If Schwartz Lied ...

[Herlock Sholmes]

It's either bingo or dogma

Arbeter Fraint: At about one o’clock the steward of the club, Comrade Louis Dimshits, came with his cart from the market.

Probably the later

Not according to the clock that he saw.

[Herlock Sholmes]

This thread at the very least has illustrated the lengths to which some will sink to propagate a theory. Reason is simply ignored or talked over. How many times have we had to stress the very obvious issues with times and the very understandable discrepancies that exist? Do some posters really think that some of these witnesses lied about being poor and that they all carried split-second accurate timepieces or that every home had a clock? Even when we repeatedly hear witnesses say “about” or “around” or “I should think.” Even when from his own lips we hear that PC Lamb say that he didn’t carry a watch. Still we get posters trying to hold witnesses to exact times just so that they can jump up and down yelling ‘cover-up.’ This cannot be put down to misunderstanding. It’s deliberate. So what else have we had?

We’ve had Michael trying to use Gilleman (who he annoying and inexplicably keeps calling Gillen) as proof of an earlier discovery time when the only mention of him is when he calls Eagle to see the body (at 1.00) - on what planet is this reasonable?

We’ve even had Michael trying to use Eagle himself to prove the earlier time even though Eagle said that he first saw the body at around 1.00 - on what planet would someone try this?

We’ve had Michael completely ignore the fact that Spooner said that he’d been at the yard 5 minutes before Lamb got there. He even tried to say that Spooner didn’t say it even though it’s in black and white - again, on what planet? Even now he can’t even bring himself to admit that Spooner said this. How desperate is that?

We’ve had him making a huge point about Diemschutz use of the word ‘precisely,’ even though Frank explained several times that Diemschutz could have got from the clock to the club in under a minute - would this sink in, of course not. It’s not in the script.

And now we have another person trying to push this half-baked, evidence-free theory based on thin air. And as usual when someone is proposing something barking mad on here they make sure that they repeatedly use The Marriott Defence against anyone that disagrees….”you’re just trying to defend the old established theories.” Yawn.

Does it matter if you repeatedly state that Stride might not have been a ripper victim…..of course not, because a few pages on they’ll use it again! Let’s face it though, they have no evidence so they have to resort to stereotyping an opponent. Straight from the Rubenhold text book

There’s no evidence of a cover-up of course. Not a shred. Just post after post of imaginative fiction and an absolute refusal to take a sensible view on times. It’s not cover up versus non-cover up, it’s dishonesty versus honesty because those proposing a cover up cannot be excused by the suggestion of being mistaken. It’s absolutely deliberate.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

William Marshall in the Daily News of 6 October: "I heard nothing more till the cry of "Murder" was raised in the street, which occurred just after one o'clock."
Marshall in the Morning Advertiser of same date: "I did not hear anything till I heard murder being called in the street just after one o’clock on the Sunday morning."
In the People of 7 October: "The witness went indoors about twelve o'clock, and heard nothing more until the cry of "Murder" was raised, just after one a.m."
The Times of 6 October: "I went in about 12 o'clock and heard nothing more until I heard "Murder" being called in the street. It had then just gone 1 o'clock."

Marshall, unlike possibly Mortimer, is an independent witness who claimed he heard the cries for "Murder" "just after one o'clock".

We can see which of those papers got it right by looking at the Daily Telegraph:

C: Did you hear anything more that night?
M: Not till I heard that the murder had taken place, just after one o'clock.

So Marshall heard the cry of murder at right on 1am - almost definitely by reading a clock - and then learnt of the murder just after 1am, presumably by walking the short distance down to the yard, and being told what had occurred. Marshall may well have been on Reid's list of 28.
It is perhaps a little odd that only one non-club member on Reid's list, was called to the inquest. Although, Spooner had the advantage of actually seeing Diemschitz and Kozebrodski run to Grove street and start doubling-back, while dressed up as a policeman who then rudely leaves his lady friend standing alone, when he deems it appropriate to set off with the men toward Berner street.
Actually, there was another big reason for calling Spooner. He was able to clear up any doubts about an evidently fictional chase down Fairclough street, which had been described to police by a paid actor, who had obvious connections to the secretary of the club.

