Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If Schwartz Lied ...

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

  • Originally posted by drstrange169 View Post
    So you've avoided lockdown, lucky feller!
    Hi drstrange,

    Yeah, we've got the masks, and next week we'll have to sign in anywhere we go, but that's pretty trivial compared to being locked down. But we were locked down for the bushfires with no power, no mobiles and no petrol. On New Years Eve there were whirlpools of fire crossing the paddocks. I stayed to defend and the fire came down the hill and roared at me. At midday it was as dark as midnight and the sky was blood red. Our place was saved only by a sudden windchange. I hope I don't have to live through something like that again.

    Cheers, George
    “Contrariwise,” continued Tweedledee, “if it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be but as it isn’t, it ain’t. That’s logic.”

    Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, everything must be said again. - Andre Gide

    Comment


    • Too many Aussies here for a cricket fan like me I’m expecting an arse-kicking in the upcoming Ashes series (for the duration of which I intend to identify as Czechoslovakian)
      Regards

      Herlock Sholmes

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
        Too many Aussies here for a cricket fan like me I’m expecting an arse-kicking in the upcoming Ashes series (for the duration of which I intend to identify as Czechoslovakian)
        Czech or Slovak these days.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Dickere View Post

          Czech or Slovak these days.
          Good point Dickere.
          Regards

          Herlock Sholmes

          Comment


          • Originally posted by caz View Post

            It's figurative. In Victorian times it was a common enough expression to mean 'on the hour', or 'just on 1 o'clock'.

            Nowadays we would rarely use a striking clock to fix the time, so we no longer think in those terms and the language has evolved to reflect modern methods.

            But back then, the very reason for having clocks that chimed was so the time could be judged without needing to see an actual clock or watch face - or sun dial, or smart phone - up close.

            Louis D reached the scene around the same time the clock showed the time as 1am. It's irrelevant whether it chimed on the hour or not.
            Hi Caz,

            I agree that it is figurative and doesn't refer to an actual clock. There is no press interview where Diemshitz mentions a clock. That was a later addition for the inquest. I don't think he was lying or involved in a conspiracy. His interviews with the press were full of contradictions and errors and he just polished up his coronial testimony.

            Cheers, George
            Last edited by GBinOz; 07-05-2021, 10:42 PM.
            “Contrariwise,” continued Tweedledee, “if it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be but as it isn’t, it ain’t. That’s logic.”

            Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, everything must be said again. - Andre Gide

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

              Is the English language an issue?

              He heard ‘murder being called when the clock had already struck 1.00. This ties in with Diemschutz finding the body at 1.00 and running for the police 2 minutes later.
              I think you underestimate the amount of time between Louis' arrival, and the commencement of the police search. This is evident in Arbeter Fraint. There was lots of running around and indecision.

              Then again, everything points to a 1.00 discovery time because we have no reason, and certainly no evidence, to doubt it.
              You didn't tell me how PC Collins managed to arrive at the scene before Smith. Did he hear the early, unaccounted for whistle? You know, the one that suggests a pre-1am discovery time.

              I guess you could solve the problem by suggesting Collins responded to Lamb's whistle, but that would require Smith arriving a good few minutes after Lamb. That places Smith (according to your timing estimate), last passing the yard at shortly before a quarter to one.

              Alternatively, if Collins did respond to the mystery whistle and arrived very soon after Lamb, then the policeman seen by James Brown through his window, must have been Edward Spooner.

              Either way, the situation begs for an explanation. Let's see what you can come up with...
              Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                And what does that quote prove?
                That Mortimer saw Goldstein twice.

                Why don’t you just pick one newspaper and take everything they published as gospel? Or do you prefer to jump from newspaper to newspaper selecting individual quotes that you like as gospel?
                I see no reason to doubt its authenticity. I do see reason why many would be motivated to see otherwise.
                Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                  Diemschutz saw a clock and Blackwell owned a watch. So 1.00 and 1.16 are times that we should be confident about and timelines should be built around these.

