|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 76
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 08, 2003 - 8:19 pm: |       |
Maybe this was covered on the old message boards, maybe not. But, does anyone recall the suggestion that these Whitechapel murders (all of them?) were the result of some fiendish attempt at stirring hatred against the Jews?
Martin Friedland (The trial of Israel Lipski), commented on anti semitism in his book....
"It is clear, however, that most of the voluminous Ripper literature has neglected to place the murders in the context of the then-growing anti-semitism in England and the possibility that someone was trying to place the responsibility for the murders on the Jews...."
I thought someone had looked into this aspect?
Does anyone remember?
Regards, Jon
|
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 77
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 08, 2003 - 8:30 pm: | |
I think I could have worded that a little better.
Three scenarios come to mind.
1) The press/public were at a loss to understand a motive and reacted in such a way as to condemn Jews.
2) The murderer had some other specific motive (or urge?), but, tried to leave the victims at locations which suggested a Jewish connection to throw the authorities off the true line of inquiry.
3) The murders were committed with the sole intent of stirring anti-semitism against Jews.
Thats what I meant.
Regards, Jon |
Christopher T George
Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 277
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 08, 2003 - 9:07 pm: | |
Hi, Jon:
We have of course discussed previously that all of the Jewish connections on the night of the Double Event might lead one to believe there was some connection of the murders to the Jews and even an attempt by the murderer(s) to blame the Jews, i.e., those connections are:
1) Stride's murder next to the International Workingmen's Club in Berner Street;
2) Eddowes's murder in Mitre Square adjacent to the Great Synagogue and the Imperial Club, a Jewish men's club, from which eyewitness Joseph Lawende and friends were coming;
3) Then, almost as a capper to the evening of possibly linked Jewish coincidences, the writing on the wall mentioning "Jewes."
Of course, the naysayers who claim that Stride was not a Ripper victim mess up that lovely theory, ... er, I think you are one, are you not, Jon?
Certainly the enigmatic graffito reading, The Jewes are not the men to be blamed for nothing might imply that the writer of the graffito was saying the Jews are to blame for the murders, or else the murderer was committing the crimes to lay the blame on the Jews. As if he were saying, or believed, "I can't stop myself -- the Jews have driven me to it" -- possibly that sort of twisted thinking.
The Nazi pamphlet by von Soltikow, republished in a reprint version by Stephen Ryder, which Christian Jaud and I reviewed for Ripper Notes, claims that the murders were committed by the Jews in order to force white Anglo women into white slavery in the brothels of New Jersey.
Yer takes yer choice. . . I hope this helps, Jon.
All the best
Chris |
Jim DiPalma
Sergeant
Username: Jimd
Post Number: 22
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 10:08 am: | |
Hi All,
Jon, some years ago on the old boards, Yazoo (remember him?) posted a theory along this line, the gist of which was one of your points 2) or 3), above. It's been too many years, I can't recall exactly which one it was.
As substantiation for his theory, Yaz cited each of the points that Chris has enumerated above, the proximity of the murder sites to Jewish establishments, and the wording of the Goulston St graffito. So yes, this has been proposed and hashed out at length in the past. That thread can probably be found on the Casebook CD.
Cheers,
Jim |
Chris Scott
Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 381
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 10:51 am: | |
Hi all
Having spent a lot of time looking at the census details for Whitechapel, Aldgate and Spitalfields, it would have been difficult, in view of the concentration of Jewish immigrants in the area, to choose a place that was NOT near some Jewish business or concentraion of Jewish inhabitants.
It would be analogous to saying that the Brick Lane bomb of recent times was an incitement to anti-Bangladeshi feelings as it was in close proximity to businesses and residences of that ethnic group. As we know from the history of the perpetrator, it was nothing of the sort.
I am reasonably convinced that "selection" of the victims was opportunistic, then I am naturally wary of any theory that relies on the sites of the murders and their interrelationship having some significance, be it tracing out pentagrams or any other geometric symbol, or casting slurs on any ethnic group
Regards
Chris
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 262
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 1:02 pm: | |
Hi All,
I think I might go so far as to speculate that if Jack wasn't Jewish he may have had something against the local prostitutes just for being as willing to service Jewish customers as non-Jewish, if he happened to be a bigot as well as a murderer.
