Schwartz v. Lawende

[Michael W Richards]

My guess (and no, I don't have proof) is that Schwartz approached club members, related his story and either expressed a desire to go to the police or was encouraged to do so. He was then told an interpreter would be helpful or even necessary and Wess was suggested. If you find Wess suspicious as a translator, how many translators of Hungarian do you think the club had available?

Could Wess have approached Schwartz and induced him to lie in a murder investigation? Sure. But I have no reason to believe that that was the case.

c.d.

Now you understand how I view the interruption theorizing..."sure, but I have no reason to believe that was the case".

It seems what can be believed is very subjective.

[c.d.]

Isnt it reasonable to entertain the idea that Wess knew Israel was there that night, that Wess might have heard about when Israel left or maybe what he says he saw when he left, Wess approaches him at his new home, talks him into going down to the station and making a statement, that Wess, either with Israels agreement or not, indicates that a likely assailant was seen with Liz and neither of them were on Club property at the time. Israel says he was looking to see about his wife and the move,..but isnt it logical that the reason we see a "theatrical" Immigrant Jew just outside a club that entertained 200 or so immigrant jewish men that night, at 12:45 in the morning, is because he was at the club himself?

No, for entertainment purposes only.

c.d.

[c.d.]

It seems what can be believed is very subjective.

Yep, that is why these discussions take place.

c.d.

[Wickerman]

The CORONER, in summing up, said the jury would probably agree with him that it would be unreasonable to adjourn this inquiry again on the chance of something further being ascertained to elucidate the mysterious case on which they had devoted so much time.

Would it be reasonable to suppose that the reason Schwartz never attended the inquest - as opposed to never being called - was because he went missing? Why else would the chance of something further being ascertained require the inquest to once again be adjourned? Had Israel Schwartz not been who he said he was, him going missing is to be expected.

I think the quote you chose above could be interpreted to mean the coroner knew the police were still working to verify something.
If a witness refuses to respond to a summonz, or disappears after being called, he is committing a crime.

[Wickerman]

Detective-inspector Edmund Reid: The door of the loft was found locked on the inside, and it was forced. The loft was searched, but no trace of the murderer could be found.

Presumably the dude who locked the loft door was never the subject of special interest, because he was never identified.

Thats a bit vague, the loft could have been locked years ago.
Do you know when it was last opened?

[Wickerman]

Wick , Sorry, but it is not a casual suggestion. Liz's body was found in the pitch black side yard of a club where you would have to pass her body to go in and out of the said club.

Making a casual accusation is one for which no evidence exists, and you have provided no evidence with which to accuse a club member, but no-one else has either.
The police had to have already considered the possibility and after detaining & interrogating all the remaining members, they were satisfied none were to be suspected.

That doesn't mean she was murdered by someone who was in the club that night of course but it has to be a possibility.
Yes the police did detain 20/30 members but they were the ones who were still there . Jack surely would have scarpered as is proved with the murder of Kate.

Right, in fact it would be the first suspicion and it had to be eliminated. As we hear no rumors towards that possibility then we can accept the possibility had been removed, at least with respect to those detained.
As for any members who fled before the gates were closed, that had to be their second consideration. And, as in the first case, as nothing transpired towards that second consideration then what are the grounds for modern theorists reviving a suspicion for which no evidence exists?
It's a "what-if", which is a casual suggestion.

If we follow the medical evidence it , to me looks very likely that Liz was killed suddenly and swiftly. She was also not seen by Eagle when he went up the yard a few mins earlier . So those two combined suggests to me that the time Liz was in Dutfield's was no more than a minute or two before she was murdered.
Her legs were pointing to the gateway, and her scarf was pulled very tight with the cachous in her hand, plus she was definitely killed on the spot...

Yes, I agree with that last quote, but there are still several solutions.

Those pointers certainly leaves the option that someone in the yard came up behind her and killed poor Liz so fleetingly that it was over in seconds . Or perhaps Liz stood in the gateway , stopped someone passing and when she turned around to lead him into the yard as above happened , only this time Jack pulled her around so Liz's legs faced the gateway....

Or, the man she entered the yard with was the one who swiftly executed her.

I very much doubt anyone spotted that night with , or around Liz [ if it was indeed Liz they saw ], was her killer.

That conclusion makes no sense - the police would never say something like that. In fact they would naturally allow suspicion to fall on the man she was last seen with, and that was the PC Smith suspect - Parcel-man.
That is the way professionals look at it, so why do you differ?

