Schwartz and Brown

[Fisherman]

C.d writes:

"Liz might have started the evening expecting to be on a date but that doesn't necessarily mean that she finished it that way. Her date may have failed to show or they could have had an argument. Liz may have figured hey it's a Saturday night and I am dressed up why not try and earn a little money."

Exactly, c.d - and that fits my suggested scenario like a glove! If she set out to meet with Marshalls man/BS man, she may well have opted for business afterwards. There is nothing much that would speak against such a thing.

"Polly, Annie and Kate may have had romantic interests in their lives as well. But just having a romantic interest doesn't necessarily make it a domestic."

Once again you are correct, c.d - but this time over we need to ask ourselves which is the more common demise: To be killed by your spouse or to get in the way of a fierce eviscerator? Itīs all about statistics, c.d, and only one of these sad ends could possibly be said to have been evidenced by the sight that met Diemschutz in Dutfieldīs Yard.

The best,
Fisherman

[c.d.]

Just a couple of points -- Liz might have started the evening expecting to be on a date but that doesn't necessarily mean that she finished it that way. Her date may have failed to show or they could have had an argument. Liz may have figured hey it's a Saturday night and I am dressed up why not try and earn a little money.

Polly, Annie and Kate may have had romantic interests in their lives as well. But just having a romantic interest doesn't necessarily make it a domestic.

And Michael,

Not being picky here but it is c-a-c-h-o-u-s. Just to set the record straight.

c.d.

As for Schwartz being the trustworthy account for 12:45am, it seems to me that the known evidence suggests only 1 witness gave a story for 12:45am at the Inquest....and it wasnt Schwartz...and there is NO evidence that has been uncovered to show that he did in fact attend the Inquest, or that his testimony was actually supressed by the authorities.

Since Lawende is supposedly trusted and he appears at the Inquest for Kate with the police stating clearly that they were withholding part of his statement for investigative purposes,.....its hard to imagine that they would do so only for his statement if they also believe Israels.

Why wasnt he introduced or his story...or why wasnt mention made of suppression of any kind.

It seems he didnt appear, and no-one has proven different in 121 years.

Best regards again.

Hi Lynn,

Liz was no exceptional woman, so I doubt a client fell head over heels with her and killed her. I think we're dealing with a stranger killing here.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Liz, by Kidneys statements and by her known history, had relationships with men most of her life....outside her work. Odd that you would assume that her killer could not have come from that group, since we can clearly see in the second before her attack, she was holding cashous and not expecting any attack....while perhaps alkone with her killer in a dark yard./

Since its very possible she wasnt working that night, there is a very good case to be made she was paying special attention to her clothes that night and she is wearing a flower....why would she be most likely to talk to strangers? At least one or 2 of the men she was seen with might well have been friends...you do know prostitutes can have friends dont you?

Best regards

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Lynn,

Liz was no exceptional woman, so I doubt a client fell head over heels with her and killed her. I think we're dealing with a stranger killing here.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[lynn cates]

Kidney

Hello Tom. Although if I were Abberline, Kidney would be my first chap to question, I don't think that he could hold up to the interrogation if he were guilty. Unless, of course, he has much more involved neuronal synapsing than I imagine.

I am looking towards a client who is growing overly fond of Liz. Any ideas?

The best.
LC

[Tom_Wescott]

Fisherman,

By no means do I consider your theory outrageous, just unlikely. I argue vehemently against Kidney as Stride's killer, because I'm pretty much convinced he didn't do it. But I'm more convinced Kidney didn't kill Stride than I am convinced the Ripper did kill Stride, if that makes sense. So I keep my mind open to other possibilies.
If anything, it's refreshing to follow a different line of inquiry than the tire old Kidney line for once. Nevertheless, I think you might be seeing things that aren't there.
Yes, it was quite common for 'punters' to entertain these women and buy them drinks before having sex, if they did at all. You'll remember that Pearly Poll and her friends spent hours pub crawling with their soldiers before finally pairing off to get the job done. The papers are full of this stuff. Men weren't paying by the hour then, girls needed the money, and more often then not, they needed the drink.
While I don't argue that Marshall's man is relatively consistent with the description of BS Man, it's a rather generic description, and there can be no doubt that Stride was seen with different men that night, most of them AFTER she was seen walking away with Marshall's man.
I agree that an 'acquaintance' theory would be nice, but we can't force one on the facts. The facts do not indicate any of these men as being serious lovers of Liz, and certainly not one so serious they'd kill over her.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Fisherman]

Hi Tom!

