Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If Schwartz Lied ...

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

  • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post



    The issue with the Harris clock is that both Diemschitz and Smith had a chance to look at it, yet both report being at that corner at 1:00. How could Diemschitz have looked at it, but not Smith? Very counter-intuitive. More generally, how could Diemschitz be correct about the time, and the beat PC be out by several minutes? Also very counter-intuitive.

    So who was wrong? Given that Diemschitz was originally saying he got home about 1am, before sharpening that up to exactly 1am, I would say it were Diemschitz who was wrong. It's quite possible that due to problems of nighttime visibility from his moving cart, Diemschitz never even looked at that clock behind the window.
    Nice attempted side-step.

    Diemschutz actually stated that he took his time from Harris’ clock, Smith only ‘had the chance’ of doing so. So we can’t say that he actually did. He might have taken his time from a clock that he’d seen earlier on his beat.

    Who is wrong about being there at 1.00? Well it’s very obviously, and provably Smith. How many times do we have to go over this.

    Diemschutz finds body at 1.00 - FACT

    Lamb then gets to the yard with Eagle at approx 1.05 - FACT

    Smith got to the yard after Lamb - FACT

    Therefore, Smith arrived at the yard after 1.05 and so must have been at the top of Berner Street after 1.00. - FACT

    These times tie up perfectly with Johnston, Blackwell and Brown.

    It’s way past time that you conceded this.

    ​​​​​​…….

    And as for why Smith said that he went to Berner Street at 1.00? Probably down to wording in the transcript. It’s noticeable that he mentions his normal route. He was probably asked about time but he said that he couldn’t give an exact time but “I usually went into Berner Street at 1.00 on my normal beat.” It was a near enough estimate. It’s noticeable that no one at the Inquest said “hold on, Diemschutz said he found the body at 1.00!” It wasn’t an issue.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

      Diemschutz actually stated that he took his time from Harris’ clock, Smith only ‘had the chance’ of doing so.
      He did state that at the inquest, but I do not believe it.
      He also stated he did not know what position Stride's hands were in, after having told the press the exact opposite. So he either lied to the press, or he lied to the coroner.
      So what else did he lie about? Did he lie about the cart colliding with the body?

      I was coming home from market at one o'clock on Sunday morning. I am a traveller by trade, and go to different markets to sell my goods. Yesterday I went to Westow-hill. As the night was so wet I did not stay quite so late as usual. After I had passed through the gate which had been left open on driving into the yard my donkey shied a little in consequence of my cart coming in contact with something on the ground.

      Where are the collision marks on the victim?

      Did Diemschitz really go looking for police?

      Mrs D: When my husband examined the body he found that life, so far as he could tell, was quite extinct. He at once sent for a policeman.

      Louis: I and Isaacs ran out for a policeman, but could not find one after traversing several streets, but in the meantime another man from the Club, Eagle, ran to the Leman-street police-station and fetched two policemen, who arrived about seven minutes after the discovery.

      Seven minutes after the discovery? So about 1:07 or 1:08? That would have Smith arriving at about 1:10 or 1:11. Was Smith's timing out by about a third of his beat time? If yes, then Fanny Mortimer was correct that he had passed her place at shortly before a quarter to one. If no, then Fanny likely did not go to the yard just after 1am, but was actually there by 1am.

      If Smith arrived no earlier than 1:10, and Johnston arrived at about 1:12, then how did Smith manage to write a report in 1 minute...?

      When I saw deceased lying on the ground I recognized her at once and made a report of what I had seen.

      What he had seen included Stride standing with parcel man. Writing what he had seen, in his notebook, would take significant time.

      A further issue is that we are never told who Eagle went searching with? Why? Was it Kozebrodski? If yes, then this must be false...

      A man whom I met in Grove- street returned with me, and when we reached the yard he took hold of the head of the deceased. As he lifted it up I saw the wound in the throat.
      At the very same moment Eagle and the constables arrived.


      ...and this is probably true...

      Spooner: I stood by the side of the body for four or five minutes, until the last witness arrived.

      Also, why did Diemschitz say he met Spooner in Grove street...?

