Schwartz v. Lawende

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jeff

The above is far and away the most sensible post regarding Shwartz's sighting. The incident witnessed by Schwartz was over in a flash. From approaching Stride and her assailant, to legging it down Berner Street, we are talking what, a minute ?
Regards Observer

Hi Observer

Unfortunately my partner has been recovering a major op.. But I did start work re-constructing Cox report of following a suspect, which we believe started in Wentworth Street near Castle Ally...heading down to St George in the East

But I intend to head back on a quiet day after xmas, and while there I'll try and recreate Schwartz walk (as I'll be in Henrique St) and post it up on utube. But yes my guess is it will be around 60-90 seconds

Perhaps we should make a sweep stake on the final answer for fun?

Yours Jeff

[Syrius]

Thanks for all the info on this, and all the ideas, everyone. I've not got as far as looking at the various memos and views of people such as Abberline yet - I want to get myself straight on the various "facts" first.

Fleetwood - many thanks for pointing out the neckerchief issue. To my mind, you're right - having a neckerchief in your pocket on the off-chance that you may end up committing a second murder is ridiculously unlikely.

I can't, immediately, think of why a neckerchief wouldn't be worn - so either Schwartz didn't see it, or he and Lawende must have been talking about different people (or Lawende made it up, which I don't think it particularly likely.)

PC Smith is an interesting one - at the moment I'm reckoning that at least two out of three from Smith, Schwartz and Lawende saw the same person. But I'm not certain that that person was necessarily the killer.

Also, Rosella, thank you for clearing up the possibility that Stride was already dead before all that happened.

[Jeff Leahy]

Thanks for all the info on this, and all the ideas, everyone. I've not got as far as looking at the various memos and views of people such as Abberline yet - I want to get myself straight on the various "facts" first.

Fleetwood - many thanks for pointing out the neckerchief issue. To my mind, you're right - having a neckerchief in your pocket on the off-chance that you may end up committing a second murder is ridiculously unlikely.

I can't, immediately, think of why a neckerchief wouldn't be worn - so either Schwartz didn't see it, or he and Lawende must have been talking about different people (or Lawende made it up, which I don't think it particularly likely.)

Hi Syrius

Don't forget that Schwartz view of BSM was almost entirely from behind. Which is why he comments on the broad shoulders, so its unlikely he'd notice the scarf...

And the man seen by PC Smith had a 15 minute window to get rid of the parcel possibly add the scarf or change hat, especially if he was a Taylor living close by...

Then we have the arrest the following day of a man wearing a red scarf...

So i think it probable the kliller had a red scarf

all best

Yours Jeff

[Jon Guy]

, This man was supposedly a key witness in this murder yet we dont even know where he lived the morning of the murder, something the police would surely have asked and checked on. .

Hi Michael

Don`t you think his address would have been on the statement he gave to the Police ?

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Michael

Don`t you think his address would have been on the statement he gave to the Police ?

I believe they would have insisted on getting that information Jon, yet at the same time I realize there is no information about those details in the official records, or even in the press accounts.

My opinion is that he was determined to have been a compromised witness due to some form of relationship with the club, there has been research that seems to confirm a friendship between Wess and Schwartz from earlier times in Paris. A member here, Debra, dug that up.

Of all the relevant witnesses here only 1 has hard copy corroborative evidence, Fanny Mortimer. She said she stood at her door from 12:50 until 1am and that she watched a man walk past the club at around 12:55-56 carrying the infamous black bag. His statement Tuesday night corroborates her statement Sunday. Everyone else came and went without being seen, or heard, by anyone else, excluding perhaps the young couple, likely seen by both Fanny and Brown.

Departures at 12:35, arrivals at 12:40, scuffle in front of the gates at 12:45, cart and horse arrival,..no-one saw any of them, therefore we have only the witnesses word on it. The appraised character of the witness would then factor heavily. Most of these witnesses were perceived by the locals and the authorities as anarchists, and some attack police with clubs within a few months. In that yard.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Michael

I believe they would have insisted on getting that information Jon, yet at the same time I realize there is no information about those details in the official records, or even in the press accounts.

The Schwartz statement is one document that we know must have existed and somewhere aloha the way lost , stollen or destroyed. But thats fairly typical with the case in general. We are only looking at the tip of the iceburg when it comes to the case paperwork.

My opinion is that he was determined to have been a compromised witness due to some form of relationship with the club, there has been research that seems to confirm a friendship between Wess and Schwartz from earlier times in Paris. A member here, Debra, dug that up.

