Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Spooner revisited, with some Lamb on the side.

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

  • NotBlamedForNothing
    replied
    Originally posted by New Waterloo View Post
    Thank you NotBlamed for pointing me towards the 'Whistling on Berner Street' very interesting but wow a lot to read.
    I think I drafted the initial post and forgot to edit it.

    I'm going to suggest something more radical.

    Louis Diemschitz could settle the matter? Echo, Oct 1:

    I got a candle, and at once went into the yard, where I saw a quantity of blood near the body. I did not touch the body. I went for a policeman, but could not find one. When looking for the police, I told a young man of the affair, and he came with me back to the yard.

    The important thing here seems to be the date of the press report. No chance of Diemschutz being influenced by later reports and it seems accepted by all that he was first to discover the body. So he leaves the yard and within a short period finds a young man. He doesn't mention any girlfriend with the young man. Where has she gone at this stage. Is Spooner the killer of Stride. Great alibi to be at the scene in plain site. Maybe just a mad idea.

    NW​
    Have you had a read of Edward spooner - Casebook: Jack the Ripper Forums​?

    Leave a comment:


  • New Waterloo
    replied
    Thank you NotBlamed for pointing me towards the 'Whistling on Berner Street' very interesting but wow a lot to read. I'm going to suggest something more radical.

    Louis Diemschitz could settle the matter? Echo, Oct 1:

    I got a candle, and at once went into the yard, where I saw a quantity of blood near the body. I did not touch the body. I went for a policeman, but could not find one. When looking for the police, I told a young man of the affair, and he came with me back to the yard.

    The important thing here seems to be the date of the press report. No chance of Diemschutz being influenced by later reports and it seems accepted by all that he was first to discover the body. So he leaves the yard and within a short period finds a young man. He doesn't mention any girlfriend with the young man. Where has she gone at this stage. Is Spooner the killer of Stride. Great alibi to be at the scene in plain site. Maybe just a mad idea.

    NW​

    Leave a comment:


  • NotBlamedForNothing
    replied
    Originally posted by New Waterloo View Post
    Really a wild long shot this one! Does anyone police or members of the club mention Spooner coming along with them to the yard. The more I think about this the more odd it becomes. So we have two couples, Stride and her mystery man and Spooner and his mystery girl standing in the street a relatively short distance from each other at sort of a similar time. Have we had a closer look at Spooner. On reading the press report about the violent robbery it says that Spooner pulled somebody to the ground by their hair. Seems a bit of unusual method to me. Just thinking of how stride was pulled to the ground backwards. Really nuts this but was Spooner with a girl. great alibi to get involved with the discovery of Stride. Age is about right. Was he in fact Strides partner standing by the board school.

    Now waiting to be shot down in flames!!
    please be gentle

    NW
    I suggested a while back that Spooner might have been involved with the WVC patrols. Perhaps have a look at
    Whistling on Berner Street - Casebook: Jack the Ripper Forums

    Leave a comment:


  • New Waterloo
    replied
    Really a wild long shot this one! Does anyone police or members of the club mention Spooner coming along with them to the yard. The more I think about this the more odd it becomes. So we have two couples, Stride and her mystery man and Spooner and his mystery girl standing in the street a relatively short distance from each other at sort of a similar time. Have we had a closer look at Spooner. On reading the press report about the violent robbery it says that Spooner pulled somebody to the ground by their hair. Seems a bit of unusual method to me. Just thinking of how stride was pulled to the ground backwards. Really nuts this but was Spooner with a girl. great alibi to get involved with the discovery of Stride. Age is about right. Was he in fact Strides partner standing by the board school.

    Now waiting to be shot down in flames!!
    please be gentle

    NW

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing View Post

    Lamb: I went into the gateway of No. 40, Berner-street, and I saw something dark lying on the right-hand side, close to the gate. I turned my lamp on and found it was a woman.

