The Stride Murder

[NotBlamedForNothing]

If we replace ‘screamed’ with ‘called’ (simply as an example) it doesn’t appear so contradictory.

If we change the evidence, we can make sense of Schwartz's story.

[Wickerman]

What you say is completely irrelevant, weve already established that, what he said is. You still dont get this and its not for a lack of trying, it has nothing to do with me subjectively deciding what was said is the "truth", its just using what was said instead of claiming its wrong. You dont know he was wrong, you have no idea where he got the time, you have no idea how his estimating skills were, you have no idea whether he was blatantly lying, the only thing you do know is how to be an a**h***. The fact Ive wasted any time on someone like you at all shows my interest in getting at the truth and trying to assist you in seeing it. Whats your interest here besides being a pain in the ass?

Just for my part, I was never arguing with you over times, until the few recent posts. That was mostly you & Herlock, but what I mostly objected to was your assertion that when a witness speaks about what they did, using "I", you insisted, that means he was alone.
For all your assertions above about wanting to get to the truth, it is remarkable that you also insist on pushing a false argument.

I think you know "I" does not mean he was alone, you have to know that, clearly you've had sufficient schooling and English is, I assume, your first language, so why you peddle this false assertion can only suggest you are not able to accept 'truth', the only truth you are interested in is your own truth - whatever you decide fits.
I hope I'm wrong, it is still not too late for you to accept it is an unnecessary position to take, that you know very well "I" does not mean he was alone.

This view of yours then forces you to invent a third person that doesn't actually exist, someone you call Jacob Isaacs, or was it Isaac Jacobs?, because all the published statements & testimony (yes, there is a difference), support the fact Diemshutz & Kozebrodski left the yard to run in the same direction. They don't have to be together, as in "side-by-side", but Spooner saw two men coming towards him, east along Fairclough. Which means the two from Dutfields Yard were essentially 'together'.

It is not clear, in any surviving statement how long afterwards Eagle left to run up to Commercial St. Neither is it clear whether Eagle ran west on Commercial, then turns back east to head towards Grove St.
There had to be some kind of delay to allow Koz. to catch him before they both met up with PC Lamb.

There's a clear sequence of events that can be established without relying on the accuracy of stated times.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Joseph Lave....can someone please explain how this man placed himself at the crime scene for the entire duration of the time frame between which Stride could have been murdered, and claimed to have not seen or heard anything the entire time he was in the yard?

He also said it was dark...

As did Diemschutz when he turned into the yard and up to him discovering the body....but when subsequently asked whether he thought the killer could have moved further into the yard without being seen, he was sure that he would have seen the killer, had the killer done so, due to the yard (from the side door of the club moving west) being partially lit from the light emanating from the upstairs room and illuminating the yard from the club door, ergo, the only dark area was from the gate to the club door.

Diemschutz believed the only time the killer could have escaped unseen by him, was within the few moments AFTER he went into the club to find his wife.

And so based on this, it begs the question...IF the killer was disturbed, where did he hide?...

Diemschutz was certain that the killer didn't go past him
He was also sure that the killer couldn't have moved further into the yard while he was there, otherwise, he would have seen the killer move. It would then suggest that the killer was either standing in the dark between the body and the side door, or the killer managed to run past the door and further into the yard which was dark further up the yard...but how did the killer then move so quickly before Diemschutz was upon him?

Unless the killer went into the club?...

Suggesting that the killer had previously come out from the club, and must have known the layout.

By the time of the discovery, there seems to me to have been too much blood flow along the passageway, for the killer to have been disturbed by Diemschitz. The killer must have already come and gone.

And as for Joseph Lave... his placing himself at the crime scene at the time of the murder...when we KNOW that Stride was murdered, is so blatantly a lie, that it is astounding how Lave wasn't scrutinized further.

Lave is certainly a fascinating character. Had the murder occurred at about 12:50, it is quite possible Lave was back inside - that's what his own timings suggest. By the same token he seems to have been in the right place at the right time to see Stride at the gateway. Did he lie, or did "Israel Schwartz" lie?

[Herlock Sholmes]

What you say is completely irrelevant, weve already established that, what he said is. You still dont get this and its not for a lack of trying, it has nothing to do with me subjectively deciding what was said is the "truth", its just using what was said instead of claiming its wrong. You dont know he was wrong, you have no idea where he got the time, you have no idea how his estimating skills were, you have no idea whether he was blatantly lying, the only thing you do know is how to be an a**h***. The fact Ive wasted any time on someone like you at all shows my interest in getting at the truth and trying to assist you in seeing it. Whats your interest here besides being a pain in the ass?

So, a**hole, pain in the ass, troll, dolt, learning difficulties. You’re doing well on the personal attack front. Whilst bemoaning my posts!

I’m afraid that it’s you that doesn’t get it Michael.

I haven’t said that clocks are always wrong.

I haven’t said that estimations are always wrong.

But you’re wrong-headed thinking is that clicks have to be taken as correct. And that estimating skills have to be taken as spot on.

