Schwartz, a fraud?

[mariab]

Schwartz and Pipeman have been reported as been seen running (the one chasing the other). This was reported to the press by William Wess, the IWMC's secretary, in an ambiguous fashion.
And of course Hutchinson was viewed, waiting for the best part of an hour in front of Mary Kelly's dwellings. That's why he came forward with his “testimony“.

[corey123]

Hello Maria,

Well then this account by Wess contradicts Schwartzs account because Schwartz never said "Pipeman" was chasing him, rather after he realized(or rather thought) he was being followed he ran to the railway arch.

[mariab]

Corey,
in his second testimony Schwartz claimed Pipeman chased him with a knife! (Yeah, right!) William Wess curiously never mentioned Schwartz's name to the press (a fact which can be explained in many ways). Several people are trying to figure this out.

[corey123]

Hello Maria,

I like to go by the report by Swanson, which is most likely the most accurate re-telling of the supposed events. In that case pipeman wasn't chasing him, hence disrupting any credibility Wess holds for that account.

Also, I assume you are refering to the report featured in the Star?

[mariab]

Corey,
I'm convinced that Pipeman (if he existed at all) most certainly didn't chase Schwartz with a knife. What William Wess claimed about the “running around on the street done by 2 people, one of which was not a member of the IWMC“ was published in The Echo and The Jewish Chronicle.

[corey123]

Hello Maria,

I was refering to Schwartz second testimony.

[mariab]

Yes, me too.

[corey123]

Hello Maria,

What William Wess claimed about the “running around on the street done by 2 people, one of which was not a member of the IWMC“ was published in The Echo and The Jewish Chronicle.

No I ment Schwartz second testimony which did appear in the Star, which is the second account.

[mariab]

Corey, I haven't read the account in the Star yet, but I thought Schwartz' second testimony was the one with Pipeman holding a knife. I really don't have time to read any of this this week, I'm sorry. I'll definitely read it up when things get quiter with my workload.

[corey123]

Hello Maria,

Indeed it is. No hurries.

Hope things become less busy.

[Errata]

a few thoughts:

1: Dominant hands (for those who care): Most people are right hand dominant. What this means is that the dominant hand is used for fine tasks (writing, sewing, cutting, etc) the non dominant hand is the strength and stability hand. As it applies, Strides cachous were probably in her left hand because they were in her left pocket. And they were in her left pocket for the same reason I keep my cigarettes in my left pocket. I am right handed. I pull out the pack of cigarettes with my left hand, and open the pack and remove a cigarette with my right. As far as pinning a flower goes, you would hold the flower to the garment with your non-dominant hand, and pin it with your dominant one.

2: The times may be off if the club had a clock. If the club had a clock, or Schwartz had a watch, they would likely be set to a slightly different time than the clock on the street. Schwartz also might be terrible at estimating time.

3: If the only word Schwartz recognized in English was "Lipski" that doesn't speak well for his time in London up to that point. And assuming he left Hungary because of the Pogroms, it seems likely that would have been a keen judge of dangerous situations.

4: Women scream in all kinds of ways for many reasons. What was described as a scream may in fact have been more of a squeal, like in pain, or that weird gasping kind of noise we make in outrage. Or even that progression in volume people do when trying to gain someone's attention (hey. hey! HEY!)

5: Given the anti-Jewish anti-foreigner sentiments predominating in London, and the fact that Stride was killed outside of a mostly Jewish club, the cops may have decided that Schwartz's testimony would cloud the issue. They didn't need it to establish that she had been willfully murdered by persons unknown. Introducing an immigrant Jew with no English to testify could easily backfire if the jury gave in to bigotry and decided that he was lying because he was the murderer or some such. Better by far not to use his testimony, i think.

[mariab]

Thanks Corey! At least I've just finished submitting an application for sponsoring from the German state, so that one's done.

Errata,
Schwartz most definitely didn't have a watch. A watch was a significantly pricey possession in Victorian England, and Schwartz was destitute. There is some interesting and useful information in the numerous Stride threads here on casebook, and one would greatly benefit from reading both the current and the old threads.

[Errata]

Thanks Corey! At least I've just finished submitting an application for sponsoring from the German state, so that one's done.

Errata,
Schwartz most definitely didn't have a watch. A watch was a significantly pricey possession in Victorian England, and Schwartz was destitute. There is some interesting and useful information in the numerous Stride threads here on casebook, and one would greatly benefit from reading both the current and the old threads.

Yes it was. And yes he was. And while the two are most likely mutually exclusive, they aren't necessarily. If it was a bequest, or he had one from his previous life and chose not to part with it, he could have one. It's not likely, but some immigrant Jews (like my great great grandfather) felt that a watch was necessary in London, because the weather made it hard to tell when sundown was coming. And he didn't trust the big clocks. Which is a weird paranoia that got passed all the way down to my sister and I. But not the point. His having a watch, as vanishing unlikely as it was, was thrown in as an afterthought. It was more to the point that the club might have a clock, or wherever he was coming from. And since people tended to set their watches to the time of their home clock, and set their work clocks to the time of their watches, there is quite the variety of times displayed all throughout London.

[mariab]

Hello Errata,
fascinating, what you say about your great grandfather in the London fog! Still, Schwartz appears to have been in a pretty sorry situation socially and financially, thus I don't know if he might have been able to hold on to an old watch-family relict, assuming he had one. Do you recall Eddowes and Kelly pawning Kelly's boots for food?
Errata wrote:
And since people tended to set their watches to the time of their home clock, and set their work clocks to the time of their watches, there is quite the variety of times displayed all throughout London.
Precisely. Although the really poor people in Victorian Whitechapel didn't have home clocks. When we assume a slight variation between the different church clocks in the city, we're talking about a discrepancy of 5´-10´minutes max, but in the Stride case such a discrepancy is significant.

[Garza]

Precisely. Although the really poor people in Victorian Whitechapel didn't have home clocks. When we assume a slight variation between the different church clocks in the city, we're talking about a discrepancy of 5´-10´minutes max, but in the Stride case such a discrepancy is significant.

It is very significant, especially when you consider PC Smith probably seen Stride at 12.40-12.45am and not at 12.30-35am that is usually stated.