Was Israel Schwartz a form of Patsy

[Michael W Richards]

One and the same person, Michael, as detailed in the Morning Advertiser 1 Oct;

"A member of the club named Kozebrodski, but familiarly known as Isaacs, returned with Diemshitz into the court, and the former struck a match while the latter lifted the body up."

"I was in this club last night. I came in about half-past six in the evening. About twenty minutes to one this morning Mr. Diemschitz called me out to the yard. He told me there was something in the yard, and told me to come and see what it was. When we had got outside he struck a match, and when we looked down on the ground we could see a long stream of blood. It was running down the gutter from the direction of the gate, and reached to the back door of the club. I should think there was blood in the gutter for a distance of five or six yards. I went to look for a policeman at the request of Diemschitz or some other member of the club, but I took the direction towards Grove-street and could not find one. I afterwards went into the Commercial-road along with Eagle, and found two officers. The officers did not touch the body, but sent for a doctor. A doctor came, and an inspector arrived just afterwards. While the doctor was examining the body, I noticed that she had some grapes in her right hand and some sweets in her left. I saw a little bunch of flowers stuck above her right bosom".^[1]


Or we can hear from Issac K himself Josh. The only reason it was suggested that Issac[s] was in fact Issac K is so it fits Louis's story.

[Joshua Rogan]

Im glad you said Issacs above Josh, because that's who Louis said went with him...while Issac K however said... within an hour of the murder... that Louis sent him out alone at around 12:40-45

One and the same person, Michael, as detailed in the Morning Advertiser 1 Oct;

"A member of the club named Kozebrodski, but familiarly known as Isaacs, returned with Diemshitz into the court, and the former struck a match while the latter lifted the body up."

[Michael W Richards]

I think it may stem from a report of what was actually Isaacs and Louis running along the street searching for a policeman, but being mistaken for one chasing the other.

Im glad you said Issacs above Josh, because that's who Louis said went with him...while Issac K however said... within an hour of the murder... that Louis sent him out alone at around 12:40-45. He meets up with Eagle on his way back around 1. Funny... Eagle was there at 12:40, so was Lave by their statements, and Israel was outside the gates about to witness an assault in the street with who he believes is the soon to be murder victim, with a man smoking a pipe watching, ..around 12:45, and theres Brown seeing the young couple so many think is Liz and someone...at 12:45, then theres Heschberg and Gillen, and Mr Spooner gets into the picture, all around 12:40-12:45...and of course the young couple on the street and Fanny Mortimer, neither of which saw or heard anything on the street at 12:45, but Fanny sees Leon Goldstein look into the passageway at 12:55 and walk past briskly.

The street was empty at 12:45. The passageway however was not.

[Harry D]

well apparently Abberline read into the suspect wearing a peaked cap quite well. especially since all the relevant witnesses describe a man wearing a peaked cap!

Hey Abbs,

If they saw a man with a peaked hat, they had to make note of that, whether they were commonplace or not.

yup-or simpler yet-just move her body out of the yard and be done with it. anything other than come up with some convoluted conspiracy story.
or simply tell the truth and assist the police-which they undoubtedly did.

Far too risky to move the body.

Anyway, it's quite telling that Schwartz never attended the inquest, and lost precedence to another Jewish witness (Lawende) who didn't even witness an assault, and admitted he probably wouldn't recognise the man again. Something's not stacking up.

[Joshua Rogan]

Wess's story is a vague recollection of a piece of gossip he heard, I don't think we need to delve into the logistics of it too much.

I think it may stem from a report of what was actually Isaacs and Louis running along the street searching for a policeman, but being mistaken for one chasing the other.

[drstrange169]

Hungarian orthodox Jews who were well dressed and giving the appearance of being in the theatrical line.

[drstrange169]

>> I know they have no more info than Schwartz but that does not mean they didn't have more info on Schwartz than us today.<<

Anderson didn't even know that Schwartz was not at the inquest.



