Berner Street: No Plot, No Mystery

[Herlock Sholmes]

Because the Star was aware.



Robert Anderson: I have to state that the opinion arrived at in this Dept. upon the evidence of Schwartz at the inquest in Eliz. Stride’s case is that the name Lipski which he alleges was used by a man whom he saw assaulting the woman in Berner St. on the night of the murder, was not addressed to the supposed accomplice but to Schwartz himself.

Where did Anderson get the notion of "the supposed accomplice" from? Was it...

Schwartz cannot say whether the two men were together or known to each other.

Or

...a second man came out of the doorway of the public-house a few doors off, and shouting out some sort of warning to the man who was with the woman, rushed forward as if to attack the intruder.

Or was it, as you suggest, a result of the police questioning Schwartz again? Perhaps a later statement was what Anderson confused for inquest testimony. Whatever the case, we need to keep looking at the evidence we have, rather than just relying on our intuitions to determine what Schwartz would and would not have said, in a given context.



This comment suggests you haven't really understood my point. As I've made it clear, I don't believe Schwartz, at least partially if not completely. Therefore, to claim that I favour one account over the other, is meaningless - I don't favour either. What I'm saying is that those who do believe Schwartz often dismiss the Star account, claiming that it sensationalises Schwartz, for the benefit of paper sales. This is lazy thinking. The press account makes no mention of a woman being thrown onto hard ground, nor the calling out of an ethnic slur. On the other hand, we have the knife, and the apparent association of the two men.

With Schwartz, I believe there is a crucial element to the puzzle that we are missing.

Personally, I don’t really see what can be gained by looking over the same evidence. I believe that we pretty much know what happened in Berner Street. The least likely thing for me is that Schwartz lied. This would make him an attention seeking idiot and yet the experienced, well-respected Abberline felt he was telling the truth. Could Abberline have been duped? Yes, no one is infallible but the likelihood has to be strongly against it. And with all of the anti-Jewish feeling at the time Schwartz might have been playing with fire in placing himself at the scene of the murder with three other people; one of whom died and the other two who couldn’t be traced because they didn’t exist.

The ‘solution’ might simply be that Schwartz got his time wrong and an actually saw an incident earlier. Perhaps it involved Stride and by the time that Smoth passed she’d crossed the road and was with the man that Smith saw. Maybe this guy was Pipeman?

[c.d.]

I don’t think that it does though RD. I just think that it’s simply a case of Mortimer being inside when this incident occurred. I genuinely can’t understand why some see this as an issue?

How fiendishly clever of Fanny to have used the phrase "nearly the whole time." That way she could cover herself if caught in any sort of time contradiction.

See what happens when you start to go down that road?

c.d.

[Herlock Sholmes]

How fiendishly clever of Fanny to have used the phrase "nearly the whole time." That way she could cover herself if caught in any sort of time contradiction.

See what happens when you start to go down that road?

c.d.

Yeah, good point c.d. ‘Screamed but not very loudly’ is looked on as indicative of a kind of ‘get out’ clause for Schwartz so why is Fanny more trusted?

She claimed to have been on her doorstep for nearly the whole of the time between 12.30 and 1.00.

She actually said that she first went onto her doorstep at 12.45 - so that’s 50% of that 30 minute period gone for a start.

Then apparently she stayed on her doorstep for 10 minutes before going back inside - so that’s 12.45 until 12.55.

That means that she was back indoors from 12.55 until 1.00.

That’s 20 minutes out of 30 where she was indoors - so the reality seems to be that she was actually indoors for most of the time between 12.30 and 1.00. And we can’t even be certain when that 10 minutes was (due to her mention of the Constable’s footsteps). In addition can we even be certain that she was on her doorstep for the full 10 minutes or was it just an estimation and it was actually 9 or 8 or 7 minutes?

And Fanny is used to dismiss Schwartz. I said it in my original post c.d. Fanny is pretty useless as a witness.

[Lewis C]

If we consider the question..

Why did Goldstein come forward and say he was the man passing down Berner Street?

That could indicate that he was aware he had been spotted by Mortimer; maybe not directly, but in the aftermath he discovered he had been spotted and so went to Wess to get help in explaining to the police that he was in Berner Street close to the time of the murder. Because of Mortimer, it seems his hand was forced somewhat.

However, there's just something very "show and tell" about Mortimer's statement.

She specifies hearing the distinct sound of a policeman walking past on his beat, but then whilst at he door just seconds later, she doesn't then say what we would expect someone to say...

"And as I looked out I saw the policeman I had just heard walk past my door, walking down Berner Street"

The only policeman it could have been was Smith, and he had passed at least 5 minutes beforehand.