Letīs take a look at things from my wiew!

To begin with, your assertion that prostitutes would search for punters outside pubs "sauced up and horny" (nice one) is of course a good one - it works much the same way today.
What does not happen today, though, and would not have happened in 1888 either, is that prostitutes offer their time to do small talk and kissing in doorways. The more reasonable suggestion would be for the prostitute to take advantage of the ... ehrm, sauced up and horny state of their client-to-be, and get the show on as fast as possible, allowing for more time to find the next punter.

But no, this is not what goes down in the Marshall man case. No drunken appearance about that man, as if he had just excited a pub, no bottom-pinching, no nudge-nudge there - instead he gives a respectable appearance, speaks softly and with an educated voice, and the couple seems quite affectionate and not intent on any carnal affairs. They walk away, his arm around her, towards Ellen Street.

Does this look like quick, "sauced-up", paid-for sex to you, Tom? A drunken horny man and a prossy taking full advantage of things? It most certainly does not look like that to me, I must say!

"SCHWARTZ: He said the man stopped and spoke to the woman. The man was on the pavement, the woman was inside the gates. After he pulled her out and pushed her down, she said 'no, no, no' softly, suggesting she was concerned and afraid. This all happened quickly, so it's not at all likely that they were chatting amicably at all."

Exactly so, Tom - nor have I suggested this exchange was an amicable one! My contention is that BS man/Marshalls man more or less stumbled upon Stride, passing through Berner Street, and that he was upset by the fact that she was seemingly soliciting for trade. That tallies well with the earlier scene; if he was under the impression that Stride held genuine affection for him, he may have been effectively awakened from that dream outside the yard. That, of course, is why he reacts by first speaking a few words to her: "What are you doing, Liz?", kind of, and then by trying to drag her with him AWAY from the soliciting.
Please note that when she cries out after having fallen to the grund, she does so in such a low voice as to attract Schwartzīs attention to it. And in what kind of situations do people keep their voices low when being subjected to violence and discomforts by others? Exactly so, Tom: WHEN THEY ARE AQUAINTED TO THE ONE WHO INFLICTS THE DAMAGE! I suspect you have done the same thing when somebody you know well have, say, pinched your bottom in public. You donīt yell at the top of your voice "WHAT THE **** ARE YOU DOING!!" - you instead use a loud whisper: "Donīt do that, honey! At least not here. And now!" The same thing is what goes down outside Dutfields Yard that evening. See the significance in things, Tom! Read the signs - they are quite obvious, and it is only when we use the aquintance perspective that all the pieces fit together. And when you say: "There's nothing in Schwartz's statement to suggest Stride knew BS Man", you are quite simply wrong, for the reasons outlined above. His trying to drag Stride along with him, and her keeping her voice low are just such pointers. The fact that she took her cachous out - almost certainly done inside the yard - is another clear indicator of the exact same thing.

"She was a prostitute and would take a client when she could."

You know, on the old boards, Mr Poster tried the exact same scheme, and I did not buy it then either. Itīs over-simplifying. Yes, Stride had a record of prostituting herself, but in all probability that was a part-time business for her. And no matter how that applies, we should be very careful not to accept that a prostituted womans all contacts with men are nothing but business. Ask any pimp, and you will find out. Consider her affair with Kidney.
Prostituted women are normally not in the game because they want to be. They would have just about the same dreams as most anybody, including the dream of loving and being loved. They would arrange meetings in doorways with their loved ones, just like the rest of us, speaking softly with them, kissing them affectionately and walking away down the street, his arm around her waist.
Now, that reminds me of something ...?

I will not say, however, that Stride showed her reluctance to sell sex by telling a potentional customer "Not tonight, some other night" - for that was not Stride in the first place, I suspect.

As for the rest, though, it all adds up when you realize that BS man was well known to Stride. But only then.

The best,
Fisherman

[Tom_Wescott]

Fisherman's story

Fisherman's story certainly makes for some good reading, but I do have a few problems for parts of it. I agree with Fisherman that for the sake of the present discussion, we should assume that Schwartz was telling the truth as best as he knew it. Here are some issues.

