Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If Schwartz Lied ...

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

  • Originally posted by FrankO View Post

    Thanks for inquiring & sharing this, Mike - very interesting!
    No problem Frank. It shows that the fact that Ayliffe was still there doesn’t mean that Eagle found Lamb before 1.00.
    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
      This has been discussed previously. Firstly, it’s not a case of ‘if you hear one thing then you must hear another.’ If she’d have been talking to her husband for example when Smith passed she might not have heard him. A noise can be missed if your focused on something. Also we might add that we can’t be sure that, it the time of the Schwartz incident, she might have been at the rear part of the house. In the kitchen perhaps. Maybe she’d gone to the loo but didn’t want to mention it.
      So you suppose that Fanny was out of hearing range, because otherwise there must have been a cover-up, but as that is impossible in principle, she must have been out of hearing range.
      Congratulations, you've just created new knowledge - ex nihilo.

      And we have 2 opinions as to what time that actually was. If we remove the surrounding circumstances we should ask ourselves this - who was likelier to have been correct? A woman just standing on her front doorstep on a very normal evening (as far as she was aware at the time) and with no real reason to have logged the time (we have no way of knowing if she had a clock of course) or a policeman on a regulated beat.
      You're confusing the issue. She may have been wrong about the time, or Smith may have come up with 12:30-35, by subtracting 25-30 minutes from 1am ...

      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.

      Regardless of the case, you are claiming that the 'important statement' report is the 'likeliest', and that statement refers to the woman going to her door immediately after hearing the constables plod. The absolute time is irrelevant. It makes no difference if the time were 12:35 or 12:42.

      As you say, we should put Smith's timings ahead of someone at home with no reason to log the time. So once again, the timing and the recording of very recent incidents ...

      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.


      A man who passed clocks on his route and who, under normal circumstances and without any activity on his round) would have passed down Berner Street at the same time every evening on that route.
      You're confusing a PC on his beat, with a wind-up toy.

      More disingenuous stuff. If anyone is trying to make the data fit the theory it’s you and Michael I’m afraid. You continually dismiss/ignore the idea that Smith might have been correct as to what time he passed along Berner Street. So no I’m not ‘tweaking.’ I’m saying that we have 2 witnesses. One say that x occurred at y while the other says that it occurred at z. We have no certain way of knowing which was correct so why do you choose one as if the other doesn’t exist?
      I modify Smith's earlier time for the same reason Frank does. It is to prevent Smith returning to Berner street before Lamb gets there.
      Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

      Comment


      • Neil Bell, from Capturing Jack the Ripper:

        [Lamb] was working his beat on the south side of Commercial Road around 1.00 a.m. on 30 September, and pacing along with fellow constable 426H William Ayliffe, who had just finished his fixed-point duty not far away on the Commercial Road, at Grove Street junction, and was on his way back to Leman Street station when two men came rushing straight toward the constables from the direction of Berner Street.
        Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

        Comment


        • . So you suppose that Fanny was out of hearing range, because otherwise there must have been a cover-up, but as that is impossible in principle, she must have been out of hearing range.
          Congratulations, you've just created new knowledge - ex nihilo.
          No. What I’m saying is very simple. Just because Fanny didn’t hear the Schwartz incident it’s not proof that it didn’t occur.

          1. We don’t know how loud the incident was. Schwartz use the word “screamed” and added “but not very loudly.” These two don’t go together so it smacks of being due to translation when a better word than ‘screamed’ couldn’t be found. He certainly stressed that she didn’t make any loud noises though.

          2. We don’t know whereabout FM was in the house at the time. She was inside the house but we have no more detail. She wasn’t tied to one room and so could have moved to the rear part of the house for some task.

          3. We aren’t able to test how sound carried from one room to another. What if a door between to rooms was closed or was close to being closed. This would affect how sounds were carried.

          4. We don’t know if she’d visited an outside loo at the time.

          5. We don’t know if she was talking to someone (like a husband) at the time of the incident. I don’t know if she was married or if anyone else lived with her but someone could have been telling her something and so she was focused on their words.

