Is Mr Schwartz the equivalent of a Hasidic Hutchinson?

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Chris,

I've pointed out to Michael that Blackwell feels the murder most likely occurred under 20 minutes before he arrived, but Michael prefers his 'CYA' estimate of 30 minutes.

Michael,

While we agree that Schwartz should have appeared at the inquest, 'reasonable' is relative, so the police may have had a very benign and reasonable motive behind not having him appear. Another possibility is that they didn't want to share this info too quick with the City Police because they didn't want the CP catching Jack before they could.
Goldstein looked up at the house. He didn't look in the yard, and even if he had, it would have been too dark for him to see anything. Fanny Mortimer witnessed Goldstein cruise right on by the house with only a glance, so are you suggesting that Goldstein DID see something but had the capacity to not react in any obvious way? I'd find that remarkable.
I've never dismissed any evidence in this case with a wave of the hand. In fact, I've tried to find explanations for every bit of it. All Goldstein tells us is that no one was pulling Stride about Berner street at approx. 12:50am.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[perrymason]

Blackwell did not say that.

According to most newspapers he said some variant of "not more than 20 minutes, or at the most half an hour". According to a couple of others he said "20 minutes to half an hour".
http://forum.casebook.org/showpost.p...&postcount=192

Hi Chris, You didnt find it odd that he is quoted as saying "not" more when in fact he adds more time with his very next line? Seems to me a quote that virtually reads "cant be more but maybe was more" isnt him saying 20 minutes.

I believe he is allowing himself room for an earlier killing, which by his words translates to most probably between 12:46am and 12:56am. So.... Just in time to get interrupted... 4 minutes later.

Best regards

[perrymason]

Hi Chris,

I've pointed out to Michael that Blackwell feels the murder most likely occurred under 20 minutes before he arrived, but Michael prefers his 'CYA' estimate of 30 minutes.

Michael,

While we agree that Schwartz should have appeared at the inquest, 'reasonable' is relative, so the police may have had a very benign and reasonable motive behind not having him appear. Another possibility is that they didn't want to share this info too quick with the City Police because they didn't want the CP catching Jack before they could.
Goldstein looked up at the house. He didn't look in the yard, and even if he had, it would have been too dark for him to see anything. Fanny Mortimer witnessed Goldstein cruise right on by the house with only a glance, so are you suggesting that Goldstein DID see something but had the capacity to not react in any obvious way? I'd find that remarkable.
I've never dismissed any evidence in this case with a wave of the hand. In fact, I've tried to find explanations for every bit of it. All Goldstein tells us is that no one was pulling Stride about Berner street at approx. 12:50am.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hi Tom,

Last point first,....I believe the time of the Goldstein sighting is 12:55 ish, and that is within the 10 minute time frame where by Blackwells remarks, she is most likely murdered. He may mean nothing, but he must have been walking by either just after, just before, or as the murder happened.

I believe Goldstein walking towards a club that he is a member of with a case full of cigarette cartons while cigarette makers area awake in Dutfield Yard cottages hints that he might have intended to drop them off there. He walked past "hurriedly".......did his statement reveal why he was hurrying past a club he belongs to near 1am? Could Fanny tell whether he looked up....or in, could she tell whether he was looking up towards the open second floor window, or straight back into the yard? Could she know if he saw anything?

The thing I have now with Israel is the same I had with Hutchinson....ergo the thread....he is not an official witness regardless of any supporting remarks made by anyone about his statement. They did put the other man who had the same timing as Israel on....so I would think its not a huge leap of faith to surmise they chose one 12:45am story over the other.

She wasnt in two places at 12:45....BSM and Browns man are not the same...and in the Inquest, she is down the street by the school, not outside the yard.

As I said before many times, the incident that Schwartz describes if accurate is a vital piece of evidence...as would be GH's statement. One cannot appear at Inquest as the story was not known at the time.....and one had 3 weeks of Inquest dates to make an appearance...or have his story entered onto the record. He didnt, and It isnt.

If we use Brown as they did, this murder becomes wide open for suspects again....with Schwartz, one almost has to assume that the man didnt scurry off after helping her up....which takes us nearer and nearer to the probable cut time.

All the best.

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Michael, a few points to address from your last post:

1) Goldstein was walking past the club, not toward it.

2) Mortimer saw a man casually glance toward the club as he walked by it. Nothing more, nothing less.

3) How is Schwartz not an 'official' witness when he gave a statement to the police that was distributed to every nearby police station?

4) Who said BS Man and Brown's man were the same? If anything, Brown's man is Pipeman.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Chris]

perrymason

Obviously we've discussed this at length before.

My point was that Blackwell simply didn't say what you claimed.

