Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Stride Murder

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

  • Originally posted by The Rookie Detective View Post
    Okay...so how does the following hypothesis work...


    When Fanny opens her door around 1am and sees Goldstein walking hurriedly towards the club before turning right around the corner near the board school.

    What if...she sees Schwartz?


    NBFN suggested that Goldstein and Schwartz could be the same person and here's why I think that particular notion is interesting...


    IF Goldstein and Schwartz were the same person, then by the same token, Mortimer saw Schwartz...

    And that is potentially very significant because IF it was Schwartz who was seen around 1am walking down Berner street, and then Schwartz's statement of seeing Stride being assaulted was actually true; then could that explain why nobody else witnessed the attack on Stride...because the incident didn;t happen at 12.45am..it happened moments after Mortimer saw Schwartz/Goldstein walk hurriedly down the street.
    Why do you suppose moving the incident forward a few minutes would have prevented there being other witnesses to it?

    When police times are given weight in the timeline, Diemschitz can't be arriving any later that about 12:55. Had Goldstein walked south through Berner St just prior to Fanny locking up, both his time and route become almost identical to that described by Schwartz. I've read a lot of old Berner St threads - how is it that no one has ever noticed this?

    Now Schwartz said he was almost at the gateway when he saw BS man attack Stride. The distance between Mrs Mortimer's house and the gateway is only around 20 yards or so.
    It is more like 20 feet. You might get a better idea of the distances involved from this thread ...
    https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...-berner-street

    Now WHEN Mrs Mortimer saw the man with the bag walking hurriedly before looking up at the club, she may have witnessed Schwartz noticing BS man and then walking hurriedly past the gateway.

    In other words, when Mortimer saw Goldstein/Schwarts look up at the club, that may have been the exact moment when Stride was assaulted and NOT at 12.45am.
    The idea of Stride standing just outside the gateway, always sounds dubious to me. Perhaps there was a quarrel going on just inside the line of the gates, and that is why Goldstein "looked up at the club". I suggest this look must have been more than a quick glance, else Fanny would not have remembered it. So, it looks similar to "the Hungarian" who "turned back to learn what was the matter".

    The problem being that Fanny doesn't seem to have noticed this quarrel. However, as no one else seems to have noticed what Schwartz did, I suggest that the time of the incident was nothing like 12:45. Hence Fanny Mortimer's use of the word 'previously', which would otherwise have been redundant.

    But why then would Schwartz say 12.45am instead of around 1am?


    Well perhaps the following is also true...


    When Goldstein saw Stride being attacked, he hurriedly walked past and then went around the corner to avoid the scene; similar to Schwartz fleeing the scene in his statement.

    Now what would be the reason for Goldstein to invent Schwartz to state a time of 12.45am?


    Well IF Goldstein realized that the man who attacked Stride was someone he recognized from the club, then he approached Wess and told him he saw the attack. Wess in an attempt to sweep things under the carpet then told Goldstein to go to the police, but not JUST to try and explain him being in Berner Street with his bag, but also to try and take the focus away from members of the club.
    Goldstein goes to the police AFTER he knows he was spotted and because he knows he was ssen around the time of the murder at 1am, he cant lie to the police and say he was there earlier. He then decides to go to the police as a Jew named Schwartz and then tells the police of an assault occuring at 12.45am INSTEAD of the actual time the assault took place at 1am.

    That would explain why nobody else witnesses the assault at 12.45am...because that time was falsely given to detract from the fact that Goldstein had witnessed the actual assault 15 minutes later.
    Mortimer's reference to black bag man, appeared in the Oct 1 (Monday) papers. It was almost Wednesday when Goldstein went to the police station with Wess. Merging the identities of Goldstein and Schwartz requires explaining why Goldstein didn't just go to the police earlier, as Goldstein, and leave it at that.

    Now WHO could Goldstein have seen?

    Well, let's look at Parcel man...now he could have been the killer, but he could have also have been Eagle, who returned to the club at the same time that PC Smith saw parcelman.
    Noe being a guy with a girlfriend/fiancee; he would have been unlikely to have admitted talking to Stride as he went back towards the side door of the club. Stride was there and Eagle must have seen her as he walked through the gateway.
    She wasn't on the floor, because he spoke to her and just didnt want to admit it for fear of bringing suspicion upon himself.

    I suggest that the man Joseph Lave; who gave varying duration as to his time spent in the yard could also have been parcel man, but was more likely to have been the man who assaulted her.

