Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If Schwartz Lied ...

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

  • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

    There were many people on the street, in the hour leading up to the murder. For example...

    Coroner: Did you meet anybody in Berner-street?
    Wess: I can't recollect; but as I went along Fairclough-street, close by, I noticed some men and women standing together.

    That was at about 12:15, but the point is that we see a pattern common to all witnesses who were on the street - they all see other people. Smith did, Eagle did, Wess did, and Mortimer did. She saw men near the club and others on the street (one of them twice). So the situation looks pretty dire for Schwartz, even before we consider men from the WVC and plain clothes police.

    Your big failing is that you only think about Fanny. All you talk about in this regard, is Fanny. Everywhere you look, you only see Fanny. Yet when the timing doesn't suit, you want to hide Fanny away.

    And your absolutely enormous failing is your remarkable incredulity that an events of 30 seconds or so couldn’t have gone unseen at a quarter to one in the morning on an East End back street. You simply cannot prove that it’s anything like impossible that this couldn’t have occurred. In fact (and yes, this will annoy you) but it’s absolutely textbook conspiracist thinking. Conspiracist can’t accept that coincidences occur or that something can occur within a small time frame. Could this incident have occurred unseen? Absolutely, 100%, without a doubt. That doesn’t mean that it did of course but it means that you have zero evidence to prove otherwise but, like a dog with a bone, you won’t accept this and let it go. It has to be a lie. There has to have been a mystery or a cover-up.


    Who were the inconvenient witnesses to Schwartz' little play? Name one.

    It was a general point not specific to Schwartz.

    Smith was likely the most correct about the time, and I'm not sure about the 10 minute period, because it does not agree with either her other comments, or with Goldstein. However, if Smith was correct, and the 10 minutes was close enough to the truth, then the pony & cart must have been heard at about 12:48. Is that also correct?
    For this paragon of a witness to have been correct we have to say that, a) PC Smith passed 10 or 15 minutes later than he actually did, and b) that either Diemschutz inexplicably lied about arriving back earlier, or that he couldn’t tell time, or that he couldn’t see the clock properly and didn’t realise that he couldn’t see the clock properly or that the clock was 10 minutes or so out…


    Or……we could say PC Smith was correct AND Louis Diemschutz (who actually saw a clock) was also correct leaving us with the unpalatable suggestion (for you) that Fanny was simply honestly mistaken. She wasn’t on her doorstep when Schwartz passed and she was indoors for much longer before she heard Diemschutz and then the noise from the yard. Or less charitably, she was simply a busybody who couldn’t get her story straight.

    Regards

    Sir Herlock Sholmes

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

      I don’t know what this section is about? My point is an obvious one.

      If it’s claimed that Fanny went onto her doorstep just after Smith passed and that was at 12.45 then Smith was wrong by 10 or 15 minutes. Is that reasonable? If you think that it is then fine, it’s your own call of course.
      But you would have us believe Lamb was wrong by about that amount, so ..are police times more or less likely to have been correct vs the bystanders who didnt wear a watch and were not exposed to a timepiece just before they became aware of something or took some action? The correct answer is obviously the police, because they are the only ones to have reasons to be vigilant about times all night long. Schwartz didnt have a watch as I recall, neither did Louis, nor Spooner. Nor Eagle. Nor Lave. But Fanny, Issac K and Heschberg all came from inside and its almost a cert that they had access to clocks indoors. Lamb knew his beat times.

      And oddly enough only Spooner out of the witnesses that were guessing about times has some secondary validation for a time in the passageway around 12;40-12:45. So a few people were there when Israel says his event took place...funny not one other person saw or heard any of what he claimed happened. Might be a good thing to check on what Smith actually did say..."My beat was past Berner- street, and would take me twenty-five minutes or half an hour to go round. I was in Berner-street about half-past twelve or twenty-five minutes to one o'clock, and having gone round my beat, was at the Commercial-road corner of Berner-street again at one o'clock. I was not called. I saw a crowd outside the gates of No. 40, Berner-street. I heard no cries of "Police." When I came to the spot two constables had already arrived".

      Seems to me we can add Smith to a group of witnesses that claimed an earlier than 1am discovery. If he sees this at 1am, and the crowd is already there, then it can establish the woman was found by someone before 1am.

      This is where the rubber meets the road. We have ample reasons to set a discovery time earlier than 1am, and if Louis had arrived after 1am, when Fanny had gone back indoors, then he didnt discover the victim. If he arrived earlier while Fanny was indoors, then that can work with the majority of witnesses who gave an earlier discovery time.
      Last edited by Michael W Richards; 11-22-2021, 05:34 PM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

        But you would have us believe Lamb was wrong by about that amount, so ..are police times more or less likely to have been correct vs the bystanders who didnt wear a watch and were not exposed to a timepiece just before they became aware of something or took some action? The correct answer is obviously the police, because they are the only ones to have reasons to be vigilant about times all night long. Schwartz didnt have a watch as I recall, neither did Louis, nor Spooner. Nor Eagle. Nor Lave. But Fanny, Issac K and Heschberg all came from inside and its almost a cert that they had access to clocks indoors. Lamb knew his beat times.

        Not it doesn’t mean that. Lamb said :

        “…shortly before one o'clock,” or “About 1 o’clock, as near as I can tell,” Times or Telegraph take your pick.

        So “shortly before 1.00 could have meant 12.59. So if Eagle ran into Lamb at 1.04 or 1.05 then that means 5 or 6 that he might have been 5 or 6 minutes out. Is 5 minutes impossible…..no. Or unlikely? I can’t see how.

        You disingenuously say that Louis didn’t have a watch. He didn’t but he specifically said that he derived his time from seeing a clock. Unlike Koz and Hoschberg who were very clearly guessing.

        Again, the fact that there was a clock inside the club doesn’t mean that Koz, Hoschberg or Lave used it. In fact it’s very obvious that they were estimating by the wording used. Do we have to keep repeating Michael that Hoschberg said “around 1.00 I should think.” These aren’t the words of a man who has just looked at a clock. He was guessing.

