Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If Schwartz Lied ...

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

  • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    I see nothing sinister in the slightest. Vague yes, but why sinister?
    I'm not saying it necessarily is sinister. Just that the discrepancy in numbers might have been due to people sneaking off before the gates were closed. Possibly people who did not care to be around a dead body. However, things look a little different when considering the loft situation.

    In general Lamb appears to be saying that there were 20 -30 people in the yard. Some of whom were from the club (the ‘from 15-20 people’) the rest “had followed me in.”
    Lamb entered the club several minutes after his arrival. It was after the arrival of assistant Johnston and before Dr Blackwell. It is then that he estimated the 15-20. What happened after Lambs arrival and up to that point, is hard to say. However, Baxter questioned him heavily on the possibility of 'leakages'.

    Reid gave a more exact number because he’d counted the number of statements taken…28 (Lamb’s estimation was 20-30)
    What a shame that list of 28, hasn't survived
    Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

      Surely we can only assume that before she went onto her doorstep she was inside her house? She said shortly before 12.45 she heard Smith. Smith said that it was between 12.30 and 12.35.
      Assuming that does not explain why she had the front door unlocked after midnight.
      It seems to me, much more compatible with the notion of her being on her doorstep, nearly the whole time ...

      So what does nearly the whole time actually refer to? She did not see Smith and Stride with man, so it could mean she were in and out.
      It could also mean locking up before 1am, as in, she nearly made it to 1am. Yet how would she know her timing that precisely, without referencing a clock?
      I think there is a clue in; shortly before a quarter to one o'clock she heard the measured, heavy tramp of a policeman ...
      That is very precise for someone not looking at a clock, fairly regularly. On the other hand, it could be some sort of guestimate. The report says...

      Locking the door, she prepared to retire to bed, in the front room on the ground floor, and it so happened that in about four minutes' time she heard the pony cart pass the house, and remarked upon the circumstance to her husband.

      Did Fanny really say 'in about four minutes', or is someone doing sums? Well quite possibly ...

      Thus, presuming that the body did not lay in the yard when the policeman passed-and it could hardly, it is thought, have escaped his notice-and presuming also that the assassin and his victim did not enter the yard while the woman stood at the door, it follows that they must have entered it within a minute or two before the arrival of the pony trap. If this be a correct surmise, it is easy to understand that the criminal may have been interrupted at his work.

      Was the four minute gap real, or is it there to explain when the murder took place?
      The reporter must have know about Diemschitz claiming to have arrived right on 1am, to suppose a gap that precise. It would also seem the notion of interruption was not original to the reporter, or the police ...

      The man who drove the cart says he thinks it quite possible that after he had entered the yard the assassin may have fled out of it, having lurked in the gloom until a favourable moment arrived.

      Now this may explain why Diemschitz was so adamant about his timing. The four minute gap only 'works' if he sees the clock at exactly one o'clock - 'about one o'clock' will not do. This explanation also requires Fanny to have locked up at close to 12:55, and for Diemschitz to know that was the case. Might he have...?

      Fanny: I was just about going to bed, sir, when I heard a call for the police. I ran to the door, and before I could open it I heard somebody say, 'Come out quick; there's a poor woman here that's had ten inches of cold steel in her.' I hurried out, and saw some two or three people standing in the gateway. Lewis, the man who looks after the Socialist Club at No. 40, was there, and his wife.

      So Diemschitz may have wanted people to suppose that the murder occurred between Fanny's lockup, and his arrival, and to therefore suspect an interrupted (and unsatisfied?) killer. Presumably, that would be to help keep the club out of trouble, that no one there had caused.

      Last but not least, there is the argument over the word 'previously'

      If she was right and Smith passed at just before 12.45 then we can ask why he didn’t see people in the yard as per Michael’s earlier discovery time?
      She can't actually see people in the yard, from her doorstep. So not sure what you're referring to.

      If Smith was right then it’s reasonable to suggest that Fanny was back inside when Schwartz passed.
      If Smith was right, then his 25 to 30 minute beat would have him returning between 12:55 and 1:05.
      Smith was close to right about his later timing, but the earlier timing is more of an estimate. He seems to have come up with 12:30-35, by doing a mental subtraction.

