Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Was Israel Schwartz a form of Patsy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Was Israel Schwartz a form of Patsy

    I wanted to move this on from the Israel Schwartz thread so..
    This has been suggested before but I do wonder if Schwartz was asked to say what he did. A man who spoke very little English, possibly not long in the country [was it 1887 he arrived?], possibly trying to make a living among his fellow Jews. After all what did he say he saw? A man quarrelling with Liz, no murder nothing, very hard to disprove. But it does put a person of interest in the Police's minds. Not only that but the cry of Lipski would also suggest that the murderer was a gentile. We know the ill feeling against the Jews by the rubbing off of the Goulston st graffiti, certainly it was thought that the mention of the word Jews could cause a riot. Not only that but up until recently the prime suspect was a Jew going by the name of Leather apron. A victim found in the yard of a club occupied by boisterous radical Jews. You can see why feelings could run high.
    This is an extract from the Polish Yiddel paper from 1884 - The law makes thus no distinction between a Jew
    and others. But what about the people? Do the people think he is equal to all others? Do the people
    say, as well, that a Jew is just as good as a Christian? Do the people like the Jews? We must say:
    No!
    Try it: go out on a Saturday afternoon in Whitechapel, stand on a corner where some English workers
    are hanging out, pipe in mouth, and every time a Jew walks by, you will hear the friendly call, "bl****
    Jew!" Is that a sign of brotherly love?
    In Brick Lane, at the same time, one can often see Jewish women dressed up nicely, with gold chains
    and rings, sitting comfortably in the street. Observe the eyes of the English passers-by as they look at
    them, and you will see a half dozen pogroms in those glances.
    When you are looking for a house to rent, you will meet many landlords who ask you if you are a Jew;
    and if you say yes, they will simply not rent out their house to you. By what right do they do that?
    When you want to insure your house, and the agent says: "our insurance agency does not accept
    Jewish houses"—what do you call that?
    When the Standard talks of "Jews—and Christian gentlemen"; when the Pall Mall Gazette chooses
    the words "this is a swindle fit for a Jew's mind"; ...
    when the referee is angry because Jews have good horses and ride
    them proudly—in short, when one sees and hears all that, what can one think about the equality of
    Jews in the eyes of the people?
    Christians burn down their own houses sometimes, too, but no-one says they
    will not insure Christian houses; they will just not insure that person's house who is suspected of the
    arson. Workers are jealous of rich Christians, too, but they are jealous of the rich man, not the
    Christian. When a Jew swindles, then the Jews are blamed, as a group.
    Jews, open your eyes before it is too late! A pogrom in Brick Lane, or in the side-streets of
    Commercial Road, could be bloodier and more terrible than a pogrom in Balta...


    Could Schwartz have been used as a form of Patsy? Well I feel if Jack was strongly suspected of being someone from the club I believe that some of the members would feel their homes, families and livelihoods would have been at risk.
    Regards Darryl

  • #2
    Like John Pizer, I've thought that Schwartz may have been a police plant.

    Comment


    • #3



      Yeah man.
      Had the problem in the 60s.
      Real bummer.
      Last edited by DJA; 10-17-2019, 10:15 PM.
      My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

      Comment


      • #4
        Calling Mr. Occam....calling Mr. Occam....Could Schwartz have been a patsy? Sure. Is there any real reason to think so other than for the sake of a good old conspiracy theory? No.

        I think he simply witnessed a street hassle and not a murder.

        c.d.

        Comment


        • #5
          Calling Dr. Sutton, calling Dr. Sutton....

          There may be a few so-called "conspiracy" aspects in this case that are actually quite possible. But for the most part it was simple circumstances that dictated police follow-up procedures...blah...blah...blah

          Comment


          • #6
            A fair enough question, certainly worth thinking about the repercussions if the murder was suspiciously linked to the club.
            If Schwartz was used to deflect suspicion away from the Jewish population by fabricating a story ( insert debate about Fanny in the doorway here), why rely on the obscure reference to Lipsky? Not exactly a sure way to divert the potentially hostile gentiles. If I recall rightly it was suggested at the time that the shout of Lipsky indicated a Jewish attacker.
            Why not have Schwartz come forward saying something like " the man spoke to me in English, although I didn't understand him" or something to that effect?
            All in all, I'm not of the opinion that Schwartz was involved in any conspiracy, but he is an interesting character and so I welcome the debate.
            Your evening of swing has been cancelled.