As for what he meant by what he did say, clearly the reports differ, but I don't accept there is any ambiguity about the meaning of any of them.

[perrymason]

perrymason

Obviously we've discussed this at length before.

My point was that Blackwell simply didn't say what you claimed.

As for what he meant by what he did say, clearly the reports differ, but I don't accept there is any ambiguity about the meaning of any of them.

Hi Chris, youre right, I agree, there is no ambiguity.
He states "not more than 20 minutes"...then adds a 10 minute buffer to the statement, extending the range of time estimated from the moment he arrived back to the time Liz Strides throat was cut to as much as 1/2 hour total elapsed time.

So.....he estimates she was cut within 20 minutes prior to his arrival...or perhaps as much as 30. Giving you an approximate window of 10 minute where the cut most likely occurred. Could it have happened closer to 1am? maybe....but why did his addendum then lengthen the original period given, instead of abbreviating it?

Best regards

[perrymason]

Hi Michael, a few points to address from your last post:

1) Goldstein was walking past the club, not toward it.

2) Mortimer saw a man casually glance toward the club as he walked by it. Nothing more, nothing less.

3) How is Schwartz not an 'official' witness when he gave a statement to the police that was distributed to every nearby police station?

4) Who said BS Man and Brown's man were the same? If anything, Brown's man is Pipeman.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hi Tom,

From the way I read the details he came from around the corner towards the club gates, looked in towards the club and walked hurriedly past. Since his view at that point looked past the open kitchen door and to the back of the yard, not to the second floor window,.... which when he is at the gate opening is behind him, to his upper right....

He was certainly walking towards the gates even if only to pass "hurriedly" by. Im assuming since you didnt address my possible correction on your time of that sighted pass, you agree with the 12:55 time that I suggested.

Fanny saw a man walk hurriedly by the club...exactly....the fact that the time he does so could well be just after or during the murder itself, so its interesting that you are pretty cavalier about his potential value. Who said any Club witness told only the truth? Their sworn oath? That would mean a great deal to men who would gladly dismantle the society the rules reside in?

I actually said Browns Man and BSM are not the same man.....maybe because they, like Liz, cant be standing in 2 different places at the same time.

You like Schwartz's story....thats your business, and tied deeply into your own personal lines of thought regarding likely culprits based on his scenario.

Ive decided Id rather use the account that was deemed worthy to repeat in court. And oddly enough that account allows potential for a Ripper 100 % better than Israels does. And it really allows for a club patron in the yard.

Eagle, Diemshutz, Kozebrodski, Goldtein, maybe Israel.....all main witnesses and possibly all with a vested interest in protecting it.

Best regards Tom.

[drstrange169]

Congratulations on a long overdue thread.

Some points that may or may not be of value.

• Inquests can take written statements, so it is always possible Baxter knew of Schwartz’s tale. However to my mind, the fact that he doesn’t mention it in the summing up, indicates he either did not know or considered it of no value for some unknown reason.

• Based on the information we have, it seems to me, very unlikely that Schwartz was excluded for racial reasons. The double event was already a very high profile Jewish event. Stride’s murder took place in the precincts’ of a Jewish club. The bulk of the witnesses on the first day of the inquest were not only Jewish but social revolutionaries to boot. Whilst the Schwartz’s story is relatively new to modern researchers, it was widely known at the time. Newspapers as far away as Ireland and America reported the tale. Locally, Wess and the crowds on the street seemed to know, a version of it at least. And, as has already been pointed out, the Eddowes Inquest shared none of the qualms Warren had about the “message”. Remember the inquests were not made up of Whitehall Wallahs but people who lived and/or worked in the area. They knew better than any, the prevailing climate. So realistically, where was a danger that wasn't already present?.

• Leman Street police station had it’s own interpreter (his name escapes me at the moment and I don’t have my files here, Smeg? Snike? Something very Dickension and non-Jewish sounding). Unless someone has evidence to the contrary, we should assume he translated rather than Wess, whose impartiality, given his politics would not be trusted by the police.

[Chris]

So.....he estimates she was cut within 20 minutes prior to his arrival...or perhaps as much as 30. Giving you an approximate window of 10 minute where the cut most likely occurred.

I really don't have the time to go through all this again, but quite clearly if you start by saying the death occurred in the previous 20 minutes and then say that it may have occurred in the previous 30 minutes "at the most", then your "window" is 30 minutes, not 10.

You are saying that it is still most likely to have occurred in the previous 20 minutes, but you are allowing for an outside probability that it happened between 20 and 30 minutes ago.

You can believe the Daily Telegraph version if you like, but the other papers clearly say something quite different.