        What does “Lamb knew his beat times actually mean?” He knew when his beat started and he knew approximately how long a full beat should take. He wasn’t a robot though. And as Caz rightly pointed out if he was anything like confident in what time Eagle got to him why was he at pains to stress that he didn’t have a watch? Why didn’t he, like the untrained Diemschutz, say “I’d just seen a clock so I know that the time was……” He was estimating and could easily have been 5 minutes out.


        And oddly enough only Spooner out of the witnesses that were guessing about times has some secondary validation for a time in the passageway around 12;40-12:45

        No he doesn’t. Firstly, Koz was supposedly with the body at 12.45 when it had just been discovered by the man that was still with him in the yard! The man who brought Spooner back to the yard with him at 12.35 according to Spooner himself. On what planet is that confirmation? It’s the opposite of confirmation. Spooner gives 2 times and the BOTH negate Koz and Hoschberg.

        Spooner then said 5 minutes before Lamb which clearly wasn’t 12.35 and clearly wasn’t 12.45. There’s not a chance in the world that Lamb got to the yard at 12.50 or before. It’s not even worth wasting words on.


        So a few people were there when Israel says his event took place...funny not one other person saw or heard any of what he claimed happened.

        No one was there at the time that Schwartz passed or they would have seen him. As no one saw him no one was there. It’s simple. Fanny had gone back inside. Obvious. No mystery.

        Might be a good thing to check on what Smith actually did say..."My beat was past Berner- street, and would take me twenty-five minutes or half an hour to go round. I was in Berner-street about half-past twelve or twenty-five minutes to one o'clock, and having gone round my beat, was at the Commercial-road corner of Berner-street again at one o'clock. I was not called. I saw a crowd outside the gates of No. 40, Berner-street. I heard no cries of "Police." When I came to the spot two constables had already arrived".

        Still trying to hold every time to the exact minute when it suits I see. Try accepting that these witnesses weren’t robots and that they require the use of reasonable approximations and it will become clear. Wash away the conspiracist fog and see the truth. Just keep saying to yourself “approximately, approximately, approximately, about, around, something like, approximately, approximately, approximately” and it might sink in.” Stop juggling. Smith arrived after Lamb probably around 1.05ish. No complications. No stopwatches. No mystery. Simple.

        Seems to me we can add Smith to a group of witnesses that claimed an earlier than 1am discovery. If he sees this at 1am, and the crowd is already there, then it can establish the woman was found by someone before 1am.

        You probably can in Grassy Knoll World but here on good old planet Earth we can’t. We all know what happened and have done for 130 years. We just don’t know who did it.

        This is where the rubber meets the road. We have ample reasons to set a discovery time earlier than 1am, and if Louis had arrived after 1am, when Fanny had gone back indoors, then he didnt discover the victim. If he arrived earlier while Fanny was indoors, then that can work with the majority of witnesses who gave an earlier discovery time.

        We haven’t a single, solitary shred of creditable evidence to place the discovery time before 1.00 when it actually occurred. Koz and Hosch can safely be dismissed.
        Stride was killed between 12.45 and 1.00 by a man who might or might not have been Jack The Ripper. Her body was discovered by Louis Diemschutz at 1.00 (allowing for any clock synchronisation issues of course)

        Every single point raised by conspiracists can and has been dealt with numerous times but they are simply to biased to accept it.

        Im sure that I’m not the only one that wishes that conspiracists would switch of their ego’s and desist in making a mockery of this entire subject. And you’ve never answered my question Michael….

        Why do you still post from your high horse when for the last 20+ years your club cover-up theory has been rejected wholesale by ripperology? It’s a strange tone to adopt for the fringest of fringe conspiracy theorists. Let’s face it Michael, numerically speaking more people believe the Stephen Knight theory than believe your theory. According to a Casebok poll more people believe that Lewis Carroll was Jack the Ripper than believe your theory. I wonder if it will ever sink in with you?​​​​​​​


        Regards

        Sir Herlock Sholmes

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

          Stride was killed between 12.45 and 1.00 by a man who might or might not have been Jack The Ripper. Her body was discovered by Louis Diemschutz at 1.00 (allowing for any clock synchronisation issues of course)

          Every single point raised by conspiracists can and has been dealt with numerous times but they are simply to biased to accept it.

          Im sure that I’m not the only one that wishes that conspiracists would switch of their ego’s and desist in making a mockery of this entire subject. And you’ve never answered my question Michael….

          Why do you still post from your high horse when for the last 20+ years your club cover-up theory has been rejected wholesale by ripperology? It’s a strange tone to adopt for the fringest of fringe conspiracy theorists. Let’s face it Michael, numerically speaking more people believe the Stephen Knight theory than believe your theory. According to a Casebok poll more people believe that Lewis Carroll was Jack the Ripper than believe your theory. I wonder if it will ever sink in with you?

          That you still dont get what is essentially already there on paper Herelock really doesnt bother me. The idea that you have been bestowed the ability to speak on behalf of Ripperology as whole does irk me though. I realize that your ego prevents you from seeing the bleeding obvious sometimes, but in no way do you have the right nor the mandate to speak on behalf of Ripperology.

          Because someone doesnt post support for one idea or the other doesnt mean I dont recieve it. And in some cases from people far more fitting to speak on behalf of the study having contributed so much to it.

          If you disagree with something, fine. But you do not speak for everyone...you just think you do apparently.

          On the above specifically...Louis provably did not discover Stride at 1am, Fanny was at her door then. No cart, no Louis at 1am. Even if he did arrive after 1am, Lamb, Kozebrodksi,and Heschberg contradict that he would be "discovering" Stride directly. Allowing for any clock synchronization indeed. You state things that are provably false and your "cherry picking" as has been pointed out already doesnt help you.

          Ive dumbed the questions down for you, ....If Lamb arrived before 1am with Eagle and Issac K, then approx what time was the body first discovered? If Smith saw a crowd at the gates at 1am, then when did that discovery take place? Both answers....BEFORE 1am.