            Comment


            • #7
              I think when we look at the word Lipski as a racial slur the word Yid comes to mind. The word is Jewish for Jew particularly among the Ashkenazi Jews, so will be used by the Jewish population and possibly one Jew throwing it as an insult to another Jew he dislikes. But if somebody shouted Yid in the street to someone of strong Jewish appearance most people would, I believe surmise that it was a Gentile shouting abuse against a Jew.
              Regards Darryl

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
                I think when we look at the word Lipski as a racial slur the word Yid comes to mind. The word is Jewish for Jew particularly among the Ashkenazi Jews, so will be used by the Jewish population and possibly one Jew throwing it as an insult to another Jew he dislikes. But if somebody shouted Yid in the street to someone of strong Jewish appearance most people would, I believe surmise that it was a Gentile shouting abuse against a Jew.
                Regards Darryl
                True enough. Except that Schwartz never actually said the shout was directed at him. He thought it was a warning shout to an accomplice. Which, far from diverting suspicion away from jews, would seem to implicate them.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

                  True enough. Except that Schwartz never actually said the shout was directed at him. He thought it was a warning shout to an accomplice. Which, far from diverting suspicion away from Jews, would seem to implicate them.
                  That is fair comment Joshua but was there some confusion in Schwartz testimony? For in a draft letter dated 5 Nov Anderson states that the opinion arrived at the department was "Lipski" was not addressed to the supposed accomplice but to Schwartz himself, and Warren says something similar in another letter to the Home Office. Also Schwartz in Swanson's report he says that Schwartz ran because he thought the other man was following him [no mention of running after him], and he had a clay pipe in his hand. But in another report by Abberline he says that the second man ran in the same direction as himself but he couldn't tell if he was following him or not. And in the Star report Schwartz says he states positively there was a knife in the second man's hand [no clay pipe], and that it was him who shouted Lipski to Liz's assaulter.
                  One of two things springs to my mind. Some of the proper full story of what Schwartz meant to say was lost in translations or Schwartz couldn't get his story straight [fabrication or otherwise], and kept changing it.
                  Regards Darryl

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
                    I wanted to move this on from the Israel Schwartz thread so..
                    This has been suggested before but I do wonder if Schwartz was asked to say what he did. A man who spoke very little English, possibly not long in the country [was it 1887 he arrived?], possibly trying to make a living among his fellow Jews. After all what did he say he saw? A man quarrelling with Liz, no murder nothing, very hard to disprove. But it does put a person of interest in the Police's minds. Not only that but the cry of Lipski would also suggest that the murderer was a gentile. We know the ill feeling against the Jews by the rubbing off of the Goulston st graffiti, certainly it was thought that the mention of the word Jews could cause a riot. Not only that but up until recently the prime suspect was a Jew going by the name of Leather apron. A victim found in the yard of a club occupied by boisterous radical Jews. You can see why feelings could run high.
                    This is an extract from the Polish Yiddel paper from 1884 - The law makes thus no distinction between a Jew
                    and others. But what about the people? Do the people think he is equal to all others? Do the people
                    say, as well, that a Jew is just as good as a Christian? Do the people like the Jews? We must say:
                    No!
                    Try it: go out on a Saturday afternoon in Whitechapel, stand on a corner where some English workers
                    are hanging out, pipe in mouth, and every time a Jew walks by, you will hear the friendly call, "bl****
                    Jew!" Is that a sign of brotherly love?
                    In Brick Lane, at the same time, one can often see Jewish women dressed up nicely, with gold chains
                    and rings, sitting comfortably in the street. Observe the eyes of the English passers-by as they look at
                    them, and you will see a half dozen pogroms in those glances.
                    When you are looking for a house to rent, you will meet many landlords who ask you if you are a Jew;
                    and if you say yes, they will simply not rent out their house to you. By what right do they do that?
                    When you want to insure your house, and the agent says: "our insurance agency does not accept
                    Jewish houses"—what do you call that?
                    When the Standard talks of "Jews—and Christian gentlemen"; when the Pall Mall Gazette chooses
                    the words "this is a swindle fit for a Jew's mind"; ...
                    when the referee is angry because Jews have good horses and ride
                    them proudly—in short, when one sees and hears all that, what can one think about the equality of
                    Jews in the eyes of the people?
                    Christians burn down their own houses sometimes, too, but no-one says they
                    will not insure Christian houses; they will just not insure that person's house who is suspected of the
                    arson. Workers are jealous of rich Christians, too, but they are jealous of the rich man, not the
                    Christian. When a Jew swindles, then the Jews are blamed, as a group.
                    Jews, open your eyes before it is too late! A pogrom in Brick Lane, or in the side-streets of
                    Commercial Road, could be bloodier and more terrible than a pogrom in Balta...


