If Schwartz Lied ...

[Herlock Sholmes]

The cachous are only a problem because we normally suppose Stride was attacked while standing. The killer grabs the scarf perhaps, and pulls her to the ground. Somehow he gets her down on the stones and then cuts, without her letting go of the cachous packet. This is perplexing, but a simple solution would be to have her sitting when attacked. That way, her hand is already close to the ground, or even on it. The 'problem' with that solution is that is would make BS Man, and the other theatrics introduced by Schwartz, seemingly redundant.

Regarding the idea of someone else getting her in the passageway, that someone is surely going to be from the club. Given that scenario, it hardly seems strange to find Wess talking to a reporter about a mysterious chase down Fairclough street, perceived to be the murderer being chased by a man who is known not to be a club member, but whose name escapes the secretary at that moment.

Are the cachous really such an issue? I’ve never felt that they were. Isn’t it possible that Stride, in an attempt at self defence, was punching at her killer’s side and back with a fist holding the cachous? Hence, cachous in hand. It’s like the sight and alleged discovery of a grape stalk in the yard. Why was that in any way mysterious? If there’s a simple explanation why ignore it?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Andrew,

Times 3 Oct 1888:- By the jury. - As I was going to Berner-street I did not meet any one except Mr. Harris, who came out of his house in Tiger Bay (Brunswick-street). Mr. Harris told me he had heard the policeman's whistle blowing.


THE MEMBERS OF THE WHITECHAPEL VIGILANCE COMMITTEE

George Lusk - President	Joseph Aarons - Treasurer
Mr. B. Harris - Honorary Secretary	Mr. J. A. Cohen - Committee Member
Mr. Reeves - Committee Member	Mr. Haughton - Committee Member
Mr. Lindsay - Committee Member	Mr. Jacobs - Committee Member
Mr. Isaacs - Committee Member	Mr. Mitchell - Committee Member
Mr. Hodgins - Committee Member	Mr. Barnett - Committee Member
Mr. Lord - Committee Member	Mr. Lawton - Committee Member
Mr. Vander Hunt - Committee Member	Mr. Sheed - Committee Member
Mr. Van Gelder - Committee Member	Albert Bachert - Chairman (1889)

Cheers, George

Hello George,

Can we just assume that this was the same Mr Harris or Isaacs and Jacobs for that matter?

[JeffHamm]

Hi Herlock,

Mr Hamm goes into full-on ‘Boffin’ mode. An excellent piece of work Jeff. You’ve done the subject a real service by doing this. Some of longer gap estimates can be seen as ‘eyebrow raisers’ but this is purely a case of them being counter intuitive but you’ve got the research and the evidence to back them up. This should now be the framework that we use to view and discuss events in Berner Street. Hats off to you Jeff.

Thanks. George (GBinOz) has also presented a timeline, only sycnc'ed to PC Smith's beat. In the end the two recreations are pretty similar, and we end up with time-stamps that differ by around 6-7 minutes. And that's good, because it means we both end up concluding that PC Smith and Dr. Blackwell's clocks differ by about that much, so our differences in the time stamps reflects the difference in the clocks to which we are referring. Also, nothing either of us presents differs from the sequential version that FrankO has presented in the past. That makes 3 independent examinations all coming to the same basic conclusion, there's nothing in the statements that indicates deception, and the stated times people give are consistent with being truthful in recounting their beliefs.

Time is relative after all.

- Jeff

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock,



Thanks. George (GBinOz) has also presented a timeline, only sycnc'ed to PC Smith's beat. In the end the two recreations are pretty similar, and we end up with time-stamps that differ by around 6-7 minutes. And that's good, because it means we both end up concluding that PC Smith and Dr. Blackwell's clocks differ by about that much, so our differences in the time stamps reflects the difference in the clocks to which we are referring. Also, nothing either of us presents differs from the sequential version that FrankO has presented in the past. That makes 3 independent examinations all coming to the same basic conclusion, there's nothing in the statements that indicates deception, and the stated times people give are consistent with being truthful in recounting their beliefs.

