leaving and BS man also leaving, without ANY of them being seen OR heard..in under a minute...is simply improbable.

      In reality, these things take time.

      So rather than saying a time of 12.42am, we need to give a time frame

      It is when we apply the necessary time frame, that it all begins to fall apart.



      Has anyone ever created a 3D CGI version of the incident, who can perhaps construct the scene in real time and see how it runs.



      RD

      ''The same applies to the incident involving Bs Man allegedly assaulting Stride.''



      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.


      As ive already suggested, if that were the case we could all use the term Alledged when we dont agree with a perticular witness statement . Where would that get us ?

      If you could somehow show ''proof'' that it didnt happed then great lets see it , but if not ,all you have is your speculation and conjecture on your behalf







      'BS man walking down Berner Street to then be seen by Schwartz as he goes over to Stride to assault her, the subsequent shout of "Lipski" followed by Schwartz leaving, pipeman leaving and BS man also leaving, without ANY of them being seen OR heard..in under a minute...is simply improbable.'


      No more or less inprobable than any other witness statement [and there were many ] involved in the Stride murder.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by The Rookie Detective View Post

        Charles Letchford stated his sister was at the door at "10 minutes to one"

        But you state that it was 12.55am.


        Does that mean that she was at her door for 5 minutes between 12.50am to 12.55am?

        But saw nobody.


        When we list specific times like 12.42am (for example) we also need to account for time spent at the door.

        In other words; to be at the door at a set time, we must then cover the time spent at the door itself.

        The same applies to the incident involving Bs Man allegedly assaulting Stride.

        If it happens at a specific time of 12.42am (for example) we also need to factor in the time before and after the attack.

        ​​​​​​BS man can't just appear from thin air, assault Stride, and then leave the scene by vanishing. It takes time for him to come and go AND crucially NOT be seen at any point of his arrival and departure from the scene.

        BS man walking down Berner Street to then be seen by Schwartz as he goes over to Stride to assault her, the subsequent shout of "Lipski" followed by Schwartz leaving, pipeman leaving and BS man also leaving, without ANY of them being seen OR heard..in under a minute...is simply improbable.

        In reality, these things take time.

        So rather than saying a time of 12.42am, we need to give a time frame

        It is when we apply the necessary time frame, that it all begins to fall apart.



        Has anyone ever created a 3D CGI version of the incident, who can perhaps construct the scene in real time and see how it runs.



        RD
        All that we know RD is that we can come up with a few versions that work but we don’t know which one is the actual one. This shows that these events aren’t impossible as some claim. They are only impossible if we apply impossibly high expectations with regard to accuracy. We don’t need to assume plots or that people lied….


        Letchford passes at approximately 12.30 - how do we know that it was 12.30 and that he wasn’t giving a ball park figure? How would his time compare in synchronicity with Smith’s? How did he arrive at the 12.50 time for his sister? If his sister told him what time it was how can we judge the accuracy of her time? There’s also no mention of how long she was on her doorstep - she could just have been locking up for the night and so had a quick glance outside. Letchford said “and everything seemed to me to be going on as usual.” This only means that he saw nothing unusual..so he may have seen the couple.

        The couple arrive just after 12.30 - we don’t know which way they arrived from or who they were. As Letchford only mentioned seeing nothing out of the ordinary maybe they had been there for a while?

        Smith passes at approximately 12.32 - Letchford has gone indoors. He sees the couple. We have no way of tying down Smith’s time or comparing it as far as synchronicity goes with other clocks.

        The couple move on seconds later. We can’t be certain that this was Stride but it’s certainly possible.

        Lave comes into the yard at approximately 12.33 - perhaps he saw the couple but it wasn’t anything ‘unusual,’ and a couple walking away from the scene wouldn’t have appeared connected to a murder which occurred a few minutes later. By this time Eagle is walking along Berner Street. What we know for certain though is that Smith didn’t see Lave and Lave didn’t mention seeing Smith. We also can’t be anything like sure what time Lave went into the yard.

        Eagle returns some time between 12.35 and 12.40 -Lave goes back inside just after Eagle got back. He didn’t see Eagle or go back to the gate before going inside.

        Stride arrives at the gateway just after Eagle returned - this could have been at 12.36 or 12.37 or 12.38 or 12.39. All that we know is that Stride definitely ended up at the yard. Maybe she was waiting for someone or, maybe my suggestion that she could have ducked into the gateway to try and avoid BS man?

        The incident occurs - from the time that BS man and Stride first meet (if it was Stride) to Schwartz and Parcelman leaving the street takes around 30 seconds. If BS man then kills Stride we could add another minute or so.

        Fanny goes onto her doorstep just after the incident - maybe she heard BS man’s footsteps and mistook them for a Constable’s (walking slowly because he was a bit drunk?) But we have no way of knowing what time Fanny went onto her doorstep but we know that she didn’t see Stride.

        At approximately 12.40 Brown goes for his supper - justafter that the couple arrive at the corner of Fairclough. Fanny can’t see them from where she’s standing. We also have to remember the time of day and the poor street lighting.

        Brown returns and sees them 12.45.

        Goldstein passes at around 12.50 - seen by Fanny. Goldstein never mentioned what time he passed so we can only say that he passed while Fanny was on her doorstep and we can’t even be certain of what time she was there or exactly how long she was there for.

        Fanny goes back inside just after seeing Goldstein pass

        Letchford’s sister goes onto her doorstep at approximately 12.55 to lock up and sees nothing.

        Fanny hears horse and cart around 1.00 - it’s Louis.

        Fanny hears commotion from the club just after 1.00.
        Regards

        Sir Herlock Sholmes.

        “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

        Comment



        • 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.



          Regards

          Sir Herlock Sholmes.

          “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
            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
            ​​​​​
            Last edited by The Rookie Detective; 04-22-2024, 12:26 PM.
            "Great minds, don't think alike"

            Comment


            • 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.

              Comment


              • 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.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by The Rookie Detective View Post

                  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.
                  Regards

                  Sir Herlock Sholmes.

                  “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

                  Comment


                  • 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.
                    Last edited by c.d.; 04-22-2024, 04:57 PM.

                    Comment


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

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post
                        I'm guessing that standard police procedure would have been (as it still is) to question people individually to prevent confirmation bias.
                        Agreed Scott.
                        Regards

                        Sir Herlock Sholmes.

                        “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by The Rookie Detective View Post

                          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.
                          Regards

                          Sir Herlock Sholmes.

                          “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

                            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?
                            Michael Richards

                            Comment


                            • 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 Richards

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

                                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
                                "Great minds, don't think alike"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X