For what reason do we include Stride?

[Michael W Richards]

Would the club cover up for a member that they knew was Stride's killer? Club loyalty was one thing but presumably these members had mothers, sisters and daughters.

c.d.

If you recall cd, Morris was originally scheduled to speak at the club that night, and there were threats that forced then to cancel that and instead allow Eagle, who regularly gave a speech why Jews should be Socialists, to speak again that night. I suspect that its possible they may have had hired security that couldnt be cancelled, I think Morris backed out late in the week. That puts non-members, and maybe non Jews, likely in that alleyway.

"Israel leaves via the kitchen door at around 12:40 and sees a security guy manhandling a woman inside the gates, near the wall. The man yells at him "Lipski", which was known to have been used derogatorily towards Jews,..there may have been another member smoking a pipe there...(people were known to be in the alley after meetings according to neighbors), and Schwartz scoots past him out into the street. The security man gets pissed at the woman who has turned her back on him and starts out for the open gates, grabs the woman and chokes her, then cuts her throat and drops her, her head 6 inches from the gate. Louis arrives just after or as this happened, near 12:45, his horse shies, and he notices what has gone on. He calls for people inside the club as Eagle arrives back at the club, to assess what happened and what to do. Louis sends out Issac by himself to look for help. Shortly after 1 he and Eagle also head out, with a story between them that Louis had just arrived back at the club. Unfortunately they were not able to convey that story to any other members, or Spooner, which is why 3 people say they were with Louis and by the dying woman at around 12:45, and why Issac says he was sent alone by Louis and Louis says they went together. Fanny Mortimers statement is assurance that Louis did not arrive at 1 as he stated emphatically."

That's about where I am coming from. Even if it wasn't a club member that did the deed, they would still have to protect themselves.

[Herlock Sholmes]

It doesn't work like that, CD. In the real world, minorities tend to protect their own. They won't rat each other out.

This can certainly be true Harry but can we say that this with total confidence? What I mean is that, on finding a body outside the club (a murdered woman that could very well have been a club members wife/girlfriend/sister/mother) they would have lied about the circumstances. Wouldn’t it have been possible that a few consciences might have spoken out?

Another point that I’d like to make is this: (and I haven’t read all of the thread so I don’t know Michael’s reasoning on this) how confident would the members have been that their efforts weren’t just a waste of time? This whole plan would have been created in such a short space of time, why would this prove to the police (or lead the members to believe) that Diemschutz didn’t just disturb a club member just after he’d cut Stride’s throat?

[Harry D]

Would the club cover up for a member that they knew was Stride's killer? Club loyalty was one thing but presumably these members had mothers, sisters and daughters.

It doesn't work like that, CD. In the real world, minorities tend to protect their own. They won't rat each other out.

[c.d.]

Would the club cover up for a member that they knew was Stride's killer? Club loyalty was one thing but presumably these members had mothers, sisters and daughters.

c.d.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Because that is a much tougher act, (than merely lying) to put together at the last minute; they may not have been able to come up with a fool big enough (at that time, three murders in) willing to travel around Whitechapel with a dead whore in his 'trunk.' -- BTW I am not an advocate of this conspiracy theory, it seems a 'large leap to me' as well.

You’re probably right Aperno. I suppose that it would depend on how desperate they were. I just can’t see the need for a conspiracy here.

[Harry D]

Schwartz' statement puts the victim off premises when first assaulted, by someone who was likely a Gentile, by virtue of the Lipski remark. It was almost certainly meant to infer it was directed at Israel, not Pipeman...remember he had an interpreter...and that is the best possible scenario for the Jewish immigrant Anarchists who ran the club. Off site gentile.

Exactly. The usage of "Lipski" from the attacker alone was meant to incriminate a gentile. I expect that Schwartz may have received this epithet first-hand and called on it when inventing this little incident.

Btw, I'm not suggesting that Stride's murder was a conspiracy. She may have been killed by a club member, the Whitechapel murderer, or anyone else. I just believe that Schwartz's testimony was a deliberate attempt to divert any possible suspicion from the Jewish socialists. Moving the body was far too risky. If they had been caught transporting the body they would've been banged to rights. They weren't stupid.

