Which Schwartz interpretation is acurate ?

[c.d.]

Hello Jeff,

I am talking about his report on the Stride murder not the marginalia. Why list a possibility if you don't think it is probable?

c.d.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hello Jeff,

Since Swanson allows for the possibility of another killer he is not taking the times stated as being written in stone. Obviously there is enough doubt in his mind that he feels someone other than the B.S. man could have been the killer. He is not stating this as a metaphysical possibility as in anything is possible. Otherwise every police report would run thousands of pages listing all things possible. He is stating that there is enough doubt regarding times and statements that there is a real probability of another killer.

c.d.

In my opinion Swanson simply investigated all the possibilities.

If the Marginalia is to be believed then clearly he thought Jack the Ripper had been positively ID'd at the Seaside Home.

Yet Swanson continued to consider further possible Victims and Suspects for the crime as far as 1894-5.

So we have a president of Swanson considering all the angles, as it was his job to do so. Even when he was personally satisfied the case was solved.

Yours Jeff

[c.d.]

Hello Jeff,

Since Swanson allows for the possibility of another killer he is not taking the times stated as being written in stone. Obviously there is enough doubt in his mind that he feels someone other than the B.S. man could have been the killer. He is not stating this as a metaphysical possibility as in anything is possible. Otherwise every police report would run thousands of pages listing all things possible. He is stating that there is enough doubt regarding times and statements that there is a real probability of another killer.

c.d.

[lynn cates]

minds at work

Hello CD. Thanks.

"However, I don't think that Swanson just pulled the possibility of another killer out of a hat. Isn't it reasonable to assume that this would have been the result of discussing it with Abberline and maybe others?"

I think it MOST likely that he--like Sir Charles, Wynne Baxter, and others--was thinking about the case and asking himself questions.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Goldstein

Hello Jeff. Thanks. Your question about Goldstein is quite astute. IF she was propositioning men, and IF BSM had already left, they why not proposition him?

Cheers.
LC

[Jeff Leahy]

Hello Lynn and Jeff,
Hello Jeff,

Swanson would have been using the same witness times and statements as we have available to us (or so I assume). So when he mentions the possibility of another killer it is not in the same vein as in all things are possible, it is because he believed that there was a reasonable degree of probability that this could have been the case.

c.d.

I think we can assume Swanson had better information than us. He would have had the original Schwartz report for a start. In fact Swanson would have had access to more information than anyone involved in the case reporting to Anderson.

What I'm questioning is if we believe Schwartz timings, having been attacked by BSM she would have only have had a window of 2-3 possible minutes before FAnny is stood at her door. She's not seen by Fanny.

Then we have a second small window of time when Fanny goes inside and shortly hears the approaching Horse and cart.

So even if Swanson considers the possibility he clearly must have also considered the fact that Scwartz may have witnessed the murder.

I've personally always thought the Marginalia supports that belief.

Swanson must have been aware Kosminski had once lived at Dutfeild yard and lived only just around the corner with his brother. If Swanson was indeed aware of this, then he was considering the Stride murder rather than the Jack the Ripper murders as a whole.

Yours Jeff

[c.d.]

Hello Lynn and Jeff,

Lynn, you are right that it is misleading to refer to "the police." I think we have all been guilty of that at some point. However, I don't think that Swanson just pulled the possibility of another killer out of a hat. Isn't it reasonable to assume that this would have been the result of discussing it with Abberline and maybe others?

Hello Jeff,

Swanson would have been using the same witness times and statements as we have available to us (or so I assume). So when he mentions the possibility of another killer it is not in the same vein as in all things are possible, it is because he believed that there was a reasonable degree of probability that this could have been the case.

c.d.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hello Jeff.

"Stride being out of Fanny's sight bleeding to death at 12.50 seems the most logical conclusion."

Precisely. Well done. Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn

I dont know if its well done. But the question arises if Liz is alive and well during this period of time. Why does no one see her? Where was she?

With a client inside Dutfield yard? In the print shop?