Love,
Caz |
John R. Fogarty
Sergeant
Username: Goryboy
Post Number: 27
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 9:02 pm: | |
I would echo CTG's thoughts, i.e., that the Ripper was indeed trying to implicate the Jews in his murders, to wit:
1) Stride's murder next to the International Workingmen's Club in Berner Street;
2) Eddowes's murder in Mitre Square adjacent to the Great Synagogue and the Imperial Club, a Jewish men's club, from which eyewitness Joseph Lawende and friends were coming;
3) Then, almost as a capper to the evening of possibly linked Jewish coincidences, the writing on the wall mentioning "Jewes."
And, lest we forget...
4) "Lipski," a local, anti-semitic pejorative supposedly shouted by the man attacking Liz Stride (presumably at witness Israel Schwartz, said to possess a "distinctively Jewish appearance," by police).
And there you have it: four separate attempts to implicate the Jews -- all in one night! Seems persuasive to me.
Cheers,
John e-Rotten
(a.k.a., Goryboy) |
Jim DiPalma
Sergeant
Username: Jimd
Post Number: 23
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 12, 2003 - 10:43 am: | |
Hi All,
Just to address the points raised by Chris and John:
1) Stride's murder next to the International Workingmen's Club in Berner Street.
First and most obvious, one would have to accept Stride as a Ripper victim in order to consider her murder as part of a plan to implicate the Jews. Second, if one accepts Schwartz's account, then Stride's murder seems to have been opportunistic rather than pre-planned, i.e., the site was not selected in advance.
2) Eddowes's murder in Mitre Square adjacent to the Great Synagogue and the Imperial Club, a Jewish men's club, from which eyewitness Joseph Lawende and friends were coming;
Which only reinforces Chris' point regarding the density of Jewish establishments in the area. I recall years ago one poster stating you couldn't swing a dead cat in Whitechapel without hitting a Jewish establishment of some sort.
3) Then, almost as a capper to the evening of possibly linked Jewish coincidences, the writing on the wall mentioning "Jewes."
Which requires the belief that the Goulston St graffito was actually written by the Ripper. It's fair to say there is considerable doubt that was the case.
4) "Lipski," a local, anti-semitic pejorative supposedly shouted by the man attacking Liz Stride (presumably at witness Israel Schwartz, said to possess a "distinctively Jewish appearance," by police).
Which establishes beyond any doubt that the man who Schwartz saw attacking Stride harbored some anti-Semitic feelings, and that he was likely a local, given his familiarity with the perjorative "Lipski". Beyond that it is not safe to draw any further conclusions - it has certainly not been established that he was the Ripper.
And there you have it - four alternative explanations for the events of that night, all plausible, none requiring any sort of cognitive leap that is unsupported by the evidence.
John, I'm certainly not picking on you, it's entirely possible that the Ripper did make a deliberate attempt to implicate the Jews. There was a certain anti-Semitic atmosphere prevalent in the area at the time, and as a result of the press coverage accorded to Leather Apron earlier that same month, it was public knowledge that the police suspected a Jewish killer, at least initially. So, there is some support for the idea. The problem I have with it is that it requires certain assumptions (that Stride was definitely a Ripper victim, and that the Ripper definitely wrote the graffito) that remain unproven.
Cheers,
Jim
|
pipette
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 7:42 am: | |
Oh but Jim, if he had some anti-semitic feelings, why didn't he kill some jewish prostitutes ?
(hope not to offend you, no offense intended, by sounding too familiar calling you Jim the first time i post here but you know, we frenchies are a bit "wild" over those points)
After all, in the whole world history, each time a guy had something against the jews, he just turned his weapon against them.
Wouldn't have it been easier this time too ?
pipette alouette. |
John R. Fogarty
Sergeant
Username: Goryboy
Post Number: 29
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 11:19 am: | |
Hi, Jim,
Excellent points, all. And don't worry about my feeling picked on; I've thicker skin than that.
