The Identity of Israel Schwartz

[Sam Flynn]

He has the single most significant witness sighting in all of the series....he sees a Canonical tussle with a man minutes from her murder and only feet from it. No other witness sees overt aggression just prior. And he is left off the record.

Indeed - and that's "conspiracy talk" where I come from, Mike. Thanks for spotting - and using - the thread I set up on that very topic

I saw that and went there Sam....just giving you some fuel for a reason for him to change his name to John.

David,...no less mesmerized than Abberline was of Hutchinson? We know why Hutch wasnt called, they didnt know he existed pre-Inquest.

But Schwartz they did know before. And not one iota of his story is offered or entered into evidence...let alone an appearance on the stand.

He has the single most significant witness sighting in all of the series....he sees a Canonical tussle with a man minutes from her murder and only feet from it. No other witness sees overt aggression just prior. And he is left off the record. We dont even have his official translated statement...we have recollections of it.

Best regards

[Sam Flynn]

Nor do we know why Goldstein doesnt show up until Tuesday night to explain himself. If they believe he lied....did they believe that was due to an allegiance of some kind to the Socialist Jews at The International Club? His story was the only one that suggested directly that a Club man was likely not involved.

I've started a thread called "The Berner Street (Con)spiracy", for those who aren't particularly interested in the "Identity of Israel Schwartz"

[DVV]

I think the data that we all know suggests that the Police didnt believe his story

Hi Mike,
and what about Swanson (19 October - of course!):

"I Schwartz is to be believed, and the police report of his statement casts no doubt upon it..."

Amitiés mon cher,
David

Hi again,

Id agree with you Ben, it doesnt explain his delay at all. Nor do we know why Goldstein doesnt show up until Tuesday night to explain himself.

Roy, on that rationale for leaving Israel out of the Inquest....I myself cannot buy that police would not just repress some remarks of his while on the stand if that was the case, and I cannot believe that they would completely omit a statement that suggests the victim was seen being accosted just before being found murdered. Certainly the manner of Liz Strides murder offers the possibility that anyone with a knife could have caused her wound...unlike Annies for example.

I think the data that we all know suggests that the Police didnt believe his story....there is no other reason I can think of to omit it entirely from the statements given at Inquest.

If they believe he lied....did they believe that was due to an allegiance of some kind to the Socialist Jews at The International Club? His story was the only one that suggested directly that a Club man was likely not involved.

No other witness saw Liz with a man that could not have come from the Club.

Best regards

[Ben]

So we only have their lack of support for it within 72 hours to go by. We dont know he intentionally dodged the Inquest.

...Which wouldn't explain why he didn't come forward as soon as he learned of the murder, Mike.

But, y'know, back to Schwartz!

All the best,
Ben

[Roy Corduroy]

Likely Israel Schwartz didn't testify because his account contained the cry of "Lipski" so the authorities kept that out of the inquest. For obvious reasons.

That's not my own idea, it's Phil Sugden's.

Roy

Michael,

To think that it is always mentioned that Hutchinson was discredited, but Schwartz never even had to appear! I smell a rat.

Cheers,

Mike

Hi Mike...nice to chat directly.

Not sure if you're baiting me with the above, but if not, thats just about the way its beginning to look to me. With George its always possible he didnt wait specifically for the Inquest to close that day...in fact Im sure many were surprised, considering the victims state, that it was only one day. So we only have their lack of support for it within 72 hours to go by. We dont know he intentionally dodged the Inquest.

But.. whats the deal here with Israel...his story is recounted by a credible source, its before the Inquest has taken place, and he brings an altercation with the victim just before her death almost on the murder spot, into the frame.

Not even a mention of his story, nor any indication the police supressed it.

Then Wess of all people is the first witness called at the Inquest. Wess? He left the scene 45 minutes or more before the incident occurs. Why not Diemshutz...he finds her. Or PC Smith or James Brown first?

