Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If Schwartz Lied ...

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

  • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    The people inside the club are totally irrelevant when it comes to seeing the Schwartz incident, for very obvious reasons. So this leaves Mortimer and the couple. We can’t say that the couple were still in the street at 12.45 so they are irrelevant too. So this leaves Mortimer.

    And we know that she gave differing versions of what she did that night so how do we select which version to believe? One version easily allows for her having gone back inside when the Schwartz incident occurred (we also have to bear in mind that when Schwartz said 12.45 we can’t know how accurate that was) It’s also noticeable that she didn’t see Stride arrive at the gates of the yard. You might doubt Schwartz but there’s no doubt that she was there. Why didn’t Fanny see her? U less she was inside of course.

    Therefore it’s not surprising or far fetched in the slightest that no one saw this incident. This is life. Things sometimes happen and no one witnesses them. And we also have to remember that the incident would have only lasted for a matter of seconds. There’s just nothing surprising about this. There’s nothing mysterious about any of this if we except that people make errors in timing. Especially at that time and in that area.
    Actually we can say that there were other witnesses aside from Mortimer that could have witnessed Schwartz's alledged incident, the young couple was seen by Brown at 12:45.

    What we have with Fanny are multiple sources saying she was at her door "almost the whole time" between 12:30 and 1am. You sought to identify periods she wasnt by virtue of events she never mentions, you dont consider she was at her door at 112:45 and didnt see anything because nothing occurred. You cant assume Fanny missed anything, particularly when Schwartz see 2 additional men on the street that neither Fanny or the young couple ever sees. This was not some orchestrated event, where people come and go at just the correct times to avoid being seen. Fanny was at her door the majority of that 30 minutes, not a minority of that period. She didnt miss anything in my opinion...and we know at 12:55 she was standing there until 1. Only Diemshutz arrival, which by virtue of her statement, we cannot claim happened at 1 as he said.

    Lets not forget multiple witnesses who saw something they all shared at the same approx time and at a specific point in both time and geography, all of them suggesting that Liz Stride was dying on her side in the passageway at around the same time Israel claimed to see her standing up in the street being assaulted in the presence of 2 previously unseen men. Who leave again without being seen.

    I think its not surprising we dont see Israel at the Inquest...clearly nothing of his statement is validated by any other witness.

    Last edited by Michael W Richards; 10-15-2021, 04:26 PM.
    Michael Richards

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

      Actually we can say that there were other witnesses aside from Mortimer that could have witnessed Schwartz's alledged incident, the young couple was seen by Brown at 12:45.

      What we have with Fanny are multiple sources saying she was at her door "almost the whole time" between 12:30 and 1am. You sought to identify periods she wasnt by virtue of events she never mentions, you dont consider she was at her door at 112:45 and didnt see anything because nothing occurred. You cant assume Fanny missed anything, particularly when Schwartz see 2 additional men on the street that neither Fanny or the young couple ever sees. This was not some orchestrated event, where people come and go at just the correct times to avoid being seen. Fanny was at her door the majority of that 30 minutes, not a minority of that period. She didnt miss anything in my opinion...and we know at 12:55 she was standing there until 1. Only Diemshutz arrival, which by virtue of her statement, we cannot claim happened at 1 as he said.

      Lets not forget multiple witnesses who saw something they all shared at the same approx time and at a specific point in both time and geography, all of them suggesting that Liz Stride was dying on her side in the passageway at around the same time Israel claimed to see her standing up in the street being assaulted in the presence of 2 previously unseen men. Who leave again without being seen.

      I think its not surprising we dont see Israel at the Inquest...clearly nothing of his statement is validated by any other witness.
      No, I try to identify Mortimer’s movements for that evening by reason. What is more likely….. that Fanny was on her doorstep almost the whole and didn’t see Schwartz because he lied to place himself at the scene of the murder as part of some weird, ineffective plot involving club members or, the much more sensible, that what she told the EN was essentially correct but wrong on her time. That she did indeed go onto her doorstep just after Smith had passed and for around 10 minutes. Meaning that she was back inside when as Schwartz passed.

      If she was on the doorstep nearly the whole time……

      1. Why didn’t she see Diemschutz return?
      2. Why didn’t she see Stride arrive at the gates?
      3. Why didn’t she see Spooner allegedly arriving at 12.35?
      4. Why didn’t she see Hoschberg allegedly dashing to the club at 12.45?
      5. Why didn’t she see Morris Eagle return?