      Spooner: On Sunday morning, between half-past twelve and one o'clock, I was standing outside the Beehive Public- house, at the corner of Christian-street, with my young woman.

      So much of what Diemschitz said, is questionable. Yet like that very odd figure, Israel Schwartz, he is almost universally 100% believed. Incredible.

      So we can’t say that he actually did. He might have taken his time from a clock that he’d seen earlier on his beat.
      Probably a public clock at the top of his beat, a few minutes up Commercial Road. The Harris clock was probably some smallish courtesy clock in the shop window - barely visible at nighttime, especially to someone driving a cart.

      Who is wrong about being there at 1.00? Well it’s very obviously, and provably Smith. How many times do we have to go over this.
      You haven't proven anything. You've only conflated your belief in Diemschitz, with the truth of the matter.
      Andrew's the man, who is not blamed for nothing

      Comment



      • >>There woud be little point if they couldn't move from their point if required.<<

        They couldn't move. We know this from Mrs Chapman's murder.


        >>I attibute "about" to lazy journalism rather than uncertainty about time.<<

        Not when it's followed by, "as near as I could tell", which has all the hallmarks of a direct quote.


        >>Smith states he was at the Harris clock corner at one o'clock. <<

        No.

        One journalist reported that. The bulk of the other papers reported it differently. Which is why I wrote we have to look for the answer elsewhere to see which one was right and why I listed a long series of facts and other witness reports that show your choice of journalist was, as you put it, "lazy".


        >>We can't know how big that clock was nor how easy it would be to spot a time from a moving vehicle ... etc.<<

        None of that matters. We know from the evidence of the other witnesses and the fixed point timing that 1:00 was the most likely to be correct, otherwise we have to disregard the bulk of the known evidence. Where is the value in that?

        Deimshitz says he saw a clock, nobody disputes a clock was there.
        Looking at the clock a was a natural thing to do.
        No policeman is report as specifically citing seeing Harris's clock, which is extremely odd if they did.
        His timing fits with Fanny Mortimer's story.
        Fanny Mortimer's story is backed up by Leon Goldstein.
        Brown's story fits with all the above.
        The Letchford family members add circumstantial evidence.
        The fix point police regulations, support the notion of all the above peoples claims.
        To date nobody has come ups with a credible reason for Deimshitz to lie.
        And perhaps most compelling of all, the police reports and the coroner, who heard all the evidence we haven't, concur with Deimshitz's !:00 a.m. time.

        Against that we have two seeming journalistic errors and a need to alter the police code and re-write all the main witnesses statements.
        The problem with theories is the constant need to alter the evidence to make them work.


        dustymiller
        aka drstrange

        Comment


        • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

          He did state that at the inquest, but I do not believe it.

          Without reason.

          He also stated he did not know what position Stride's hands were in, after having told the press the exact opposite. So he either lied to the press, or he lied to the coroner.

          Or he made a mistake.

          So what else did he lie about? Did he lie about the cart colliding with the body?

          No, because the cart didn’t collide with the body.

          I was coming home from market at one o'clock on Sunday morning. I am a traveller by trade, and go to different markets to sell my goods. Yesterday I went to Westow-hill. As the night was so wet I did not stay quite so late as usual. After I had passed through the gate which had been left open on driving into the yard my donkey shied a little in consequence of my cart coming in contact with something on the ground.

          Which ‘version’ is this one because in others he said that his pony ‘shied’ to the left. He also said ‘pony’ and yet in this one he says donkey so to me that implies that this version it’s too trustworthy.

          Where are the collision marks on the victim?

          If a horse felt something against its legs as it passed it could have been Stride’s skirt.

          To try and make something out of the above quote is complete and utter desperation. How many versions of statements are you going to post with trivial differences that get you scratching your chin?


          Did Diemschitz really go looking for police?

          Yes.

          Mrs D: When my husband examined the body he found that life, so far as he could tell, was quite extinct. He at once sent for a policeman.

          Again!!! A slight difference in wording in one version. This isn’t a recording of her voice. It’s someone who’s talked to her then written them up later.

