Does The Star Article Show That Schwartz Was Discredited?

[Simon Wood]

Hi CD,

Of which possibly possible and reasonably probable possibilities are you thinking?

Regards,

Simon

[c.d.]

Hi CD,

Of which possibly possible and reasonably probable possibilities are you thinking?

Regards,

Simon

Hello Simon,

I can think of a few -- sickness on Schwartz's part, inability to obtain a translator, possibly a deal cut with Schwartz when he initially gave his story to the police that he wouldn't have to appear at the inquest. Possibly, as Tom suggests, the police held his testimony back for some reason. Or it simply could be because given the apparent problem in getting his story straight in the first place (since it appears he was never completely clear on what was going on exacerbated by the language hurdle) that the police felt it would just confuse the jurors.

Finally, since no one was actually on trial, the jurors were going to return a verdict of the old person or persons unknown with or without Schwartz's testimony.

c.d.

[Wickerman]

"It is because of this that I wonder if his remarks on Schwartz's "reliable statement" was not the actual last word."

I think (for what little it's worth) that Abberline's interrogation left no reason to doubt Schwartz. It was only AFTER the investigation was pursued that suspicions arose.

I believe Swanson was aware of the "Leman position" and it was this that precipitated his "If his statement is to be believed . . .".

I do have to wonder if we have been pursuing a red herring with Swanson's comment. I think everyone assumes Swanson is referring to Schwartz's honesty, meaning, he appears to be telling the truth.

The context in which this "If Schwartz is to be believed..." is used is in a paragraph concerning the physical description of the man he saw. It is the second paragraph of three successive paragraphs, the first paragraph begins with, "The description of the man seen by the P.C.....", and the third and last paragraph ends with, "...to that given by Schwartz than to that given by the P.C."
The line we are concerned with is buried right in the middle, so context may be the clue.

I think it is possible that the line, "If Schwartz is to be believed...", may have only meant, "If the description offered by Schwartz is accurate...".
So nothing pertaining to 'honesty' per-se.
The line continues to discuss the possibility different men are being described by both Schwartz & the P.C.

But one of the most telling factors--at least in my mind--is that the club, in their very next "Arbeter Fraint," never even hinted at Schwartz's story. An excellent strategy GIVEN they were the ones who concocted it and who now were timid about being involved.

You're on your own with that one Lynn.

[Wickerman]

But with regard to Phillips, Swanson explicitly sets out the conflicts with the other evidence. That's what I think he would have done if the police had had reason to doubt Schwartz's veracity.

To some degree Swanson follows that procedure in this instance, he does make comparisons between the description given by PC Smith, and that offered by Schwartz.
So, continuing on from what I wrote to Lynn, Swanson essentially writes:

"If the description given by Schwartz is accurate, and there is nothing in his statement to contest it, then it follows that Schwartz and PC Smith are describing different men....". (Paraphrase)

If this is all that Swanson was meaning then there is no implied approval of his overall statement in that line, however, I can't imagine Swanson including the details of Schwartz's statement (which he does, beginning with the time, date, name & address of witness, etc.) in his report to the Home Office if the police had any doubts about it.

[Simon Wood]

Hi CD,

Wow!

The excuses which are invented to maintain the status quo never cease to amaze.

Regards,

Simon

[Hunter]

If this is all that Swanson was meaning then there is no implied approval of his overall statement in that line, however, I can't imagine Swanson including the details of Schwartz's statement (which he does, beginning with the time, date, name & address of witness, etc.) in his report to the Home Office if the police had any doubts about it.

Bingo!
Someone said something rational and in keeping with the information at hand.

Amazing in this place!

[lynn cates]

poorly done

Hello CD. Thanks.

Hand it to them? No. He/they made a rum job of it. Had they planned a good story for Israel, he would have BSM going up the passage with Liz, followed by a scream and sound of scuffle. I think it was hastily--and poorly!--concocted.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Rime of the Ancient Ripperologist

Hello Jon. Thanks.

Of course, that is altogether possible. But the line should have been, "If Schwartz's description is correct." Also, going with context, as in your wise dictum, IF that were Swanson's meaning, perhaps he would have added, "I see no reason to believe otherwise"? If Abberline were focused on Israel and his testimony, surely the overall purpose would be to see if deception were being practised?