Time is relative after all.

- Jeff

Now if you can just tell us who killed her everyone would be most grateful.

[JeffHamm]

Now if you can just tell us who killed her everyone would be most grateful.

ha ha! If I could do that, what would we all do for a past-time? But, since you asked, it was
{****** remainder of post removed due to sensitive content ******}.

- Jeff

[Herlock Sholmes]

ha ha! If I could do that, what would we all do for a past-time? But, since you asked, it was
{****** remainder of post removed due to sensitive content ******}.

- Jeff

Was he a Barrister?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Are the cachous really such an issue? I’ve never felt that they were. Isn’t it possible that Stride, in an attempt at self defence, was punching at her killer’s side and back with a fist holding the cachous? Hence, cachous in hand. It’s like the sight and alleged discovery of a grape stalk in the yard. Why was that in any way mysterious? If there’s a simple explanation why ignore it?

I find it interesting that many people suppose that Stride's killer was interrupted - which very likely implies JtR - and that Schwartz's story is true. Yet BS Man is the antithesis of JtR. So am I right to presume you suppose Stride was not a JtR victim?

[Herlock Sholmes]

I find it interesting that many people suppose that Stride's killer was interrupted - which very likely implies JtR - and that Schwartz's story is true. Yet BS Man is the antithesis of JtR. So am I right to presume you suppose Stride was not a JtR victim?

I don’t see how that’s connected to the issue of the cachous? Whether she was killed by the ripper or not isn’t it possible that she tried to get her attacker to stop strangling her? And if she was in a terrorised state, punching at her attackers sides and back, doesn’t that give an explanation why the cachous were found in her hand?

I don’t know if she was a victim. She might well have been. Interruption is entirely possible. It’s also possible that she was killed by BS Man and that he wasn’t the ripper.

[JeffHamm]

Hi NBFN,

I find it interesting that many people suppose that Stride's killer was interrupted - which very likely implies JtR - and that Schwartz's story is true. Yet BS Man is the antithesis of JtR. So am I right to presume you suppose Stride was not a JtR victim?

But is B.S. the antithesis of JtR? He certainly doesn't seem to be like how JtR is often portrayed, but then, how sure can we be? It is assumed that Nichols took JtR to where she was killed, but we don't actually know that as a fact. If she was walking a loop that included Buck's Row, he could have met her just as Schwartz described the meeting with Stride. Same with Eddowes. We don't know for certain the couple seen by Lawende and friends was Eddowes, and even if it was, we don't know for certain he went with her into Mitre Square. If either of those assumptions are not true, Eddowes could have met JtR in passing in Mitre Square, and again a B.S. type attack could occur. I think, though, we could rule that out for Chapman given the location of her murder, but what if that is the odd one out? Kelly might be also tend to get ruled out, unless of course JtR breaks into her room while she's sleeping.

Personally, I do tend to agree with you, and think the way in which B.S. seems to suddenly attack Stride seems different from the other crimes. But, it is also possible that Stride and B.S. had spent time together earlier that evening, and he's angry at her over something from that time (maybe she gave him the slip from a pub, for example). In other words, while it does seem different, we have to consider if that's due to our assumptions about how the other crimes were committed is wrong, and what we're seeing is JtR's more typical sequence (obviously here I'm presenting B.S. as JtR, and to be clear, I'm not convinced he was, nor convinced he wasn't - I'm wishy washy on Stride's inclusion).

Again, I do think the evidence suggests JtR tended to spend at least a bit of time posing as a customer, and didn't just suddenly attack women he walked by, but at the same time, that isn't a proven fact. It's just the most probable given what we have to interpret. As such, we need to be a bit cautious about ruling Stride out on that basis alone. Also, serial killers are not robots, they do vary in their behaviours from one crime to the next, and Stride may simply be an example of that variation.

