Packer and Schwartz

[harry]

Spooner and his female companion were at the corner of Christian St.The couple that Brown saw were by the board school,a few yards from Berner Street.It is possible that the couple Mortimer saw were the same couple that Brown saw,who moved after Mortimer went indoors.Mortimer could not possibly have seen Spooner and companion, who according to Spooner, were at the corner of Christian St from about 12.30 until being told a murder had been commited in Berner St.W hether Brown saw Spooner and companion is not known,but being a resident of the street I think Brown would have known the location of both the Board School and Christian St well enough to not having mixed them up.

[lynn cates]

magnificent

Hello Jeff. I must say the sketch at #154 is magnificent.

Now, if one can visualise where and how Liz's body were eventually found, and compare to this sketch, I think one would be forced to abandon the BSM story.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

ice

Hello John.

"I once fell backwards after slipping on the ice-I threw out by arms and spread my fingers, and as a consequence I ended up with a dislocated shoulder."

Hmm, I once fell forward when slipping on the ice. My hands went out in front of me. And, as I was working as a dustman at the time, my hand was mangled in the mechanism as it worked.

So much for "resolving" what to do with hands whilst falling.

Cheers.
LC

[S.Brett]

Firstly I'm now in agreement with Karsten that Schwartz wasn't the Seaside home witness..

Good Morning Jeff!

Do not forget:

"Upon being taken to the Mortuary Schwartz identified the body as that of the woman he had seen." Swanson

When Stride...down on the footway... Schwartz had a good view of Stride...

Schwartz thought that both men, BS Man and Pipeman" were older than himself. He was a young man and "the Berner Street mystery" a difficult situation for him. BS Man and Pipeman were more important for him (self- protection?) than Stride. But Schwartz proved he had courage and went to the police the next day.

But what I would like to say is:

If we assume that the couple of Packer, Marshall and PC Smith is always Stride and the Ripper it makes no sense to think that Stride was suddenly alone. Why? It makes more sense to guess that Stride and the Ripper went into the yard after PC Smith was gone. Waiting at the entrance of the yard also makes sense... until the air is pure...

In this scenario, the Ripper was next to stride when BS Man and Schwartz entered the Berner Street via Commercial Road. In this case Schwartz did not see the Ripper he saw only the woman. With high probability Pipeman also saw only the woman. It is possible that BS Man thought in the darkness of the yard another person is waiting but could not see the man.

If BS Man and Pipeman were found by the police, they knew that no one saw the killer.

Macnaghten stated:

“ A woman, Elizabeth Stride, was found in Bemers Street, with her throat cut, but no attempt at mutilation. In this case there can be little doubt but that the murderer was disturbed at his demoniacal work by some Jews who at that hour drove up to an anarchist club in the street.”

We know that Macnaghten (no one ever saw the Whitechapel murderer) is not entirely correct and maybe he meant Lawende, Levy and Harris in Duke Street later the same night but I think it is quite possible he really meant BS Man, Schwartz and Pipeman (+ Diemschütz and his cart).

Yours Karsten.

[S.Brett]

If the man with the woollen scarf of a violet colour and the haggard face found by a constable later in day on 1. October not far from Mitre Square is Kosminski and to him belonged the bloody shirts in Batty Street (Mrs. Kuer) which the police could assign him later in October 1888 then this was a seriously problem for Kosminski. If Matthew Packer recognized Kosminski ,end of October 1888, as the man who bought grapes at the shop of him accompanied by Stride and a member of the Kosminski family suspected Aaron of being the Ripper then it got worse for him than before. Maybe, this family member stated: Years ago he lived next to the Dutfields Yard (Murder in Dutfields Yard! At this moment a member of the family thought: Please, not Aaron). The police knew for sure that the brother Woolf lives in Providence Street a few steps away from the Stride crime scene. The police had to accept that he was the man in Dutfields Yard who was not seen by BS Man, Schwartz and Pipeman. But he was there... The newspaper parcel, described by PC Smith, maybe, it was a paper bag with grapes...