OK .. lets just run with your scenario for a second... If Wess was trying to distract attention from the club, isn't Schwartz story rather odd in its complexity, the requirement of two men and the fact that he only sees the victim thrown to the ground rather the stabbed by a stranger?

Surely someone wishing to draw suspicion from the club would invent a far more simple and damning towards an outsider?

Yours Jeff

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Michael

OK .. lets just run with your scenario for a second... If Wess was trying to distract attention from the club, isn't Schwartz story rather odd in its complexity, the requirement of two men and the fact that he only sees the victim thrown to the ground rather the stabbed by a stranger?

Surely someone wishing to draw suspicion from the club would invent a far more simple and damning towards an outsider?

Yours Jeff

Let me answer that with a question Jeff....IF you had a financial stake in what went on at 40 Berner Street and you were aware of the anti-Semitism in the area and poor perception of club members by the authorities and general public, could you imagine a more fortuitous scenario than a gentile seen attacking the woman off property?

[Abby Normal]

Let me answer that with a question Jeff....IF you had a financial stake in what went on at 40 Berner Street and you were aware of the anti-Semitism in the area and poor perception of club members by the authorities and general public, could you imagine a more fortuitous scenario than a gentile seen attacking the woman off property?

yeah one where a woman wasn't attacked, or her body found, anywhere near the property.

if anyone had anything to do with the murder from the club and it was some kind of conspiracy, all they would need to do was remove her body-they had diemshitz horse cart already there-away from the club and dump her. simple and end of problem.

but its soooo much more probable that someone from the club murdered her, a lowly unfortunate that was so very important, probably because she knew some thing of political intrigue, perhaps she was a spy! and then the club members came up with a cockamamie convoluted story in an instant, and told the police, press and everyone the same thing. Never to be discovered in their dastardly plot!!

cue the the carnival music.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Michael

I attend to agree with Abby.

The shouting of 'Lipski' doesn't necessarily suggest the attacker was a gentile, its ambiguous. Why not invent a cleaner story?

And why the requirement of a second man?

Frankly if they made the story up to deflect from the club they don't appear to have done a good job...

Besides the shock of finding the body and the gossip followed by a second murder report must have sent the area into gossip over drive (Look at 9-11 and recently Paris) It would be very difficult to contain and control the story?

Merry Xmas to you both by the way

Yours Jeff

[Michael W Richards]

yeah one where a woman wasn't attacked, or her body found, anywhere near the property.

if anyone had anything to do with the murder from the club and it was some kind of conspiracy, all they would need to do was remove her body-they had diemshitz horse cart already there-away from the club and dump her. simple and end of problem.

but its soooo much more probable that someone from the club murdered her, a lowly unfortunate that was so very important, probably because she knew some thing of political intrigue, perhaps she was a spy! and then the club members came up with a cockamamie convoluted story in an instant, and told the police, press and everyone the same thing. Never to be discovered in their dastardly plot!!

cue the the carnival music.

Since there was a blood trail moving the body might be redundant. And who says that these were the types of people who would tamper with incriminating evidence anyway, right ? It seems you were aware that the police were using Unfortunates to spy on organizations and individuals, that's good, although I personally don't see that as an issue here.

The club had a bad reputation...a murder on their property was a problem, a gentile attacker from the street solves most of those issues.

The concept is so simplistic I would have thought it easy for you to grasp. I never suggested a club member killed her, although I don't rule that out, nor have I suggested she was killed for spying or the like. You've done that.

[Pcdunn]

Unfortunate or not, the murdered woman was a Christian, also, which adds to the difficulty of her being found on the club's property.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Michael

I attend to agree with Abby.

The shouting of 'Lipski' doesn't necessarily suggest the attacker was a gentile, its ambiguous. Why not invent a cleaner story?

And why the requirement of a second man?

Frankly if they made the story up to deflect from the club they don't appear to have done a good job...

Besides the shock of finding the body and the gossip followed by a second murder report must have sent the area into gossip over drive (Look at 9-11 and recently Paris) It would be very difficult to contain and control the story?

Merry Xmas to you both by the way

Yours Jeff

same to you Jeff! and happy new year

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Michael

I attend to agree with Abby.

The shouting of 'Lipski' doesn't necessarily suggest the attacker was a gentile, its ambiguous. Why not invent a cleaner story?

And why the requirement of a second man?

Frankly if they made the story up to deflect from the club they don't appear to have done a good job...

Besides the shock of finding the body and the gossip followed by a second murder report must have sent the area into gossip over drive (Look at 9-11 and recently Paris) It would be very difficult to contain and control the story?