I mean if she's not there on the floor bleeding to death, then she must have been doing something else but she is not seen by Goldstein or Mortimer.

If shes hiding inside Dutfeild gate way, why doesn't she proposition Goldstein?

I think we are agreed Because its hard to envissage another sanario that fits the known facts

Yours Jeff

[lynn cates]

spot on

Hello Jeff.

"Stride being out of Fanny's sight bleeding to death at 12.50 seems the most logical conclusion."

Precisely. Well done.

Cheers.
LC

[Jeff Leahy]

Hello Jeff,

Blackwell's time of death is simply an estimate not the exact time. There are simply too many questions that have to be answered if we want to conclude that the B.S. man was her killer..

Yes i agree. However if we assume Goldstein passes down the street between 12,50 and 1 AM as is usually estimated, seen only by Fanny who was at her door 'No more than ten minutes' Then its what Fanny doesnt see that is important. Because if Stride was still alive and soliciting at this time it seems Improbable that Fanny would not have seen her.

Its Fanny NOT seeing Stride that gives the greatest support to Blackwell's estimate and holds all of the pieces with Browns and Schwartz time estimates together.

Stride being out of Fannys sight bleeding to death at 12.50 seems the most logical conclusion.

The police at the time considered the possibility of another killer so obviously they didn't consider it improbable.

c.d.

Well it was their job to consider ALL possibilities and its safe to assume that they did. Swanson was a capable and well seasoned Detective

Happy Easter

Yours Jeff

[lynn cates]

chastisement

Hello DLDW. Thanks.

Yes, I see your line of reasoning here. But what of Liz? No chastisement for his inaction during the assault?

Cheers.
LC

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Smiley-face.

Hello DLDW. And so he just stands there whilst this is occurring?

And BSM leaves right after Schwartz and PM, Liz ignores her "client," retrieves her cachous from a pocket, and THEN he strikes. perhaps he felt neglected?

Cheers.
LC

Hullo Lynn. So good to speak with you after such a long gap. Why should he do anything else? Especially if he had intent on her life. Sure, BSM leaves cause he's done his bit. He's a coward who has been witnessed abusing a woman, so he does what cowards do and cheeses it. Pipe/knife man had already legged it behind Schwartz. So it leaves her murderer. No, not neglected. If he had design on her life, he might have watched and waited to see if she expired. Never mind the practical and tactical aspects of lingering in the shadows. Say he was particularly non-threatening to perceive, would Stride have expected him to come to her assistance? She has been accosted and is rattled. He feigns consolation, what any good psycopathic serial killer would do to ensure the least amount of resistance, affording him the maximum opportunity given what had just transpired. I could continue to prattle but I am certain you get the particular line I am expounding upon. It is a hell of an occurence no doubt, but it is sound enough when viewed in the particular context. Ie the reasoning IS sound within those parameters. Wow, been away too long. Apologies to all and any.

[lynn cates]

compliment

Hello CD. Thanks.

Disparage? Not a bit of it. In fact, I complimented him. I said his views should be counted as equal to Sir Charles's.

But my point was that it is misleading to refer to "the police." It sounds like a consensus. But there was none.

Cheers.
LC

[c.d.]

Hello Lynn,

You seem to be rapidly losing your famous objectivity. You are now at the point where you feel that anybody who does not lend credence to your views is either a liar or incompetent.

I can see no reason to disparage Swanson.

c.d.

[lynn cates]

timing

Hello CD.

"There are simply too many questions that have to be answered if we want to conclude that the B.S. man was her killer."

And the main one being Israel's veracity. Have you considered the possibility that one of the clubmen--Lave or Eygle (or even Wess)--caught a glimpse of the killing and so could be adamant about time (12.45 in the AF piece as also Schwartz)?

"The police at the time considered the possibility of another killer so obviously they didn't consider it improbable."

Police? Well, Swanson did. And his view, I suppose, is as good as Sir Charles and his secret society.

Cheers.
LC