      Why are these discrepancies brushed under the carpet?

      For numbers 3 and 4 we know that the answer is because they didn’t arrive at the yard at their guessed time. They were mistaken and both arrived after 1.00.

      For number 1 we know for a fact that Diemschutz arrived at 1.00

      For numbers 2 and 4 we know that the answer is because she wasn’t on her doorstep at that time.

      Its all very simple. A few errors of timing. Nothing sinister at all. Apart from these few errors there’s not a smidgeon of evidence for anything suspicious. The times tie up with the arrival of the police and the doctors (unless we keep quibbling over a minute or two here and there)

      The club members would not have worried about the club being closed.
      They couldn’t possibly have ignored the much simpler and effective alternative plans.
      Theres no way they could not have realised the enormous risks of the plan.
      There’s no way they’d have chosen a non-English speaker to carry it out.
      There’s no way that Schwartz could have been such a cretin that he could mess up such a childishly simple plan.

      Its not even remotely approaching believable. And we also know for a fact that Schwartz non-attendance was nothing to do with him not being believed.


      Regards

      Sir Herlock Sholmes



      “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

      “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
        I guess you misread my quote there....off premises assailant, I didnt say it was intended to suggest the murder was off premises as it clearly wasnt. Shall we just boil this down a bit? Liz was killed between 12:35 and 1. At that time approx 30 jewish immigrants were known to be in the club, and a young couple was seen on the street. At least 2 of those immigrant jewish men claim to be in the passageway during that time. There is not one single corroberation for any part of Israel Schwartz story about what happened on the street. Not one other person sees a BSM, or a pipeman, nor Liz alive after 12:35.

        So, where is the killer almost certainly from? .....obviously from the pool of jewish immigrant men onsite.
        "On the left side of the yard is a house, which is divided into three tenements, and occupied, I believe, by that number of families. At the end is a store or workshop belonging to Messrs. Hindley and Co., sack manufacturers."

        This has been pointed out to you multiple times, but you repeatedly ignore any possible suspect that is not Jewish.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Fiver View Post

          "On the left side of the yard is a house, which is divided into three tenements, and occupied, I believe, by that number of families. At the end is a store or workshop belonging to Messrs. Hindley and Co., sack manufacturers."

          This has been pointed out to you multiple times, but you repeatedly ignore any possible suspect that is not Jewish.
          You have a point in that I assumed the cottagers were also Jewish, I do believe Lave lived in one of those cottages and I dont know his ethnicity. In fact the house that Israel claimed to have moved from that day might have been one of those cottages. It would explain why he was there at that time, and why no census data has definitely answered that question. My point was that Strides killer had to come from somewhere on that property, Lave and Eagle confirmed what Fannys says about the street, that it was deserted..aside from the young couple Fanny and Brown see. But no witness aside from Israel claimed to see any other people on the street. No BSM, no Pipeman and no Stride after 12:35. Since Fanny didnt see Liz after 12:35, and since we have reason to believe she was in that passageway getting murdered as early as 12:46 according to Blackwell....( Phillips thought that the cut could have been made as early as 12:30), if she cant be seen by Fanny at anytime she was at her door after 12:35, it stands to reason she was already in the passageway when Schwartz claims he saw her and 2 other people. Multiple witnesses also say that, because they were standing around her while she lay bleeding to death at around that same time.

          The whole inference in this argument is that multiple corroborating stories supercede any stories that are singular, unsupported, and therefore amount only to one persons word against others. If 3 or 4 people see the same something at a same given time, none see anyone else, and someone claims to have been there at that time and seen something completely different with new additions to the people available to that site at that time...club men,...then the corroborative accounts can be the only ones worth accepting as some kind of "truth". Unless verification can be made, it must be evidence that is not wholly trustworthy.

