The Stride Murder

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I'm not too hung up on the 4-5 minutes Spooner gave or what Diemschutz stated about when Eagle returned. I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. Of course, everything would depend on how much later than Diemschutz Eagle actually ran out of the yard and whether he first turned left at the top of Berner Street or immedediately turned right. But I think that even if he ran out 1.5 minutes or so after Diemschutz and first turned left, he wouldn't have arrived back more than 3 minutes after Louis.

Regarding Spooner touching Stride's face/chin, I don't know if he was the first and only one to do so, but the fact that Mortimer's remark that she saw a man touch her face and say it was quite warm fits very well with Spooner's own statement sticks out to me.

All the best,
Frank

Hi Frank.

Would it be 'logical' to suppose that Eagle immediately turned right, and ran toward the fixed-point location, given his nearby address?

From Interview with a Neighbour:

"I was just about going to bed, sir, when I heard a call for the police. I ran to the door, and before I could open it I heard somebody say, 'Come out quick; there's a poor woman here that's had ten inches of cold steel in her.' I hurried out, and saw some two or three people standing in the gateway. Lewis, the man who looks after the Socialist Club at No. 40, was there, and his wife.

So Diemschitz and Spooner are back in the yard when Mortimer arrives. Who do you suppose might have been the man she heard, outside her door? Could it be Eagle heading toward Commercial Road, or just someone from club who decided to rouse a few of the neighbours? Perhaps it was the mysterious Jacobs?

[Wickerman]

Hi Wickerman. Yes a very valid point about me assuming BSM was drunk. I am wrong in making that assumption. In fact the reports re Schwartz do seem to say that BSM is walking as if partially intoxicated would be the best way of describing the walk. So he either has an odd gait for whatever reason, could be drunk or pretending to be drunk....

Hi, yes it's just terminology, we assume he was drunk, or had a limp, it's just that when you use 'know', there are some readers who will pick up on the 'know' and it will get repeated.
Just by way of example, I have not seen anywhere that Joseph Isenschmid is known to have had a limp. If there's anyone out there who has seen a medical record, or police description, or a neighbors recollection of him having a limp please correct me.
However, I have read elsewhere that Isenschmid had a limp, unless someone responds to my last sentence, I can only trace this belief to the story about Mrs Fiddymont who spoke about a suspicious character she saw who had a limp. If I recall correctly, Abberline thought it might be Isenschmid, ergo, from that point on Isenschmid has been given this limp.
However, the first suspect the police entertained that might be the man Mrs Fiddymont saw was a man called William Pigott. He was brought before Mrs Fiddymont in an identity parade, she declined that he was the man, but no-one seems to have suggested this Pigott had a limp, but a limp was attached to Isenschmid, but on what basis?

It's all because people repeat what they read, the experienced posters here know BS-man was not 'known' to be drunk, but it is one of the possibilities.

When we were kids and did something wrong we all ran off. It doesn't make sense that BSM, concerned for Stride would go to all the trouble of engaging in a push pull with Stride and then just disappear. If he feared for her safety and was an innocent man he would have stayed around a bit to make sure she was safe wouldn't he. He had just made a big fuss of things.

Why does he disappear so quickly, why as an important witness doesn't he come forward. Why doesn't he call for the police at the time if he was so concerned about Stride going into the club.

I just keep thinking. Schwartz is out the way, Pipeman has disappeared.

There is a moment of quiet in the yard and in the street. An unexpected opportunity.

Throat cut, run off.

If he was seen by at least two people (Schwartz, Pipeman), then why go ahead and kill her if he has already been seen?
Either man could have run to the nearest policeman, who could be on his way to what he thinks is an assault.

[The Rookie Detective]

So...

We have Pipeman...identified by Schwartz as being across the road from the location of the murder... but the Nelson Beerhouse was on the same side of the road as the club...Pipeman never came forward as a witness.

We have BSman... identified by Schwartz as the man who shouted "LIPSKI!" after he assaulted Stride; a woman who was then murdered no more than 15 minutes after the initial assault... but BSman never came forward to clear his name...and an assault which nobody else claims to have witnessed.

