An even closer look at Black Bag Man

[Herlock Sholmes]

You have come far pilgrim. A definitive post on the realities of timelines. I entirely agree....hang on...can someone please check the temperature in the infernal realms of perdition.

[GBinOz]

This is from an interview with Mrs Mortimer by the Evening news 1 Oct:
A man touched her face and said it was quite warm.

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.

I don't believe that it can be disputed that the man referred to as touching Stride's face was Spooner. The young man and his sweetheart told Mortimer they were standing on what could only be the corner of Berner and Fairclough, where Brown observed a couple standing. It seems to me that the couple had, as had Mortimer, gone to the yard after the alarm had been raised and Mortimer was talking to them in that situation. Were that the case, the young man was unlikely to have been Spooner, whom Mortimer could probably have identified, and the young woman could not have been Stride purely on the fact that the young woman was talking to Mortimer and Stride was dead.

[Tom_Wescott]

In the first paragraph you suggest a possible connection between Schwartz and the club. In the second, a hypothetically lying Schwartz gets incredibly lucky that the street is empty at that time. Could Eagle have told Wess the street was empty just before 12:45? Could Lave have confirmed this? Could Eagle have told Wess he believed he had passed the victim on the street, talking to a man, and thus placing an incident a few minutes after his entry to the club was relatively risk free?

In #479, we can see the club paywalling itself to make money by giving journalists "explanations about the murder". Did the Socialist Club's profiteering get out of hand, when Wess's story telling landed him in a hole of own making? What are the chances that Israel Schwartz would have gone to the police about what he saw? Lucky Wess.

You also claim that Brown's dark overcoat man is another remarkable coincidence. This is who you're talking about ...

Second man age 35 ht. 5 ft 11in. comp. fresh, hair light brown, moustache brown, dress dark overcoat, old black hard felt hat wide brim, had a clay pipe in his hand.

Pipeman ran off.

You're misunderstanding. My point is that because the police, at least initially, took Schwartz seriously, and because the contemporary sources do not give us a factual base for discounting Schwartz, we're rather forced to take his evidence on board. I don't believe much in coincidence, so I don't see Brown's man as any sort of coincidence. He is the last man seen with Stride before she's found dead. Full stop. Bern suggests he's BS Man, I've suggested he's Pipeman. He may be a third man, but that's less likely. Frustratingly, if Schwartz was a liar, then BS Man and Pipeman are mere figments. But it's not possible to conclude that Schwartz was a liar, so we have to conclude based on the available evidence that what he described happened just before Brown came on the scene.

Schwartz ran off. And kept running. Pipeman stopped at some point. Where did he go once he stopped?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

This is from an interview with Mrs Mortimer by the Evening news 1 Oct:
A man touched her face and said it was quite warm.

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.

I don't believe that it can be disputed that the man referred to as touching Stride's face was Spooner. The young man and his sweetheart told Mortimer they were standing on what could only be the corner of Berner and Fairclough, where Brown observed a couple standing. It seems to me that the couple had, as had Mortimer, gone to the yard after the alarm had been raised and Mortimer was talking to them in that situation. Were that the case, the young man was unlikely to have been Spooner, whom Mortimer could probably have identified, and the young woman could not have been Stride purely on the fact that the young woman was talking to Mortimer and Stride was dead.

You're way, way behind in the discussion of Mortimer's couple.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Abby Normal]

Coroner: If there were singing and dancing going on would you have been likely to have heard the cry of a woman in great distress-a cry of murder, for instance-from the yard?
Eagle: Oh, we should certainly have heard such a cry.

Whereas you conveniently left out the evidence. Also, the rain had stopped.

no i didnt. the (not very loud) cries were from the street, and wetness from recent rain would still muffle sounds.

[Herlock Sholmes]

“Not very loudly” tends to mean “not very loudly.” Why some people find this problematic I’ll never know? “Of low volume,” “not piercing,” “lacking in loud noise.” It’s why no one heard the incident.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

You're misunderstanding. My point is that because the police, at least initially, took Schwartz seriously, and because the contemporary sources do not give us a factual base for discounting Schwartz, we're rather forced to take his evidence on board. I don't believe much in coincidence, so I don't see Brown's man as any sort of coincidence. He is the last man seen with Stride before she's found dead. Full stop. Bern suggests he's BS Man, I've suggested he's Pipeman. He may be a third man, but that's less likely. Frustratingly, if Schwartz was a liar, then BS Man and Pipeman are mere figments. But it's not possible to conclude that Schwartz was a liar, so we have to conclude based on the available evidence that what he described happened just before Brown came on the scene.