We know that it can't have been Smith because Smith saw a couple; which Mortimer doesn't.
It then begs the question....

Who did Mortimer hear? Was it a policeman?

Well if it was Smith, then she is wrong with her timings and wrong with stating how quiet and empty the street was.

But if she is right with her timing, then it seems probable that it wasn't a policeman she heard at all.

That is then backed up by the fact she doesn't follow up on her initial claim of what she heard; ergo, she doesn't say she saw the policeman she had just heard passing by moments beforehand.

But why doesn't she either confirm or deny it was a policeman?

I believe it's because she opened the door and saw another person who she thought was the policeman, but who walked heavily....

Perhaps with an awkward gait

Now...if Schwartz's account was genuine and the assault took place, then it contradicts Mortimer's claims that the street was quiet.

I have always believed that Schwartz was lying, but there is a scenario whereby he was the only one telling the truth.

Mortimer claims to have been at her door for 10 minutes and had nothing to report

Lave also says he is outside and goes as far as the street but sees or hears nothing.

But what if the likes of Mortimer were aware of the assault, but didn't tell the police for fear of reprisal from the club?

As a local, Mortimer may have been fearful of the kind of individuals that were associated with the club.

It's also interesting that in the census return, there are no first names listed for Mortimer and her family. They were not provided by Mortimer to the enumerator for some reason

Is there a scenario whereby Mortimer thinks it's a policeman, looks out and realises it isn't, then hears the assault....and simply closes her door.

Sometimes it's the witnesses who say they saw or heard nothing, that actually saw the most, but are fearful of declaring it.

The equivalent to a person who says "no comment" to every question asked to them by the police, is more likely to be guilty or know more than they're letting on.


RD

Hi RD,

I wouldn't question Mortimer's statement on the grounds that she didn't see anyone when she first went to her door. She said that she went to her door immediately after she heard the footsteps, so what likely happened is that she didn't see anyone when she went to her door because he had already passed.

[The Rookie Detective]

Let's look again at some of the time parameters


We know that the assault witnessed by Schwartz had to of occurred AFTER PC Smith passed, and before Stride was murdered, because it would seem a stretch of logical boundaries to suggest the assault occurred before PC Smith passed.

PC Smith passed sometime between 12.30am-12.35am, based on a 25 to 30 minute walking beat and his subsequent arrival shortly after Stride was discovered circa 1am.

Morris Eagle returned to the club circa 12.40am, and it's important to note him having to use the side door because the main entrance was closed when the club closed to the main event between 11.30-midnight. In fact, we know that the main street entrance/exit was still unlocked at 12.15am when Wess left.

We know that PC Smith didn't see Eagle try the front door; and that Eagle didn't see PC Smith either. It would be logical on that basis to say that they were in Berner Street at different times. But those times would have been within a few minutes of each other.

It would seem more likely that PC Smith passed the club at 12.35am, and that Eagle got back at 12.40am, tried the front door, and then went down the side into Dutfield's yard.

The issue with this though is that PC Smith saw Stride with a man, whereas just 5 minutes later, Eagle sees nobody.

How is that explained?

Well, one possible explanation was that Parcelman was Eagle. Unlikely, but still possible based on the timeframe.

But if not, then where did Stride and the man seen by PC Smith go between 12.35am - 12.40am?

They couldn't have remained stationary without being seen by Eagle when he returned just a few minutes after PC Smith saw Stride with Parcelman.

If Eagle wasn't Parcelman, then where did Parcelman and Stride go between being spotted by PC Smith, to Eagle's return no more than 5 minutes later?

Then we have Wess...

Wess left with his brother through the front door circa 12.15am, meaning the front door was still unlocked after the main group had left by midnight.

It makes sense that on his return; Eagle would try the front door first, because he had left at 11.45pm when it was still open, and had good reason to not realize that the front entrance had been locked.

The front door was therefore locked at some point between Wess leaving at 12.15am to Eagle having returned at 12.40am, meaning all viable access to and from the club from 12.40am, was via the side door in Dutfields Yard.

From Mortimer's perspective, she would not have been able to see anyone going in or out of the club after Eagle got back, because the street entrance was locked.

We therefore know that Mortimer must have been standing at her door after Eagle had already gone via the side entrance, otherwise, she would have seen Eagle attempting to get in through the front entrance.

We then have Lave, who gave a mixed/non-specific time or duration for how long he was outside. However, based on his statement, he went as far as the street; and saw nobody. He never saw PC Smith and he never bumped into Eagle when we know Eagle had gone back in through the side entrance. More crucially, nobody saw Lave enter or exit the club, or walk as far as the street.

