The Stride Murder

[Wickerman]

How likely or unlikely do we think it is that Schwartz was just mistaken about his time and passed before 12.30 and saw a short incident involving a woman who resembled Stride? Similar age and build, similarly dressed (after all, women’s fashions weren’t that varied especially for women of Stride’s class in society)

Something along those lines, yes Herlock.
I suspect the press account was exaggerated or coloured with details that make it more exciting for the reader, especially as we have a police account of the same incident that is missing those 'exciting' details.

For that reason I put the police version ahead of the press version in importance. And, in Swanson's version:
- we have no pub on the corner of the street.
- we can't be sure where Pipeman is standing.
- he makes no mention of a yard or passage, only a woman stood by some gates, and being thrown down on the footway which is outside the gates.
- were the gates he passed even open?

So my question is, was Schwartz even in the right street?
There's no doubt he thought he was, but at night could he have turned down the wrong street?
Swanson is investigating a murder in Berner St. and as Schwartz thought he was in that street then naturally his statement mentions him turning into Berner St., but did he?
As Schwartz needed a translator, we can't assume he could read the street signs, he may have turned down the wrong street.

So where could he have gone, possibly to a street that had a gateway near to the end, on west side of the street.
Batty St., the next street over has the Board School at the end on the west side, but there is an entrance or gateway, with a pub beside it, just before the school.
I wonder if he walked down Batty St. and saw an altercation in that gateway. If so, then there never was an altercation in Dutfields Yard, no-one else witnesses one.

This is why the police took so long to confirm his story, they may have discovered he was in the wrong street - an innocent mistake.
I'm not convinced either way, but it may answer more than a few questions in this case.

[Michael W Richards]

And this is where your rationale goes off the rails from the very start. Even the police and pretty much everyone else knew they were dealing with a single serial killer eventhough there was little to no experience with this type of crime before, and the term hadn’t even been coined yet. You’re going about it arse backward. You’re trying to twist the evidence to support multiple killers when you should be trying to analyze various evidence that points to a single suspect.

I suppose guessing is fine for others to use as a starting point, and without having any idea what was really happening Im sure that suggesting 1 man was running amok in the East End at that time was politically better than letting the public imagine multiple killers on the loose. But Im not a cart before the horse kind of guy. Nor am I someone who can comfortably assemble 5 women from the 13 unsolved murder files and call it a serial killers spree. I can comfortably group 2, perhaps 3 of the Canonicals as very likely being by the same man/men. I know other students feel similarly.

What is being consistently represented inaccurately is the suggestion that evidence, when quoted as is, is somehow "twisted" if it suggests something other than what others...in the mainstream, albeit... believe. Like for example timings by the Stride witnesses.

[Michael W Richards]

Is everyone aware that the Ripper crimes were only 1 of the big stories that Fall? The other story has thieves, murders, bombers, traitors, spies, corrupt politicians and lots of innocent peoples deaths. That other story is why Anderson is recalled from Paris, not Switzerland. So maybe stop imaging that Jack The Ripper is the only bad guy in London at that time. Im sure that if Torso Man was here today he would also remind you how scary he was.

[Michael W Richards]

Something along those lines, yes Herlock.
I suspect the press account was exaggerated or coloured with details that make it more exciting for the reader, especially as we have a police account of the same incident that is missing those 'exciting' details.

For that reason I put the police version ahead of the press version in importance. And, in Swanson's version:
- we have no pub on the corner of the street.
- we can't be sure where Pipeman is standing.
- he makes no mention of a yard or passage, only a woman stood by some gates, and being thrown down on the footway which is outside the gates.
- were the gates he passed even open?

So my question is, was Schwartz even in the right street?
There's no doubt he thought he was, but at night could he have turned down the wrong street?
Swanson is investigating a murder in Berner St. and as Schwartz thought he was in that street then naturally his statement mentions him turning into Berner St., but did he?
As Schwartz needed a translator, we can't assume he could read the street signs, he may have turned down the wrong street.

So where could he have gone, possibly to a street that had a gateway near to the end, on west side of the street.
Batty St., the next street over has the Board School at the end on the west side, but there is an entrance or gateway, with a pub beside it, just before the school.
I wonder if he walked down Batty St. and saw an altercation in that gateway. If so, then there never was an altercation in Dutfields Yard, no-one else witnesses one.

This is why the police took so long to confirm his story, they may have discovered he was in the wrong street - an innocent mistake.
I'm not convinced either way, but it may answer more than a few questions in this case.

That is interesting out of the box thinking, the only problem I see immediately is that Wess translated for Schwartz.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Something along those lines, yes Herlock.
I suspect the press account was exaggerated or coloured with details that make it more exciting for the reader, especially as we have a police account of the same incident that is missing those 'exciting' details.