Or, of course, Stride might not be a victim of JtR at all, that too has to be considered.

In my view, though, the differences in the Stride case are enough to make us question her inclusion, but not enough to confidently conclude she should be excluded. And, the similarities are sufficient to make us consider her inclusion but not enough to confidently conclude we should include her. In short, I can confidently state that I have very little idea about whether or not Stride should be put into the series.

And, as I say, I do tend to agree with you that her attack by B.S. does seem to deviate from the other C5 cases, but the nature of her throat wound is almost a carbon copy of the wound to Eddowes (Eddowes' was a bit deeper, but not by all that much). Also, there is time unaccounted for in which B.S. could leave the area, and someone else shows up, so again it's not a sure thing that B.S. killed Stride (and if he didn't, it's unlikely he's JtR though I suppose by some bizarre coincidence he could be; i.e. JtR assaults Stride, leaves and kills Eddowes, and someone else showed up and killed Stride! But let's not go there as that sort of "just so" story is best left to Hollywood).

- Jeff

[GBinOz]

Hello George,

Can we just assume that this was the same Mr Harris or Isaacs and Jacobs for that matter?

Hi Herlock,

Welcome back. I was starting to have concerns about your absence.

Your quote "Are the cachous really such an issue? I’ve never felt that they were."
I tend to agree. I think the cachous are devoted more time than they deserve.

"Can we just assume that this was the same Mr Harris or Isaacs and Jacobs for that matter?"
Definately not. The fact that their names are on that list only gives rise to a possibility that they may have been our persons of interest. More importantly, the names Spooner and Herschburg are not on the list, which was my reply to Andrew.

Cheers, George

[GBinOz]

Hi NBFN,
In my view, though, the differences in the Stride case are enough to make us question her inclusion, but not enough to confidently conclude she should be excluded. And, the similarities are sufficient to make us consider her inclusion but not enough to confidently conclude we should include her. In short, I can confidently state that I have very little idea about whether or not Stride should be put into the series.

- Jeff

Hi Jeff,

In Australia we call that an "each way bet".

Cheers, George

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Personally, I do tend to agree with you, and think the way in which B.S. seems to suddenly attack Stride seems different from the other crimes.

I think the argument that BSM is not at all like JtR, can be taken a stage further. BSM is not much like any murderer. The clumsy behavior, the on-street assault, the presence of witnesses, and the calling of 'Lipski' so close to Batty street. Can you name another murderer who behaved like this?

[JeffHamm]

I think the argument that BSM is not at all like JtR, can be taken a stage further. BSM is not much like any murderer. The clumsy behavior, the on-street assault, the presence of witnesses, and the calling of 'Lipski' so close to Batty street. Can you name another murderer who behaved like this?

Schwartz was walking behind B.S., and pipeman appears to have come outside from somewhere, so it is quite possible that B.S. was unaware of the potential witnesses until Schwartz passed and the confrontation already started. And, in some ways, it's very much like Berkowitz's attacks, only Berkowitz used a gun rather than a knife (though his first 2 attacks, one unconfirmed, were with a knife but proved nonfatal). Berkowitz would just shoot people in their cars, then run from the scene. He was spotted running past a someone walking their dog on one occassion, and I think others saw him as well. He used a large calibre handgun, and the sound would draw a lot of attention from potential witnesses. Rader also left witnesses, two kids, at one location. Bundy was seen fleeing the scene at the sorority house in Florida, and at the beach (near the start of his killings), he approached all sorts of woman trying to lure victims.

Basically, while the murder styles were different, there are a fair number of examples (and those are just some of the more the famous ones) where the killer showed a lack of concern about potential witnesses. Berkowitz because he figured noone would get a good look at him, Rader because he got spooked and fled when the phone rang and he forgot about the kids that were locked in the bathroom. A similar forgetting of a victim in the house occurred with Richard Speck, who killed 8 of the 9 nurses he had tied up, basically he lost count. And Bundy didn't think anyone would really remember him since if they refused to help him he just moved on and didn't push it.