[Lewis C]

That conclusion makes no sense - the police would never say something like that. In fact they would naturally allow suspicion to fall on the man she was last seen with, and that was the PC Smith suspect - Parcel-man.
That is the way professionals look at it, so why do you differ?

The last man that she was seen with, that is, if Israel Schwartz and James Brown were both wrong.

[Wickerman]

I think Ive mentioned this lots before, but I could believe Israel Schwartzs story if the real action actually took place in the passageway, not on the street....

And yet, in the police report no yard is mentioned. All Schwartz described was an assault in the gateway, her being thrown down on the footpath.
If that was the only version it could be assumed the gate was closed. There is nothing to suggest the victim was in an alley.
In the press version there are a few inconsistencies with the report given to police. My preference is to go with the police report as the most accurate.

I suggested some time ago that because Schwartz could not read English, he may have only thought he was in Berner St., in the dark and especially if he had been drinking, he may have walked down a different street.
All he told police was he passed a gateway, there is also a gateway in Batty St., and it is next to a pub, the Red Lion I think. So, if Schwartz passed a woman being assaulted outside the Red Lion, but he thought he was in Berner St. it would explain the confusion why his story does not match the other witnesses.
The press would naturally think he was talking about Berner St. so they would fill in the missing landmarks, like the pub on the corner, which is true for Berner St. but not for Batty St.

Israel leaves the club by the side door....(checking to see if his wife had moved a few meager items 12 hours earlier doesnt seem reasonable to me, an immigrant Jew just outside a club where immigrant Jews just finished a large meeting, someone known by Wess....)... because I think he likely attended part of the meeting or went there after it ended. He sees Liz and a thug slightly inside the gates near the wall, he hears the man threaten her as he passes, the man tells him effectively to get lost...he leaves quickly, thug cuts Liz.

So, you choose to place Schwartz as coming from the club, on no tangible basis.

Its almost certain that the interpreter is Wess, so how does Wess know to seek out Israel, and that he was there at that time, and saw something... if no-one else saw Israel or anyone in his story? Accompanied by a friend, not someone was sent for to translate. Wess came in with Israel.

Does Wess go to find Israel to accompany him in? Again, who knows on that Sunday afternoon that someone named Israel Schwartz passed by the club and saw the victim get manhandled just before being found? No-one saw Israel, or heard him, or BSM, or Pipeman...so how is it that someone sought him out to bring him in for a statement...without knowing that he was there?

Do you notice how easy it is to move from speculation (almost certain...) to certainty (Wess came in with Israel).

You convince yourself of one potential theory, and now attempt to convince others?

[Darryl Kenyon]

Making a casual accusation is one for which no evidence exists, and you have provided no evidence with which to accuse a club member, but no-one else has either.
The police had to have already considered the possibility and after detaining & interrogating all the remaining members, they were satisfied none were to be suspected.


Or, the man she entered the yard with was the one who swiftly executed her.


That conclusion makes no sense - the police would never say something like that. In fact they would naturally allow suspicion to fall on the man she was last seen with, and that was the PC Smith suspect - Parcel-man.
That is the way professionals look at it, so why do you differ?

Wick why is it a casual accusation please ? I never said someone in the club killed Liz that night [ or who was in the yard ], but it has to be a possibility. You say yourself - The police had to have already considered the possibility and after detaining & interrogating all the remaining members, they were satisfied none were to be suspected.
Yes they would be satisfied of the ones who were detained. But who do you think the 300 people were who were questioned after the double murder with 80 questioned further ? And were the search area also included the immediate vicinity around Berner street . The police would definitely try and trace everyone who was known to be in the club that night . That is beyond doubt . So if the police allowed for the possibility that it could be someone from the club , why can't anyone else examine the possibility all these years later.

I have said myself that Liz could have stopped a punter [ Jack ], as he was passing down the street who followed her into the yard before quickly killing her.

So if PC Smith did see Jack , and yes the police allowed for the possibility , were was he and Liz after 12/30 am or 12/35 am [ his testimony ] . Because he sure weren't in the yard at 12/40 as per Morris Eagle or on the street or he would have said so. And what if Jack saw PC Smith which is likely , would he then go on to kill Liz knowing he had been spotted by a copper , not for me.

Regards Darryl

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Let me ask you this.....is a scenario like one that has a very drunk bully reacting aggressively, impulsively, to rejection by a woman far fetched? I dont think that Liz was there to solicit myself, but maybe men there might have. And I believe she could hold her own, she was experienced out there. I can easily see a poorly judged act that took 2 seconds and couldnt be undone.

Is it far-fetched can be determined by answering; how often did similar sorts of crimes occur in the East End in that era?

