If Schwartz Lied ...

[GBinOz]

No George that’s not what I said.

We surely couldn’t suggest that what Letchford meant was that his sister was on her doorstep at 12.50 and then she went inside and Charles heard the commotion at 12.51?! What I said is that this very strongly implies a gap between 12.50 and the hearing of the commotion. How long that gap was…. we can’t say.

But any minute after 12.50 points us further and further away from a discovery time of 12.45. And every minute past an earlier discovery time points us more and more to a discovery time of closer to 1.00. It’s an accumulation.

We have this evidence. We have Diemschutz seeing a clock. We have Lamb saying that he arrived at the yard 10 or 12 minutes before 1.16. We have Eagle saying that he was called to see the body at around 1.00. We have Brown giving us a very plausible account of how he estimated his time of hearing the men calling for a Constable at around 1.00. We have a discredited cover-up and so we can discount lies.

When it quacks like a duck….

There is nothing in Letchford's statement that eliminates any time after 12:50 and it is deceptive to suggest that there is. We have been over the guesstimate of Eagle and your claim that he may have looked at a clock when you knew very well that he didn't. You know very well that you are distorting the facts to say that Lamb said that he arrived at the yard 10 or 12 minutes before 1.16. He said that he arrived at the yard 10 or 12 minutes before the doctor, and you know very well that Lamb mistook Johnson for Blackwell as I have previously pointed out to you the relevant inquest evidence to prove that fact beyond any doubt. Blackwell even pointed out this error when he was recalled. You are wasting everyone's time by requiring us to repeatedly correct your deliberate falsehoods.

Cheers, George

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I give up!

You, like Michael, are lost causes.

When you 2 enter the room reason leaves by the back door.

George is right, you really are intolerant of other peoples views

[Herlock Sholmes]

There is nothing in Letchford's statement that eliminates any time after 12:50 and it is deceptive to suggest that there is. We have been over the guesstimate of Eagle and your claim that he may have looked at a clock when you knew very well that he didn't. You know very well that you are distorting the facts to say that Lamb said that he arrived at the yard 10 or 12 minutes before 1.16. He said that he arrived at the yard 10 or 12 minutes before the doctor, and you know very well that Lamb mistook Johnson for Blackwell as I have previously pointed out to you the relevant inquest evidence to prove that fact beyond any doubt. Blackwell even pointed out this error when he was recalled. You are wasting everyone's time by requiring us to repeatedly correct your deliberate falsehoods.

Cheers, George

Clearly any attempt at being polite to you George makes no difference. I’ve questioned your interpretation as you’ve questioned mine. Now you accuse me of deliberate falsehoods. No matter, I think I’ll survive.

You clearly have been infected by the drivel posted by NBFN and Michael. You are no equally obsessed with trying to prove that Louis was covering something up.

I’ve just re-read what Blackwell said when he was recalled. Times and Telegraph versions and see no evidence of him admitting to Lamb confusing him for Johnson.

Blackwell, who had a ******* watch said that: “On Sunday morning last, at ten minutes past one o'clock.” Or “At 10 minutes past 1 on Sunday morning I was called to 40, Berner-street.”

So I’ll ask again….

What time did Eagle get to the yard with Schwartz? The doctors being, I believe, about a minute or so from Dutfield’s Yard.

I say that they got to the yard around 1.05. Giving 5 minutes to get to Blackwell’s, for the PC to tell Johnson and for Johnson to inform Blackwell. Ties up perfectly with the man with the watch.

Other suggestions from the Dodgy Diemschutz Brigade. Body discovered 12.45 ish. Eagle and Lamb back at the yard at 12.50 ish.

The Police then loiter around for 15 minutes gawking at a corpse before deciding on a leisurely stroll round to the Doctors.

Which is the likelier?

Actually George, don’t bother.

[Herlock Sholmes]

George is right, you really are intolerant of other peoples views

No.

Im intolerant of biased crap. I’m tired of bull**** about cover-ups.

I prefer the opinions of adults and not babies and fantasists.

Ill listen to Jeff and Caz and FrankO and Joshua and DavidO and many others. Basically anyone that doesn’t say silly things and that don’t have an agenda.

[JeffHamm]

Hi Jeff,

The inquest report shows that Lamb said he closed the gates after the doctor arrived and the doctor opened Stride's blouse. Johnson said Lamb closed the gates after he arrivesd and he opened Stride's blouse . Blackwell said the gates were closed when he arrived and Stride's blouse was already open. Lamb mistook Johnson for Blackwell, so the 10-12 minutes has to be subtracted from Johnson's arrival time, not from Blackwell's. Blackwell actually pointed out this error when he was recalled.

