Mrs. Fanny Mortimer, Time wrong?

[Wickerman]

The couple standing at the corner were probably not seen by Mortimer but rather something she had heard while talking to others.

On a sideline, Mortimer does say that, "...they told me they did not hear a sound."

Had Mortimer discussed this with the couple afterwards?

Does this mean the couple stayed at the scene while the investigation unfolded that night, or does it mean Mortimer knew the couple and discussed the crime hours afterwards?

This remark was published in the Monday morning papers so the news went to print Sunday night. Therefore, sometime on Sunday Mrs Mortimer stood in conversation with this couple yet, the couple claimed they left the scene before the murder started - interesting.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Well, if one can cry out not loudly then anything is possible.

[Cogidubnus]

three times but not very loudly

It could have been a translational issue dig...or possibly if her throat was cut as she was "hurled" to the ground...

Just a thought

Dave

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

One is fine the other not so much

It could have been a translational issue dig...or possibly if her throat was cut as she was "hurled" to the ground...

Just a thought

Dave

Translation issue is fine. She was deep into to the passage. If the body couldn't be seen without striking a match..... And no blood trail. Throat was slit where body was found.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

And

Two different versions of where the attack occured? Footpath and sidewalk? How far was Stride in again?

[Cogidubnus]

Light in a dark place?

Translation issue is fine. She was deep into to the passage. If the body couldn't be seen without striking a match..... And no blood trail. Throat was slit where body was found.

She was only five or six feet into the passage...her feet were just cleared by the gates when they were later shut...so consider Schwartz's two statements:-

Firstly to the police on 30th September:-

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

Then to the Star, 1st October:-

The Hungarian saw him put his hand on her shoulder and push her back into the passage

If one accepts the footway he meant was that leading into the yard, then there is no inconsistency there, and it is possible that he could indeed have seen Liz yanked by the scarf, throat slit and cast down in one rapid movement...

The scarf was cut/frayed along its lower edge, and there was a stream of blood running from the body towards the kitchen door of the building...could some of it have been arterial spray?

Whatever he saw, it certainly frightened him off...

All the best

Dave

[Michael W Richards]

I'm sure he meant Smith.

Swanson's report stating that Goldstein passed by at 'about 1' anchors the time Mortimer was at her door - at least the tail end of it. How long she was there up to that point or how many times she was in or out is speculative. As is reported, there are two versions offered.

The couple standing at the corner were probably not seen by Mortimer but rather something she had heard while talking to others.

Hi Hunter,

There are a few misleading statements above ....for one, Fanny stated the night of the murders that she was at her door "nearly the whole time between half-past twelve and one o'clock ", which she later amended to be at her door "off and on" during that period. She also stated without reservation that she was at her door "continuously" from 12:50 until 1am. She did not see anyone but the young couple and later Goldstein, which Goldstein's statement Tuesday night and pass timing of approx 12:55-56 corroborates. The only speculation regarding her time at the door and what she didnt see is made by people who believe the stories of unsubstantiated events that occurred in front of the gates during that time. Who, in order to facilitate that belief, must claim that Fanny missed seeing it...or hearing it. Like Louis arriving at 1am for example....or Israels altercation.

She stated regarding the young couple..." A young man and his sweetheart were standing at the corner of the street, about twenty yards away, before and after the time the woman must have been murdered, but they told me they did not hear a sound." So, she saw them and spoke with them personally afterward.

Im still amazed that people choose to disparage a witness that has substantiated statements to the plethora of club members who do not. Like Lave, Eagle,.... most probably a member, Schwartz,.. and certainly one, Louis.

None of those witness have any other witness statement that corroborates their stories. Not even each others, in the case of Lave and Eagle, who both claimed to be in the same location at the same time and didnt even see each other.

And yet all of them had a stake in how this murder was perceived.

Cheers

[Wickerman]

This remark was published in the Monday morning papers so the news went to print Sunday night. Therefore, sometime on Sunday Mrs Mortimer stood in conversation with this couple yet, the couple claimed they left the scene before the murder started - interesting.

It took some finding but here is the quote:

"From twelve o'clock till half-past a young girl who lives in the street walked up and down, and within twenty yards of where the body was found, with her sweetheart.

"We heard nothing whatever," she told a reporter this morning. "I passed the gate of the yard a few minutes before twelve o'clock alone. The doors were open, and, so far as I could tell, there was nothing inside then." "I met my young man (she proceeded) at the top of the street, and then we went for a short walk along the Commercial-road and back again, and down Berner-street. No one passed us then, but just before we said "Good night" a man came along the Commercial-road; and went in the direction of Aldgate."
Echo, 1st Oct.