For that reason I put the police version ahead of the press version in importance. And, in Swanson's version:
- we have no pub on the corner of the street.
- we can't be sure where Pipeman is standing.
- he makes no mention of a yard or passage, only a woman stood by some gates, and being thrown down on the footway which is outside the gates.
- were the gates he passed even open?

So my question is, was Schwartz even in the right street?
There's no doubt he thought he was, but at night could he have turned down the wrong street?
Swanson is investigating a murder in Berner St. and as Schwartz thought he was in that street then naturally his statement mentions him turning into Berner St., but did he?
As Schwartz needed a translator, we can't assume he could read the street signs, he may have turned down the wrong street.

So where could he have gone, possibly to a street that had a gateway near to the end, on west side of the street.
Batty St., the next street over has the Board School at the end on the west side, but there is an entrance or gateway, with a pub beside it, just before the school.
I wonder if he walked down Batty St. and saw an altercation in that gateway. If so, then there never was an altercation in Dutfields Yard, no-one else witnesses one.

This is why the police took so long to confirm his story, they may have discovered he was in the wrong street - an innocent mistake.
I'm not convinced either way, but it may answer more than a few questions in this case.

There’s certainly nothing that I can think of that makes this particularly unlikely Wick. I was only considering the timing issue of course but I’d say that your ‘wrong street’ suggestion is certainly is a possible. And as no one saw or spoke to him that night how do we know that he hadn’t had a beer or six?

[Herlock Sholmes]

I suppose guessing is fine for others to use as a starting point, and without having any idea what was really happening Im sure that suggesting 1 man was running amok in the East End at that time was politically better than letting the public imagine multiple killers on the loose. But Im not a cart before the horse kind of guy. Nor am I someone who can comfortably assemble 5 women from the 13 unsolved murder files and call it a serial killers spree. I can comfortably group 2, perhaps 3 of the Canonicals as very likely being by the same man/men. I know other students feel similarly.

What is being consistently represented inaccurately is the suggestion that evidence, when quoted as is, is somehow "twisted" if it suggests something other than what others...in the mainstream, albeit... believe. Like for example timings by the Stride witnesses.

If it happened today and you presented a modern day police force with 2 bodies murdered and mutilated as Chapman and Eddowes were. Both prostitutes (whether full or part time) of a similar age, less than a months apart and in such close proximity what do you think the odds would be of them saying “we’re clearly looking for 2 different killers here?”

Ill take a guess….5675699864336899753 to one.

[New Waterloo]

Hello Wickerman yes you are correct in your comment about Strides clothes not being disorganized in any way and no signs of her being dragged but we can confirm because of the surgeons comments that she must have been on the ground somewhere for the mud to be "well plastered" on her left side and matted in her hair left side.

Presumably the mud caked on to her coat when she was pulled/pushed/fell during her interaction with BS Man. I agree very odd you are spot on when you say where is the mud on the ground of the cobbled yard and if she just stumbled or fell the the ground during the BS man incident it wouldn't have stuck to her like that would it?

Do we know the make up of the footway or the street. Were they just dirt or were they cobbled. It is a bit of a mystery. But wats new!

Great thread

NW

[Michael W Richards]

If it happened today and you presented a modern day police force with 2 bodies murdered and mutilated as Chapman and Eddowes were. Both prostitutes (whether full or part time) of a similar age, less than a months apart and in such close proximity what do you think the odds would be of them saying “we’re clearly looking for 2 different killers here?”

Ill take a guess….5675699864336899753 to one.

The problem with that is that modern forensic investigation methodologies are light years ahead of what 1888 London Detectives had to work with. Perhaps you might invert your suggestion....since 1888 contemporary police only had the bare minimum of data tools they could work with at that time, it would be understandable that they might see similar style killings as most probably by one man. In modern forensic investigations of serial killers its abundantly clear that many of them kill in ways that other serial killers also kill, they are not all unique by any stretch. Strangulation, dismemberment, stabbing, shooting, bury the bodies, leave the bodies, hide the bodies, burn the bodies ....there are a lot of repetitive murder methods being used by different killers. And lots of killers.

I dont see why that might not be the same in London in 1888. Different men killing in similar fashion. When its dissimilar to the majority of murder cases, thats when I can see potential linkage. I believe that Annie Chapmans murder is a dissimilar murder to any of the unsolved murders in that file. Some similar things might show up in other murders, but there is a unique signature to Annies murder. I also believe that Marys murder is very unique, but not in quite the same way. And I believe that any one of a dozen killers or more in London at that time could have killed Liz Stride based on the most simplistic of methods used.