[APerno]

This seems to be a very large leap to me. In the midst of a series of prostitute murders, where the police hadn’t previously connected the potential murderer to the location, why would they start now when another prostitute was found murdered? Why didn’t they wrap the body in a sheet and chuck it onto the back of Diemschutz cart for him to dump a couple of miles away whilst a club member washed the blood away?

Because that is a much tougher act, (than merely lying) to put together at the last minute; they may not have been able to come up with a fool big enough (at that time, three murders in) willing to travel around Whitechapel with a dead whore in his 'trunk.' -- BTW I am not an advocate of this conspiracy theory, it seems a 'large leap to me' as well.

[Herlock Sholmes]

If the police found a dead woman on their property without any indication that A) she was actually killed off property, and B) no one but club attendees were there at the time, that club would have been closed for good that night

This seems to be a very large leap to me. In the midst of a series of prostitute murders, where the police hadn’t previously connected the potential murderer to the location, why would they start now when another prostitute was found murdered? Why didn’t they wrap the body in a sheet and chuck it onto the back of Diemschutz cart for him to dump a couple of miles away whilst a club member washed the blood away?

[JeffHamm]

Schwartz' statement puts the victim off premises when first assaulted, by someone who was likely a Gentile, by virtue of the Lipski remark. It was almost certainly meant to infer it was directed at Israel, not Pipeman...remember he had an interpreter...and that is the best possible scenario for the Jewish immigrant Anarchists who ran the club. Off site gentile.

Hi Micheal,

Unfortunately, Schwartz originally told the police Lipski was shouted at Pipeman. There was a lot of back and forth between HO and the police, and MPs, etc, all pushing for locating this "Lipski", until Abberline explained that it was used as an insult, and probably directed at Schwartz himself, not at pipeman. The story, as originally told by Schwartz, increased suspicions that JtR was a Jew. There is no way a conspiracy as organized as the one you suggest, with the sole purpose of directing attention away from the Jewish Socialist groups, would include that sort of detail. They would have chosen a non-Jewish name, whether an English one or foreign, wouldn't matter, anything but a Jewish name. It doesn't make sense, and blaming the interpreter, or hoping the police worked out that Schwartz was wrong, is stretching plausibility to breaking. All of the evidence points to the club doing everything they could to assist the police.

- Jeff

[Michael W Richards]

Hello Michael,

Your whole argument simply boils down to if A then B. In other words, if you can show that the club had a motive for engaging in a conspiracy then it absolutely has to follow that they did in fact put that plan into action.

They had no choice if they intended to stay open and keep generating cheques for Louis and Morris. If the police found a dead woman on their property without any indication that A) she was actually killed off property, and B) no one but club attendees were there at the time, that club would have been closed for good that night. But Louis says he arrived at 1am, contradicted directly by Fanny Mortimers account and 3 other witnesses. They likely had 15 minutes to figure out what to do, Louis sent Issac K out by himself just after 12:45 to get help and he came back empty handed in time to see Eagle arrive back.

Then Sunday night the friend of Wess says he saw an assault on the victim outside the gates by a gentile....a story likely given by the translator..who was likely Wess. Wess translated for Goldstein on Tuesday night.

[Michael W Richards]

The biggest problem with the conspiracy theory is that Schwartz's original report makes no sense given the proposed goal. The goal of the conspiracy is to deflect suspicion away from the club and the Jewish population. But Schwartz's original report is that "Lipski" was shouted at Pipeman. If you're going to try and deflect attention away from a Jewish club and/or the Jewish population in general, it's probably best not to have your planted witness give a story where they implicate a Jewish perpetrator. It was the police, through questioning Schwartz, realized it was probably directed at Schwartz himself, not at Pipeman, but Schwartz's initial belief was that it was directed to another one of the possible offenders.

Now we could go Area 51 on that, and propose that "yes, they knew the police would work out the Lipski thing, and that would further prove their lack of involvement", but I do hope that sort of magical thinking isn't going to be taken up and championed (Please, I'm not suggesting it - it's presented as an example of how a club conspiracy starting point falls over itself by creating problems that don't otherwise exist).

Times reported by witnesses are all relatively close to each other, the exact times people indicate, however, will be error prone. They're not "lying" per se, they just are estimating a time and that is error prone.

