Witness ignored, witness invented

[miakaal4]

According to testimony taken at the scene, between 5 and 7 people saw Liz Stride was clutching a bunch of grapes in the right hand, and some sweets in the left. The hands were tight clenched. Grape skins and pips had been seen on the ground close to the body. And yet the shop 10 yards away that sold grapes was ignored. And the seller Matthew Packer who claimed to have spoken with a man accompanying Stride at around midnight, was first interviewed by the Press not the police!!! Nor was he invited to the inquest. And has very little said apart from the fact he is dodgy on Casebook. Why?
Then this Israel Schwartz bloke turns up, apparently, full of I saw this and I saw that, nothing to back his claims, but enough to get him a lot of attention on this Casebook, and the contemporary cops it seems. Not invited to inquest. Why? Seems to me the cops either were not up to much or they were not interested in catching the killer. Schwartz and Packer should have both been closely question during the inquest. So what the hell was happening in Whitechapel?

[erobitha]

According to testimony taken at the scene, between 5 and 7 people saw Liz Stride was clutching a bunch of grapes in the right hand, and some sweets in the left. The hands were tight clenched. Grape skins and pips had been seen on the ground close to the body. And yet the shop 10 yards away that sold grapes was ignored. And the seller Matthew Packer who claimed to have spoken with a man accompanying Stride at around midnight, was first interviewed by the Press not the police!!! Nor was he invited to the inquest. And has very little said apart from the fact he is dodgy on Casebook. Why?
Then this Israel Schwartz bloke turns up, apparently, full of I saw this and I saw that, nothing to back his claims, but enough to get him a lot of attention on this Casebook, and the contemporary cops it seems. Not invited to inquest. Why? Seems to me the cops either were not up to much or they were not interested in catching the killer. Schwartz and Packer should have both been closely question during the inquest. So what the hell was happening in Whitechapel?

I do like your posts, I'm a fan.

This will be a rib tickler. Many on here claim Packer was a fantastist who kept changing his testimony. All mentions of grape stalks were omitted by witnesses at the inquest of Stride's murder, despite numerous eye witness reports on the night. The grapes magically disappeared. Even though she had grape skins in her stomach and fruit stains on her clothes. It was not documented officially, ergo it did not happen.

Hope you hang around.

[Abby Normal]

According to testimony taken at the scene, between 5 and 7 people saw Liz Stride was clutching a bunch of grapes in the right hand, and some sweets in the left. The hands were tight clenched. Grape skins and pips had been seen on the ground close to the body. And yet the shop 10 yards away that sold grapes was ignored. And the seller Matthew Packer who claimed to have spoken with a man accompanying Stride at around midnight, was first interviewed by the Press not the police!!! Nor was he invited to the inquest. And has very little said apart from the fact he is dodgy on Casebook. Why?
Then this Israel Schwartz bloke turns up, apparently, full of I saw this and I saw that, nothing to back his claims, but enough to get him a lot of attention on this Casebook, and the contemporary cops it seems. Not invited to inquest. Why? Seems to me the cops either were not up to much or they were not interested in catching the killer. Schwartz and Packer should have both been closely question during the inquest. So what the hell was happening in Whitechapel?

packer was unreliable as a witness as he kept changing his story, adding to it etc. classic attention seeking fifteen minutes of fame "witness". no wonder the police dropped him-they even said as much.

Schwartz was trying to avoid getting involved as the police found him, he didnt come forward on his own-that may have something to do with him not being at the inquest. perhaps his being a foreigner and not speaking the language? but probably IMHO he just didnt make himself available and or was avoiding the police. just my opinion though as we just dont know why he wasnt at the inquest. But his story is corroberated by other witness that night that all saw a suspect wearing a peaked cap.

[miakaal4]

[QUOTE=Abby Normal;n739938]

packer was unreliable as a witness as he kept changing his story, adding to it etc. classic attention seeking fifteen minutes of fame "witness". no wonder the police dropped him-they even said as much.

Packer gave the truth. The police bent his story this way and that not him. Why would a guy who just sold some grapes lie about it? The grapes were there, they were left out of the inquest because he could give a good description of the killer, and it obviously wasn't some ape like foreigner, or some caricature of a Jewish man, it was a cultured Englander, upper class toff. One of the untouchables. And a MASON. Like Warren and his pals. Their code is to protect each other, and that is what they were doing. If you don't believe the ritual theory, then how do we explain the way MJK's organs and body bits were laid out compass fashion? Uterus and breast under the head, liver between the feet etc. Perhaps heart thrown in fire? I reckon he was using, don't laugh, Dark Magic. I know it sounds nuts, but we must not forget the Victorians were really superstitious and into the occult. Seances, bells over graves, dead kids propped up with sticks for family pics!! Sure the police and other "gents" in the club may have seen the pattern was Mason based, but not know the reasons. Either way, they swore an oath and if that means old Packer gets outed so be it!

[Wickerman]

I think it is necessary to point out the police view.
Swanson dismissed Packer because the police need reliable witnesses with a view to a trial, this had nothing directly to do with an inquest. The coroner could have called Packer regardless of the police view.