Lave places himself walking past the murder site, close to the time of the assault witnessed by Schwartz and close to the alleged time of Stride's murder, but fails to see anything untoward.

How is this explained?

Well, he couldn't have been on the street at 12.35am without being seen by PC Smith
He couldn't have been on the street at 12.40am when Eagle returned
He couldn't have been on the street at 12.45am when Schwartz said to have witnessed the attack.

That means the only time he could have gone as far as the street and witnessed nothing, had to have been after the time of the alleged assault witnessed by Schwartz.

However, we know that he couldn't have gone as far as the street when Mortimer was standing at her doorstep for around 10 minutes, because he would have then been seen by Mortimer.

We then have Schwartz whose story could have only occurred after Eagle had gone back into the club, after Lave had gone back into the club/hadn't come out of the club yet, after PC Smith had walked past, and when Mortimer was inside her house and out of view of the club.

And the story told by Packer; that the man who accompanied Stride; bought some grapes, and then stood almost opposite him in full view of him, on the other side of the road for around 30 minutes.

We then have Marshall living at 64 Berner Street, who at 11.45 pm claimed to have seen Stride further down Berner Street opposite 68 Berner Street.

But what some don't seem to talk about much, is the fact that the couple seen by Marshall, were standing outside the George IV public house, at the junction with Boyd Street, just south of Faircloth Street

This man seen by Marshall, closely fits the description of the man seen with Stride outside the Bricklayer's Arms 45 minutes earlier.

The issue has always been the talk of another "sweetheart" couple having been present in the vicinity, that subsequently came forward.

However, this other couple, was not the same couple seen by Marshall.

It seems evident that after leaving the Bricklayers Arms, Stride and her companion left and went to the George IV pub at the junction with Boyd Street, south of Faircloth Street, but still on the same western side of Berner Street.

We know that Marshall states he saw the couple walking away, and that he went back into his house at midnight.

We then have Packer, who states the couple who bought grapes were standing opposite him for over half an hour.
They were standing virtually in the same spot as the "Sweetheart" couple, who we know were not Stride and her companion.

The question is, were the couple seen by Marshall, the same couple who bought grapes from Packer?

We are only touching the tip of the iceberg with this.

Any thoughts thus far?



RD

[Herlock Sholmes]

Suggestion - Stride is with a man but she’s trying to shake him off. Not that she’s scared of him, she’s just supposed to be meeting someone near the club. The guy ‘Parcelman’ keeps trying to persuade her to go with him. PC Smith sees them talking but after he passes they stroll to the corner of Fairclough Street where they continue to talk and he persists in trying to get her to go with him. When Eagle returns they are out of sight just around the corner.

Brown passes at around 12.45ish and hears her say ‘not tonight.’ As soon as she says that the man moves off along Fairclough Street and Stride moves to the gateway to wait for the person she is supposed to be meeting. A minute later BS man arrives followed by Schwartz.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

How fiendishly clever of Fanny to have used the phrase "nearly the whole time." That way she could cover herself if caught in any sort of time contradiction.

See what happens when you start to go down that road?

c.d.

How ironic that Herlock then goes on to claim that Mortimer did indeed get caught in a time contradiction.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

She actually said that she first went onto her doorstep at 12.45 - so that’s 50% of that 30 minute period gone for a start.

The report indicates she went to her doorstep immediately on hearing the passing boots. There is no mention of her first going to her doorstep at that point, and the reference to shooting the bolts hardly suggests she had been inside for hours.

What would 'first' mean in this context? First time that morning? First time since the club event ended, or started? First time that night?

In contrast to your ultra-literal interpretation, I believe it likely that Mortimer had been at her doorstep at different points throughout the evening. That's what people did back then. Today they might watch TV instead. If I watched a half-hour show, made tea midway through, and said "I was watching TV nearly the whole time between 12:30 and 1 o'clock", would it be safe to conclude that I was not watching TV at 11pm? Not really.

[Wickerman]

I got tired of looking up the various press reports, so I put them all together in the manner of approximately thirty-five minutes of a clock.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Morris Eagle returned to the club circa 12.40am, and it's important to note him having to use the side door because the main entrance was closed when the club closed to the main event between 11.30-midnight. In fact, we know that the main street entrance/exit was still unlocked at 12.15am when Wess left.

We know that PC Smith didn't see Eagle try the front door; and that Eagle didn't see PC Smith either. It would be logical on that basis to say that they were in Berner Street at different times. But those times would have been within a few minutes of each other.

It would seem more likely that PC Smith passed the club at 12.35am, and that Eagle got back at 12.40am, tried the front door, and then went down the side into Dutfield's yard.

The issue with this though is that PC Smith saw Stride with a man, whereas just 5 minutes later, Eagle sees nobody.