Cheers, George

Hi Geoorge,

Ah, yes, I had forgotten that detail. I believe Johnson arrived about 3 minutes before Blackwell, so that still puts Lambs arrival at 1:01-1:03 (according to Dr. Blackwell's watch) based upon the statements. As the article I pointed to earlier indicates short times are likely to be overestimated, which would shift that window a bit later in time but I'll leave it as stated. For those who are interested, 10-12 minutes, as estimations would translate to indicating roughly 8-10 minutes of "real time" (7m 56s - 9m 45s, to be precise). So a 2 minute adjustment.

We have two routes that men from the club said they ran, one south and east on Fairclough and back (when the picked up Spooner). That covers just shy of 940 feet round trip. Average running speed is about 6 mph, and covering that distance would require 1 m 47s. The other route heads north, then east on Commercial, where Lamb was found. That distance is roughly 635 feet, for a round trip of 1270, requiring 1m 12s and 2m 24s, respectively.

There are conflicting reports, one has those two journeys happening in sequence, as one of the men appears to have done both, and another account has them happening in parallel.

Let's start with at the same time.
Both journeys start at 1:00
Spooner arrives at the scene at 1:01:47
Lamb is contacted on Commercial 1:01:12
Lamb arrives at the scene at 1:02:24.

Now let's consider what this looks like if the journeys happen in sequence, and start at 1:00.

Spooner arrives at the scene at 1:01:47
Lamb is contacted on Commerical at 1:02:59
Lamb arrives at the scene at 1:04:11

In both possibilities, Spooner arrives at the scene before Lamb (I think sequential might fit better with a statement by Spooner estimating the duration between their arrivals, but the error associated with short intervals would generally make it irrational to rule either out; I can't remember Spooner's estimated interval, I think he said 4 or 5 minutes? adjusting the latter for a tendency to overestimate would suggest 3m 37s of real time; 4 minutes adjusts to 2m 49s).
Lamb is contacted by the men from the club just minutes after 1
Lamb arrives at the scene at a time that is within, or very close to the time window we calculated based upon the estimated durations between Lamb's arrival and Johnson's arrival (1:01-1:03).

If we account for the tendency for people to overestimate short durations, then both of the above times for Lamb would fall within the "target window".

Obviously, we don't know the actual running speed of the men, and so forth, so these are, obviously simply another set of estimations that would also have a +- range of error to them, but including that will just increase the overlap between our estimated windows.

Anyway, either a sequential or a parallel set of journeys results in a consistent pattern of "who came first; Spooner vs Lamb" and places Lamb at the scene at a time that would not be viewed as conflicting with the time we get to based upon estimations of how much time had passed until Johnson's arrival.

I've started the journey's at 1:00 o'clock, but that's 1 o'clock on Dr. Blackwell's watch. Allowing for a +-3 minutes range of error with regards to readings from different clocks (a 6 minute window), Lamb's "shortly before 1", Deimshutz's 1 o'clock, etc, all make sense and do not conflict.

I've chosen a very narrow clock de-sync window, not because I think that's accurate (the real window is probably larger), but because we're dealing with such small differences in times when comparing various theories that if we were to accurately represent the error ranges of all of these measures I rather suspect we would end up with a clock range error closer to 20 minutes wide (+- 10 minutes), which also indicates that the two analyses produce compatible results but allows for a lot wider range of values to also be viewed as doing that. I'm being a bit over zealous (meaning willing to claim "that doesn't work" a bit more than I should be) with my +-3 minutes just so I might be able to differentiate something, but alas, no luck.

- Jeff

[DJA]

Clearly any attempt at being polite to you George makes no difference. I’ve questioned your interpretation as you’ve questioned mine. Now you accuse me of deliberate falsehoods. No matter, I think I’ll survive.

You clearly have been infected by the drivel posted by NBFN and Michael. You are no equally obsessed with trying to prove that Louis was covering something up.

I’ve just re-read what Blackwell said when he was recalled. Times and Telegraph versions and see no evidence of him admitting to Lamb confusing him for Johnson.

Blackwell, who had a ******* watch said that: “On Sunday morning last, at ten minutes past one o'clock.” Or “At 10 minutes past 1 on Sunday morning I was called to 40, Berner-street.”

So I’ll ask again….

What time did Eagle get to the yard with Schwartz?

Actually George, don’t bother.

[GBinOz]

Apologies to Herlock and Jeff,

Blackwell pointed out Lamb's error in his original testimony, not when he was recalled.

The Daily Telegraph, Wednesday, October 3:-
Blackwell: The double doors of the yard were closed when I arrived, so that the previous witness must have made a mistake on that point.