          You want to believe Louis arrived around the time he said he did....1am. Then why didnt Fanny see or hear that, and what time...after seing to his wife and gathering people to the passageway did people first leave for help? Around the time that Johnson arrives? Why did Lamb see Eagle before 1am? Why did Smith see people at 1.

          You cant see whats right there. Not a problem for all of Ripperology...just you it seems.
          Last edited by Michael W Richards; 11-22-2021, 07:28 PM.

          Comment


          • What could we have expected the Police to have done with the descriptions that Schwartz gave? Or any other witness in this case for that matter? How many arrests could they have made? How many ID parades do we know occurred during these murders? Your point proves nothing.
            So is your point that the police regarded Schwartz as a valid, yet pretty much worthless witness?

            According to the Star, two arrests were made prior to the Oct 2 edition. One was based on the Hungarian's description, the other based on another source. How could there be another source, when Schwartz said the man with the pipe was the only other person on the street? Did Pipeman tell the police who his accomplice was?

            A newspaper talking vaguely about ‘the Police’ is not good evidence. Especially when it’s directly contradicted by official documents.
            Both the Oct 1 & 2 editions mention the Leman street police. Obviously it's too troubling for you to recognize this.

            Swanson hinted at doubts, and Anderson sounded outright skeptical of Schwartz. You appear to want the situation to be clean, unambiguous, black and white. Yet the real world is dirty, ambiguous, and full of greys.

            And I’m not pulling a line. The suggestion that the Press might have exaggerated is just a possibility. If someone within the Police had their doubts about Stride, and it’s quite possible that they did, we don’t know any details so it might just have been the opinion of the individual officer that the reporter interviewed. Or a small percentage of officers. The point is that this officer, or these officers, had no influence on the police investigation because Abberline clearly believed Schwartz and the Police acted accordingly.
            The Star report suggests otherwise...

            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.

            Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

            Im not picking cherries I’m refusing to get carried away as you do every time you read anything on the case that has a slightly different wording or mentions a slightly different time or whenever you get an idea or whenever you think “I wonder if anyone has ever accused witness x of anything? Let me see.
            You're avoiding the obvious. The 'measured, heavy tramp' report, does not give the reporters info source. Is it therefore worthless?

            You start from a point of “well there must be some kind of mystery or cover-up in this somewhere,” but I start from a position of saying “most witness tend to give there opinions honestly so this should be the default position until significant evidence is produced to prove otherwise, always bearing in mind that timings have to be accepted as approximations when we know this to have been the case and taking into account that not everyone uses language in exactly the same way especially when we consider poor education and the use of second languages.”
            I start from the same position as you do. It's just that I'm not permanently stuck at the starting gates.
            Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

              That you still dont get what is essentially already there on paper Herelock really doesnt bother me. The idea that you have been bestowed the ability to speak on behalf of Ripperology as whole does irk me though. I realize that your ego prevents you from seeing the bleeding obvious sometimes, but in no way do you have the right nor the mandate to speak on behalf of Ripperology.

              Because someone doesnt post support for one idea or the other doesnt mean I dont recieve it. And in some cases from people far more fitting to speak on behalf of the study having contributed so much to it.

              If you disagree with something, fine. But you do not speak for everyone...you just think you do apparently.

              On the above specifically...Louis provably did not discover Stride at 1am, Fanny was at her door then. No cart, no Louis at 1am. Even if he did arrive after 1am, Lamb, Kozebrodksi,and Heschberg contradict that he would be "discovering" Stride directly. Allowing for any clock synchronization indeed. You state things that are provably false and your "cherry picking" as has been pointed out already doesnt help you.

              Ive dumbed the questions down for you, ....If Lamb arrived before 1am with Eagle and Issac K, then approx what time was the body first discovered? If Smith saw a crowd at the gates at 1am, then when did that discovery take place? Both answers....BEFORE 1am.

              You want to believe Louis arrived around the time he said he did....1am. Then why didnt Fanny see or hear that, and what time...after seing to his wife and gathering people to the passageway did people first leave for help? Around the time that Johnson arrives? Why did Lamb see Eagle before 1am? Why did Smith see people at 1.

              You cant see whats right there. Not a problem for all of Ripperology...just you it seems.
              I don’t claim to speak for Ripperology. I’m questioning why you post in a tone that suggests that you are the one seeing the obvious whilst everyone else is missing it. Just saying that you receive support is just words. You are on the outer fringe of conspiracists.

              It’s amazing. You accuse me of cherry picking and stating things that aren’t true just after you’ve done EXACTLY that. How many times do we have to explain this Fanny Mortimer nonsense for christs sake Michael take those conspiracy goggles off. Just for 5 minutes. Just try it.

              Why do you say that Fanny was on her doorstep at 1.00. Fanny herself appears not to have known herself when she was on her doorstep so how the hell can you keep on tying her down to times? I’ll tell you why. Because you couldn’t care less about the truth. You’ll try absolutely any tactic to shoehorn your theory in. A square peg in a round hole. A sad joke.

              You need to keep calling witnesses liars and assuming that they were ‘in on it.’ I’m tired of hearing your clownish nonsense.

              If Fanny went onto her doorstep at 12.45 for 10 minutes (as she said) HOW THE HELL DID SHE MISS SEEING EAGLE GO FOR A PC AND THE RETURN WITH LAMB???

              Why didn’t Fanny see Eagle?
              Why didn’t Fanny see Diemschutz come back at 12.45 or so if she was on her doorstep ‘nearly the whole time?’
              Why did Brown hear Diemschutz and Koz around 1.00?
              Why did Sara and the servants say he returned at 1.00?
              Why did Wess say 1.00?
              Why didn’t Minsky say 1.00?
              Why did Gilleman and Eagle say they first saw the body at !.00?

              I suppose they were all ‘in on it?’