          Louis: I and Isaacs ran out for a policeman, but could not find one after traversing several streets, but in the meantime another man from the Club, Eagle, ran to the Leman-street police-station and fetched two policemen, who arrived about seven minutes after the discovery.

          Seven minutes after the discovery?

          No “about seven minutes….” It was an estimate (remember them?)

          So about 1:07 or 1:08?

          See above.

          That would have Smith arriving at about 1:10 or 1:11.

          Please at least try a more honest approach. You keep making exaggerations simply to try and make your points appear more valid. Smith arrived just after Lamb so why do you have to make it 3 or 4 minutes?! Try a minute for fairness.

          Was Smith's timing out by about a third of his beat time? If yes, then Fanny Mortimer was correct that he had passed her place at shortly before a quarter to one. If no, then Fanny likely did not go to the yard just after 1am, but was actually there by 1am.

          Why can’t you just get this for f*^@s sake! Diemschutz 1.00/ Lamb approx 1.05/1.06/ Smith approx 1.06/1.07/ which, if Smith first passed at 12.35, meant that his second round took 31 minutes or so. Where is the problem?

          If Smith arrived no earlier than 1:10, and Johnston arrived at about 1:12, then how did Smith manage to write a report in 1 minute...?

          Smith probably arrived at around 1.06/1.07

          When I saw deceased lying on the ground I recognized her at once and made a report of what I had seen.

          He didn’t actually sit down a write s report! He probably just meant that he made some notes in his book.

          What he had seen included Stride standing with parcel man. Writing what he had seen, in his notebook, would take significant time.

          Smith - ”And verily I was strolling along Berner Street in the course of my regulars duties,” Lamb - “PC Smith we have a murder here any chance of some help with the crowd?” Smith - “ You’ll have to wait until I’ve completed my report.” “…..‘‘twas an overcast evening and the birds were silent in the trees…..”

          A further issue is that we are never told who Eagle went searching with? Why? Was it Kozebrodski? If yes, then this must be false...

          A man whom I met in Grove- street returned with me, and when we reached the yard he took hold of the head of the deceased. As he lifted it up I saw the wound in the throat.
          At the very same moment Eagle and the constables arrived.


          ...and this is probably true...

          ​​​​​​​How does this disprove Kozebrodski? Perhaps he didn’t exist?


          Spooner: I stood by the side of the body for four or five minutes, until the last witness arrived.

          Which was Lamb…….so it all ties up……as I’ve repeatedly said.

          Also, why did Diemschitz say he met Spooner in Grove street...?

          Spooner: On Sunday morning, between half-past twelve and one o'clock, I was standing outside the Beehive Public- house, at the corner of Christian-street, with my young woman.

          Error by him when recalling a stressful situation. Transcription error. Unimportant.

          So much of what Diemschitz said, is questionable. Yet like that very odd figure, Israel Schwartz, he is almost universally 100% believed. Incredible.

          Not a single reason to disbelieve Diemschutz if you’re not wearing conspiracy goggles.

          Probably a public clock at the top of his beat, a few minutes up Commercial Road. The Harris clock was probably some smallish courtesy clock in the shop window - barely visible at nighttime, especially to someone driving a cart.

          You are the Chubby Checker of Ripperology. So much twisting.

          You haven't proven anything. You've only conflated your belief in Diemschitz, with the truth of the matter.

          I take an honest approach without the deliberate manipulations and falsehoods required to manufacture a laughable, non-existent plot.

          A man sees a clock and people contort themselves like Olga Korbut to try and show that he either misread or ignored it and was part of a joke plot. It’s long past time that a bit of growing up was done here. Look for a conspiracy and you’ll find one anywhere. So stop looking. Just view what we know. Stop manipulating times by insisting that they are to be taken as exact just so that you can show discrepancies. Stop dropping in false facts (like Goldstein’s mythical double-pass) where you try and add them to a list of ‘knowns.’ With a very reasonable allowance for timing (errors in estimation) it all ties in. There was no mystery, only errors. And there was certainly no plot. The idea of a plot is an embarrassing joke which should be consigned to the dustbin of history but, as we can see with Michael, history shows us that obsessive conspiracy theorists and their pet theories are difficult to separate. Sadly.​​​​​​​

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
            He did state that at the inquest, but I do not believe it.