We have Schwartz who himself came forward to give his account of what happened, but he spoke no English and so his story was translated by another.

We have Leon Goldstein who came forward to the police after he was advised to by the club, in order to clear his name. He also went with a translator, who happened to be the club secretary.

Schwartz and Goldstein's journey is similar, but one with the Stride assault and the other without.

We have Mrs Mortimer who sees a man, who is later revealed as Goldstein, so we can at least be sure that Goldstein is there at the scene very close to the time of the murder.
He has a bag full of empty cigarette boxes, suggesting he had been selling them prior. There are cigarette makers living in the same yard where Stride is later found murdered.
Was Goldstein about to walk into the yard to go to one of the Cigarette makers who was living in one of the houses on the left of the yard, when he saw that there was a woman on the floor/ a couple standing in the gateway, and he changed his mind and so walked passed the yard and went around the corner past the board school.

Was Goldstein told to go to the police by Wess, because the killer was a member of the club and they had to incorporate damage limitation?

We then have Packer who only tells his story after Charles Le Grand interviews him on multiple occasions. He initially said he heard or saw nothing, but then becomes a key witness to a couple to whom he sold grapes..which were alleged to have been found in the right hand of the victims, despite the coroners being adamant that only the Cahous were found in the left hand and nothing had been in her right hand.
The couple he claims to have been standing across from him were there for "over half an hour."...in the rain.
This couple are standing in the same place (corner of the street outside the board school, almost opposite Packer's window at 44 Berner Street) as the couple seen by James Brown on his way to the chandler's shop around 12.45am, approximately the same time that Schwartz claimed to have witnessed an assault on Stride.

However, this "sweetheart" couple subsequently appears to have not been there at the time of the murder; the woman came forward to say they were there earlier, meaning that the couple James Brown saw were more likely to be Stride and her killer.
Unless Brown was there before 12.20am, he must have seen Stride and not the sweetheart couple.
She is heard to say to the man with her.."No, not tonight, some other night"

IF the couple Brown saw were the Sweetheart couple, then they must have been there around the time of the assault on Stride and witnessed it.

But IF the couple were Stride and her potential killer, then Brown did indeed see Stride and it fits with Mortimer's statement.

There were 2 couples, one couple being Stride and her companion.

Brown saw a couple on the corner
Mortimer states a couple were standing on the corner
Packer states he sold grapes to a couple who stood almost opposite him at number 44; that's the CORNER of the street. Otherwise, we have 2 separate couples standing within 10 yards of each other at the same time.

We also have Charles Letchford/Letchworth/LechMERE (can you imagine)... who passed down Berner Street at 12.30am and who lived either at 30 Berner Street. He also claimed his sister stood at the door at 12.50am and neither of them saw or heard anything.

We must not forget that Charles's sister was ANOTHER witness and stood at her door at 12.50am...why is she never mentioned?

We then have Diemshultz who claims to discover Stride's body after his pony shies away to the left. He goes past the body with his cart and then upon discovering the body, he goes into the club to raise the alarm (and find his wife) - approximately 1am

We then have Eagle aged 24, who returns to the club after escorting his girlfriend home. This is around 12.35am...around the same time that PC Smith witnesses Stride speaking to a man with a parcel aka Parcel man aged around 28.

We have Joseph Lave who comes out into the yard to get some fresh air from the club...and he goes as far as the street and sees nothing or nobody. He is outside in the same location as the murder anywhere from 5 minutes to half an hour.

We have Mrs Mortimer who only saw Goldstein...and seemed to have a lot to say about the couple on the corner, seeing the body, not seeing anyone leave the yard etc...

We have so many different witnesses...and IF we take out Schwartz's dramatic story, then apart from 2 different couples seen talking on the corner of the street or by the club, and the transit of Goldstein, there doesn't seem to have been much in the way of things going on in Berner Street.

Interestingly, Morris Eagle claims to have returned back to the club at the same time that PC Smith walks his beat.