    Spooner: I was standing outside the Beehive Tavern, at the corner of Christian-street and Fairclough-street along with a young woman. I had been standing there about five-and-twenty minutes when two Jews came running along hallooing out "Murder" and "Police." They ran as far as Grove-street and turned back. I stopped them and asked what was the matter. They said, "There's a woman murdered in Berner-street in the yard by No. 40." I went there and saw the body lying just inside the gate. There were about fifteen people in the yard, and they were standing round. They were mostly Jews. One of them struck a match, but before that I could see that the body was that of a woman and that there was blood about.

    Apparently, Spooner had much better eyes than PC Lamb, but little concern for his lady friend, who he seems to have left abandoned on the street.
    Well... Lambs comments are about the moment he arrived, Spooner's are about what he saw after being there a few minutes. As for his "date", for all we know she came over to see whats up as well. I would think under the circumstances he can be forgiven for leaving her so abruptly.

    Leave a comment:


  • NotBlamedForNothing
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

    Spooner is the ONLY witness that has no apparent agenda here.
    Lamb: I went into the gateway of No. 40, Berner-street, and I saw something dark lying on the right-hand side, close to the gate. I turned my lamp on and found it was a woman.

    Spooner: I was standing outside the Beehive Tavern, at the corner of Christian-street and Fairclough-street along with a young woman. I had been standing there about five-and-twenty minutes when two Jews came running along hallooing out "Murder" and "Police." They ran as far as Grove-street and turned back. I stopped them and asked what was the matter. They said, "There's a woman murdered in Berner-street in the yard by No. 40." I went there and saw the body lying just inside the gate. There were about fifteen people in the yard, and they were standing round. They were mostly Jews. One of them struck a match, but before that I could see that the body was that of a woman and that there was blood about.

    Apparently, Spooner had much better eyes than PC Lamb, but little concern for his lady friend, who he seems to have left abandoned on the street.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by Doctored Whatsit View Post
    Firstly, I agree that Spooner should be regarded as an independant witness with no link to the police, the club or the street, and his evidence should be considered very seriously. Secondly, it is therefore very unfortunate that we don't have his original police statement nor the inquest transcript, and have to rely on newspaper evidence which is clearly inaccurate. His evidence, as reported, contradicts not only the evidence previously given by West, Eagle, Louis D and PC Lamb, but also his own otherwise clear evidence. Despite this huge glaring anomaly, no-one noticed, not the Coroner, the jurors nor the police, when he is reported as saying that he entered the yard at 12. 35 am. It is therefore a near certainty that he didn't say it, and that it is a journalist's error.

    However, let us consider Spooner's evidence, firstly, his original statement, as it corresponds with the other major evidence, especially the evidence where reasonably accurate times can be demonstrated. He stood on the corner for about 25 minutes between 12. 30 am and 1 o'clock - till say 12. 55 am - when club members rushed past shouting "murder, police", they shortly came back, he spoke to them and they all went into the yard - so appx 1 am. He said that PC Lamb arrived about 5 minutes later - say 1. 05 am.

    PC Lamb said that at about 1 am club members caught up with him and he followed them to the yard - arriving say 1. 05 am. That matches Spooner's evidence. Lamb at once sent a second constable to get the doctor, and Edward Johston says that the PC arrived between 1. 05 and 1, 10 am, which is a fair match, and Blackwell said it was 1. 10 am. Johnson called Blackwell, and hurried to the yard himself. He said that Blackwell timed his arrival at 1. 16 am, and that he personally had arrived 3 or 4 minutes earlier. Louis D said that the doctor arrived 10 minutes after the police - another time match, and PC Lamb said the same. Blackwell gave a ToD of 12. 46 - 12. 56 am.

    Times, as expected, are not perfect, as Louis D put his arrival at 1 am, according to a shop clock he passed, and the other evidence suggests that the clock might have been about 5 - 10 minutes fast, but otherwise it is a pretty fair match. Later evidence supports this timescale quite well. James Brown said he saw Stride about 12. 45 am, with a lot of noise from the club about 15 minutes after he got home - so about 1. 05 am, and Schwarz also reckons that Stride was near the yard at about 12. 45 am. PC Smith said that he passed about 12. 35 am and saw Stride nearby, returned about 1 am, saw the crowd around the yard, saw the body, and as he was leaving to get the ambulance, Johnson arrived. Johnston timed his arrival at about 1. 12 am, so Smith really arrived perhaps shortly after 1. 05 am. Fanny Mortimer hears Smith passing perhaps at about 12. 35, is at her door much of the next 10 - 20 minutes, the street is quiet, she sees Goldstein pass, locks up, hears Louis D pass by, and then the noise from the club shortly afterwards. This is all quite reasonable.