                  But for some strange reason George it doesn’t appear to work like that. So we have to ask if it’s likely that he was mistaken or lying. I see no reason for him to have lied and those that do enter into conspiracist madness which I’m not even prepared give a seconds credence to. So could he have been mistaken? Well if the possibility existed, for example if he was a distance away, then he had no reason not to admit this. 1.00 or 1.01 or 1.02 would have made no difference to his statement. But he speaks with 100% confidence so there’s zero reason to doubt that he had a clear view of the clock. We know of no sight problems or that he had any problems reading the time. So the evidence is against him making an error. So viewing what he said there isn’t a smidgeon of evidence to suggest that he didn’t see that clock exactly when he said that he did. There just isn’t.

                  So what’s left for some (I’m not including you in this) is to say “ well I have another story and I need Diemschutz to have lied..”

                  His wife backed up his time.
                  Eagle said that he first sa the body around 1.00 (including Gilleman too)
                  Brown heard Diemschutz shouting for the police just after 1.00.
                  Even FM heard a cart at around 1.00.

                  If it quacks like a duck and we dismiss a ludicrous non-existent cover-up……
                  Herlock,

                  We've just had a discussion about the inaccuracy of Victorian clocks which you named a banner moment and I agree. But you can't have a logiacal progression to prove a statement is fact by starting the progression with the statement is fact. That is a logical fallacy. You are then supporting your argument by using statements from people when you don't know how long it has been since they actually saw an inherently inaccurate clock. There is nowhere where a clock is even mentioned as being in the Club. I'm sure you would point this out to me if I responded by saying that Kozebrodski said that Diemshitz called him to the yard at 12:40. I based my timeline on an event - the coroner's time for the Smith-Stride encounter which he set at 12:30 and the times fit with some witness statements but not others. But I'm flexible. If you present convincing evidence I will be persuaded. You just haven't, IMHO, done that yet.

                  Cheers, George
                  “Contrariwise,” continued Tweedledee, “if it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be but as it isn’t, it ain’t. That’s logic.”

                  Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, everything must be said again. - Andre Gide

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by GBinOz View Post

                    Hi NBFN,

                    That description matches Frederick Deeming almost perfectly.

                    Cheers, George
                    That's interesting, George.

                    Here's another comparison - https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...118#post757118
                    Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by caz View Post

                      It's figurative. In Victorian times it was a common enough expression to mean 'on the hour', or 'just on 1 o'clock'.

                      Nowadays we would rarely use a striking clock to fix the time, so we no longer think in those terms and the language has evolved to reflect modern methods.

                      But back then, the very reason for having clocks that chimed was so the time could be judged without needing to see an actual clock or watch face - or sun dial, or smart phone - up close.

                      Louis D reached the scene around the same time the clock showed the time as 1am. It's irrelevant whether it chimed on the hour or not.
                      In other words, the clock didn't strike one.

                      Diemschitz' story seems to have gone through a number of iterations. Rather like Schwartz', in that respect.
                      Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

                        In other words, the clock didn't strike one.

                        Diemschitz' story seems to have gone through a number of iterations. Rather like Schwartz', in that respect.
                        No, it just means it is not definitive proof the clock was chiming, it still may have. In other words, it's also not proof that would allow the claim the clock didn't strike one. And whether or not the clock chimed, doesn't change Diemshitz's testimony that he checked the time by the clock, and it was 1 o'clock when he did so. Chiming or not doesn't change the position of the hands.

                        - Jeff

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                          And what does that quote prove?

                          Why don’t you just pick one newspaper and take everything they published as gospel? Or do you prefer to jump from newspaper to newspaper selecting individual quotes that you like as gospel?
                          I don't think it is a matter of confirmation bias. I was somewhat surprised when I read this statement from FM. I had previously read the she said the man came from Commercial Road, walked quickly down Berner St quickly glancing up at the Club as he passed, and turned into Fairclough St at the School corner. This is not a slight variation in her accounts, it is the complete opposite. I don't know what to make of it, and can only think of two possibilites. First, she was very confused, which puts a question mark on her reliability. Second, she was talking about a return trip and dropped off a bit of the story for each reporter......for the sake of brevity???? Any one know the location of Spectacle Lane in 1888's London?

                          Cheers, George
                          “Contrariwise,” continued Tweedledee, “if it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be but as it isn’t, it ain’t. That’s logic.”

                          Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, everything must be said again. - Andre Gide

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

                            The closest I can find is William Marshall, in the Times:

                            I went in about 12 o'clock and heard nothing more until I heard "Murder" being called in the street. It had then just gone 1 o'clock.

                            This is compatible with Diemschitz turning into Berner street at about 12:55.



