Which Schwartz interpretation is acurate ?

[moonbegger]

PS .. Take a look at the picture of Berner street .. on the Corner a few doors down from Dutfields yard .. is that not the pub ?

[Dr. John Watson]

Hello Dr John , If this Is correct then surely Warren made a huge mistake when forwarding his account .. Warren would have us believe that the man who threw the woman down called out , and not the Pipe man in the doorway ?

It is the press account that has Pipe man calling out , just like you say Abberline wrote in his official report ?? is this correct ?

Cheers , Moonbegger

Sorry Moon. It was my mistake. It should have read " . . . himself or the second man. . . ." The police said Schwartz told them it was the assailant who shouted, and Abberline apparently accepted that statement without further question. His interrogation of Schwartz concerned only who the assailant was shouting at - him or the second man. Schwartz, of course, said it was the second man who "shouted out a warning" to Stride's attacker in the Star version of his account. If this is the truth, it would certainly account for Schwartz being confused when Abberline kept asking him if the "Lipski" shout was directed toward him or the second man!

John

[moonbegger]

HaHa , No worry's John . I thought we had stumbled upon something new

Moonbegger

[moonbegger]

The CSI book also confirms , the Nelson pub is a few doors down from the yard .. On Berner Street ..

moonbegger

[Dr. John Watson]

Regarding where Schwartz was situated on Berner Street, his Press statement seems to indicate he turned onto Berner from Commercial Road and noticed Stride's attacker in front of him, acting as though he was intoxicated. This is on the same side as Dutfield's Yard. When he sees the man ahead of him accost a woman, he crosses to the opposite side of the street to avoid getting involved - don't know directions, but this would be the same side as the board school. He never crosses back to the other side. He sees a second man come out of a public house. I've always thought this was on the same side as Schwartz, but I don't know whether there's a pub there; there does appear to be a commercial establishment on the opposite corner, and no reason why "pipe man" didn't emerge from there. At any rate, Schwartz may have been just passing Dutfield's when the second man appeared, saw a guy attacking Stride, and shouted out "Lipski," perhaps in a joking manner. He might have looked toward Schwartz at the same time, causing the witness to become afraid and hasten away.

Incidentally, police files indicate that the "second man" was never identified or located.

John

[moonbegger]

Dr John ,

I've always thought this was on the same side as Schwartz, but I don't know whether there's a pub there; there does appear to be a commercial establishment on the opposite corner,

Yes John , The commercial establishment on the opposite corner was indeed the Nelson pub .. I agree totally with the scenario you describe here ..

cheers , moonbegger .

[lynn cates]

story

Hello Roy. To be fair, Swanson notes that nothing in the report casts doubt on the story. Other than that . . .

Cheers.
LC

[DRoy]

Hello Roy. To be fair, Swanson notes that nothing in the report casts doubt on the story. Other than that . . .

Cheers.
LC

Lynn,

He (through Abberline) casts doubt on whether Schwartz witnessed the assult that led to her murder.

Swanson like Abberline might have believed his story which is where the 'no doubt' comes from. No matter how much he told the truth about his story, if he couldn't identify Stride (which he didn't until after giving his statement) then perhaps the 'no doubt' only had to do with his story not the identification.

That wouldn't lessen the value of seeing an assult in the spot where 15 minutes Stride is actually murdered. Could it have been one or both of the men that 15 minutes previously assulted a 'woman'?

Cheers
DRoy

[Wickerman]

So his evidence would have been given secretly or in camera as they say.

A classic case of the police withholding evidence.

Stephen, the Coroner's Inquiry is a public inquiry. It is the public who judge the testimony not the Coroner.

[Dr. John Watson]

To my mind, the importance of Schwartz's statement is the undisputed fact that he observed a woman getting beaten by a man, while a second man watched, all within 15 minutes of when Stride's body was discovered only a few feet away. The fact that Schwartz identified Stride as the woman he saw makes his statement all the more significant, especially if one concedes that the 15-minute time interval is an estimate and that it refers to the time her body was discovered, not the time she was murdered. Police were unable to identify either Stride's assailant or the second man, and neither ever came forward. At the very least, the events described by Schwartz amount to a remarkable coincidence, if that's all it was. However, despite the time interval, the fact that two men, one violent and one possibly armed with a knife, were observed at the scene of the murder only minutes earlier should have been sufficient cause for police to pull out all the stops in identifying and locating both men for questioning. After all, either man could have lingered with Stride after Schwartz departed or reappeared within a few minutes to accost her. The "second man," for instance, might have returned ostensibly to comfort Stride after her attacker left, only to lure the unfortunate woman into Dutfield's Yard and then slit her throat.

John

[harry]

Schwartz follows BS along Berner street,on the same side of the street.Although it appears to Schwartz the man in front may have been under the influence of drink,Schwartz appears to have not considered him a threat.It is only when the altercation at the gate begins,that Schwartz crosses the road,and from then until pipeman appears,seconds only,Schwartz speaks of no perceived threat from BS.It is only on the appearance of Pipeman that Schwartz tells of running away.Why would he run away from a man lighting a pipe?

[harry]

Should have put 'no' before perceived.

[harry]

Sorry,I meant after.Age is catching up.

[GUT]

G'day Harry

Why would he run away from a man lighting a pipe?

Maybe he was allergic to tobacco.

[lynn cates]

doubt

Hello Roy. Thanks.

Perhaps so, but I am trying to stay with Swanson's language. He seems to be aware that some doubt, but he seems not to share it.

Cheers.
LC