In re-reading Sugden (for the 9th time!) I find myself persuaded that indeed there were so many Jewish establishments in the area that it would have been difficult not to kill somebody near one.
However, I still believe Stride's attacker, as witnessed by Schwartz, was in fact Jack the Ripper. Not only was the cut to Stride's throat performed in exactly the same manner as the other canonical murders (left to right, after the body had been laid down), but the killing of Catharine Eddowes in Mitre Square just 45 minutes later PROVES the Ripper was on the prowl that night. This remarkable coincidence -- two killings in one night, one inarguably by the Ripper -- is circumstancial evidence I've yet to see any authority remark upon.
After all, what are the chances that Stride was killed by some local ne'er-do-well (say, Michael Kidney, her former lover), only to have the Ripper himself strike down another woman just 45 minutes later, on the same night? Not even Sugden draws this conclusion (perhaps because it is so obvious). No, I think the second killing, of Eddowes, less than 3/4 of a mile away, speaks volumes. Disturbed by Diemschutz, the Ripper, unsatiated, went further afield in search of prey....
As to Stride's attacker (in my opinion, Jack the Ripper) shouting "Lipski," this is proof to me that the killer was not Jewish. Whether he was trying to implicate Jews is another matter. It could've been exactly as rendered in the recent movie "From Hell," with the attacker yelling at Schwartz, "What're you lookin' at, Lipski?"
However, the Goulston Graffito does appear to be an attempt to throw the police off the scent and steer them toward the Jews. That's IF one believes the Graffito was written by JTR, as I do. (Det. Halse claimed the chalk marks looked "fresh," or recent, and I doubt such a blatantly anti-semitic slogan would have remained long on a doorway to a building occupied by so many Jews).
Nuff for now,
Cheers,
John e-Rotten
(a.k.a., Goryboy) |
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 96
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 7:10 pm: | |
"....Not only was the cut to Stride's throat performed in exactly the same manner as the other canonical murders (left to right,"
Well, there IS only two choices, and a cut L-R is no more conclusive of Jack than a cut R-L being proof against it being Jack.
"....after the body had been laid down)"
The important point is not whether she was on her feet or not, but more along the lines of "where is the choking?" and "why was she curled up on her side?"
Her killer did not take control of the situation as he apparently has with Nichols, Chapman & Eddowes. So, where is the similarity?.
"...but the killing of Catharine Eddowes in Mitre Square just 45 minutes later PROVES the Ripper was on the prowl that night."
Ah, you have not been reading the boards lately have you? 
('coincidence' would not be in the dictionary if there were no need for it)
"This remarkable coincidence..."
Which is rather like saying "This miracleous miracle", or "this mysterious mystery".
Coincidences are exactly that, remarkable, thats why they came up with a special word.
"-- two killings in one night, one inarguably by the Ripper -- is circumstancial evidence I've yet to see any authority remark upon."
Authority?, well, numerous members on these boards have remarked on that for several years.
"...After all, what are the chances that Stride was killed by some local ne'er-do-well (say, Michael Kidney, her former lover), only to have the Ripper himself strike down another woman just 45 minutes later, on the same night?"
Pretty good actually.
This was the East-End afterall, and was not the only murder to occur that night, and not the only crime committed that night either.
Do you recall the group of burglars operating in the vicinity of Mitre Square that very night?, and the 'Torso' was dumped in Whitehall roughly, within the same 24 hr period?
What were you saying about coincidences?
Have a good weekend, Jon |
John R. Fogarty
Sergeant
Username: Goryboy
Post Number: 31
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 9:34 am: | |
Jon:
Permit me to quote your previous message, with my original statements in plain text, your critiques in italics and my rebuttals in bold.
"....Not only was the cut to Stride's throat performed in exactly the same manner as the other canonical murders (left to right),"
Well, there IS only two choices, and a cut L-R is no more conclusive of Jack than a cut R-L being proof against it being Jack.
