Why is Liz Stride's Murder So Contentious?

[Fisherman]

Truebluedub writes:

"OK we only have the Star's word on it that a reporter met Schwartz himself. According to the Star the first man was drunk which does not appear in what the police said, the second man is the one doing the shouting in the Star contradicting the Police version, and the second man's hair colour changes from brown to red.

On October 1 The Star say: The truth of the man's statement is not wholly accepted. Yet on the 19th of October Swanson's memo showed they were accepting the statement. The "Lipski" discussion went on on the 25th and 29th of October, the 1st of November the 5th of November. Showing that the statement was taken seriously a whole month later and demonstrates that Schwartz heard Lipski and not a warning."

Iīm afraid, Truebluedub, that you are leaving out an important piece here. What the Star says is this:

"The police have arrested one man answering the description the Hungarian furnishes. This prisoner has not been charged, but is held for inquiries to be made. The truth of the man's statement is not wholly accepted."

So the man whose statement the police would not wholly accept was not Schwartz - it was the man imprisoned since he tallied with Schwartz description. Meaning - of course - that Schwartz was believed throughout, explaining why the "Lipski" outcry was scrutinized for a longish time afterwards.

The best,
Fisherman

[Ben]

I'd have to agree that the Schwartz and Lawende descriptions are pretty similar, more so than Schwartz and Marshall in my view.

Bear in mind that the Star report contained elements that were in contrast to the Swanson condensed report, as truebluedub points out. If they were capable of changing a man's moustache from brown and red and a peaked cap to a felt hat, it's quite possible that "respectable" was in similar contradiction.

Regards,
Ben

[Jeff Leahy]

Put like that....BTW,I DO think Stride is Jack's work......it's just the timings in Berners st confuse me.........
Steve

The timings in Berner street confuse everyone

[truebluedub]

INFORMATION WHICH MAY BE IMPORTANT

was given to the Leman-street police late yesterday afternoon by an Hungarian concerning this murder. This foreigner was well dressed, and had the appearance of being in the theatrical line. He could not speak a word of English, but came to the police-station accompanied by a friend, who acted as an interpreter. He gave his name and address, but the police have not disclosed them. A Star man, however, got wind of his call, and ran him to earth in Backchurch-lane. The reporter's Hungarian was quite as imperfect as the foreigner's English, but an interpreter was at hand, and the man's story was retold just as he had given it to the police. It is, in fact, to the effect that he

SAW THE WHOLE THING.

It seems that he had gone out for the day, and his wife had expected to move, during his absence, from their lodgings in Berner-street to others in Backchurch-lane. When he came homewards about a quarter before one he first walked down Berner-street to see if his wife had moved. As he turned the corner from Commercial-road he noticed some distance in front of him a man walking as if partially intoxicated. He walked on behind him, and presently he noticed a woman standing in the entrance to the alley way where the body was afterwards found. The half-tipsy man halted and spoke to her. The Hungarian saw him put his hand on her shoulder and push her back into the passage, but, feeling rather timid of getting mixed up in quarrels, he crossed to the other side of the street. Before he had gone many yards, however, he heard the sound of a quarrel, and turned back to learn what was the matter, but just as he stepped from the kerb

A SECOND MAN CAME OUT

of the doorway of the public-house a few doors off, and shouting out some sort of warning to the man who was with the woman, rushed forward as if to attack the intruder. The Hungarian states positively that he saw a knife in this second man's hand, but he waited to see no more. He fled incontinently, to his new lodgings. He described

THE MAN WITH THE WOMAN

as about 30 years of age, rather stoutly built, and wearing a brown moustache. He was dressed respectably in dark clothes and felt hat. The man who came at him with a knife he also describes, but not in detail. He says he was taller than the other, but not so stout, and that his moustaches were red. Both men seem to belong to the same grade of society. The police have arrested one man answering the description the Hungarian furnishes. This prisoner has not been charged, but is held for inquiries to be made. The truth of the man's statement is not wholly accepted.

OK we only have the Star's word on it that a reporter met Schwartz himself. According to the Star the first man was drunk which does not appear in what the police said, the second man is the one doing the shouting in the Star contradicting the Police version, and the second man's hair colour changes from brown to red.

On October 1 The Star say: The truth of the man's statement is not wholly accepted. Yet on the 19th of October Swanson's memo showed they were accepting the statement. The "Lipski" discussion went on on the 25th and 29th of October, the 1st of November the 5th of November. Showing that the statement was taken seriously a whole month later and demonstrates that Schwartz heard Lipski and not a warning.
The fact that they contradict basic facts given in official sources which by their nature are more likely to be accurate means the Star account is irrelevant.

[Fisherman]

Jeff writes:

"surely respectable appearance is a matter of opinion"

It is, Jeff. And I donīt propose that he was a well-tailored gent with a cylinder hat and shining shoes. I donīt think that a description of "respectable" given by an Eastender about a fellow Eastender has to amount to much more that an appearance of everyday cleanliness and unpatched, untorned clothing - such things would probably have led to a verdict of respectability, especially if we allow ourselves to theorize that the reporter may have thought that - given BS mans actions - Schwartz was describing a ruffian, and asked a question like: "Was he a rough character?" and received the answer "Oh, no - he was perfectly respectable".

That is not high society respectability - itīs just ordinary decency and cleanliness. But those features are exactly what Lawendes man seems to lack - nothing respectable about him; Loose, Ill-fitting clothes in an era when tight-fitting jackets were prescribed, combined with shabbyness and a ruffians look, he does NOT come across as somebody who Marshall would have put down as a clerk, does he?