          So dont bank on what Israel said. Or anyone else who claimed to see nothing on that same spot at a time when multiple witnesses say they were there too. Like Eagle. Or Lave.
          Michael Richards

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

            You have a point in that I assumed the cottagers were also Jewish, I do believe Lave lived in one of those cottages and I dont know his ethnicity. In fact the house that Israel claimed to have moved from that day might have been one of those cottages. It would explain why he was there at that time, and why no census data has definitely answered that question. My point was that Strides killer had to come from somewhere on that property, Lave and Eagle confirmed what Fannys says about the street, that it was deserted..aside from the young couple Fanny and Brown see. But no witness aside from Israel claimed to see any other people on the street. No BSM, no Pipeman and no Stride after 12:35. Since Fanny didnt see Liz after 12:35, and since we have reason to believe she was in that passageway getting murdered as early as 12:46 according to Blackwell....( Phillips thought that the cut could have been made as early as 12:30), if she cant be seen by Fanny at anytime she was at her door after 12:35, it stands to reason she was already in the passageway when Schwartz claims he saw her and 2 other people. Multiple witnesses also say that, because they were standing around her while she lay bleeding to death at around that same time.

            The whole inference in this argument is that multiple corroborating stories supercede any stories that are singular, unsupported, and therefore amount only to one persons word against others. If 3 or 4 people see the same something at a same given time, none see anyone else, and someone claims to have been there at that time and seen something completely different with new additions to the people available to that site at that time...club men,...then the corroborative accounts can be the only ones worth accepting as some kind of "truth". Unless verification can be made, it must be evidence that is not wholly trustworthy.

            So dont bank on what Israel said. Or anyone else who claimed to see nothing on that same spot at a time when multiple witnesses say they were there too. Like Eagle. Or Lave.
            Hi Michael,

            My conclusion is that Brown saw the couple that FM referred to, and not Stride. I find myself unable to concur with your statements regarding Eagle. His time estimates were based on a starting point with a 15 minute range and then he attempts to estimate a time interval of about an hour. He specifically stated that he did not look at the clock in the club (who knows if that clock was syncronised?) so basically his times are highly approximate and not worthy of note. I am not aware of Lave quoting any clock reference so he probably falls into the same category.

            I would not dismiss Israel's testimony too quickly, as if FM's story is evaluated against Smith's times it does not fare badly. My assessment is that Stride was murdered around 12:50. The big factor in all of these discussions is that clocks were not synchronised and time estimates by anyone except the professionals (the police) are dubious to the point of being irrelevant.
            “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.”

            Comment


            • Originally posted by GBinOz View Post

              Hi Michael,

              My conclusion is that Brown saw the couple that FM referred to, and not Stride. I find myself unable to concur with your statements regarding Eagle. His time estimates were based on a starting point with a 15 minute range and then he attempts to estimate a time interval of about an hour. He specifically stated that he did not look at the clock in the club (who knows if that clock was syncronised?) so basically his times are highly approximate and not worthy of note. I am not aware of Lave quoting any clock reference so he probably falls into the same category.

              I would not dismiss Israel's testimony too quickly, as if FM's story is evaluated against Smith's times it does not fare badly. My assessment is that Stride was murdered around 12:50. The big factor in all of these discussions is that clocks were not synchronised and time estimates by anyone except the professionals (the police) are dubious to the point of being irrelevant.
              I believe the young couple seen by Schwartz were the same couple seen by Mortimer as well. This is sort of by default, they are the only people seen on the street by Fanny between 12:35 and 12:55 when she sees Goldstein. Apparently she spoke with the young couple afterwards and they didnt see anyone either....which means...for Israel to have been accurate and truthful both Fanny and the *young couple, (*who didnt go inside at intervals), had to miss seeing all of them.

              As for Eagle, its not how long he was in the club when he returned, its what time he actually returned. Lave and Eagle both said they were by the gates at 12:40, neither saw anyone or each other. And no less than 3......suggested to be 4...people stated they were in the passage, with Louis and the dying woman, at between 12:40 and 12:45. One is Issac Kozebrodski. If Eagle arrived at 12:40 why didnt he see anyone...if Eagle arrived at 12:40, why didnt Lave seen him, and if Eagle arrived at 12:40, why couldnt he be sure if there was a dying woman just inside the gates.
              Last edited by Michael W Richards; 10-19-2021, 07:04 PM.
              Michael Richards

              Comment


              • I find it interesting that after I mention that not only Fanny didnt see or hear Israels event but neither did the young couple who did not go indoors from time to time that half hour....people stopped posting.