So, compared to my cleaning up a mess of the club's own making theory - which might also explain modern researchers' difficulty in identifying the individual named Israel Schwartz - you're happy with the incident being real, and even extending it to link Pipeman with Overcoat Man. I'm fine with that and think you're within the bounds of possibility, which is why I've posted on my own interpretation of the event. Where I think you could do better, is in regard to what Wess actually knew. He claims to have been told the name of the pursuer, and hints that onlookers were under the impression the pursued man was the murderer. Schwartz, that is. Describing Wess's account as garbled is not enough, in my opinion. At the very least, the Echo report suggests that Schwartz was more involved in the incident than he claimed. Less specifically, those who take Schwartz at his word might be wise to remember that there are two or more sides to every story, and in this case, we have only heard one.

Schwartz ran off. And kept running. Pipeman stopped at some point. Where did he go once he stopped?

In other words, he circled back, retrieved Stride from the gateway, chatted to her around the corner for a while, and then coaxed her to go back to the yard where he kills her. Have I got that right?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

You're way, way behind in the discussion of Mortimer's couple.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

What got me with Mortimer's couple, is both the distance - "20 yards" - and the coincidence of the young woman's timing - "about twenty minutes" - with that of James Brown. However, after taking other things into account, my perception has flipped - the man is looking in a different direction...



The 20 yards is Fanny's mistake - the pub around the corner the young woman referred to, was the Beehive, not the Nelson. The about 20 minutes is Spooner's about 25. The woman is the subject of the report because she spoke to Mortimer while Edward was attending to matters in the yard. The woman is neither named nor quoted because she did not speak to the press - only to Fanny, who gave her story to the press, second-hand. Mortimer's couple was Spooner and his girlfriend. The board school couple was Stride and Overcoat Man - as Brown supposed. There was no other couple, other than the couple who said their goodnights at 12:30, at the top of Berner St. Had the board school couple been yet another pair, they would have become crucial to the police investigation, but the police make no reference to them as separate identities, nor were they called to the inquest. They didn't exist.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

“Not very loudly” tends to mean “not very loudly.” Why some people find this problematic I’ll never know? “Of low volume,” “not piercing,” “lacking in loud noise.” It’s why no one heard the incident.

Whatever loudness you attribute to the screams, they were still screams. Not accepting this amounts to changing the evidence. Abberline accepted Schwartz in stating the woman screamed three times, so if you believe Schwartz because the police believed him, you have to accept the evidence as it is.

[Tom_Wescott]

So, compared to my cleaning up a mess of the club's own making theory - which might also explain modern researchers' difficulty in identifying the individual named Israel Schwartz - you're happy with the incident being real, and even extending it to link Pipeman with Overcoat Man. I'm fine with that and think you're within the bounds of possibility, which is why I've posted on my own interpretation of the event. Where I think you could do better, is in regard to what Wess actually knew. He claims to have been told the name of the pursuer, and hints that onlookers were under the impression the pursued man was the murderer. Schwartz, that is. Describing Wess's account as garbled is not enough, in my opinion. At the very least, the Echo report suggests that Schwartz was more involved in the incident than he claimed. Less specifically, those who take Schwartz at his word might be wise to remember that there are two or more sides to every story, and in this case, we have only heard one.

I'm possibly the only writer who's ever published anything pursuing the thought that Schwartz was the actual killer. But no, there's really no supporting that at all. I still hold it's possible his entire story was fabricated. I've looked to prove that's the case but could not. What evidence there is does not refute his story and actually goes some small way to confirm it.

In other words, he circled back, retrieved Stride from the gateway, chatted to her around the corner for a while, and then coaxed her to go back to the yard where he kills her. Have I got that right?

Stride had a deformed leg. That probably played a part in her fall when BS Man pulled her from the yard into the street. But her legs still worked, so I'm willing to wager she didn't just stand in the gateway waiting for a man to tell her in which direction to move. She went towards Fairclough Street where Overcoat Man approached for their rendezvous on the School Board side. I only suggest Overcoat Man was Pipeman because a) they both wore long overcoats and b) were both seen around the same place at around the same time. On a balance of probabilities, it's more likely they were the same man than different men. But I will say this - I feel certain that Brown was a credible witness and that Overcoat Man actually existed. I'm not as certain about Schwartz. I accept his evidence because I cannot discount his evidence. It's as simple as that.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[The Rookie Detective]

Rather than Spooner and his GF being the young couple, is there any chance it may have been Eagle and his GF?

The term "sweetheart" is used in the press in reference to Eagle when referring to his GF. Is it possible that Eagle and his GF were standing around for longer than he cliamed and that the couple seen was Eagle and the woman he then took home.

If the couple were around the previous hour and had long gone by the time of the murder, and Mortimer was mistaken, then there's a chance that the man and his sweetheart were actually Eagle and his GF.

In other words; the woman who spoke to Mortimer and said she and her man had been 20 yards away, may have been Eagle's GF who became alerted to the murder.