              Grow up Michael, we’re not in a Dan Brown novel. This was a simple murder. It couldn’t be more obvious.
              Regards

              Sir Herlock Sholmes

              Comment


              • And your absolutely enormous failing is your remarkable incredulity that an events of 30 seconds or so couldn’t have gone unseen at a quarter to one in the morning on an East End back street. You simply cannot prove that it’s anything like impossible that this couldn’t have occurred. In fact (and yes, this will annoy you) but it’s absolutely textbook conspiracist thinking. Conspiracist can’t accept that coincidences occur or that something can occur within a small time frame. Could this incident have occurred unseen? Absolutely, 100%, without a doubt. That doesn’t mean that it did of course but it means that you have zero evidence to prove otherwise but, like a dog with a bone, you won’t accept this and let it go. It has to be a lie. There has to have been a mystery or a cover-up.
                From the time Schwartz turns into Berner street, to the moment he reaches the gateway, more than 30 seconds have already elapsed. He still has to observe the action and run to the railway arch. Yet even this does not take into account how long Stride might have been standing in the gateway, if Schwartz' kooky story were true. Constantly making comments about me, is not going to cover-up the fact that your analysis is rubbish.

                The other big error that Schwartz believers make, is confuse the timespan of the entire incident, with the audibility of the incident. If a man calls out 'Lipski' on a quiet street, someone is going to hear it. If a woman screams three times, someone is going to hear it. If a man shouts a warning, someone is going to hear that. No one heard any of this stuff, and (poorly) estimating the timespan of the entire incident - or some subset of the incident - is not going to explain all this away. It seems Schwartz was a fake witness.

                Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                For this paragon of a witness to have been correct we have to say that, a) PC Smith passed 10 or 15 minutes later than he actually did, and b) that either Diemschutz inexplicably lied about arriving back earlier, or that he couldn’t tell time, or that he couldn’t see the clock properly and didn’t realise that he couldn’t see the clock properly or that the clock was 10 minutes or so out…
                Smith was likely correct about the time. I walked you through the implications of this, but you pretended not to understand.

                Or……we could say PC Smith was correct AND Louis Diemschutz (who actually saw a clock) was also correct leaving us with the unpalatable suggestion (for you) that Fanny was simply honestly mistaken. She wasn’t on her doorstep when Schwartz passed and she was indoors for much longer before she heard Diemschutz and then the noise from the yard. Or less charitably, she was simply a busybody who couldn’t get her story straight.
                You must be the only person in all of Ripperology, who supposes both Smith and Diemschitz turned into Berner street at close to 1am.

                As for Mortimer being a doorstep dwelling busybody who couldn't get her story straight, don't you think that's a bit rich, coming from a Schwartzist?
                Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                Comment


                • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

                  From the time Schwartz turns into Berner street, to the moment he reaches the gateway, more than 30 seconds have already elapsed. He still has to observe the action and run to the railway arch. Yet even this does not take into account how long Stride might have been standing in the gateway, if Schwartz' kooky story were true. Constantly making comments about me, is not going to cover-up the fact that your analysis is rubbish.

                  Railway arches are irrelevant.

                  Your analysis is not only rubbish it’s dishonest, contemptible, biased rubbish. I’m tired of enduring it.

                  The other big error that Schwartz believers make, is confuse the timespan of the entire incident, with the audibility of the incident. If a man calls out 'Lipski' on a quiet street, someone is going to hear it.

                  Rubbish.

                  If a woman screams three times, someone is going to hear it.

                  Rubbish.

                  If a man shouts a warning, someone is going to hear that.

                  Rubbish.

                  No one heard any of this stuff, and (poorly) estimating the timespan of the entire incident - or some subset of the incident - is not going to explain all this away. It seems Schwartz was a fake witness.

                  Laughable. Bloody fake witnesses. What’s next. Schwartz was a patsy?


                  Smith was likely correct about the time. I walked you through the implications of this, but you pretended not to understand.

                  No, I understood it for what it was. Embarrassing, self-serving conspiracist junk.

                  You must be the only person in all of Ripperology, who supposes both Smith and Diemschitz turned into Berner street at close to 1am.

                  I don’t recall anyone seriously questioning Diemschutz time apart from you and Grassy Knoll.

                  As for Mortimer being a doorstep dwelling busybody who couldn't get her story straight, don't you think that's a bit rich, coming from a Schwartzist?

                  And there we have it. Us and them. Schwartzist Stay in your own conspiracist bubble bleating about how ‘they would say that wouldn’t they.’

                  Anyone who says that there was a cover-up is a complete ……………

                  Why don’t you and Michael just form your own little thread? It’s impossible to discuss the case with an agenda.
                  Regards

                  Sir Herlock Sholmes

                  Comment


                  • Let’s put this ridiculous fantasy of a cover-up to bed once and for all (even though there’s no evidence that will convince the committed conspiracist and we have 2 hardcore conspiracists here.)


                    The suggestion from Michael is that Diemschutz actually discovered the body around 12.45 but lied when he said that it was 1.00. He also claims that Lamb arrived at the yard around 12.50 (let’s not quibble about a minute or 2 here or there) So…..

                    This would mean of course that between the discovery and the arrival of Lamb there’s a period of 5 minutes or so (again, no quibbling, perhaps a little more than 5 minutes) And so in 5 minutes or so the plotters a) find the body, b) straight away their first concern is that the police will close down the club because they’ve been so remiss as to allow a ripper murder on their premises (of course these are vicious, heartless anarchists who wouldn’t care about the dead women or about misinforming the police which might have led to the real killer escaping justice but hey)… , c) they decide that they need a plan (avoiding anything obvious and simple like Diemschutz saying that he saw the killer escape and that the killer shouted at him in say, an Irish accent, or even moving the body) they come up with a plan to get get someone to lie to the Police (risking being found out of course) and that the plan would hinge on the use of the word ‘Lipski.’ They make up this kind of plan with all of the potential ramifications and pitfalls in around 5 minutes and on the spur-of-the-moment and decide to proceed. Ok, but not only that…. Mastermind Louis doesn’t even bother telling Kozebrodski (who he couldn’t have failed to have noticed running for a PC with him) and Hoschberg about this leaving them to blab that he found the body at 12.45. He also forgets to prime Spooner who guesses at a time 10 minutes before gets back from the market! Does anyone see a few problems here? Are there any more? Well funnily enough….

