Ripper Confidential by Tom Wescott (2017)

[NotBlamedForNothing]

It wasn't her patch, all witnesses said they had never seen her before, she was brought there. And now everybody think her client just left her without getting his 4d worth?

Not everybody, because not everybody thinks she was soliciting.

PC Smith placed him there, and now everybody thinks he left "without any supportive evidence" - who saw him leave?

If he was not a client, his quiet conversation with Stride has to be explained otherwise. Okay, the newspaper parcel was a collection bag for stolen goods. The targets at that time were the costermonger carts in the backyard, which were left unattended. The costermongers sold, amongst other items, sweetmeats. Stride had grabbed what she could but didn't make it out of the yard. Some of the items she had tried to nick were retrieved, but not the cachous packet.

[Tom_Wescott]

In other words, PC Smith was guessing...

You previously remarked that PC Smith couldn't have known what the time was, he was guessing there also,...

And yet, when it comes to the parcel that Parcel-man was carrying - suddenly PC Smith isn't guessing anymore, in fact you take his 18 inch as verbatim, as if he had measured it. It can't be anything else, it had to be 18 inch because Smith said so.

Put yourself in his place, when asked to guess the size of that woman's handbag who you walked passed yesterday. How likely are you to truly get it right?
PC Smith caught a glimpse of a newspaper parcel at midnight, and you think he got the measurement spot on?

Packer said he wrapped the grapes in a pkg, just like Fish & chips they wrapped in newspaper.
Newspaper was the common means of wrapping all kinds of produce on market stalls or private businesses, even as late as 60 years ago. They didn't have wrapping paper, they couldn't afford it.
Packer didn't hand the man a fistful of grapes, he wrapped them and handed the man the pkg of newspaper, Stride & Parcel-man walked up to the club, and crossed over where PC Smith saw them together about 12:35.

Yes, of course PC Smith was guessing at both the time and the parcel size. It's not like he kept copious notes of every person he saw and at what minute he saw them. And why do you keep bringing up Packer? You might be the only one left who believes a word he said about the rain-defying, grape-eating Stride.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

I don't have anything to add to this discussion now, but I would like to take this opportunity to say thank you Tom for your two books that I really enjoyed

Thanks, Fogelpa!

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

It wasn't her patch, all witnesses said they had never seen her before, she was brought there. And now everybody think her client just left her without getting his 4d worth?
PC Smith placed him there, and now everybody thinks he left "without any supportive evidence" - who saw him leave?

Perhaps I misunderstood you. I understood you to mean that when Schwartz was walking behind BS Man, that inside the gate of Dutfield's Yard stood Stride with yet another man who Schwartz did not see. Is that it, or did you mean something else?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi George.

Did Brown see the couple who ended up speaking to the press and Fanny Mortimer? That seems to be a crucial question.

He couldn't have, because they weren't standing there at 12:50am. Per the young woman's own statement to the press. This isn't a tough one. Either Brown saw a completely different woman who looked very much like the woman who would die minutes later and only yards away, or he saw the woman who died minutes later and only yards away. That's our choice.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Wickerman]

According to the report, the talking had already commenced by the time she is turned around and thrown down. The order of events is stop, talk, attempt to pull into street, turn around, throw down.

That's funny, not a good enough argument, but is a little bit funny.

Some do consider why.

They don't seem to have come up with anything.

Others will ask themselves why Schwartz would have lied, and being unable to answer their own question, will lack the curiosity to consider why Stride might have been there, alone.

Her being alone is the unique argument, she's been with a man all night, now she is supposed to be alone - based on what?

... & then Schwartz walked away ...

Doesn't seem like he was the least bit terrified.

Lets complete the sentence shall we....

...and then he ran as far as the railway arches....

He didn't wait to ask if the two men were together working together - run, and ask questions later.

[GBinOz]

Yes, of course PC Smith was guessing at both the time and the parcel size. It's not like he kept copious notes of every person he saw and at what minute he saw them. And why do you keep bringing up Packer? You might be the only one left who believes a word he said about the rain-defying, grape-eating Stride.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hi Tom,

IMHO Smith was making an educated estimate on times based on his experience with his beat. The police were required to know the time where as Mortimer, Diemshitz, the Club were all using estimates based on clocks that could be +/- ten minutes.

I have to add that I am with Jon regarding Packer. I think Packer was un-necessarily maligned regarding his story.

Cheers, George

[Abby Normal]

He couldn't have, because they weren't standing there at 12:50am. Per the young woman's own statement to the press. This isn't a tough one. Either Brown saw a completely different woman who looked very much like the woman who would die minutes later and only yards away, or he saw the woman who died minutes later and only yards away. That's our choice.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

i dont think brown saw stride. no flower, mans wearing long overcoat and not a peaked cap.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Tom,

IMHO Smith was making an educated estimate on times based on his experience with his beat. The police were required to know the time where as Mortimer, Diemshitz, the Club were all using estimates based on clocks that could be +/- ten minutes.

I have to add that I am with Jon regarding Packer. I think Packer was un-necessarily maligned regarding his story.

Cheers, George

packer is about as unreliable a witness as one can find in the whole case. his story changed which ever way the wind was blowing that day. even the police at the time didnt beleive him.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

He couldn't have, because they weren't standing there at 12:50am. Per the young woman's own statement to the press. This isn't a tough one. Either Brown saw a completely different woman who looked very much like the woman who would die minutes later and only yards away, or he saw the woman who died minutes later and only yards away. That's our choice.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

So, Fanny Mortimer can be trusted to have supplied the correct time that Smith passed by (give or take a minute or two) but having spoken to a couple later in the morning, she got both their times and location wrong.