Eagle doesn't see PC Smith, Stride OR a couple talking
PC Smith sees Stride talking with a man...

Could Eagle have been Parcel Man?

BOTH Eagle and Diemschultz sold jewelry and so was parcelman holding a box of jewelry that he took into the club with him?

Did Eagle engage in conversation with Stride on his return to the club?
But what Morris Eagle returns to the club around 12.35am with a parcel containing some jewelry with the intent of taking it into the club. As he enters Berner Street he sees Stride.

She is waiting for someone.

He sparks up a conversation. They are seen by PC Smith as he walks past.

Eagle doesn't see Pc Smith, Stride or Parcelman
Smith sees Stride and Parcelman

Therefore...

Parcelman is Eagle?


What does ALL of this data tell us?


But before this post becomes too long...


RD

[FrankO]

Hi Jon,

It's hard to say if they (Diemshutz & Kozebrodski) left together, or 30 seconds or a minute apart. I would say they both ran in the same direction, close enough for Spooner to believe they came past him together.

I agree with your second sentence; that is the impression I get reading the evidence.

It seems more like a mishearing to me. something similar to Barnet saying "hair", when some reporters thought he said "ear".
It's just that Jacobs doesn't sound to my ear like Diemshutz - neither the consonants nor the syllables match.

Although that's true, the thing that makes me inclined to think it was a mishearing - besides the fact that both names have two syllables - is that if Eagle did, in fact, gave the names of both men, then I find it a bit odd that there was no newspaper that gave both names or, at least, two names.

I recall one account where Spooner said he had been stood by the body for nearly 5 minutes before Eagle & the first constable arrived.
Was Spooner the first to touch the face?
That would make a link between Mortimer's statement & other events.

I'm not too hung up on the 4-5 minutes Spooner gave or what Diemschutz stated about when Eagle returned. I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. Of course, everything would depend on how much later than Diemschutz Eagle actually ran out of the yard and whether he first turned left at the top of Berner Street or immedediately turned right. But I think that even if he ran out 1.5 minutes or so after Diemschutz and first turned left, he wouldn't have arrived back more than 3 minutes after Louis.

Regarding Spooner touching Stride's face/chin, I don't know if he was the first and only one to do so, but the fact that Mortimer's remark that she saw a man touch her face and say it was quite warm fits very well with Spooner's own statement sticks out to me.

All the best,
Frank

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Hi New Waterloo,

I think that BS Man absolutely could have been Stride's killer. NBFN's suggestion that she was mugged is also possible. Or it could have been a member of the club that threw her down because he didn't like her soliciting in front of the club. Or maybe she angered someone who had a romantic or sexual interest in her. But regardless of who it was, I see no reason why we should expect him to stay at the gateway for any period of time after the assault. He may or may not have been drunk, and even if he was, different people act in different ways when they're drunk.

According to Schwartz, there was one other witness, Pipeman, and Pipeman never came forward as a witness. It could be that there was another witness shortly after Schwartz passed that likewise never came forward. But I think most likely BS Man didn't stay near the gateway for long because he had no reason to. He may or not have also had every reason not to.

The mugging theory can explain why the second man never came forward - he too was a mugger and was after whatever the well-dressed man in front of him might have had on him which was valuable. It can therefore explain why Schwartz perceived the two men as possibly being together. It can explain the missing sixpence. It can possibly give a reason for Stride having to resort to soliciting on the street. Was Stride also mugged for other possessions she had on her?

Dr Phillips: The right ear was pierced for an earring, but had not been so injured, and the earring was wanting.

However, it cannot explain how Stride could have removed an earring while holding onto the cachous. Nor can it explain stuff like this.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Hi Wickerman. Yes a very valid point about me assuming BSM was drunk. I am wrong in making that assumption. In fact the reports re Schwartz do seem to say that BSM is walking as if partially intoxicated would be the best way of describing the walk. So he either has an odd gait for whatever reason, could be drunk or pretending to be drunk. According to Schwartz however he does obviously have some kind of disagreement/problem with Stride at the gateway and the disagreement is not just verbal but in his mind serious enough for him to lay hands on Stride (an assault) where she ends up on the ground. Now I am trying to not make assumptions but consider the options for BSM.