How is that explained?

Possibly by referring to inquest testimony.

C: Did you see anyone about in Berner-street?
E: I dare say I did, but I do not remember them.

We then have Lave, who gave a mixed/non-specific time or duration for how long he was outside. However, based on his statement, he went as far as the street; and saw nobody. He never saw PC Smith and he never bumped into Eagle when we know Eagle had gone back in through the side entrance. More crucially, nobody saw Lave enter or exit the club, or walk as far as the street.

Lave places himself walking past the murder site, close to the time of the assault witnessed by Schwartz and close to the alleged time of Stride's murder, but fails to see anything untoward.

How is this explained?

Well, he couldn't have been on the street at 12.35am without being seen by PC Smith
He couldn't have been on the street at 12.40am when Eagle returned
He couldn't have been on the street at 12.45am when Schwartz said to have witnessed the attack.

That means the only time he could have gone as far as the street and witnessed nothing, had to have been after the time of the alleged assault witnessed by Schwartz.

However, we know that he couldn't have gone as far as the street when Mortimer was standing at her doorstep for around 10 minutes, because he would have then been seen by Mortimer.

If Lave did not make it past the line of the gates, Mortimer and Lave would not have seen each other.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Suggestion - Stride is with a man but she’s trying to shake him off. Not that she’s scared of him, she’s just supposed to be meeting someone near the club. The guy ‘Parcelman’ keeps trying to persuade her to go with him. PC Smith sees them talking but after he passes they stroll to the corner of Fairclough Street where they continue to talk and he persists in trying to get her to go with him. When Eagle returns they are out of sight just around the corner.

Brown passes at around 12.45ish and hears her say ‘not tonight.’ As soon as she says that the man moves off along Fairclough Street and Stride moves to the gateway to wait for the person she is supposed to be meeting. A minute later BS man arrives followed by Schwartz.

Brown appears to only witness the couple on his return home and not while on his way to the chandler's shop.

[JeffHamm]

I got tired of looking up the various press reports, so I put them all together in the manner of approximately thirty-five minutes of a clock.

That's a nice graphical representation Wickerman! If you inserted the news sources (paper and date) for the information, that would be an incredibly efficient way to summarize her testimony. I might steal that format myself .

- Jeff

[Wickerman]

Let's look again at some of the time parameters...


The issue with this though is that PC Smith saw Stride with a man, whereas just 5 minutes later, Eagle sees nobody.
How is that explained?

Hi RD.
It is explained by reading the inquest (just teasing)
Not that it matters a whole lot, but Eagle didn't say he saw nobody, when asked if he saw anyone in the street, he replied:

"I dare say I did, but I do not remember them".

But if not, then where did Stride and the man seen by PC Smith go between 12.35am - 12.40am?

They were in the street, Eagle just didn't remember them specifically.

The front door was therefore locked at some point between Wess leaving at 12.15am to Eagle having returned at 12.40am, meaning all viable access to and from the club from 12.40am, was via the side door in Dutfields Yard.

I would hazard a guess, that Wess unlocked the front door from the inside, perhaps it automatically locked once it closed behind him as he left?

[Wickerman]

That's a nice graphical representation Wickerman! If you inserted the news sources (paper and date) for the information, that would be an incredibly efficient way to summarize her testimony. I might steal that format myself .

- Jeff

Yes, go ahead if that is what you have in mind.

[JeffHamm]

Yes, go ahead if that is what you have in mind.

I think it might be a nice way to take witnesses, particularly those who mention multiple times, and organize their statements. One could do this for all of the witnesses for a given case, which would allow one to lay out all of the witness testimony in a visual presentation. After that, one could make an attempt to combine "the clocks"; sort of like a jig-saw puzzle, being constrained by testimony that indicates the order of events (i.e. I arrived and X shows up a few minutes later). Trying to keep track of all the information, particularly conflicting information from different news sources, can be tricky. But a graphical representation that allows one to "see it all" in one go might be a very useful tool in showing which of the news reports might be erroneous. Some error ranges (subjective statements like "a short while later ...") would be hard to depict of course, but at least one could compare the statements in order to decide if the differences in the clocks seem consistent with the description. I think I'm going to give this go, though not sure how long it will take me. But it should be very interesting if I can get it done.

Anyway, I'm now thinking of how I could write a program to enter statements and draw clocks and so forth. Some of it would be simple, but the annoying bit would be getting the text output neatly organized. Might be easier to just draw them free hand, but I'm also wondering if it would be possible to then have the program combine things, and maybe do some sort of analysis to try and determine how things best fit together? That could be an interesting project. I'm digressing though (surprise surprise).

- Jeff