    Now this brings us back to WHY was Stride standing outside the club/by the gateway to the yard?

    Well she may have been recently dating someone from the club; perhaps the man seen with her exiting the Bricklayers Arms then went with Stride to the club, but being a non-Jew the man asked her to wait outside while he went inside to take care of business.


    And perhaps the reasons WHY Mrs Mortimer saw nobody enter the yard AND the reason why the killer appeared to vanish when Diemschultz entered the yard, is because AFTER cutting her throat, the killer went BACK into the club and so NEVER came out of the gateway the entire time.


    The killer may have had some cachous in the club and he stepped out to kiss her...BUT he was a SMOKER...and AFTER kissing her, he gave her some cachous...and then he cut her throat. Like a kiss of death.

    Now when Goldstein invented Schwartz to concoct the story of Bs Man and Pipeman, THAT story would have held elements of truth in order to better sell the lie.
    An Englishman at the club? I did find one reference to English club members.

    And so the truth would be that...

    As Goldstein returned to Berner Street from the coffee shop, he walked towards the club door. At the exact time that Mortimer then sees Goldstein, Goldstein has just seen Stride being attacked and so hurried across the road just like in his story as Schwartz. The crucial clue being that the time of 12.45am is clearly NOT correct based on all the other witnesses statements.
    And so maybe Schwartz story is partly true but the timing deliberately changed to negate the fact that Goldstein almost certainly saw her killer.

    Now that would suggest that Stride wasn;t a victim of JTR becuase AFTER killing Stride, the Ripper would have need to have gone to Mitre Square.
    However, IF the killer did indeed go back into the club, he could then have been one of the men who ran out to go and look for a policeman.

    Are there any of the club members who didn't return back to the club AFTER Stride's body was found?

    The man who killed Stride could have used the "let's go look for help" as a means by which to escape and had towards Mitre Square. That is of course only relevant IF Stride was murdered by JTR.

    Are there also ANY of the club members who DIDN'T actively go out and look for police? That could be another way to escape the scene undetected.


    And so...thought please?
    It seems most of the people at the club at the time of the discovery did not get involved with the search for police. It also seems that several people left the club at that time and did not return before the gates were closed.
    Andrew's the man, who is not blamed for nothing

    Comment


    • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

      I can't see Fanny saying things like ...

      ... the only man whom I had seen pass through the street previously ...

      Someone with not so good grammar would not use the word 'whom'.
      I can imagine Fanny saying this though ...

      ... the only man I seen who had passed through the street previously ...

      Goldstein 2 - Schwartz 0?​
      I think that "previously" means previous to her going out of her house just after 1:00.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Lewis C View Post

        I think that "previously" means previous to her going out of her house just after 1:00.
        I would agree, she is referring to the previous time she came out of her house.
        And, that line comes after she mentions coming out at 1:00 am.
        Therefore, the previous time she came out, or stood at her door, was between 12:45-12:55. This is when she said no-one came in or out of the yard.
        This then must be the time she saw Goldstein?
        Regards, Jon S.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Lewis C View Post

          I think that "previously" means previous to her going out of her house just after 1:00.
          That is the usual interpretation.
          Is it not true that "the only man whom I had seen pass through the street", is past tense? My point is that the qualifier 'previously', is redundant, unless it isn't.

          Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

          I would agree, she is referring to the previous time she came out of her house.
          And, that line comes after she mentions coming out at 1:00 am.
          Therefore, the previous time she came out, or stood at her door, was between 12:45-12:55. This is when she said no-one came in or out of the yard.
          This then must be the time she saw Goldstein?
          ​In or out?

          There was certainly no noise made, and I did not observe anyone enter the gates.

          How coincidental is it that Goldstein is seen right at the moment we could reasonably expect the murder to have occurred, but he was just passing by?

          In the past I've asked why Goldstein delayed coming forward to the police, and even when he did, he required the persuasion of Wess. Apparently, the reason was "he didn't want to get involved". That is like saying Schwartz was not at the inquest because he didn't want to be involved. It's not a choice.
          Andrew's the man, who is not blamed for nothing

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

            I would agree, she is referring to the previous time she came out of her house.
            And, that line comes after she mentions coming out at 1:00 am.
            Therefore, the previous time she came out, or stood at her door, was between 12:45-12:55. This is when she said no-one came in or out of the yard.
            This then must be the time she saw Goldstein?
            I think so, yes.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

              That is the usual interpretation.
              Is it not true that "the only man whom I had seen pass through the street", is past tense? My point is that the qualifier 'previously', is redundant, unless it isn't.