If he has an unusual gait it could be suggested that this does not affect his intentions or his actions, whatever they may be.

If he is drunk then grabbing hold of Stride could be as a result of his condition. We are all people of the world and seen drunken behaviour. Perhaps she said something that upset her or vice versa, a multitude of reasons sparking his drunken behaviour

Whether it be a funny walk, or a drunkard walk, can you see this man pulling off the Mitre Square murder, and then quickly disappearing into the night?

It's interesting what happens when the relevant part of the press report is merged with the relevant line in Swanson's report.

When he came homewards about a quarter before one he first walked down Berner-street to see if his wife had moved. As he turned the corner from Commercial-road he noticed some distance in front of him a man walking as if partially intoxicated. He walked on behind him, and having got as far as the gateway where the murder was committed he saw [the] man stop & speak to a woman, who was standing in the gateway.

Someone will be able to give us the distance between Commercial Rd and the gateway, but it's not far at all. So, either the man was walking particularly slowly, or Schwartz was walking as fast as Leon Goldstein was when observed taking the same path through Berner St. If the former, I can't see this man being the Ripper. If the latter, then why does Schwartz have a habit of being so similar to the man with the black bag?

or

If was pretending to be drunk. This is intentional behaviour, employed to confuse people. Now I am out of my depth but clearly intentional behaviour used to confuse people just before somebody has their throat cut. Well not sure what this means really but I do know as fact that pretending to be drunk has been used by people in the past to achieve something.

I suppose what I am trying to get across is that BSM must have had a reason to interact with Stride so physically. Most people don't go around grabbing others unless there is a reason so he must have thought the situation was serious enough to make a decision to grab her. There is a commotion with Pipe man shouting, Stride on the floor and Schwartz deciding to clear off.

When we were kids and did something wrong we all ran off. It doesn't make sense that BSM, concerned for Stride would go to all the trouble of engaging in a push pull with Stride and then just disappear. If he feared for her safety and was an innocent man he would have stayed around a bit to make sure she was safe wouldn't he. He had just made a big fuss of things.

Why does he disappear so quickly, why as an important witness doesn't he come forward. Why doesn't he call for the police at the time if he was so concerned about Stride going into the club.

I just keep thinking. Schwartz is out the way, Pipeman has disappeared.

There is a moment of quiet in the yard and in the street. An unexpected opportunity.

Throat cut, run off.

Run off? Are we talking JtR here?

[New Waterloo]

Hi Wickerman. Yes a very valid point about me assuming BSM was drunk. I am wrong in making that assumption. In fact the reports re Schwartz do seem to say that BSM is walking as if partially intoxicated would be the best way of describing the walk. So he either has an odd gait for whatever reason, could be drunk or pretending to be drunk. According to Schwartz however he does obviously have some kind of disagreement/problem with Stride at the gateway and the disagreement is not just verbal but in his mind serious enough for him to lay hands on Stride (an assault) where she ends up on the ground. Now I am trying to not make assumptions but consider the options for BSM.

If he has an unusual gait it could be suggested that this does not affect his intentions or his actions, whatever they may be.

If he is drunk then grabbing hold of Stride could be as a result of his condition. We are all people of the world and seen drunken behaviour. Perhaps she said something that upset her or vice versa, a multitude of reasons sparking his drunken behaviour

or

If was pretending to be drunk. This is intentional behaviour, employed to confuse people. Now I am out of my depth but clearly intentional behaviour used to confuse people just before somebody has their throat cut. Well not sure what this means really but I do know as fact that pretending to be drunk has been used by people in the past to achieve something.

I suppose what I am trying to get across is that BSM must have had a reason to interact with Stride so physically. Most people don't go around grabbing others unless there is a reason so he must have thought the situation was serious enough to make a decision to grab her. There is a commotion with Pipe man shouting, Stride on the floor and Schwartz deciding to clear off.

