Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Help On Some Details

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bridewell
    replied
    Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
    You would expect his police statement to be the more accurate. Police officers are trained to extract much information and to clarify important points when taking witness statements. Abberline was an experienced officer.

    Why are people so reluctant to accept official statements, and want to play them off against newspaper reports..

    If the matter went to court newspaper reports would not form part of the prosecution case.

    Hutchinsons statement would have been taken under police conditions.i,e at the station, newspaper interviews anywhere from a street corner, to someones front door.

    www.trevormarriott.co.uk
    I agree. Badham and Abberline were in the business of gathering evidence. Journalists were in the business of selling newspapers.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
    Is that daylight saving time?

    Lol!
    Thanks for pointing that out. Should be 2:15 and 2:30!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
    .... In 2 or 3 days after his statements Hutch is reported to be discredited......
    You keep repeating that too. In spite of the fact the police were still looking for Astrachan 4 days after that bogus claim in the press.

    I don't understand this blind faith in something proven false.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
    Only difference is that Hutchinson told his story 4 days later.
    Why do you keep repeating that?

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

    I have never heard of an interrogation report do you have any reference to one.
    When an important witness, or suspect is interrogated. Does the officer write down what the person being questioned said?

    Leave a comment:


  • Trevor Marriott
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
    No, just that there is some to suggest that his "belief", once again, amounted to nothing in terms of usable evidence. In 2 or 3 days after his statements Hutch is reported to be discredited, and Israels statement doesnt even warrant a passing mention in the formal hearing as to how Liz died.
    The question of evidence is somewhat irrelevant because none of the witness testimony was ever fully tested in any of the victims inquests. But I would have expected the police to have had the ability to asses and evaluate each statement on its merits, and to have perhaps re interview those persons whose gave statements which conflicted with others.

    You have to bear in mind an inquest is only to determine a cause of death.

    As far as Stride is concerned researchers are reading to much into this issue of the assault on Stride shortly before her murder suggesting it was her subsequent killer. There is more than one explantion which could resolce the issue

    www.trevormarriott.co.uk

    Leave a comment:


  • c.d.
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
    cd, dont be obstuse. In any document, press, police, private observation, there is no record of Israel Schwartz'z statement in any format being made available at the Inquest into Liz Strides death. Theres your fact.
    Hello Michael,

    The point I was making was that apparently you and you alone of all the posters on Casebook know WHY Schwartz didn't appear at the inquest. I was asking you to share your information or to admit that you are simply speculating.

    c.d.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
    So why is that being questioned ? There is nothing on record anywhere to suggest Abberline did not believe him.

    www.trevormarriott.co.uk
    No, just that there is some to suggest that his "belief", once again, amounted to nothing in terms of usable evidence. In 2 or 3 days after his statements Hutch is reported to be discredited, and Israels statement doesnt even warrant a passing mention in the formal hearing as to how Liz died.

    Abberline had a past with this particular neighbourhood...he is not just some hotshot Scotland Yard man assigned to these cases, he made his name there. They gave him a party and a cane when he was promoted. He, above any investigator, had a personal issue with these cases being unsolved. The fact that he endorses people who are later proven to have no valuable insights to share is just indicative of his frustration and the things he would want to believe.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
    Like I said, we only have paraphrase to work with from Lewis.
    Trying to criticise her individual words, when they may not be her actual words is pointless.
    All we need to do is understand her overall story.
    - That she saw a man loitering opposite Millers Court.
    - That there was a man & woman in Dorset street, the woman was hatless, the worse for drink, and they both passed up the court.

    As this is the same story, at the same time, at the same place, as told by Hutchinson is all we need to concern ourselves with.
    Only difference is that Hutchinson told his story 4 days later.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post
    If the police dismissed Schwartz, why is Donald Swanson still discussing him as a valid witness in a report dated October 19th?
    Maybe it was his belief. No-one was searching for either BSM or Pipeman at that time.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by c.d. View Post
    Hello Michael,

    I think it is quite unfair of you not to share your evidence with the rest of us seeing as how you know for a FACT that this was the case.

    c.d.
    cd, dont be obstuse. In any document, press, police, private observation, there is no record of Israel Schwartz'z statement in any format being made available at the Inquest into Liz Strides death. Theres your fact.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sunny Delight
    replied
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
    Thanks same here sunny.
    Ill just add before dropping it is that i actually meant abberlines statement about the peaked cap.lawende and schwartz arent mentioned by him but there peaked cap man suspect certainly is. Amd blotchy is mentioned as a valid suspect later by i beleive dew? Or swanson. Cant remember.
    Amyway my point being is hutch should be by far the best witness, no question, and the fact that him and his suspect disapear entirely as valid, speaks volumes about his credibility imho.
    Toodles.

    Sorry to continue on lol but just wondering- do you not think Abberline supercedes his peaked cap comment by stating the only witnesses to see the killer saw his back. As we know Lawende and Scwartz both saw men believed to be the killer and saw their face. So ergo their witness statements are not what Abberline is referring to. He is really only referring to Mrs Long. Maybe because Lawende and Schwartz descriptions don't match that of George Chapman at all well.


    Yeah I think it was Dew who said that Blotchy was the main suspect for him. His writings seem quite good and his memory also not bad but he does refer to Blotchy as having a beard yet Mrs Cox said he was clean shaven. A small error but significant. He also believed Hutchinson had the wrong night but then who did Sarah Lewis see if not Hutch? Interestingly I am sure Dew would have remembered Hutchinson being discredited but there is no mention. Rather he still believes Hutchinson's story. Just that he had the wrong night. That is an important point. He still believed the story.
    Last edited by Sunny Delight; 01-06-2019, 11:00 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trevor Marriott
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
    Yes, perhaps. I choose to treat those two statements as equal. Not play one off against the other.
    What is missing is Abberline's interrogation report, that is where all the detail would be found.

    I have never heard of an interrogation report do you have any reference to one.

    Agreed. And in his police statement he said they went into Dorset street "and I followed them". So thats what he did.
    So why is that being questioned ? There is nothing on record anywhere to suggest Abberline did not believe him.

    www.trevormarriott.co.uk

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
    Hutch sees kelly and aman enter the court and takes up his vigil about 3:15. Lewis arrives and passes into millers court shortly after 3:30. Both fixed there times by clocks.
    Lewis couple couldnt have been kelly and aman.
    That really should be the end of it.
    Is that daylight saving time?

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by seanr View Post
    Yes, quite consistent with both stories. But not consistent with Sarah Lewis' statement describing this same moment.
    Like I said, we only have paraphrase to work with from Lewis.
    Trying to criticise her individual words, when they may not be her actual words is pointless.
    All we need to do is understand her overall story.
    - That she saw a man loitering opposite Millers Court.
    - That there was a man & woman in Dorset street, the woman was hatless, the worse for drink, and they both passed up the court.

    As this is the same story, at the same time, at the same place, as told by Hutchinson is all we need to concern ourselves with.
    Last edited by Wickerman; 01-06-2019, 07:51 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X