If Diemshutz ran out of the yard in search of a PC at, say, 1:02 - which is perfectly possible - then Marshall's testimony is perfectly compatible with Diemshutz seeing a clock indicating one o'clock. Clear & simple.

By the time Diemschitz pulled up, it would already be 1:01, and then at least another minute elapses while he mucks around with matches. So 1:02 already. Then there is all the hesitation around the body - telling her to get up and more lighting of candles. Yet somehow Marshall hears the cry of murder right on midnight.
Yet this comparison is only valid if Diemschitz' discovery story is true, of which I have serious doubts. Reading between the Arbeter Fraint lines, combined with that very suspicious discovery story in the Irish Times, leads me to suppose that it may well have been Kozebrodski who discovered the body. Diemschitz may not have even been the second person to see her dead - more likely it was Krantz and Yaffa (possibly Lave).

It really can't be anything other than a non-issue, because, as it stands, whose or which clock/time-piece are you even going by? The clock Diemshutz stated he saw? Blackwell's watch? William Marshall's time-piece? The Club clock, if it had one? Mortimer, if she had one? The Leman Street police station's? The Commercial Street police station's? Ayliffe's, if he had one? Eagle's home clock? William Wess's? Or Greenwich Mean Time perhaps?

The multiple clocks referenced by PC Smith, on his regulated beat.
Smith would have passed at least 3 clocks, on his 25-30 minute beat, in Commercial Road alone.
No matter what evidence is put forward by supporters of the Standard Model, nothing will ever trump this ...

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 saw deceased lying on the ground I recognized her at once and made a report of what I had seen.

Especially anything said by Louis Diemschitz ...

Sep 30: She had a flower in the bosom of her dress, and in one hand she had some grapes and in the other some sweets. She was grasping them tightly.

Inquest: I did not notice what position her hands were in. I only noticed that the dress buttons of her dress were undone.

This alone, is enough to disqualify Diemschitz as a reliable witness.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

1.00 is about 1.00.

So is 12:56 - about the time Fanny Mortimer was locking up, and heard the pony & cart approaching.

Walter Dew was correct about the near simultaneity of these events, and modern idealists have it wrong. Unlike those idealists, Dew was not hopelessly compromised by a need to maintain a hobby, adhere to political correctness ideology, or demonstrate strong tribal loyalty.

The person that wrote that got his info second hand.

First hand: I went yesterday to Weston Hill market, a place I usually visit on Saturdays, and I got back about one o'clock this morning.

Diemschitz only gets one bite at the cherry.

Diemschutz actually saw a clock.

He said he did - that's all we know. The weight of evidence suggests that believing that he looked at that clock, and that it read what he said at the inquest, is more an act of faith than anything else.

If you can PROVE that he didn’t (and you can’t) or you can PROVE that the clock was wrong (and you can’t) then you have no point to make.

C: What did you do with the pony?
D: I left it in the yard by itself, just outside the club door.

There is not a single witness statement that implicitly or explicitly verifies this claim. I do not trust Diemschitz to have spoken the truth.

[Herlock Sholmes]

1.00 is about 1.00


>So is 12:56 - about the time Fanny Mortimer was locking up, and heard the pony & cart approaching.

Walter Dew was correct about the near simultaneity of these events, and modern idealists have it wrong. Unlike those idealists, Dew was not hopelessly compromised by a need to maintain a hobby, adhere to political correctness ideology, or demonstrate strong tribal loyalty<

To say “modern idealists have it wrong” is wrong on 2 levels. Firstly it’s the stating of your opinion as a fact. Secondly it’s the dishonest appeal to The Marriott Defence. How many times are you going to do this and ignore the FACT that I’ve repeatedly told you that I accept the possibility that Stride might not have been a ripper victim? I’d also add that I’m possible the least PC person that you’ll ever speak to. Also that I have more interests in life than the Whitechapel Murders and I genuinely hope that it is solved. Yet still you stoop to the same nonsense and will undoubtedly continue to do it.

Ok if your going to say that about me I’ll say this……I don’t believe that your efforts in research are motivated by a desire for truth. I believe that they are completely ego-driven (like a few others) You just want to present yourself as the outside-the-box thinker. The iconoclast battling against the stuck-in-the-mud ‘old guard.’ Blah, blah, blah.