              ​In or out?

              There was certainly no noise made, and I did not observe anyone enter the gates.

              How coincidental is it that Goldstein is seen right at the moment we could reasonably expect the murder to have occurred, but he was just passing by?

              In the past I've asked why Goldstein delayed coming forward to the police, and even when he did, he required the persuasion of Wess. Apparently, the reason was "he didn't want to get involved". That is like saying Schwartz was not at the inquest because he didn't want to be involved. It's not a choice.
              Here's the full sentence and the one after it:

              "It was just after one o'clock when I went out, and the only man whom I had seen pass through the street previously was a young man carrying a black shiny bag, who walked very fast down the street from the Commercial-road. He looked up at the club, and then went round the corner by the Board School."

              So I think your point is that with my interpretation, "previously" is an unnecessary word that doesn't really change the meaning. I suppose that's true, though maybe by including the word, she's just being emphatic that she didn't see the man after she went out after 1:00.

              Maybe the reason Goldstein didn't come forward immediately was that at first, he didn't think there was much reason to. He had walked through the area close to the time when the murder occurred, but he didn't see anything, so he doubted there was any value in going to the police to say that he saw nothing. However, after Mortimer reported having seen him, then it was necessary to talk to the police so that they would know he was who Mortimer saw and that they need not look for him or suspect him.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                It might, but there's no actual evidence to connect Goldstein with the crime. He was there around the time, like Lechmere, or Hutchinson, Richardson, even Cadosch, and so on.
                Cadosch ??? Yikes....the game really is afoot.
                They are not long, the days of wine and roses:
                Out of a misty dream
                Our path emerges for a while, then closes
                Within a dream.
                Ernest Dowson - Vitae Summa Brevis​

                ​Disagreeing doesn't have to be disagreeable - Jeff Hamm

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                  Hi Andrew, as you can see Swanson wrote that Goldstein "stated", which is why I take Swanson at his word.
                  Goldstein "stated" he had come from the cafe in Spectacle Alley.
                  It might be reasonable to suppose the police checked his claim, I don't recall reading anything to that effect, but we do know he made that claim.
                  Hi Jon,

                  I have a recollection of someone saying that the police checked Goldstein's presence at the Spectacle. Strangely enough, I thought it was you. You are the one that usually has this type of obscure information at his fingertips.

                  Cheers, George
                  They are not long, the days of wine and roses:
                  Out of a misty dream
                  Our path emerges for a while, then closes
                  Within a dream.
                  Ernest Dowson - Vitae Summa Brevis​

                  ​Disagreeing doesn't have to be disagreeable - Jeff Hamm

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by The Rookie Detective View Post
                    Now that would suggest that Stride wasn;t a victim of JTR becuase AFTER killing Stride, the Ripper would have need to have gone to Mitre Square.
                    However, IF the killer did indeed go back into the club, he could then have been one of the men who ran out to go and look for a policeman.

                    Are there any of the club members who didn't return back to the club AFTER Stride's body was found?
                    Hi RD,

                    I don't think that Kozebrodski or Jacobs (Freidenthal?) were mentioned as actually returning to the yard.

                    Do you realise that if you throw in Diemshitz as Parcelman you are getting close to Randy Williams Three Jacks theory?

                    Cheers, George
                    They are not long, the days of wine and roses:
                    Out of a misty dream
                    Our path emerges for a while, then closes
                    Within a dream.
                    Ernest Dowson - Vitae Summa Brevis​

                    ​Disagreeing doesn't have to be disagreeable - Jeff Hamm

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Lewis C View Post

                      Here's the full sentence and the one after it:

                      "It was just after one o'clock when I went out, and the only man whom I had seen pass through the street previously was a young man carrying a black shiny bag, who walked very fast down the street from the Commercial-road. He looked up at the club, and then went round the corner by the Board School."

                      So I think your point is that with my interpretation, "previously" is an unnecessary word that doesn't really change the meaning. I suppose that's true, though maybe by including the word, she's just being emphatic that she didn't see the man after she went out after 1:00.
                      Let's suppose your interpretation is correct. What are left with? The Schwartz incident at about 12:45, not being noticed, and then the 'Goldstein incident' about 5 minutes later, which is noticed. The opposite of what we might expect.