"You're on your own with that one Lynn."

Not a rare occurrence. As Coleridge put it, "Ah! wedding guest, this soul hath been alone on a wide, wide sea. So lonely 'twas that God, himself, scarce seem-ed' there to be." (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

some

Hello Jon, Cris.

"I can't imagine Swanson including the details of Schwartz's statement (which he does, beginning with the time, date, name & address of witness, etc.) in his report to the Home Office if the police had any doubts about it."

No doubt, the upper echelon chaps, and perhaps HO chaps, were convinced. That much cannot be doubted.

May not be helpful to think of "police" monolithically?

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Hello Jon, Cris.

"I can't imagine Swanson including the details of Schwartz's statement (which he does, beginning with the time, date, name & address of witness, etc.) in his report to the Home Office if the police had any doubts about it."

No doubt, the upper echelon chaps, and perhaps HO chaps, were convinced. That much cannot be doubted.

May not be helpful to think of "police" monolithically?

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn.
Surely, the opinions of these "upper echelon types" are derived from the reports passed up the line from Swanson, Abberline & Co.

I suspect you allude to the suggested doubts by the Leman-street police as published in the press? Whether this was an accurate reflection or not, any doubts held at that level are not likely to impact the opinions of the Coroner, if Scotland Yard were of a different opinion.

Swanson doesn't strike me as the type to dabble in speculation, he will report what the witness said and what the investigation unearthed. Though as I mentioned earlier, his ability to form coherent sentences where contention exists leaves a little to be desired.

[Batman]

Surely the statement which is "not wholly accepted" is that of the man in custody who has not been charged "but is held for inquiries to be made". Had he admitted guilt he would have been charged. Clearly he did not do so and gave an account claiming his innocence. Had this been verified he would have been immediately released - yet he wasn't. I contend that it was his statement which was "not wholly accepted" and the investigation of which necessitated his continued detention.

Have you read the thread on Pipeman being cleared?

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=8520

Paul Begg suggests with reason an explanation for the above in his book 'The Facts'. It was the first time I read about the possibility of Pipeman being found by the police and questioned. This explains some of the odd statements in the papers about this incident and its 'witnesses'.

[Chris]

I realise conspiracy theories can be fun, but I think people are cheating if they don't say who's meant to be "in" and who's meant to be "out". Specifically, if Schwartz was prevented from giving evidence at the inquest because his appearance would give the lie to a misrepresentation about the murders, who knew that? Was Swanson "in" or "out"? What about his superiors?

[Batman]

Schwartz non-appearance absolutely can't be because his testimony was invalid as the investigation notes make it abundantly clear they believed Schwartz after the inquest and for quite some time to come.

It is generally accepted that Schwartz is Swanson's witness because he is a Met witness while Lawende is the city police witness.

[Wickerman]

Hi All,

If Israel Schwartz's statement had been amenable to the police he would have appeared at the inquest.

But had he appeared at the inquest the 1.00 am mutilandum interruptus story upon which the idea of a double-event so heavily depended would have been blown out of the water.

Ergo! Exit Schwartz.

Regards,

Simon

Schwartz's story was apparently still acceptable well into mid October, though Swanson himself wrote that he was not convinced the man seen by Schwartz had to be the murderer.

As he points out, there was still time for Stride to approach, or be approached by, another man.
Diemschitz could still be the interrupting agent, or rather the approach of his horse and cart down Berner St.

[lynn cates]

disconnect

Hello Jon. Thanks.

"I suspect you allude to the suggested doubts by the Leman-street police as published in the press?"

Yup.

"Whether this was an accurate reflection or not, any doubts held at that level are not likely to impact the opinions of the Coroner, if Scotland Yard were of a different opinion."

Entirely agree. And that is my main point with Swanson. He was aware of their doubts but preferred his own opinion.

I need not point out the "disconnect" between those of us who work in the trenches, as it were, and those who grace carpeted offices. (To be fair, DSS was usually one of the former.)

Cheers.
LC