Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If Schwartz Lied ...

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

  • I see that the wind up shows no sign of abating

    Comment


    • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

      It's a long one, isn't Herlock? Far queue, as they say.
      Hey, the poster known as Caz stated that you didn't have a sense of humour

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Observer View Post

        I see that the wind up shows no sign of abating
        Originally posted by Observer View Post

        Hey, the poster known as Caz stated that you didn't have a sense of humour
        Yes, and it's incredible she has that opinion of me. But that's not all she refuses to recognise - I'm also full of good ideas and new insights. Just ask Abby if you don't believe me.
        Yet it's not just in regards to me that she has it all wrong. Check out this deluded bit of wishful thinking...

        Originally posted by caz View Post

        Well that's one for you to figure out, along with anyone else who prefers to regard Schwartz as a murder suspect than to consider the possibility that he was a decent man, just trying to help the police with their enquiries, and doing his best to make sense of what he had witnessed.
        Schwartz a decent man, who was just trying to help the cops? Caz thinks that about one of the top three suspects in the whole case! Clearly she is not a strong judge of character.
        Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

        Comment


        • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

          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?
          In Swanson's words BS-man "turned her round", it wouldn't make sense if she was facing him, so she must have had her back to him. That being the case, she was likely stood talking facing someone who was more in the shadows than she was.
          The only person we know she was with is Parcel-man, it could have been someone else, but why invent another person when there is no reason to.
          The parcel was the grapes they bought from Packer.

          So, when BS-man came passed, he saw what was going on - a hooker with a client, so grabbed her and spun her around to face him, likely said something like "we don't want your sort around here", and pushed her to the ground.
          Quite possibly that's when Parcel-man stepped forward, as she squealed for him to help, Schwartz rushed passed too fast to see the man in the shadows.

          That's the scenario I see, just speculation on my part but what is for sure is there was more going on in that gateway than we know from Schwarts. Stride was not alone, she never had been whenever she was seen that night.
          The main question is, who was it that was with her - I favour Parcel-man, thats all.

          Regards, Jon S.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

            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.
            Why would no-one come forward to admit being with a prostitute seconds before she was murdered? - I honestly can't imagine. You'd think there'd be a line of them only too willing to put themselves on the spot.....



            Regards, Jon S.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

              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.
              How does this point to an ambush? Where do you get these deductions from?

              For a start it was BS Man that was walking and Stride who was standing still. Then how can anyone know how tight or loose the scarf was before the attack? Then how could anyone know at what point the scarf was pulled?
              Regards

              Sir Herlock Sholmes



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

              ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

              Comment


              • .
                Schwartz a decent man, who was just trying to help the cops? Caz thinks that about one of the top three suspects in the whole case! Clearly she is not a strong judge of character
                Mrs Fiddymont is a better suspect than Schwartz. As is Lord Salisbury, his wife, his butler, Queen Victorian and her oldest corgi Graham.
                Regards

                Sir Herlock Sholmes



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

                ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                  Why would no-one come forward to admit being with a prostitute seconds before she was murdered? - I honestly can't imagine. You'd think there'd be a line of them only too willing to put themselves on the spot.....



                  Regards

                  Sir Herlock Sholmes



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

                  ”Baroni licitum est dicere troglodytam”

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                    In Swanson's words BS-man "turned her round", it wouldn't make sense if she was facing him, so she must have had her back to him. That being the case, she was likely stood talking facing someone who was more in the shadows than she was.
                    It wouldn't make sense for BS man to try to pull her into the street, but ... fail.
                    As for it not making sense for her to have then been facing away from him, what is the right way to have someone facing you, if you intend to push them to the ground?

                    The only person we know she was with is Parcel-man, it could have been someone else, but why invent another person when there is no reason to.
                    I'm not the one imagining she was waiting for someone at the gateway, so I don't have to invent Godot.
                    On the other hand, what is the explanation for parcel man talking quietly to Stride at about 12:40, and killing her by 1am?

                    The parcel was the grapes they bought from Packer.
                    A half a yard wide parcel of grapes. Okay.

                    So, when BS-man came passed, he saw what was going on - a hooker with a client, so grabbed her and spun her around to face him, likely said something like "we don't want your sort around here", and pushed her to the ground.
                    Quite possibly that's when Parcel-man stepped forward, as she squealed for him to help, Schwartz rushed passed too fast to see the man in the shadows.
                    So Schwartz got as far as the gateway, but didn't realize there was another man a few yards away, hiding in 'the shadows'. Okay.

                    Why didn't Stride (the hooker) and parcel man (the client), get on with it...?

                    ...he saw a man stop & speak to a woman, who was standing in the gateway.

                    What did BS do when parcel man stepped forward? Did he gawk like Schwartz had? What does BS care about her sort being around here? Was he from the club?
                    Why did parcel man wait until other people were around before moving in for the kill? If BS man witnessed this 'stepping forward' - and how could he not - what's his excuse for not intervening in her murder? Why was the body not discovered for nearly 15 minutes?

                    As you know, the story (both versions), is that Schwartz did not rush past...

                    On crossing to the opposite side of the street, he saw a second man standing lighting his pipe.

                    ...but, feeling rather timid of getting mixed up in quarrels, he crossed to the other side of the street. Before he had gone many yards, however, he heard the sound of a quarrel, and turned back to learn what was the matter...

                    So with Stride on the ground doing her three little squeals for help - which no one manages to hear - parcel man seizes the opportunity, yet Schwartz does not even notice his presence? Why did Pipeman - according to one account - then pursue Schwartz, thinking him to be the murderer? How can Schwartz not be on the suspect list?