            Without reason.
            It is clear that he sharpened up his time. Do you deny that he sharpened up his time?

            He also stated he did not know what position Stride's hands were in, after having told the press the exact opposite. So he either lied to the press, or he lied to the coroner.

            Or he made a mistake.
            Or he lied. It was a blatant contradiction, so what exactly was the mistake?

            I was coming home from market at one o'clock on Sunday morning. I am a traveller by trade, and go to different markets to sell my goods. Yesterday I went to Westow-hill. As the night was so wet I did not stay quite so late as usual. After I had passed through the gate which had been left open on driving into the yard my donkey shied a little in consequence of my cart coming in contact with something on the ground.

            Which ‘version’ is this one because in others he said that his pony ‘shied’ to the left. He also said ‘pony’ and yet in this one he says donkey so to me that implies that this version it’s too trustworthy.
            The Star. This one is the Evening News:

            I am a traveler in the common jewellery trade, and work only for myself. I have also been the steward for the International Working Men's Club for between six and seven years, and I live on the premises of the club. For some time I have been in the habit of going to Westow Hill, at the Crystal Palace, every Saturday, in order to sell my goods at the market which is there. I got back this Sunday morning about one o'clock, and drove up to our club-room gate in my pony cart.

            Where are the collision marks on the victim?

            If a horse felt something against its legs as it passed it could have been Stride’s skirt.
            Just a slight brush against a fetlock? LOL

            How could the 'horse' have felt something if it were pulling to the left? The above EN report continues...

            My pony is frisky and apt to shy, though not much, and it struck me when I was passing through the double gates into the yard that he wanted to keep too much to the left side against the wall.

            To try and make something out of the above quote is complete and utter desperation. How many versions of statements are you going to post with trivial differences that get you scratching your chin?
            Tell me how the pony could want to keep too much to the left wall, and yet in the Echo, we have...

            The gate was pushed back, and the wheel of my cart bumped against something.

            She was supposedly found lying against the right side wall (the club). How could the wheel have bumped against 'something', without leaving a mark?

            Did Diemschitz really go looking for police?

            Yes.
            Quote someone other than Diemschitz, to back this up.

            No “about seven minutes….” It was an estimate (remember them?)
            So maybe 8 or 9.

            Please at least try a more honest approach. You keep making exaggerations simply to try and make your points appear more valid. Smith arrived just after Lamb so why do you have to make it 3 or 4 minutes?!
            This has been explained to you before.
            Try a minute for fairness.
            For fairness to your lack of logic?

            Why can’t you just get this for f*^@s sake! Diemschutz 1.00/ Lamb approx 1.05/1.06/ Smith approx 1.06/1.07/ which, if Smith first passed at 12.35, meant that his second round took 31 minutes or so. Where is the problem?
            This has been explained to you before.

            Smith probably arrived at around 1.06/1.07
            He probably arrived at the top of Berner street, when he said he did.

            He didn’t actually sit down a write s report! He probably just meant that he made some notes in his book.
            Opinion stated as fact. Hypocrite.

            A further issue is that we are never told who Eagle went searching with? Why? Was it Kozebrodski? If yes, then this must be false...

            A man whom I met in Grove- street returned with me, and when we reached the yard he took hold of the head of the deceased. As he lifted it up I saw the wound in the throat.
            At the very same moment Eagle and the constables arrived.


            ...and this is probably true...

            How does this disprove Kozebrodski? Perhaps he didn’t exist?
            It either disproves Kozebrodski, or Diemschitz. Take your pick.

            Spooner: I stood by the side of the body for four or five minutes, until the last witness arrived.

            Which was Lamb…….so it all ties up……as I’ve repeatedly said.
            We know who it was, just as we know that subtracting 4 or 5 minutes from 1:05, takes us back to 1:00 or 1:01.

