If Schwartz Lied ...

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I've never understood this suggestion, Michael, to be honest. It seems more clever than compelling, though I acknowledge that many people seem to believe it.

For this to be the correct, we have to believe that an unknown witness (or witnesses) misinterpreted seeing several men looking for a policeman as a chase, but then --coincidentally--there really HAD been a chase a short time earlier, as described by Schwartz.

That is not the only coincidence. Both events are reported as having occurred at about 12:45.
So coincidence is not really the right word - it more like a paradox.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I don’t understand this part.

If Schwartz walked behind BS Man and BS Man stopped at the gates then that means that Schwartz, at that moment, was feet or even yards (according to how far behind BS Man he walked) behind the couple. So if he crosses the road how does this get him ‘…by the Board School?’ When he crossed the road he could have been 20 yards north of the front of the club and so a fair distance from the Board School.

Before he had gone many yards, however, he heard the sound of a quarrel, and turned back to learn what was the matter, but just as he stepped from the kerb ...

Schwartz got real close to Stride...

Swanson: ... on turning into Berner St. from Commercial Road & having got as far as the gateway where the murder was committed he saw a man stop & speak to a woman, who was standing in the gateway.

...and as a consequence...

Upon being taken to the mortuary Schwartz identified the body as that of the woman he had seen...

[Herlock Sholmes]

Before he had gone many yards, however, he heard the sound of a quarrel, and turned back to learn what was the matter, but just as he stepped from the kerb ...

Schwartz got real close to Stride...

Swanson: ... on turning into Berner St. from Commercial Road & having got as far as the gateway where the murder was committed he saw a man stop & speak to a woman, who was standing in the gateway.

...and as a consequence...

Upon being taken to the mortuary Schwartz identified the body as that of the woman he had seen...

I can’t recall from the literature on the case but has anyone ever suggested that part of Schwartz testimony might speak against BS Man being the ripper?

We don’t know the distance between Schwartz and BS Man as they both walked along Berner Street but it couldn’t have been much. Therefore the time gap between BS Man reaching Stride and Schwartz getting to the point where he felt the need to cross the road could have been more than a very few seconds.

The ripper gained his victims trust by posing as a customer so that they might take him to a secluded spot. So is it likely that the ripper would have a) have got into an argument on the street with a potential victim and b) done it almost immediately he’d bumped into her?

Id considered a) before and it’s the main reason that I have my doubts that BS Man was the ripper (whether he killed Stride or not) but I’d never considered b) the speed that the 2 fell into an argument. It just doesn’t sound like ripper-ish behaviour?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

We don’t know the distance between Schwartz and BS Man as they both walked along Berner Street but it couldn’t have been much.

BS Man didn't walk. He hid at the gates, in the darkness.
Stride did walk, and she walked as if half-tipsy - she had a right leg problem, which caused an uneven gait.

[Herlock Sholmes]

BS Man didn't walk. He hid at the gates, in the darkness.
Stride did walk, and she walked as if half-tipsy - she had a right leg problem, which caused an uneven gait.

How do you come by that version of events?

According to The Star interview: “As he turned the corner from Commercial Road he noticed some distance in front of him a man walking as if partially intoxicated.”

From Swanson: “….he got as far as the gateway where the murder was committed he saw a man stop & speak to a woman, who was standing the gateway…”

You can’t stop unless your moving.

[Wickerman]

Just a piece of trivia I came across today, it relates more to previous discussions we have had about the possibility Schwartz avoided Baxter's inquest.

Here is a press cutting reporting how Baxter deals with such people.



Here, a 19th century Websters Dictionary explains, Estreate/Estreated.



Not a witness, but the issue avoiding a summons is the same.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Just a piece of trivia I came across today, it relates more to previous discussions we have had about the possibility Schwartz avoided Baxter's inquest.

Here is a press cutting reporting how Baxter deals with such people.



Here, a 19th century Websters Dictionary explains, Estreate/Estreated.



Not a witness, but the issue avoiding a summons is the same.

Thanks for posting that Wick

[NotBlamedForNothing]

How do you come by that version of events?

According to The Star interview: “As he turned the corner from Commercial Road he noticed some distance in front of him a man walking as if partially intoxicated.”

From Swanson: “….he got as far as the gateway where the murder was committed he saw a man stop & speak to a woman, who was standing the gateway…”

You can’t stop unless your moving.