MARSHALL'S MAN: It's important to remember that Stride was a penniless prostitute. Now that she didn't have Kidney supporting her, she had to make her own money. Cleaning would provide her with some, but she had to prostitute to fully provide for herself. Marshall saw Stride standing with a man near a pub, so it's probable she met this man outside the pub, probably as he was leaving. I say this because no one inside the pub remembered seeing her. Eddowes, likewise, was waiting outside pubs to meet men as they exited, sauced up and horny. The man's behavior was rather loose and might suggest he was not sober. The comment about Stride saying anything but her prayers would have offended most women, but Stride laughed, suggesting it was understood that loose morals were the reason he was with her. The idea that prostitutes in general won't kiss their clients is a creation of modern Hollywood and should not be seen as an indicator of romantic intimacy here. The two of them walked away from the direction of the club towards Ellen Street.

SCHWARTZ: He said the man stopped and spoke to the woman. The man was on the pavement, the woman was inside the gates. After he pulled her out and pushed her down, she said 'no, no, no' softly, suggesting she was concerned and afraid. This all happened quickly, so it's not at all likely that they were chatting amicably at all. This man approached by way of Commercial road, coming from the opposite direction from where Marshall's man was last seen walking. There's nothing in Schwartz's statement to suggest Stride knew BS Man. Either she was soliciting or the man was turning into the gateway to enter the yard when he happened upon Stride.

Between Marshall and Schwartz, Stride was spotted talking to two different men, so while it's certainly possible that Marshall's man was BS Man, it's also unlikely that he was. She was a prostitute and would take a client when she could.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

P.S. Although it's probably nothing, Marshall's man and Stride stood outside 58 Berner Street for 10 minutes. Any idea who lived at this address in 1888?

[Fisherman]

Well, Harry, regardless of whether Schwartz was scared or not, he had the advantage of being able to compare two men in height! And since he had been walking directly behind BS man BEFORE he was scared by what went down, he would have had every chance to get that height correct. After that, he tok a look at Pipeman and saw that this man was considerably taller that the other guy.

I think this is quite enough to realize that Browns man and Pipeman were probably not one and the same.

The best,
Fisherman

[harry]

Fisherman,
Just cast your doubts aside.Schwartz was apparantly more concerned with his own safety than standing and taking in a detailed description,and besides a man in a long coat,on a dark night,in a dark street,might,might tend to appear much taller than was actually the case.

[Fisherman]

The suggestion that Pipeman and James Browns man were one and the same rests on the ground that we are ready to believe that what one witness (Brown) said about the length of his man (5 ft 7) can be reconciled with Schwartz estimation of 5 ft 11.
I am having all sorts of trouble with that.

The best,
Fisherman

[harry]

Why not come forward

We have,seemingly,five men in or near Berner st at 1245 AM.Of those five two come forward as witnesses.There is speculation but no evidence,that the man seen by Brown and the man referred to as pipeman could have been the same person.However there are definately two persons who witnessed the proceedings outside the yard who could have come forward and given evidence.One was certainly innocent.A reasonabe explanation can be given for BS.There appeared strong circumstantial evidence against him,and even if innocent,the only witness that could clear him was dead.One cannot blame him for remaining quiet.
Pipeman however appears to have nothing to fear.That is nothing that we know of,but if he had indeed been the man seen by Brown,or could be proven to have had some aquaintance with Stride,then his presence at the scene might be viewed differently.I view his reluctance to come forward as more suspicious than that of BS.

[Fisherman]

Michael writes:

"Simple evidence in terms of the physical wounds dictates that a simple answer may also be applicable I think."

That, my friend, is in all probability a very useful approach. It constitutes much of a bottom line in both our perceptions of the Stride deed, and itīs good to be in agreement about it.
As for the rest of it all, we do differ. And all I will say about that is that I think that I have chosen the simpler answer in this instance too ...

... but that is not to rule out you scenario - of course the clubsmen must be awarded interest, given that the murder took place in their yard. But I think I will leave that particular part of the investigation in your hands!

The best,
Fisherman

[lynn cates]

mum

Hello Mike. 'ere now, 'ere now, ah never said nothin' Guv.

Cheers.
LC