    Now let's look at the timescale if Spooner really did enter the yard at 12. 35 am. That would mean that Louis D arrived at about 12. 25 am, and the rushing about started about 12. 30 am. But West had given evidence that he was in the yard about 12. 30 am, and saw nothing, and all was quiet. Eagle said he returned to the yard at about 12.35 am, and passed through it, seeing nothing, and that the discovery was about 20 minutes later. Club members must have left about 12. 30 am shouting "murder police", one group finding Spooner - about 12. 35 am, and the other finding PC Lamb - but not till about 1 am, and Lamb arrived about 1. 05 am, or 30 minutes after Spooner, despite Spooner claiming it was just 5 minutes. Schwarz didn't see Stride, and Brown didn't see her either at 12. 45 am, and didn't notice the crowd around the yard. He heard the noise from the club 15 minutes before he went out, and not 15 minutes after he returned home. PC Smith didn't notice the crowd around the yard at 12. 35 am, and couldn't have seen Stride with a flower in her button-hole at that time. Fanny was completely wrong to claim the street was quiet, it was bedlam, and she heard Louis D pass by before she heard the policeman's footsteps, and not after she had locked up .... er, it just doesn't work ...Blackwell's ToD, is out by 30 minutes. Although estimated ToD's, are not regarded as very accurate, they usually are quite accurate when the murder is very recent and blood is still fresh and still congealing.

    It really doesn't fit does it? It is much easier to believe that a couple of club members got the time wrong, perhaps the club clock was slow, and they thought that the discovery was earlier than it was. Let's take a look at Spooner's reported statement. Having first clearly stated that he was on the corner till about 12. 55 am, which fits the major timed evidence very well, he is reported as saying that he entered the yard "about 25 minutes to 1". Obviously this contradicts his own evidence as well as previous witnesses, and no-one noticed! This is, I think, almost certainly an example of a journalist, trying to keep up with what was being said, and making a simple error with his shorthand record. In the previous sentence, Spooner said, "five minutes, and then twenty five minutes", and I think he then said "five minutes to one". The journalist, struggling to keep up, heard "five", "twenty five" and "five", and recorded "five, "twenty five" and "twenty five". I'm guessing, of course, but only the later time fits the bulk of the evidence.
    What needs to be done with some of the statements, to make them fit better with some other statements, is to disagree with the times they have provided and guesstimate your own timeline that would fit the evidence better. You have to presume all the witness accounts that provide a timeline that cannot be supported by the evidence given by the trusted sources...(unbiased witness, uninvolved witness, policemen, doctors), ...were actually wrong.

    And when you make those witness lists you will notice that the accounts that do not allow for the "trusted" witness time evidence to be validated..are ALL club affiliated or known to be friends with someone there. Louis, Mrs D, Morris, Joseph, and Israel. If we accept their times, then Spooner, Smith, Lamb, Johnson, Blackwell, Mortimer, some of the members from inside the club....are all wrong.

    I personally have no reason to suspect Spooner said anything other than what he believed he saw happen and when, I expect Lamb to have been tracking his time up to the very time he says he saw the men looking for help, I know that Johnson was woken and surely checked his clock at home before leaving for Berner Street, and Blackwell checked his own watch when he arrived. Fanny was there and saw the street within that half hour...provably, the young couple were interviewed and saw nothing on the street during that period.

    I know Louis would be scared of losing his job over this, Morris would lose future speaking engagements there, Mrs D's fate is linked with Louis's, and there is not one witness that can validate that Israel Schwartz was actually there, that a BSM was actually there, and that a Pipeman was actually there during that last half hour.