>>I have trouble with the report in the Echo, to me it seems the quickest way home for Schwartz is straight down Berner St and into Ellen and home.<<

Wess's story is a vague recollection of a piece of gossip he heard, I don't think we need to delve into the logistics of it too much.


>>Maybe he had a p/t job here and wore some of that attire at the time he was interviewed , it was said he had the appearance of being in the theatrical line.<<

A few of us have looked into the theatre records, so far nobody has come up with Schwartz, however there have been a couple of good candidates who were, not surprisingly, tailors.



>>Yes, Oct 1 report could mean the prisoner but it could also mean Schwartz ... <<

No it clearly references the "prisoner".



>> but Oct 2 report definitely puts a dampener on things<<

Yes it does and that is definitely a mystery.

[drstrange169]

>> Am I the only one who thinks the term 'theatrical' was a euphemism for homosexual?<<

That's exactly what I used to think, but hunting around I couldn't find it being used as a contemporary euphemism. A more likely euphemism would have been a reference to the Aesthetic Movement rather than the theatre.

Plus it was a far less enlightened time. Homosexuality was illegal and if a newspaper could connect a homosexual ring to the ripper than that would have been great copy for The Star. Let's face it Duittists still think it's a great connection!

I don't think we can rule it out, but I consider it less likelier than I used to.

[drstrange169]

>> Lets remember that Israel said nothing directly to anyone official, he said what he said to an interpreter..who was likely Woolf, an acquaintance,..<<

Wess makes it clear in his Echo interview that he didn't go to the police with Schwartz. If he did then the police would be asking why he so blatantly lied to the Echo.

But, all this is irrelevant, the purpose of the alleged conspiracy was to spread a story. Wess had the chance to promote Scwartz's "fake" story and not only chose not to, instead actually opened up the speculation that the killer could have been a club man. One hell of a bad conspiracy tacit!

We can't rule out the notion that a club man killed Mrs Stride, but we can say that a wider conspiracy by the club did not happen, because it failed so spectacularly.

[Michael W Richards]

Perhaps you can ask Santa to explain the concept of an Argument from Ignorance.

c.d.

Why would I ask that jolly old fellow about some erroneous application of language cd. Don't bother trying to be highbrow with me.

[c.d.]

Huh? My post wasn't self explanatory enough? You don't understand how when information is not present in an official review of the facts that it cannot be considered valid information? You prefer to believe in something that doesn't exist and has no validity? Ok...excuse me, I have to take a call from Santa.

Perhaps you can ask Santa to explain the concept of an Argument from Ignorance.

c.d.

[Michael W Richards]

"The ONLY valid reasons"... Sorry, but that is the very definition of an Argument from Ignorance which is a logical fallacy.

c.d.

Huh? My post wasn't self explanatory enough? You don't understand how when information is not present in an official review of the facts that it cannot be considered valid information? You prefer to believe in something that doesn't exist and has no validity? Ok...excuse me, I have to take a call from Santa.

[c.d.]

"The ONLY valid reasons"... Sorry, but that is the very definition of an Argument from Ignorance which is a logical fallacy.

c.d.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

With blinders off the ONLY valid reasons Israels story doesn't appear in ANY form at the Inquest is because it wasn't deemed important, or it was discovered to be false. The story details, if believed, make that a virtual impossibility. It would have been relevant, if not even a, or the, critical piece of the puzzle. But its not there, in any form.

Therefore using Israel Schwartz's events to re-construct the events of that night is a huge waste of time.

I'm inclined to agree on that point. More than most Schwartz seems to be totally disregarded by the authorities. Is it conspiracy or such that his statement doesn't fit at all with anyone else? But it's always pointed out he was a recent immigrant, yet we expect him to have a perfect knowledge of the geography. He ran past his own house? Was he even on Berner Street?

[c.d.]

Hello A.B.E.,

Again, we simply don't know why he didn't testify. It could have been a very mundane reason like illness or perhaps he simply didn't show up possibly for fear of the B.S. man retaliating against him.

c.d.