Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If Schwartz Lied ...

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

  • . Tell me why the following is not also an implicit reference to Schwartz...

    Spooner: I did not meet anyone as I was hastening to Berner-street, except Mr. Harris, who was coming out of his house in Tiger Bay when he heard the policeman's whistle. He came running after me.

    Presumably the question was something like...

    Did you come across anyone, while making your way to the yard, who might have been leaving the crime scene?

    Was Spooner too late getting to the yard, to have seen Schwartz? Then why does he change his mind about the time he arrived...?

    I believe it was about 25 minutes to one o'clock when I ran round to the yard.

    In other words, I could not have missed seeing a man running away from the vicinity of the crime. Did Spooner have Schwartz in mind?
    How could he have been when it would have been 10 minutes before Schwartz arrived. We know this 12.35 was an error of course.
    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


    • Pipeman was found by the police and cleared.

      He was most likely the corner beer shop proprietor having a knock off smoke.

      Click image for larger version

Name:	pipe knife Rogers.jpg
Views:	64
Size:	65.0 KB
ID:	773877

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

        There’s no way that Schwartz would have made such a statement and neglected to have mentioned one man. If there were 2 men as you suggest then this incident involved only 3 men + Stride. How could he have neglected to have mentioned one of them especially when he mentions one of them having a knife?
        Who told Wess that the man pursued had escaped his pursuer?

        The man pursued escaped, however, and the secretary of the Club cannot remember the name of the man who gave chase, but he is not a member of their body.

        Did Knifeman tell Wess about the non-member Pipeman, pursuing a man believed to be the murderer? If it was Pipeman himself who told Wess, then we are left supposing that Wess knew the identity of Pipeman, but the police did not.

        Also, how many people witnessed the assault on Stride? The Star, Oct 1:

        The police have been told that a man, aged between 35 and 40 years of age, and of fair complexion, was seen to throw the woman murdered in Berner-street to the ground. Those who saw it thought that it was a man and his wife quarrelling, and no notice was taken of it.

        So perhaps Schwartz did neglect to mention one man to the police, and another man to the Star reporter. No wonder Leman street are having doubts...

        In the matter of the Hungarian who said he saw a struggle between a man and a woman in the passage where the Stride body was afterwards found, the Leman-street police have reason to doubt the truth of the story. They arrested one man on the description thus obtained, and a second on that furnished from another source, but they are not likely to act further on the same information without additional facts.

        Who was the other source that gave a description of Pipeman? Knifeman, perhaps?

        I’d say that Swanson just got a bit confused in his retelling.
        Swanson got confused about the man's location, behavior, and hand-held implement? I know Swanson was working very long hours, but that's a lot to get confused about.
        Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

          Surely this just comes from the police exploring the possibility that BS Man and Pipeman might have known each other? Without the benefit of any transcripts police interviews we have no way of knowing of course. They might have asked “are you certain that he was shouting ‘Lipski’ at you” which possibly raised something of a doubt in his mind? This would have left the police with an option to consider.
          According to Swanson, "the police apparently do not suspect the second man". Thus, the only man who could have supposed that the second man was an accomplice, was Schwartz.
          Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

            How could he have been when it would have been 10 minutes before Schwartz arrived. We know this 12.35 was an error of course.
            You're missing my drift, which is why I think Spooner gave the second time. He wanted the inquest people to suppose that there was no way he could have missed a man leaving the crime scene. The second time 'covers' Schwartz, whereas the implied 12:55 does not. Coincidence or not?
            Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

            Comment


            • Originally posted by DJA View Post
              Pipeman was found by the police and cleared.

              He was most likely the corner beer shop proprietor having a knock off smoke.
              Unlikely to have been the proprietor, or anyone, leavig the pub at that hour, Sir;

              Times 2 Oct, Wess:
              "On the same side as the club is a beershop and I have seen men and women coming from there.
              A Juryman. - That is always closed about 9 o'clock."

              Comment


              • Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Times [London] - 2 October 1888

                Hi Josh,

                Can't find th
                at.
                Is that one of Andy's Irish Times articles

                If the prop lived on the premises ......

                I used to live/work at the Annandale Hotel in Sydney in the late 1960s.
                Worked odd hours although the pub kept standard hours.Cleaning,restocking,etc.
                Last edited by DJA; 11-16-2021, 12:46 PM.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by DJA View Post
                  Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Times [London] - 2 October 1888

                  Hi Josh,

                  Can't find th
                  at.
                  Is that one of Andy's Irish Times articles

                  If the prop lived on the premises ......

