Schwartz, a fraud?

[Sunny Delight]

Who gave the following description? Star, Oct 1:

The police have been told that a man, aged between 35 and 40 years of age, and of fair complexion, was seen to throw the woman murdered in Berner-street to the ground. Those who saw it thought that it was a man and his wife quarrelling, and no notice was taken of it.

Why is the age different to both Schwartz' Met account (30), and Star account (30)?

Why was the event witnessed by multiple people, when according to Abberline...?

There was only one other person to be seen in the street, and that was a man on the opposite side of the road in the act of lighting a pipe.

Collective silence will work for a while, but at some point, these and other Schwartz-related questions will have to beanswered.

I place zero substance upon newspaper reports when we have the actual Police files. The Met statement take precedent. That is what he told Police, that is what they had to work with. Newspaper reports have their place but only if Police files are unavailable and even then they need co-orboration and at times it helps if two or more reported the same thing(isolated reporting is subject to all sorts of caveats.).

As for your other question the Ripper may still have been tipsy by the time he got to Mitre Square(does this account for the much less systematic removal of organs?). The doctors thought it much more botched than his previous actions. Does it also account for poor decision making- the taking of half Eddowes apron? Then when he got to Goulston Street possibly spooked by a passer by he discards it in a panic? These are only thoughts of mine that may or may not have substance.

[Sunny Delight]

Hi Sunny
dont forget the peaked cap!
Now if Schwartz had mentioned a salt and pepper jacket, ....!!!

oh the many ifs... if only we had a little more information

Cheers
Ichabod Crane

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!!

[Herlock Sholmes]

If Schwartz ultimately was not believed by the police it doesn't necessarily follow that they believed him to be lying. It could have been that because of the language barrier and his short time on the scene that they simply didn't know what the hell he had seen. They also might have concluded that he simply saw a little street hassle.

But if they did conclude that he was lying why then did they not prosecute him and why didn't they conclude that the club must have been involved in some sort of cover up? Connecting the dots in that case should have been pretty obvious to at least one person on the force.

c.d.

And why did they put his description of BS Man on the front of The Police Gazette on 20th October if they didn’t think that his statement was of value?

[Varqm]

His Oct 1 statement to the STAR was way too different from his police statement:

A SECOND MAN CAME OUT
of the doorway of the public-house a few doors off, and shouting out some sort of warning to the man who was with the woman, rushed forward as if to attack the intruder. The Hungarian states positively that he saw a knife in this second man's hand, but he waited to see no more. He fled incontinently, to his new lodgings. He described

-even police had doubts: Oct 2 STAR:
In the matter of the Hungarian who said he saw a struggle between a man and a woman in the passage where the Stride body was afterwards found, the Leman-street police have reason to doubt the truth of the story.

-----------------------

Coroners act 1887:

"It shall be the duty of the coroner in case of murder or manslaughter to put into writing the statement on oath of those who know the facts and circumstance of the case,or so much of such statement as is material,and any such deposition shall be signed by the witness and also by the coroner."

It would be "amateur hour" if Baxter did not include a witness who saw an assault on the victim minutes before the murder.The suggestion is silly.The inquest would be way too incomplete. Schwartz had 2 stories,in a barren/quiet street,he was guessing.

[Herlock Sholmes]

His Oct 1 statement to the STAR was way too different from his police statement:

A SECOND MAN CAME OUT
of the doorway of the public-house a few doors off, and shouting out some sort of warning to the man who was with the woman, rushed forward as if to attack the intruder. The Hungarian states positively that he saw a knife in this second man's hand, but he waited to see no more. He fled incontinently, to his new lodgings. He described

-even police had doubts: Oct 2 STAR:
In the matter of the Hungarian who said he saw a struggle between a man and a woman in the passage where the Stride body was afterwards found, the Leman-street police have reason to doubt the truth of the story.

-----------------------

Coroners act 1887:

"It shall be the duty of the coroner in case of murder or manslaughter to put into writing the statement on oath of those who know the facts and circumstance of the case,or so much of such statement as is material,and any such deposition shall be signed by the witness and also by the coroner."

