Packer and Schwartz

[John G]

Hi John

Schwartz`s address would have been given on his statement to the Police.

Hi Jon,

Thanks for this. Very informative.

[Observer]

It may also behelpful if you were to familiarize yourself with earlier posts in this thread. There are numerous logical flaws to Scwartz's evidence, not least the cachous problem.

Does this include the logical flaw, that because Schwartz, when pursued, ran past the street in which he lived, and did not run directly home he must surely have been telling lies? That's also one or yours I believe.

[Observer]

No, wrong again! I suggested no such thing, you're obviously starting to confuse me with someone else!

Yes you did. And given the time I will find said comment.

[John G]

Does this include the logical flaw, that because Schwartz, when pursued, ran past the street in which he lived, and did not run directly home he must surely have been telling lies? That's also one or yours I believe.

No wrong again, I suggested no such thing! Frankly this is all starting to get a little tiresome. It appears that you read, but you don't absorb.

[Observer]

You have a very short memory span, and tiresome or not, you stated both of the examples I highlighted. It also appears that you post, and then forget what you posted.

[Observer]

You didn't give any reasons!

There was no need, it was a fairy story, full stop. An utterly pointless exercise.

[curious4]

Dear John

I try to keep discussions on these boards as polite as I can. Inferring that I am an idiot because I believe a witness and you don't almost smacks of bullying in my opinion. I am too far advanced in years to worry about what anyone says of me, but we all benefit from an amicable discussion.

Best wishes
C4

[Observer]

Hi C4.

Oh how I wish I had the patience you obviously have in abundance. What irked me was this. it appears John G is in despair of we who believe Schwartz to have been telling the truth. The same John G, who in my opinion, with regard to the Whitechapel murder series on the whole talks a considerable amount of BS.

Regards

Observer

[curious4]

Hi C4.

Oh how I wish I had the patience you obviously have in abundance. What irked me was this. it appears John G is in despair of we who believe Schwartz to have been telling the truth. The same John G, who in my opinion, with regard to the Whitechapel murder series on the whole talks a considerable amount of BS.

Regards

Observer

Thanks Observer. As I said before, it's a strange thing that so much time is spent trying to discredit credible witnesses such as Schwarz and Hutchinson (who is accused of being too good, as was a witness in the case of the murder of the Swedish foreign minister, who was proved right) trying to prove dodgy witnesses, such as Maxwell, correct. Almost as big a mystery as the murders lol

Best wishes
C 4

[Observer]

Yes indeed. Where would we be without the various conflicting input of the witnesses with regard to this case though? We'd all be the very best of freinds ! And we can't have that can we.

Regards

Observer

[Jeff Leahy]

In your opinion.

What if he hopped home and opened the parcel? He might have lived close enough to do this, Greenfield street fore instance

And return down Berner street

After all Schwartz POV was really only of his back sense the description of shoulders

Yours Jeff

[S.Brett]

Hello Karsten. Thanks for the kind words.

Delighted to hear that. My theory is that:

1. Mac, just after obtaining his post, was investigating the recent ripper killings.

2. He got the tale from the HO or FO.

3. It involved two Jews--one Polish. (Wirtkofsky)

4. Lowenheim said he could identify Wirtkofsky.

5. They had met at a "Home."

6. Wirtkofsky (as we know) claimed he hated prostitutes and would kill all of them.

7. Somehow, the name became mixed with Kosminski.

8. Mac brought him forward in his memorandum, only to dismiss.

9. Anderson ran with it. Likewise, Swanson.

I have been seeking the resolution of the story. So far, no success. Perhaps there is some record of what happened to Wirtkofsky at the HO or FO?

Good luck searching.

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

Sorry for the late reply. It has been a hard weekend.

I do not know why but I think that the Wirtkofsky/Lowenheim story might be important for the Ripper case. I have realised your theory.

6. Wirtkofsky (as we know) claimed he hated prostitutes and would kill all of them.

Detective Cox (City Police) stated:

"The murderer was a misogynist, who at some time or another had been wronged by a woman. And the fact that his victims were of the lowest class proves, I think, that he was not, as has been stated, an educated man who had suddenly gone mad. He belonged to their own class."

Macnaghten:

"He had a great hatred of women, specially of the prostitute class, & had strong homicidal tendencies."

"My" Jack the Ripper is Kosminski/Aaron Kozminski and I guess that Cox (and his colleague Sagar) spoke about "Kosminski" as it also Anderson, Swanson and Macnaghten did. Well, this is my belief. But I would like to know whether Wirtkofsky had really something to do with this case.