          6. We don’t know how good her hearing was. Maybe she only heard the horse and cart because she was near to the door but wouldn’t have heard it from other locations in the house?

          7. We don’t know if it was a case of ‘not noticing’ the sound of the background sound incident rather than not actually hearing it. It’s very easy not to notice something like a few sounds on a street that she heard sounds from every day. We have to remember that as far as she was concerned at the time this was just a normal night. She wasn’t on alert.

          And I do hate to keep bringing it up but why is it that you don’t find it strange that neither she nor anyone else saw or heard Diemschutz arrive back earlier than the time that he said that he did? If we use your thinking then surely an earlier arrival time by Diemschutz has to be eliminated on that basis?
          Regards

          Sir Herlock Sholmes



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

          ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

          Comment


          • . You're confusing the issue. She may have been wrong about the time, or Smith may have come up with 12:30-35, by subtracting 25-30 minutes from 1am ...

            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.

            Regardless of the case, you are claiming that the 'important statement' report is the 'likeliest', and that statement refers to the woman going to her door immediately after hearing the constables plod. The absolute time is irrelevant. It makes no difference if the time were 12:35 or 12:42.

            As you say, we should put Smith's timings ahead of someone at home with no reason to log the time. So once again, the timing and the recording of very recent incidents ...

            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
            I don’t understand the point that you’re trying to make? How am I confusing anything?

            Smith arrived after Lamb therefore he cannot have arrived at the yard at exactly 1.00. He’s obviously estimating just as he was estimating when he said that he’d arrived on his previous round between 12.30 and 12.35. It’s possible that he was just quoting the times that he would normally have passed along Berner Street. The first pass would have been between 12.30-12.35 + or - a bit. And his second pass would have been around 30 minutes later, so approximately 1.00-1.05 + or - a bit.

            Another example of trying to create a mystery out of nothing.

            ​​​​​​……..

            My original point though was to show how the Conspiracy Party constantly seek to use FM to try and dismiss Schwartz. And they do this by ignoring the possibility of Smith being correct in his arrival time.
            Regards

            Sir Herlock Sholmes



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

            ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

            Comment


            • . You're confusing a PC on his beat, with a wind-up toy.
              Im just pointing out that a Constable on a regulated beat had more reason to have been aware of the time that a woman lounging around on her doorstep on a very normal evening.
              Regards

              Sir Herlock Sholmes



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

              ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

              Comment


              • . I modify Smith's earlier time for the same reason Frank does. It is to prevent Smith returning to Berner street before Lamb gets there.
                There’s no need for modification with the time ranges available. Would Smith’s beat have taken exactly 30 minutes every time? No, it can’t have been exact. So….

                First pass - approx 12.30-12.35

                Second pass - (approx 30 minutes later) and so around 1.00-1.05.

                Those would have been his average times but we should still allow a + or - of a minute or two as he wasn’t ‘a wind up toy)

                So he arrives at the yard just after Lamb.

                Yet again…..no mystery.
                Regards

                Sir Herlock Sholmes



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

                ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                Comment


                • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post
                  Neil Bell, from Capturing Jack the Ripper:

                  [Lamb] was working his beat on the south side of Commercial Road around 1.00 a.m. on 30 September, and pacing along with fellow constable 426H William Ayliffe, who had just finished his fixed-point duty not far away on the Commercial Road, at Grove Street junction, and was on his way back to Leman Street station when two men came rushing straight toward the constables from the direction of Berner Street.
                  Again, no issue there.

                  Whoever told him that his shift had ended couldn’t have told every officer that his shift had ended at exactly 1.00. So Ayliffe had been told sometime between 1.00 and 1.05 and had begun his walk back when Eagle arrived. Lamb called to Ayliffe who was still in range or might he have blown his whistle? Might this have been the whistle that Harris heard?
                  Regards

                  Sir Herlock Sholmes



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

                  ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                  Comment


                  • One of the problems of this ‘plot’ is that we have to assume stupidity on the part of the plotters. If Diemschutz actually found the body early but he lied to the Police about finding her at 1.00 then we have to assume that, there and then, a plot was created. After all, simply altering the discovery time alone achieves nothing. Therefore they must, at the time, have come up with the idea of a false witness to point the Police away from any suggestion that the killer was Jewish or even worse a club member.

