|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Steve Swift
Detective Sergeant
Username: Swift
Post Number: 51
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 7:00 am: | 
|
Fair enough Harry,but I'm sorry,British soldiers were not taught un-armed combat in the 1800's.
There is a sequence of events you can draw from the death of Liz Stride but it is all speculation.
Liz chars for Jewish people.
While working she comes across or hears something that leads her to believe she knows who the Whitechapel killer is.
She lets Kidney in on the information but does not tell him who she suspects.
They decide to blackmail and recieve threats(hence the padlock)
Liz takes matters into her own hands and leaves Kidney and arranges to meet the man.
The meet goes ahead and ends in violence (Lipski!)
The killer, enraged, then heads of and runs into Eddowes,kills her and drops her apron under the graffiti.
The Juwes are the men
that will not be blamed for nothing.
So yes Matt - we can see the Jewish connection - but its all just speculation really.
Bill Shankly to a Liverpool fan:
"Where are you from?"
"I'm a Liverpool fan from London."
"Well laddie . . . . What's it like to be in heaven?"
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 2246
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 7:22 am: |
|
Hi Matt,
If he really hated Jews why wasn't he murdering them? He wasn't because he either was targeting prostitutes by preference or because he was targeting women in general and they (prostitutes) were just easy pickings.
You answered your own question.
Jack wasn't killing Jews because he was killing vulnerable women instead, who either made advances to him, or didn't reject his own. He made it easy on himself.
That in no way suggests he wasn't anti-Semitic. Unless he was himself Jewish, he would have been more than happy to see the blame put on a Jew. To suggest he would have killed Jews instead of women if he was anti-Semitic is like saying that Peter Sutcliffe would have killed black men instead of women if he had been racist. I've no doubt the Yorkshire Ripper would have been as happy to see the police looking for a black man as he must have been all the time they were looking for a Geordie.
I can imagine that any non-Jewish Jack would have been mighty pleased with himself when he finally hit the sack, after turning the night round into such a success.
Love,
Caz
X |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1961
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 11:08 am: |
|
No Matt,
You are not the only one.
Evidence does not hint at a certain Jewish connection.
Speculation does.
So rest easy tonight in the knowledge that you sanity is perfectly intact….to a degree, judging on the subject matter.
Monty
It begins.....
|
Jennifer Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 3026
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 11:16 am: |
|
Yo Matt, Monty,
yeah I don't see anything so unusual. I tend to get the impression there was a little element of ism going on
but hey,
yo!
Jenni
"it is hard not to feel a twinge of guilt. Guilt for the fact that this man's name would always be coupled with something other than the great works of book-collecting and abdominal operations with which he is now associated."
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 428
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 12:56 pm: |
|
Monty,
"Evidence does not hint at a certain Jewish connection"
No, not as such. You are correct. But only if we dismiss the evidence we do not like.
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 603
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 2:51 pm: |
|
Hi Helge,
I can see why people might think that there is some kind of Jewish connection, but that area was so predominantly overwhelmed by Jewish activity.......by Jewish people and by the whole Jewish culture, that the aliens in the area were actually the gentiles.......
Just to illustrate.......this is a quote from the time under the heading of Wentworth Street market........and it does show how the Jews were viewed at the time.........yeek.......
‘Wentworth Street is off Middlesex street, once known as Petticoat Lane - and appropriately so, for it was the headquarters of the 'old clo’ trade' - not far from Aldgate Railway Station. In Wentworth Street, any Sunday morning, may be seen such a spectacle as if portrayed in this picture. From all the Purlieus of Whitechapel, crowds of foreigh Jews flock to do the marketing which their faith prevents them from doing on their own Sabbath. It must be confessed that they are not all scrupulously clean, not is ones’s sight the only sense that is offended. The noise is often deafening, and in the babel of sound half a dozen different languages may be distinguished = French, German, Russian, Polish, Hebrew, with the Yiddish compounds of them all, and occasionally English.’
That more or less sums up the whole area at the time......to not find a Jewish connection would have been the thing........