Cheers, George

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Ah, yes, I had forgotten that detail. I believe Johnson arrived about 3 minutes before Blackwell, so that still puts Lambs arrival at 1:01-1:03 (according to Dr. Blackwell's watch) based upon the statements. As the article I pointed to earlier indicates short times are likely to be overestimated, which would shift that window a bit later in time but I'll leave it as stated. For those who are interested, 10-12 minutes, as estimations would translate to indicating roughly 8-10 minutes of "real time" (7m 56s - 9m 45s, to be precise). So a 2 minute adjustment.

Jeff, a few comments...

Is this underestimating of short time periods, a generally accepted phenomena? Has it been replicated in other studies?

Both journeys start at 1:00

So at what time are you suggesting Diemschitz turned into Berner street?

In both possibilities, Spooner arrives at the scene before Lamb (I think sequential might fit better with a statement by Spooner estimating the duration between their arrivals, but the error associated with short intervals would generally make it irrational to rule either out; I can't remember Spooner's estimated interval, I think he said 4 or 5 minutes? adjusting the latter for a tendency to overestimate would suggest 3m 37s of real time; 4 minutes adjusts to 2m 49s).

The sequential model is more likely to be correct, because Spooner told the coroner that he made observations of the deceased, before standing by the body for 4 or 5 minutes. He must be doing the latter when Lamb arrives, as at the inquest...

C: Was any one touching the body when you arrived?
L: No. There was no one within a yard of it.

So Diemschitz' memory must have been incorrect, when he stated that Spooner and Lamb arrived almost simultaneously. Going off on a tangent, a sequential search does raise the question as to why the search for police initially proceeded along Fairclough street, and not the much better bet of Commercial Road.

If we account for the tendency for people to overestimate short durations, then both of the above times for Lamb would fall within the "target window".

The later time for Lamb, would mean that Smith does not arrive until about 1:07, and if we start the search with the assumption that Diemschitz turned into Berner street at 1:00, then the 1:07 could go to 1:09 or even later. That would imply Smith was out in his timing by about 7 minutes. That is about 25% of his beat's mean timespan.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’ve just re-read to get a fuller picture. I know recall the reasons for saying that Lamb mistook Johnston for Blackwell. It was an error of memory. There really would be no point in me lying about a demonstrable fact like this. It’s in black and white. So….

We have Johnston saying that he was informed at either “a few minutes past 1.00” or more specifically “5 or 10 minutes past 1.00.”

Blackwell, who definitely had a watch, said that he was first called at 1.10.

Id say that it’s reasonable to assume that as soon as he was told Johnston would have gone to inform his boss. Therefore I’d suggest that it’s reasonable that Ayliffe got to the Doctors at 1.10

So if we put a estimate to Johnston receiving the info, going up to inform Johnston, going back down, getting his bag, putting on his coat and walking to Dutfield’s Yard I don’t think that 3 minutes is unreasonable? Estimates of course. This gives us Johnston arriving at around 1.13.

Lamb, mistakenly having Johnston as the first doctor (instead of Blackwell) estimated that he arrived 10-12 minutes before Johnston.

So by this Lamb is estimating that he arrived at the yard between 1.01 and 1.03.

…..

My main point would again be, if Ayliffe arrived at Blackwell’s door at 1.10 (again an estimate of course) then we have to consider the gap of time between the Police arriving at the yard and Ayliffe getting to the Doctors a minute away. It being immediately obvious that they needed at Doctor there.

So, for example, if it’s suggested that Eagle met Lamb at 12.50. Then they would have reached the yard at 12.51. How could we explain a huge 19 minute gap?

A meeting time of 12.55 would still require an explanation for a huge delay of 15 minutes.

Surely we can’t imagine that these delays would have occurred? The nearer we get to a meeting up time of 1.00 or later the more reasonable the gap becomes.

I’ve suggested around 1.04/1.05 as a time that Eagle met Lamb. If it was 1.05 then we have a gap of no more than 5 minutes for the Ayliffe returned from Commercial Road to Dutfield’s Yard and was then sent, and arrived, at Blackwell’s.

Therefore a meeting time for Eagle and Lamb of around 1.04/1.05 is in accordance with what we know occurred.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

What time did Eagle get to the yard with Schwartz?

Well Eagle said he had been at the club several times during the day, and Schwartz said he had gone out for the day, and before finding out if his wife had completed the expected move, so I'd say they arrived no later than mid-morning.

[JeffHamm]

Hi all,

I've gone back to the Yarmey 2000 study which examined the accuracy of people's estimation of durations, and have used their data to work "backwards", take an estimation and work out the average real duration it represents. I've also worked out the 95% confidence interval (basically, the range of real time durations that a given estimation represents). Meaning, if we have someone say "it was about 5 minutes", then the actual duration will fall, 95% of the time, between some minimum and maximum range of times. While I think the average and maximum values are probably reasonably good, working out the minimum part of the range has a few issues that I can't address due to not having the raw data and only the summary they report. However, this isn't a publication for scientific purposes and the values should be good enough to serve our purposes.