    I think between the 2 groups, the one that has little or nothing to do with the clubs operations, promoting Socialism, and has no financial stake in any perceptions that the police might have had about possible guilt, have the upper hand here. People protect themselves when faced with job, housing or reputation loss. All 3 are at stake for that group of club staffers.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by New Waterloo View Post
    Excellent post Michael. In particular your valid point that Spooner has no angle, no bias. He is a straight forward witness so it is very reasonable to suggest that he is telling the truth as he sees it. Just a few of points which I hope will assist in the debate.

    I am not sure where his young woman friend goes when he makes his way to the yard, seems a bit strange that he would go off without her with a murderer wandering the area (people were aware of earlier killings). Perhaps she did go with him or lived near to where they were standing and went home?

    I have never concentrated too much on timings and I am of the strong belief that we should go with the evidence, What your post clearly shows is that we have to accept that Berner Street and the area around it was not as quiet as we seem to believe or imagine. I think we seem to imagine this particular murderer (of Stride, JTR or not) creeping around in the shadows, perhaps arranging a meeting with Liz, planning the kill. The location of the club and all of the people in the club and entering and exiting makes it a bizarre choice.

    Some suggest that JTR was taking a great risk in the Hanbury Street back yard. But that's a yard to a house where people are asleep and where couples have wandered before. The Berner Street Club is a lively venue with dozens of people in attendance, with a pub next door, with Packer selling his goods by the entrance with people coming and going and an active printers office in the yard, let alone local residents standing outside their houses and a regular police patrol. Locals would also know that the police were often in attendance at the club. I believe there was a large disturbance a couple of weeks earlier.

    Whoever the killer was, because of the clubs activities he would have known this. Perhaps if it was JTR he misjudged OR he wasn't local and when for a short period the street went quiet he misjudged and had to rush when he realized his mistake. If he came from say West London or somewhere then maybe. But a local JTR no chance unless he was off his head, mentally ill or drunk.

    After reading your post I am beginning to believe that the answer to the Stride murder is something to do with the club rather than a chosen venue by JTR for is quiet yard which evidence is suggesting was far from quiet and where there was more activity than we would like to admit

    NW
    I think we can see learning and progression from Polly to Annie. He is likely interrupted in Bucks Row, so he tries a different location that offers backyards as the likely spot the street women would go with clients. I believe he considers his murder on Hanbury as "satisfactory", in that he gets to remove organs to take with him, and leaves without being seen. I think its the mutilations, not the murder itself, that drives him. So....does he then take a chance at attacking a woman just feet off the sidewalk where he can clearly hear many men obviously awake and just inside the building...risking interruption once again? I dont see that happening, and the fact that she is murdered unlike any other alledged Canonical, makes a Ripper murder on Berner Street even less probable.

    In Bucks Row he killed on an open ended street, so....2 directions to have to be aware of when he grabs her...and with Liz, just off the street inside the gates, he has 2 directions again to have to be attentive to...the street, or from out the clubs side door, or from the yard. In Hanbury its really just the yard access from the house he has to watch, so just 1 ingress/egress route. I personally dont see the killer of Polly and Annie reverting to a strategy that isnt at least as "private" as Hanbury was.
    Last edited by Michael W Richards; 02-05-2024, 03:57 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post

    In an interesting side note...

    As reported in the ELO four months later, February 2, 1889, Spooner himself was involved in a violent assault against a Jewish tradesman in Christian Street, SGE.


    Click image for larger version Name:	Daring Van Robbery.jpg Views:	0 Size:	198.1 KB ID:	829616

    Click image for larger version Name:	Daring Van Robbery B.jpg Views:	0 Size:	80.7 KB ID:	829617

    That is an interesting snippet rj. Im wondering whether the tradesmans ethnicity had anything to do with the violent behaviour, or whether he, like so many men in that district at the time, got into physical altercations on occasion. I also note that Spooner denied involvement in the robbery...but presumably not the assault? Its not mentioned.

    I think one thing is clear about his behaviour that night, he came to the aid of the men he saw running. Who happened to be Jews. And then went to a Jewish Mens Club with them. So, I dont see antisemitic overtones there, nor in his remarks.