                Israel statement was translated, perhaps the translator fudged the details, perhaps he made the whole thing up in English. Which Israel presumably wouldnt be aware of if that happened. Its likely Wess translated, and we know Wess and Schwartz are documented as friends later in the LVP, were they at that time? israel is directly connected to that club also later in the LVP, does he have a connection with it then?
                Michael Richards

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
                  I find it interesting that after I mention that not only Fanny didnt see or hear Israels event but neither did the young couple who did not go indoors from time to time that half hour....people stopped posting.

                  Israel statement was translated, perhaps the translator fudged the details, perhaps he made the whole thing up in English. Which Israel presumably wouldnt be aware of if that happened. Its likely Wess translated, and we know Wess and Schwartz are documented as friends later in the LVP, were they at that time? israel is directly connected to that club also later in the LVP, does he have a connection with it then?
                  I don’t mind answering.

                  1. If Fanny went onto the doorstep just after Smith passed as she herself said, and if a policeman is more likely to be time-aware than your average citizen (as you yourself agreed to on the other thread) then she probably went onto her doorstep sometime approaching 12.35. And so if she was on the doorstep for around 10 minutes as she herself said then it’s probable that she’d gone back inside by the time that Schwartz passed. Either this or you can believe that Israel Schwartz simply lied and placed himself needlessly and alone at the scene of a murder. I know which one makes most sense.

                  and then

                  2. You claim that returned and Diemschutz discovered the body around 12.30/12.35. You believe that Hoschberg and Kozebrodski said that they were with the body at 12.45 (which means that there was action going on a few feet from Fanny’s door.) You believe that Spooner and Diemschutz went dashing into the yard, after yelling for the police, at 12.35.

                  How come Fanny neither saw or heard any of this? Or is that acceptable but the missing of a thirty second or so incident isn’t?

                  We could also add from the testimony…..why didn’t she see Eagle return or Lave? And of course why didn’t she see Stride arrive at the doors of the gates?

                  A clearer example of your highly selective analysis of witnesses I couldn’t hope to find.
                  Regards

                  Sir Herlock Sholmes



                  “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

                  “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

                  Comment


                  • To sum up on this point….

                    We know that Fanny gave 2 versions of what she did that night. This is a fact.

                    As we weren’t there neither of us can say which one was true. This is a fact.

                    And so the big question that you ask (slightly rephrased by me) is……. Would it have been possible for Fanny to have missed the Schwartz incident?

                    The answer to this, logically, has to be yes. I can’t prove the positive and you can’t prove the negative.

                    Therefore if one of the versions that Fanny gave was true then the possibility that she missed the incident definitely exists.

                    Therefore Fanny Mortimer can’t be used to show that Schwartz wasn’t where he said that he was.
                    Regards

                    Sir Herlock Sholmes



                    “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

                    “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

                    Comment


                    • I dont recall ever being specific about what time I believe Louis actually did arrive, but if pressed I would say perhaps around 12:40...when the accounts Ive been citing all arrive there. I think Louis pulled in, discovered what had just happened and called for help. I think Eagle had perhaps just returned and perhaps was upstairs, and that Issac and Heschberg were there roughly when they suggested. I think Spooner sees a search party sent out immediately, but its not Issac K, because he went another route alone around that same time. I think the reason that Lave and Eagle dont mention each other at 12:40 is because they intended to suggest that the area was deserted at that time. I believe that Eagle reveals he may know otherwise about what happened when he returned, because he "couldnt be sure" a dying woman was also there at that time. He hedges his bet so not to get proven wrong later. I think Eagle goes out just after Issac K, and when Issac sees him returning with Lamb its around 12:58-1am.

                      So if Fanny does go inside at around 12:36 and stays in there until shortly after 12:40-45, then she would miss all this happening...including Louis arriving. But the fact that the young couple was on the street all throughout that half hour and saw no-one...Fanny says she spoke with them after....suggests that Fanny didnt miss anything when indoors because nothing transpired on the street during those minutes. She returns to the door near 12:50 and stays there until 1am. She saw Goldstein at 12:55 ish.

                      The only thing that is missing is Israels activities, which quite frankly were almost certainly not as represented. Its a story, probably arrived at by another person who had a stake in the club staying open, Wess, who also is likely the translator for Schwartz as he later is for Goldstein on Tuesday. Israel risked nothing if they couldnt prove he was lying, and the reason we still have to argue this is because that proof never surfaced. Because no-one else was concerned about what was on the street at 12:40-12:45 and Fanny was likely not at her door. You cant see what doesnt occur, but you cant really refute was is claimed if you didnt actually see it for yourself at that time.

