Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If Schwartz Lied ...

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

  • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

    Is this phrase 'staring at nothing and nobody', designed to create doubts about Fanny's doorstep vigils?
    Is Fanny Mortimer a threat to established beliefs?
    Not at all. The attempt to threaten 'established beliefs' involves trying to put Fanny on her doorstep, seeing and hearing nothing of the incident Schwartz described.

    You know the drill, Caz. The Schwartz incident "might have been over in a few seconds".
    Yes, but nobody is trying to put Fanny on her doorstep for just 'a few seconds'. All we know is that she was not there to see the Schwartz Theatre Group arrive or depart from the scene, but that doesn't mean there was no performance. She wasn't a permanent fixture there from half past midnight to Ovaltine and lights out, so her ten minutes - give or take - spent gawping, didn't have to coincide with a brief act played out between 12.44 and 12.46 - also give or take.

    Knowing? How?
    As I said, they'd have had to be insane to set such a drama at 12.45, not knowing if there could have been one, two or half a dozen Fannies, all on their doorsteps from ten minutes before curtain up time, to ten minutes after the play was meant to end, complaining to each other the whole time that the street was as silent as the grave, giving them nothing and nobody to gossip about. The plotters had to know there was nobody watching, when the action was meant to have taken place. Ironically, this helps everyone if Fanny wasn't watching at the right time. She didn't see Schwartz and co, or the early arrival of Louis D. But she couldn't catch the plotters out either, if she had no idea what was or wasn't happening at 12.45.

    The so-called Schwartz incident cannot just be accepted at face value.
    That's fine. It's your opinion and you are entitled to it.

    For my part, I merely see no good reason to conclude that nothing of the kind happened. But it certainly wouldn't rock my world to do without BS man.

    Last edited by caz; 05-28-2021, 03:05 PM.
    "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


    Comment


    • Originally posted by drstrange169 View Post
      >>It's also bullshit, because you changed 'discovered' to 'murdered'. Nicely done.<<

      Again,

      "... Comrade Louis Dimshits, came with his cart from the market. He was the first to notice the dead body."

      Ergo, Der Arbeter Fraint is indisputably stating "Dimshits" was the first ... period.

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you outline your theory in the thread, Diemschutz' pony and cart - an obstruction to proceedings?

      It being that:

      A club member drags Mrs Stride into the street as Diemshitz arrives.
      She is given grapes to feed his donkey, as she does so, she is grabbed by several club members, holding her front and back and they stuff a sock in her mouth.
      Someone pulls her scarf tight for several minutes till she becomes unconscious.
      A cachous packet falls to ground, and is picked up by one of the men.
      They lift her onto a blanket and cut her throat precisely along the scarf line.
      She is then carried on the blanket inside the gates leaving a trail of blood the men tread in.
      The cart is driven inside and Diemshitz runs inside calling for help.
      Mrs Mortimer is paid a "fiver" to make up her story.

      You are right, the smell of bullshit has been brought in here, but's not on my shoes.
      Dear God alive. You'd think he would have read up just a little about the case first, before posting stuff like this.

      Love,

      Caz
      X
      "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


      Comment


      • .
        Yes, but nobody is trying to put Fanny on her doorstep for just 'a few seconds'. All we know is that she was not there to see the Schwartz Theatre Group arrive or depart from the scene, but that doesn't mean there was no performance. She wasn't a permanent fixture there from half past midnight to Ovaltine and lights out, so her ten minutes - give or take - spent gawping, didn't have to coincide with a brief act played out between 12.44 and 12.46 - also give or take
        Hi Caz,

        I was wondering if you’d ever seen that scene in Father Ted where Ted is trying to explain to Dougal why the cows that are far away in the distance aren’t actually really small cows? I’m guessing that you know how he feels.
        Regards

        Herlock Sholmes

        Comment


        • . As I said, they'd have had to be insane to set such a drama at 12.45, not knowing if there could have been one, two or half a dozen Fannies, all on their doorsteps from ten minutes before curtain up time, to ten minutes after the play was meant to end, complaining to each other the whole time that the street was as silent as the grave, giving them nothing and nobody to gossip about. The plotters had to know there was nobody watching, when the action was meant to have taken place. Ironically, this helps everyone if Fanny wasn't watching at the right time. She didn't see Schwartz and co, or the early arrival of Louis D. But she couldn't catch the plotters out either, if she had no idea what was or wasn't happening at 12.45.
          It would have been the stupidest plan ever. Could we believe that Diemschutz and the others at The Texas School Book Depository I meant the IWMEC wouldn’t have questioned the rest of the street? Could we believe that they wouldn’t have realised that someone might have been hovering around at 12.45 or been looking out of there window. Could we believe that they didn’t consider some Goldstein type figure coming forward to say that he passed down Berner Street at 12.45? Or, as you mentioned, could we believe that they couldn’t have imagined a neighbour saying “well I was looking out of my window at 12.35 and I saw Mr Diemschutz go into the yard on his cart?