[Herlock Sholmes]

The person that wrote that got his info second hand.

>First hand: I went yesterday to Weston Hill market, a place I usually visit on Saturdays, and I got back about one o'clock this morning.

Diemschitz only gets one bite at the cherry.<

Pointless, conspiracist nitpicking……again.

Diemschutz actually saw a clock.

>He said he did - that's all we know. The weight of evidence suggests that believing that he looked at that clock, and that it read what he said at the inquest, is more an act of faith than anything else<

Utter nonsense. The ‘weight of evidence’ overwhelmingly tells us that he discovered the body when he said that he did. He said that he saw a clock but you add the conspiracist ‘well he would say that wouldn’t he’ type comment. No, he said that he saw a clock because he saw one. He said what time it said because he was capable of telling the time. There’s nothing to squeeze from this piece of black and white testimony. Nothing is more desperate than your efforts to discredit Diemschutz without a smidgeon of evidence.

[Herlock Sholmes]

. C: What did you do with the pony?
D: I left it in the yard by itself, just outside the club door.

There is not a single witness statement that implicitly or explicitly verifies this claim. I do not trust Diemschitz to have spoken the truth.

Because you are a conspiracy theorist with no regard for reason. Once he’d arrived Dobbin played no further part in the story so no one enquired after his opinion or bothered to find out what happened to him. I wonder what happened to the horse as it wasn’t there just after the initial discovery?……err, let me think……..mmm……….well…….got it! Someone moved it

I wonder if in years time people will say “Ah yes, I remember Herlock, he was the man that solved the great ‘what happened to the horse mystery’…..what a genius.”

[Herlock Sholmes]

.
So is 12:56 - about the time Fanny Mortimer was locking up, and heard the pony & cart approaching

Unless PC Smith was correct about what time he passed along Berner Street in which case Fanny could have gone back inside before 12.45.

Who is likelier to have been more reliable on timing? A woman lounging around on her front doorstep on a very run-of-the-mill evening with no reason to make a note of the time (even if she had the means) Or a Constable on a regulated beat who passes the same spot at roughly the same time every night and who probably walks past various clocks and who has every reason to have been reasonably aware of the time as he would have been expected to have reported any serious incidents with times.

Which of the 2 would any reasonable person favour?

[Herlock Sholmes]

.
Originally posted by FrankO View Post
William Marshall in the Daily News of 6 October: "I heard nothing more till the cry of "Murder" was raised in the street, which occurred just after one o'clock."
Marshall in the Morning Advertiser of same date: "I did not hear anything till I heard murder being called in the street just after one o’clock on the Sunday morning."
In the People of 7 October: "The witness went indoors about twelve o'clock, and heard nothing more until the cry of "Murder" was raised, just after one a.m."
The Times of 6 October: "I went in about 12 o'clock and heard nothing more until I heard "Murder" being called in the street. It had then just gone 1 o'clock."

Marshall, unlike possibly Mortimer, is an independent witness who claimed he heard the cries for "Murder" "just after one o'clock".


NBFN:

We can see which of those papers got it right by looking at the Daily Telegraph:

C: Did you hear anything more that night?
M: Not till I heard that the murder had taken place, just after one o'clock.

So Marshall heard the cry of murder at right on 1am - almost definitely by reading a clock - and then learnt of the murder just after 1am, presumably by walking the short distance down to the yard, and being told what had occurred

It gets more surreal. Can anyone understand this?

Frank quotes 4 examples of Marshall saying that he heard the cry of murder just after 1.00.

In response NBFN quotes another……then he tries to say that this shows that he heard the cry of murder at exactly 1.00. On what planet?

Can anything be clearer than this from the Inquest?

“I went in about 12 o’clock and heard nothing more until I heard “Murder” being called in the street. It had then just gone 1 o’clock.”

I can’t believe that I need to explain these 2 sentences. The phrase “…just gone 1 o’clock,” means just after 1.00. Therefore he heard Diemschutz and Koz just after 1.00 exactly when Diemschutz said that he was there.

It comes to something when evidence is criticised for being too good.