When we were kids and did something wrong we all ran off. It doesn't make sense that BSM, concerned for Stride would go to all the trouble of engaging in a push pull with Stride and then just disappear. If he feared for her safety and was an innocent man he would have stayed around a bit to make sure she was safe wouldn't he. He had just made a big fuss of things.

Why does he disappear so quickly, why as an important witness doesn't he come forward. Why doesn't he call for the police at the time if he was so concerned about Stride going into the club.

I just keep thinking. Schwartz is out the way, Pipeman has disappeared.

There is a moment of quiet in the yard and in the street. An unexpected opportunity.

Throat cut, run off.

[Lewis C]

If we are to believe the witness Schwartz then I think there is something about BSMs behaviour which needs considering. Schwartz states that BSM is walking as if partially intoxicated. In other words has been drinking to the extent that his walk is affected. The altercation takes place at the gateway with physical contact between him and Stride. Even if Stride stumbles and falls it is significant contact. Now remember BSM has been drinking.

Schwartz clears off being followed/pursued by Pipeman. Now you researchers with more experience than me would know that timing becomes very important. We seem to have have very little time to fit everything in when you consider the question.

Where has BSM gone. He appears to have disappeared. No sightings reported by witnesses.

Now experience tells me that if Schwartz is telling the truth, this drunk or a least tipsy BSM is not going to just walk away from the scene. We all know drunks have a particular habit of hanging around and arguing the toss with anyone available. Stride hasn't gone she is still there. He has already assaulted her and obviously was that worked up to do so.

If it was BSM who cut Strides throat, drunk or not he would be off like a shot. Getting out of the area and MAY have been able to without being seen. BUT if he was a drunk person causing a stir then I believe he would have hung around and continued his agitation well for a least for a few minutes and then wandered off.

How and why did BSM disappear from the scene so quickly?

To me this seems to suggest that BSM is our murderer.

Against this is that Schwartz could be lying, or BSM himself was threatened by somebody out of sight in the yard. sort of "clear off or I will use the knife on you" so he rapidly clears off.

Perhaps if he isn't the murderer he sees it take place and shocked and thinks I am out of here.

Whatever he seems to disappear from the scene very quickly. It would be interesting to know form the timing researchers the minimum and maximum time that BSM could have been at the gateway before a witness arrives and would have seen him

NW

Hi New Waterloo,

I think that BS Man absolutely could have been Stride's killer. NBFN's suggestion that she was mugged is also possible. Or it could have been a member of the club that threw her down because he didn't like her soliciting in front of the club. Or maybe she angered someone who had a romantic or sexual interest in her. But regardless of who it was, I see no reason why we should expect him to stay at the gateway for any period of time after the assault. He may or may not have been drunk, and even if he was, different people act in different ways when they're drunk.

According to Schwartz, there was one other witness, Pipeman, and Pipeman never came forward as a witness. It could be that there was another witness shortly after Schwartz passed that likewise never came forward. But I think most likely BS Man didn't stay near the gateway for long because he had no reason to. He may or not have also had every reason not to.

[Fleetwood Mac]

In other words it was Muffin the Mule that discovered the body?

Joking aside, that was pointed out by one member some years back.
Someone who had experience with horses said if the dark lump had been a pile of stones, or soil the horse wouldn't have shied away from it, it would have just trotted on past. The member suggested the horse detected life, that Liz had to have been still sufficiently alive at that point when the horse past, that it sensed danger.

It does beg the question if Diemshutz had driven past the body, and the horse had not shied, how long would it have been before the body was found, and based on all the existing testimony, what time would be assigned to the murder?

I think it's part of the instinct/evolution of a pony to detect something that is unusual and may be dangerous, Jon, and as you'll know ponies have a far better sense of smell and sight than humans, in the dark. I would absolutely disagree on the point Liz must have been alive, a pony will detect an unusual object.

On how long Liz could have been there undiscovered, that's a very good point that the vast majority of people will have never considered. As is the TOD estimate point.