                    Could Schwartz have been used as a form of Patsy? Well I feel if Jack was strongly suspected of being someone from the club I believe that some of the members would feel their homes, families and livelihoods would have been at risk.
                    Regards Darryl
                    No I don't think so. I think the article you quote supports this in that Schwartz was subject to a bit of random antisemitism. I believe that as someone new to the area he got a bit freaked out i.e. staring a bit too much at a random act of casual street violence i.e. a prostitute hassling a potential client and got called out for it. It just so happens that that person was later to be murdered that he gets involved. I think the police, at a later date realised that this incident was not relevant to the murder (possibly speaking to/eliminating pipe man and BS man from their enquiries. Evidence now lost) and dismissed him, hence why he doesn't really feature later in the investigation.

                    Tristan

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      It appears that Israel Schwartz's statement was translated by Woolf Wess, who also apparently translated for Leon Goldstein. Wess surely had something at stake in this, dependent on the police's perceptions about what happened there, as did Louis and Morris. And I believe one of our star researchers here Debra discovered that Israel and Woolf were acquainted.

                      Israel Schwartz offered an eyewitness sighting of an alleged altercation involving a soon to be murder victim mere feet from where that happens, a sighting that includes what seems to be an anti-Semitic gentile assailant and another witness, none of which has any corroboration from any source, nor is included in any shape or form in any existing record of Inquest transcripts. Its inconceivable that if he was believed he would not have had his story entered in those records.
                      Michael Richards

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
                        I wanted to move this on from the Israel Schwartz thread so..
                        This has been suggested before but I do wonder if Schwartz was asked to say what he did. A man who spoke very little English, possibly not long in the country [was it 1887 he arrived?], possibly trying to make a living among his fellow Jews. After all what did he say he saw? A man quarrelling with Liz, no murder nothing, very hard to disprove. But it does put a person of interest in the Police's minds. Not only that but the cry of Lipski would also suggest that the murderer was a gentile. We know the ill feeling against the Jews by the rubbing off of the Goulston st graffiti, certainly it was thought that the mention of the word Jews could cause a riot. Not only that but up until recently the prime suspect was a Jew going by the name of Leather apron. A victim found in the yard of a club occupied by boisterous radical Jews. You can see why feelings could run high.
                        This is an extract from the Polish Yiddel paper from 1884 - The law makes thus no distinction between a Jew
                        and others. But what about the people? Do the people think he is equal to all others? Do the people
                        say, as well, that a Jew is just as good as a Christian? Do the people like the Jews? We must say:
                        No!
                        Try it: go out on a Saturday afternoon in Whitechapel, stand on a corner where some English workers
                        are hanging out, pipe in mouth, and every time a Jew walks by, you will hear the friendly call, "bl****
                        Jew!" Is that a sign of brotherly love?
                        In Brick Lane, at the same time, one can often see Jewish women dressed up nicely, with gold chains
                        and rings, sitting comfortably in the street. Observe the eyes of the English passers-by as they look at
                        them, and you will see a half dozen pogroms in those glances.
                        When you are looking for a house to rent, you will meet many landlords who ask you if you are a Jew;
                        and if you say yes, they will simply not rent out their house to you. By what right do they do that?
                        When you want to insure your house, and the agent says: "our insurance agency does not accept
                        Jewish houses"—what do you call that?
                        When the Standard talks of "Jews—and Christian gentlemen"; when the Pall Mall Gazette chooses
                        the words "this is a swindle fit for a Jew's mind"; ...
                        when the referee is angry because Jews have good horses and ride
                        them proudly—in short, when one sees and hears all that, what can one think about the equality of
                        Jews in the eyes of the people?
                        Christians burn down their own houses sometimes, too, but no-one says they
                        will not insure Christian houses; they will just not insure that person's house who is suspected of the
                        arson. Workers are jealous of rich Christians, too, but they are jealous of the rich man, not the
                        Christian. When a Jew swindles, then the Jews are blamed, as a group.
                        Jews, open your eyes before it is too late! A pogrom in Brick Lane, or in the side-streets of
                        Commercial Road, could be bloodier and more terrible than a pogrom in Balta...