Who was Stride waiting for, at the gateway? Godot? Why do we never hear from this person?
Prostitutes had never been seen at Dutfield's Yard, and Stride had no coin on her person.
Stride was never witnessed alone that night, and she was never standing in the gateway.
Schwartz' account reverses the characters - who waits, who walks and how they walk, what they are carrying, and the direction of travel.
Imagine you are in the yard, and Stride walks along heading north, on her way home. As soon as you see her, grab the bow the of her scarf and pull hard. Which way is the bow now turned?

Phillips: The deceased had round her neck a check silk scarf, the bow of which was turned to the left and pulled very tight.

Stride was ambushed.

[Wickerman]

Who was Stride waiting for, at the gateway? Godot? Why do we never hear from this person?
Prostitutes had never been seen at Dutfield's Yard, and Stride had no coin on her person.
Stride was never witnessed alone that night, and she was never standing in the gateway.
Schwartz' account reverses the characters - who waits, who walks and how they walk, what they are carrying, and the direction of travel.
Imagine you are in the yard, and Stride walks along heading north, on her way home. As soon as you see her, grab the bow the of her scarf and pull hard. Which way is the bow now turned?

Phillips: The deceased had round her neck a check silk scarf, the bow of which was turned to the left and pulled very tight.

Stride was ambushed.

Stride was not waiting for anyone, she was still with Parcel-man, he was just further in the shadows out of sight.
That's my view at least.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Who was Stride waiting for, at the gateway? Godot? Why do we never hear from this person?

We don’t know who she was waiting for or if she was soliciting. If she was waiting for someone who didn’t show it’s hardly surprising that they didn’t come forward especially if they had no alibi.

Prostitutes had never been seen at Dutfield's Yard, and Stride had no coin on her person.

I thought that someone had mentioned that they had? I could be mis-remembering though. Stride might have been out drinking with someone but they argued and went their separate ways. Stride might then have decided to try and earn something. Why would she go somewhere else?

Stride was never witnessed alone that night, and she was never standing in the gateway.

Apart from by Schwartz of course but this doesn’t mean that she was never alone. Her movements can’t be accounted for with anything lie completeness so this doesn’t come close to proving anything.

Schwartz' account reverses the characters - who waits, who walks and how they walk, what they are carrying, and the direction of travel.

No it doesn’t.

In the Police report he said that he saw “….a man stop & speak to a woman, who was standing in the gateway.” So the man was walking along Berner Street and he stopped to speak to a woman who was standing.

In The Star interview says “…..he noticed some distance in front of him a man walking as if partially intoxicated. He walked on behind him, and presently he noticed a woman standing in the entrance to the alley way….” So the only difference is the ‘partially intoxicated’ part but as Swanson was synthesising the evidence it’s hardly suspicious or significant that he omitted this part.

There’ no difference in the direction of travel. The only difference is the knife Which could have been newspaper exaggeration.

Imagine you are in the yard, and Stride walks along heading north, on her way home. As soon as you see her, grab the bow the of her scarf and pull hard. Which way is the bow now turned?

Depends on which hand was used.

Phillips: The deceased had round her neck a check silk scarf, the bow of which was turned to the left and pulled very tight.

The scarf tells us nothing of importance.

Stride was ambushed.

Only if you completely reverse the evidence. I’m almost at a loss for words over how you can keep coming up with these fantasies. It’s like being in some alternate universe where ‘walking’ means ‘standing still.’ Left is right, north is south.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Stride was not waiting for anyone, she was still with Parcel-man, he was just further in the shadows out of sight.
That's my view at least.

She was still with him, but out of her sight? Is that an oxymoron?

What do you suppose the parcel was for? Was it large enough to hold a jacket, which could be put on after the murder, to cover blood stains on his shirt?

[Joshua Rogan]

I'm curious to know how to tighten a bow that is already tied around someone's neck by simply pulling it.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I'm curious to know how to tighten a bow that is already tied around someone's neck by simply pulling it.

Join the queue Joshua

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I'm curious to know how to tighten a bow that is already tied around someone's neck by simply pulling it.

Was it already tight...?

Blackwell: I formed the opinion that the murderer probably caught hold of the silk scarf, which was tight and knotted, and pulled the deceased backwards, cutting her throat in that way.

If not, then then pulling and tightening must have occurred due to separate actions.

It should be noted that Blackwell's opinion supports the ambush theory, and seems to directly contradict...

The man tried to pull the woman into the street, but he turned her round & threw her down on the footway...

...unless he pulled her backwards as soon as she stopped screaming and got herself off the ground. Too bad the supposed accomplice got in the way of Schwartz being able to tell us what happened next.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Join the queue Joshua

It's a long one, isn't Herlock? Far queue, as they say.