A young man and his sweetheart were standing at the corner of the street, about 20 yards away, before and after the time the woman must have been murdered, but they told me they did not hear a sound.

You claimed that Mortimer was a reliable witness because her sighting of Goldstein was confirmed. So why not in this case? What is the issue with there being another couple, that are not the couple in the Echo report?

[Trevor Marriott]

He couldn't have, because they weren't standing there at 12:50am. Per the young woman's own statement to the press. This isn't a tough one. Either Brown saw a completely different woman who looked very much like the woman who would die minutes later and only yards away, or he saw the woman who died minutes later and only yards away. That's our choice.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hi Tom
One also has to consider the street lighting for these different locations, poor lighting will affect witnesses descriptions and cause problems in identifying who was who

Where were the street lamps situated in relation to where the witnesses were positioned, and were they all working, how far were the witnesses away from the persons they were referring to?

It seems this information was not obtained by the police as part of the investigation. That is why there is now a problem with assessing and evaluating the witness statements

I have mentioned a stated legal case previously which not only refers to the identification of suspects but is also used in determining the accuracy of witness testimony a pneumonic is used ADVOKATE R Turnbull 1976

Amount of time under observation: How long did the witness have the person/incident in view?

Distance: What was the distance between the witness and the person/incident?

Visibility: What was the visibility at the time? Factors include the time of day/night, street lighting, etc.

Obstruction: Were there any obstructions to the view of the witness?

Known or seen before: Did the witness know, or had the witness ever seen, the person before? If so where and when?

Any reason to remember: Did the witness have any special reason for remembering the person/incident? Was there something specific that made the person/incident memorable?

Time-lapse: How long has elapsed since the witness saw the person/incident?

Error discrepancy: Are there any errors or material discrepancies between descriptions in the first and subsequent accounts of the witness?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[NotBlamedForNothing]

They don't seem to have come up with anything.

When pressed, "waiting for someone", or "she was soliciting", are the usual explanations.

Her being alone is the unique argument, she's been with a man all night, now she is supposed to be alone - based on what?

This is only a problem if Schwartz's story is accepted as being true. What is the best reason anyone has come up with for believing it?

Lets complete the sentence shall we....

...and then he ran as far as the railway arches....

He didn't wait to ask if the two men were together working together - run, and ask questions later.

Let's go back to your argument ...

I am saying BS-man passed the gateway and saw Stride talking to a man in the shadows of the gateway. He took her to be soliciting with him, and accosted her just as Schwartz walked past, but Schwartz's attention was focused on the assault, he failed to notice the man stood in the shadows, he only saw BS-man attack Stride, and was more concerned about his own survival, and fled.

You're saying that Schwartz fails to see a man in the shadows, because he is focused on the assault, and he flees out of concern for his survival. Yet when Schwartz walks away, he is not showing that concern, at least not outwardly.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Hi Tom,

IMHO Smith was making an educated estimate on times based on his experience with his beat. The police were required to know the time where as Mortimer, Diemshitz, the Club were all using estimates based on clocks that could be +/- ten minutes.

George, if it's not too much to ask, could you give a brief timeline of events, based on your acceptance of police timings? Either that or point me to an old post.

I have to add that I am with Jon regarding Packer. I think Packer was un-necessarily maligned regarding his story.

In the Evening News story about Packer, this is the description of the man who buys the grapes ...

The man was middle aged, perhaps 35 years; about five feet seven inches in height; was stout, square built; wore a wideawake hat and dark clothes; had the appearance of a clerk; had a rough voice and a quick, sharp way of talking.

This is William Marshall, at the inquest ...

He was dressed in a black small coat, and dark trousers. He seemed to me to be a middle aged man. He had a round cap with a small peak to it, somewhat like one of those worn by sailors. He was about 5ft 6in high and rather stoutish.
...
He did not look as if he was engaged in hard work. He had more the appearance of a clerk than anything I can suggest. I do not think he had any whiskers.

Those descriptions are too close to be ignored, but perhaps Marshall was influenced by the Evening News report.

[GBinOz]

George, if it's not too much to ask, could you give a brief timeline of events, based on your acceptance of police timings? Either that or point me to an old post.

Hi Andrew,

The timeline that I did is shown in Post #2455 here:

https://forum.casebook.org/forum/ripper-discussions/witnesses/751019-if-schwartz-lied/page164#post760653

Frank also did a sequential description, here:

https://forum.casebook.org/forum/ripper-discussions/victims/elizabeth-stride/712210-the-schwartz-bs-man-situation-my-opinion-only/page31#post771267

Jeff did a timeline based on Backwell's watch time. I can't locate that one,, but I recall that if a clock correction was applied to convert to police time is was pretty closed to mine.

Cheers, George

[Wickerman]

Not everybody, because not everybody thinks she was soliciting.

Yes, I used the term loosely, most people assume she was soliciting.
I think she prepared herself that evening as if she was going on a date.

I do remember reading one prostitute's comment to a newspaper man was to the effect that, if their client provides food and drink all evening and they end up with their 4d at the end, they consider it a good night.
Today, we don't truly know what the procedure was, did they have several clients in an evening, or meet up with one and be more like an escort for that whole evening.
It seems to me Stride was more like an escort, she was with the same man all evening.