      Again, I really can’t see anything suspicious about any of this.
      Fanny couldn't see anything suspicious, either
      Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

      Comment


      • .
        If she was right and Smith passed at just before 12.45 then we can ask why he didn’t see people in the yard as per Michael’s earlier discovery time?

        >She can't actually see people in the yard, from her doorstep. So not sure what you're referring to <
        I was referring to PC Smith. If Fanny was correct in that he passed her house at just before 12.45 then Michael’s earlier discovery time goes out of the window because Smith saw nothing when passing the yard.
        Regards

        Sir Herlock Sholmes



        "Tis but a part we see, and not a whole."

        ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

        Comment


        • .
          Again, I really can’t see anything suspicious about any of this.

          >Fanny couldn't see anything suspicious, either <
          Because she’d gone back inside before it happened.
          Regards

          Sir Herlock Sholmes



          "Tis but a part we see, and not a whole."

          ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

          Comment


          • . Did Fanny really say 'in about four minutes', or is someone doing sums? Well quite possibly ...
            I’d agree on sums. No one really guesses at 4 minutes do they? They’re more likely to round up by estimating to 5 minutes. Sounds like 4 minutes was to get from ‘time A to time B.”
            Regards

            Sir Herlock Sholmes



            "Tis but a part we see, and not a whole."

            ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

            Comment


            • .
              Was the four minute gap real, or is it there to explain when the murder took place?
              The reporter must have know about Diemschitz claiming to have arrived right on 1am, to suppose a gap that precise. It would also seem the notion of interruption was not original to the reporter, or the police ...

              The man who drove the cart says he thinks it quite possible that after he had entered the yard the assassin may have fled out of it, having lurked in the gloom until a favourable moment arrived.

              Now this may explain why Diemschitz was so adamant about his timing. The four minute gap only 'works' if he sees the clock at exactly one o'clock - 'about one o'clock' will not do. This explanation also requires Fanny to have locked up at close to 12:55, and for Diemschitz to know that was the case. Might he have...?
              I tend to think that the ‘4 minutes’ was a Press calculation but even then it’s not easy to see why they chose 4 minutes? Fanny is saying that she was on her doorstep for the 10 minutes from 12.45 to 12.55. Diemschutz as we know said that he arrived at the yard at 1.00 (whether or not the clock had now clicked onto 1.01 or not) then with a minute added for him to have gone inside, come back out and then begun the shouts for a Constable it might have been close to 1.02, so we could be talking about 7 minutes between Fanny going inside and then first hearing a commotion. So why 4 minutes?

              Also if it was actually Smith that was correct in the time that he’d passed then we could have Fanny going back inside before 12.45. This would give us a gap of 16 or 17 minutes before the commotion. Could Fanny herself have mistaken 16 or 17 minutes for 5 minutes? It’s not impossible but I have to say that it’s not a very convincing speculation.

              I tend to think that the Press just believed that Fanny heard Smith around 12.45, she went onto her doorstep just after (12.46) Her 10 minutes took them to 12.56 and the 4 minutes was from 12.56 to Diemschutz time (1.00.)
              Regards

              Sir Herlock Sholmes



              "Tis but a part we see, and not a whole."

              ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

              Comment


              • . Lamb entered the club several minutes after his arrival. It was after the arrival of assistant Johnston and before Dr Blackwell. It is then that he estimated the 15-20. What happened after Lambs arrival and up to that point, is hard to say. However, Baxter questioned him heavily on the possibility of 'leakages'
                Apologies if I’m being Sunday morning slow here but I don’t understand this.

                After who’s arrival? Spooner?

                We mentioned Reid but you can’t mean that Lamb arrived after him.
                Regards

                Sir Herlock Sholmes



                "Tis but a part we see, and not a whole."

                ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                  I was referring to PC Smith. If Fanny was correct in that he passed her house at just before 12.45 then Michael’s earlier discovery time goes out of the window because Smith saw nothing when passing the yard.
                  Sorry, half asleep.
                  Smith saw nothing in the yard, although I'll leave to MWR to state how critical that point is to his thinking.
                  I believe Michael has put forward the idea that Goldstein saw 'something' in the yard, and decided to keep walking.
                  Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

                    Sorry, half asleep.
                    Smith saw nothing in the yard, although I'll leave to MWR to state how critical that point is to his thinking.
                    I believe Michael has put forward the idea that Goldstein saw 'something' in the yard, and decided to keep walking.
                    Regards

                    Sir Herlock Sholmes



                    "Tis but a part we see, and not a whole."