                            Some people are very clear on what they want the truth to be.
                            Hi Andrew,

                            No, Marshall didn't mention an actual clock just a series of o'clocks. I have just re-read his testimony. He saw a couple for 10 minutes starting 11:45 (guessed time) at which stage he said "They went away down the street, towards Ellen-street. They would not then pass No. 40 (the club).". They were three houses away and the nearest lamp was 20 feet from them. He didn't see Liz's flower and his description of the man - middle aged, wearing a cap doesn't match Smith. The coroner was so exasperated with his description he said "Is that the best suggestion you can make? - It is.".
                            Then this incoherant gobbledygook:
                            "[Coroner] Did you hear anything more that night? - Not till I heard that the murder had taken place, just after one o'clock. While I was standing at my door, from half-past eleven to twelve, there was no rain at all. The deceased had on a small black bonnet. The couple were standing between my house and the club for about ten minutes.
                            Detective-Inspector Reid: Then they passed you? - Yes.
                            A Juror: Did you not see the man's face as he passed? - No; he was looking towards the woman, and had his arm round her neck. There is a gas lamp at the corner of Boyd-street. It was not closing time when they passed me."

                            I also re-read the testimony of Brown.

                            "[Coroner] Did you notice any flower in her dress? - No.
                            [Coroner] What were they doing? - He was standing with his arm against the wall; she was inclined towards his arm, facing him, and with her back to the wall.
                            [Coroner] Did you notice the man? - I saw that he had a long dark coat on.
                            [Coroner] An overcoat? - Yes; it seemed so.
                            [Coroner] Had he a hat or a cap on? - I cannot say.
                            [Coroner] You are sure it was not her dress that you chiefly noticed? - Yes. I saw nothing light in colour about either of them.
                            [Coroner] Was it raining at the time? - No. I went on.
                            [Coroner] Did you hear anything more? - When I had nearly finished my supper I heard screams of "Murder" and "Police." This was a quarter of an hour after I had got home. I did not look at any clock at the chandler's shop. I arrived home first at ten minutes past twelve o'clock, and I believe it was not raining then."

                            So he didn't see a flower, couldn't even tell if the man had anything on his head and his timing was a series of added guesses started from when he guessed he got home. He didn't see Stride - he saw the couple Mortimer saw at that exact spot and later engaged in conversation.

                            Compare the above stuff and nonsense with the testimonies of of Kozebrodski, Heshberg and the much maligned Packer, which are far more coherent and believable.

                            Cheers, George

                            Last edited by GBinOz; 07-06-2021, 03:45 AM.
                            “Contrariwise,” continued Tweedledee, “if it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be but as it isn’t, it ain’t. That’s logic.”

                            Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, everything must be said again. - Andre Gide

                            Comment


                            • I posed this question to Herlock in a previous post and now I'd like to throw the question to everyone. Without referring to any clock times at all, what would a reasonable interval of time be for
                              Start: Diemshitz to drive down Berner St from the corner, turn into the yard, halt his pony after it shied, prod about with his whip, alight from the cart and light a match, shift the pony up near the door, run inside searching for his wife, alert club members, return with Kozebrodski, light another match and inspect Stride's injury, brief discuss who is going where to raise the alarm and
                              Finish: exit the gateway raising the alarm?

                              My opinion would be about 5-6 minutes.

                              Cheers, George
                              “Contrariwise,” continued Tweedledee, “if it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be but as it isn’t, it ain’t. That’s logic.”

                              Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, everything must be said again. - Andre Gide

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

                                Is it better that this...?

                                I only noticed one person passing, just before I turned in. That was a young man walking up Berner-street, carrying a black bag in his hand.
                                He was respectably dressed, but was a stranger to me. He might ha' been coming from the Socialist Club., A good many young men goes there, of a Saturday night especially.
                                Andrew,
                                Can you give me the source of this statement please. I know I've seen it before but I can't find the source. Also, what is this "Arbeter Fraint" of which you speak?

                                EDIT: Never mind, I found it.

                                Cheers, George
                                Last edited by GBinOz; 07-06-2021, 06:28 AM.
                                “Contrariwise,” continued Tweedledee, “if it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be but as it isn’t, it ain’t. That’s logic.”

                                Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, everything must be said again. - Andre Gide

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X