[Herlock Sholmes]

. By the time Diemschitz pulled up, it would already be 1:01, and then at least another minute elapses while he mucks around with matches. So 1:02 already. Then there is all the hesitation around the body - telling her to get up and more lighting of candles. Yet somehow Marshall hears the cry of murder right on midnight.
Yet this comparison is only valid if Diemschitz' discovery story is true, of which I have serious doubts. Reading between the Arbeter Fraint lines, combined with that very suspicious discovery story in the Irish Times, leads me to suppose that it may well have been Kozebrodski who discovered the body. Diemschitz may not have even been the second person to see her dead - more likely it was Krantz and Yaffa (possibly Lave).

As ever, when a conspiracist tries to make something fit we get witnesses walking around like Buzz Aldrin on the moon. Why a minute ‘mucking around with matches?’ There was a kitchen inside the door which would undoubtedly have had matches. He’s more than familiar with the place and his wife’s in the kitchen. So in he goes gets matches and back to the yard…..15 seconds say.. Telling her to get up….5 seconds.

If Marshall heard a cry of murder at 12.00 then it was unconnected to the club. Elsewhere in this case it has been stated that the cry of murder was not uncommon.

You think that Koz found the body????

You’re just saying things for the sake of saying them. It all ties up. There are no issues. Diemschutz discovered the body when he said that he did. Witnesses can lie or be mistaken but they can tell the truth too. To call someone a liar you need proper evidence. You have none.

[Herlock Sholmes]

. The multiple clocks referenced by PC Smith, on his regulated beat.
Smith would have passed at least 3 clocks, on his 25-30 minute beat, in Commercial Road alone.
No matter what evidence is put forward by supporters of the Standard Model, nothing will ever trump this ...

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 saw deceased lying on the ground I recognized her at once and made a report of what I had seen.

Especially anything said by Louis Diemschitz ...

Sep 30: She had a flower in the bosom of her dress, and in one hand she had some grapes and in the other some sweets. She was grasping them tightly.

Inquest: I did not notice what position her hands were in. I only noticed that the dress buttons of her dress were undone.

This alone, is enough to disqualify Diemschitz as a reliable witness.

No it doesn’t. What a joke.

How do you know that he passed at least 3 clocks by the way?

You cannot know which clock he might have looked at?

You cannot know that one or two of them might have been on the other side of the road and he didn’t bother to look.

Smith’s statement doesn’t mention how he arrived at the time and his use of ‘…in my ordinary round’ could indicate that he quoted 1.00 because he usually went into Berner Street at 1.00. But as everyone except for you and Michael know we have to allow for a bit of leeway on timings. 5 or 6 minutes is absolutely nothing.

Its staggering that you think that this disqualifies Diemschutz. This is not an honest approach.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

If Marshall heard a cry of murder at 12.00 then it was unconnected to the club. Elsewhere in this case it has been stated that the cry of murder was not uncommon.

I obviously said 'midnight' in error (that was the time Marshall went in, after being at his door for half an hour). I meant 1:00am. Any reasonable person could work this out. Perhaps you should just calm down a bit.

[FrankO]

Andrew, if you want to believe that it was actually Kozebrodski who discovered Stride at around 12:55 and that he was the “prime star” instead of Diemshutz, then go ahead. If you want other people to believe that, too, then you’ll have to produce some good explanations and evidence for it. Until now, you haven’t done that as far as I’m concerned.

For instance, you use the Irish Times of 2 October which has Eagle stating that he returned to the club about 25 minutes to one. Out of 13 versions of Eagle’s statement (both official and unofficial), there are only 2 that have Eagle return 25 minutes to one. One of them, the Times of 2 October, also has him state that he first saw the body at about one o’clock, while the Irish Times of 1 October has him arrive back at the club at about 20 minutes to one.

You have to do better than this.

Another instance is William Marshall, just as Herlock points out. When we have 4 newspapers saying that Marshall stated he heard a cry of “Murder” was raised/”Murder” being called in the street just after one o’clock, you manage to create from “Not till I heard that the murder had taken place, just after one o'clock.” that Marshall heard the cry of murder right on 1 am, then learnt of the murder just after 1 am and even that he presumably did so by walking the short distance down to the yard, where he was told what had happened.

You also have to do better than this, as there simply isn’t a shred of evidence that Marshall went outside after hearing the screams to check out anything. He may well have gone out as you say, but there simply isn't a shred of evidence.