                    So why didn’t they simply use a club member that they knew was, at the very least, in the vicinity at the time. Someone trustworthy, who was committed to the survival of the club and who could come across as a reliable witness to the Police. Morris Eagle appears to be a very obvious choice with the added bonus that he’d earlier left the club and returned at 12.40. So the childishly simple plan would have been to have got Eagle to say something like…..”I got back at 12.40 and there was a man and a woman standing at the gateway having an argument. The woman looked like the dead woman to me. The man got angry when he saw me and called me a nosey Jewish bastard. He had a thick Irish accent and was wearing……..etc”

                    No need for any non-English speaking witnesses or cryptic uses of a single word to indicate that the killer wasn’t Jewish.

                    Every single way that you view this ‘plot’ it crumbles.
                    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
                      A bit more info from Jon/Neil.

                      Neil recalled finding out that some H Division FP duties extended until 7.00am. He then found it in Dickens Dictionary of London (which I have but didn’t think of looking at)

                      “Ah. Got it.

                      It was in Dickens dictionary of London.

                      “Apologies if these have been apologised before, but I haven't seen them:

                      "The under-mentioned places are appointed as fixed points where a police constable is to be permanently stationed from 9pm to 1am. In the event of any person springing a rattle, or persistently ringing a bell in the street or in an area, the police will at once proceed to the spot and render assistance.

                      H or Whitechapel Division

                      Ben Jonson-rd and White Horse-st, Stepney, junction of
                      Brick-la and Bethnal-green-rd, junction of
                      Christian-st and Commercial-rd, end of
                      Church-st, Wapping
                      Columbia-rd, Bethnal Gn, corner of Hassard-st
                      Commercial-rd-east, corner of Bromehead-st
                      Commercial-st, Spitalfields, corner of Thrawl-st
                      Flower and Dean-st and Brick-la, Spitalfields, end of
                      George-yd, Hight-st, Whitechapel, end of
                      G.E. Ry., High-st, Shoreditch, front of
                      Great Garden-st and Whitechapel-rd, opposite end of
                      Hanbury-st, cor of Deal-st, Mile End New Town
                      Hare-alley, High-st, Shoreditch, end of
                      Hermitage-br, Wapping
                      Leman-st, Commercial-st and Hight-st, Whitechapel, junc of
                      New Gravel-la-br, London Docks *
                      Old Gravel-la-br, London Docks *
                      Ship-alley & St George's-st-east, south end of
                      Shoreditch Church
                      Spencer-st and Watney-st, St. Georges East, corner of
                      Spitalfields Church
                      Stepney ry-stn, Commercial-rd-ea
                      Upper East Smithfield, principal entrance London Docks
                      Warner-pl and Hackney-rd, cor of
                      Wells-st, Whitechapel, opposite Sailors' Home,
                      Whitechapel Church
                      White Horse-la and Mile End-rd, junction of

                      *A constable is stationed at each of these points from 3pm to 7am."


                      So only where there’s an asterisk were they on till 7am.”


                      So 1.00 for Ayliffe.
                      What would happen with the fixed stations after 1am? Is the constable replaced by another until a certain time or does a beat begin which includes the position?

                      Comment


                      • Stewart Evans shared these pages from The Police Book, with me some years ago.





                        A Fixed Point station only existed between the hours specified, after that the point was merely part of a regular constables beat.
                        Regards, Jon S.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Curious Cat View Post

                          What would happen with the fixed stations after 1am? Is the constable replaced by another until a certain time or does a beat begin which includes the position?
                          According to Inspector Reid very few of these fixed-point men were on duty all night. For most of them their shift ended at one o'clock and they weren't replaced.

                          This is what Lamb had said about it in the Morning Advertiser of 3 October:
                          "There is a constable on fixed-point duty at the corner of Grove-street, Commercial-road, and he came off duty at one a.m. The man on the beat then has to do his duty."

                          (I see you've beaten me to it, Jon - thanks for sharing the information!)