- Jeff

Schwartz' statement puts the victim off premises when first assaulted, by someone who was likely a Gentile, by virtue of the Lipski remark. It was almost certainly meant to infer it was directed at Israel, not Pipeman...remember he had an interpreter...and that is the best possible scenario for the Jewish immigrant Anarchists who ran the club. Off site gentile.

[JeffHamm]

Abby Normal why do you think a "conspiracy" is so far-fetched? Conspiracies do happen. Every single day. You can't lump this in with chemtrails or 9/11.

You know what the climate was like at the time. Antisemitism was rife, many quarters suspected a Jew, and now a potential Ripper victim was found next to a club for jewish subversives. There had to be some kind of damage control to deflect any suspicion from the club and its members. They ABSOLUTELY had motive for cooking up a witness like Schwartz. He popped up very quickly, very conveniently, and the only word he happened to catch was an antisemitic slur from the attacker? Yeah, right.

The biggest problem with the conspiracy theory is that Schwartz's original report makes no sense given the proposed goal. The goal of the conspiracy is to deflect suspicion away from the club and the Jewish population. But Schwartz's original report is that "Lipski" was shouted at Pipeman. If you're going to try and deflect attention away from a Jewish club and/or the Jewish population in general, it's probably best not to have your planted witness give a story where they implicate a Jewish perpetrator. It was the police, through questioning Schwartz, realized it was probably directed at Schwartz himself, not at Pipeman, but Schwartz's initial belief was that it was directed to another one of the possible offenders.

Now we could go Area 51 on that, and propose that "yes, they knew the police would work out the Lipski thing, and that would further prove their lack of involvement", but I do hope that sort of magical thinking isn't going to be taken up and championed (Please, I'm not suggesting it - it's presented as an example of how a club conspiracy starting point falls over itself by creating problems that don't otherwise exist).

Times reported by witnesses are all relatively close to each other, the exact times people indicate, however, will be error prone. They're not "lying" per se, they just are estimating a time and that is error prone.

- Jeff

[JeffHamm]

Hi Jeff.

I have to wonder though if there wasn't another aspect to the crimes that we tend to overlook.
There were abandoned houses in Mitre Square, in fact all over Whitechapel. There were passages that were not patrolled, or patrolled less frequent. and some locations where there were no streetlamps.
Why didn't he kill and leave bodies in places where no interruption was practically guaranteed?

Look at the display aspect, how Kelly was almost posed to greet the next person who came in the door?
Bucks Row was a public thoroughfare yet at the time he struck it was practically desolate. The back yard of Hanbury street can be expected to be busy, yet again he struck at a time that was quiet. Mitre Square is the same, he left Eddowes in a place where she will be found because it is a well frequented spot. There was a nightwatchman on duty in St. James Place, at the Fire Station, just seconds around the corner, and I suppose Dutfields Yard is another 'in your face' location, it just got too busy too soon for his liking?

On the one hand he needed a degree of seclusion, but it had to be in a place where the seclusion changes to public exposure in minutes, on the scale of 'shocking' the next person who comes through as soon as he leaves.

Yes, there certainly would locations more logical than those chosen. There does appear to be aspects of displaying/posing, in terms of placement of the body and organs, though it could also due to the "process" rather than by design. Regardless, I do think the eventual "shock" value was something JtR would enjoy fantasizing about afterwards.

Also, if JtR is led to the locations by the victims, he may not have had much choice with regards to choosing more secluded areas. Getting them to enter into an abandoned building might have been too difficult, and too likely to make him memorable if he failed to convince a victim and she then escapes somehow (I'm thinking escapes pre-attack, but knowing some fellow tried to get her into a vacant building, which I assume was unusual, would make such an approach stand out).

Still, I suspect leaving the bodies on display was a big part of it for JtR, particularly for post-offense reliving.

- Jeff

[rjpalmer]

It was indeed raining, but it was also Saturday night--the most profitable night of the week. I doubt if the drabs of Aldgate had the luxury to take the night off.

As with the postal worker:

"neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays these ladies from the swift completion of their appointed rounds...."

[Sam Flynn]

We know its true for the ones I mentioned

The witnesses you mentioned made their sightings in far more busy/populous parts of town where "false positive" identifications would be more likely, simply because there'd have been more people around. Not so Church Passage at the best of times, never mind just after it had been peeing down with rain.