Cox also stated:

"The man we suspected was about five feet six inches in height, with short, black, curly hair, and he had a habit of taking late walks abroad. He occupied several shops in the East End, but from time to time he became insane, and was forced to spend a portion of his time in an asylum in Surrey."

(Again) it reminds me of Macnaghten

(Macnaughten? via) Sims:

"who was the sole occupant of certain premises in Whitechapel after night-fall"

Maybe, there were suspects similar to Kosminski. I am thinking of David Cohen and Wirtkofsky.

Schwartz:

"He thus describes the first man, who threw the woman down:- age, about 30; ht, 5 ft 5 in; comp., fair; hair, dark; small brown moustache, full face, broad shouldered; dress, dark jacket and trousers, black cap with peak, and nothing in his hands."

"He described the man with the woman as about 30 years of age, rather stoutly built, and wearing a brown moustache. He was dressed respectably in dark clothes and felt hat."

Detective Cox:

"The man we suspected was about five feet six inches in height, with short, black, curly hair"

Is it possible that Schwartz´s BS Man and Cox´s Man were one and the same person?

I am therefore somewhat cautious because Schwartz stated "Full face" and I do not expect a Ripper with a full face. The face of "my Ripper" is haggard.

Evening News Portsmouth, 2 October 1888:

"Detective Inspector Reid who has charge of the case, had a great deal of information volunteered to him by women of the class to which the victim belonged regarding men whom they allege to have threatened them with death. Each informant is convinced that the man she saw was the unknown who is now so keenly searched for, but as the description varies in each case it is quite plain that they cannot refer to the same person. According to one he is a thick set and close shaven man, with a short coat and dark trousers; another states that he is a pretty tall man, with short dark whiskers; sometimes he wears a dark ulster, and at others a checked one; now he is well dressed, and again shabby genteel; and altogether the description given are so confusing that they afford no guide to any officer. It would seem that in Whitechapel, Stepney, and Spitalfields there are several petty ruffians who level blackmail upon these women under threats of mutilation, and, after parting with any sum they may possess, the wretched females tell either a constable or some of their neighbours that they have had a narrow escape from the murderer, and give a description of him."

Warren, 24 October 1888:

"I have to transmit, for the information of the Secretary of State, copies of a minute by Mr. Anderson on the subject, and of Reports by Chief Inspector Swanson, which I directed to be prepared on my return from abroad early in September.
Very numerous and searching enquiries have been made in all directions, and with regard to all kinds of suggestions which have been made; these have had no tangible result so far as regards the Whitechapel Murders, but information has been obtained which will no doubt be useful in future in detecting cases of crime."

Lynn,

"there are several petty ruffians who level blackmail upon these women under threats of mutilation" and "useful in future in detecting cases of crime"

Is it possible that "Blackmail" is one of these cases of crime? Is it possible that one of these "petty ruffians" is Schwartz´ BS Man?

These "ruffian" are to be equated with the "Leather Aprons". If my memory serves me well you are an expert for Leather Apron.

Do you know something about Bootlaster (Morris Lubnowski practised this profession/ 1891) who were named "Snob"? If I remember correctly one of the Leather Apron was named "The Mad Snob". Is it right?

http://www.familytreeservice.co.uk/census-occupations-b-Boot-Laster.html

Kind regards,

Karsten.

[curious4]

Yes indeed. Where would we be without the various conflicting input of the witnesses with regard to this case though? We'd all be the very best of freinds ! And we can't have that can we.

Regards

Observer

Most definitely not! :-D

[John G]

Dear John

I try to keep discussions on these boards as polite as I can. Inferring that I am an idiot because I believe a witness and you don't almost smacks of bullying in my opinion. I am too far advanced in years to worry about what anyone says of me, but we all benefit from an amicable discussion.

Best wishes
C4

Hello C4,

I certainly don't think you're an idiot and I unreservedly apologize if I've given that impression. I acknowledge that your theory may make sense from a logical perspective, however, I was trying to point out that it wasn't what Schwartz says he observed. Of course, you are perfectly entitled to your opinions and I have a great deal of respect for you as a poster as your ideas are clearly always well thought out. You have always been polite in your responses to me and to others, which is clearly a credit to you.

Once again, I apologize if I've given offence as that was honestly not my intention.

[John G]

Hi C4.

Oh how I wish I had the patience you obviously have in abundance. What irked me was this. it appears John G is in despair of we who believe Schwartz to have been telling the truth. The same John G, who in my opinion, with regard to the Whitechapel murder series on the whole talks a considerable amount of BS.

Regards

Observer

There is absolutely no need to resort to personal attacks. I am well aware what you mean by "BS". Frankly this post is outrageous and I shall have no hesitation in reporting any further comments of this kind.