[S.Brett]

Hello Wickerman yes you are correct in your comment about Strides clothes not being disorganized in any way and no signs of her being dragged but we can confirm because of the surgeons comments that she must have been on the ground somewhere for the mud to be "well plastered" on her left side and matted in her hair left side.

Presumably the mud caked on to her coat when she was pulled/pushed/fell during her interaction with BS Man. I agree very odd you are spot on when you say where is the mud on the ground of the cobbled yard and if she just stumbled or fell the the ground during the BS man incident it wouldn't have stuck to her like that would it?

Do we know the make up of the footway or the street. Were they just dirt or were they cobbled. It is a bit of a mystery. But wats new!

Great thread

NW

Hi New Waterloo,

Evening News, 1 October 1888:

"The left side of her face is much dirtied and bruised, as if she had been forcibly thrust down into the mud of the Court"

Btw.:

In Philip Hutchinson´s "The Jack the Ripper Location Photographs" you can take a look into Dutfields Yard (summer of 1900). There is a pile of dirt where Liz Stride was lying. With this photograph and the photograph of 1909 it semms that the Berner Street, the entranceway & the yard were cobbled. The entranceway, of course, lowered. The footway, on the left and on the right of the entrance, was higher than the entranceway. The same in 1888? I don´t know...

Schwartz´s "onto the footway" could also mean "onto the entranceway" (not the footway on the left & on the right side of the entrance).

Karsten.

[GBinOz]

That's very interesting. Did she articulate why she thought the the injuries to Chapman and Eddowes were by a different hand? And did she make comparisons with other possible victims?

Hi Fiver,

I asked her to look at just the Chapman and Eddowes autopsies here:

http://www.pathguy.com/jack.html

That is the only information that she considered, and commented that the Chapman organ removal was like a slash and grab, such as would be done by a butcher, whereas the degree of difficulty in the Eddowes organ removals was far higher, with a far higher skill level exhibited. She said that she had seen many a top surgeon, operating in optimum conditions, nick the bowel during a hysterectomy, and considered it highly unlikely that the injuries and the organ removals could have been achieved in anything like 12 minutes. We have to ask ourselves, how many of the posters here have actually participated in an abdominal hysterectomy or a kidney removal. Theory is one thing, practical experience another. It is a shame that Prosector is no longer contributing to this forum.

My daughter was not aware of Trevor's video, where the experts he spoke to drew the same conclusion. That video can be viewed here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpQqMtVVkzY&t=1011s&ab_channel=dickcopy

Cheers, George

[Mark J D]

A few thoughts on Israel Schwartz: [...]

When they moved he was not at home, a man who like going out, [I]"the appearance of being in the theatrical line"

Maybe he actually was in the theatre -- doing three shows on a Saturday in Yiddish (and leaving his wife to move house)...?

M.

[Wickerman]

That is interesting out of the box thinking, the only problem I see immediately is that Wess translated for Schwartz.

In what way is it a problem?

[Wickerman]

There’s certainly nothing that I can think of that makes this particularly unlikely Wick. I was only considering the timing issue of course but I’d say that your ‘wrong street’ suggestion is certainly is a possible. And as no one saw or spoke to him that night how do we know that he hadn’t had a beer or six?

It's always niggled me that he saw none of the other witnesses, and none of them saw him.
Yet both stories have that ring of truth. It's almost like two parallel events occurred at the same place and time, which of course is ridiculous.
If, both scenario's are true, and it cannot be a 'wrong day' argument, or wrong time, then it must be 'wrong place'?
It must be one or the other - unless we go for that old escape clause of accuse someone of lying, which I will resist at all costs.
So, if we look into each story deep enough, do we see where the two stories do not actually match.
I think we do.

[Wickerman]

Hi New Waterloo,

Evening News, 1 October 1888:

"The left side of her face is much dirtied and bruised, as if she had been forcibly thrust down into the mud of the Court"

Btw.:

In Philip Hutchinson´s "The Jack the Ripper Location Photographs" you can take a look into Dutfields Yard (summer of 1900). There is a pile of dirt where Liz Stride was lying. With this photograph and the photograph of 1909 it semms that the Berner Street, the entranceway & the yard were cobbled. The entranceway, of course, lowered. The footway, on the left and on the right of the entrance, was higher than the entranceway. The same in 1888? I don´t know...

Schwartz´s "onto the footway" could also mean "onto the entranceway" (not the footway on the left & on the right side of the entrance).

Karsten.

Given the horse and cart traffic, I wondered if 'mud' was just a euphemism for horse dung. Anywhere horses go we see lumps deposited in the road.

[Michael W Richards]

In what way is it a problem?

Wouldnt Wess know what street the club he belonged to and where his business was? It also might be that it was as you suggest, but Wess in his translation moved the location to Berner without Israels knowledge.