So, B.S. pushing Stride about isn't really all that different, particularly as it is possible he was unaware of Schwartz and pipeman, but even if he was, not that big a deal once they fled.

We also have to remember that Long potentially saw JtR with Chapman just shortly before they went into the backyard of Hanbury, and Lawende, Harris, and Levey may have seen JtR with Eddowes, also just before her murder. So, we know JtR wasn't really concerned about possibly being seen with a victim. Is a bit of pushing really going to make a difference in the end, if shortly thereafter she's going to be found dead? To someone who was willing to go on and kill both Chapman and Eddowes, I wouldn't think so, which could be seen as a point in favour of B.S. being JtR. As I say, the Stride case is a collection of things that seem to work both ways.

- Jeff

[Herlock Sholmes]

Schwartz was walking behind B.S., and pipeman appears to have come outside from somewhere, so it is quite possible that B.S. was unaware of the potential witnesses until Schwartz passed and the confrontation already started. And, in some ways, it's very much like Berkowitz's attacks, only Berkowitz used a gun rather than a knife (though his first 2 attacks, one unconfirmed, were with a knife but proved nonfatal). Berkowitz would just shoot people in their cars, then run from the scene. He was spotted running past a someone walking their dog on one occassion, and I think others saw him as well. He used a large calibre handgun, and the sound would draw a lot of attention from potential witnesses. Rader also left witnesses, two kids, at one location. Bundy was seen fleeing the scene at the sorority house in Florida, and at the beach (near the start of his killings), he approached all sorts of woman trying to lure victims.

Basically, while the murder styles were different, there are a fair number of examples (and those are just some of the more the famous ones) where the killer showed a lack of concern about potential witnesses. Berkowitz because he figured noone would get a good look at him, Rader because he got spooked and fled when the phone rang and he forgot about the kids that were locked in the bathroom. A similar forgetting of a victim in the house occurred with Richard Speck, who killed 8 of the 9 nurses he had tied up, basically he lost count. And Bundy didn't think anyone would really remember him since if they refused to help him he just moved on and didn't push it.

So, B.S. pushing Stride about isn't really all that different, particularly as it is possible he was unaware of Schwartz and pipeman, but even if he was, not that big a deal once they fled.

We also have to remember that Long potentially saw JtR with Chapman just shortly before they went into the backyard of Hanbury, and Lawende, Harris, and Levey may have seen JtR with Eddowes, also just before her murder. So, we know JtR wasn't really concerned about possibly being seen with a victim. Is a bit of pushing really going to make a difference in the end, if shortly thereafter she's going to be found dead? To someone who was willing to go on and kill both Chapman and Eddowes, I wouldn't think so, which could be seen as a point in favour of B.S. being JtR. As I say, the Stride case is a collection of things that seem to work both ways.

- Jeff

We can add the Zodiac to that list when he killed taxi driver Paul Stine, Jeff. I’ve always counted the fact that BS Man was seen as a point against him being the ripper but we can’t discount him of course. He might have been the killer but not the ripper of course. It’s worth mentioning Hutchinson too of course. Would the ripper have gone on to kill after someone had stopped down to look him in the eye?

[Herlock Sholmes]

I think the argument that BSM is not at all like JtR, can be taken a stage further. BSM is not much like any murderer. The clumsy behavior, the on-street assault, the presence of witnesses, and the calling of 'Lipski' so close to Batty street. Can you name another murderer who behaved like this?

What do you think about the possibility that Schwartz simply misheard BS Man? There are several possibilities of course and they’re all total speculation. One that was mentioned many years ago (I can’t recall who by) was that BS Man knew Stride and actually called out “Lizzie.” Or perhaps the killer recognised Pipeman and he was a Mr “Lindsay.”