    In terms of his viability as a witness I stand by the assertion that there is no visible agenda that he is carrying with him on that night, hes just an innocent bystander telling what he recalls happened. I do see potential for some witnesses to have been in a self defense mode though, which could have affected how they told their stories.

    Leave a comment:


  • rjpalmer
    replied
    Originally posted by New Waterloo View Post
    Excellent post Michael. In particular your valid point that Spooner has no angle, no bias. He is a straight forward witness so it is very reasonable to suggest that he is telling the truth as he sees it. Just a few of points which I hope will assist in the debate.
    In an interesting side note...

    As reported in the ELO four months later, February 2, 1889, Spooner himself was involved in a violent assault against a Jewish tradesman in Christian Street, SGE.


    Click image for larger version  Name:	Daring Van Robbery.jpg Views:	0 Size:	198.1 KB ID:	829616

    Click image for larger version  Name:	Daring Van Robbery B.jpg Views:	0 Size:	80.7 KB ID:	829617

    Leave a comment:


  • Doctored Whatsit
    replied
    Firstly, I agree that Spooner should be regarded as an independant witness with no link to the police, the club or the street, and his evidence should be considered very seriously. Secondly, it is therefore very unfortunate that we don't have his original police statement nor the inquest transcript, and have to rely on newspaper evidence which is clearly inaccurate. His evidence, as reported, contradicts not only the evidence previously given by West, Eagle, Louis D and PC Lamb, but also his own otherwise clear evidence. Despite this huge glaring anomaly, no-one noticed, not the Coroner, the jurors nor the police, when he is reported as saying that he entered the yard at 12. 35 am. It is therefore a near certainty that he didn't say it, and that it is a journalist's error.

    However, let us consider Spooner's evidence, firstly, his original statement, as it corresponds with the other major evidence, especially the evidence where reasonably accurate times can be demonstrated. He stood on the corner for about 25 minutes between 12. 30 am and 1 o'clock - till say 12. 55 am - when club members rushed past shouting "murder, police", they shortly came back, he spoke to them and they all went into the yard - so appx 1 am. He said that PC Lamb arrived about 5 minutes later - say 1. 05 am.

    PC Lamb said that at about 1 am club members caught up with him and he followed them to the yard - arriving say 1. 05 am. That matches Spooner's evidence. Lamb at once sent a second constable to get the doctor, and Edward Johston says that the PC arrived between 1. 05 and 1, 10 am, which is a fair match, and Blackwell said it was 1. 10 am. Johnson called Blackwell, and hurried to the yard himself. He said that Blackwell timed his arrival at 1. 16 am, and that he personally had arrived 3 or 4 minutes earlier. Louis D said that the doctor arrived 10 minutes after the police - another time match, and PC Lamb said the same. Blackwell gave a ToD of 12. 46 - 12. 56 am.

    Times, as expected, are not perfect, as Louis D put his arrival at 1 am, according to a shop clock he passed, and the other evidence suggests that the clock might have been about 5 - 10 minutes fast, but otherwise it is a pretty fair match. Later evidence supports this timescale quite well. James Brown said he saw Stride about 12. 45 am, with a lot of noise from the club about 15 minutes after he got home - so about 1. 05 am, and Schwarz also reckons that Stride was near the yard at about 12. 45 am. PC Smith said that he passed about 12. 35 am and saw Stride nearby, returned about 1 am, saw the crowd around the yard, saw the body, and as he was leaving to get the ambulance, Johnson arrived. Johnston timed his arrival at about 1. 12 am, so Smith really arrived perhaps shortly after 1. 05 am. Fanny Mortimer hears Smith passing perhaps at about 12. 35, is at her door much of the next 10 - 20 minutes, the street is quiet, she sees Goldstein pass, locks up, hears Louis D pass by, and then the noise from the club shortly afterwards. This is all quite reasonable.