I think Wess not Diemshutz holds the power there for one, and we have good reason to believe Wess translated for Goldstein...as per TW. Maybe also Schwartz.

In some ways this appears to be a case that suggested the Club strongly, but without physical evidence to confirm it...witness evidence holds sway. Wess may have been the words of 2 witnesses who both give club favorable accounts...offsite thug, and nothing seen when walking past the gates at 12:55am. Then he opens the Inquest.

Were the police sort of publicly trying the Club? They couldnt blame them outright without evidence, bad politics....but they could put the case in front of an Inquest Jury and have the leading club authority be the one responsible to speak first. Without the witness whose story is responsible for the introduction of an off site thug meeting the victim...outside the yard. Because they felt he was biased? Or Wess was..who may have translated?

Just putting down thoughts to see if any make sense. And the above doesnt jive with the almost unanimous Police opinion that Liz Stride was killed by the Ripper.....unless they were exploring whether the Ripper came from inside the yard or the club.

All the best Mike.

[The Good Michael]

Michael,

To think that it is always mentioned that Hutchinson was discredited, but Schwartz never even had to appear! I smell a rat.

Cheers,

Mike

Just to explore Israel's conspicuous absence from the Inquest...even as a entered report without the witness having to appear...if they thought he lied, changing his name to "John" later on might not be a bad idea.

This might be one witness that would'nt want attention afterwards.

Best regards all.

[DVV]

I need to mark this day down on my calendar.

The Day of Agreement.
Socialists welcome.
But no trainers.

[Malcolm X]

writing a book/ long essay is very hard indeed, but you do learn far more about the suspect, i wrote Sweeney Todd but it took 2 years...lost everything when my PC crashed...i did have my own website

i would love to do a book on HUTCH, but it means dropping all my other interests, especially PC gaming ...far too time consuming with work as well.

Hi Michael, why aren't you forming a dissertation? In my experience, the process of organizing and researching the information in order to write a cohesive dissertation usually helps the writer understand the subject even better.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hi Tom,

I think its for the same reasons Im not writing or thinking of writing a novel or short story based around the crimes...committing to doing the required research myself. And I also freely admit its very difficult for me to remain impartial with all aspects of the known data in these cases. Plus....Im no writer.

Im more about the free form general discussion of ideas, rather than just pitching my own perspective...yes, I do try and be persuasive in my arguments and have data that can corroborate a fixed opinion, but I see the discussions as the source of the pleasure I get from the study.

I think if I was to dive in head first and become a contributor to data available, it wouldnt be on a topic that has 120 years of investigation behind it without answers. Better men than me have already had a go.

Cheers Tom.

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Michael, why aren't you forming a dissertation? In my experience, the process of organizing and researching the information in order to write a cohesive dissertation usually helps the writer understand the subject even better.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

But that doesn't make him a Revolutionary nor in a conspiracy to protect one. Michael, I tried to clarify the situation for you. Now you want to melt the butter.

Roy

No It doesnt Roy, I agree. Im not still suggesting he may have observed any Jewish Holiday at the club....Im taking the fact we dont know he was associated with the Club and his known Judaism to wonder if there are religious reasons for his being where he says he was at 12:45am. For example...where is the nearest temple from 40 Berner and would he pass that location on Berner Street as a ressonable route home from there? His new home. Were there late night prayer meetings nearby due to the holiday?

If any of that pans out...you will ask why would he lie for the Club? Good question. My idea is that he may have had friends in there...maybe some who went to a meeting that night intended to attract new Socialists...not rabble rouse the existing ones. Maybe he even did,...and didnt want a considered conversion made public.

Im thinking aloud of course here, Im not forming a dissertation or anything...my goal is to have input that to me addresses a nagging feeling that Schwartz's story may be tainted, that there may be logical reasons for that, and the lack of any evidence that his story was considered as trustworthy,..based on the total absence of the story at the Inquest.

Best regards.