The other point that's worth considering is that Liz would not necessarily have been rendered unconscious immediately and may have been gargling blood, which puts a different complexion on whether or not Jack was disturbed by Louis.

Obviously Dr Phillips was more conservative in his estimate than Dr Blackwell when he said: "within an hour".

All things considered, I would say the best bet is that Louis did not disturb Jack and Liz was dead not long after PC Smith passed.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

How and why did BSM disappear from the scene so quickly?

mugging: an act of attacking and robbing someone in a public place

Whatever he seems to disappear from the scene very quickly. It would be interesting to know form the timing researchers the minimum and maximum time that BSM could have been at the gateway before a witness arrives and would have seen him

This also applies to Stride. The 'Schwartz incident' is implicitly defined as beginning the moment Schwartz enters Berner St and ends the moment he leaves it. It should be defined as the moment the first of the four enters Berner St, and either ending with a murder and the last of the three men leaving the street, or when all four have left the street. However, this would undermine the believability of the story, and mess with timelines.

We can keep the incident fairly short in time, however, by regarding the altercation as being a mugging. The problem then is that the first man is no longer the murderer, but the timing for the murder is almost perfect. So perhaps the incident was real enough but did not occur when Schwartz claimed it did.

decoy: a person, device, or event meant as a distraction, to hide what an individual or a group might be looking for

[Wickerman]

If we are to believe the witness Schwartz then I think there is something about BSMs behaviour which needs considering. Schwartz states that BSM is walking as if partially intoxicated. In other words has been drinking to the extent that his walk is affected. The altercation takes place at the gateway with physical contact between him and Stride. Even if Stride stumbles and falls it is significant contact. Now remember BSM has been drinking.

We do not know that, adopting a suggestion as fact has become a common fault in these murders.
There is a suspect who was known to have an 'awkward gait', nothing to do with drinking.
I imagine there were many in the East End that had problems walking, either from polio or war wounds, it can't have been unusual to see a man stumbling along.
Whether BS-man had been drinking is only a guess.

Schwartz clears off being followed/pursued by Pipeman. Now you researchers with more experience than me would know that timing becomes very important. We seem to have have very little time to fit everything in when you consider the question.

Where has BSM gone. He appears to have disappeared. No sightings reported by witnesses.

Now experience tells me that if Schwartz is telling the truth, this drunk or a least tipsy BSM is not going to just walk away from the scene. We all know drunks have a particular habit of hanging around and arguing the toss with anyone available. Stride hasn't gone she is still there. He has already assaulted her and obviously was that worked up to do so.

If it was BSM who cut Strides throat, drunk or not he would be off like a shot. Getting out of the area and MAY have been able to without being seen. BUT if he was a drunk person causing a stir then I believe he would have hung around and continued his agitation well for a least for a few minutes and then wandered off.

How and why did BSM disappear from the scene so quickly?

To me this seems to suggest that BSM is our murderer.

Against this is that Schwartz could be lying, or BSM himself was threatened by somebody out of sight in the yard. sort of "clear off or I will use the knife on you" so he rapidly clears off.

Perhaps if he isn't the murderer he sees it take place and shocked and thinks I am out of here.

Whatever he seems to disappear from the scene very quickly. It would be interesting to know form the timing researchers the minimum and maximum time that BSM could have been at the gateway before a witness arrives and would have seen him

NW

It's the common problem, no-one saw what Schwartz saw, and we all wonder why.

[Wickerman]

That's interesting because I was unaware of the burglary.

Just had a random thought....the cellar at 29 Hanbury Street was broken in to shortly before the murder....and the Post Office close to Mitre Square was also broken in to...

and so could those incidents be connected?

Could these have been committed by the ripper...as a means of reconnaissance to check for police response, timings etc...

And could they have also been places where the killer was present BEFORE the murders took place?

Random, but interesting nonetheless.