I’m simply pointing out that we have to consider the possibility of error.

Its very simple.

Theres only one person on here being completely unreasonable, lacking in understanding, insulting and biased. And it’s you.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Thank you Herlock, I wonder if a "not very loud" cry (hardly a scream), was because her saviour was only feet away.
My thinking is she was in the yard with Parcel-man, he is the one who kills her after the fracas dies down.
If she had been alone, wouldn't she cry out louder to raise attention from neighbours?, but because he was close, and she expected him (Parcel-man) to come to her aid, she let out only a muffled cry.

A few feet away? Imagine it ...

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

... where she was later found. Schwartz observed the murder.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Heschbergs time roughly matches Issac Kozebroski's time and roughly matches Spooners time. You might want to revisit the time Spooner gives for being at the gate, if you read it ever before. All within 5 minutes of each other. Louis said he didnt even arrive until at least 15 minutes later. Which has the help posse's going out around 1:05-1:10, which is 5 minutes after Lamb says he was there with Eagle, and at the same time Johnson says he was there. Remember, the times given are not yours to adjust according to some twisted beliefs, they are what was given. You do not know better than any of them what time it was. Youve chosen to believe Louis uncorroborated time against 3 witnesses whose times are within 5 minutes of each other, all describing the same scene they witnessed. And by doing so youve run into direct conflict with Lambs given times and Johnsons. You seem to be fine with accusing everyone else of errors.....but accepting no possibility of that for yourself.

Spooner gave two ‘times.’ One he arrived at from pub closing times which, considering pubs don’t always chuck out on time seems a bit flimsy. The other he arrived at from seeing Lamb arrive, any reasonable person would tell you that this was far more likely to have been accurate. In fact, unless someone else arrived disguised as a Constable then it has to be accurate.

So Michael….now listen carefully and try to grasp this…..if his 12.35 estimation was correct (as you claim it was) then Lamb must have arrived at the yard at 12.40 - which he clearly didn’t. So we can say with certainty that Spooner arrived at the yard nearer to 1.00 (just after) So that dismisses Spooner from your list of rogue witnesses - leaving 2. Ok? 2.

Compared to Diemschitz, his wife, the servant, Minsky, Eagle, Gilleman, Lamb.

Im sure there is a good name for that kind of "logic", but as youve pointed out, Ive used almost every derogatory term for you by now anyway. People can see you provoke and I respond angrily. Its no secret. I am just tired of you and that kind of crap, its not why Im here. Im here to learn and share ideas. I have no idea why youre here other than to troll my posts.

I’ve tried for ages to discus this calmly and reasonably with you but, as others have found out over the years, it’s impossible. Your the one who ‘provokes’ with your obsessional inventions.

By the way…..a question for you to duck….

Explain how Diemschitz, our arch plotter, was so stupid, so unfeasibly dim-witted, so mind-numbingly, catastrophically, humongously lame-brained as to have come up with a plan that involved lying to the police and yet he forgot to tell Kozebrodsky about it?

[Wickerman]

A few feet away? Imagine it ...

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

... where she was later found. Schwartz observed the murder.

She was not found on the footway Andrew.

[jmenges]

Michael W Richards had to run but he might be back just in time for Christmas.

As has been said many many times...I can't be everywhere always reading everything.
I rely in large part on you all to report posts that violate the rules.

THERE ARE RULES.
We expect members to refrain from violating them.
We also expect members to report other members who violate them.

Ideally, this is how our little corner of paradise works.

Thanks

JM

[Lewis C]

The part I highlighted above suggests he said he went into the passageway about 20 minutes before the alleged discovery at 1, and that he walked into the street. That account cannot be reconciled with Israel Schwartz's statement. As a matter of fact, there is no-one but Israel who claims to have seen Liz Stride, alive or dead, during that time. Yet she is there somewhere.

James Brown said that he was almost certain that he saw Stride at 12:45 or 12:50. You and others may think that he was mistaken about who he saw, but it's a fact that he SAID that he was almost certain that he saw her.

[Wickerman]

James Brown said that he was almost certain that he saw Stride at 12:45 or 12:50. You and others may think that he was mistaken about who he saw, but it's a fact that he SAID that he was almost certain that he saw her.

He "said" it yes, but others also claim to be stood at that same spot, at that time.

"A young girl had been standing in a bisecting thoroughfare not fifty yards from the spot where the body was found. She had, she said, been standing there for about twenty minutes, talking with her sweetheart, but neither of them heard any unusual noises."
Daily News, 1 Oct.

Mortimer:
"A young man and his sweetheart were standing at the corner of the street, about twenty yards away, before and after the time the woman must have been murdered, but they told me they did not hear a sound".
Evening News, 1 Oct.

Distance, especially at night is hard to judge.
Dutfields gateway to the corner at the Board School is actually 60 ft. (20 yds)
Two reports there mention a young girl with her sweetheart standing on the corner of Berner & Fairclough, right about the time James Brown passes by.

James Brown appears to be mistaken.