                      Maybe the reason Goldstein didn't come forward immediately was that at first, he didn't think there was much reason to. He had walked through the area close to the time when the murder occurred, but he didn't see anything, so he doubted there was any value in going to the police to say that he saw nothing. However, after Mortimer reported having seen him, then it was necessary to talk to the police so that they would know he was who Mortimer saw and that they need not look for him or suspect him.
                      Fanny reported having seen him the day of the murder. It is possible Wess found out about what she had seen before the end of the day. Wess took Goldstein to Leman St at about 10:30pm on Tuesday.
                      Andrew's the man, who is not blamed for nothing

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by The Rookie Detective View Post

                        Thank you kindly for clarifying that Michael and great post as always.

                        I have wondered whether the killer fled, or accessed one of the buildings or flats to make his escape and head off towards the City of London for Eddowes.

                        We tend to focus on what occurred in Berner Street, but unless the yard was definitely a cul-de-sac with only Berner St as an exit, then i'm inclined to wonder whether the killer may have exited through the far end of the yard and didn't exit back out into Berner Street.

                        IF he was disturbed (and not suggesting her was) then he would have had no choice but to move back further into the yard.
                        Are we certain that there's no point of exit through the yard without needing to walk out and back past the body of Stride?

                        I do appreciate you taking the time to acknowledge my post. For me, it's not necessarily about agreeing or disagreeing, it's all about the discussion and the journey we share to try and unravel this endless quest.


                        RD
                        Andrew's the man, who is not blamed for nothing

                        Comment


                        • Here's an interesting coincidence.

                          The following post refers to a man who visited Whitechapel in late October, 1888.
                          Discussion for general Whitechapel geography, mapping and routes the killer might have taken. Also the place for general census information and "what was it like in Whitechapel" discussions.

                          In the attached letter, the man refers to buying a Yiddish newspaper called Die Zukunft, published at 8 Little Alie Street.
                          I know that address from somewhere, I thought to myself.
                          It's the address of a man and his family in the 1901 census. The man's name is Israel Schwartz. See this post ...
                          In The Absence Of Evidence thread, c.d. said... To which Herlock replied... Okay, interesting thoughts that I may come back to, but let's continue on to Fiver's reply to HS... As no one seems to have taken up Fiver's suggestion, I will. Following is a quote of Fanny Mortimer that appeared in several Oct 1 papers. You
                          Andrew's the man, who is not blamed for nothing

                          Comment


                          • Ah no...just to clarify my meaning from my previous post (as I feel it was misinterpreted; my fault entirely)

                            So...

                            the Schwartz "incident" NEVER happened...BUT Goldstein (who was Schwartz) was seen by Mortimer at the exact same moment that Goldstein looked towards the club and saw the attack at 1am.
                            Goldstein looked towards the club AND WITNESSED the murder OR the murderer in the process of attacking Stride in the gateway and THEN he hurried off around the corner, all of which Mortimer witnessed. Her focus was on watching Goldstein and not on the murder being committed inside the gateway out of her viewpoint.

                            Goldstein then approached Wess to say he had witnessed a CLUB MEMBER attack Stride and Wess told him to go to the police to clear his name AND to create a story to take the focus away from the club. Wess may have given Goldstein a "If you take the club down, then you'll go down with it by being implicated in the murder" scenario.

                            BUT because Goldstein witnessed Stride being attacked at 1am and he happened to be passing, he knew that he would be implicated and so he had to go to the police as Schwartz; a stereotypical looking Jew who was conveniently unknown to the club.

                            Goldstein as Schwartz then makes up a story of BS man and Pipeman (who never existed) attacking Stride at 12.45am.

                            But the reason wy nobody saw anything AT 12.45am is because nothing happened UNTIL 1am.

                            This means that Stride was standing inside the gateway EITHER alone of WITH her killer out of sight throughout the ordeal.

                            THe last GENUINE sighting was that made by PC Smith around 12.35am-12.40am, the same time that EAGLE returned to the club. BUT because the front door was locked, he had to use the side door, so he must have SEEN Stride as he went through the yard.
                            He SAID he DIDN'T see her because he may have missed her in the darkness. But that can't be true, because she was still alive at the time Eagle returned. The only way he could have missed her; is if she was already dead, and that wasn't the case. On that basis he must have walked past her.

