Schwartz, a fraud?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Now do you see what harm your proclamations are to new students Herlock? People believe what they read, instead of studying all the factors for themselves...its why there is a Canonical Group in the first place. People took other peoples word,...like Louis, who said he arrived "precisely" at 1am,

He did.

like Morris who says he arrived at the passageway at 12:40 yet didnt see Lave

This is the trustworthy Lave who claimed to have been in an empty Dutfield’s Yard at 1.10. Nice choice.

or anyone else, despite the fact that 4 people say they were there with others at that time. Read all the witness accounts Sunny, note the times and actions, use whatever logic and reason are at your disposal and you will find that only a minority of statements suggest a 1am discovery, and all are contradicted by the majority of witnesses who said 12:40-12:45.

Yes....study the facts....give less weight to guesses.....check the corroboration......Michael’s confirming witnesses collapse like a pack of cards.

Also study where Fanny Mortimer lived...understand that she was at her door facing the street...is it possible she could have missed a cart and horse and driver pulling up to 40 Berner Street just before or at 1am?

She didn’t see the cart or Schwartz because of her inability to see through walls.

None of the witnesses who said the discover was after 1 have any corroboration at all, all of the witnesses who said 12:40-12:45 are corroborated by multiple witness accounts.

Laughably untrue as every unbiased Ripperologist in the universe will tell you. Your witnesses have been eliminated.

Its like bizarro world when people start using the uncorroborated non-validated statements to argue against a plethora of matching ones. 4 people see a tiger at 4pm, and the other people who say they were there....1 sees a Giraffe and nothing else, and no-one sees him. What animal is probably there

None because it was just a conspiracy with a Freemason in a tiger suit.

Rather patronising don’t you think? Just because Sunny Delight has only made relatively few posts it doesn’t mean that he hasn’t been looking at the case for years. And you don’t need to have years of experience to understand the difference between an estimation and a timing with corroboration.

Your witnesses have been refuted by corroborating evidence. Stick to your convenient estimations and guesses Michael.

I wonder why no one else takes your theory seriously Michael? You’d think that after all these years you would attract at least a few supporters. Even sympathy votes. But no here you are clinging to the sinking life raft shouting “conspiracy!”

Its way past time to give it up.

[Herlock Sholmes]

then whose being the a**hole?

Hello Michael,

Is this just a rhetorical question or are you looking for an answer?

c.d.

I can answer c.d.

I better not

[Herlock Sholmes]

An open question on the police whistle.

1. We have the only police whistle blown by PC Lamb some time after 1.00.

2. Hoschberg said that he heard the police whistle and headed to the yard at about 12.45.

3. Spooner runs into Mr Harris, according to Spooner, at 12.35 and Harris had already heard the whistle.

So what do we think is the correct deduction?

1. Harris and Hoschberg both heard the whistle 10 minutes apart and 20-30 minutes before Lamb actually blew it.

Or
2. They both heard Lamb blow his whistle just after 1.00 but we're genuinely mistaken in their estimation of the time?

[Varqm]

Varqm I’d suggest that you take a little time to read through some of this thread. As everyone here will confirm I’m not the conspiracist. I’m about as far away from a conspiracy theorist as you’ll find anywhere. Michael is suggesting the cover up.

Why, if The Star got hold of him, would the authorities also have got hold of him? He wasn’t in hiding when The Star spoke to him. I’m not saying that this certainly happened Varqm just that it’s a possibility. What if he had a friend living in Manchester for example and he went to stay with him (and the police didn’t know this?)

Im sorry but to suggest that he wasn’t called to give evidence because of conflicting stories doesn’t make sense. You are implying that the Police didn’t trust what Schwartz said. If that was the case why would they put his description of BS Man on the front of their Gazette on October 20th? They obviously put weight in Schwartz evidence.

The determination whether Schwartz - or Hutchinson for that matter,were lying/guessing or not, did not end in 1888.It was the years after;they realized it then.The conflicting stories,the use of Lawende in 1891 and the omission of the two witnesses ,whose sightings were very significant,from memoirs showed the police changed their minds.The basis for "analysis" should stop after the last police memoirs.I do not know who was the last.
It was only after ripperologists started writing about the case that those two witnesses were included again.

[Varqm]

Precisely...but not like "precisely at 1"...right Herlock? Actually precise Varqm. There is no way Schwartz if believed would not have been the star witness at that Inquest. People like to imagine differently...apparently because someone unofficially states they believed the story..like thats a quality stamp or something. Its just an personal opinion in the Gazette, an opinion, not a Position taken by the Police.