It would be "amateur hour" if Baxter did not include a witness who saw an assault on the victim minutes before the murder.The suggestion is silly.The inquest would be way too incomplete. Schwartz had 2 stories,in a barren/quiet street,he was guessing.

But the fact is that he didn’t appear at the Inquest and the Police did put his description of BS Man on the front page of the Police Gazette 18 days after that Star report about Leman Street Police. His evidence was also being mentioned as important into November by very senior police officers. If the police didn’t place and faith in his evidence it’s makes no sense that they would use it and even act on it.

Might not the Oct 2nd Star report have been the result of a reporter speaking to one officer who had doubts and who may have given the impression that his was a generally held view?

[Sunny Delight]

Is there any possibility of Schwartz evidence being suppressed by Police with the coroners blessing? Or alternatively is there a possibility of Schwartz giving his evidence 'behind closed doors' so to speak? Maybe the whole 'Lipski' anti-semitic slur was deemed inappropriate to be given full press coverage?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Is there any possibility of Schwartz evidence being suppressed by Police with the coroners blessing? Or alternatively is there a possibility of Schwartz giving his evidence 'behind closed doors' so to speak? Maybe the whole 'Lipski' anti-semitic slur was deemed inappropriate to be given full press coverage?

I’m insure about the possibility of your first suggestion Sunny but I think that the ‘behind closed doors’ suggestion was shown not to have been possible by Wickerman as there would still have been record of him giving his evidence somewhere.

[Michael W Richards]

"I was standing outside the Beehive Public- house, at the corner of Christian-street, with my young woman. We had left a public- house in Commercial-road at closing time, midnight, and walked quietly to the point named. We stood outside the Beehive about twenty-five minutes."

The club that closed at midnight would be no more than a 15-20 saunter for them, 25 minutes outside the Behive...that seems to me he said at the Inquest that perhaps 40-45 minutes had elapsed since they left the pub on Commercial.

Which makes 12:35 seem a little early, but not out of line..and only a few minutes difference to men who were actually standing around Stride at the time.

"I believe it was twenty-five minutes to one o'clock when I arrived in the yard."

"I thereupon proceeded down Berner-street and into Dutfield's-yard, adjoining the International Workmen's Club-house, and there saw a woman lying just inside the gate.
[Coroner] Was any one with her? - There were about fifteen people in the yard.
[Coroner] Was any one near her? - They were all standing round.

Confirming that there were men gathered at the time that was stated by many witnesses who also claimed to be among that 15 people, and demonstrates that within a few minutes of finding the body, they were still standing around inactive...making my suggestion that the men most responsible there were considering their options less egregious perhaps?

If the majority of the witnesses are essentially correct, they are corroborative as well, then Eagle lied about what he saw at 12:40, so did Lave and so did Louis. The paid occasional speaker at the club, someone living on the property in a cottage in the passageway, and the paid club steward. All 3 would suffer if the police's primary suspect was someone still in attendance more than 1 hour after the meeting ended. Someone therefore within an inner circle there. If one of them is suspected, then the club closes until the truth can be discovered. In that context, Israels statement seeks to place a very likely suspect from off the premises, and as an anti-Semite. Thereby distancing the club from a probable killer. In fact one might be sympathetic for them based on that story, the overt insult indicating the bad feelings towards local immigrant Jews.

One man though sees through the deception, because the "another murder" they had yelled was incorrect...Jack only killed Kate that night, and therefore the Jews are the men that are attempting to avoid blame.

[Herlock Sholmes]

"I was standing outside the Beehive Public- house, at the corner of Christian-street, with my young woman. We had left a public- house in Commercial-road at closing time, midnight, and walked quietly to the point named. We stood outside the Beehive about twenty-five minutes."

The club that closed at midnight would be no more than a 15-20 saunter for them, 25 minutes outside the Behive...that seems to me he said at the Inquest that perhaps 40-45 minutes had elapsed since they left the pub on Commercial.

Which makes 12:35 seem a little early, but not out of line..and only a few minutes difference to men who were actually standing around Stride at the time.

"I believe it was twenty-five minutes to one o'clock when I arrived in the yard."

