Which Schwartz interpretation is acurate ?

[Cogidubnus]

And the accounts of Mrs Mortimer in the Daily and Evening News show her at the door for a significantly shorter period, thus missing all the action. I'd suggest there were possibly two differing agency feeds...

All the best

Dave

[moonbegger]

James Brown also puts Stride on the street at the same time in company with a man who to some degree resembles Pipeman.

Some degree ? Height ( No) Build (No) Coat (yes) .. Do we rule out Height & Build ( Broad shouldered ) as insignificant , because of a coat description , that may well have been misinterpreted ? especially as a man of the same height and build ( Broad shouldered ) was also witnessed with Liz just a few minutes later and only a few yards away .. in a quiet , empty street .. what are the chances of Liz being accosted by two Broad shouldered men of the same height , within minutes of each other ?

Let me throw this scenario out there , just for jolly : What if Browns BSM was actually with PM , who was waiting for him . He eventually talks Liz into a quick visit to the yard across the street .. As he passes his friend (PM) he removes his Overcoat ( not wanting to soil it ) and tells his friend to keep hold of it until he is done his business .. on reaching the yard , Liz has another change of heart , pissed off and walking away towards CR he suddenly remembers his friend has his overcoat .. He turns back down Berner street , and on passing Liz again , his frustrations get the better of him , and all the rest fits together like Egg's & Bacon ..

You know it makes sense Rodney

cheers , moonbegger .

[lynn cates]

friends

Hello MB. On this scenario, why is PM waiting there so long, and AFTER BSM has headed north? And why is PM running from his friend?

Cheers.
LC

[Dr. John Watson]

Let me throw this scenario out there , just for jolly : What if Browns BSM was actually with PM , who was waiting for him . He eventually talks Liz into a quick visit to the yard across the street .. As he passes his friend (PM) he removes his Overcoat ( not wanting to soil it ) and tells his friend to keep hold of it until he is done his business .. on reaching the yard , Liz has another change of heart , pissed off and walking away towards CR he suddenly remembers his friend has his overcoat .. He turns back down Berner street , and on passing Liz again , his frustrations get the better of him , and all the rest fits together like Egg's & Bacon.

Moon, your scenario reminds me of a trick used by the men's ware salesmen at Grace Brothers: If a customer found a jacket too snug, they simply stretched the seams until they broke and voila - perfect fit!

John

[Jeff Leahy]

Fanny Mortimer said she was on her doorstep at 36 Berner St between 12.30m to 1 am and never saw anything that Schwartz described.

James Brown saw a couple at approx 12.45am in Fairclough St

Why do these witnesses get ignored and Schwartz treated as gospel?
If they are right, there is no BS man in Berner St, so many theories need revising.

Hi Sudbury

None of Fanny's statement makes sense if you place her at her door at 12.30. However if Fanny comes to her door at 12.50 for 10 minutes everything locks together perfectly with Brown and Blackwell's estimate time of death, baring in mind Stride may not have deid instantly and would have been out of view of Fanny.

Of course we'll probably never no for certain which or if parts of which are correct from the Star report or Swanson's report.

However it might be argued that it seems unlikely Stride would have stayed in the area to be attacked twice given the incident described in both cases.

It therefore seems more logical that Schwartz witnessed Strides attack.

So to turn the problem on its head, pushing the woman into the yard seems a more logical conclusion. Although if Stride fell directly onto the pavement it might be possible for the killer to pull the body into the yard while the two men flee.

You takes your choice I guess. But which ever you take it seems improbable Fanny was at her door at 12.30. The purpose of which was most probably to chat to passers by and she only saw Goldstein who passed around 12.55.

Trust that helps

Yours Jeff

[moonbegger]

Hello MB. On this scenario, why is PM waiting there so long, and AFTER BSM has headed north? And why is PM running from his friend?

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn , The outrageous scenario I crafted , was indeed , as Dr John pointed out " Grace Brothers " logic

My main point of contention is simply the "Overcoat kerfuffle"

Do we rule out Height & Build ( Broad shouldered ) as insignificant , because of a coat description , that may well have been misinterpreted ? especially as a man of the same height and build ( Broad shouldered ) was also witnessed with Liz just a few minutes later and only a few yards away .. in a quiet , empty street .. what are the chances of Liz being accosted by two Broad shouldered men of the same height , within minutes of each other ?

cheers , moonbegger .

[lynn cates]

twice

Hello MB. Thanks.

"what are the chances of Liz being accosted by two Broad shouldered men of the same height, within minutes of each other?"

Or even be accosted twice--for that matter?

Cheers.
LC

[caz]

Hi Lynn,

If we allow for two men, BSM and her killer, I'm not sure you can really count the actual murder as a second instance of 'accosting'.

Try to think of it this way. It would have been far, far more common for unaccompanied East End women out late on a Saturday night, to find themselves accosted in some way (and for several likely reasons) than to be knifed to death in cold blood (for no apparent reason).

If you ask what were the chances of any woman being accosted whenever she walked those streets alone, it would be much the same for the tiny few who were murdered as for the vast majority who weren't - fairly high I would have thought.

It's the murder that makes this such an unusual and tragic night out for Stride; not the fact (if we allow it is one) that she was accosted at the entrance to a club after midnight. Her own reaction speaks for itself. She was not unduly alarmed and appears to have stayed put to collect herself before the totally unexpected axe fell. It appears to have been something she would have taken in her stride (sorry). If she was not soliciting, she would still have appreciated that not all men she encountered would make that distinction. To many she was just fair game - a woman out alone and potentially available. Most would leave her be; some would push their luck; others would act aggressively. That was just the way of the world.

