Which Schwartz interpretation is acurate ?

[Wickerman]

If Brown had got a look at the mans face and described a Black moustache
would we still strike it down as coincidence ? but we will never know because he didn't .. but it doesn't mean it wasn't there .

It might help your argument if Brown had noticed the woman wearing a flower.
Stride certainly was wearing one before the Brown incident at the Bricklayers Arms, and after, when in Berner St.

I rather favor this couple seen by Brown was the courting couple which we know walked up and down Berner St. around this time.

[J6123]

I do not believe that anyone could behave as BS Man did, and also successfully commit the murders of Nichols, Chapman, and Eddowes (and Tabram too, for that matter). The hallmark of the other crimes for me are the stealth of the killer. He killed under people's bedrooms, he killed near watchmen, he killed on routes regularly patrolled by police. In at least one case, he may have come within seconds of being seen by an oncoming witness.

I do not believe a rowdy brawler like BS Man could have done that. No matter what kind of hat he is wearing.

it's easy to rule B.S man out of being the Ripper, on the basis the Ripper would never have been that wreckless or oblivious to being caught. but then again, you could argue that a killer who kills under people's bedrooms, kills near watchmen, kills on routes regularly patrolled by police (In at least one case coming within seconds of being seen by an oncoming witness) - is very much wreckless and oblivious.

i do fully understand your point though, that B.S man's behaviour seems to fly in the face of what we would 'expect' from the ripper, and it does present a problem. as does the fact a different knife was used on Stride to that used on Eddowes.

[moonbegger]

Liz and her killer, perhaps. Whether Stride's killer was also Jack is another matter

Yes indeed Sam .. but I also think , along with others , that if Schwartz claim is false , or mistaken , then there is every possibility it could have been a Ripper killing that was interrupted .. elevating Browns man as a viable suspect . Especially when other witness descriptions are compared with Browns man .

He was a short, pale-faced man with a black moustache. The man appeared to be about 40. His bag was not very large, about six or nine inches long. The hat he wore was a round hat, rather high - a stiff felt hat.
Sarah Lewis.

The man was about 5ft. 5in. in height. He was well dressed in a black morning suit with a morning coat....
He had a thick black moustache and no beard. He wore a black billycock hat, rather tall, and had on a collar.
J. Best.

And Brown ..

The man was described as being about 5ft 7in tall and stoutly built, wearing a long overcoat which went down almost to his heels. He was wearing a hat, but Brown was unable to describe it.

If Brown had got a look at the mans face and described a Black moustache
would we still strike it down as coincidence ? but we will never know because he didn't .. but it doesn't mean it wasn't there .

Obviously we cannot be sure which witnesses actually witnessed the Killer , but it may be an idea to place identification similarity and consistence , before witness credibility , and see what pops up .

moonbegger

[Sam Flynn]

For arguments sake , if we take Schwartz out of the equation , That leaves Brown witnessing Liz & Jack ?

Liz and her killer, perhaps. Whether Stride's killer was also Jack is another matter

[moonbegger]

That could well be Gareth. Had you also noticed the similarity of description, even to the "round hat, but rather high"?


He was a short, pale-faced man with a black moustache. The man appeared to be about 40. His bag was not very large, about six or nine inches long. The hat he wore was a round hat, rather high - a stiff felt hat.
Sarah Lewis.

The man was about 5ft. 5in. in height. He was well dressed in a black morning suit with a morning coat....
He had a thick black moustache and no beard. He wore a black billycock hat, rather tall, and had on a collar.
J. Best.

If we content ourselves by eliminating suspects due to the differences of dress between all the men concerned in the Stride/Eddowes cases (those seen by Marshall, Smith, Brown, Schwartz and even Lawende), we might see a remarkable consistency between the Britannia-man & Bricklayers-man.

For arguments sake , if we take Schwartz out of the equation , That leaves Brown witnessing Liz & Jack ?

The man was described as being about 5ft 7in tall and stoutly built, wearing a long overcoat which went down almost to his heels. He was wearing a hat, but Brown was unable to describe it.

moonbegger .

[Wickerman]

... since the last man seen with the living Eddowes (almost certainly her killer, IMO) had a distinctly downmarket appearance compared to Britannia/Bricklayer-man.

I'm not so sure, afterall, we know that Eddowes body was not identified by Lawende, he could only suggest the clothes were similar.
Swanson acknowledged this as a problem too.

Then there is the timing issue. As we all know, Watkins discovered the body at 1:44am, but Lawende said he saw this couple at Church Passage about 1:30.
Fourteen minutes seems very tight considering they had to walk, presumably casually, a distance of about 160ft from Duke St. to the murder site.
In fact it may have been even less than fourteen minutes if we accept Levy's opinion.
"...We got up to leave at half-past one on Sunday morning, and came out three or four minutes later."

The time could be reduced to 10 or 11 minutes, max.

I think there is reasonable cause to doubt that the couple seen at the Duke St. end of Church Passage were actually Eddowes and her killer.

[Sam Flynn]

That could well be Gareth. Had you also noticed the similarity of description, even to the "round hat, but rather high"?

Indeed, Jon. Even down to the fact that both men were described as respectably dressed; Best even going so far as to remark that he was surprised to see a man thus attired in the Bricklayers' Arms.

