Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Schwartz v. Lawende

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Jeff Leahy View Post
    Yep I totally agree. I'm simply saying that the pressure is on the reporter to make his story more exciting...thats not to say he made it up but a good journalist, and I've worked with a few, know how to ask the right questions to get what they want...this can be miss leading in itself, especially if the person in question is working through a translator

    Persoanlly i feel the basic story holds true in both versions

    Schwartz saw a woman attacked he cross the road to avoid confrontation, the attacked shouted something, another man appeared, he got scared and ran

    Thats what we have. He estimates 12.45 which is not contradicted by the other witnesses directly and he thought the woman was Stride

    As I've said a number of times now over the last year I've come to the opinion he did not get a good look at the killer. I don't think any of the early witnesses did, and this is Supported by what Abberline and MacNaughten say... Macnaughten only speak of a City PC having a rough idea.

    So if there was a witness he wasn't discovered or didn't come forward until after March 1889 when Cox lost the trail of the man he felt was the killer

    Yours Jeff
    Hi Jeff
    I'm simply saying that the pressure is on the reporter to make his story more exciting...thats not to say he made it up but a good journalist, and I've worked with a few, know how to ask the right questions to get what they want...this can be miss leading in itself, especially if the person in question is working through a translator

    Persoanlly i feel the basic story holds true in both versions

    Schwartz saw a woman attacked he cross the road to avoid confrontation, the attacked shouted something, another man appeared, he got scared and ran

    Thats what we have. He estimates 12.45 which is not contradicted by the other witnesses directly and he thought the woman was Stride

    As I've said a number of times now over the last year I've come to the opinion he did not get a good look at the killer. I don't think any of the early witnesses did, and this is Supported by what Abberline and MacNaughten say... Macnaughten only speak of a City PC having a rough idea.
    Agree with this. the only possibility of a witness getting a good view was hutch if you believe him-I don't.

    So if there was a witness he wasn't discovered or didn't come forward until after March 1889 when Cox lost the trail of the man he felt was the killer
    Don't agree with this.


    We need to stop taking what the upper eschelons of the police, specifically, Anderson, MM and swanson say as gospel. Their recollections are so riddled with errors I don't see how anyone can.

    Cant we simply accept that Andersons ID didn't go in such the positive way he recalled it?

    The kosminski ID happened once he came to the attention of the police-long after the murders ceased.

    Lawende was a "respectable" witness the police trusted and were able to track down (probably because he had a stable working and living condition).

    They were probably being overly optimistic something positive would come about-but it didn't. It was probably along the lines of "i think it might be him but I cant swear to it."

    with the passage of time, wishful thinking, memories fading and a bit of arse covering, it became more positive in Andrsons mind. His faithful servent backed him up.

    MM knew of the ID but wasn't convinced, heard rumors about Druitt about same time, perhaps a little after, and opted for him.


    Its really what happened here isn't it?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
      Hi Jeff


      Agree with this. the only possibility of a witness getting a good view was hutch if you believe him-I don't.



      Don't agree with this.


      We need to stop taking what the upper eschelons of the police, specifically, Anderson, MM and swanson say as gospel. Their recollections are so riddled with errors I don't see how anyone can.

      Cant we simply accept that Andersons ID didn't go in such the positive way he recalled it?

      The kosminski ID happened once he came to the attention of the police-long after the murders ceased.

      Lawende was a "respectable" witness the police trusted and were able to track down (probably because he had a stable working and living condition).

      They were probably being overly optimistic something positive would come about-but it didn't. It was probably along the lines of "i think it might be him but I cant swear to it."

      with the passage of time, wishful thinking, memories fading and a bit of arse covering, it became more positive in Andrsons mind. His faithful servent backed him up.

      MM knew of the ID but wasn't convinced, heard rumors about Druitt about same time, perhaps a little after, and opted for him.


      Its really what happened here isn't it?
      Hi Abby,

      Ah, but what about the possibility that the witness was Joseph Hyam Levy, as some have suggested? Of course, there is a possibility that he'd seen, or knew, more than he claimed, but for some reason he didn't want to get involved in the inquiry.

      The Evening News opined:

      " Mr Joseph Levy is absolutely obstinate and refuses to give us the slightest information. He leaves one to infer that he knows something, but that he is afraid to be called on the inquest. Hence, he assumes a knowing air." (Evening News, 9 October, 1888).

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Jeff Leahy View Post
        Yeah but John , its the same basic story, with some differences that might easily be explained

        Its not like he invented a fourth person or an alien spaceship

        Schwartz is credible, as are most of the witnesses

        You can't expect members of the public to be professionals they are what they are...you or me...and we get stuff wrong

        Yours Jeff
        Hi Jeff,

        Well, I agree that sometimes people get things wrong, however, I am able to confirm that, to the best of my knowledge, I've never run away from somebody lighting a pipe, based upon the false assumption that they were rushing me with a knife!

        In fact, the main difficulty for me is that the very context of the second account differs fundamentally from the first, i.e. as regards the role of Pipeman/Knifeman.