          Terrible plan. Terrible cover up. Didn’t happen. It’s very obvious stuff.
          Regards

          Herlock Sholmes

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

            That really should be end of story Frank but it won’t be of course. At the end of the day, as we all know, the horse and cart were unimportant and so didn’t merit any mention as to its exact location. We know that Diemschutz arrived on it and we know that it wasn’t left near to the body. Another non-mystery.
            I wouldn't be surprised either if it isn't end of story for NBFN, Mike, but for me it is. All has been said.
            "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 Herlock Sholmes View Post

              No but I’d say that she wasn’t the most reliable of witnesses. It’s interesting to see how those seeking to create a mystery cling to one version of what she said while ignoring the other. Or how they believe her to be so reliable that they refuse to even countenance the suggestion that PC Smith might have been correct and that she might have been wrong. A poster might almost be tempted to use the word ‘selective.’
              Say what you like. Fanny Mortimer is a corroborated witness.

              I see you're flip-flopping again on that dubious report.
              What are the original sources that that report was based on? Proper scholarship demands that that question at least be acknowledged.

              You're also deliberately trying to mislead regarding my position on Smith.
              Smith said he proceeded to Berner street at 1am. I accept this, and have quoted Smith many times.
              Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                Are you saying that this isn’t a fact?
                Yes. It is a fact that it takes much longer than a few seconds just to walk from the Commercial Road to the gateway. Lo and behold, a woman is already standing there! Did she arrive in a few seconds also - the same few seconds? Didn't you say you thought she was there waiting for someone?
                Then there is the issue of someone being thrown down on the footway. Did Liz then just pick herself up, and run off stage?
                At least Caz can see that the whole incident feels a bit theatrical.
                Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                  Behold The Marriott Defence.
                  Don't you mean...? Behold, yet another version of The Marriott Defence
                  This seems to be another of your catch-all responses.
                  Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by FrankO View Post

                    Then he clearly would not have done his job well and should have asked questions until he could make sense of it.
                    Or maybe he just thought to himself ...

                    Why should it be so important to Stride's inquest that he would have said at what point(s) he stopped before leaving his pony just outside the side door, if he did stop?
                    Indeed. For your problem to be there, what’s missing is that Diemshutz steered his pony towards the side door. Seeing that we have no reason at all to think that he did that, he could just as well have steered back to its original route after the shying, the one that would have taken the cart past the body without Diemshutz noticing it. Or he could have steered it towards where the waterclosets were - directly opposite the side door - as the yard was wider there.

                    But even if he did steer it towards the side door, the pony & cart would have been obliquely in the yard, with the cart further away from the right wall than the pony’s head. If the pony’s head would have been a problem for people to get out, it would have been a problem for Diemshutz to get in. If so, I don’t see why Diemshutz shouldn’t have moved the pony in such a way that it wouldn’t be in the way any longer, leaving enough room for people to get out one by one.

                    So, following the evidence, we get this: Diemshutz entered the yard on his “little cart”, that was "not a very wide cart”, more or less taking “up the centre of the passage”, when his pony shied to the left and so much so that “he wanted to keep too much to the left side against the wall”. Diemshutz then looked to the ground on his right and a bit ahead of him and saw something lying there, poking it with his whip while riding more or less alongside the ‘heap’ and then when he’d passed the ‘heap’ and still hadn’t found out what it was, he halted his pony, got off the cart and went over to the heap to light a match and discover it was the figure of a woman. Then he ran inside, without having to move the pony. End of story.
                    So I see you accept the reasoning in #960. It's just that the cart was a bit to the left of the carriageway ruts, and apparently that made all the difference.
                    Okay, so now we have Diemschitz stopping well to the left of the body, past the body, and above the body. Yet he claims to have to attempted to lift the unknown object, simply by reaching out, back and down with his whip handle!
                    Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by FrankO View Post

