If Schwartz Lied ...

[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

[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

[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

[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.

[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]

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?

[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]

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]

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 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?

[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 all,

Ok, I've had a go at trying to put together a timeline of events. I'm using Dr. Blackwell's watch as the standard time, meaning, witness statements of times are based upon other clocks and so we would expect some error due to their clock reading differently from Dr. Blackwell's. Presumably, though, the times shouldn't be hugely different, but a difference of 10 minutes between two clocks would not be unexpected. So, what I've been doing is trying to work backwards from Dr. Blackwell's time of arrival when we know his watch read 1:16. BST is "Blackwell Standard Time", so the recreation times are all stated in BST, and I'll do my best to explain what I've done. I chose a clock-sync error of +-10 minutes (as I had mentioned that in earlier posts, I stuck with it). When working backwards, to estimate times in BST, if someone stated a duration (i.e. x minutes later event A happens), then I translated their estimated duration using the average for that estimated duration (the table at the end of this post). If they estimated a range (X-Y minutes), I averaged the table values for X-Y minutes. When people described their movements (went from A-B), I measured that distance on the maps, and used 3.1 mph for walking, 2.5 mph for a PC on their beat, and 6.1 mph for people running. That would give me an estimated duration for their actions. Then, I could compare the recreation time for their actions to their statement of what time they said they did these things. And if the recreation time (which is in BST) and their statement of the time (which is not in BST) fall within the clock sync error range, then I consider the recreation to be reasonable.

Another test of the reasonableness of the recreation is when two events get assigned an estimated time in BST values, and we also have someone involved in those events present that as a duration (x minutes). I then compare the estimated interval in BST with their testimony. And if the BST interval falls within the range for the X minute estimate (i.e. is between the min and max value in the table), then the recreation is considered within tolerances.

Finally, George has indicated he did a recreation of the Deimshutz "pony shy until start of search", and that he found this required about 1 minute and 50seconds. I'm using his results for that estimation.

I started with what serves as the initial "core" of the recreation, which starts with Blackwell's arrival, and now with George's information, works back to Deimshutz's arrival. This is what I presented earlier, but I've reduced some of the ranges I presented then to singular points in time by using the midpoints, and using the exact table values rather than being lazy and rounding to nearest minutes. Nothing major changes, just the time details follow a consistent methodology.

All Times Stated are in BST (Blackwell Standard Time);

All Witness Statements thought to be clock based times are viewed as consistent if within a clock-sync error of +-10 minutes.

All Witness Statements with regards do a duration or interval length are viewed as consistent if within the range shown in the Table at the end. If a duration is required to continue the estimated time line, the average duration will be used. If multiple witnesses state different values for the same duration, the average of their adjusted durations will be used. Given the skew associated with the ranges of durations (the max is much further from the average than the minimum) we would expect, overall, for more of the errors to be below the mean than above the mean, but I am unable to estimate what the ratio should be as the exact form of the skewed distribution is unknown and so I am unable to determine how far above the median the mean, average, is likely to be located).

Here is the core of the recreation:
1:16: Dr. Blackwell arrives at scene

1:13:35: Johnson arrives at scene (duration 3-4 minutes later -> 2m 25s, ave of two adj. durations)

1:04:45: PC Lamb Arrives (an adjusted duration to 8m 50s; ave of 10-12m estimate)
NOTE: recreated time between Spooner & PC Lamb’s arrival is 2m 24s. Spooner estimated 5 minutes, which ranges from 1m 38s to 15m 06s, with an average of 3m 37s. Recreation interval well within acceptable limits.