If that's the case; did Eagle's GF effectively give him an alibi that was never used or picked up on at the time, and the discussion with Mortimer acted as some sort of leverage that could be used if necessary?


What really makes things interesting and rather complicated, is that it was stated that the woman who was with her sweetheart on the corner, closely resembled the victim in terms of her attire and general appearance.

If that is indeed true, then it adds into the mix the possibility that nobody saw Stride at all, and the woman seen was not Stride.

It's random, but there seems to be no concrete proof that any of the witnesses actually saw the victim, and that there was another woman present who just happened to resemble the victim.

That may be incorrect of course, but I am sure I have seen a source that states the victim closely resembled the woman who was with her BF and who was around after the murder to talk to Mortimer.

If that's the case, could the murder of Stride have not been a Ripper killing and possibly a case of mistaken identity?

Random, but thought I'd ask.

[Doctored Whatsit]

Whatever loudness you attribute to the screams, they were still screams. Not accepting this amounts to changing the evidence. Abberline accepted Schwartz in stating the woman screamed three times, so if you believe Schwartz because the police believed him, you have to accept the evidence as it is.

I have always regarded the quote "she screamed three times, but not very loudly", as a problematic translation into English by someone whose range of English vocabulary is rather limited. Quite simply, a scream is loud, and you cannot scream even relatively quietly. I am therefore of the opinion that in Schwartz' native tongue he said that Stride made some sort of irritated squeal at being pushed around, and the translator simply didn't have the right words to describe exactly what was said by Schwartz, and so added "not very loudly" to illustrate that it wasn't really a scream at all.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Whatever loudness you attribute to the screams, they were still screams. Not accepting this amounts to changing the evidence. Abberline accepted Schwartz in stating the woman screamed three times, so if you believe Schwartz because the police believed him, you have to accept the evidence as it is.

I do accept the evidence as it it. They were done ‘not very loudly.’ That is the evidence. It’s what Schwartz said. Screamed is just a word. Can you distinguish any kind of difference in ‘screamed’ or ‘yelled’ or ‘squealed’ or ‘howled’ or ‘cried’ or ‘called out?’

[Herlock Sholmes]

I have always regarded the quote "she screamed three times, but not very loudly", as a problematic translation into English by someone whose range of English vocabulary is rather limited. Quite simply, a scream is loud, and you cannot scream even relatively quietly. I am therefore of the opinion that in Schwartz' native tongue he said that Stride made some sort of irritated squeal at being pushed around, and the translator simply didn't have the right words to describe exactly what was said by Schwartz, and so added "not very loudly" to illustrate that it wasn't really a scream at all.

Exactly Doc. And yet a mystery is created from this. It came from a non-English speaker via a interpreter for whom English probably wasn’t his first language.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I'm possibly the only writer who's ever published anything pursuing the thought that Schwartz was the actual killer. But no, there's really no supporting that at all. I still hold it's possible his entire story was fabricated. I've looked to prove that's the case but could not. What evidence there is does not refute his story and actually goes some small way to confirm it.

Dissertations don't count as published works, but Gavin Bromley has had thoughts on Schwartz as killer.

Just to be clear on Wess's comments to the Echo, I think he was hinting that although it had been perceived the pursued man was the killer, he knew that wasn't the case. He seemed to know rather a lot about the incident. I'm sure you know of the misinterpreted police search theory. I doubt very much Wess was dumb enough to get that confused but had Wess used the search as a basis for his man pursued story, he might have thought that alone was worth the price of admission into the club. Without Schwartz's visit to Leman St station, Wess might have been left holding the bag. The metaphorical bag, that is, not Goldstein's shiny black one. Having said that, he did front Goldstein at the same station, after the Star reported doubts about Schwartz's story. Coincidence?

Stride had a deformed leg. That probably played a part in her fall when BS Man pulled her from the yard into the street. But her legs still worked, so I'm willing to wager she didn't just stand in the gateway waiting for a man to tell her in which direction to move. She went towards Fairclough Street where Overcoat Man approached for their rendezvous on the School Board side. I only suggest Overcoat Man was Pipeman because a) they both wore long overcoats and b) were both seen around the same place at around the same time. On a balance of probabilities, it's more likely they were the same man than different men. But I will say this - I feel certain that Brown was a credible witness and that Overcoat Man actually existed. I'm not as certain about Schwartz. I accept his evidence because I cannot discount his evidence. It's as simple as that.

I'm trying to picture this scenario. Brown makes his way to the chandler's shop but does not see Schwartz running with another man trailing him. According to Wess, the pursuit went along Fairclough St. So presumably, Brown just missed seeing this. Where then, is Stride when Brown is between his home and the shop? If she didn't wait long to get moving, she could be on her way to Fairclough St, and even with her deformed leg it won't take her long to get there. I suspect Brown should have seen Stride on his outward leg.