Was Israel Schwartz a form of Patsy

[JeffHamm]

And in context it was an insult that was hurled at Jews locally. The only reason its in Israel's statement, imo, is to try and establish a gentile assailant.

Except that in Schwartz's original telling he indicated that Lipski was shouted not at him but to a possible accomplice (Pipeman). It was Abberline who, during questioning of Schwart, established that it might have been shouted at Schwartz himself. In otherwords, Schwartz's first telling of the events implicate a Jewish accomplice at least. This is hardly something one would concoct in order to deflect attention away from the Jewish community.

- Jeff

[Michael W Richards]

Except that in Schwartz's original telling he indicated that Lipski was shouted not at him but to a possible accomplice (Pipeman). It was Abberline who, during questioning of Schwart, established that it might have been shouted at Schwartz himself. In otherwords, Schwartz's first telling of the events implicate a Jewish accomplice at least. This is hardly something one would concoct in order to deflect attention away from the Jewish community.

- Jeff

Even if it was directed at Pipeman its still intended to be anti Jew sentiments, and if that's the case it could have been BSM to Pipeman saying "Look we have a Jew here". There has never been any reason to suggest that they were not working in tandem.

[Michael W Richards]

[I]

Never say never, but based on the information we have, it's very unlikely Schwartz was connected to the club.

He needn't be anything more than Woolf's friend, and perhaps an attendee that night...which would explain what the hell he is doing "seeing if his wife needs help moving", (something she had all day to do, and likely involved very few belongings), at 12:45 outside a predominantly Jewish club that had a large meeting that night until 11:00-11:30.

Personally I believe both possibilities are the truth here.

[Darryl Kenyon]

"I questioned Israel Schwartz very closely at the time he made the statement as to whom the man addressed when he called Lipski, but he was unable to say." Abberline's report. (My emphasis)

Plus, the margin note in Swanson's report says, " The use of "Lipski" increases my belief that the murder was a Jew."

As we all know, Abberline also wrote, "Schwartz has a strong Jewish appearance", which implies an Orthodox Jew. Given the club's virulent anti religious stand, it is extremely unlikely an Orthodox Jew would defend the club.

If Schwartz was a club mole, he did a lousy job all round.

Woolf Wess claimed a club member chased someone (Schwartz?) down the street that night, which blows away any club albi as far as Schwartz was concerned. It also kills the unsupported notion that Wess translated for Schwartz to the police.

Never say never, but based on the information we have, it's very unlikely Schwartz was connected to the club.

A few points here, Both Anderson and Warren said in official letters that they thought that Lipski was directed at Schwartz.

If a club member did chase Schwartz down the street that night then he is obviously BSM, so why did he not come forward and clear his name?

Schwartz is Yiddish for dark or black, he may have changed his surname to reflect his appearance [ and a lot of Jews did change their surname, Lipski for one]. Plus it was said that Schwartz had a theatrical appearance , nothing about looking like an orthodox Jew.

And from The Star - "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."
The Hungarian states positively. Seems to me he was questioned closely by the Star as well. Yet this differential is generally put down to a loss in translation. So if that is the case why not the same with Abberline? But to me it seems more like someone telling a tale who keeps getting his facts wrong or mixed up because it ain't true.
Regards Darryl

[Darryl Kenyon]

It's not like it was an if A then B type of arrangement meaning all they had to do was concoct a conspiracy and the club was off the hook. A conspiracy could easily backfire with very serious consequences for club members. And ask yourself this -- if you were a club member engaging in a conspiracy would you want an immigrant new to the country with a wife and new child who didn't speak English to be your point man?

c.d.

Well someone who couldn't speak English would be harder to question very closely, and how do we know an interpreter wouldn't make a slip in translation, he could easily claim that. And what is Schwartz actually claiming anyhow? He saw a man and a woman having an altercation outside the club in an area where drunken violence was an every day part of life. If push came to shove he could say he was mistaken and he wasn't sure that it was Liz. An immigrant Jew new to the area, Few friends possibly little work with a family moving into a new home just round the corner from Berner St. Sounds to me he would be the perfect person to coerce into embellishing a story which may have happened earlier in the evening or the night before or not at all. Packer was still spouting his nonsense weeks after being interviewed by the Police and Swanson said in a letter that Packers statements were valueless, yet it didn't stop him carrying on even after being interviewed, no threat of obstructing justice there.
Regards Darryl

[Darryl Kenyon]

If you do believe Schwartz then James Brown must have just missed all the commotion as he was stood on the corner of Berner/Fairclough streets for three or four minutes as he saw no BSM nor Schwartz running down the street the same with Fanny Mortimer as she was back and forth from her door and Leon Goldstien as he passed down the street neither did anyone see or hear anything from the chandlers shop or the beer house which were both open at the time and not far away. Of course this doesn't mean it didn't happen but it does leave the time extremely tight with no corroborating evidence. Nor is there any concrete evidence that Schwartz was called to the inquest even though it was adjourned and dragged on and the coroner saying - in summing up, said the jury would probably agree with him that it would be unreasonable to adjourn this inquiry again on the chance of something further being ascertained to elucidate the mysterious case on which they had devoted so much time. Funny thing for him to say when on the face of it, the most important witness of all hadn't given his account.
Regards Darryl

[JeffHamm]

Even if it was directed at Pipeman its still intended to be anti Jew sentiments, and if that's the case it could have been BSM to Pipeman saying "Look we have a Jew here". There has never been any reason to suggest that they were not working in tandem.