"I thereupon proceeded down Berner-street and into Dutfield's-yard, adjoining the International Workmen's Club-house, and there saw a woman lying just inside the gate.
[Coroner] Was any one with her? - There were about fifteen people in the yard.
[Coroner] Was any one near her? - They were all standing round.

Confirming that there were men gathered at the time that was stated by many witnesses who also claimed to be among that 15 people, and demonstrates that within a few minutes of finding the body, they were still standing around inactive...making my suggestion that the men most responsible there were considering their options less egregious perhaps?

If the majority of the witnesses are essentially correct, they are corroborative as well, then Eagle lied about what he saw at 12:40, so did Lave and so did Louis. The paid occasional speaker at the club, someone living on the property in a cottage in the passageway, and the paid club steward. All 3 would suffer if the police's primary suspect was someone still in attendance more than 1 hour after the meeting ended. Someone therefore within an inner circle there. If one of them is suspected, then the club closes until the truth can be discovered. In that context, Israels statement seeks to place a very likely suspect from off the premises, and as an anti-Semite. Thereby distancing the club from a probable killer. In fact one might be sympathetic for them based on that story, the overt insult indicating the bad feelings towards local immigrant Jews.

One man though sees through the deception, because the "another murder" they had yelled was incorrect...Jack only killed Kate that night, and therefore the Jews are the men that are attempting to avoid blame.

But of the 5 pieces of information that Spooner offered you are still ignoring the ones that don’t add up to an earlier time which firstly outnumber the one that does and secondly are confirmed by other people/actions. Such as seeing Diemschutz and Kozebrodski at just after 1.00. Such as saying that he’d arrived at the yard 5 minutes before Lamb. Such as meeting the guy who said that he’d been alerted by the police whistle which could only have been Lamb. So these points should carry more weight that an estimation that leaves us with unknowns. Did he leave the pub at exactly 12.00 or was it 12.05? How long did the stroll actually take? How did he know that they talked for 25 minutes when he didn’t have a watch? So it’s not entirely inconceivable that it might have been - left pub at 12.05, then 20 minutes stroll takes him to 12.30, then he chats to the woman for 30 minutes rather than 25 which takes him to 1.00. These are not massive leaps of faith they are minor differences easily possible for someone without a watch which would take us to a time that matches up with the other points. So the weight of evidence is overwhelmingly and I really mean overwhelmingly in favour of a time of around 1.00.

To say that Eagle lied is stating opinion as fact as there is no evidence that he did. There’s not even a hint. Lave may have lied because it’s impossible to believe that he was in an empty yard at 1.10. Of course there’s also not a smidgeon of evidence that Diemschutz lied. Eagle, Gilleman, Spooner, Hoschberg all confirm a discovery time of around 1.00 when considered using a balance assessment rather than leaping on any incorrect estimations. Fanny Mortimer also confirms this by hearing Louis’ horse and cart. It’s fairly obvious stuff if you don’t start from a point where there had to have been a cover up and so require the evidence to back this up when it clearly doesn’t.

And during the ‘Autumn Of Terror’ when the murders were what everyone was talking about was there really any chance of a prostitute with her throat cut not being considered as a part of this series (whether rightly or wrongly?) And so would it have been even remotely likely that the police might have punished the club for the ripper striking inside its gates? Could they really have gotten away with this? As I said before, at a time when Warren was so concerned about anti-Jewish feeling that he had a badly spelt grafitto erased? It’s not even remotely likely and it’s therefore not likely that the club members first thoughts on finding a body would have been in that direction. And then we are being asked to believe that within the space of less than 30 minutes they worried about the club being closed and came up with a plan which included finding someone to pretend that he saw Stride? Then they didn’t tell the few remaining members the story? It makes no sense.

Also, if they came up with the Schwartz plan why didn’t they find someone who could confirm it? A man walking in the opposite direction say who also saw the incident and Schwartz?

It just doesn’t hold water.

[Sunny Delight]

I’m insure about the possibility of your first suggestion Sunny but I think that the ‘behind closed doors’ suggestion was shown not to have been possible by Wickerman as there would still have been record of him giving his evidence somewhere.