        And, of course, there are numerous other problems with Schwartz as a witness: cachous problem; lack of supporting evidence for the confrontation he describes; PC Smith's revised timeline conflicting with Schwartz's timings...
        Last edited by John G; 02-03-2016, 12:14 PM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Jon Guy View Post
          Hi Michael

          He was going to check his wife had moved to their new accommodation ?

          His address would be on his statement to the police, but this has not survived.
          Yes, that was the story...which in and of itself is implausible because she had 12 hours to move what would amount to a suitcase or 2. His address, at the start of that day, isnt anywhere...not in the press coverage, in reports, nowehere. My guess is that he might have resided in one of the four cottages in the passageway, it would explain why he was headed in the direction ofthe club, and he obviously didnt reside anywhere else on Berner.

          If he resided in the cottages, then it would explain a lot...both the reason for his story, and its absence from a formal review or evidence.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by John G View Post
            Hello Jon,

            But didn't most newspapers report that Packer sold the grapes at 11:00am, well before PC Smith's sighting?
            Hi John.
            The newspaper which provided the first account was the Evening News, 4th Oct. Packer here stated he sold the grapes at 11:45...

            On the 29th ult., about 11.45 p.m., a man and woman came to his shop window, and asked for some fruit.

            The couple then crossed the road opposite Dutfields Yard...

            They then crossed the road and stood on the pavement almost directly opposite to the shop for a long time more than half an hour.

            The couple then came over to the club...

            It was then ten or fifteen minutes past twelve o'clock, Packer, who was about to close his shop, noting the time by the fact that the public houses had been closed

            His press account does not give the time he shut up shop, that is given to Sgt. White...

            I asked him what time he closed his shop on the previous night. He replied Half past twelve (Half past 11)

            "Half past 11" is added as an alternate, likely taken from the summary by A.C.B., though where it came from is unknown. It was not stated in the press and was not part of the original statement.

            We know Stride was not buying grapes at 11:00 because she was at the Bricklayers Arms at 11:00.

            Of course, the fact that Stride's clothes were not found to be wet, when her body was discovered, also creates problems.
            Indeed, and James Brown said he thought it had stopped raining by 12:00, and Phillip Krantz replied to a Juror that... "the weather was quite dry at the time".
            Last edited by Wickerman; 02-03-2016, 02:29 PM.
            Regards, Jon S.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by John G View Post
              Hi Abby,

              Ah, but what about the possibility that the witness was Joseph Hyam Levy, as some have suggested? Of course, there is a possibility that he'd seen, or knew, more than he claimed, but for some reason he didn't want to get involved in the inquiry.

              The Evening News opined:

              " Mr Joseph Levy is absolutely obstinate and refuses to give us the slightest information. He leaves one to infer that he knows something, but that he is afraid to be called on the inquest. Hence, he assumes a knowing air." (Evening News, 9 October, 1888).
              sounds like the grasping of a jilted reporter to me.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by DJA View Post
                Original ACB statement had Packer selling the grapes at 11pm and no mention of any rain.
                I compared the letter by A.C.B. with what was given in the press on the same day. I thought it necessary to demonstrate that A.C.B. had not taken those details from the press, so where did he get them?

                Evidence taken from the Evening News Oct. 4 = {RED}

                4th October, 1888.
                Matthew Packer
                keeps a shop in Berner St. has a few grapes in window, black & white.
                On Sat night about 11 pm {11:45} a young man from 25-30 {middle aged about 35} about 5.7. {5ft 7in} with long black coat buttoned up {dark clothes} soft felt hat, kind of Yankee hat {wideawake hat} rather {stout, square built} broad shoulders rather quick in speaking, rough voice {rough voice and a quick sharp way of talking}. I sold him pound black grapes 3d. A woman came up with him from Back Church end (the lower end of street) She was dressed in black frock & jacket {dark dress and jacket}, fur round bottom of jacket a black crape bonnet, she was playing with a flower like a geranium white outside & red inside {white flower in her bosom}. I identify the woman at the St. George's mortuary as the one I saw that night -
                They passed by as though they were going up Com- Road, but instead of going up they crossed to the other side of the road to the Board School, & were there for about an hour till I shd. Say 11.30, talking to one another.
                {They then crossed the road and stood on the pavement almost directly opposite to the shop for a long time more than half an hour.}
                I then shut up my shutters.
                Before they passed over opposite to my shop, they wait near to the club for a few minutes apparently listening to the music.
                {the couple moved from their position, and Packer saw them cross the road again and come over to the club, standing for a moment in front of it as though listening to the music inside.}
                I saw no more of them after I shut up my shutters.{Then he lost sight of them.}
                I put the man down as a young clerk. {appearance of a clerk}
                He had a frock coat on no gloves.
                He was about 1 inch or 2 or 3 inches a little higher than she was.
                A.C.B.
                4.10.88.