Her closing words, though a little ambiguous, might suggest that she and her man were on Commercial Rd. somewhere west of Berner St. about the time of the murder, when they were passed by another man heading west.

[Cogidubnus]

There are a few misleading statements above ....for one, Fanny stated the night of the murders that she was at her door "nearly the whole time between half-past twelve and one o'clock ", which she later amended to be at her door "off and on" during that period. She also stated without reservation that she was at her door "continuously" from 12:50 until 1am. She did not see anyone but the young couple and later Goldstein, which Goldstein's statement Tuesday night and pass timing of approx 12:55-56 corroborates. The only speculation regarding her time at the door and what she didnt see is made by people who believe the stories of unsubstantiated events that occurred in front of the gates during that time. Who, in order to facilitate that belief, must claim that Fanny missed seeing it...or hearing it. Like Louis arriving at 1am for example....or Israels altercation.

Well Michael, it's clear there are two versions of the Fanny Mortimer account, the one which appears in the Times, the East London Advertiser and the Illustrated Police News (such an ill-assorted triumvirate it just has to originate with an agency), which you appear to endorse.

The second, which appears in the Daily News and the London Evening News suggests she went to the door for approximately a ten minute period culminating in Goldstein's passing.

I don't think it's unduly speculative to respect the witnesses and attempt to put all their evidence together coherently, do you? If you discredit Schwartz because he didn't appear at the inquest, then you have to sacrifice Mrs Mortimer too on the same grounds...How far down the line of ignoring witnesses do you wish to go?

Personally I'd rather attempt to fit the statements together before discarding too many!

If you really want me to be speculative, it occurs to me that. (if that's what it is), the agency-reported duration of Fanny Mortimer's stay at the door might've been calculated by somebody at the agency from the passing of PC Smith's heavy tread (1230 to 1235) to the reported time of the discovery of the body (just after 1 am), afterwards attributing the words to her as local colour - her own statement might've been rather more bland than we sometimes give her credit for...more like the Daily News one in fact...

Like so many things in the WCMs there's always more than one interpretation!

All the best Mike

Dave

[Hunter]

I was going to post a response, but after reading Dave's post it won't be necessary at this time.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo again Cogi.

....Personally I'd rather attempt to fit the statements together before discarding too many!...
Dave[/QUOTE]

That is the approach I was taking also. Or to be more accurate, one of the approaches.

[Michael W Richards]

Well Michael, it's clear there are two versions of the Fanny Mortimer account, the one which appears in the Times, the East London Advertiser and the Illustrated Police News (such an ill-assorted triumvirate it just has to originate with an agency), which you appear to endorse.

The second, which appears in the Daily News and the London Evening News suggests she went to the door for approximately a ten minute period culminating in Goldstein's passing.

I don't think it's unduly speculative to respect the witnesses and attempt to put all their evidence together coherently, do you? If you discredit Schwartz because he didn't appear at the inquest, then you have to sacrifice Mrs Mortimer too on the same grounds...How far down the line of ignoring witnesses do you wish to go?

Personally I'd rather attempt to fit the statements together before discarding too many!

If you really want me to be speculative, it occurs to me that. (if that's what it is), the agency-reported duration of Fanny Mortimer's stay at the door might've been calculated by somebody at the agency from the passing of PC Smith's heavy tread (1230 to 1235) to the reported time of the discovery of the body (just after 1 am), afterwards attributing the words to her as local colour - her own statement might've been rather more bland than we sometimes give her credit for...more like the Daily News one in fact...

Like so many things in the WCMs there's always more than one interpretation!

All the best Mike

Dave

Hi Dave,

The 2 versions of the story are not contradictory, and they may well be the result of the interviewer rather than Fanny. Ultimately her story is that she was at her door during the period of time from 12:30 until 12:50, sporadically, and that at 12:50 she remained there until 1am. She didnt see or hear Schwartz's altercation, she didnt see or hear Eagle return, she didnt see or hear Louis as he approaches for what he said was a 1am arrival....something that surely must have been visible and audible to someone at their door at that time. She didnt see Pipeman, She didnt see BSM.

She didnt see or hear any of the arrivals and events at the times stated by the individuals concerned....so are they are telling the truth and she is lying? What reason would she have to lie? For what reasons might club members modify their statements? When you have someone who has no agenda telling us that she didnt see people who Had an agenda that night....avoiding suspicion and arrest on suspicion,...why would I believe the people who have motivations to lie?