So I'm afraid as good a theory as it might be, I think you might be hard pushed to back it up........sorry
Jane
xxxxx |
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 429
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 5:11 pm: |
|
Hi, Jane
Yes, I know I'll have a hard time backing this up. But then again no one has ever been able to back up any other theory, either, have they
I am working on more specifics than I would be willing to talk about right now. Not because I wish to keep it to myself, but because it is only in the primary stages of research, and I am simply not willing to go out there any further than I allready have..
I'll give myself five percent chance to be half right..which isn't much..but then again I think it is worth the effort.
You see, I have more than these "coincidences" to back up an anti-Jewish "theme" (and I use this in its widest sense of meaning) to the case. But you are quite righ, I can't back it up. At least not right now.
But think about it. Regardless of any other connection, all it takes is for the GSG to be the Rippers handiwork, and there IS beyond doubt an anti-Jewish theme here allready. Now, we all know we cannot directly prove Jack wrote that one, but neither can anyone prove he did not, and the case rests there until new information surfaces.
Or possibly old information is recognized for what it is...
Anyway. All we have on many of the "facts" are personal interpretations of how to read them. We cannot even agree on which victims were Jack's.
So to dismiss anything out of hand is not likely to get us anywhere. At the same time I do not expect anyone to actually agree with me on this one (although I know some that do).
What we must differentiate here are interpretations and real facts.
For instance, if someone say that Jack is someone that was actually in France at the time of the murders, I guess the theory can be easily shot down But a theory that does not violate any known fact, is not invalidated no matter how many personal opinions are thrown at it.
At the same time, that theory needs to be substantiated as well. But as I said, no one has ever come close to that anyway, so I'm not feeling any pressure...hahah.
Anyway, this is not to say that I do not want peoples' opinions on this. It is greatly appreciated. But maybe I should be more grateful that most do not comment it at all! I have more than a hunch what certain people feel.
And why does this "Jewish theme" fit as part of this thread? Well, maybe it does not, but if I'm correct then the murder of Stride is the key, and it follows that if it can be proved that she was not a Ripper victim, then that is that.
But of course, SOMEONE killed her anyway. And I may still be half right!
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 430
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 5:30 pm: |
|
Oh, just one more thing, Jane.
As I have understood it the entire area WAS heavily influenced by Jews..which is a prerequisite for how I consider this anyway... But not ALL streets, not ALL buildings had any direct link to anything Jewish. But Goulston St. did.
In fact, on the very morning after the double event, it would be teeming with Jewish vendors that held their marked on SUNDAYS as opposed to saturdays, because of the sabbath.
Now this was more than frowned upon by many gentiles.
Yes, yes, this could all be circumstantial. All I'm saying is that had this gone on in most other streets, then in fact, this link (if indeed it is one), would have been non existent.
I'm not looking for the most tenuous of links here. And indeed, a LOT more of those do exist. But somehow my gut feeling tell me there are more coincidences here than there should be.
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 604
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 5:45 pm: |
|
Hi Helge,
Well I have always been one to take theories as far as they will go and only give up on it when something presents itself which totally precludes it as a possibility......so good for you!
I would love to see what you come up with eventually.......Is Liz the key? That would make a nice change instead of it being Mary.
I wish you luck with the Goulston Street graffito.....I am actually on the fence with that one as well, slightly more in favour of it not being the work of JtR......but I will be happy to be proved wrong...
Keep me posted!
Hugs
Jane
xxxxx
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4191
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 6:04 pm: |
|
Helge,
Just a quick reminder... it is very easy to find Jewish indicators in the Ripper context, simply because the murders happened in an area that was to a major extent inhabited by Jews and even without the Ripper was fueled with anti-semitism. This was a natural part of the area at the time! That does not in itself imply anything else or show that the murders had any antisemitic or Jewish implications.
It was a Jewish immigrant community and therefore it is natural to find this imbedded in the context, without it necessarily having something to do with the murders as such.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/historian
|
Stanley D. Reid
Chief Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 506
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 6:16 pm: |
|
Hi all,
If JTR had an issue with Jews, I wonder why that was the only word in the GSG (as I recall) that was misspelled, grant you, there is the grammatical error. I would question if the people who saw it first weren't seeing what they wanted to see or feared seeing; the good old Virgin Mary in the potato chip thing. At any rate, I haven't been able to form a solid position on what the message meant or whether JTR actually wrote it. If pressed, I guess I'd say I'm 51% "sure" he put it there as a red herring.