If the Police didnt believe him, then why are people still using his story as some sort of a factual baseline. Its seems people choose what makes sense to them, some dont feel compelled by reason or logic...they use gut feelings, or a overarching belief that an individual carries about how many the "Ripper" killed or who killed the Canonical Group...like weve proven that 5 had linkage. We havent, for the record. We haven't even linked one with 1 other within the assumptive Group.

I personally do link at least 2 with one killer, perhaps a third...that only leaves 10 in the Unsolved Murders file for the same period and district. Also...people should look at the total murders that year for greater London before they go about espousing ideas that only 1 man was at work in London....oops, someone just published a book with that same premise? Guess they have that overarching problem too.

I agree with the highlight above.And besides the police view of the witness could have changed after,week/months .
I believe in the Canonical five plus Frances Coles. Chapman,Eddowes and Kelly at least.
Mackenzie and Tabram could also have been,but not as strong as the above,it's the same area.

[Varqm]

Naive to think the Police could not find an interpreter? I would say Schwartz spoke Hebrew most likely- possibly just Hungarian only and maybe both. As it is we cannot know. What I do know is even nowadays Police struggle to find interpreters of both quality and integrity. It isn't a given the Police would have found one.

If Schwartz was straightforward they would have.He was too important, perhaps the key.

[IchabodCrane]

Hi Icha
Did Schwartz mention a peaked cap? I don't recall that he did unless I am mistaken. Very true though on the lack of information. From the info we do have though the descriptions are very similar. Now if one or the other had described a 5ft 11 man with dark complexion, thin build, aged about 40 and clean shaven then there would have been a big problem!!

Hi Sunny

yes, NotForNothing made a comprehensive comparison analysis of the two men:

https://forum.casebook.org/forum/ripper-discussions/suspects/general-suspect-discussion/743972-stride-a-victim?p=744500#post744500

Peaked cap is definitely in the picture here
But what is the Hungarian word for peaked cap? i forgot....

Cheers
IchabodCrane

[FrankO]

None of the witnesses who said the discover was after 1 have any corroboration at all, all of the witnesses who said 12:40-12:45 are corroborated by multiple witness accounts.

Both Diemshutz & Eagle are corroborated as to their timings by Mrs. Diemshutz, her servant Mila and Julius Minsky.

Also Mortimer corroborates Diemshutz & Spooner as to the latter touching Stride’s face, which was just after one o’clock. Of course, only Spooner stated to have touched the face before the police took control of the scene.

Then there are James Brown and William Marshall, who both heard the shouting of “Murder” just after/around one o’clock. Both of them, however, didn’t hear the shouting of the couple of Jews who, according to you, ran along Fairclough Street some 20 minutes earlier. Which is very odd, to say the least.

Just as it’s very odd, to say the least, that Spooner didn’t mention Diemshutz & Isaacs and, a little later, Eagle, going for a policeman when he had already been in the yard for some 20 minutes without anybody doing a thing. The 2 going in search of a policeman after a period of some 20 minutes of doing nothing would, given the situation, have been quite noteworthy, but, nothing of this from Spooner.

And, of course, what’s also very striking is that Diemshutz told a copy of what Spooner told about the running & shouting of 2 men in search of a policeman, not finding one but instead bringing a man back to the yard, who then lifted the head of the woman, when all of this already supposed to have happened some 20 minutes earlier.

[Sunny Delight]

Rather patronising don’t you think? Just because Sunny Delight has only made relatively few posts it doesn’t mean that he hasn’t been looking at the case for years. And you don’t need to have years of experience to understand the difference between an estimation and a timing with corroboration.

Your witnesses have been refuted by corroborating evidence. Stick to your convenient estimations and guesses Michael.

I wonder why no one else takes your theory seriously Michael? You’d think that after all these years you would attract at least a few supporters. Even sympathy votes. But no here you are clinging to the sinking life raft shouting “conspiracy!”

Its way past time to give it up.

Hi Herlock. I have been interested in the case for a few years. I am I suppose relatively young(36 to be exact) but my interest very much stems from my University studies where I researched British and Irish history(I am Irish). What fascinated me was Irish migrants and their living conditions and the communities that sprang forth. Also the Fenian bombing campign which I happened to stumble upon whilst researching the 1916 Easter rising.(the main signatory of the 1916 Proclaimation of independence had been arrested and jailed in England for over 15 years mostly in solitary confinement. He had been a Fenian bomber). And that led me to Mary Kelly and the conspiracy theories around her- total nonsense by the way also. I then started researching this case- I think the context of the time period is fascinating.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Both Diemshutz & Eagle are corroborated as to their timings by Mrs. Diemshutz, her servant Mila and Julius Minsky.