                    ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                      I’d agree on sums. No one really guesses at 4 minutes do they? They’re more likely to round up by estimating to 5 minutes. Sounds like 4 minutes was to get from ‘time A to time B.”
                      That's how I see it. The gap is also necessary to make time for murderer and victim to enter the yard, unnoticed, and murderer to exit the yard, unnoticed.
                      My theory is that Diemschitz exploited his knowledge of Mortimer's doorstep timing (time A), by adding 1:00am to the mix (time B), and the notion of the interrupted killer who hides in the darkness until Louis goes inside.
                      By the way, I wonder how many people in Louis' position, would have just yelled for assistance?
                      Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                        I tend to think that the ‘4 minutes’ was a Press calculation but even then it’s not easy to see why they chose 4 minutes? Fanny is saying that she was on her doorstep for the 10 minutes from 12.45 to 12.55. Diemschutz as we know said that he arrived at the yard at 1.00 (whether or not the clock had now clicked onto 1.01 or not) then with a minute added for him to have gone inside, come back out and then begun the shouts for a Constable it might have been close to 1.02, so we could be talking about 7 minutes between Fanny going inside and then first hearing a commotion. So why 4 minutes?
                        The maths does look a bit wobbly, unless 1 minute is allowed for lockup. Who can tell? Yet whatever time is meant by "shortly before a quarter to one o'clock ... Immediately afterwards she went to the street-door ...", we know that the person responsible for the heavy, measured tramp was in the process of observing the soon to be victim, and her male companion. How long did they stay where Smith saw them?

                        The supposed 4 minute gap from lockup to hearing the cart, doesn't seem to fit seamlessly with Fanny's quotes ...

                        I had just gone indoors, and was preparing to go to bed, when I heard a commotion outside ...

                        I was just about going to bed, sir, when I heard a call for the police. I ran to the door ...


                        To me, just gone indoors, means anywhere from a few seconds to 2 minutes, 3 at most. Not 7.

                        Also if it was actually Smith that was correct in the time that he’d passed then we could have Fanny going back inside before 12.45. This would give us a gap of 16 or 17 minutes before the commotion. Could Fanny herself have mistaken 16 or 17 minutes for 5 minutes? It’s not impossible but I have to say that it’s not a very convincing speculation.
                        I agree

                        I tend to think that the Press just believed that Fanny heard Smith around 12.45, she went onto her doorstep just after (12.46) Her 10 minutes took them to 12.56 and the 4 minutes was from 12.56 to Diemschutz time (1.00.)
                        The DN/EN Mortimer report is very odd. It's a weird mash of unquoted from statements from two witnesses, false or questionable assumptions, and the theorising of the writer, or the police, or both. Worse still, it's not clear which bits fall into which category.
                        Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                          Apologies if I’m being Sunday morning slow here but I don’t understand this.

                          After who’s arrival? Spooner?

                          We mentioned Reid but you can’t mean that Lamb arrived after him.
                          I should have written ...

                          Several minutes after arriving, Lamb entered the club. That was after the arrival of assistant Johnston, but before that of Dr Blackwell. It was then that he estimated the 15-20. What happened after Lamb's arrival and up to the point he entered the club, is hard to say. However, Baxter questioned him heavily on the possibility of 'leakages'.

                          A little clearer?

                          What I'm not clear on is the order of Lamb entering the club, and Blackwell arriving.

                          Lamb: I put a constable at the gate and told him not to let any one in or out. I then entered the club and, starting from the front door, examined the place.

                          Blackwell: The doors were closed when I arrived.

                          Seems clear, except ...

                          Lamb: Dr. Blackwell was the first doctor to arrive; he came ten or twelve minutes after myself, but I had no watch with me.

                          How did he estimate 10-12 minutes, if he the were in the club when Blackwell arrived (1:16)?

                          Maybe Lamb confused Johnston and Blackwell...

                          Lamb: When I blew my whistle other constables came, and I had the entrance of the yard closed. This was while Dr. Blackwell was looking at the body. Before that the doors were wide open.