Except that's not what Schwartz initially reported to the police. If Schwartz was directed by the club to divert suspicion away from the Jewish population their "story" isn't going to be one where Schwartz starts off by saying JtR's accomplice was named Lipski. Home Office took that very seriously, and was sending letters to the police asking what efforts they had to track down anyone by the name of Lipski, and the police did search for people of that name. Their cover story, as originally told, directed suspicion towards a Jewish killer, not away from one. It was only through Abberline's questioning of Schwartz that he was able to determine that Schwartz was not positive that the shout of Lipski was directed at pipeman, and because Abberline knew it was used as a derogatory name towards Jews, that the police changed their minds. They still looked for Lipski's, just to make sure, but Schwartz's orginal testimony implicates a Jewish offender at least as an accomplice. It's exactly the opposite of the "club cover up" goal.

- Jeff

[c.d.]

Well someone who couldn't speak English would be harder to question very closely, and how do we know an interpreter wouldn't make a slip in translation, he could easily claim that. And what is Schwartz actually claiming anyhow? He saw a man and a woman having an altercation outside the club in an area where drunken violence was an every day part of life. If push came to shove he could say he was mistaken and he wasn't sure that it was Liz. An immigrant Jew new to the area, Few friends possibly little work with a family moving into a new home just round the corner from Berner St. Sounds to me he would be the perfect person to coerce into embellishing a story which may have happened earlier in the evening or the night before or not at all. Packer was still spouting his nonsense weeks after being interviewed by the Police and Swanson said in a letter that Packers statements were valueless, yet it didn't stop him carrying on even after being interviewed, no threat of obstructing justice there.
Regards Darryl

Hello Darryl,

Yes, good points. But if the police doubted his story I can see them saying "well, Israel you are fairly new to this country so let us explain what can happen to someone who lies to the police in a murder investigation." Club loyalty versus the consequences for a wife and new daughter? Tough call.

c.d.

[Abby Normal]

"I questioned Israel Schwartz very closely at the time he made the statement as to whom the man addressed when he called Lipski, but he was unable to say." Abberline's report. (My emphasis)

Plus, the margin note in Swanson's report says, " The use of "Lipski" increases my belief that the murder was a Jew."

As we all know, Abberline also wrote, "Schwartz has a strong Jewish appearance", which implies an Orthodox Jew. Given the club's virulent anti religious stand, it is extremely unlikely an Orthodox Jew would defend the club.

If Schwartz was a club mole, he did a lousy job all round.

Woolf Wess claimed a club member chased someone (Schwartz?) down the street that night, which blows away any club albi as far as Schwartz was concerned. It also kills the unsupported notion that Wess translated for Schwartz to the police.

Never say never, but based on the information we have, it's very unlikely Schwartz was connected to the club.

great points DR. and totally agree.

[Abby Normal]

Except that's not what Schwartz initially reported to the police. If Schwartz was directed by the club to divert suspicion away from the Jewish population their "story" isn't going to be one where Schwartz starts off by saying JtR's accomplice was named Lipski. Home Office took that very seriously, and was sending letters to the police asking what efforts they had to track down anyone by the name of Lipski, and the police did search for people of that name. Their cover story, as originally told, directed suspicion towards a Jewish killer, not away from one. It was only through Abberline's questioning of Schwartz that he was able to determine that Schwartz was not positive that the shout of Lipski was directed at pipeman, and because Abberline knew it was used as a derogatory name towards Jews, that the police changed their minds. They still looked for Lipski's, just to make sure, but Schwartz's orginal testimony implicates a Jewish offender at least as an accomplice. It's exactly the opposite of the "club cover up" goal.

- Jeff

bingo

[Abby Normal]

Hi DK
I noticed you haven't responded to my post #18. not sure if you saw it or not. : )

[drstrange169]

>>He needn't be anything more than Woolf's friend, and perhaps an attendee that night...which would explain what the hell he is doing "seeing if his wife needs help moving", (something she had all day to do, and likely involved very few belongings)...<<

The "wifemoving" is only in The Star account and therefore needs to be approached with extreme caution.


>> ... at 12:45 outside a predominantly Jewish club that had a large meeting that night until 11:00-11:30.<<


There were no less than two synagogues at the end of Berner St which were celebrating a Jewish holy period. No reason he couldn't have been coming from them. Simple answer is, we don't know where he'd been, but the police would have asked.