                            BUT because she was later murdered, he can't tell the police he spoke to a known prostitute and make that public, because he had a girlfriend/fiancee.
                            I can't imagine any guy telling his fiancee... "yes, I chatted to that prostitute, but I promise I didn't kill her, even though someone did cut her throat shortly after I spoke to her"
                            Eagle covered his own back and said he didn't see her.

                            Now the man seen by PC Smith had to have gone somewhere BUT because he was seen with her around 20 minutes BEFORE she was murdered at 1am, then we have several possible scenarios...and so parcelman was either...

                            Eagle, who spoke to her, was witnessed by PC Smith and then he innocently returned to the club with his parcel full of cigarettes to give to his comrades etc...

                            Another member of the club who then innocently went back into the club after having had a breather from the smoke (Lave?)
                            Another member of the club who had enticed her into the yard and was with her in the darkness for 20 minutes before killing her.
                            A non-member of the club who enticed her into the darkness at some point over the 20 minutes and then killed her just as Goldstein walked past.

                            The reason why Parcelman has remained a key suspect has been down to the assault alleged to have taken place at 12.45am (according to Schwartz)

                            BUT because the entire incident never happened and NOTHING HAPPENED UNTIL 1am when the killer; who was already standing with her in the darkness, then attacked her and cut her throat at the same location where she was later found, it makes Parcelman less of a suspect UNLESS he spent 20 minutes with her FROM the time Pc Smith saw him, to the point of the attack at 1am

                            And so the likes of BS man and Pipeman NEVER existed. The theatrical assault on Stride NEVER HAPPENED.

                            BUT crucially... Goldstein DID witness the moment that Stride was attacked in the dark. He saw a man killing her and then fled. Mortimer confirms seeing Goldstein walking hurriedly and that action of walking hurriedly away occurred AFTER GOLDSTEIN looked towards the club.

                            The murder of Stride was relatively silent and was only seen AND?OR heard by Goldstein who then looked towards the club/gateway and THEN hurriedly walked away.

                            The reason WHY Goldstein then came forward is because of the pressure he faced from the club AND because he KNEW that by saying he saw the attack, he could also then have been perceived as the killer, and so THAT is the reason why the 12.45am attack was then created to

                            A- change the time of the killing/assault from 1am to 12.45am
                            B- suggest that Stride was assaulted before Goldstein arrived
                            C- make it appear that someone NOT connected with the club approached Stride from the north and then attacked her
                            D- add in a suspicious-looking Pipeman who was observing the attack and was an accomplice NOT attached to the club.
                            E- suggest that 2 men not involved with the club were behind the assault
                            F- make it appear that there nobody from the club had any connection to the attack


                            BUT because every good lie requires elements of TRUTH to come across as genuine, Goldstein used elements of what he DID see and hear at 1am when Stride was actually being murdered and so elements of the story he used as Schwartz DID bear some similarities to the truth of what did actually happen.

                            But Goldstein needed a clincher, something to seal the deal and convince the police...and what better way to fool the police, than to play the race card.

                            By stating that BS man shouted LIPSKI to his accomplice, it immediately draws focus away from it being a member of the club, because a verbal anti-Jewish slur could not have conceivably been made by a Jew.

                            But here's the thing; nobody ever shouted LIPSKI, because BS man and Pipeman were imaginary and Schwartz aka Goldstein needed something alarming to make the police believe that nobody from the club could have been involved.

                            Now Goldstein may have seen very little of the murder, but he certainly heard it, because that's what drew his focus to look toward the club.

                            And so IMO the killer was a member of the club, could have been parcelman IF he spent 20 minutes with her in the dark after PC Smith saw him, but was most likely to have been Joseph Lave, who gave mixed timings.

                            I therefore believe that THIS is what happened...

                            Having spoken to Stride briefly at 12.40am, Eagle goes back into the club and opens his parcel full of cigarettes to share with his comrades. They light up and Eagle is overheard by Lave telling another man (Strides lover?) that Stride is waiting for him outside.
                            Lave overhears this...but he is filled with an inner rage...and so he decides to go outside of the club to get some "fresh air." ...via his own room at the club to pick up a knife and some cachous...just in case...
                            A man on the run from the USA (via Russia) and taking refuge in the only place that would have taken him.
                            He's a transient man for a reason.
                            At 12.50am he comes out of the club and sees Stride waiting outside the club door.
                            She is wet from the rain but remains outside because her lover has told her that Non-Jews entering the club is frowned upon etc..
                            Lave then sparks up conversation with her.
                            Stride has been waiting for her lover to come out of the club, the russian/german Jew seen earlier outside the Bricklayer's Arms?...
                            Lave knows the man and is a little jealous and he knows that Stride is a woman who solicits for sex... and he wants to try his luck with her too...but not for sex, for power.
                            Lave is charming. He comments on her dress, her flowers...and he briefly asks her about her lover...and by proxy, sex.
                            (men often use the ruse of getting a woman to openly talk about sex, as a way of feeling power and control over a woman. It can be a thrill for some men)

                            Over the next 5 minutes they chat and Stride is made to feel at ease.