If all this was so, then Schwartz and Lawende were not at the Seaside Home. The police must have used a "third" witness. Not necessarily from the night of the Double Event. I think he was from the Kelly murder.

If all this is right I understand why Kosminski was the "Prime Suspect"...

[John G]

Hello Rocky.

"my instinct is to clench and hold on to the candy without even thinking"

Of course, she was "clenching" it between thumb and forefinger.

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

Excellent point. And, of course, as has been discussed before, it suggests that she had just taken out the cachous, using thumb and forefinger, when she was attacked. Not something that she was likely to do when not fairly relaxed, or whilst attempting to fend off an assault from BS man. Unless she intended to use the cachous as a defensive weapon, of course!

Nor is it remotely likely that she would continue to successfully clench the cachous, held somewhat precariously between thumb and forefinger, during the assault described by Schwartz, I.e. whilst he attempted to pull her into the street (unless the cachous were at this point the subject of a tug of war contest!), spun around, and, finally, thrown onto the footway.

Anyway, this was Dr Phillips opinion:

Foreman of the jury: "Do you think that the woman would have dropped the packet of cachous altogether if she had been thrown to the ground before the injuries were inflicted?

Dr Phillips:" That is an inference, which the jury would be perfectly entitled to draw?"

[Jon Guy]

Nor is it remotely likely that she would continue to successfully clench the cachous, held somewhat precariously between thumb and forefinger, ?"

Clenched, John ?
Do you have a source for this, as I can only find the word lodged- Daily Tel Oct 6th 1888

You will understand that there is a huge difference between the inference of lodged and clenched

[Jeff Leahy]

Hello Jeff,

Thanks for this. Excellent diagram. It also appears to me, from the diagram, that Schwartz didn't get a good look of Stride either, more of a sideways glance.

Yes, and as he crossed the road, he'd see more of BSM back and less of Stride.

He also couldn't see BSM hands, and if Stride turned to go back into the yard pulling or pushing would be hard to distinguish from Schwartz POV, backwards -forwards

(Only just got back from an aborted trip to London so better get some work done before full reply)

Yours Jeff

[John G]

Clenched, John ?
Do you have a source for this, as I can only find the word lodged- Daily Tel Oct 6th 1888

You will understand that there is a huge difference between the inference of lodged and clenched

Hello Jon,

Yes, I believe your correct with lodged. However, if Stride didn't take them out, how did they get there? It seems the only logical explanation. Moreover, doesn't seem to have spilled any-some were spilled but after Dr Blackwell split the packet.

[Jon Guy]

Hello Jon,

Yes, I believe your correct with lodged. However, if Stride didn't take them out, how did they get there? It seems the only logical explanation. Moreover, doesn't seem to have spilled any-some were spilled but after Dr Blackwell split the packet.

Hi John

Well, lodged could infer that the killer placed them there. But, as we know the Doctors observed the hand had relaxed on death, the packet could have moved from the palm of her hand to her fingers as she died.

You can try this at home, John .. wrap some parma violets in toilet tissue and hold in the palm of your hand. Now, dance around your living room (don`t forget to close the curtains first), and then stop and lie down relaxing your grip. What happens ?

[John G]

Hi John

Well, lodged could infer that the killer placed them there. But, as we know the Doctors observed the hand had relaxed on death, the packet could have moved from the palm of her hand to her fingers as she died.

You can try this at home, John .. wrap some parma violets in toilet tissue and hold in the palm of your hand. Now, dance around your living room (don`t forget to close the curtains first), and then stop and lie down relaxing your grip. What happens ?

Hello Jon,

Unfortunately I seem to be temporarily out of stock of parma violets! However, even if this scenario is possible it still doesn't explain how she managed to hold onto the cachous, and without spilling any, during at least two assaults, including the one described by Schwartz.