                    We have Louis and Koz running and yelling for a Constable. Doh! They didn’t appear concerned that someone might hear them or see them and tell the Police “hey, I saw Diemschutz and Kozebrodski running for a PC at 12.50.” Abberline scratches his head “hey, but I thought Louis didn’t get back until 1.00?” Never mind eh, perhaps they thought that no one would notice?

                    Then they have to get their ‘fake witness.’ No problem…..who wouldn’t be willing to lie and place themselves at the scene of a throat-cutting? So who do they choose that can get the story across convincingly? Obviously the ideal person is a man that can’t speak English. Why would you want a man who speaks English when we know that most of the Whitechapel Police speak Hungarian of course. Luckily for these crafty plotters though our man Schwartz is not only compliant he’s off the charts stupid too. He claims to be in a street that he wasn’t in so how could he or any of the plotters know that Mrs Nosey at number 49 isn’t going to say to the Police” well I was looking out of my window from 12.30 until 1.00 and I could see the gates of the club and I didn’t see any ‘incident.’ Oh and by the way I saw Diemschutz arrive back at 12.45 too.” No, no one’s bothered. After all it’s not as if lying to the Police about a murder is serious is it?

                    Then all our Schwartz has to do, via an interpreter of course, is to say that the attacker shouted Lipski at him. Simple. How could anyone complicate or confuse something that simple? Well apparently he can. He completely and unnecessarily introduces the surplus-to-requirements Pipeman and then introduces a doubt as to whether Lipski was shouted to him or Pipeman. Wouldya believe it. Good fake witnesses were obviously hard to come by in Whitechapel in 1888.

                    Fiendish plots often get revealed but luckily not one person over the years blabbed. No family member. No descendant of a club member. Not a peep.

                    So we have an appallingly dumb plan with a laughable motive thought up in a staggeringly short space of time in extraordinary circumstances. A plan that even a 9 year old would have said “hold on what if someone says ‘Schwartz couldn’t have been there because I’d have seen him?’ “ Or any number of very obvious questions.

                    We have posters here who have the nerve to try and claim the higher ground whilst proposing this kind of utter nonsense. And it’s such very obvious nonsense. Nonsense hits you in the face whichever way you look at it. So why are some blind to this nonsense.


                    Because they want it to be true. As if.
                    Regards

                    Sir Herlock Sholmes

                    Comment


                    • I'm having another try at a timeline based on Police times, but with the proviso that times are still appoximate and it is the sequence that is important. I have also noted there in my theories on clock synchronisations. Some of the first category is from FrankO's last timeline, and I am hoping he doesn't mind me borrowing it (Hi Frank). My times presume that we overlook Diemshitz's single solitary stated clock observation of an exact time of one o'clock in favour of his multiple statements of "his usual time of about one o'clock". Without further ado:

                      <12:34 - Wess & company leave, Letchford arrives, Lave goes outside (and remains there for 5 to 10 minutes), Eagle returns to the club, couple arrives at the corner of the board school, Stride & companion arrive opposite the club
                      12:34 - Smith sees Parcelman and Stride and is heard passing by FM.
                      12:35 - Parcelman and Stride cross into the yard just before FM arrives at her door. FM’s clock is running 10 minutes fast and shows 12:45.
                      12:45 - PM leaves door after locking up. Brown passes and sees the couple. Couple leaves. Schwartz turns into Berner St.
                      12:46 - BSM and Schwartz arrive at the yard and BSM pulls Stride from the yard into the street. Schwartz crosses the road and proceeds to Fairclough St. Pipeman emerges, frightens Schwartz, BSM calls out Lipski. Pipeman and Schwartz depart to the south.
                      12:47 - 12:51 - Someone kills Stride
                      12:50 - Diemshitz turns into Berner St. Club clock is running 10 minutes slow and reads 12:40.
                      12:51 - Mortimer hears the cart pass. Diemshitz pulls into yard and horse shies.
                      12:51 to 12:54 - Diemshitz prods Stride with whip, climbs down from cart, lights match and sees shape of woman, goes into club searching for his wife, locates candle and returns to discover the body, alerts those in the club who emerge and light matches to observe the body.
                      12:55 - Club members depart the yard looking for police. Club clock reads 12:45.
                      12:57 - Lamb is alerted in Commercial Road and proceeds to the yard.
                      12:58– Lamb is standing over body.
                      1:00 - Smith arrives at the Berner St/Commercial Road corner and proceeds to yard.
                      1:01 - Lamb sends Constable for doctor and sends Eagle to Leman St PS.
                      1:03 - Johnson is alerted, goes to alert Blackwell, whose pocket watch is running fast and reads 1:10
                      1:06 - Johnson arrives at yard and is mistaken for Blackwell by Lamb and Diemshitz.

                      1:07 – Johnston opens Stride’s collar and begins to examine body. Lamb closes gates.
                      1:09 - Blackwell arrives at yard, finds gates closed. Pocket watch is running fast and shows 1:16. Finds Stride’s collar is open. Blackwell estimates Stride has been dead 20 minutes to half hour:- i.e. TOD of about 12:40 to 12:50 Police time.