If we content ourselves by eliminating suspects due to the differences of dress between all the men concerned in the Stride/Eddowes cases (those seen by Marshall, Smith, Brown, Schwartz and even Lawende), we might see a remarkable consistency between the Britannia-man & Bricklayers-man.

Which is both intriguing and frustrating, since the last man seen with the living Eddowes (almost certainly her killer, IMO) had a distinctly downmarket appearance compared to Britannia/Bricklayer-man.

[Wickerman]

The description of Bricklayers-man given by Best strikes me as having a ring of truth, but the attributes Lewis/Kennedy ascribed to Britannia-man's gaze seem generic, with more than a whiff of the "madman" stereotype. "Strange character with unnatural glaring eyes" (Lewis/Kennedy) wouldn't look out of place in any penny-dreadful, but "Man with sore eyes and no eyelashes" (Best) seems rather more grounded in reality.

That could well be Gareth. Had you also noticed the similarity of description, even to the "round hat, but rather high"?


He was a short, pale-faced man with a black moustache. The man appeared to be about 40. His bag was not very large, about six or nine inches long. The hat he wore was a round hat, rather high - a stiff felt hat.
Sarah Lewis.

The man was about 5ft. 5in. in height. He was well dressed in a black morning suit with a morning coat....
He had a thick black moustache and no beard. He wore a black billycock hat, rather tall, and had on a collar.
J. Best.

If we content ourselves by eliminating suspects due to the differences of dress between all the men concerned in the Stride/Eddowes cases (those seen by Marshall, Smith, Brown, Schwartz and even Lawende), we might see a remarkable consistency between the Britannia-man & Bricklayers-man.

[lynn cates]

inopportune

Hello Jon. Thanks.

"I can't see it being too debatable as to how a client manages to position himself behind a prostitute, sooner or later this arrangement is to be expected."

Quite. But some times are opportune, others not.

Cheers.
LC

[Sam Flynn]

Secondly, Stride had been in the company of a strange character "with weak eyes" that night at the Bricklayers Arms.
A 'strange character' with an "unnatural glare in his eyes" was seen outside the Britannia the night Mary Kelly was murdered.

I can't in all truth rule Stride out as a Ripper victim unless these issues are resolved somehow.

The description of Bricklayers-man given by Best strikes me as having a ring of truth, but the attributes Lewis/Kennedy ascribed to Britannia-man's gaze seem generic, with more than a whiff of the "madman" stereotype. "Strange character with unnatural glaring eyes" (Lewis/Kennedy) wouldn't look out of place in any penny-dreadful, but "Man with sore eyes and no eyelashes" (Best) seems rather more grounded in reality.

[Wickerman]

". . . That's right, dear. It's on the side next the building. I'll just insinuate myself between your good self and the building. And mind you hold on to those cachous."

Hi Lynn.
I can't see it being too debatable as to how a client manages to position himself behind a prostitute, sooner or later this arrangement is to be expected.

The cachous however are a problem regardless of what we try to envisage.
Hold on to those cachous she did, that is taken for granted.

[Abby Normal]

Hi DM



I generally find your postings both logical and thoughtful but I'm afraid I can't quite go all the way with you on this one...

Everyone (including serial killers) has their off-days...in fact it's possible that for JtR, each killing occured on an off-day, but that's really a subject for another thread.

If our Jack was a bit "impaired", (through alcohol or otherwise), prior to killing Liz, you also have to remember that the second victim that night was also far more than somewhat impaired - so JTR didn't have to be particularly cunning...

But also - what if the allegedly drunken gait witnessed by Schwartz happened actually to be the typically rolling gait of a sailor just landed? (not an uncommon sight perhaps in this particular area of London at that time)...and that peaked hat described by other witnesses? Begins to sound more interesting maybe?

All the best

Dave

Yes Cog. Absolutely. And All the evidence seems to point to stride being sober and eddowes being enibriated which is why stride probably didn't end up mutilated like eddowes.

Also, if jack was effed up that night it could help explain the seeming Change in mo with the attack on stride. It may have also led to him cutting himself while working on eddowes which led to him cutting her apron to use as a bandage. I'll stop there.

[lynn cates]

the scene

Hello Jon. Thanks.

Yes, indeed. But surely that is congruent with his being behind her? No face to face fracas was going on.

"Just turn around my dear, let me brush that mud off your jacket......"

". . . That's right, dear. It's on the side next the building. I'll just insinuate myself between your good self and the building. And mind you hold on to those cachous."

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Hello Jon. Thanks.

IF he gave her the cachous just before killing her, and IF we agree that her assailant was just behind her when she was killed, then he needed to creep around behind her whilst she was busy with the cachous.

Is that a comfortable speculation?

Not really, if you recall she fell on her side.

"Just turn around my dear, let me brush that mud off your jacket......"

[lynn cates]

Seek, and ye shall find--maybe.

Hello (again) Jon. Thanks.

"If we can find no place for 'Jack' then we can rule Stride out altogether as a Ripper victim."

I think my problem is in the "finding." I can (almost) see why "Jack" was first dreamed up. Several women killed, must have been one bloke, voila, Jack. But why go out of the way to "find" or make room for him?

"I would quite happily shut 'Jack' out, except for the fact there was something in the order of 10-15 minutes unaccounted for after Schwartz fled the scene."

You mean before Dimshits found the body? I am good with Liz dying around 12.45 and being found around 12.55--although there may have been a few minutes whilst the club chaps were deciding what to do.

Cheers.
LC