From the reports that have survived it seems Packer was genuinely confused as to the time he saw Stride & her man. In one report we read of 11:00 - 11:30, then he shut up shop. In another it was 12:00-12:30, then he shut up shop.
Swanson cannot use his statement if he cannot assure them of the time.

My view is that today we can provide the answer that Packer couldn't, and I believe Swanson must have been able to also.
Swanson cannot correct his witness, Packer must do that himself, but he couldn't so Swanson had to let him go.

Stride was outside the Bricklayer's Arms about 11:00 pm (seen by Best & Gardiner), so she couldn't have been at Dutfield's Yard at the same time.
I believe Swanson would have known this, as the police used the press in the same way as the press used the police.

The bottom line is, Packer told a story that was in part confirmed by PC Smith who saw Stride with 'parcel-man' about 12:30 outside Dutfield's Yard.

The grapes is a different issue, the subject was not raised by Packer, yet he has been criticized by most theorists largely due to the grape story.

Incidentally, no grape skins or pips were reported as found anywhere near, or inside the yard. A grape stalk was found in the drain down the yard, and also the press reported some white flower petals in the yard.

[miakaal4]

Swanson the Free Mason you mean? Grape juice was on her kerchief, and whatever time the cops say he saw Stride, she still had the grapes bought for her! Don't you see? First they say no grapes, then, she did buy the grapes but wrong time, so there was grapes. Either way he is a witness and was ignored. Israel, if he existed could have seen anyone. Or no-one, again, not at inquest. Another possible witness just pissed away.

[Wickerman]

Swanson the Free Mason you mean? Grape juice was on her kerchief, and whatever time the cops say he saw Stride, she still had the grapes bought for her! Don't you see? First they say no grapes, then, she did buy the grapes but wrong time, so there was grapes.

Will no-one rid me of these pesky Freemasons....


I've not said there was no grapes, in my view the parcel (carried by the man) were the grapes.
The issue over the grapes was that they were in her right hand as she was found - that was the debatable issue.
The medical evidence can be dismissed in my view (that she had not eaten grapes), as the autopsy was conducted over 30 hours later. Long enough for the stomach acids to dissolve any grape flesh, being mostly water.

If you drop the Freemason angle (it's tired, old & outdated) you may find a logical argument.

[erobitha]

I do like your posts, I'm a fan.

This will be a rib tickler. Many on here claim Packer was a fantastist who kept changing his testimony. All mentions of grape stalks were omitted by witnesses at the inquest of Stride's murder, despite numerous eye witness reports on the night. The grapes magically disappeared. Even though she had grape skins in her stomach and fruit stains on her clothes. It was not documented officially, ergo it did not happen.

Hope you hang around.

Must correct my own statement here. Grape skins and stones were identified nearby where Stride was found in Berner Street Court. Grape skins in her stomach were not found as I claimed, that was my misrecollection. However, eyewitness reports (Isaac Kosebrodski, Fanny Mortimer, PC Lamb & Louis Diemshutz himself) all reported seeing a grape stalk in her right hand. Fruit stains on her handkerchief were found and confirmed by Dr Phillips at her inquest . Yet all such existence of grape stalks disappeared from official reports. Phillips even went out of his way to state NO grape skins or stones were found in her stomach. Slightly odd thing to do, declaring what was NOT in her stomach.

[barnflatwyngarde]

"Will no-one rid me of these pesky Freemasons...."

I will, let's shake on it!

[Michael W Richards]

According to testimony taken at the scene, between 5 and 7 people saw Liz Stride was clutching a bunch of grapes in the right hand, and some sweets in the left. The hands were tight clenched. Grape skins and pips had been seen on the ground close to the body. And yet the shop 10 yards away that sold grapes was ignored. And the seller Matthew Packer who claimed to have spoken with a man accompanying Stride at around midnight, was first interviewed by the Press not the police!!! Nor was he invited to the inquest. And has very little said apart from the fact he is dodgy on Casebook. Why?
Then this Israel Schwartz bloke turns up, apparently, full of I saw this and I saw that, nothing to back his claims, but enough to get him a lot of attention on this Casebook, and the contemporary cops it seems. Not invited to inquest. Why? Seems to me the cops either were not up to much or they were not interested in catching the killer. Schwartz and Packer should have both been closely question during the inquest. So what the hell was happening in Whitechapel?

There are a number of contentious decisions that the authorities made regarding witness value and validity. I think that the matter of corroboration is vital when sussing out who to believe. And THE most contentious stories have none. Schwartz, Hutchinson, Packer.

[Abby Normal]

[QUOTE=miakaal4;n739940]

packer was unreliable as a witness as he kept changing his story, adding to it etc. classic attention seeking fifteen minutes of fame "witness". no wonder the police dropped him-they even said as much.