    Now let's look at the timescale if Spooner really did enter the yard at 12. 35 am. That would mean that Louis D arrived at about 12. 25 am, and the rushing about started about 12. 30 am. But West had given evidence that he was in the yard about 12. 30 am, and saw nothing, and all was quiet. Eagle said he returned to the yard at about 12.35 am, and passed through it, seeing nothing, and that the discovery was about 20 minutes later. Club members must have left about 12. 30 am shouting "murder police", one group finding Spooner - about 12. 35 am, and the other finding PC Lamb - but not till about 1 am, and Lamb arrived about 1. 05 am, or 30 minutes after Spooner, despite Spooner claiming it was just 5 minutes. Schwarz didn't see Stride, and Brown didn't see her either at 12. 45 am, and didn't notice the crowd around the yard. He heard the noise from the club 15 minutes before he went out, and not 15 minutes after he returned home. PC Smith didn't notice the crowd around the yard at 12. 35 am, and couldn't have seen Stride with a flower in her button-hole at that time. Fanny was completely wrong to claim the street was quiet, it was bedlam, and she heard Louis D pass by before she heard the policeman's footsteps, and not after she had locked up .... er, it just doesn't work ...Blackwell's ToD, is out by 30 minutes. Although estimated ToD's, are not regarded as very accurate, they usually are quite accurate when the murder is very recent and blood is still fresh and still congealing.

    It really doesn't fit does it? It is much easier to believe that a couple of club members got the time wrong, perhaps the club clock was slow, and they thought that the discovery was earlier than it was. Let's take a look at Spooner's reported statement. Having first clearly stated that he was on the corner till about 12. 55 am, which fits the major timed evidence very well, he is reported as saying that he entered the yard "about 25 minutes to 1". Obviously this contradicts his own evidence as well as previous witnesses, and no-one noticed! This is, I think, almost certainly an example of a journalist, trying to keep up with what was being said, and making a simple error with his shorthand record. In the previous sentence, Spooner said, "five minutes, and then twenty five minutes", and I think he then said "five minutes to one". The journalist, struggling to keep up, heard "five", "twenty five" and "five", and recorded "five, "twenty five" and "twenty five". I'm guessing, of course, but only the later time fits the bulk of the evidence.
    Last edited by Doctored Whatsit; 02-05-2024, 12:00 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • New Waterloo
    replied
    Excellent post Michael. In particular your valid point that Spooner has no angle, no bias. He is a straight forward witness so it is very reasonable to suggest that he is telling the truth as he sees it. Just a few of points which I hope will assist in the debate.

    I am not sure where his young woman friend goes when he makes his way to the yard, seems a bit strange that he would go off without her with a murderer wandering the area (people were aware of earlier killings). Perhaps she did go with him or lived near to where they were standing and went home?

    I have never concentrated too much on timings and I am of the strong belief that we should go with the evidence, What your post clearly shows is that we have to accept that Berner Street and the area around it was not as quiet as we seem to believe or imagine. I think we seem to imagine this particular murderer (of Stride, JTR or not) creeping around in the shadows, perhaps arranging a meeting with Liz, planning the kill. The location of the club and all of the people in the club and entering and exiting makes it a bizarre choice.

    Some suggest that JTR was taking a great risk in the Hanbury Street back yard. But that's a yard to a house where people are asleep and where couples have wandered before. The Berner Street Club is a lively venue with dozens of people in attendance, with a pub next door, with Packer selling his goods by the entrance with people coming and going and an active printers office in the yard, let alone local residents standing outside their houses and a regular police patrol. Locals would also know that the police were often in attendance at the club. I believe there was a large disturbance a couple of weeks earlier.

    Whoever the killer was, because of the clubs activities he would have known this. Perhaps if it was JTR he misjudged OR he wasn't local and when for a short period the street went quiet he misjudged and had to rush when he realized his mistake. If he came from say West London or somewhere then maybe. But a local JTR no chance unless he was off his head, mentally ill or drunk.

    After reading your post I am beginning to believe that the answer to the Stride murder is something to do with the club rather than a chosen venue by JTR for is quiet yard which evidence is suggesting was far from quiet and where there was more activity than we would like to admit

    NW

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Spooner is the ONLY witness that has no apparent agenda here. We know the club members want to appear innocent, we know that the neighbours had low opinions of the club and the men that attended it, and we know that the Police wouldnt mind having a good reason to shut them down referring to them as "anarchists", but all we know about Spooner is that he happened to be there chatting up a lady friend when he became a part of the story. His view of what he recalled isnt subject to any agenda or concerns he might have had concerning a murder that night. But the club was the location of that murder, the men still at the club at the time are the only ones who are seen or heard nearby at that time, and the police think they are looking for a immigrant Jewish man who is at large killing street women. At least according to Anderson that was the working theory in September, the weeks leading up to this killing.