Thanks Herlock. Didn't Swanson say Schwartz had appeared in an internal memo? Maybe the behind closed doors document has been lost? In saying that I have enormous respect for Wickerman so I am willing to take his word for it. I suppose the first suggestion is one we will be unable to prove so it does leave the possibility Schwartz did attend.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Sunny
dont forget the peaked cap!
Now if Schwartz had mentioned a salt and pepper jacket, ....!!!

oh the many ifs... if only we had a little more information

Cheers
Ichabod Crane

bingo ichabod. the peaked cap pretty much clears up alot of the sub mysteries on the night of the double event. marshall, smith, schwartz and lawende all decribe a suspect with a peaked cap. even more, there was an anon sighing of a peaked cap man in church street in between time of dutfield and mitre square attacks who was acting suspicious...trying to hide his face, wiping his hands. the ripper was wearing a peaked cap that night.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Thanks Herlock. Didn't Swanson say Schwartz had appeared in an internal memo? Maybe the behind closed doors document has been lost? In saying that I have enormous respect for Wickerman so I am willing to take his word for it. I suppose the first suggestion is one we will be unable to prove so it does leave the possibility Schwartz did attend.

Anderson mentioned it but it’s certain that he was mistaken so I think we’re as certain as we can be that Schwartz didn’t attend but we have no way of knowing the reason for this. All we can say though is that it can’t have been because the police had no faith in Schwartz evidence as has been suggested or why would they have put his description of BS Man on the front cover of the Police Gazette 3 weeks after the murder? So we’re left to speculate. Maybe Schwartz feared for his safety and so went into hiding so that he couldn’t appear at the Inquest? Maybe he asked to be excused as he feared for his life and the Coroner agreed (weighing up the little he could have contributed to how and when Stride was murdered?)

[Michael W Richards]

It just doesn’t hold water.

I can only offer ideas and hypothesis Herlock, I have no hidden evidence or superior knowledge...but what I propose is within the known data, its a consensus of the majority of witnesses and even the Arbeter Fraint published later that month cited a timing of around 12:45 for the discovery event. Your estimate of what constitutes watertight may be too constricting...it doesnt have to be perfect, it does have to work within some cornerstone foundations. Human nature is one factor I use, and in this case, I can see sweat and concern on some faces, not alarm and concern for the victims life. Men standing around when Spooner comes in, men standing around with Issac K and Heschbergs statements...including the second hand reference to another member who confirms the aforementioned.

Maye stop thinking about a storyline in terms of leaks and use common sense, rationality and reason.

[Losmandris]

Is it possible to place Schwartz, BS man and pipe man and stride on this picture or is it taken from the wrong direction?

Tristan

[Herlock Sholmes]

I can only offer ideas and hypothesis Herlock, I have no hidden evidence or superior knowledge...but what I propose is within the known data, its a consensus of the majority of witnesses and even the Arbeter Fraint published later that month cited a timing of around 12:45 for the discovery event. Your estimate of what constitutes watertight may be too constricting...it doesnt have to be perfect, it does have to work within some cornerstone foundations. Human nature is one factor I use, and in this case, I can see sweat and concern on some faces, not alarm and concern for the victims life. Men standing around when Spooner comes in, men standing around with Issac K and Heschbergs statements...including the second hand reference to another member who confirms the aforementioned.

Maye stop thinking about a storyline in terms of leaks and use common sense, rationality and reason.

But common sense, rationality and reason tells us that Spooner and Hoschberg got to the yard after 1.00. Rationality tells us that Gilleman informed Eagle about the body at 1.00. Witnesses making estimates on timings can be wrong especially if they don’t have direct access to a clock or a watch so when these estimations are made we have to look at a wider picture for anything that might either refute or confirm. It’s especially true of Spooner because as well as estimating 12.35 everything else he said points to times around 1.00 which have to outweighs the earlier time. And so the times that you’re relying on are beyond all reasonable doubt incorrect.

As I’ve said before, Stride might not have been a ripper victim. None of us can be 100% certain. It’s also not impossible that the killer sought refuge in the club or was a club member. It’s also not impossible that a few members became aware of this and decided to keep it quiet. But coming up with a reason for a cover up (a scenario) isn’t enough to justify one. The evidence points away from it.