Actually, there ARE only two choices, but a cut running L-R, tailing off on the R side, was indeed JTR's M.O., and is far more conclusive of his being the perpetrator than a cut running R-L argues against it. This isn't merely my opinion, Jon, but the learned medical opinions of Drs. Phillips, Gordon and Brown, who autopsied JTR's victims.
"....after the body had been laid down)"
The important point is not whether she was on her feet or not, but more along the lines of "where is the choking?" and "why was she curled up on her side?" Her killer did not take control of the situation as he apparently has with Nichols, Chapman & Eddowes. So, where is the similarity?
No, the point is exactly that she had been laid down prior to her throat being cut--this again was the Ripper's M.O., Jon. He could just as easily have slit her throat from behind while she was standing, thus spilling blood down the front of her frock. That he did not do so, but in fact despatched Stride exactly as he had her predecessors, proves it was JTR.
As to the strangling, Stride's white-and-black checked scarf was found tightly knotted and violently twisted round toward the left--a good sign that she was indeed throttled prior to having her throat slit.
Also, regarding her being curled up on her left side, I believe Sugden was correct when he wrote that Stride bled to death very slowly, as only the vessels on the left side of her throat were severed. This would have allowed her to live long enough to roll to her left slightly, perhaps in an attempt to escape or get back to her feet, rather than blacking out from syncope straight away.
"...but the killing of Catharine Eddowes in Mitre Square just 45 minutes later PROVES the Ripper was on the prowl that night."
Ah, you have not been reading the boards lately have you? ('coincidence' would not be in the dictionary if there were no need for it)
I have been reading the boards, Jon, but I prefer to stick with primary source material as Sugden did, rather than modern-day, hearsay opinion on message boards.
"This remarkable coincidence..."
Which is rather like saying "This miracleous miracle", or "this mysterious mystery".
Coincidences are exactly that, remarkable, thats why they came up with a special word.
Actually, that's not quite correct: "miraculous miracle" and "mysterious mystery" are grammatical redundancies; "remarkable coincidence" is not. I would have had to write "coincidental coincidence," which I didn't.
"-- two killings in one night, one inarguably by the Ripper -- is circumstancial evidence I've yet to see any authority remark upon."
Authority?, well, numerous members on these boards have remarked on that for several years.
By "authority," I meant recognized, published authorities like Sugden, Begg, Evans, Fido, Rumbelow, et al, not just other members on the boards. Any fool can stumble in here and post messages.
"...After all, what are the chances that Stride was killed by some local ne'er-do-well (say, Michael Kidney, her former lover), only to have the Ripper himself strike down another woman just 45 minutes later, on the same night?"
Pretty good actually.
This was the East-End afterall, and was not the only murder to occur that night, and not the only crime committed that night either.
Do you recall the group of burglars operating in the vicinity of Mitre Square that very night?, and the 'Torso' was dumped in Whitehall roughly, within the same 24 hr period?
What were you saying about coincidences?
I still contend that it was a miraculously miraculous miracle that Eddowes was killed less than 45 minutes after Stride. Robber gangs and torso killers were not committing JTR-like crimes that night; the murderer of Stride and Eddowes, however, was. On the same night. A most remarkable coincidence indeed. 
Have a great weekend, too, Jon.
Cheers,
John e-Rotten
(a.k.a., Goryboy) |
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 98
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 12:16 pm: | |
Hi John, you wrote:....
"...Actually, there ARE only two choices, but a cut running L-R, tailing off on the R side, was indeed JTR's M.O., and is far more conclusive of his being the perpetrator than a cut running R-L argues against it. This isn't merely my opinion, Jon, but the learned medical opinions of Drs. Phillips, Gordon and Brown, who autopsied JTR's victims."
Your choice of wording, either intentionally or otherwise, is structured to imply that 'the opinion of Dr Phillips, Gordon, Brown, etc, was that a cut L-R is evidence of JtR's work'. Not true.
If you choose to be accurate about the specific details then Stride had one singular slash whereas JtR's other victims all had 'two' cuts to the throat, one short stab/slice at the carotid artery and then one longer slice.
