If Schwartz Lied ...

[caz]

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.

Oh I know that scene very well, Herlock.

Just catching up after the long weekend.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

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.

Er, that was sarcasm I'm afraid, NBFN. I'm one of those who blames Schwartz for nothing.

[caz]

This foreigner was well dressed, and had the appearance of being in the theatrical line.

Ironic

He could not speak a word of English, but came to the police-station accompanied by a friend, who acted as an interpreter.

Convenient

He gave his name and address, but the police have not disclosed them. A Star man, however, got wind of his call, and ran him to earth in Backchurch-lane.

Suspicious

The reporter's Hungarian was quite as imperfect as the foreigner's English, but an interpreter was at hand, ...

'Lucky'

... and the man's story was retold just as he had given it to the police.

Cobblers

Okay, so who was it 'convenient' or 'lucky' for, to have Schwartz's account interpreted in such a way as to have two men involved in the assault on Stride, one of them named Lipski?

What if Abberline had taken this at face value? How convenient would that have been for the Jews at the club, considering they stupidly left the murdered woman to be found on their premises?

[Herlock Sholmes]

.
one: The man being chased is a man whom the public prefer to regard as the murderer. Presumably you don't suppose Isaacs was the murderer. So who is 'the public', and why does 'the public' prefer to regard the man being chased (supposedly or not), as the murderer? Remember this was at about 12:45. Remember also, that Arbeter Fraint said the murder occurred at about a quarter to one. So does that mean Wess also regards the man who was chased, as being the murderer? Would that man be Israel Schwartz?

For ‘public’ I’d just substitute ‘local rumour mill.’ It sounded like a chase connected to events in Dutfield’s Yard so rumour was that someone was chasing a possible culprit.

[Herlock Sholmes]

.
two: Wess cannot remember the name of the man who gave chase, but he is not a member of their body.Diemschitz was the club steward, so it cannot be him doing the 'chasing'. Yet somehow Wess not only knows of this chase, but he was also told the name of the man who did the chasing, and knows that he is not a member of the club.

He’s heard talk of a ‘chase’ but can’t remember a name being mentioned which the reporter interpreted as him not being able to remember a name that he’d heard.

[Herlock Sholmes]

.
So according to Wess, there was indeed a chase along Fairclough street, during the time Spooner says he was on that street. Yet Spooner never mentioned it, and no other witness mentioned it, as far as we know

Which shows that this ‘chase’ never happened. It was obviously a mistaken interpretation of Diemschutz and Kozebrodski’s search for a PC.

[Herlock Sholmes]

So did Spooner. Yet the search cannot be the chase. Did Brown or Marshall tell Wess the name of the man who chased the murderer?

Why can’t they be the same? There was very obviously no chase.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Oh I know that scene very well, Herlock.

Just catching up after the long weekend.

Love,

Caz
X

It’s a classic Caz. Hope you had a good weekend?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Why can’t they be the same? There was very obviously no chase.

Have you heard of Israel Schwartz?

[caz]

Which shows that this ‘chase’ never happened. It was obviously a mistaken interpretation of Diemschutz and Kozebrodski’s search for a PC.

I agree, Herlock. Two men are seen running, one a few yards ahead of the other, before news of the latest murder begins to hit the streets. People then jump to the not unreasonable conclusion that it was the killer who was being pursued, when in reality the two men were both running to fetch a policeman.

When Schwartz gave his account, and suggested he was being chased away from the scene of crime at around 12.45am - by a man called Lipski - the two incidents got conflated and it was assumed that the murder itself had been committed at the same time - which it may have been, but it wasn't discovered and the alarm raised for another 15 minutes, give or take.

Well that's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

It’s a classic Caz. Hope you had a good weekend?

Very nice thanks. Hope you did too. First bit of really summery weather here in Devon, so it was great to lounge in the garden with a good book and a cold beer or three.

Seems like I missed nothing on this thread.

Love,

Caz
X

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I agree, Herlock. Two men are seen running, one a few yards ahead of the other, before news of the latest murder begins to hit the streets. People then jump to the not unreasonable conclusion that it was the killer who was being pursued, when in reality the two men were both running to fetch a policeman.

The two men searching for police were Diemschitz and Kozebrodski. Correct?
According to what Wess tells the Echo reporter, the man chasing is not a member of their body, and he (Wess) was given the man's name.
That either means Diemschitz lied about participating in the search, or the whole man pursued story was fake news.
However, if one believes Schwartz, that later case makes for a rather large coincidence!

When Schwartz gave his account, and suggested he was being chased away from the scene of crime at around 12.45am - by a man called Lipski - the two incidents got conflated and it was assumed that the murder itself had been committed at the same time - which it may have been, but it wasn't discovered and the alarm raised for another 15 minutes, give or take.

Well that's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

Love,

Caz
X

Conflated by who? Who knows about the Schwartz incident, other than Israel and a few police at Leman street?
To conflate the Schwartz incident with the search, requires at least some knowledge of each. Who had that, and passed on a conflation of the two, to Wess?
Why did this person think that the murderer had escaped? Did the pursuer tell him he gave up trying? Did the pursuer also tell him why he thought there had been a murder, at that point? If it is all down to confusion of two events, how did the confusion come about, if this someone or 'the public' is somehow aware of the Schwartz incident, independently of Schwartz' police statement?
Last but not least, is the question that no one wants to answer; why didn't Spooner report seeing both a chase, and then the search party running for police?

[Herlock Sholmes]

The two men searching for police were Diemschitz and Kozebrodski. Correct?
According to what Wess tells the Echo reporter, the man chasing is not a member of their body, and he (Wess) was given the man's name.
That either means Diemschitz lied about participating in the search, or the whole man pursued story was fake news.
However, if one believes Schwartz, that later case makes for a rather large coincidence

Or the whole ‘chase’ nonsense was very obviously a confusion caused by a rumour. The fact that he might have said that he could remember the name might mean that he’d vaguely heard a name mentioned but he couldn’t recall it. Saying he wasn’t a member might just have been him being over protective toward the club.

Why are you dwelling on this very obvious rumour-driven error?

[Wickerman]

Why can’t they be the same? There was very obviously no chase.

I agree, it wasn't a chase.

[Fiver]

So I take it you don't take that report at face value. Congratulations.

Perhaps you should read what I actually said.

That report neither proves nor disproves anything about Israel Schwartz' account. Schwartz' statement of 12:45 was an estimate. Mortimer's statement of "shortly before a quarter to one o'clock" was also an estimate. It is quite possible that Schwartz' incident occurred at 12:42 and Mortimer came to her doorway at 12:44 after Schwartz and the other people he claims to have seen had moved down the street or ducked into Dutfield's Yard.

Here is that report again.

"It appears that shortly before a quarter to one o'clock she heard the measured, heavy tramp of a policeman passing the house on his beat. Immediately afterwards she went to the street-door, with the intention of shooting the bolts, though she remained standing there ten minutes before she did so. During the ten minutes she saw no one enter or leave the neighbouring yard, and she feels sure that had any one done so she could not have overlooked the fact. The quiet and deserted character of the street appears even to have struck her at the time. 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 Diemschitz's pony cart pass the house, and remarked upon the circumstance to her husband."

That report - taken at face value - neither proves nor disproves anything about Israel Schwartz' account. Schwartz gave an estimate of the time. Mortimer gave an estimate of the time. This isn't a whodunnit novel - those times are estimates and the accounts do not contradict each other.