                {Some time between half past eleven and twelve a man and woman came up Berner street from the direction of Ellen street, and stopped outside my window looking at the fruit. The man was about thirty to thirty five years of age, medium height, and with rather a dark complexion. He wore a black coat and a black, soft felt hat. He looked to me like a clerk or something of that sort. I am certain he wasn't what I should call a working man or anything like us folks that live around here.}

                { I saw that she was dressed in dark clothes, looked a middle aged woman, and carried a white flower in her hand.}
                Regards, Jon S.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                  Hi John.
                  The newspaper which provided the first account was the Evening News, 4th Oct. Packer here stated he sold the grapes at 11:45...

                  On the 29th ult., about 11.45 p.m., a man and woman came to his shop window, and asked for some fruit.

                  The couple then crossed the road opposite Dutfields Yard...

                  They then crossed the road and stood on the pavement almost directly opposite to the shop for a long time more than half an hour.

                  The couple then came over to the club...

                  It was then ten or fifteen minutes past twelve o'clock, Packer, who was about to close his shop, noting the time by the fact that the public houses had been closed

                  His press account does not give the time he shut up shop, that is given to Sgt. White...

                  I asked him what time he closed his shop on the previous night. He replied Half past twelve (Half past 11)

                  "Half past 11" is added as an alternate, likely taken from the summary by A.C.B., though where it came from is unknown. It was not stated in the press and was not part of the original statement.

                  We know Stride was not buying grapes at 11:00 because she was at the Bricklayers Arms at 11:00.



                  Indeed, and James Brown said he thought it had stopped raining by 12:00, and Phillip Krantz replied to a Juror that... "the weather was quite dry at the time".
                  Hi Jon,

                  But aren't there also problems with Packer selling the grapes at 11:45? Thus, at the inquest William Marshall stated:

                  "While I was standing at my door, from half-past eleven to twelve, there was no rain at all."

                  Now, Packer stated that, after selling the grapes, he observed the couple for more than half an hour, during which time it was raining. In fact, he even remarked to his wife:

                  "What fools those people are to be standing in the rain like that?"

                  All of this suggests that it stopped raining prior to 11:30, which means Packer must have sold the grapes before 11:00am, i.e. on account of the thirty plus minutes he observed the couple for.

                  But this creates further problems because Best and Gardner should then have noted Stride carrying the grapes, but they failed to do so.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by DJA View Post
                    Original ACB statement had Packer selling the grapes at 11pm and no mention of any rain.
                    But that's also problematic because John Best stated that it was raining heavily at that time.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by John G View Post
                      Hi Jon,

                      But aren't there also problems with Packer selling the grapes at 11:45? Thus, at the inquest William Marshall stated:

                      "While I was standing at my door, from half-past eleven to twelve, there was no rain at all."

                      Now, Packer stated that, after selling the grapes, he observed the couple for more than half an hour, during which time it was raining. In fact, he even remarked to his wife:

                      "What fools those people are to be standing in the rain like that?"

                      All of this suggests that it stopped raining prior to 11:30, which means Packer must have sold the grapes before 11:00am, i.e. on account of the thirty plus minutes he observed the couple for.
                      Hello John.
                      We have another point to consider, on Saturday nights the public houses must close at midnight, Packer stated:

                      It was then ten or fifteen minutes past twelve o'clock, Packer, who was about to close his shop, noting the time by the fact that the public houses had been closed.

                      Every other night closing time was 12:30.
                      Regards, Jon S.

                      Comment


                      • According to PC Smith it had not rained since 11 pm.

                        He saw a couple he thought to be Stride and a man at 12.30am over the road

                        Schwartz saw the altercation at 12.45 am.

                        Stride was dead within 15 minutes.

                        What is the problem,apart from possibly a clock being a bit fast!
                        My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                        Comment


                        • >> ... he (Packer) even remarked to his wife ...<<

                          Of course this was the same wife who told Sgt. White she couldn't "give the slightest information respecting the matter.In fact the whole household said they saw nothing until the Grand Enterprise showed up;-)
                          dustymiller
                          aka drstrange

                          Comment


                          • Diemshutz adds some flavour to his story, after the Inquest,by adding grapes to the sweetmeats Stride was holding.
                            Last edited by DJA; 02-03-2016, 06:51 PM. Reason: Spelling.
                            My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by DJA View Post
                              According to PC Smith it had not rained since 11 pm.

                              He saw a couple he thought to be Stride and a man at 12.30am over the road

                              Schwartz saw the altercation at 12.45 am.

                              Stride was dead within 15 minutes.

                              What is the problem,apart from possibly a clock being a bit fast!
                              Well, what PC Smith actually said was that it rained very little after 11:00an, suggesting that it stopped entirely sometime between 11:00 and 11:30.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                                Hello John.
                                We have another point to consider, on Saturday nights the public houses must close at midnight, Packer stated:

                                It was then ten or fifteen minutes past twelve o'clock, Packer, who was about to close his shop, noting the time by the fact that the public houses had been closed.

                                Every other night closing time was 12:30.
                                Hello Jon,

                                I think this causes further problems for Packer's evidence. Thus, he told Sergeant White that he closed his shop, "in consequence of the rain. It was no good for me to keep open".

                                However, if it stopped raining just after 11:00am, and no later than 11:30, then he must have closed up when the pubs were still open, a fact which directly contradicts his account.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X