[drstrange169]

>>A few points here, Both Anderson and Warren said in official letters that they thought that Lipski was directed at Schwartz.<<

On this matter, Anderson and Warren's opinion carries no more weight than yours, mine, or anyone else's. They simply read Swanson's report like the rest of us.
The only opinion that counts is Schwartz's and he specifically said he didn't know.

In fact, given that he apparently didn't speak English, it may not even have been "Lipski" he heard at all. It has been speculated that the ejaculation was addressed to Mrs Stride with terms like "Lizzie" or Let's see" or "Let be" etc.


>>If a club member did chase Schwartz down the street that night then he is obviously BSM, so why did he not come forward and clear his name?<<

The reports we have indicate they probably did.


>>Schwartz is Yiddish for dark or black, he may have changed his surname to reflect his appearance ...<<

Without going into the details of prejudice within the Jewish community against dark skinned Jews (of Arabic/ Middle eastern descent), suffice to say, I personally doubt it.



>> Plus it was said that Schwartz had a theatrical appearance , nothing about looking like an orthodox Jew.<<

Actors don't wear a uniform, so there is nothing to distinguish their profession visually. Ergo, the reporter must have meant 'theatrical appearance" in the sense of unusual or flamboyant, If you see pictures of Orthodox Jewish men of the period, you quickly understand that their appearance can quite accurately be described as "theatrical". So too could a cross-dresser etc.



>>And from The Star - "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."<<

The Star interview needs to approached with extreme caution by researchers.



>>Yet this differential is generally put down to a loss in translation. So if that is the case why not the same with Abberline? <<

Because The Star specifically points out that it's translation was very poor. Also, unlike Abberline, The Star had a vested financial interest in pimping up the story.

[drstrange169]

>>If you do believe Schwartz then James Brown must have just missed all the commotion as he was stood on the corner of Berner/Fairclough streets for three or four minutes as he saw no BSM nor Schwartz running down the street the same with Fanny Mortimer as she was back and forth from her door and Leon Goldstien as he passed down the street neither did anyone see or hear anything from the chandlers shop or the beer house which were both open at the time and not far away.<<

To quote Abby, "Bingo!"

[Darryl Kenyon]

>>A few points here, Both Anderson and Warren said in official letters that they thought that Lipski was directed at Schwartz.<<

On this matter, Anderson and Warren's opinion carries no more weight than yours, mine, or anyone else's. They simply read Swanson's report like the rest of us.
The only opinion that counts is Schwartz's and he specifically said he didn't know.

In fact, given that he apparently didn't speak English, it may not even have been "Lipski" he heard at all. It has been speculated that the ejaculation was addressed to Mrs Stride with terms like "Lizzie" or Let's see" or "Let be" etc.


>>If a club member did chase Schwartz down the street that night then he is obviously BSM, so why did he not come forward and clear his name?<<

The reports we have indicate they probably did.


>>Schwartz is Yiddish for dark or black, he may have changed his surname to reflect his appearance ...<<

Without going into the details of prejudice within the Jewish community against dark skinned Jews (of Arabic/ Middle eastern descent), suffice to say, I personally doubt it.



>> Plus it was said that Schwartz had a theatrical appearance , nothing about looking like an orthodox Jew.<<

Actors don't wear a uniform, so there is nothing to distinguish their profession visually. Ergo, the reporter must have meant 'theatrical appearance" in the sense of unusual or flamboyant, If you see pictures of Orthodox Jewish men of the period, you quickly understand that their appearance can quite accurately be described as "theatrical". So too could a cross-dresser etc.



>>And from The Star - "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."<<

The Star interview needs to approached with extreme caution by researchers.



>>Yet this differential is generally put down to a loss in translation. So if that is the case why not the same with Abberline? <<

Because The Star specifically points out that it's translation was very poor. Also, unlike Abberline, The Star had a vested financial interest in pimping up the story.

On this matter, Anderson and Warren's opinion carries no more weight than yours, mine, or anyone else's. Really?

The reports we have indicate they probably did. So if these reports are correct and Schwartz was chased off by a member of the club then he is obviously bsm which means the club knows who he is but declines to say. A far bigger conspiracy than what i am suggesting.

If you see pictures of Orthodox Jewish men of the period, you quickly understand that their appearance can quite accurately be described as "theatrical". But no reports [what i am aware of], suggest he was an orthodox Jew

The Star had a vested financial interest in pimping up the story. So how come they specifically say in the same article The truth of the man's statement is not wholly accepted [Schwartz] Doesn't sound much to me like they are pushing a sensational scoop.
There are big differences in the Star and Abberline's accounts, all that is really lost in translation and within one day ?
If you believe some or all of it [like pipeman carrying a knife], could be, then why not believe that Schwartz didn't fully understand the question [through a translator], when asked about who the cry of lipski was aimed at.
The Star would have given anything to have a scoop like they had if it was true, so they would have questioned Schwartz very closely, yet they specifically doubt his story.
Regards Darryl