                          Last edited by FrankO; 05-31-2021, 12:31 PM.
                          "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

                            That’s another good point Jeff. I don’t know if alcohol was available at the club though? I’m wondering if anyone knows this?
                            Irish Times, Oct 1:

                            In order to inquire further into these matters, the reporter next visited the club referred to , a rather low class little building covered with posters, most of them in the Hebrew language. Mrs Lewis, wife of the steward, as she explained, was standing at the door in the centre of a host of people, but she declined to call on her husband, who had been up all night, and had only just gone to bed. Pressed to speak as to the character of the club, Mrs Lewis was inclined to be retired, but a young man in the crowd volunteered an explanation of the institution. "You see," he explained, "the members are bad Jews - Jews who do not heed their religion, and they annoy those who do in order to show contempt for the religion. In the Black Fast a week or two ago, for instance, they had a banquet, and ostentatiously ate and drank, while we might do neither. They hold concerts there till early in the morning, and women and girls are brought there." "Were they here last night?" asked the reporter. "No" said Mrs Lewis, "there was only a concert and discussion on last night."

                            The reporter referred to, seems to have previously spoken to Abraham Hershburg, and Barnett Kenterich at #38.
                            Note that in the quote, 'Mrs Lewis' says that her husband had just gone to bed. Herschburg was interviewed shortly after 6am.
                            The paper also notes …

                            The young fellow who had previously spoken gave some further details at some length on the finding of the body by Lewis, but he could give no further facts that those given in the above statements.

                            So presumably at least some of the 'above statements' (Diemschitz, Eagle, Lave), were made later on in the day, and the first description of Diemschitz finding the body - at least to the Irish Times - may well have been given by Herschburg, who is seemingly not a club member …

                            The body was not found by Koster, but by a man whose name I do not know, a man who goes out with a pony and barrow, and lives up the archway where he was going, I believe, to put up his barrow on coming home from market. He thought it was his wife at first, but when he found her safe at home he got a candle and found this woman. He never touched it till the doctor had been sent for.

                            So who did Herschburg get the details from? Did that person mention grapes?
                            This is how the Irish Times describes the murder …

                            There do appear to be peculiarities in the tale of one of the [double event] murders that point more closely to a possible revelation. The woman was not in the company of her assailant. She carried in one hand sweetmeats and in another grapes, as if she were on her way to her home. She was surprised, grasped and her throat severed by a fierce attack, and it is hardly possible that this could have been done without some stains having been made upon the murderer's clothes.

                            "The woman was not in the company of her assailant." Who knew that?
                            "She carried in one hand sweetmeats and in another grapes, as if she were on her way to her home." Who knew that?
                            "She was surprised, grasped and her throat severed by a fierce attack …" Who knew that?
                            Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                            Comment


                            • Irish Times, Oct 1:

                              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.

                              I wonder where young Joseph was living, at the time? Somewhere nearby, perhaps? Evening News, Oct 18:

                              We have received the following letter:

                              SIR - Referring to your issue No. [2227], I beg of you to publish a contradictory statement respecting the Whitechapel murder; in fact, your reporter has been wrongly informed, or else it his own suggestion.

                              The police are not in the house, nor has the woman had a lodger who is now missing, but a stranger brought the shirts, and when he fetched them, he was detained by the police, and after inquiries discharged. As regards our house, it is not as your report describes it, for it is a most respectable house and in good general condition; although it is certainly not Windsor Castle. There are only two lodgers, one a drayman, name of Joseph, who works for the Norwegian Lager Beer Company, and the other a baker, name of Carl Noun, who has been at work in Margate, and only returned on the 6th of this month after the season was over. I trust you will publish these statements as I put it to you, in fact it may injure the poor woman in her business. - Respectfully.

                              C. NOUN (a lodger in the house).

                              22, Batty-street, Commercial-road, E., October 17.
                              Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                                Stewart Evans shared these pages from The Police Book, with me some years ago.





                                A Fixed Point station only existed between the hours specified, after that the point was merely part of a regular constables beat.
                                Cheers Wick (and Stewart Evans of course)

                                Regards

                                Sir Herlock Sholmes



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

                                ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X