Also Mortimer corroborates Diemshutz & Spooner as to the latter touching Stride’s face, which was just after one o’clock. Of course, only Spooner stated to have touched the face before the police took control of the scene.

Then there are James Brown and William Marshall, who both heard the shouting of “Murder” just after/around one o’clock. Both of them, however, didn’t hear the shouting of the couple of Jews who, according to you, ran along Fairclough Street some 20 minutes earlier. Which is very odd, to say the least.

Just as it’s very odd, to say the least, that Spooner didn’t mention Diemshutz & Isaacs and, a little later, Eagle, going for a policeman when he had already been in the yard for some 20 minutes without anybody doing a thing. The 2 going in search of a policeman after a period of some 20 minutes of doing nothing would, given the situation, have been quite noteworthy, but, nothing of this from Spooner.

And, of course, what’s also very striking is that Diemshutz told a copy of what Spooner told about the running & shouting of 2 men in search of a policeman, not finding one but instead bringing a man back to the yard, who then lifted the head of the woman, when all of this already supposed to have happened some 20 minutes earlier.

Ahhhhh the cool, invigorating fresh air of unbiased reason.

Welcome back to The Grassy Knoll Frank

[FrankO]

Then there are James Brown and William Marshall, who both heard the shouting of “Murder” just after/around one o’clock. Both of them, however, didn’t hear the shouting of the couple of Jews who, according to you, ran along Fairclough Street some 20 minutes earlier. Which is very odd, to say the least.

What I forgot tot add is that if we stick to Brown's statement, then Brown was either on his way to or at the chandler's shop at the intersection of Berner & Fairclough Streets when the 2 unknown Jews passed running & shouting.

[FrankO]

Ahhhhh the cool, invigorating fresh air of unbiased reason.

Welcome back to The Grassy Knoll Frank

Cheers, Michael!

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock. I have been interested in the case for a few years. I am I suppose relatively young(36 to be exact) but my interest very much stems from my University studies where I researched British and Irish history(I am Irish). What fascinated me was Irish migrants and their living conditions and the communities that sprang forth. Also the Fenian bombing campign which I happened to stumble upon whilst researching the 1916 Easter rising.(the main signatory of the 1916 Proclaimation of independence had been arrested and jailed in England for over 15 years mostly in solitary confinement. He had been a Fenian bomber). And that led me to Mary Kelly and the conspiracy theories around her- total nonsense by the way also. I then started researching this case- I think the context of the time period is fascinating.

With the Fenian connection you’ve probably looked into the Tumblety connection? I don’t think that he was the Ripper but he certainly had an eventful life.

Ive recently watched a superb documentary on the Easter Rising narrated by Liam Neeson which you’ve probably seen. It was great to see black and white interviews with some of those that were involved plus wives etc.

[Herlock Sholmes]

An open question on the police whistle.

1. We have the only police whistle blown by PC Lamb some time after 1.00.

2. Hoschberg said that he heard the police whistle and headed to the yard at about 12.45.

3. Spooner runs into Mr Harris, according to Spooner, at 12.35 and Harris had already heard the whistle.

So what do we think is the correct deduction?

1. Harris and Hoschberg both heard the whistle 10 minutes apart and 20-30 minutes before Lamb actually blew it.

Or
2. They both heard Lamb blow his whistle just after 1.00 but we're genuinely mistaken in their estimation of the time?

Question avoided like the plague i see.

[Herlock Sholmes]

If Schwartz was straightforward they would have.He was too important, perhaps the key.

Of course we would have expected Schwartz to have appeared but I can’t see how he was ‘key’ Varqm? The Inquests aim was to decide how and when she died of course and so as far as the ‘how’ was concerned Schwartz was entirely surplus to requirements. As to the ‘when,’ yes he could have narrowed the window of time down by less than 10 minutes (only by saying that Stride was still alive at 12.45) but it’s hardly massive is it? And of course this wouldn’t have affected the police investigation one iota because they had Schwartz statement anyway.

The most important point as far as discussion on here goes is that we can’t simply state that he didn’t appear at the Inquest because the police put no faith in his story unless we can prove this and we can’t. We know that the Inquest began directly after the murder; we know that the police interviewed a potential BS man; we know that the description was being used into late October and we have senior police officers talking about Schwartz (none of whom said that he wasn’t believed) so how could all this have happened if Schwartz had been disregarded in 24 hours? It’s ludicrous. As long as there are possible alternative explanations then we shouldn’t be making categorical statements. Is it possible that Schwartz simply went into hiding to avoid giving evidence at the Inquest? I’d say that this has to be at least a possibility. Whether individuals suspect that this is or isn’t true is largely irrelevant unless someone can prove it either way.