[Tom_Wescott]

From the way I read the details he came from around the corner towards the club gates, looked in towards the club and walked hurriedly past. Since his view at that point looked past the open kitchen door and to the back of the yard, not to the second floor window,.... which when he is at the gate opening is behind him, to his upper right....

He walked along the sidewalk, which went past the club. He glanced at the club...not into the yard...probably because of the open windows and talk/music he heard. I imagine anyone walking by the club at such times would turn a glance its way. He did not stop to look, or else Fanny would have said as much. There's no way Goldstein saw a murder occuring or a dead body. The only thing we can learn from him is a) Fanny Mortimer is the only Berner Street witness to receive confirmation of her tale, and b) Brown's couple and Schwartz's people had either skiddadled by 12:50am or had yet to appear.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[perrymason]

He walked along the sidewalk, which went past the club. He glanced at the club...not into the yard...probably because of the open windows and talk/music he heard. I imagine anyone walking by the club at such times would turn a glance its way. He did not stop to look, or else Fanny would have said as much. There's no way Goldstein saw a murder occuring or a dead body. The only thing we can learn from him is a) Fanny Mortimer is the only Berner Street witness to receive confirmation of her tale, and b) Brown's couple and Schwartz's people had either skiddadled by 12:50am or had yet to appear.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

He could not see the Club with a 90 degree head turn, when at the open gates, he would have had to look upwards and slightly over his right shoulder. She didnt say he did that.

And Chris, it is useless to debate this, youre right... you seem to think that his increase of time means it was actually closer to 1am....which is the inverse of what it does mean. He very clearly lengthened the period of time because he suspected his initial 20 minute estimate may have been too short a time. To me that reads he adds that extra 10 minutes to cover his ass...which lends itself to the conclusion that he felt that its quite possible she was cut even earlier in the evening than he first suggested.

It essentially erases any legitimate interruption....because for him to have been interrupted when first hearing the cart on cobblestones down the road approaching, that would mean he is still in the yard with the body when Diemshutz pulls in. Then a slip out the gates while Diemshutz runs in the kitchen is the only possible way that could have transpired. Not a great basket for the eggs....IMHO.

Best regards

[Tom_Wescott]

He could not see the Club with a 90 degree head turn, when at the open gates, he would have had to look upwards and slightly over his right shoulder. She didnt say he did that.

You're assuming he was walking on the pavement/sidewalk in front of the club, whereas he was probably on the school board side, considering he would be turning left at the corner.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[drstrange169]

Re: time of death.

“It is futile mentioning any time in units of less than an hour,
even when the death was quite recent. A medical witness who attempts to determine the time of death from temperature estimation in minutes or fractions of hours is exposing himself to a severe challenge to his expertise which may well amount to near ridicule”
Dept of Forensic Medicine, Dundee University.

That’s modern science; imagine then the accuracy of a relatively inexperienced Victorian G.P’s estimation of T.O.D.

In evidential terms we can’t pin Stride’s death to a ten minute window, it is not medically possible. Why then did Blackwell say it, if there were no medical grounds, what other factors would he have used?
In his testimony he states,

“From twenty minutes to half an hour when I arrived. The clothes were not wet with rain.”
(my emphasis)

If Blackwell’s TOD was based on dry clothing, he was estimating the time of the last rainfall as a maximum outside parameter, not a ten minute window.

[Tom_Wescott]

Dusty,

To come up with what you did, you must be studying the material very closely, because that certainly never occurred to me. I'm enjoying your posts on this subject, so keep 'em coming! However, since it stopped raining a good hour or more before Blackwell arrived in Berner Street, I'm not sure the dry clothes were how he arrived at his estimate. I believe he felt that Morris Eagle would have been aware of the body when he walked along the passage around 12:40, and that's why Blackwell felt she had not been killed at the time. Therefore, medically speaking, Blackwell felt that Stride had been murder less than 20 minutes prior to his arrival, but it certainly couldn't have been more than 30 minutes prior or Eagle would have stumbled over her.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[perrymason]

The rain ended between 11 and 11:30pm, and since she is found at 1:00am, I dont see the connection or the relevance myself. All it told him is if the cobblestones were still damp near 1am, she had not been lying for very long on them.

As to what his cut time estimate suggests Tom.....at least you have one supporter. I guess thats the difference between just reading something and trying to actually understand it...since the quote first sets a time almost in stone by the phase "not more than" and then is immediately followed by a time that was in fact MORE THAN, means 20 minutes or less to you and at least one other.

Im always surprised when people support a partial quote. I think an entire quote is more meaningful and probably more revealing myself....certainly for the context. But I guess thats my radical use of logic and reason again....sorry.

Best regards