The slice on Stride's neck was more indicative of the 'second' cut than a first (pressure release), type cut and therefore speaks more of the work of another hand. What was done to Stride was no evidence of technique but more indicative of an angry slash at the throat in the same style as McKenzie & Coles.
As has been pointed out to others, 'signature' speaks volumes, "none-descript could-have-beens" are not evidence.
"No, the point is exactly that she had been laid down prior to her throat being cut--this again was the Ripper's M.O., Jon. He could just as easily have slit her throat from behind while she was standing, thus spilling blood down the front of her frock. That he did not do so, but in fact despatched Stride exactly as he had her predecessors, proves it was JTR."
Again, I suggest you are viewing this from "the eye of the beholder". The position of Stride's body was curled up and on her side. We know she had been pushed and generally physically assaulted just prior to having her throat cut, and we also know she was not standing upright at the time her throat was cut.
The suggestion was made she may have been pulled back by her scarf and as she hit the ground the killer slashed her at the throat.
This is about all we can reasonably tell about what may have occured in that dark alley.
Now, for you to suggest "this was JtR's M.O. and it proves he was her killer', it totally wrong.
"....As to the strangling, Stride's white-and-black checked scarf was found tightly knotted and violently twisted round toward the left--a good sign that she was indeed throttled prior to having her throat slit."
Really?, then why do you follow it with.....
".....This would have allowed her to live long enough to roll to her left slightly, perhaps in an attempt to escape or get back to her feet, rather than blacking out from syncope straight away."
JtR, according to what we (they) determined, choked them into losing consciousness, layed them flat out and proceded to cut their throats.
First you want Stride to have been strangled by her scarf (to fit JtR's MO), then you suggest she was still conscious and rolled over in response to the cut throat?
It's one or the other John, but you can't have it both ways.
Contemporary opinion was as I stated above...
".....she may have been pulled back by her scarf and as she hit the ground the killer slashed her at the throat."
And that fits the medical evidence, it does not fit JtR's signature.
If you choose to follow Sugden then you must surely also admit she had to be conscious to roll over, and therefore she was not strangled (choked?) into unconsciousness, as per JtR is thought to have done.
Lets make no mistake here, there is a fine line between Stride being a victim of JtR, based on the medical evidence, or not.
But, in order to cross that line, and include her as one more JtR victim (as certain as Nichols, Chapman & Eddowes), then the medical evidence must suggest something more than an apparent street-assult-turned-murder.
And to make your case even worse you are then faced with those who argue that 'her killer was not interrupted', as some do.
Arguing the case for Stride as a Ripper victim is not an easy task, as evidenced by those who have had to resort to 'faith' rather than evidence to keep her 'in'.
Raising her murder above coincidence is tough (tuff).
Good luck.
Regards, Jon
|
Chris Scott
Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 411
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 5:06 pm: | |
One of the main problems I had with the scenario of this thread is that at least two of the sites had no apparent Jewish presence nearby - Bucks Row and Hanbury Street
While reading up on somthing completely different today I came across this quote:
Durward St. was also the home of the Brady Club. The Brady Club played an important role in developing the character of Jewish youth in the East End. It offered recreation in physical persuits like boxing, wrestling, badminton, table-tennis and annual sea-side camps. There was also a library and debating societies. There was also a girls Brady Club in Hanbury Street.
This is from an interesting article called LONDON EAST END
WHITECHAPEL WALK (FROM WHITECHAPEL STATION)
which you can find at:
http://www.ibiblio.org/yiddish/Places/London/london.htm |
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 100
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 5:49 pm: | |
Chris, The Brady Club only came into being from 1897, or thereabouts.
Actually, the only connection I heard about Buck's Row and the Jewish community was the proximity of the Jewish Cemetery just north of the Wharf.
Thats all I recall concerning Jews in that area.