    The club is full of immigrant Jewish men.

    Its for that reason, and the fact that Spooners questioned timeline marries well with other witnesses, that I believe his story carries weight here. And why the club staff members statements need a close look.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by Kattrup View Post
    Hello Michael

    Does that mean that by ignoring Spooner’s own statement “Between half-past 12 and 1 o'clock on Sunday morning I was standing outside the Bee Hive publichouse​” you are self adjusting the given times so what seems to fit better for your own preconceptions is left, then you arent interested in investigation, you are interested in validating your own beliefs?
    What I believe isnt really the point being made, its trying to see what statements have traction and which ones dont based on the statement, not the interpretation and/or revision of one. Yes, there are conflicting times given... even by the same witness, but Ive never insisted that these times were inflexible nor that they need be to the minute in agreement with others. Ive been accused of it, but inaccurately. Allowance of a short period of time variances is fine I think...my own version suggests plus or minus 5 minutes. For example, Issac Kozebrodski said within the hour of the discovery that he was called outside by Mr Diemshitz around "20 minutes" to 1. He also is on record as stating that he arrived back at the club around 12:30 and "about 10 minutes later" was summoned by Louis. Both are 20 minute intervals, and they might have been off 5 minutes or so either way, but with Louis Diemshitz's story this interaction between Louis and Issac occurs 20-25 later. Shortly after 1am, according to Louis's timeline. Issac had just been inside and likely referenced a clock to allow him to confidently say what time he arrived, but is it very likely that he would have been be off by 25 minutes in his estimate of what 10 minutes felt like? Then we have a second source, from the club again, who gives that same approximate 12:40-12:45 time for his learning of the body. We also have Spooner, who suggests a similar timing. Then we have Lamb, who believed that he saw the men already seeking help "just before 1". One of them is Issac Kozebrodski who saw Eagle and joined him, then the 3 headed to the gates. Then we have Johnson arriving on site at 1:10am, after being at home asleep, woken by a call, got dressed and rushed down to Berner Street....how long might that have taken? If he learned of it when Eagle arrived at the station, sent by Lamb, to notify them of the death, just after 1am,....then how did that all happen when Louis has supposedly only just arrived and just got down from the cart to light a match and see what his horse was skittish about. How did Eagle find Lamb at just before 1 if Eagle didnt even learn of the woman until after 1 when Louis supposedly summoned help. How could Issac K get instructions from "Mr Diemshitz or some other member" around 12:40 if Louis is still 15-20 minutes away?

    If the men sent for help did so around the times given by Issac K, Mr Heschberg and Mr Spooner, around 12:40-12:45, then Eagle could have seen Lamb at "just before 1", Issac could have spent time running and seeing no-one until he sees Eagle, and Johnson could have learned of this with enough time to be there at 1:10, and Blackwell at 1:16. The boots Fanny heard could have been from one of these men. The cart and horse she heard could have been Dimeshitz'z being led away to the stable.

    But if Louis doesnt arrive until "precisely" 1 am...or thereabouts, the process of him notifying others, gathering around the woman, some being sent for help...which they find only after some minutes looking and then Lamb sending Eagle to the station so Johnson can be called....is what, perhaps 10-15 minutes in total? That would make Johnsons arrival by 1:10 impossible.

    By accepting the stories of Israel, Louis, Morris and Lave the continuity of any storyline is fractured. Without them, most if not all the relevant stories support the approximate given times.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kattrup
    replied
    Hello Michael

    Does that mean that by ignoring Spooner’s own statement “Between half-past 12 and 1 o'clock on Sunday morning I was standing outside the Bee Hive publichouse​” you are self adjusting the given times so what seems to fit better for your own preconceptions is left, then you arent interested in investigation, you are interested in validating your own beliefs?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X