1:03:33: PC Lamb alerted by “runners”

1:02:21: Runners start heading from yard, north towards Commercial Road
Returned from Fairclough
Spooner arrives at Scene

1:00:34: Runners head out south toward Fairclough
NOTE: James Brown testifies that at about 12:45 he sees a man and woman by the Board School on Fairclough, and believes the woman was Stride. He estimates 15 minutes later he hears cries of “Police”, from people moving towards Gove Street (15 min has a range of 6m 13s to 37m 56s, and an average of 12m 33s; given his 12:45 is not in BST, the combination of clock-sync error and estimation error, means his statement is consistent with the recreation times, but it is impossible to tease apart the sources of error in order to translate his 12:45 BST; if we, however, use his duration estimation and work back from our runners, it would suggest he walked past at
12:48:01, and that difference is well within clock sync error ranges).

12:58:24: Diemshutz’s arrival (based upon George’s 1m 50s recreation of pony shy->heading out
NOTE: Diemshutz testifies to arriving at 1 o’clock based on different clock. Recreated BST well within clock sync error range

Building upon the Core:

PC Smith testifies as follows:
“It takes me from 25 minutes to half an hour to go round my beat. I was last in Berner-street about half-past 12 or 12:35. At 1 o’clock I went to Berner-street in my ordinary round. I saw a crowd of people outside the gates of No. 40. I did not hear any cries of “Police.” When I got there I saw Constables 12 H. R and 252 H. I then saw the deceased, and, on looking at her, found she was dead. I then went to the station for the ambulance. Dr. Blackwell’s assistant came just as I was going away.”
So, we know he arrives after PC Lamb (1:04:45 BST), and before Johnson’s arrival (1:13:35 BST). We also know he carries out a few activities at the scene, though from what he describes, those could be done fairly quickly, which could suggest he arrives closer to Johnson than PC Lamb, but not necessarily.

We do not know what clock PC Smith bases his time stamp on. His description of the time of his last patrol as “half-past 12 or 12:35” suggests that is not the Harris clock at the top of Berner Street, as if it were he would not have to state a range. George has interpreted this 5 minutes as indicating the time interval for his patrol of Berner Street. While I can’t rule that out (at 2.5 mph, regulation patrol speed, going up and down Berner’s street would take about 4 minutes, so Geoge’s idea is defendable). However, the phrasing to me does not come across that way as I would think it would have been stated as “I was last in Berner-street between 12:30 and 12:35”, rather than including “about” and using “or”. As such, I’m treating his testimony as indicating he did not use the Harris clock to time-stamp his patrol.

Also, the time 1 o’clock in his testimony is within the statement “At 1 o’clock I went to Berner-street …”, and not “At 1 o’clock I was at Berner-street …”. This testimony is as recorded in The Times, which is what I have access to. There may be conflicting reports in other papers, as is commonly the case. His patrol description starts with “Jower’s-Walk” (sic; Gower’s Walk), which at regulation speed is about 2m 23s away from Berner Street. Therefore, it sounds to me like he updates his time a Gower’s walk, and at 1 he started heading towards Berner’s Street, making his arrival at the top of it around 1:02:23 (his time, not BST), and as he would pick up the pace due to the activity, arrives at the scene at 1:03 (his clock time, not BST). A 25-30 minute typical patrol round would place him there at 12:32:23-12:37:23, which fits well with his stated estimated times. I suggest, therefore, that PC Smith arrives at between roughly 1:05 and 1:06 BST, with the difference between his time and BST reflecting clock-differences (I’ll put it at 1:05:30, midway in that range).

This would place his previous patrol (in BST) entering Berner Street between 12:35 and 12:40, so we’ll estimate that to be 12:37:30 (BST).

Fanny Mortimer:
She testifies she goes out for about 10 minutes after hearing what she takes to be a police man pass by. A 10 minute estimate translates to 7m 56s, but has a range of 3m 48s -27m 00s. If we give PC Smith a bit of time to get out of her view, that would place Fanny Mortimer on her door step between 12:39 and 12:47 (BST), during which Goldstein passes. Also, James Brown doesn't pass until 12:48:01, which is why FM didn't see him. Testimonies are lining up and consistent once all adjusted to BST.