                      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.”
                      If money can't buy happiness, explain motorcycles, malt whisky and pipe tobacco.
                      Everybody lies - Greg House MD

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by GBinOz View Post
                        I'm having another try at a timeline based on Police times, but with the proviso that times are still appoximate and it is the sequence that is important. I have also noted there in my theories on clock synchronisations. Some of the first category is from FrankO's last timeline, and I am hoping he doesn't mind me borrowing it (Hi Frank). My times presume that we overlook Diemshitz's single solitary stated clock observation of an exact time of one o'clock in favour of his multiple statements of "his usual time of about one o'clock". Without further ado:

                        <12:34 - Wess & company leave, Letchford arrives, Lave goes outside (and remains there for 5 to 10 minutes), Eagle returns to the club, couple arrives at the corner of the board school, Stride & companion arrive opposite the club
                        12:34 - Smith sees Parcelman and Stride and is heard passing by FM.
                        12:35 - Parcelman and Stride cross into the yard just before FM arrives at her door. FM’s clock is running 10 minutes fast and shows 12:45.
                        12:45 - PM leaves door after locking up. Brown passes and sees the couple. Couple leaves. Schwartz turns into Berner St.
                        12:46 - BSM and Schwartz arrive at the yard and BSM pulls Stride from the yard into the street. Schwartz crosses the road and proceeds to Fairclough St. Pipeman emerges, frightens Schwartz, BSM calls out Lipski. Pipeman and Schwartz depart to the south.
                        12:47 - 12:51 - Someone kills Stride
                        12:50 - Diemshitz turns into Berner St. Club clock is running 10 minutes slow and reads 12:40.
                        12:51 - Mortimer hears the cart pass. Diemshitz pulls into yard and horse shies.
                        12:51 to 12:54 - Diemshitz prods Stride with whip, climbs down from cart, lights match and sees shape of woman, goes into club searching for his wife, locates candle and returns to discover the body, alerts those in the club who emerge and light matches to observe the body.
                        12:55 - Club members depart the yard looking for police. Club clock reads 12:45.
                        12:57 - Lamb is alerted in Commercial Road and proceeds to the yard.
                        12:58– Lamb is standing over body.
                        1:00 - Smith arrives at the Berner St/Commercial Road corner and proceeds to yard.
                        1:01 - Lamb sends Constable for doctor and sends Eagle to Leman St PS.
                        1:03 - Johnson is alerted, goes to alert Blackwell, whose pocket watch is running fast and reads 1:10
                        1:06 - Johnson arrives at yard and is mistaken for Blackwell by Lamb and Diemshitz.

                        1:07 – Johnston opens Stride’s collar and begins to examine body. Lamb closes gates.
                        1:09 - Blackwell arrives at yard, finds gates closed. Pocket watch is running fast and shows 1:16. Finds Stride’s collar is open. Blackwell estimates Stride has been dead 20 minutes to half hour:- i.e. TOD of about 12:40 to 12:50 Police time.


                        Cheers, George
                        Much as we might disagree on some issues George at least in know that you are just trying to make sense of timing issues and not trying to shoehorn in a theory like some.

                        I have no issue with a time of 1.00 for Louis of course but I agree that we can’t be certain about the accuracy of clocks. I’m wondering if the Police actually checked the clocks as part of their investigation? We have no way of knowing of course but they would have done this in 2021. Maybe they did look more closely at times than we give them credit for? Maybe this is why they didn’t appear to question Diemschutz 1.00 or the apparent fact that the Schwartz incident and Fanny going onto her doorstep both occurred at 12.45 according to them? Today it’s used by some to show Schwartz wasn’t there but can we believe for a second that Abberline and his colleagues wouldn’t have been aware of this? They were on the ground. They spoke to witnesses in greater detail than the fragments that have been passed down to us. They must have looked at events closely and they still came to the conclusion that Schwartz was being truthful.

                        Two points on your timeline George.

                        1) Wouldn’t your version have meant Eagle walking past the body or the couple?
                        2) Out of all of the given times the only one that I’d have real confidence in the accuracy of would have been Blackwell’s watch. Watch owners (especially a Doctor who had to keep records and write reports) would regular check there watches for accuracy and adjust accordingly. I just can’t imagine Blackwell leaving his watch for however long to allow it to become 5+ minutes out.
                        Regards

                        Sir Herlock Sholmes

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                          Then all our Schwartz has to do, via an interpreter of course, is to say that the attacker shouted Lipski at him. Simple. How could anyone complicate or confuse something that simple? Well apparently he can.
                          This comment displays an ignorance of Schwartz' tale. If BS had unambiguously shouted 'Lipski' at Schwartz, Pipeman would have no reason not to continue smoking (and gawking), right where he was. Whereas in Swanson's report, we are told that the call was "apparently to the man on the opposite side of the road", and as Schwartz walks away, Pipeman seemingly starts to follow. According to Abberline, the following consisted of actual running.

                          The story is feeble enough as it is - even without considering that no one else heard or saw any of it - as supposedly the mere calling of 'Lipski' was enough to prompt Pipeman into action - whether that be to chase away the 'intruder', or for his own safety. Meanwhile, the helpless woman presumably then goes quietly into the passageway, while the men are running away in fear, or one is chasing the other. Although who knows, maybe she let out another three not very loud screams, for a total of six, just below the threshold of audibility of those in the kitchen.

                          It's a completely absurd story, yet to have 'Lipski' directed at Schwartz, would mean that whatever crumbs of credibility it had, would vanish entirely. Schwartz knew full well why the call could not be said to be directed at himself, even though he was apparently the one with the strong Jewish appearance.

                          He completely and unnecessarily introduces the surplus-to-requirements Pipeman and then introduces a doubt as to whether Lipski was shouted to him or Pipeman. Wouldya believe it. Good fake witnesses were obviously hard to come by in Whitechapel in 1888.
                          Pipeman was real enough, and he contradicted Schwartz so completely, that Leman street decided they would no longer be acting on Theatrical Man's information, without additional facts. Who might have been able to supply those additional facts, though, is unclear.
                          Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                            I’m wondering if the Police actually checked the clocks as part of their investigation?

                            Two points on your timeline George.

                            1) Wouldn’t your version have meant Eagle walking past the body or the couple?
                            2) Out of all of the given times the only one that I’d have real confidence in the accuracy of would have been Blackwell’s watch. Watch owners (especially a Doctor who had to keep records and write reports) would regular check there watches for accuracy and adjust accordingly. I just can’t imagine Blackwell leaving his watch for however long to allow it to become 5+ minutes out.
                            Hi Herlock,

                            As you are probably aware, I have put the question of the police methods of keeping accurate time records to Monty, and await his reply. Logicaly I would think that the beat cop's supervising Sargeant may have had a pocket watch which he regulated to GMT via the telegraph at the local police station and then provided his beat cops with corrections for the local clocks on their beats. But this is just speculation until we hear from Monty.