Regards, Jon |
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 587
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 6:21 pm: | |
Hi Chris
Thanks for posting that link. When you single out Bucks Row and Hanbury St, does that mean you think that Tabram's and Kelly's sites did have a Jewish connection? (apart from the surrounding inhabitants)
Robert |
Saddam
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 8:44 pm: | |
The blindness, the blindness! Even when they breathe the golden truth right out of their mouths, still they do not see. If I die before I can complete A?R, they wouldn't take hold of the obvious for another million years.
Saddam
|
John R. Fogarty
Sergeant
Username: Goryboy
Post Number: 32
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 4:19 am: | |
Hi, Jon:
You make several good points arguing against Stride being a Ripper victim. And, in going back through the inquest testimony, autopsy reports, etc., I find I'm actually becoming persuaded that you (and others) may well be correct in asserting that Long Liz was killed by someone other than JTR.
Schwartz, for example, described following an apparently drunken man down Berner St. to Dutfield's Yard. There, this man tried to pull a woman Schwartz later ID'd as Stride into the street. The drunk then threw her to the ground, where she screamed three times, but "not very loudly," according to Schwartz. At this point, Schwartz crossed the street to avoid the altercation, yet Stride's attacker saw him, cried "Lipski" at him and continued his assault. None of this sounds like JTR behavior. Rather, it sounds much more like a drunken Michael Kidney having his final go at the woman who'd recently left him.
Also, the one slice to the throat rather than two. Albeit left-to-right, and about 6 inches in length, it's nothing like the throat-cutting of Nicholls, Chapman, Eddowes, or Kelly. Bruising on Stride's collarbone indicates her assailant indeed pushed her to the ground. Then, the position of her scarf seems to show that her attacker dragged her back into the alley, allowing her to roll to her left side (which was covered with mud). None of this sounds like the cold, cool, silent strike of Our Boy.
True, Eddowes was killed by JTR about 44 minutes later, but that may well have been a most timely (and amazing) coincidence. Also, as you pointed out, there was indeed another woman murdered that night, barely three miles away, by her husband -- who cut her throat...
No, the more I look at the written evidence that remains, the more convinced I am that Stride was killed by Kidney. But since this board is concerned with attempts by JTR to implicate Jews, perhaps our discussion would be best continued on the Victims-Liz Stride boards.
The only question remaining is Kidney's appearance. Did he resemble any of the men seen by PC Smith, Marshall, Schwartz or Brown that night in Berner Street? The only sketch of him that I've seen is that of a rather dorky looking individual with a bushy mustache and wavy hair. Any idears?
All best,
John
Cheers,
John e-Rotten
(a.k.a., Goryboy) |
Billy Markland
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 9:51 pm: | |
One thing that hasn't been mentioned. Liz Stride was, based upon the books, the only victim to have had a fairly regular job. Thus, she would have eaten better and consequently have been in better over all physical shape. Also, I do not recall any reference to Liz over-indulging in alcohol. Those facts may poise problems to a murderer who is used to victims being under-nourished & intoxicated and could cause the differences seen between the "known" JTR killings and her's.
Just a thought.
Billy |
Jim DiPalma
Sergeant
Username: Jimd
Post Number: 25
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 10:11 am: | |
Hi All,
John, I think it's become apparent that the extent to which one embraces the anti-Semitic conspiracy theory depends a great deal on one's personal beliefs regarding certain aspects of the case. As evidenced by the discussion between yourself and Jon, the theory is obviously more credible to those who believe Stride was a Ripper victim and that the Ripper wrote the Goulston St graffito, and much less so to those who do not hold the same views. As with so many other aspects of this case, ya pays yer money and ya takes yer pick.
FWIW, I do think you're to be commended for being open-minded enough to consider opposing arguements. Certainly, a strong arguement for Stride's place in the canon can be made either way, we simply don't have enough hard evidence to definitively settle the issue. The same is true of Tabram; several times over the years, I've vacillated back and forth on her being a Ripper victim.
Regarding the description of Kidney, Schwartz described Stride's attacker as "full faced" with "broad shoulders". I think it was Sugden that pointed out that Kidney had been in an infirmary about a year earlier suffering from an ailment (dispepsia?) that causes weight loss, so it's unclear if the description would have fit Kidney. Not much to go on, I agree, but it's all I have to offer regarding Kidney's physical appearance.