                      But the thing is that there was no one standing at her doorstep when Diemshutz turned into Berner Street from Commercial Road.
                      Stating opinion as fact, Frank?
                      Whatever the case, Diemschitz could not take the chance that he saw a man leaving the yard, because someone might have seen him arrive.
                      So we are left with the question; when did murderer and victim enter the yard? Was it after Fanny locked up?
                      If yes, then we really need that 4 minute gap to be true. How fortunate that Louis said 'exactly one o'clock', and not 'about one o'clock'!
                      Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by caz View Post

                        Not at all. The attempt to threaten 'established beliefs' involves trying to put Fanny on her doorstep, seeing and hearing nothing of the incident Schwartz described.
                        Evening News: "Was the street quiet at the time?"

                        Fanny Mortimer: "Yes, there was hardly anybody moving about, except at the club. There was music and dancing going on there at the very time that that poor creature was being murdered at their very door, as one may say."

                        Fanny heard stuff, and Fanny saw people. There was no Schwartz incident. Israel Schwartz was a fake witness.
                        Wess 'knew' of the fake chase along Fairclough street. It is obvious that Schwartz had some connection to the club.

                        Yes, but nobody is trying to put Fanny on her doorstep for just 'a few seconds'. All we know is that she was not there to see the Schwartz Theatre Group arrive or depart from the scene, but that doesn't mean there was no performance. She wasn't a permanent fixture there from half past midnight to Ovaltine and lights out, so her ten minutes - give or take - spent gawping, didn't have to coincide with a brief act played out between 12.44 and 12.46 - also give or take.
                        Daily News, Oct 1:

                        A young girl had been standing in a bisecting thoroughfare not fifty yards from the spot where the body was found. She had, she said, been standing there for about twenty minutes, talking with her sweetheart, but neither of them heard any unusual noises.

                        FM: A young man and his sweetheart were standing at the corner of the street, about 20 yards away, before and after the time the woman must have been murdered, but they told me they did not hear a sound.


                        The only performance is the one that plays out in the minds of Ripperologists
                        Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by caz View Post

                          Dear God alive. You'd think he would have read up just a little about the case first, before posting stuff like this.

                          Love,

                          Caz
                          X
                          I had read up a little, but I also think first impressions can be valuable. They come without any accumulated baggage.
                          If I'd instead done a lot of reading before putting some initial thoughts down, I would probably have ended up in the abyss that you lot are in.
                          As it turns out, my intuitive sense that Diemschitz discovery story did not stack up, turns out to have been correct.
                          Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by caz View Post

                            Not at all. The attempt to threaten 'established beliefs' involves trying to put Fanny on her doorstep, seeing and hearing nothing of the incident Schwartz described.
                            I was standing at the door of my house nearly the whole time between half-past 12 and 1 o'clock this Sunday morning, and did not notice anything unusual.

                            Didn't have to try too hard

                            As I said, they'd have had to be insane to set such a drama at 12.45, not knowing if there could have been one, two or half a dozen Fannies, all on their doorsteps from ten minutes before curtain up time, to ten minutes after the play was meant to end, complaining to each other the whole time that the street was as silent as the grave, giving them nothing and nobody to gossip about. The plotters had to know there was nobody watching, when the action was meant to have taken place. Ironically, this helps everyone if Fanny wasn't watching at the right time. She didn't see Schwartz and co, or the early arrival of Louis D. But she couldn't catch the plotters out either, if she had no idea what was or wasn't happening at 12.45.
                            I keep on hearing that the whole incident would have been over in mere seconds. So maybe they weren't insane.

                            By the way, were there indeed two Fannies on their doorsteps...?

                            Letchford: I passed through the street at half-past 12, and everything seemed to me to be going on as usual, and my sister was standing at the door at ten minutes to one, but did not see any one pass by.

                            Perhaps the two Fannies were talking to each other, and didn't notice the incident?
                            Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                            Comment


                            • >>By the way Dusty, I’ll see you at Monday’s Lodge Meeting<<

                              Use the side entrance, Bruce Robinson's at the front door photographing everybody going in.
                              dustymiller
                              aka drstrange

                              Comment


                              • >> Father Ted where Ted is trying to explain to Dougal why the cows that are far away in the distance aren’t actually really small cows?<<

                                LOVE that scene!!!
                                dustymiller
                                aka drstrange

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X