                            With your points:

                            1. This was part of Frank's timeline and I agree with him. Eagle was asked by the coroner if he saw anyone on his return to the yard and he replied that he felt sure he did but didn't remember. Of course when he was returning to the yard he had no idea that he would be asked that question, and his mind was probably engaged in thinking about the girlfriend to whom he had just said goodnight.

                            2. I have a small collection of antique pocket watches and can testify that there is a very strict regime required to ensure that they keep anything resembling accurate time. A 5 minute error could be acheived in day. The clue is in the disagreement in the time when Johnson says he was summoned. He says a few minutes after one and Blackwell reported 10 past one. If the Times is to be adopted as the time source (5 or 10 minutes past), the later disagrees with the time quoted by Lamb and Diemshitz for how long Johnson arrived after Lamb.

                            With all the time estimations it must be remembered that no one except the police had any idea that they would be asked these questions afterwards. Only the police had the obligation to keep an accurate track of times.

                            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.”
                            If money can't buy happiness, explain motorcycles, malt whisky and pipe tobacco.
                            Everybody lies - Greg House MD

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

                              This comment displays an ignorance of Schwartz' tale. If BS had unambiguously shouted 'Lipski' at Schwartz, Pipeman would have no reason not to continue smoking (and gawking), right where he was. Whereas in Swanson's report, we are told that the call was "apparently to the man on the opposite side of the road", and as Schwartz walks away, Pipeman seemingly starts to follow. According to Abberline, the following consisted of actual running.

                              The story is feeble enough as it is - even without considering that no one else heard or saw any of it - as supposedly the mere calling of 'Lipski' was enough to prompt Pipeman into action - whether that be to chase away the 'intruder', or for his own safety. Meanwhile, the helpless woman presumably then goes quietly into the passageway, while the men are running away in fear, or one is chasing the other. Although who knows, maybe she let out another three not very loud screams, for a total of six, just below the threshold of audibility of those in the kitchen.

                              It's a completely absurd story, yet to have 'Lipski' directed at Schwartz, would mean that whatever crumbs of credibility it had, would vanish entirely. Schwartz knew full well why the call could not be said to be directed at himself, even though he was apparently the one with the strong Jewish appearance.



                              Pipeman was real enough, and he contradicted Schwartz so completely, that Leman street decided they would no longer be acting on Theatrical Man's information, without additional facts. Who might have been able to supply those additional facts, though, is unclear.
                              There’s nothing remotely absurd about this. And of course that highly experienced and well regarded officer Inspector Abberline saw nothing ‘absurd’ about it. Perhaps Abberline was actually an idiot? Or did he actually talk to Schwartz getting more detail than has come down to us. It’s hardly surprising that some elements of the story became slightly confused when we consider that we had interpreters involved. For a start we don’t know how good these interpreters were; they certainly weren’t professionals.

                              Its good that you know for a fact that Schwartz was lying and that you know for a fact that Pipeman was real.

                              ​​​​​​……..

                              Swanson’s synthesis:

                              “12.45 a.m. 30th. Israel Schwartz of 22 Helen [i.e. Ellen] Street, Backchurch Lane, stated that at that hour on turning into Berner St from Commercial Road & had got as far as the gateway where the murder was committed he saw a man stop & speak to a woman, who was standing in the gateway. The man tried to pull the woman into the street, but he turned her round & threw her down on the footway & the woman screamed three times, but not very loudly. On crossing to the opposite side of the street, he saw a second man standing lighting his pipe. The man who threw the woman down called out apparently to the man on the opposite side of the road ‘Lipski’ & then Schwartz walked away, but finding that he was followed by the second man he ran as far as the railway arch but the man did not follow so far.”

                              The Star:

                              “As he turned the corner from Commercial Road he noticed some distance in front of him a man walking as if partially intoxicated. He walked on behind him, and presently he noticed a woman standing in the entrance to the alley way where the body was afterwards found. The half-tipsy man halted and spoke to her. The Hungarian saw him put his hand on her shoulder and push her back into the passage, but, feeling rather timid of getting mixed up in quarrels, he crossed to the other side of the street. Before he had gone many yards, however, he heard the sound of a quarrel, and turned back to learn what was the matter, but just as he stepped from the kerb a second man came out of the doorway of the public house a few doors off, and shouting out some sort of warning to the man who was with the woman, rushed forward as if to attack the intruder. The Hungarian states positively that he saw a knife in this second man’s hand, but he waited to see no more. He fled incontinently, to his new lodgings.”

                              So what are these ‘massive’ difference which reveal the plot?

                              1) Swanson is unclear on who BS Man called out to.

                              2) Swanson mentions Pipeman but doesn’t mention him coming from the doorway of the pub

                              3) The Star mentions a knife.

                              4) The Star has Pipeman calling to BS Man.

                              5) Swanson mentions that, at first, he thought Pipeman was following him but found that he wasn’t.

                              …..

                              So Swanson is writing a synthesis so number 2 came be dismissed as an unimportant omission.

                              Numbers 1 and 4 contradict each other but we have a non-English speaker communicating via 2 different interpreters (of unknown competence) so it’s hardly surprising that a little confusion might occur. Swanson wording isn’t particularly clear.

                              Number 5 is again hardly massive. We don’t know at what point he noticed Pipeman walking in the same direction or at what point he started runnng? As there was only a short distance between the gates and the Fairclough Street crossroads it’s hardly unlikely that Schwartz didn’t start running until he’d reached, or just turned the corner. He then looks behind him and sees that Pipeman wasn’t following him at all and that he’d turned off down one of the side streets.

                              Number 3 is the only difference of real importance of course. It’s unthinkable that Swanson would have ignored any mention of a knife and it’s difficult to put this down to the Police being the victim of poor interpretation. It’s perhaps not so difficult to see this happening with The Star though. The ‘interpreter’ was someone found at the scene so much less chance of it being a man who interpreted regularly or even considered himself entirely competent. He was a ‘make do’ interpreter. So this might have been an issue of language and it’s possible that we might factor in the Press being more than willing to accept a bit of sensationalism. This can’t be proven of course and I’m not trying to claim otherwise but 2 suggestions might be made.