                      The way I see this the multiple witnesses who stated they were by the dying woman around 12:40-12:45 were all roughly accurate, the police witness who said he saw the search party before 1 was roughly accurate. Eagle could well have returned around 12:40, and Lave could well have been there too. But so was Louis, and therefore we have to set aside Schwartz because there is no secondhand verification and assume that Louis was not truthful when he emphasized he arrived at "precisely" 1am. He was actually there 20 minutes or so earlier.

                      So, in my interpretation Louis arrived about 20 minutes before he claimed, Lave and Eagle didnt mention each other at the gates at that time because in fact there was activity going on there that they didnt want to acknowledge. Israel is a red herring, and Goldstein looked in and saw men there, some of whom might shoo him along, so he kept walking. He had a bag with empty cigarette cartons in it and its reported that men in the cottages in the passageway were cigarette makers and awake at the time this was going on. I think he was dropping off a carton or 2 there and instead was told quietly to keep walking by.

                      This whole nasty conspiracy theory amounts to men presenting what happened in their most positive light, with nothing there at 12:40, all the men upstairs, and Eagle and Lave seeing nothing out of the ordinary. Schwartz is insurance...and late to the game might be indications of time taken to construct a story.

                      The club staffers knew that the men at that club at that time were the only men legitimately within striking distance of Stride during that critical time so Schwartz gave them 3 men on the street, arguably anti-Semitic, with Stride still standing and on the street. The 2 unknown men nearest Stride suddenly become the most probable source of the killer. Relatively simple, and clever. I dont know why so many dont see that possibility, but for me it merges Reason and Logic requirements handily.

                      footnote: I forgot Fanny, who I believe went indoors when Smith left and stayed there until just before 12:50.
                      Last edited by Michael W Richards; 10-22-2021, 11:58 AM.
                      Michael Richards

                      Comment


                      • The reasons that this plan had no chance of being successful and why Louis Diemschutz couldn’t have failed to have known this from the start….

                        1) The plan has Diemschutz returning to the club earlier than the time that he stated (around 12.30) so how could he not have been aware that would only have taken one person to say that he/she had seen him returning at 12.30 and the plan immediately implodes. Diemschutz would have been fully aware of this.

                        2) How is it possible that Kozebrodski (who he went looking for Constable with) and Spooner (who he spoke to and returned to) both gave an incorrect time? The two people that Diemschutz had the best chance of telling about the plan to claim that the body was discovered at 1.00.

                        3) How could Diemschutz have been unaware (especially when we consider the seriousness of the situation) that the police would have interviewed everyone and that not everyone had been informed of the ‘script?’ All it would have taken was for just one person to have said “I checked the clock just as Diemschutz told us about the body and it was 12.35.” It would have been gave over and Louis can’t possibly have been unaware of this possibility.

                        4) How could Diemschutz been unaware of the enormous risk of just one person coming forward to say “I was looking out of my window from 12.30 until around 1.00 and I saw no incident in Berner Street.) Such an obvious and very possible risk could have been missed by Diemschutz.

                        5) How could Diemschutz, when forming this on-the-spot-plan, have known that he would have been able to find someone willing to lie about such a serious incident. And someone stupid enough not to have realised that point 4 applied to him too?

                        6) How could anyone believe that a non-English speaker was the ideal candidate for the job?

                        7) How can Schwartz have managed to mess up such a simple plan by introducing Pipeman and leaving doubt as to who the insult ‘Lipski’ was aimed at? A more pertinent question though should be, if the interpreter came from the club, they had a few hours to explain the plan to him so how could the interpreter still have confused this childishly simple plan?

                        8) Why did Diemschutz come up with this vague plan involving the word ‘Lipski’ when a child could have seen a far simple and vastly more effective plan was at hand. Diemschutz could simply have said that a man emerged from the yard carrying a knife as he’d arrived and he shouted an insult at him (maybe ‘Lipski’) Diemschutz also would have had the option of mentioning an accent and giving a description. Eagle could also have been the man to have ‘seen’ the killer. There was always the option of moving the body of course. No one would have missed the simple and effective plan in favour of the feeble one.

