Originally posted by Michael W Richards
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
John Richardson
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by c.d. View PostHello Fiver,
In all fairness, I don't think the above quote is saying that Fanny saw the horse and cart herself. Rather she seems to be quoting what Louis said. That is my take on it. Besides, how could Fanny know that his horse had shied unless she heard it from him?
c.d.
"A woman who lives two doors from the club has made an important statement. 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." - 1 October, 1888 Evening News."The full picture always needs to be given. When this does not happen, we are left to make decisions on insufficient information." - Christer Holmgren
"Unfortunately, when one becomes obsessed by a theory, truth and logic rarely matter." - Steven Blomer
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Fiver View Post
No doubt she got some information from Diemschutz, but Fanny Mortimer also said she heard his cart.
"A woman who lives two doors from the club has made an important statement. 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." - 1 October, 1888 Evening News.
Basically what is likeliest? Schwartz lied about being in Bucks Row as part of a conspiracy created because club members felt that the police might close them down for hosting a ripper murder……..or, Mortimer just missed the Schwart by a very few minutes?
And we get this because a couple of witnesses Kosebrodski and Hoschberg estimated times incorrectly. If there was a plan wouldn’t Diemschitz have made sure that they got their stories straight. Why were those two told about the ‘amended times?”
So we have 3 plausible options.
1. Diemschitz interrupted the killer.
2. Something else disturbed the killer before he arrived.
3. It wasn’t the ripper and the killer simply cut her throat and left.
All far more plausible than an imagined plot with the weakest possible motive.Regards
Sir Herlock Sholmes.
“A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
We see that it says “It appears that shortly before a quarter to one o’clock she heard the measured, heavy tramp of a policeman….” The only passing policeman was Smith who said that he passed at 12.30/12/35. So she could have gone onto her doorstep just after 12.30 and stayed there for around ten minutes meaning that she went back inside just before 12.45.
Basically what is likeliest? Schwartz lied about being in Bucks Row as part of a conspiracy created because club members felt that the police might close them down for hosting a ripper murder……..or, Mortimer just missed the Schwart by a very few minutes?
And we get this because a couple of witnesses Kosebrodski and Hoschberg estimated times incorrectly. If there was a plan wouldn’t Diemschitz have made sure that they got their stories straight. Why were those two told about the ‘amended times?”
So we have 3 plausible options.
1. Diemschitz interrupted the killer.
2. Something else disturbed the killer before he arrived.
3. It wasn’t the ripper and the killer simply cut her throat and left.
All far more plausible than an imagined plot with the weakest possible motive.
Also, instead of “Why were those two..” it should read “Why weren’t…”Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 08-17-2023, 08:54 AM.Regards
Sir Herlock Sholmes.
“A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”
Comment
-
Originally posted by Doctored Whatsit View Post
We don't know which of her different statements she may have made to the police. She therefore has made no statement on oath that we are aware of.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
We see that it says “It appears that shortly before a quarter to one o’clock she heard the measured, heavy tramp of a policeman….” The only passing policeman was Smith who said that he passed at 12.30/12/35. So she could have gone onto her doorstep just after 12.30 and stayed there for around ten minutes meaning that she went back inside just before 12.45.
Basically what is likeliest? Schwartz lied about being in Bucks Row as part of a conspiracy created because club members felt that the police might close them down for hosting a ripper murder……..or, Mortimer just missed the Schwart by a very few minutes?
And we get this because a couple of witnesses Kosebrodski and Hoschberg estimated times incorrectly. If there was a plan wouldn’t Diemschitz have made sure that they got their stories straight. Why were those two told about the ‘amended times?”
So we have 3 plausible options.
1. Diemschitz interrupted the killer.
2. Something else disturbed the killer before he arrived.
3. It wasn’t the ripper and the killer simply cut her throat and left.
All far more plausible than an imagined plot with the weakest possible motive.
It is, Schwartz, I argue who causes him to flee. Thinking he will be caught in a few minutes.
It is possible him, that Fanny heard, not a policeman.
Speculation of course, but based on what we have.
Steve
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by c.d. View PostHello Fiver,
In all fairness, I don't think the above quote is saying that Fanny saw the horse and cart herself. Rather she seems to be quoting what Louis said. That is my take on it. Besides, how could Fanny know that his horse had shied unless she heard it from him?
c.d.
Comment
-
You miss the most obvious, the killer is BS man, he is NOT aware of Schwartz before he attacks Stride, on becoming aware of Schwartz and Possible Pipeman, he simply silences Stride, and walks away.
It is, Schwartz, I argue who causes him to flee. Thinking he will be caught in a few minutes.
Hello Steve,
I think there are a few problems with that scenario. Stride wasn't found on the street where she was seen by Schwartz but back in the yard. But why kill Stride after being seen by two witnesses when at that point he was only guilty of shoving a woman?
c.d.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Doctored Whatsit View Post
Oh dear! One of many quite different statements made by Fanny Mortimer in newspapers is proof of something! Not really. We don't know which of her different statements she may have made to the police, but we do know that they chose not to call her as a witness. She therefore has made no statement on oath that we are aware of. She has proved nothing to be false.
On hearing a cart and horse, as has been said she said she heard one, not that she saw the cart, the horse, and the driver. Plus, could she positively identify which way the cart was travelling when indoors? I dont recall seeing statements made by anyone who gathers by the woman lying on the cobbles that refers to the cart and horse being there at that time. Might they have been led away to be stabled for the night? They werent stabled in that yard.
In Issac K's statement that night he says that after being called to the passageway around 12:40 he is then asked by Diemshitz, or some other member, to go for help. He leaves, alone, to do so. Might the tramp of boots Fanny heard be him seeking the police around 12:45? He finds no help, but on his way back to the club he sees Eagle returning with a PC. He joined them. The PC said this was at "just before 1am". Issac K's story matches that timing.
One last thing,...a statement is made that Louis and Issac[s] went out for help after Morris had left. If Issac left when he said under the instructions he said he was given..by himself...then why would people assume this Issac[s] fellow with Louis was actually Kozebrodski? And if Issac K was honest, why do the club staffers not mention he was sent out alone? Why do we only hear that Eagle went one way and Louis and Issac[s] another? Maybe because it was a different person than Issac K, or perhaps that the statement was a lie.Last edited by Michael W Richards; 08-17-2023, 01:08 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
in my opinion, ...she didnt see Liz, she didnt see Liz with someone, and she didnt see someone fleeing. The Inquest is to establish by what means she died, based on those factors Fanny had nothing to offer to help answer that question.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Fleetwood Mac View Post
Agreed, and it's a shame for us that we do not get to hear Fanny's statement at the inquest, whereby we could infer that it's a more reliable account of that which Fanny actually stated, saw and heard.
c.d.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by c.d. View Post
If Fanny gave multiple conflicting accounts, wouldn't the inquest be the means to determine which of those accounts was actually correct? And even if she did not see the victim she certainly could have been called to help establish some sort of timeline.
c.d.
We know Fanny was verified by Leon Goldstein and so there's no good reason to doubt that she was at her door.
I'd imagine the police would have interviewed her and taken down her statement, but unfortunately that statement hasn't survived. Except Walter Dew claimed, years later, that Fanny saw Jack.
I don't think Fanny did necessarily give 'multiple conflicting accounts'. We don't know what was implied by journalists, what they were repeating second hand, and what they embellished a bit out of a desire for sales.
Personally, I think this is one witness who we know was where she said she was and did in fact see something of possible importance. Unfortunately, we don't know which parts of that which Fanny stated, was accurately reported by journalists.
Comment
Comment