RD

DARING BURGLARY AT ALDGATE POST-OFFICE.-When the Post-office in High-street, Aldgate, a few yards from where the murder in Mitre-square took place on Sunday, was opened yesterday morning it was discovered that it had been entered by burglars and the safe forced. The safe contained an unusually large amount of money, 370l. being locked up in one of the drawers, and about 49l. being in an ordinary bowl just inside one of the compartments. Stamps to the amount of about 250l. were also in the safe. The burglars, after discovering the safe, proceeded to wrench open one of the sides. They were successful in this, and managed to reach the money in the bowl, and the stamps, which they took. The drawer in which the larger amount of cash was locked was subjected to very rough treatment, but fortunately it resisted the thieves' efforts. A sum of about 3l. belonging to the postmaster was also taken from an upper room in the house. The fact that the office had been broken into was discovered by a clerk on his arrival at eight o'clock yesterday morning. On entering the passage he saw that some of the stairs leading from the upper part of the house and over some steps by which the cellar is reached from the office had been forced up. He at once informed the police, who then found the damage to the safe. Careful examination by the police shows that the burglars first entered an empty warehouse in Duke-street, just round the corner, and then got into the post-office through the trap-door on the roof. For some time the safety of the office has been suspected by the police and the Post Office authorities, who have noticed the comparative ease by which it could be entered from the back on account of the adjacent premises being unoccupied. It is supposed that the robbery took place on Saturday night, for it seems astonishing that any thieves should have been daring enough to enter the premises after the great commotion caused by the discovery of the murder but a few yards away, and the consequent presence of so many police in the district.

https://www.casebook.org/press_reports/daily_news/18881002.html?printer=true

[The Rookie Detective]

Yes, but the Post Office was burgled adjacent to Mitre Square over the weekend of the murder. The story does not give a location, and we already have examples of confusion between the two murders.

That's interesting because I was unaware of the burglary.

Just had a random thought....the cellar at 29 Hanbury Street was broken in to shortly before the murder....and the Post Office close to Mitre Square was also broken in to...

and so could those incidents be connected?

Could these have been committed by the ripper...as a means of reconnaissance to check for police response, timings etc...

And could they have also been places where the killer was present BEFORE the murders took place?

Random, but interesting nonetheless.


RD

[New Waterloo]

If we are to believe the witness Schwartz then I think there is something about BSMs behaviour which needs considering. Schwartz states that BSM is walking as if partially intoxicated. In other words has been drinking to the extent that his walk is affected. The altercation takes place at the gateway with physical contact between him and Stride. Even if Stride stumbles and falls it is significant contact. Now remember BSM has been drinking.

Schwartz clears off being followed/pursued by Pipeman. Now you researchers with more experience than me would know that timing becomes very important. We seem to have have very little time to fit everything in when you consider the question.

Where has BSM gone. He appears to have disappeared. No sightings reported by witnesses.

Now experience tells me that if Schwartz is telling the truth, this drunk or a least tipsy BSM is not going to just walk away from the scene. We all know drunks have a particular habit of hanging around and arguing the toss with anyone available. Stride hasn't gone she is still there. He has already assaulted her and obviously was that worked up to do so.

If it was BSM who cut Strides throat, drunk or not he would be off like a shot. Getting out of the area and MAY have been able to without being seen. BUT if he was a drunk person causing a stir then I believe he would have hung around and continued his agitation well for a least for a few minutes and then wandered off.

How and why did BSM disappear from the scene so quickly?

To me this seems to suggest that BSM is our murderer.

Against this is that Schwartz could be lying, or BSM himself was threatened by somebody out of sight in the yard. sort of "clear off or I will use the knife on you" so he rapidly clears off.

Perhaps if he isn't the murderer he sees it take place and shocked and thinks I am out of here.

Whatever he seems to disappear from the scene very quickly. It would be interesting to know form the timing researchers the minimum and maximum time that BSM could have been at the gateway before a witness arrives and would have seen him

NW

[Wickerman]

Their respective arrival time

Sorry, I realized what you meant after reading a few posts.
Something less than 10 minutes, more like 5 - if we are guessing.
Does any number come to mind for yourself?