I would also put the chances quite high that a man on the prowl for potential victims would see women being accosted on occasion. Stride's killer may even have taken advantage of such a situation, by wading in to the rescue. In that case it would have been no coincidence at all. An opportunist makes his own chances.

Love,

Caz
X

[lynn cates]

yet another bloke

Hello Caroline. Thanks.

"If we allow for two men, BSM and her killer, I'm not sure you can really count the actual murder as a second instance of 'accosting'."

Of course, I'm not a big fan of ANY accosting theory. And the only reason I discussed chances was that I was replying in kind.

"Try to think of it this way. It would have been far, far more common for unaccompanied East End women out late on a Saturday night, to find themselves accosted in some way (and for several likely reasons) than to be knifed to death in cold blood (for no apparent reason)."

Whilst we are discussing likelihood, NONE was nearly so likely on Berner.

"If you ask what were the chances of any woman being accosted whenever she walked those streets alone, it would be much the same for the tiny few who were murdered as for the vast majority who weren't - fairly high I would have thought."

If by "accosted" you mean ogled or propositioned, fair enough. But Schwartz's convoluted story does not seem to include such.

"I would also put the chances quite high that a man on the prowl for potential victims would see women being accosted on occasion. Stride's killer may even have taken advantage of such a situation, by wading in to the rescue. In that case it would have been no coincidence at all. An opportunist makes his own chances."

Fair enough. So BSM was not the killer nor yet PM, who bolted. I presume, then, that you posit yet another bloke who was hidden and who saw the original fracas?

Cheers.
LC

[DRoy]

Try to think of it this way. It would have been far, far more common for unaccompanied East End women out late on a Saturday night, to find themselves accosted in some way (and for several likely reasons) than to be knifed to death in cold blood (for no apparent reason).

If you ask what were the chances of any woman being accosted whenever she walked those streets alone, it would be much the same for the tiny few who were murdered as for the vast majority who weren't - fairly high I would have thought.

Caz,

I agree, so what do you think of the theory that Schwartz was actually mistaken when he identified Stride as the one he saw being assulted?

How likely is it that what he witnessed was an assult on someone else other than Stride, with Stride being killed in roughly the same spot within 15 minutes?

In my opinion either Schwartz is full of it or he was mistaken when he identified Stride. Being mistaken at least could fit with the police opinions written in their reports.

Cheers
DRoy

[GUT]

G'day DRoy

How likely is it that what he witnessed was an assult on someone else other than Stride, with Stride being killed in roughly the same spot within 15 minutes?

I guess I'm in a minority, but I wouldn't rule it out.

[GUT]

G'day Lynn

Fair enough. So BSM was not the killer nor yet PM, who bolted. I presume, then, that you posit yet another bloke who was hidden and who saw the original fracas?

I have never understood why everyone seems to rule that out in relation to all the murders.

[lynn cates]

contrived

Hello GUT. Thanks.

Possibly because it is so contrived. There is absolutely no evidence that yet another party was involved.

Cheers.
LC

[caz]

Of course, I'm not a big fan of ANY accosting theory. And the only reason I discussed chances was that I was replying in kind.

It's hardly a theory, Lynn, short of magicking Schwartz from history. If you take him out of your own equation as an unreliable source, what are you left with but a swift, silent and efficient murder by someone who knew what he was doing, but had no apparent motive to do it?

"Try to think of it this way. It would have been far, far more common for unaccompanied East End women out late on a Saturday night, to find themselves accosted in some way (and for several likely reasons) than to be knifed to death in cold blood (for no apparent reason)."

Whilst we are discussing likelihood, NONE was nearly so likely on Berner.

Why not? Just down from the main Commercial Rd, any woman hanging around a club entrance at that time of night could have been subjected to criticism, insult, abuse or ill-use, if not lewd comments or propositions. And we know Stride was there, alone. How would any passing male or club attendee know if her reasons were entirely respectable?

So BSM was not the killer nor yet PM, who bolted. I presume, then, that you posit yet another bloke who was hidden and who saw the original fracas?

I didn't say that, Lynn. I'm completely open to any or none of the above committing the actual murder, which was not witnessed by a living soul.

We don't know that PM 'bolted', nor how far. If he was the killer he could have seen his opportunity when BSM manhandled Stride, but had to make sure Schwartz was spooked before sending BSM packing and going in for the kill himself.

I don't see why a fourth man could not have been lurking, perhaps inside the club entrance, out of sight of Schwartz, BSM and PM. After all, if you don't believe Schwartz was there, or that BSM or PM existed, then the fourth man simply becomes the first and only for you.

So how is it 'contrived' for others to consider the possibility of 'yet another party', when that's exactly what you are proposing by rejecting BSM, PM and JtR? Your killer must be 'yet another party', mustn't he?

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Caz,

I agree, so what do you think of the theory that Schwartz was actually mistaken when he identified Stride as the one he saw being assulted?

How likely is it that what he witnessed was an assult on someone else other than Stride, with Stride being killed in roughly the same spot within 15 minutes?

In my opinion either Schwartz is full of it or he was mistaken when he identified Stride. Being mistaken at least could fit with the police opinions written in their reports.

Cheers
DRoy

Hi DRoy,

I think 'mistaken' would be more likely than 'full of it' myself. Schwartz doesn't come out of it all that well by identifying Stride and admitting he bolted rather than making sure BSM wasn't doing her serious harm.

But yes, it's always possible that he saw another woman being shoved a bit, and afterwards put two and two together and made five.

Love,

Caz
X