Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing
View Post
The witnesses story must be verified to some degree before they can tell the coroner the witness is to be believed.
You must remember the police interview hundreds of witnesses in the course of their investigations, but only a few are able to offer direct testimony relating to the victim at the time of the murder.
A coroner cannot use a witness who turned out to be mistaken about what they saw, or intentionally lying for some reason. The police are expected to question the witness and investigate the truth - in other words test the witness against all the other statements given to them.
The proof of this can be seen with the statement of Maxwell who's claim directly conflicted with medical evidence, but the police could not break her claim, so they had to put her name on the coroners list.
The coroner (or his secretary) then receives the list of names coupled with copies of their statements, and the coroners office then reads all the statements and will select which witnesses they will choose to attend the public inquiry.
What I am saying is the police were still investigating Schwartz's story, as Swanson says, there is no police report at the time, which means they were still investigating his story.
This, in my view, is why he did not appear as a witness.
Comment