The multiple clocks referenced by PC Smith, on his regulated beat.

Had he actually referenced at least one clock, let alone multiple, we wouldn’t discuss his timing so much today.

No matter what evidence is put forward by supporters of the Standard Model, nothing will ever trump this ...

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 saw deceased lying on the ground I recognized her at once and made a report of what I had seen.

All of this doesn’t change the fact that Smith only arrived in the yard after Collins had arrived and he arrived after Lamb, who stated he arrived 10 to 12 minutes before Blackwell. So, at least by Blackwell’s watch, Smith didn’t arrive at the top of Berner Street at 1 am, but several minutes later. If we'd have to put a (Blackwell) time to it, it would have been 1:06 at the earliest, but probably even a bit later.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I obviously said 'midnight' in error (that was the time Marshall went in, after being at his door for half an hour). I meant 1:00am. Any reasonable person could work this out. Perhaps you should just calm down a bit.

Im perfectly calm but I’d be less annoyed if you would stop assuming that I (and other posters) can’t arrive at a conclusion that differs from your own by assessing the evidence and not because we are for some obscure reason desperate to defend those ‘old established theories.’

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Because you are a conspiracy theorist with no regard for reason. Once he’d arrived Dobbin played no further part in the story so no one enquired after his opinion or bothered to find out what happened to him. I wonder what happened to the horse as it wasn’t there just after the initial discovery?……err, let me think……..mmm……….well…….got it! Someone moved it

I wonder if in years time people will say “Ah yes, I remember Herlock, he was the man that solved the great ‘what happened to the horse mystery’…..what a genius.”

How many people here have thought about this issue any deeper than Herlock has?
Let's trace part of the story that virtually everyone believes to be true, through the words of Louis and Sarah Diemschitz ...

Louis: I drove in as usual, and, all at once, as I came into the gate, my pony shied to the left. That caused me to turn my head down to the ground on my right to see what it was that had made him shy.
Baxter: Could you see anything?
Louis: I could see that there was something unusual on the pavement. I could not see what it was. It was a dark object. There was nothing white about it. I did not get off the barrow, but I tried with my whip handle to feel what it was. I tried to lift it up, but I could not. I jumped down at once and struck a match, and as it was rather windy I could not get sufficient light to see exactly what it was. I could see, however, that there was the figure of some person lying there. I could tell by the dress that it was a woman. I did not disturb it. I went into the club, and asked where my missus was. I saw her in the front room on the ground floor.
Baxter: What did you do with the pony in the meantime?
Louis: I left it in the yard by itself, just outside the club door.

Where is the pony & cart? Easy - outside the side door of the club. Continuing ...

Louis: There were several members in the front room, where my wife was, and I told them all, "There is a woman lying in the yard," but I could not say whether she was drunk or dead.

Sarah (MA, Oct 2): I was in the kitchen on the ground floor of the club, and close to the side entrance, serving tea and coffee for the members who were singing upstairs. Up till then I had not heard a sound-not even a whisper. Then suddenly I saw my husband enter, looking very scared and frightened. I inquired what was the matter, but all he did was to excitedly ask for a match or candle, as there was a body in the yard. ... I at once complied with his request and gave him some matches. He then rushed out into the yard, and I followed him to the doorway, where I remained. Just by the door I saw a pool of blood, and when my husband struck a light I noticed a dark lump lying under the wall. I at once recognised it as the body of a woman ...

Where is the pony & cart? Same as before - outside the side door of the club. Continuing ...

Louis: I then took a candle and went out at once, and by the candle light I could see that there was blood about before I reached the body.

Sarah: ... to add to my horror, I saw a stream of blood trickling down the yard, and terminating in the pool I had first noticed. She was lying on her back with her head against the wall, and the face looked ghastly. I screamed out in fright, and the members of the club, hearing my cries, rushed downstairs in a body out into the yard.

Where is the pony & cart?
What will happen when the members rush downstairs in a body out into the yard through the side door?

Louis: I did not touch the body, but went off at once for the police.

Sarah: When my husband examined the body he found that life, so far as he could tell, was quite extinct. He at once sent for a policeman.

Where is the pony & cart?

Bonus questions. Did Louis touch the body? Where is Louis at this point?