Merry Xmas to you both by the way

Yours Jeff

Actually Jeff I believe it was Abberline who suggested that the term "Lipski" had become synonymous with a racial or ethnic slur in that area. The issue of anti-Semitism, particularly since the man heading up the Ripper investigations returned to London to discover that the evidence was pointing towards an Immigrant Jew as the culprit, was genuine.

Lets recall that the man had a "theatrical" appearance, perhaps he believed embellishments made the story seem more realistic...instead of amazingly advantageous to the club members..the ones on the payroll that is. Louis, Eagle, Wess...etc. Perhaps the translator embellished.

As for how effective the story was, well people here seem to still buy it so I guess it was pretty effective to last all this time.

I think the story Israel provides, Sunday night, via translator, is something that drew attention away from the men onsite and pointed an accusatory finger towards an antisemetic gentile off site was just about the most fortuitous event of this murder investigation for the club, and I believe that the way just the physical evidence reads, it doesn't bode well for them.

[Michael W Richards]

Since people seem to imagine that I am suggesting some coverup by the club of a club-persons responsibility for the murder, let me clarify...the club had to minimize the damage done to the perception of the club no matter who killed her. She was murdered on the property of people who the local community already felt threatened by, in part, because they were perceived as anarchist socialists.

I can easily see, based on the fact that her wounds could have been caused by any non-mutilator with a sharp knife, someone as innocuous as a security guard hired for the night being rebuffed when he approached what he thought was a working girl.

[John G]

The quote is clearly of the period from Arthur Conan Doyles, Sherlock Holmes. I was recently listen to the woman who discovered Pulsars, Jocelyn Bell Burnell. She didn't have a clue what the signals were and even called them jokingly LGM's (Little Green Men) her observation was that scientists don't prove theories they simply eliminate stuff that can be disproved, leaving what remains as the answer.

I'm saying Schwartz story is credible because of what everyone doesn't see, rather than what they do see.

If Schwartz had for instance (AS has been suggested) gone into the police station to create a cover for the club...then it means he wasn't there...the story is an invention..

And if the story was an invention it was a damn lucky made up story. Because if he said almost any other time than 12.45 he almost certainly would have been exposed as a liar. Yet its unlikely he knew Blackwells estimate time of death... He wouldn't have known Mortimer was stood at her door from approx 12.50 to shortly before one. He wouldn't know that Eagle walked down the ally at 12.40, unless he was also part of the conspiracy, he wouldn't have known that Brown left the store at 12.45 am

In short the only time frame Schwartz story fits is if he enters Berner street at 12.45... and what are the odds of him plucking the correct solution out of thin air? Liars inevitably trip themselves up because they can't possibly know all the other witness timings or medical reports

So its simply more logical that Schwartz tells the truth.

Personally I have know problem with PC Smith seeing the same man as Schwartz....My opinion is that Stride was different to all the other victims, who i believe Jack met within a very short stretch of Whitechapel and Aldgate High street... So Geographically she's out of his kill zone... So perhaps it was personal?

And if it was the same man seen by PC Smith, and Stride turned down Jack... He had plenty of time to go home (Greenfield Street) open his parcel, check his Facebook, and be back in Berner street 15 minutes later to pay the bitch back.

I think it possible Stride did know her killer. Hence the argument, and her killer cutting her throat.

Oh...and if he was the killer, i don't think Schwartz got a very good veiw of his face, only his rear hence the description of the shoulders...It would make more sense that by the time he crossed the road, BSM and Stride had moved further into the Ally, which may not have been apparent from Schwatz then 180 degree POV down Dutfield yard.

Yours jeff

Hello Jeff,

But isn't the real difficulty here that we cannot place too much faith on any of the timings given by witnesses as they were merely estimates. Even PC Smith relied on an assumption that his beat took around 25-30 minutes and that he returned to Berner Street at 1:00am, although I'm not sure how he can be certain about that. To put it simply, if every witness claimed to have been outside the club at 12:45, but saw no-one else, they could all have been telling the truth but mistaken as to timings-Edward Spooner, for instance, estimated that he arrived at the scene of the crime at about 12:35, but must have been at least half an hour out.

Regarding time of death, Dr Biggs as stated that "the best we can do pathologically is to narrow it down to a window of several hours, and even that isn't accurate or reliable." (Marriott, 2015) Of course, this opinion, by a modern forensic pathologist, seriously undermines Dr Blackwell's estimate of time of death, whose basis is therefore clearly unsupported by modern scientific analyses.