                            At 12.56am he decides to make his move. He can't be outside the club too long. (he went to his room at 12.45am and left the club at 12.50am)

                            Stride is charmed by him, but at the same time is worried about being seen and doesn't want her lover to taste the cigarette on her breath (her lover being a non-smoker?) Lave tells her not to worry as he has some cachous.
                            Lave then uses this and urges her to step into the darkness and he jokes about not wanting her lover to see them either and getting them both in trouble.

                            (note that Lave applies a clever reverse psychology technique used here - he later tells the police he needed some fresh air to get away from the smoke, in order to deter from the fact he was a smoker, ergo, he didn't come out of the club for fresh air- he came out TO SMOKE and use the smoking along with the cachous as a ruse to kill Stride)

                            At 12.57am he offers her again and she accepts.

                            (again note that offering a person a cigarette shortly before their death, is a custom that has been applied in the past. A "last cigar" sceneario.

                            I believe that the moment that Stride accepted the cigarette from Lave, is the moment he knew he was going to kill her.


                            She EITHER takes a few puffs and it tastes vile OR she smokes properly... BUT EITHER WAY, she needs to get the taste/smell of the cigarette off her breath and so he offers her the cachous that he told her about.

                            He watches her as he feels the knife in his pocket.
                            As he hands her the Cachous...

                            Goldstein is walking down Berner Street

                            Mortimer is about to open her door.

                            Then...

                            As Stride goes to open the bag of cachous she is momentarily distracted. Lave then pulls out his knife, gets her to the floor and then cuts her throat, all in under 10 seconds.

                            But at the EXACT MOMENT that Lave brings Stride to the floor, the sound is heard by Goldstein who has walked in front of the gateway. He momentarily looks toward the club side door and sees the figure of a man knelt over Stride and drawing a knife across her throat. Goldstein hurries away SEEN by Mortimer who has just opened her door.
                            Lave instinctively looks around to hear (and see?) Goldstein move away and fears he has been seen killing Stride. He stands and goes toward the gateway, but hesitates because he realizes that leaving the scene would put him in the frame.

                            And so he instead goes back into the club and manages to go to his room undetected, where he hides the knife? (??) He then remembers the cachous but as he goes to leave his room he hears the commotion outside as Diemshcultz has just entered the yard and he realizes he can't get back to Stride.

                            He then gathers his thoughts and blends in undetected.

                            The question is...how much did Goldstein actually see?


                            So...there's my hypothesis...feedback and obliteration of said hypothesis most welcome...



                            RD



                            "Great minds, don't think alike"

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by The Rookie Detective View Post

                              So...there's my hypothesis...feedback and obliteration of said hypothesis most welcome...
                              I love all the twists and turns, RD, but I think there's a good reason why Eagle, Stride, Goldstein, and Diemschitz are all converging on the club, which still contains many members, at a similar time - Supper's ready.

                              Andrew's the man, who is not blamed for nothing

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

                                ...In or out?

                                There was certainly no noise made, and I did not observe anyone enter the gates.
                                Neither, he didn't come out of the yard.
                                I meant it as she heard Goldstein coming down Berner St. from Commercial Rd.
                                The recent suggestion being the heavy tramp footsteps were by Goldstein going up Berner St.

                                In the past I've asked why Goldstein delayed coming forward to the police, and even when he did, he required the persuasion of Wess. Apparently, the reason was "he didn't want to get involved". That is like saying Schwartz was not at the inquest because he didn't want to be involved. It's not a choice.
                                I disagree
                                Goldstein is comparable to Packer, as his reluctance to get involved was clear from the beginning.
                                We don't know if Schwartz was summonzed to the inquest, but he went voluntarily to give his statement to police, unlike Goldstein.

                                Regards, Jon S.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X