                              1) That Schwartz realised that he might have appeared in the newspaper as a man who left Elizabeth Stride in the hands of a man who might have turned out to have been the Ripper. So he adds being threatened with a knife as an excuse for leaving.

                              2) That this kind of conversation took place: Reporter - So you saw this man holding a pipe? Schwartz - Yes. Reporter - Are you sure that it couldn’t have been a knife? Schwartz - It looked like a pipe to me. Reporter - Well it was dark after all. This man might have been the killer after all. Schwartz - Well I suppose that it might have been a knife. Reporter - Ok so you saw this man with a knife, what happened next?

                              Yes, I’m going to be accused of ‘creative writing’ and that doesn’t bother me. At the end of the day though, if Schwartz was lying as part of a cover up could he have been such an unmitigated dimwit as to give 2 differing stories (including a knife) within 24 hours of each other when the basic story was a very simple one? Or are the ‘errors’ more like to have originated from transcribers and interpreters. I know which I think is massively the likeliest explanation.
                              Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 11-23-2021, 11:24 AM.
                              Regards

                              Sir Herlock Sholmes

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by GBinOz View Post
                                I'm having another try at a timeline based on Police times, but with the proviso that times are still appoximate and it is the sequence that is important. I have also noted there in my theories on clock synchronisations. Some of the first category is from FrankO's last timeline, and I am hoping he doesn't mind me borrowing it (Hi Frank). My times presume that we overlook Diemshitz's single solitary stated clock observation of an exact time of one o'clock in favour of his multiple statements of "his usual time of about one o'clock". Without further ado:
                                Nice work, George. Some comments...

                                12:34 - Wess & company leave, Letchford arrives, Lave goes outside (and remains there for 5 to 10 minutes), Eagle returns to the club, couple arrives at the corner of the board school, Stride & companion arrive opposite the club

                                In most papers, Wess leaves at 12:15
                                Letchford arrives/passes through the street. Doesn't quite gel, does it?
                                You have Lave outside as late as 12:44...

                                12:34 - Smith sees Parcelman and Stride and is heard passing by FM.
                                12:35 - Parcelman and Stride cross into the yard just before FM arrives at her door. FM’s clock is running 10 minutes fast and shows 12:45.


                                ...yet he apparently doesn't see what Smith sees?

                                12:45 - PM leaves door after locking up. Brown passes and sees the couple. Couple leaves. Schwartz turns into Berner St.

                                How did the couple end up talking to both Mortimer and the press?

                                12:46 - BSM and Schwartz arrive at the yard and BSM pulls Stride from the yard into the street. Schwartz crosses the road and proceeds to Fairclough St. Pipeman emerges, frightens Schwartz, BSM calls out Lipski. Pipeman and Schwartz depart to the south.
                                12:47 - 12:51 - Someone kills Stride
                                12:50 - Diemshitz turns into Berner St. Club clock is running 10 minutes slow and reads 12:40.
                                12:51 - Mortimer hears the cart pass. Diemshitz pulls into yard and horse shies.


                                How could it not be BS, given this timing? Diemschitz didn't see anyone leaving, and more importantly there was lots of blood to be seen very soon after his arrival. So the crude and raucous BS Man, must have been the killer, who very likely was not JtR. Thus Mitre Square must be a coincidence.

                                12:51 to 12:54 - Diemshitz prods Stride with whip, climbs down from cart, lights match and sees shape of woman, goes into club searching for his wife, locates candle and returns to discover the body, alerts those in the club who emerge and light matches to observe the body.

                                According to his wife, she was not hard to find at all - she was in the kitchen just a few yards from where he pulled up. Rather fascinatingly, when Louis comes out with the candle and others follow, the pony & cart seems to have disappeared.

                                12:55 - Club members depart the yard looking for police. Club clock reads 12:45.
                                12:57 - Lamb is alerted in Commercial Road and proceeds to the yard.
                                12:58– Lamb is standing over body.


                                What about Spooner? 12:58 - 5 = 12:52
                                Mortimer appears to reach the yard before any police. So this must occur at 12:56 or 57. She said she went out just after 1am. That is a difference of 5 minutes, not the 10 minutes you assumed @12:35. 5 minutes would have her outside until 12:50, in full view of the Schwartz incident. It would also have her locking up at the same time as Diemschitz turned into Berner street.

                                Walter Dew: Just as she was about to re-enter her cottage the woman heard the approach of a pony and cart. She knew this would be Lewis Dienschitz, the steward of the club. He went every Saturday to the market, returning about this hour of the early morning.

                                Don't underestimate Walter.

                                1:00 - Smith arrives at the Berner St/Commercial Road corner and proceeds to yard.
                                1:01 - Lamb sends Constable for doctor and sends Eagle to Leman St PS.
                                1:03 - Johnson is alerted, goes to alert Blackwell, whose pocket watch is running fast and reads 1:10


                                Eagle reached Leman street at 1:10, according to one report. That means Lamb takes 9 minutes to get there. Possibly too long, although one has to consider things such as:

                                * he had already been running, and may have needed to go slow and/or stop to catch his breath
                                * he may have had footwear that really impeded his progress
                                * there may have been a short wait when he reached the station

                                1:06 - Johnson arrives at yard and is mistaken for Blackwell by Lamb and Diemshitz.

                                I think that is true.

                                1:07 – Johnston opens Stride’s collar and begins to examine body. Lamb closes gates.
                                1:09 - Blackwell arrives at yard, finds gates closed. Pocket watch is running fast and shows 1:16. Finds Stride’s collar is open. Blackwell estimates Stride has been dead 20 minutes to half hour:- i.e. TOD of about 12:40 to 12:50 Police time.


                                A murderer leaving the yard at 12:50, must have escaped the attention of Letchford's sister ... if Letchford is to be believed.
                                Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X