Remember that this drunk bully is a man who wants sex, not violence. Had Schwartz followed this man after both had turned into Berner St from Commercial Road, why do you suppose the man decided kill instead of returning to Commercial Road, or indeed not leaving it in the first place? I'm sure there were numerous ladies of the night along there.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I see too many red flags that argue against the whole drunk bully scenario:

No argument or yelling heard by anyone in the club;

No evidence of Stride being roughed up;

Clothes not torn;

No knife wounds to the body.

I would expect some of these things if her killer was in a state of anger. Instead, we have a quiet, efficient cut to the throat. Too me, that indicates someone who has done this before.

c.d.

Good post. Just to be clear, are you saying that BS Man did not kill Stride?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

So if PC Smith did see Jack , and yes the police allowed for the possibility , were was he and Liz after 12/30 am or 12/35 am [ his testimony ] . Because he sure weren't in the yard at 12/40 as per Morris Eagle or on the street or he would have said so. And what if Jack saw PC Smith which is likely , would he then go on to kill Liz knowing he had been spotted by a copper , not for me.

So, what's your preferred scenario?

[Michael W Richards]

Is it far-fetched can be determined by answering; how often did similar sorts of crimes occur in the East End in that era?

Remember that this drunk bully is a man who wants sex, not violence. Had Schwartz followed this man after both had turned into Berner St from Commercial Road, why do you suppose the man decided kill instead of returning to Commercial Road, or indeed not leaving it in the first place? I'm sure there were numerous ladies of the night along there.

If you mean men being rough with street ladies..I would imagine those were daily occurrences at that time. If you mean lead to murder...it happened, but with far less frequency, sure. We only look at the unsolved ones primarily, but there were plenty of others that year in London that were solved and Im sure some were caused by a flare up in anger while in an inebriated state...and I believe Strides murder looks like one of those.

I suppose I envision a LVP London where men that led violent criminal street-wise lives were not uncommon, why any one of them suddenly kills is a case by case study project. All I know is that within the stories told about that half hour we have Stride being assaulted in public, a drunken thug type, conflicting timelines from various witnesses, witnesses to the streets status, and 30 or more Jewish Immigrant men inside a club singing and drinking. This is not a clandestine location, its the only place on the street at that time where any singing and laughing could be heard from down below at street level. Its probably the only place on Berner Street at that time of night to buy a drink. Its an improbable location that night at that time to try and solicit, it appears all the men known to be there at the time are indoors.

Thats all you need, really.

The killer is likely from that club,... member, attendee, whatever...or he somehow manages to slip in and out unseen by anyone. But the result is the same either way, he cuts his victim just once. It seems you have a drunken thug for a possible suspect right there on the scene. There is no apparent motive other than an intention to injure or kill. No scuffles, no defensive wounds, no sign of any real trouble based on her clothing and physical demeanour.

I can easily see a situation where some drunken man who makes his living violently gets insulted by something Liz might have said to him and in a brief, impulsive, angry and impaired gesture this crime takes place. I believe that the clubs culpability, in terms of their likely association with this killer.....or vice versa, is limited or nil. But I believe their reputation and continued operation relied on a general perception of innocence. Which means they could have withheld information that suggested their involvement...like say, some men were in the alley smoking at the time, someone there likely knew why Stride was there in the first place and didnt speak up...

I think its very fortunate for some club staffers that their efforts to deflect any suspicion....like yelling ...."another murder has been committed"...statements that no-one was seen and nothing was heard by those same staffers, coupled with the bottom of the ninth appearance of Artsy Schwartzy and his offsite assault by a drunken thug, they dodged a bullet that night. Although I think the overall significance of Liz Strides murder in the big scheme of Rippermania is just as a sad footnote, she happened to be killed by a brute on the same night that possibly THE Jack the Ripper killed someone...wrong place at the wrong time. And as a result, she became famous.

[c.d.]

I think its very fortunate for some club staffers that their efforts to deflect any suspicion....like yelling ...."another murder has been committed".

Throw in a Jewish appearing Schwartz, "Lipski", the creation of a drunken thug and that no one can corroborate his story and these club members were true criminal masterminds. I don't think there was a conspiracy in the Kennedy assassination but if there was these club members made them look like rank amateurs.

Seems what we have here is confirmation bias at its finest.

c.d.

[c.d.]

There is no apparent motive other than an intention to injure or kill. No scuffles, no defensive wounds, no sign of any real trouble based on her clothing and physical demeanour.

That reminds me of somebody...can't put my finger on it right now...but it will come to me I'm sure.

c.d.