                  I used to live/work at the Annandale Hotel in Sydney in the late 1960s.
                  Worked odd hours although the pub kept standard hours.Cleaning,restocking,etc.
                  Apologies, Dave. It was from the Times, but was Eagle's evidence rather than Wess'.

                  if Pipeman lived in the building, it seems unlikely that he would have "chased" Schwartz rather than simply going inside.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

                    You're missing my drift, which is why I think Spooner gave the second time. He wanted the inquest people to suppose that there was no way he could have missed a man leaving the crime scene. The second time 'covers' Schwartz, whereas the implied 12:55 does not. Coincidence or not?
                    I still don’t get your drift. How does 12.35 ‘cover’ Schwartz?
                    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 Joshua Rogan View Post

                      Apologies, Dave. It was from the Times, but was Eagle's evidence rather than Wess'.

                      if Pipeman lived in the building, it seems unlikely that he would have "chased" Schwartz rather than simply going inside.
                      Sincerely doubt Schwartz was chased.

                      Seems to have fled incontinentlly or sumfin.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

                        According to Swanson, "the police apparently do not suspect the second man". Thus, the only man who could have supposed that the second man was an accomplice, was Schwartz.
                        Don’t see how you can arrive at that? They knew of the existence of the second man from Schwartz and they may have considered whether they knew each other and whether ‘Lipski’ was directed at Schwartz or Pipeman?
                        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


                        • Surely this ‘chase’ was a case of after-the-event confusion? Between Schwartz leaving the scene an Brown hearing Diemschutz and Koz running along Fairclough Street in search of a Constable?
                          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


                          • With regard to Spooner's time estimates...
                            ​​​​​​
                            Rather than lies or cover-ups, isn't it likely that there was simply some confusion in the court as to what time the pubs closed, just as there had been at the earlier inquest of Nichols? Perhaps after Spooner gave his first time estimate based on a twelve-thirty closing time, there was a suggestion (which unfortunately for us went unrecorded in the press) that they actually closed at midnight rather than at half past, and his second arrival time estimate takes this into account.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
                              With regard to Spooner's time estimates...
                              ​​​​​​
                              Rather than lies or cover-ups, isn't it likely that there was simply some confusion in the court as to what time the pubs closed, just as there had been at the earlier inquest of Nichols? Perhaps after Spooner gave his first time estimate based on a twelve-thirty closing time, there was a suggestion (which unfortunately for us went unrecorded in the press) that they actually closed at midnight rather than at half past, and his second arrival time estimate takes this into account.
                              Spooners most cohesive timings include a saunter from the pub at closing....midnight...to the location outside the Beehive (20 minutes tops), and then 20-25 minutes loitering there. If you look where the pub was it couldnt take more than 20 minutes for the "saunter", which with 20-25 minutes added, puts him in the passageway about 12:40-12:50. Which works with about 5 minutes before Lamb arrives, as he said. Which means that the men he saw running came out before 12:45, which puts the discovery around 12:40...as Issac K and Heschberg said.

                              Its easier if you dont simply decide which accounts to use but instead do the basic math. Youll find that stories, some stories, fit together in a sequences of events and times, and some dont, like Louis arriving just after 1 and just starting this whole process. Clearly, people were aware of Liz Stride in the passageway well before 1am. Lamb was there before 1 for god sake.

                              When you add Louis, Morris and Israel you see some substantial variances from the majority of the witnesses, who within their own independant stories, validate each others. So they do not form a sequence of events or a timeline that can be used in reconstructing this last half hour, or specifically the last 15 minutes of the hour.
                              Michael Richards

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

                                Spooners most cohesive timings include a saunter from the pub at closing....midnight...to the location outside the Beehive (20 minutes tops), and then 20-25 minutes loitering there. If you look where the pub was it couldnt take more than 20 minutes for the "saunter", which with 20-25 minutes added, puts him in the passageway about 12:40-12:50. Which works with about 5 minutes before Lamb arrives, as he said. Which means that the men he saw running came out before 12:45, which puts the discovery around 12:40...as Issac K and Heschberg said.

                                Its easier if you dont simply decide which accounts to use but instead do the basic math. Youll find that stories, some stories, fit together in a sequences of events and times, and some dont, like Louis arriving just after 1 and just starting this whole process. Clearly, people were aware of Liz Stride in the passageway well before 1am. Lamb was there before 1 for god sake.

                                When you add Louis, Morris and Israel you see some substantial variances from the majority of the witnesses, who within their own independant stories, validate each others. So they do not form a sequence of events or a timeline that can be used in reconstructing this last half hour, or specifically the last 15 minutes of the hour.
                                Fantasy. Even considering clocks being out Spooner arrived at the very earliest 12.55. Hoschberg and Koz were wrong. I don’t care what anyone says on this. They were too far out in their estimates to be taken seriously. Diemschutz found the body at 1.00 (clock might have been slightly out) End of story.

                                Time to stop assuming the majority of witnesses were lying to support two.
                                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