Schwartz v. Lawende

[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.

[c.d.]

It seems what can be believed is very subjective.

Yep, that is why these discussions take place.

c.d.

[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.

[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.

[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.

I think that the very content of Schwartzs statement allows for suspicion...just happened to be there,...(we dont know where he actually lived that morning)....checking on his wife, (who must have already finished moving their few belongings almost 12 hours previous to that time),... an immigrant Jew who just happens to be outside an immigrant Jews Mens Club after a large meeting that night,..coincidentally....seeing events and people that not one other person in that area can corroborate,....conveniently......who decides after an entire day has passed that he needed to go to the police,.... he seeks advice from someone about getting a translator and miraculously is advised to get William Wess to do that for him,....a man who happens to work at the very same location his "incident" happens at and is someone he already knows from meeting him in their past.......

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?

[c.d.]

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.

[Michael W Richards]

Why is so hard to believe that he approached someone to go with him since he didn't speak English or was advised to do so?

And that someone just happened to be Wess, who runs a business at that address? Someone who he already knows from previously meeting him in Paris, as I recall?

I am still not really getting this. Did Wess simply walk up to random people and say hey by the way by any chance did you see a woman get murdered tonight?

No, I agree....you arent getting it. Ok, on Sunday afternoon who knew that Israel Schwartz was there and saw an altercation with the soon to be victim? Only Israel, at that time, right? He hasnt told anyone yet. When he does decide to come in, many hours later, how is it that he already has someone with him to translate...and how likely is it that it would randomly be William Wess? Someone he knows, and someone who happens to work at that very address he saw his event?

c.d.

Or, is it more likely that Wess went to Israel to encourage him to come forward and speak on his behalf...maybe with some minor story tweaks. Granted I dont know who went looking for whom, but I do know that IF someone went to Israel, then they would have reason to suspect he was there and maybe saw something. Or they would have reason to get some help from someone "theatrical" maybe.

[c.d.]

Why is so hard to believe that he approached someone to go with him since he didn't speak English or was advised to do so?

I am still not really getting this. Did Wess simply walk up to random people and say hey by the way by any chance did you see a woman get murdered tonight?

c.d.

[Michael W Richards]

You missed an important thing, its almost certain that Wess interprets for him. Wess is the friend that accompanies him to the station. Why would you imagine that he would seek out someone to go in with him, does he indicate that once he heard the news he decided to come forward? Or was he asked to come forward, by someone who by all accounts should not have known Israel Schwartz was even there. Wess had gone home. No-one saw or heard Israel or anyone in his story. Who knew that afternoon that Israel was there? Just himself...supposedly. And BSM and Pipeman I guess.

So...the real question is, was he approached to come forward or did he approach someone? If Wess sought him out.......then we have some serious cred issues, for multiple statements.

[c.d.]

Let me ask you a question cd...........how did anyone know that Israel Schwartz had been there at all? Who knew to seek him out? Hows this...."He could not speak a word of English, but came to the police-station accompanied by a friend, who acted as an interpreter."

So someone brought him in.

I think the most obvious answer is that it was Schwartz who sought out someone to go with him not the other way around. Not really sure I understand your question.

c.d.

[Michael W Richards]

Are you completely dismissing Schwartz's account in your scenario?

c.d.

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. 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.

Let me ask you a question cd...........how did anyone know that Israel Schwartz had been there at all? Who knew to seek him out? Hows this...."He could not speak a word of English, but came to the police-station accompanied by a friend, who acted as an interpreter."

So someone brought him in.

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?

[c.d.]

Are you completely dismissing Schwartz's account in your scenario?

c.d.

[Michael W Richards]

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.

Remember I said 2 seconds of bad judgement and a flash of anger, not some angry drunken thug. What if..he first tries to be smooth and proposition her, then firmly pokes her in the chest to emphasize he means business, then she tells him to get lost and turns her back to walk away. He grabs her scarf from behind, pulls on it and twists it, she chokes, loses her balance... shuffling backwards, and he runs a knife across her throat and lets go of the scarf. She falls on her side, slightly behind the open gate, her legs curl into her body and she bleeds out. The bruises on her shoulders, the scarf being twisted and tightened and nicked along the same line as the cut on her throat, the fetal position of an injured person, the fact that there is no indication she moved at all once on the ground. I think that scenario fits the evidence fine.

[c.d.]

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.

[Michael W Richards]

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.