                          Which would imply Lamb having arrived shortly after 1am, if his 10-12 minute estimate were fairly accurate.
                          Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post
                            I guess the newspaper reports about the long delay in finding police, were all false then, as was Arbeter Fraint's claim of a 10 minute search time. Yet I don't see why anyone from the club would say this if it weren't more or less true. It's not like they deliberately padded the search out to beyond 1am, so that the fixed duty officer couldn't say anything that contradicted the claim of a 1am discovery time.
                            The AF has Diemshutz discovering the body at about 1 am. Adding 10 minutes to that would take the time to around 1:10 for the arrival of Lamb & Ayliffe. But that doesn’t go with the fact that Eagle also arrived around 1:10 at the Leman Street police station to alert Inspector Pinhorn. So, one of AF claims was, in fact, false, Andrew.
                            "You can rob me, you can starve me and you can beat me and you can kill me. Just don't bore me."
                            Clint Eastwood as Gunny in "Heartbreak Ridge"

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post
                              Now this may explain why Diemschitz was so adamant about his timing. The four minute gap only 'works' if he sees the clock at exactly one o'clock - 'about one o'clock' will not do. This explanation also requires Fanny to have locked up at close to 12:55, and for Diemschitz to know that was the case. Might he have...?

                              Fanny: I was just about going to bed, sir, when I heard a call for the police. I ran to the door, and before I could open it I heard somebody say, 'Come out quick; there's a poor woman here that's had ten inches of cold steel in her.' I hurried out, and saw some two or three people standing in the gateway. Lewis, the man who looks after the Socialist Club at No. 40, was there, and his wife.

                              So Diemschitz may have wanted people to suppose that the murder occurred between Fanny's lockup, and his arrival, and to therefore suspect an interrupted (and unsatisfied?) killer. Presumably, that would be to help keep the club out of trouble, that no one there had caused.
                              Wouldn't it have been much easier (and independent of anybody else) if they'd just turned Stride on her back, lifted her skirts and moved/opened her legs somewhat?

                              "You can rob me, you can starve me and you can beat me and you can kill me. Just don't bore me."
                              Clint Eastwood as Gunny in "Heartbreak Ridge"

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by FrankO View Post

                                The AF has Diemshutz discovering the body at about 1 am. Adding 10 minutes to that would take the time to around 1:10 for the arrival of Lamb & Ayliffe. But that doesn’t go with the fact that Eagle also arrived around 1:10 at the Leman Street police station to alert Inspector Pinhorn. So, one of AF claims was, in fact, false, Andrew.
                                Or both. 1am is too late, and 10 minutes is too long.
                                Reducing each by 5 minutes, results in much more realistic numbers. Discovery 12:55, and no more than 5 minutes search time.
                                Why the newspapers talk about this oddly lengthy search, is hard to explain, if there is little truth to it. Yet I have come to the realization that the following is probably BS.

                                Isaacs: I went to look for a policeman at the direction of Diemshitz or some members of the club. I went in the direction of Grove street, and could not find one. I afterwards went into the Commercial road, and there along with Eagle I found two officers.

                                I don't think that is correct. I think the searches were concurrent, not sequential. This is what really happened ...

                                Eagle: I ran towards the Commercial-road, Dienishitz, the club steward, and another member going in the opposite direction down Fairclough- street.

                                This could be close to the truth also ...

                                Diemschitz: A man whom I met in Grove- street returned with me, and when we reached the yard he took hold of the head of the deceased. As he lifted it up I saw the wound in the throat.
                                [Coroner] Had the constables arrived then? - At the very same moment Eagle and the constables arrived.


                                What is going on with Kozebrodski in Arbeter Fraint is hard to work out, as is why he claimed to have accompanied both LD and ME, in the search for police.
                                Perhaps there is clue in the Irish Times ...


                                About five minutes to one o'clock this morning a youth about twenty years of age named Joseph Koster was accosted by a little boy who came running up to him as he was passing on the opposite side of 40 Berner street, used by the International Socialist Club, and told him that a woman was lying in the gateway next to the club, with her throat cut. Koster immediately ran across the road and saw a woman lying on her side in the gateway leading into Dutfield's stabling and van premises.

                                This is not as mysterious as it seems. The only real mystery is why Koster would refer to 17 year-old Kozebrodski, as a 'little boy'.
                                Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X