I doubt that they were placed there by the killer-it would certainly be highly unusual, if not unprecedented, ritualistic behaviour. And, of course, it would probably rule out JtR, as he didn't demonstrate this ritual at any other crime scene.

But that's the main problem with Schwartz's evidence for me: in order for it to make even the remote sense it is necessary to resort to extreme, and remote, possibilities.

[John G]

Yes, and as he crossed the road, he'd see more of BSM back and less of Stride.

He also couldn't see BSM hands, and if Stride turned to go back into the yard pulling or pushing would be hard to distinguish from Schwartz POV, backwards -forwards

(Only just got back from an aborted trip to London so better get some work done before full reply)

Yours Jeff

Hi Jeff,

Thanks for the informative reply. It certainly suggests to me that Schwartz could easily have misidentified Stride.

[Jon Guy]

Unfortunately I seem to be temporarily out of stock of parma violets! However, even if this scenario is possible it still doesn't explain how she managed to hold onto the cachous, and without spilling any, during at least two assaults, including the one described by Schwartz. .

Two assaults, John ? When did the second one happen ?
But, joking aside, she only needs to be holding onto them during one assault, the assault when she was killed.

When you do get hold of some parma violets, hold them tightly in your hand, and whilst dancing around (let me know what music you use -I`d be interested) throw some air punches, and finally finish with a forward roll.
Now, how many parma violets did you spill ?

But seriously, they did find cachous in the gutter, and also scattered over the yard. How did you get to the conclusion that none were spilled ?

I doubt that they were placed there by the killer-it would certainly be highly unusual, if not unprecedented, ritualistic behaviour. And, of course, it would probably rule out JtR, as he didn't demonstrate this ritual at any other crime scene..

What about the items at Chapman`s feet ?
Or Eddowes colon, laid out by her side
Or the body parts laid out around the corpses

But I agree it`s very doubtful that the cachous were placed in her dead hand.

[John G]

Two assaults, John ? When did the second one happen ?
But, joking aside, she only needs to be holding onto them during one assault, the assault when she was killed.

When you do get hold of some parma violets, hold them tightly in your hand, and whilst dancing around (let me know what music you use -I`d be interested) throw some air punches, and finally finish with a forward roll.
Now, how many parma violets did you spill ?

But seriously, they did find cachous in the gutter, and also scattered over the yard. How did you get to the conclusion that none were spilled ?



What about the items at Chapman`s feet ?
Or Eddowes colon, laid out by her side
Or the body parts laid out around the corpses

But I agree it`s very doubtful that the cachous were placed in her dead hand.

Hi Jon,

Yes, but I doubt she was be relaxed enough to suddenly take out the cachous after being pulled into the street, spun around, and thrown to the ground! I think her first thought would be how to get away or call for help. In fact, isn't that what happened? She "screamed three times" Okay, I know apparently "not very loudly", but as Jeff indicated, that's an oxymoron-a bit like Schwartz, in fact! And why would she be holding them tightly in her hand? I'm assuming they weren't special cachous!

As for the spilled cachous, that's explained by Dr Blackwell, 'It is I who split them on removing them from the hand."

Of course, we haven't even started discussing some of the many other anomalies to Schwartz's evidence, I.e. no damage to dress, no sign of bruising, no sign of grazing, flower still intact...

[packers stem]

Hello Jon,

Unfortunately I seem to be temporarily out of stock of parma violets! However, even if this scenario is possible it still doesn't explain how she managed to hold onto the cachous, and without spilling any, during at least two assaults, including the one described by Schwartz.

I doubt that they were placed there by the killer-it would certainly be highly unusual, if not unprecedented, ritualistic behaviour. And, of course, it would probably rule out JtR, as he didn't demonstrate this ritual at any other crime scene.

But that's the main problem with Schwartz's evidence for me: in order for it to make even the remote sense it is necessary to resort to extreme, and remote, possibilities.

Hi John
Displayed ritualistic behaviour at every murder bar nichols as far as we know... How can it with Stride rule out JtR?