Schwartz Incident:
It is recorded as having occurred at 12:45, but that’s not in BST. We know FM did not see this event, so either it happens before she came out, or after she went back inside. Given her statements tend to suggest there wasn’t a huge gap between what is likely to be PC Smith’s patrol and her going out, I would suggest this event occurs after her goes in. So after 12:47 BST, but it must happen before Deimshutz arrives, at 12:58:24 (BST).

The Schwartz event, as described, would require no more time than it would take for him to walk along Berner’s Street from Commercial to Fairclough (and a bit less, as he indicates he runs the last bit). That distance is 415 feet, and at 3.1 mph, that requires 1m 31s. We have a window of time well beyond 1m 31s between Fanny’s going back inside and Deimshutz’s arrival. It is also within acceptable clock sync error. Given the amount of time required, it seems likely James Brown goes past before the Schwartz incident. That reduces the window to be after 12:48:01 and before 12:58:24 (BST). We still have over 10 minutes within which to fit a 1m 31s event.

So, if B.S. is Stride’s killer, it places her death between 12:48:01 and 12:58:24, BST.

This gives us the what I would suggest is a reasonable start at a recreation of the events with all of the times in BST:

I'm presenting this in reverse chronological order, error of the time estimates should be viewed with increasing caution as we move down the timeline (the previous errors will compound) but so far everything remains within tolerances.

*** recreation of events in BST ****************

1:16: Dr. Blackwell arrives at scene

1:13:35: Johnson arrives at scene
PC Smith Leaves to fetch ambulance

1:05:30: PC Smith Arrives

1:04:45: PC Lamb Arrives

1:03:33: PC Lamb alerted by “runners”

1:02:21: Runners start heading from yard, north towards Commercial Road
Returned from Fairclough
Spooner arrives at Scene

1:00:34: Runners head out south toward Fairclough
This is heard by James Brown, whose testimony places this at 1o'clock (non BST)

12:58:24: Diemshutz’s arrival (based upon George’s 1m 50s recreation of pony shy->heading out

{ Time window for Schwartz Incident }

12:48:01: James Brown sees a man and woman (Stride?) by the board School;

12:47: Fanny Mortimer goes inside (FM estimated about 4 minutes later she heard a pony and cart go by. The recreation has an 11 m 24 gap. The range for 4 minute estimates span from 1m 15s to 12m 31s, so while on the long side, the recreation is still within acceptable limits).

{ Time window for Goldstein to walk down Berner Street }.

12:39: Fanny Mortimer goes outside

12:37:30: PC Smith’s previous patrol of Berner’s Street

*** End of recreation time line ******************

I'm sure not everyone will agree with some of the decisions I've had to make, but that's the nature of these things. There are, I believe, some other witness statements we could try and work with. I expect that sooner or later something will arise that won't fall within the tolerance levels, but that's to be expected.

- Jeff

Here's the table I've used for the duration estimations again.

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.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Tiger Bay was Brunswick St and surrounds. Brunswick St runs south from Fairclough, the intersection being just east of Batty St.

Cheers, George

I found this description.

Berners-street is in a very notorious part of Whitechapel; it is close to a district which was formerly known as Tiger Bay, because of the ferocious character of the deperadoes who frequented it. A few yards distant is the house wherein Lipski murdered Miriam Angel, and the neighbourhood generally has an evil repute.

I take this to mean that Fairclough street marked the northern boundary.

Was Spooner standing within Tiger Bay?

Harris's claim to have come out of his home in Tiger Bay, seems almost intentionally non-specific.

[GBinOz]

Does anyone know the extent of Tiger Bay? Is it shown on a map? Was any part of Fairclough or Berner streets regarded as part of Tiger Bay?

Tiger Bay was Brunswick St and surrounds. Brunswick St runs south from Fairclough, the intersection being just east of Batty St.

Cheers, George

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Does anyone know the extent of Tiger Bay? Is it shown on a map? Was any part of Fairclough or Berner streets regarded as part of Tiger Bay?