            Also, why did Diemschitz say he met Spooner in Grove street...?

            Spooner: On Sunday morning, between half-past twelve and one o'clock, I was standing outside the Beehive Public- house, at the corner of Christian-street, with my young woman.

            Error by him when recalling a stressful situation. Transcription error. Unimportant.
            Excuse by you when explaining away another anomaly. No transcription error - the same was reported by multiple papers. There was actually more than one reporter, at the inquests. This is something you've never quite accepted.

            Not a single reason to disbelieve Diemschutz if you’re not wearing conspiracy goggles.
            You are the Chubby Checker of Ripperology. So much twisting.
            I take an honest approach without the deliberate manipulations and falsehoods required to manufacture a laughable, non-existent plot.
            You're a denialist.
            Andrew's the man, who is not blamed for nothing

            Comment


            • “Why didn’t Fanny Mortimer see Stride and Parcelman?” This is often used to cast doubt on the on any non-cover-up version of events. My suggestion has been the obvious one. That Smith passed at around 12.35 and saw the couple but they then moved around the corner into Fairclough Street before Mortimer came onto her doorstep. Stride and Parcelman then parted company and Stride returned to Berner Street and the club gates.

              So is there anything in the evidence to suggest that a) Stride and Parcelman went around the corner, and b) that they had reason to part company?

              Yes to both.

              a) James Brown said “As I was going across the road I saw a man and woman standing by the Board School in Fairclough-street.”

              So they were standing around the corner in Fairclough Street explaining why Mortimer didn’t see them.

              b) “As I passed them I heard the woman say, “No, not to-night, some other night.”

              So yes, Parcelman was obviously trying to persuade her to do something or to go somewhere. So he might easily have given up and returned to Berner Street alone.


              Boring and non-conspiratorial maybe. Reasonable and based on evidence nonetheless.

              Comment


              • . It is clear that he sharpened up his time. Do you deny that he sharpened up his time?
                He didn’t.

                Comment


                • Why, when we are discussing differing quotes as to whether Diemschutz pony collided with the body, you post a quote where there’s no mention of any such collision.

                  . The Star. This one is the Evening News:

                  I am a traveler in the common jewellery trade, and work only for myself. I have also been the steward for the International Working Men's Club for between six and seven years, and I live on the premises of the club. For some time I have been in the habit of going to Westow Hill, at the Crystal Palace, every Saturday, in order to sell my goods at the market which is there. I got back this Sunday morning about one o'clock, and drove up to our club-room gate in my pony cart.

                  Comment


                  • . Tell me how the pony could want to keep too much to the left wall, and yet in the Echo, we have...

                    The gate was pushed back, and the wheel of my cart bumped against something.

                    She was supposedly found lying against the right side wall (the club). How could the wheel have bumped against 'something', without leaving a mark?
                    This is akin to your ‘whip’ nonsense. Derided by all.

                    Its a non-issue.

                    Comment


                    • . Quote someone other than Diemschitz, to back this up.
                      I can produce no witness to the fact that I’ve just drunk a cup of coffee but I can assure you that I did. No one mentions moving the horse away from the door but it obviously was moved.

                      Diemschutz discovered the body at 1.00.

                      This is a fact.

                      Comment


                      • . He probably arrived at the top of Berner street, when he said he did.
                        He arrived at the yard after Lamb.

                        AFTER!

                        AFTER!

                        AFTER!

                        Comment


                        • . Opinion stated as fact. Hypocrite.
                          You can’t get anything right can you.

                          Im no expert on the Police so I’ll certainly take advice on this but…..

                          Does anyone seriously think that at a busy crime scene a police officer would make out a full report? Or would he simply make notes? Your suggestion sounds preposterous to me.

                          Comment


                          • . We know who it was, just as we know that subtracting 4 or 5 minutes from 1:05, takes us back to 1:00 or 1:01.
                            But an honest poster wouldn’t do that of course.

                            Comment


                            • . This has been explained to you before.
                              Im only interested in honest appraisals.

                              Comment


                              • . You're a denialist.
                                And you’re an ego-driven fantasist.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X