                        Could Schwartz have been used as a form of Patsy? Well I feel if Jack was strongly suspected of being someone from the club I believe that some of the members would feel their homes, families and livelihoods would have been at risk.
                        Regards Darryl
                        if jack was a member of the club and they wanted to shield the club is it really realistic they would come to this convoluted conspiracy cover up on the spot? I mean diemshitz has his cart right there-just move the body a few blocks and be done with it.
                        and besides Schwartz testimomy apparently was confusing as to who yelled what and why-surely if it was a cover up to deflect from jews/club thay would have at least got the most important part of it right, no? have the killer yell-you bloody jews and your club attracting all these whores here. how hard would that be-I just thought that up in seconds.

                        and is it really realistic that a jew-schwartz-new to the country, dosnt speak English, with a family to worry about-is going to perjure himself to police in a huge and famous murder investigation putting himself in legal jeopardy or whatever troubles come with it?

                        Not to mention he just happens to get the description of the killer, peaked cap and all, correct.

                        cmon this club conspiracy stuff is fantasy and not one iota of evidence in support of it.
                        Last edited by Abby Normal; 10-18-2019, 03:01 PM.
                        "Is all that we see or seem
                        but a dream within a dream?"

                        -Edgar Allan Poe


                        "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                        quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                        -Frederick G. Abberline

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

                          1. if jack was a member of the club and they wanted to shield the club is it really realistic they would come to this convoluted conspiracy cover up on the spot? I mean diemshitz has his cart right there-just move the body a few blocks and be done with it.

                          2. and besides Schwartz testimomy apparently was confusing as to who yelled what and why-surely if it was a cover up to deflect from jews/club thay would have at least got the most important part of it right, no? have the killer yell-you bloody jews and your club attracting all these whores here. how hard would that be-I just thought that up in seconds.

                          3. and is it really realistic that a jew-schwartz-new to the country, dosnt speak English, with a family to worry about-is going to perjure himself to police in a huge and famous murder investigation putting himself in legal jeopardy or whatever troubles come with it?

                          4. Not to mention he just happens to get the description of the killer, peaked cap and all, correct.

                          You have some erroneous beliefs.

                          1. The "conspiracy" is only convoluted if you don't understand what the perceptions of that club were. Once you do, then the reasons are clear.
                          2. BSM yelled, its clear, so your point is lost. "Lipski" was known to have derogatory meaning.
                          3. Its likely his club, and he may well have been residing in one of the passageway cottages until that day...because he is not findable in any records. Loyalty to the club and to his friend Wess would likely be an easy motivator, especially when the police wanted that club shut down.
                          4. Huh? He gets the "suspect" description correct? He creates the suspect. And im sure you based that statement on Sailor Man, who does not match Schwazrtz's.

                          The way you state your opinions like they are a given fact is fascinating, not sure if its lack of information or too much bravado.
                          Michael Richards

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post


                            You have some erroneous beliefs.

                            1. The "conspiracy" is only convoluted if you don't understand what the perceptions of that club were. Once you do, then the reasons are clear.
                            2. BSM yelled, its clear, so your point is lost. "Lipski" was known to have derogatory meaning.
                            3. Its likely his club, and he may well have been residing in one of the passageway cottages until that day...because he is not findable in any records. Loyalty to the club and to his friend Wess would likely be an easy motivator, especially when the police wanted that club shut down.
                            4. Huh? He gets the "suspect" description correct? He creates the suspect. And im sure you based that statement on Sailor Man, who does not match Schwazrtz's.

                            The way you state your opinions like they are a given fact is fascinating, not sure if its lack of information or too much bravado.
                            and here I thought Canadians were supposed to be polite
                            "Is all that we see or seem
                            but a dream within a dream?"

                            -Edgar Allan Poe


                            "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                            quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                            -Frederick G. Abberline

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

                              and here I thought Canadians were supposed to be polite
                              Its a common mistake. And often confused with na´ve.
                              Michael Richards

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X