                    That's the scenario I see, just speculation on my part but what is for sure is there was more going on in that gateway than we know from Schwarts. Stride was not alone, she never had been whenever she was seen that night.
                    That's your cue, Herlock...
                    Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                      Why would no-one come forward to admit being with a prostitute seconds before she was murdered? - I honestly can't imagine. You'd think there'd be a line of them only too willing to put themselves on the spot.....

                      I'm obviously referring to Godot, not BS Man, who by your own account is not someone she was waiting on.
                      However, it would be fair to ask; if parcel man was the grapes customer, why would he kill Stride if he'd recently been seen with the victim, firstly by Packer, and then by Smith?
                      Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post
                        This is confused. Schwartz followed the half-tipsy man down Berner street. The man stops to speak to the woman, and then the pushing and quarrelling begins ...

                        ... but, feeling rather timid of getting mixed up in quarrels, he crossed to the other side of the street.

                        So Schwartz is now walking by 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 ...

                        ... onto Fairclough street ...

                        ... A SECOND MAN CAME OUT of the doorway of the public-house a few doors off ...

                        How can Schwartz run South on Berner street to Fairclough street, if he is already on it when the man with the knife ...?

                        ... rushed forward as if to attack the intruder.

                        To be compatible with the Echo account, he must then run along Fairclough street, away from Knifeman. That means East.
                        If he does not, then the two accounts are incompatible. If he does, then please take note if your name is Edward Spooner.
                        You are clearly confused. Going east in Fairclough to get to Backchurch Lane makes as much sense as going east from England to get to Wales.

                        The Echo account says that one man was "being chased by another man along Fairclough-street". It make no mention of whether that chase was east or west.

                        The Star account shows that the Hungarian lived in Backchurch Lane and "fled incontinently, to his new lodgings" there. That means Schwartz ran south on Berner, then west on Fairclough to get to Backchurch Lane.

                        Click image for larger version

Name:	Berner.jpg
Views:	96
Size:	132.9 KB
ID:	759873

                        Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post
                        That's not what I meant. I'm saying that the Echo account does not give a complete picture of this supposed chase.

                        At some point Schwartz must turn a corner to get to his new lodgings, or a railway arch, or both. Why didn't the man who told Wess the name of the pursuer, also tell him what turn or turns the chase took? Then we would know what railway arch Schwartz was referring to, and/or if he really ran down Backchurch Lane.

                        By the way, if the new lodgings really were in Backchurch Lane, then what is the deal with 22 Ellen Street?
                        Neither the Echo nor the Star account gives full details of the alleged chase. Based on context, the railway arch would be the railway arch on Backchurch Lane, which was roughly where Backchurch met Pinchin Street. (The railway arch will get a lot more attention in 1889, when the remains of one of the Torso Killer's victims are left there.) Swanson said that Schwartz lived at "22 Helen Street, Backchurch Lane". Looking at the map, that's probably at the corner of Backhurch and Ellen.




                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

                          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.
                          "You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.” - Inigo Montoya


                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Fiver View Post

                            You are clearly confused. Going east in Fairclough to get to Backchurch Lane makes as much sense as going east from England to get to Wales.

                            The Echo account says that one man was "being chased by another man along Fairclough-street". It make no mention of whether that chase was east or west.

                            The Star account shows that the Hungarian lived in Backchurch Lane and "fled incontinently, to his new lodgings" there. That means Schwartz ran south on Berner, then west on Fairclough to get to Backchurch Lane.



                            Neither the Echo nor the Star account gives full details of the alleged chase. Based on context, the railway arch would be the railway arch on Backchurch Lane, which was roughly where Backchurch met Pinchin Street. (The railway arch will get a lot more attention in 1889, when the remains of one of the Torso Killer's victims are left there.) Swanson said that Schwartz lived at "22 Helen Street, Backchurch Lane". Looking at the map, that's probably at the corner of Backhurch and Ellen.
                            Why would #22 be on the corner? Is that where you want it to be?
                            The blue dot along Ellen street, is #22. No railway arch in that location.

                            Click image for larger version  Name:	rip81-photo14.jpg Views:	0 Size:	98.3 KB ID:	759934

                            Running east along Fairclough, then south on Christian or Grove, would take Schwartz to one of the arches.
                            He could then gingerly make his way back to 22 Ellen St. This avoids having to run right past his new lodgings, having gone south on Berner, or running past that dangerous man who lurches toward him with a knife. (A man the police did not suspect!)
                            According to the Echo and due to Wess, multiple people witnessed this chase, and these people 'preferred' to regard the man pursued as being the murderer. How was that that shared conclusion reached? Why do we never hear from these people? Was Edward Spooner one of these people? Why did Arbeter Fraint stick with the quarter to one approximate murder time? Is it because they knew that was the murder time, and/or that Schwartz was the murderer? How do you know that Pursuing Man was also Deluded Man? Or was the whole chase story a fiction?
                            Last edited by NotBlamedForNothing; 06-08-2021, 01:11 AM.
                            Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                            Comment


                            • 22 Ellen street is below the red dot.

                              Regards, Jon S.

                              Comment


                              • Perhaps he ran south on Berner street, then right into Ellen street, running right by the new address and along to Backchurch Lane. Then he ran down to the railway arch. Then he realized the man had stopped following. Then he walked along Pinchin street to the next railway arch, at the bottom of Phillip street, turned up that street, and finally turned right into Ellen street.
                                All this, to escape a man he had seen lighting a pipe. Fascinating. No wonder Leman street let Pipeman go, and locked up Schwartz instead.
                                Andrew's the man, that is not blamed for nothing

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X