All in all, we are left with descriptions by Schwartz and Marshall that tally down to the overweight and the dark peaked cap, whereas Lawendes man was seemingly made of different stuff altogether. If we want to see all three of them as the same man, we need a large shoehorn and a strong hand - and the ability to walk on aching and blistered feet in ill-fitting shoes. And I like my strolls leisurely.

The best,
Fisherman

[Steve S]

OK add this description:

Sarah Cox: Short, stout man, shabbily dressed. Billycock hat, blotchy face, carroty moustache, holding quart can of beer.

Thats three people who probably were the last people to see the last three victims alive.

Stride, Eddowes and Kelly.

Now all we need is a key suspect that matches those descriptions.

Pirate

PS i hope you not mind me bouncing this on you chaps, its been keeping me awake all night.

Put like that....BTW,I DO think Stride is Jack's work......it's just the timings in Berners st confuse me.........
Steve

[Jeff Leahy]

But surely respectable appearance is a matter of opinion.

I think i'm of respectable appearance. But my partner is always accusing me of being 'scruffy lookin'

P

[Fisherman]

Truebluedub asks:

"How reliable is the Star? Did they have a trained interpreter? What purpose did they have in reporting this testimony? Did they in fact speak with Schwartz or speak to a third party who gave a garbled version of what Schwartz said? Don't forget there are significant differences between both his statements."

Whenever I tend to forget such things, there are always people around to remind me, TBD! But the fact of the matter is that the police report tells us nothing, nada, keines, rien du tout of BS mans appearance, whereas the Star DOES. No contradictions involved, thus. Plus it is not hearsay - they had a reporter on place, interwiewing Schwartz, and therefore the only thing we are left with is a statement that BS man was of a respectable appearance.

The best,
Fisherman

[Jeff Leahy]

OK add this description:

Sarah Cox: Short, stout man, shabbily dressed. Billycock hat, blotchy face, carroty moustache, holding quart can of beer.

Thats three people who probably were the last people to see the last three victims alive.

Stride, Eddowes and Kelly.

Now all we need is a key suspect that matches those descriptions.

Pirate

PS i hope you not mind me bouncing this on you chaps, its been keeping me awake all night.

[Mascara & Paranoia]

Okay, those are comparable descriptions. Going by your theory that Schwartz saw the killer in the dark, you've got a good argument. I know I've had this reply box open for longer than necessary to come up with a cocky response against it.

But I'm still not convinced, and I don't know what it is exactly that's keeping me from seeing things from the pro-Stride point of view. It's just, her murder is too different from the others. It doesn't seem very 'Jacky' to me.

[Jeff Leahy]

Schwartz: Aged 30, 5'5", brown haired, fair complexion, small brown moustache, full face, broad shoulders, dark jacket and trousers, black cap with peak.

Lawende: Aged 30, 5'7", fair complexion, brown moustache, salt-and-pepper coat, red neckerchief, grey peaked cloth cap. Sailor-like.

Excuse if I just use the casebook descriptions. But these two description simply sound like the same person to me?

And if you could find a suspect matching that description you might be getting somewhere.

Pirate

PS. We are looking for someone: Age approx 30, 5' 6'', fair complexion, brown hair/moustache, dark clothes, peak-cap.

[Mascara & Paranoia]

I just cant see this. Schwartz and Lawende description are as close as you are going to get considering the light and circumstance.

That's just it though, that's a reach in order to try and make them out to be the same man. But they just wasn't.

I'm not being argumentative but it's obvious that those were two completely different people.

Because of the apparent different approach between Stride, and Eddowes, I feel I would have to conclude that the man witnessed by Lawande with the dead woman, was not her killer.
This man was not in the process of roughing up Eddowes, and had the appearance of a sailor, and as the sighting was near a regular spot for prostitute trade, i would suggest that this man wanted no more then a spot of business.
Eddowes did not appear to be alarmed at his close proximity to her , although her hand position may infer that she was attempting to cool things down[ so to speak].

That doesn't make sense to me. Again, I don't mean to argue, but why would Jack forcibly kill his victims? That would draw a lot of attention to himself and may even scare the prositute(s) off. The Ripper's M.O. was very much the opposite to the ruffian who assaulted and probably killed Stride. In fact, the way in which Lawende's man operated is exactly how Jack would've ensnared his victims, lulling them into a false sense of security and attacking them offguard. If Jack came across as threatening, then he wouldn't have claimed any lives, not without being caught quickly.

[Steve S]

Compared to the others,Berners St. seems to have been like Picadilly Circus for about 45 minutes...And we still can't reconcile all the accounts,'cos nobody seems to have seen the same things........
Steve

[truebluedub]

Remember that Schwartz, who saw a man performing something that points to a ruffian, still spoke of him as having a respectable appearance according to the Star.

How reliable is the Star? Did they have a trained interpreter? What purpose did they have in reporting this testimony? Did they in fact speak with Schwartz or speak to a third party who gave a garbled version of what Schwartz said? Don't forget there are significant differences between both his statements.

Chris Lowe

[Jeff Leahy]

Interpretation. Marshall is a labourer, lawande is a commercial traveller. Perhaps they simply have a different view of 'Shabby'.

And as i said before Marshall see's his suspect much earlier in the evening...plenty of time for him to go off have a drink commit a murder and get rather 'shabby' in the process. almost three hours.

Pirate

PS the exact light and angles interest me very much. Very much indeed. In fact they are my main focus of interest.