                        9) How can Diemschutz and the club members have been unaware of the probability that this murder would have been considered by the police as a continuation of a series involving Tabram, Nichols and Chapman? It’s impossible that they wouldn’t have considered this so on what level would they have believed that the police would have held them responsible and punished them by closing the club. At a time of such ill feeling against foreigners in general and Jews in particular how would it have looked if the police had closed down the club because they were unlucky enough to have been the location of a ripper murder. The suggestion beggars belief.

                        10) Can we stereotype the members as such ‘heartless anarchists’ that they would have given the police misleading information? Would they have wanted the killer caught as quickly as possible?

                        11) With a crowd in the yard and the gates open how could they have ‘hoped’ that no passerby would have looked in and then told the police “I saw a crowd of men in the yard at 12.50,” ten minutes before Diemschutz said that he’d found the body. Goldstein for example passed by (although we don’t know the exact time) but he didn’t mention seeing a crowd in the yard and according to Fanny he actually looked at the club.

                        12) If Diemschutz and Kozebrodski actually went looking some time not long after 12.35 and they were yelling for a Constable how could they have hoped that either, a, no one heard them, or b, no one could have put a time to it that was around 20 minutes before Diemschutz had actually said that he’d found the body? This is yet another point that beggars belief.

                        ………..

                        Im sure that other points could be made but we have 12 here. I fail to see how anyone could even consider the possibility of any kind of cover up going? We see the usual conspiracist fare of course. Some vague and shady (and completely unbelievable) motive and we’re off because, as we all know, any investigation will provide the errors and contradictions with are the fertile ground beloved of the conspiracy theorist. A crime taking place in the poorest of areas in the LVP is made to measure. We have largely poorly educated people mostly wary of the police. We have police officers who’s training was little more than being able to read, write and count. We have very few people owning watches and clocks leaving us reliant on estimations (some more vague than others) And in this case we have some ‘dodgy socialists/anarchists.’

                        There was no believable or vaguely reasonable motive for a cover up. The plan that was allegedly concocted was so riddled with flaws that a child would have laughed at the suggestion. And on top of that we have to conclude that Diemschutz and his cohorts were such monumental dimwits that they missed a glaringly obvious, simpler, more effective, and vastly more likely to have succeeded, plan.

                        After 20 years this ‘cover up’ needs to be consigned to the dustbin of ripperological history. I’m wary of over-confidence but I have no problem in saying with absolute confidence “it didn’t happen.”
                        Regards

                        Sir Herlock Sholmes



                        “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

                        “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

                        Comment


                        • .
                          So if Fanny does go inside at around 12:36 and stays in there until shortly after 12:40-45, then she would miss all this happening...including Louis arriving. But the fact that the young couple was on the street all throughout that half hour and saw no-one...Fanny says she spoke with them after....suggests that Fanny didnt miss anything when indoors because nothing transpired on the street during those minutes. She returns to the door near 12:50 and stays there until 1am. She saw Goldstein at 12:55 ish.
                          No. Fanny comes on to her doorstep from between 12.30/12.35 until just before 12.45. Then goes inside.

                          Goldstein doesn’t mention a time. He might have passed at 12.44 just before she went inside.
                          Regards

                          Sir Herlock Sholmes



                          “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

                          “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

                          Comment


                          • . Israel risked nothing if they couldnt prove he was lying, and the reason we still have to argue this is because that proof never surfaced
                            How can you suggest this?

                            All that it would have taken was 1 person coming forward to say that they were looking out of their window during that period and they saw no incident and he would have been proven a liar.
                            Regards

                            Sir Herlock Sholmes



                            “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

                            “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

                            Comment


                            • . Louis was not truthful when he emphasized he arrive at "precisely" 1am. He was actually there 20 minutes or so earlier.
                              Nonsense. He had zero reason to lie. Your plot motive is a figment of your imagination.
                              Regards

                              Sir Herlock Sholmes



                              “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

                              “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

                              Comment


                              • .
                                So, in my interpretation Louis arrived about 20 minutes before he claimed, Lave and Eagle didnt mention each other at the gates at that time because in fact there was activity going on there that they didnt want to acknowledge
                                Or a more boring explanation. They were there a minute or so apart. Simple. No plot required.
                                Regards

                                Sir Herlock Sholmes



                                “Conspiracy theorists, she knew, were paranoid by definition, and usually with good reason – they were indeed being watched, largely because they were standing on an upturned bucket, haranguing the sheeple about their wingnut delusions.”

                                “If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X