Best to all,
Jim |
John R. Fogarty
Sergeant
Username: Goryboy
Post Number: 33
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 11:55 am: | |
Jim:
Many thanks for your kind remarks. I try to be open-minded at all times and take criticism in my...er...stride, so to squeak.
Now for a bit of apostasy: the more I review the written evidence, the more persuaded I am that more than one Ripper was involved. I'm beginning to believe there may have been two or even three men perpetrating these crimes. But, to the Suspects board.
In sum, I believe you are correct that the anti-semite theory depends on the eyes of the beholder, i.e., which victims fell to JTR's knife and which didn't. Anyone postulating a theory that Jack the Ripper(s) was (were) trying to implicate Jews must agree that 1) Stride was a Ripper victim and; 2) the Goulston Graffito was indeed written by JTR.
As to Mssr. Kidney, here's that sketch I mentioned:
Cheers,
John e-Rotten
(a.k.a., Goryboy) |
Saddam
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 9:09 pm: | |
A thought is a thing, and a thing is a thought. The thingness of a thing is a property of our own mind. What does it say of us that we want Kidney to have killed Stride?
Answer is the question, A?R.
|
anthony
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, August 25, 2003 - 9:28 am: | |
has anyone ever tried to trace familes living in whitechapel now who had family living in the area in 1888 , who knows what pictures or gossip may have been passed down to them,am working in the area right now which is why i have become interested in the subject,if i can be of any help whilst in the area let me know. |
Matti Kurumaa
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 22, 2003 - 12:56 pm: | |
Hello
I've allways been to conspiracy - mayby it was after the royal'ties was first taken up. But now
i have (a little bit) changed mi mind. Where would
it lead (us, somebody)if Jack did not write the Goulston graffiti; and that he was a jew ? I mean that if he was up to prostitutes, he had a kind of must to find them in the Whitechapel - namely there they where. And if he was jew and lived somewhere in or near Whitechapel. This is mayby taken up already - earlier ?
But this is what could have happen :... stumblin Jack coming up to the graffiti trying to steady his breath - he stares unbeliveably at it - he closes his eyes for a moment and stares again - he drops his bloody bundle;he does'nt even recognize it;
*...cant they (we) even write correctly...*he thinks and continues to shadows. Tonight's killing was not satisfactory, everythig went wrong, even seeing the graffiti, he thinks. But a few minutes later he notises noises of a female
somewhere in front. His blood flames up. Would he or would he not? The risk is high - but the bigger
satisfaction. He comprehends he has lost one knive, but he has two left in his belt.
So i mean i can see in mi soul eyes Jack surfing opportuniscally round Whitechapel through jews and hores, drunks and kids, poor and even higher class, searching for pray - he would have merged in the lot - without anybody paying any bigger attention to him.
If there was a conspiracy of any kind it would mean that Jack(s) person was known to someone(s) moore than himself. Here we come to a point that i have somewhere read of a 'rumor' that
at the time of the murders that Jack (and others) was a 'public seacret'.
Ofcourse there where many that where 'sure' that they knew who Jack was - or though they knew - but
a great possibility is that he was known for somebody else too.
Sorry my bad english.
MK
|
lplatman
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 05, 2003 - 11:54 am: | |
I'm sure everything jack has been discussed but has anyone thought about the fact that during the double event Jack starts on Berner Street then goes to Mitre square and then onto Goulston Street. It make sense that he lives near Goulston street because, after two murders you gotta figure he's tired and wants to go HOME.
Now you might say that it's natural to actually run away from home, to avoid detection, and that might point to Chapman. Because living on Cable Street, the first killing on Berner Street is relatively close.
I lived at 150 Cannon Street road growing up so it's fascinating to realise the murder of Elizabeth stride was only a couple of blocks away. Although when I was there, in the 50's they changed the name of Berner Street to Henriques street. |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