[New Waterloo]

Why are we so determined to resist the suggestion that Stride was dragged even if just a little bit. If we believe schwartz and yes it is a big IF. Then the altercation takes place right by the gates but NOT in the yard proper. Stride falls/is pushed onto the ground manhandled/dragged into the gateway and throat cut. If a person is five feet tall and falls then the persons head is already 5 feet from their feet. Obvious I know but that then only requires movement/dragging of say 4 feet and the body is in position. Blimey that's not unreasonable at all. What is unreasonable is to think that Stride is on the ground then gets up walks 4 feet and then is pulled to the ground again. Yes big IF but I repeat. If Schwartz is to be believed the he witnessed the start of the assault in my view. BUT we need to know lots more about who schwartz was for this to work

[FISHY1118]

Why are we so determined to resist the suggestion that Stride was dragged even if just a little bit. If we believe schwartz and yes it is a big IF. Then the altercation takes place right by the gates but NOT in the yard proper. Stride falls/is pushed onto the ground manhandled/dragged into the gateway and throat cut. If a person is five feet tall and falls then the persons head is already 5 feet from their feet. Obvious I know but that then only requires movement/dragging of say 4 feet and the body is in position. Blimey that's not unreasonable at all. What is unreasonable is to think that Stride is on the ground then gets up walks 4 feet and then is pulled to the ground again. Yes big IF but I repeat. If Schwartz is to be believed the he witnessed the start of the assault in my view. BUT we need to know lots more about who schwartz was for this to work

Why is it a ""big "IF" that we believe Schwartz?

Can you show any evidence that any other person witnessed what Schwartz claim to have seen that contradicts his version of that event.?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

She was not found on the footway Andrew.

True, so we know what Schwartz was getting at, which is therefore little different to the press report ...

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

Losing the distinction between footway and passageway, in translation, would be far easier than confusing screams with calling out. The first is a technical distinction while the latter is the difference between noise and language. Perhaps Schwartz picked up on the technical distinction between talking to Abberline and talking to the Star man. Whatever the case, I'm not sure how you can claim that 'footway' could not have meant 'passageway', having just finished arguing that Schwartz may have got the street wrong.

So, regarding Schwartz being no more than a few scant feet from the victim when these low decibel screams occurred, what do we suppose the (first) man was doing at the time? Cutting Stride's throat? Well, there is a slight problem with that:

age about 30 ht, 5 ft 5 in. comp. fair hair dark, small brown moustache, full face, broad shouldered, dress, dark jacket & trousers black cap with peak, had nothing in his hands.

Having given this description, only the second man could later be said to have been equipped with a weapon of violence ...

The Hungarian states positively that he saw a knife in this second man's hand, but he waited to see no more.

Was Schwartz starting to feel pressured, by the time he spoke to the press?

He fled incontinently, to his new lodgings.

Leon must have just moved in.

[The Rookie Detective]

He "said" it yes, but others also claim to be stood at that same spot, at that time.

"A young girl had been standing in a bisecting thoroughfare not fifty yards from the spot where the body was found. She had, she said, been standing there for about twenty minutes, talking with her sweetheart, but neither of them heard any unusual noises."
Daily News, 1 Oct.

Mortimer:
"A young man and his sweetheart were standing at the corner of the street, about twenty yards away, before and after the time the woman must have been murdered, but they told me they did not hear a sound".
Evening News, 1 Oct.

Distance, especially at night is hard to judge.
Dutfields gateway to the corner at the Board School is actually 60 ft. (20 yds)
Two reports there mention a young girl with her sweetheart standing on the corner of Berner & Fairclough, right about the time James Brown passes by.

James Brown appears to be mistaken.

That would also be the SAME couple that were alleged to of bought the grapes....

Because after purchasing the grapes, Packer states they went and stood across the road almost opposite him at no.44. and stayed there for over half an hour before crossing the road and walking towards the club where they appeared to stop as if listening to the music.he then lost sight of them.

Almost opposite Packer is EITHER the corner of the street where the "sweetheart" couple were standing according to Mortimer and co.

OR

directly opposite the murder site.

Logic and reason would then determine that it's unlikely the couple who Packer claimed to have sold grapes to, would have stood opposite the yard and so by his account must have been standing on the same corner as the "sweetheart couple"


And so Mortimer, Packer and Brown must have seen the SAME couple...who had nothing to do with the murder...unless they did of course


RD

[New Waterloo]

Fishy makes a good point. Why the big IF with Schwartz. Well personally I think he is genuine and that is partly because the story he tells is so odd that nobody would make it up. He witnesses unusual behavior by different people. The problem is interpreting what he saw. (who and what the people were doing) He cannot add to this. He just sees what he sees. The big IF is that as an infrequent poster I am aware that there are many on the site who have researched this for years and there may be information about the event that I am unaware of if that makes sense. So my approach is to resist forming a theory and then making it fit but trying to look at the statements/reports openly and see where they take us. Fishy is correct there is no evidence that Schwartz is not genuine (that I am aware of)