I've included the plot here, including the equations one can use to calculate the minimum (dotted series) average (solid series) and maximum (dashed series). You just enter the duration in seconds as X in the equations, and you get the "real duration" times back in seconds.





Using the above equations, here's a table that covers estimations from 1 minute up to 60 minutes that people can, if they wish, use to guide their interpretations.

The ranges present the min, average, and maximum associated with a stated estimate in minutes (which is usually what we're working with). The minimum and maximums are not absolutes, there is a 5% chance that the real duration is outside this range (2.5% chance to be shorter, and 2.5% chance to be longer). That means, you can always claim that it is not impossible for a duration to be outside this range if you need to argue it for your theory, but it also means you cannot rationally deny that your possible value is improbable. Given the ranges are clearly skewed (the difference between the minimum and average is much smaller than the difference between the average and the maximum), the mode (the most common value) will be located between the minimum and average value. I don't have enough information to work out what those would be though.

Enjoy

- Jeff

[JeffHamm]

Jeff, a few comments...

Is this underestimating of short time periods, a generally accepted phenomena? Has it been replicated in other studies?

Yes. Here's a quote form the Yarmey paper that nicely addresses that very important question.

"...Theoretical and empirical investigation of duration estimations date back to the nineteenth century with Vierordt's (1868) discovery that short intervals tend to be overestimated and longer ones under-estimated. This finding is now commonly referred to as `Vierordt's Law'. ..."

You can see in the table, that around 58 minutes estimated time, the average of the real duration is now starting to get longer than the estimated time, which would increase if we continued to even longer durations. That's been known since the 1800s (as the quote points out).

So at what time are you suggesting Diemschitz turned into Berner street?

I haven't suggested anything about Diemshutz, but, I've got the "searches" starting at 1 (Dr. Blackwell's watch time).

So, that means we have to have Diemshutz arrive, check the body, and get people to start things. Those events would require some time. If you think those probably could be done in a minute then according to Dr. Blackwell's watch, that would suggest Diemshutz arrives at 12:59. If you think those events would take 2 minutes, then 12:58. If you think those things took 15 minutes, then 12:45.

What I'm pointing out is that, if the searches began at 1, the times line up well.

And, given the errors associated with the information we have, the search could even start later than one, which means Diemshutz's arrival at 1 o'clock does not conflict.

Meaning, Diemshutz appears to have arrived very close to 1 o'clock according to Dr. Blackwell's watch, though it could be argued he arrived on either side of 1. As I've presented things above, it would be shortly before 1, by maybe a minute or two. But the variation we have to consider means he could have arrived shortly after by a minute or two as well.

The sequential model is more likely to be correct, because Spooner told the coroner that he made observations of the deceased, before standing by the body for 4 or 5 minutes. He must be doing the latter when Lamb arrives, as at the inquest...

C: Was any one touching the body when you arrived?
L: No. There was no one within a yard of it.

I tend to favour the sequential reading as well, but what I favour could be wrong, so when presenting the analysis one has to consider it in light of competing theories. In this case, the analysis doesn't conflict with either, so it doesn't help us differentiate between them.

So Diemschitz' memory must have been incorrect, when he stated that Spooner and Lamb arrived almost simultaneously. Going off on a tangent, a sequential search does raise the question as to why the search for police initially proceeded along Fairclough street, and not the much better bet of Commercial Road.

The phrase "almost immediately" is a very subjective phrasing. Even in the sequential version Lamb arrives a couple minutes later, so that's hardly conflicting.

The later time for Lamb, would mean that Smith does not arrive until about 1:07, and if we start the search with the assumption that Diemschitz turned into Berner street at 1:00, then the 1:07 could go to 1:09 or even later. That would imply Smith was out in his timing by about 7 minutes. That is about 25% of his beat's mean timespan.

Smith isn't reporting his times based on Dr. Blackwell's watch though, so Smith's statement, and the time you're comparing it to, come from two different clocks.

- Jeff

[DJA]

Well Eagle said he had been at the club several times during the day, and Schwartz said he had gone out for the day, and before finding out if his wife had completed the expected move, so I'd say they arrived no later than mid-morning.

[Herlock Sholmes]

What time did Eagle get to the yard with Schwartz?

I think that one can safely be called an

[DJA]

I’ve just re-read to get a fuller picture. I know recall the reasons for saying that Lamb mistook Johnston for Blackwell. It was an error of memory. There really would be no point in me lying about a demonstrable fact like this.