The problem here Dave, is that every account given by a Jewish member of the club does not fit into anyone elses account of what transpired....not Spooners, not Browns, and not Fannys. And we even have evidence that a person was sent out for help alone before Louis and Eagle left and yet neither of them made mention of it. Check Issac K's remarks that same night, within 1 hour of the murder.

Dave, their is no point in straddling a fence when a gate is right in front of you.

Cheers

[Cogidubnus]

No Michael

I'm afraid that is most certainly NOT the case

There are evidentially two different versions of the story, possibly based around the same core evidence...

Ultimately, if you look fairly at both versions, she did at least spend ten minutes at the door...the ten minutes that as Hunter suggests, are firmly pinned down by both Fanny's/Goldstein's evidence of his passing by at roughly 1 am or maybe just before...anything in excess of that is based on what is perhaps an agency report based on conjecture.

Grotesquely you almost imply her evidence is worthless. On what basis?

So if the murder took place at roughly 1245 - Taking the least extravagant claim, her evidence says she saw virtually nothing between 1245/1250 and 1255/1300...that's fine with me...that's fine with the two beat coppers, that's fine with Wess, that's fine with Eagle, that's fine with Diemschutz, that's fine with Spooner, that's fine with Doctor Blackwood, that's fine even with bloody Schwartz...that's fine with everyone...except you...is that it Mike? Got anything else other than innuendo to suggest Mortimer is lying?

No I thought not

Sorry to fall out with you on this

Dave

PS - I don't get it Mike - you set up as if to suggest she's the world's most reliable witness, then sound off in such a way as if to suggest there's proof she's a liar...honestly mate, stand back and look at it all afresh...

[Michael W Richards]

So if the murder took place at roughly 1245 - Taking the least extravagant claim, her evidence says she saw virtually nothing between 1245/1250 and 1255/1300...that's fine with me...that's fine with the two beat coppers, that's fine with Wess, that's fine with Eagle, that's fine with Diemschutz, that's fine with Spooner, that's fine with Doctor Blackwood, that's fine even with bloody Schwartz...that's fine with everyone...except you...is that it Mike? Got anything else other than innuendo to suggest Mortimer is lying?

No I thought not

Sorry to fall out with you on this

Dave

I have no idea how you interpreted the above from what Ive been saying Dave, its essentially the opposite of what Ive been suggesting. Im saying that Fanny is trustworthy and the men with a lot at stake are not as trustworthy..for one, because no other outside witness sees or hears anything of what is contended by those club members. The ones that have to explain to the police why a dead woman is found in their passage...an issue that doesnt concern Fanny at all.

Spooner says he was in the passage before Louis says he even arrived....Isaac says the same thing...so does Gillen and a few other attendees. Eagle at 12:40 at the gates, Lave at 12:40 at the gates...neither sees each other.....Fanny sees Goldstein, which ultimately proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that she was at her door during the period she claimed. But Fanny, while at her door until 1am...does not see or hear the supposed approaching cart and horse with Louis at the helm. Even though he swears he arrived at 1am.

Re-read my arguments Dave before jumping on my throat.

And explain this.....Isaac Kozebrodski, the young apprentice to Louis says he arrived back at the club at "half past 12" and "about 10 minutes later" was summoned, by Louis, to the passageway. He was asked to go for help...which he did, alone....before Louis or Eagle left the gates. So...why do people think its Issac K that leaves with Louis after 1am? And why were we not told about 3 parties searching for help...instead of just 2?

Cheers

[Cogidubnus]

Spooner's been standing outside the Beehive with his fancy piece since I don't know when...and in truth neither does he...the only key to his time of arrival is that Diemschutz had discovered the body, run indoors, related his tale and effectively sent out folk in search of coppers...two jews have run all the way down to Grove Street and doubled back, before meeting Spooner and acquainting him...he's then made his way up Berner Street to the murder site...fine...he's a reasonable witness from thereon but how on earth does he relate to what Mortimer saw or not? More to the point, how can he possibly be related to what Schwartz saw before Liz died?

Eagel returned at 12.35 and hence missed the action at about 12.45. Lave is reported, as far as I know only in the Evening News - another supposed witness that didn't make the inquest, yet is worth more than Schwartz?

Kozebrodski certainly stated he was advised of the murder earlier...but let's be honest, he was 18 years old and spoke the language imperfectly.

So Gillen? Leave surmise apart, who is he please?

You'd honestly set these up against the medical evidence, the police evidence, the evidence of your own witness Mortimer, plus the evidence of Schwartz? Sorry mate but it simply doesn't make sense

All the best

Dave