Packer gave the truth. The police bent his story this way and that not him. Why would a guy who just sold some grapes lie about it? The grapes were there, they were left out of the inquest because he could give a good description of the killer, and it obviously wasn't some ape like foreigner, or some caricature of a Jewish man, it was a cultured Englander, upper class toff. One of the untouchables. And a MASON. Like Warren and his pals. Their code is to protect each other, and that is what they were doing. If you don't believe the ritual theory, then how do we explain the way MJK's organs and body bits were laid out compass fashion? Uterus and breast under the head, liver between the feet etc. Perhaps heart thrown in fire? I reckon he was using, don't laugh, Dark Magic. I know it sounds nuts, but we must not forget the Victorians were really superstitious and into the occult. Seances, bells over graves, dead kids propped up with sticks for family pics!! Sure the police and other "gents" in the club may have seen the pattern was Mason based, but not know the reasons. Either way, they swore an oath and if that means old Packer gets outed so be it!

lol. que twilight zone theme song

[miakaal4]

Well it's obvious that because the Mason idea was blown by the silly accusation against the Royal Ripper, does not mean it was not a Mason who committed the crime. The police and the doctor either bent or withheld evidence. It wouldn't take Holmes and Watson to think about where she had got the grapes from, seeing as there was a late night fruit seller hard by. The man was walking about looking for a whore to rip, and he is carrying a parcel of grapes? Bit weird that idea. The first interview Packer gave was to a newspaper, the police hadn't even bothered him. The inquest left the grapes out too, which means Lamb and Diemshutz would have been asked, (told) not to talk about them. Now would the cops, the doctor and maybe the Coroner do that to protect a mad Russian? Pole? Sailor? Jew? No. But they would do it if they were worried that JtR was a proper gent and member of the club. The Freemasons are a secretive body with secret rituals, even today. If the killer was caught and found to be a Mason it would have been very bad for all. The working clubs were full of disgruntled working people talking Socialism. Better if the killer is a bit of mad rubbish.

[Damaso Marte]

I believe it was actually good policework to exclude Packer and Schwartz. I think Packer was making it up for attention, and Schwartz was spinning a tall tale to deflect attention as much as possible from the club. There is no corroboration of either story, and indeed Schwartz is contradicted by witnesses who saw nothing at all.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Well it's obvious that because the Mason idea was blown by the silly accusation against the Royal Ripper, does not mean it was not a Mason who committed the crime. The police and the doctor either bent or withheld evidence. It wouldn't take Holmes and Watson to think about where she had got the grapes from, seeing as there was a late night fruit seller hard by. The man was walking about looking for a whore to rip, and he is carrying a parcel of grapes? Bit weird that idea. The first interview Packer gave was to a newspaper, the police hadn't even bothered him. The inquest left the grapes out too, which means Lamb and Diemshutz would have been asked, (told) not to talk about them. Now would the cops, the doctor and maybe the Coroner do that to protect a mad Russian? Pole? Sailor? Jew? No. But they would do it if they were worried that JtR was a proper gent and member of the club. The Freemasons are a secretive body with secret rituals, even today. If the killer was caught and found to be a Mason it would have been very bad for all. The working clubs were full of disgruntled working people talking Socialism. Better if the killer is a bit of mad rubbish.

Hi Miakaal,

In there, there is actually a good point. Just because Knights book was comprehensively refuted by Mr Wood, does that mean that Jack couldn't be a Freemason? Of course not. Maybe he was a different Mason and Knight was barking up the wrong tree.

As I'm sure your aware, Berner St is a tricky scene to put together, Michael Richards is pretty knowledgeable on the details ( even if most disagree with his views), so it's not straight forward claiming that witnesses like Lamb and Diemschutz were 'told' what to say. But I'd recommend picking his brain for finer points as to who said what and when, and to who.

Also, the inquest was and still is totally separate to a criminal investigation, the coroner was not out to solve the crime. We as Ripperologists sometimes get annoyed that coroner's didn't ask pertinent questions or interview certain people, but it really wasn't their job.

The Socialist Club wilfully assisting in a cover up to protect a Mason? That's a harder one to support. It would massively suit them to show that the killer was a bourgeois toff, and that his toff fraternity was shielding him.

I'm not a fan of Masonic conspiracy, I think if it's something to be seriously persued, it's not enough to say every anomaly or counter point is a cover up. The biggest criticism of pro Masonic arguments is that they rely on tenuous assumptions, impervious to criticism because "the man" covered it all up. If facts are out there, likely probabilities, they should stand up to scrutiny, and more so accommodate the possibilities that don't support them.

Jack could have been a Freemason. He could have been a circus cowboy. The police entertained that thought briefly, but I wouldn't have a leg to stand on promoting that theory outside of the fact that authorities at the time inspected them. Maybe that was a cover up too?

Keep on by all means, I'm no more knowledgeable than anyone else, so I reckon we can all learn from each other.

Anyway, that's my tuppence.

[Wickerman]

Also, the inquest was and still is totally separate to a criminal investigation, the coroner was not out to solve the crime. We as Ripperologists sometimes get annoyed that coroner's didn't ask pertinent questions or interview certain people, but it really wasn't their job.

Thanks for bringing this important point up, far too many confuse a simple coroner's inquiry with a criminal trial.