The Grisly

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Fish. I'm not so sure Lawende described a 'shabby ruffian' either?

Jon Guy,

Marshall, a middle-aged man of 52, described the man he saw as middle-aged, and therefore likely around the same age as himself. Then and now, middle-aged means the same thing, and it's not 30. I'm sure his man was much older than BS Man. Other than generic similarities in clothing, I don't see how the two can be compared.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Jon Guy]

Hi Tom

Marshall had just turned 47.

For comparison, Packer was late 50`s and is described as an old man.

[Fisherman]

Tom W:

" I'm not so sure Lawende described a 'shabby ruffian' either?"

From the Daily Telegraph Oct 12 reporting on Inquest testimony Oct 11 of Lawende:
“Did anything about their movements attract your attention? - No. The man looked rather rough and shabby.”

The loose-fitting jacket was definitely very much out of fashion - jackets were supposed to be tight-fitting to be à la mode at that stage. So a rough-looking type, shabbily dressed. Very sailor-typish, quite possibly. Nothiong at all along the lines of Marshalls decent-looking, soft-spoken, clerkly type.

"Marshall, a middle-aged man of 52, described the man he saw as middle-aged, and therefore likely around the same age as himself. Then and now, middle-aged means the same thing, and it's not 30. "

We´ve been over that before, Tom, and I pointed out wexamples where thirty-ish ages were spoken about as "middle-age". Besides, statistical middle-age begins at 25 nowadays, although I´d say myself that 25 is strictly childish ...

The best,
Fisherman

[Cogidubnus]

Yes, because researching and not finding the proof I seek is very reassuring. And yes, of course I have doubt. There's not a question regarding the Stride murder I HAVEN'T asked, and that's how it should be. But I don't go and support some idea just because it's new, different, and possible. That's easy to do but won't get you anywhere. At this point, I've found no proof that Schwartz was a liar. His statement is plausible with no real red flags (i.e. Hutchinson), and Abberline, two weeks after meeting Schwartz for the first time, still believed Schwartz was telling the truth. There are many other things I could mention, but that's good enough for our purposes. Having said all that, I do believe Schwartz had lived at the Berner Street club up until the day of the murder and this is what gave the police pause in accepting his evidence at first.

Hi Tom...fair enough, and thanks for expanding on your views...I certainly agree he's more plausible than Hutchinson, but beyond that? Who knows?

All the best

Dave

[Stephen Thomas]

I do believe Schwartz had lived at the Berner Street club up until the day of the murder and this is what gave the police pause in accepting his evidence at first.

But why exactly do you believe that, Tom?

Surely the police or press reports would have stated that fact if fact it was.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Tom,

I don't know why you're beating yourself up about Stride.

Schwarz's description of Stride's assailant differed from Lawende's description of "Eddowes'" companion.

Allegedly this was a "double event". According to the Laws of Ripperology, whoever did one must have done the other.

Two differing descriptions screwed up the scenario.

The cops went with Lawende, keeping him under wraps.

One witness had to be discredited.

Exit Israel Schwartz.

Regards,

Simon

[mariab]

But why exactly do you believe that, Tom?
Surely the police or press reports would have stated that fact if fact it was.

I'll be discussing all this in an article. Thing is, if Schwartz was a guest and a recruit at the IWEC (doing odd jobs and being allowewd to sleep there for a few nights, like so many young Jewish immigrants recruited by the Club) this explains the Star mentioning that the police initially expressed doubts about Schwartz' story. Not claiming here that the Star is more reliable than Abberline's (and Swanson's) reports, but the Star should definitely be taken into consideration as a source too. At least 3 details in the Star report appear to have been genuine.

Schwarz's description of Stride's assailant differed from Lawende's description of "Eddowes'" companion.

BS's description doesn't differ terribly much from the man described by Lawende as seen with Eddowes.

The cops went with Lawende, keeping him under wraps.

Abberline too states that Schwartz was a good witness (paraphrasing here), and we don't even know if the police did put Schwartz under wraps or he didn't get scarce himself – this pertaining to no records of him appearing at the inquest.

One witness had to be discredited. Exit Israel Schwartz.

Not so fast. The physical description given by Schwartz pertaining to a second man at the scene fits like a glove with a WVC member who did his best to muddle up the Stride investigation. This person even possibly did his best to muddle up also the Eddowes investigation.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Maria,

Cut it anyway which way you like.

It's still Sayonara Schwarz.

Regards,

Simon

[mariab]

Hi Mr Wood-san ;-),
But why would it be "sayonara, Schwartz"? And it's your word against inspector Abberline's.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Maria,

Have you managed to find Schwartz at the inquest?

No. He was surplus to investigations.

Regards,

Simon

[mariab]

I starkly disagree that Schwartz was a surplus to investigations, as the Star reports that 2 suspects were questioned upon the descriptions he gave.
Pertaining to the inquest, my suspicion is that either Schwartz might have gotten scarce, or I expect Hunter to intervene here with some interesting thoughts about coroner Baxter, who at that point, like the police, might have been concerned about a clash with the Jewish community, with the IWEC and the "Lipsky" shout prominently involved in the investigation. We know that the HO pressured Abberline and Swanson about the "Lipsky" subtext. As for Baxter, he had won a narrow victory over Dr. Macdonald in filling the late Sir John Humphrey's seat as coroner for the Eastern District with the support of the Jewish community, and since May 1888 that district had been subdivided into the Northeastern and Southeastern districts, with Baxter retaining the Southeastern district with his political rival, Macdonald, retaining the other. Baxter was also instrumental in publicly exonerating Pizer. He was as much in need of the Jewish vote as a New Yorker or a Floridian candidate, lol. {The Baxter part comes courtesy of Hunter, AKA Cris Malone.}

[Simon Wood]

Hi Maria,

Okay, so why wasn't Schwartz at the inquest?

An inability of witnesses to speak English was not an issue.

Regards,

Simon

[mariab]

Hi Maria
It is interesting though, that the man Schwartz describes has a strong resemblance to the man Stride was seen with an hour earlier, by Marshall.

Apologies, just saw this. Yes, a lot of people have noticed this. And Marshall's man spots a certain ressemblance to Lawende's man.

[Lechmere]

Kelly's death certifcate says she was a prostitute. No sentimentality there.

[mariab]

the elusive Schwartz witness

Hi Mr Wood,
please believe me when I'm saying that this question preoccupies me considerably.

Hi Maria,
Okay, so why wasn't Schwartz at the inquest?
An inability of witnesses to speak English was not an issue.

Agree about the language barrier not having been an issue. And we don't know if not a written/translated statement wasn't presented at the inquest that the papers failed to report on/were pressured to NOT report on.
One of my suspicions would be that Schwartz got scarce and the police didn't want to advertize the fact. After all, newspaper coverage on Schwartz was super minimal. ONLY one direct interview (in the Star), 3 indirect further mentions (by the journalist who interviewed him in the Star and by William Wess in the Echo and the Scotsman), plus a couple brief, garbled mentions of the BS/Stride incident as a "domestic" in other newspapers. Just compare this to Ms. Mortimer, who went out of her way for press coverage. It appears to me that Schwartz went out of his way to avoid journalists.
Or the police and Coroner Baxter simply withheld the witness to avoid inflammatory discussions of the Jewish question, in the same fashion that the GSG got erased.