Best wishes,
Stan |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2536
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 9:36 am: |
|
Hi Helge,
I used to think it was all too much of a coincidence until I realised how very populated
that particular area of Whitechapel was with East European,mostly Jewish immigrants in 1888.
Now I think the matters you refer to were probably just that-coincidence!
Natalie
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 431
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 3:13 pm: |
|
Jane,
I certainly will keep you posted.
There is no way to prove the GSG, unless I am correct in other things, and it then becomes at least very likely to be written by Jack.
Glenn,
Thanks for your comment. I am aware that to find no Jewish link whatsoever would be almost impossible given the areas involved.
At the same time, given the social situation it would not be a far stretch if some link to anti-Semitism was indeed for real in this case either!
That argument kind of bites itself in its tail, I know, but it's the best I can come up with right now... (well, it is saturday after all..) hahah
I reiterate that to dismiss any "Jewish link" whatsoever we have to assume the GSG was not written by Jack, and think mr. Broadshoulders was not Stride's killer. If both those assumptions are wrong, then clearly there IS a "Jewish link".
Now that, in itself, tells us nothing. What if Jack was an anti-Semite? Big Deal... We allready know he was hardly a Boy Scout to begin with.
Why I think Stride is the key is not so much herself than the location in which she was killed. I think Jack had a connection to the premises.
Now, I'll be hard pressed to prove it, but I have mentioned some indications earlier.
Ok, frankly, I'm on thin ice, and as you saw I did not give myself too good odds... But there are some possibilities here.
Apart from that, I find the coincidences here just slightly too convenient to be nothing.
But so far that is just personal opinion.
Stan,
I don't really see why Jack should NOT have misspelled Jews just because he had an issue with them Anyway, I can't find any reasonable other explanation than a misspelling, or use of dialect, other than that he was using an archaic form...which brings us into Masonic territory, and I'm not going there...
There existed two versions of spelling (two, not half a dozen as someone seems to think, what people wrote later have no bearing on this at all, except to show that a great many people actually had trouble spelling the word!) We have two alternative spellings of the word, with one alternative corroborated by two officers, and thus likely to be correct.
Anyway, it is important to notice that no one at the premises seemed to think we were dealing with anything BUT a misspelling of Jews. They were there, they knew the spelling habits of the area/times, etc. I see no reason to make this more confusing than it allready are!
Besides, the main argument AGAINST the GSG being written by Jack, as I understand, is that it was a Jewish neighbourhood , and anti-Jewish graffiti would be all over the place!
So if it was NOT about Jews, what was it?
The Jacks are the men....
Hahah...
But seriously, if we can't even know what it meant, why on earth would anyone in their right mind put it up as a graffito in the first place?
(OK, maybe the bloke that put it there could neither spell nor speak coherent)
My answer is that it is not so hard to decipher at all, if we only see it with a Cockney point of view!
Natalie,
I bet you a fiver I'm right...
Seriously, as I said before, my thoughts here hinges exactly on the density of Jews, the attitude towards them, and the fact that many Gentiles would just love to see them blamed for the murders (including Jack).
Also, I think Jack (or at least the killer of Stride and Eddowes) had an issue with named Jews, and had a particular grudge that may have made him think about the blaming game to begin with.
But no, nothing of this would even get close to court...
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Stanley D. Reid
Chief Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 510
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 5:51 pm: |
|
The Joves? Got to look out for those Jupiter worshipers. The towes (blond guys)? |
Julie
Inspector
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 185
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 10:15 pm: |
|
Helge
You are certainly worthy of those comments.
I do agree with your comments re the prostitutes, that the circumstances on their being where they were, what hour they were there and how they handled advances from men feeling somewhat amorous.
Your other comments are also well presented.
best regards
Julie
|
Julie
Inspector
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 186
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 10:30 pm: |
|
Caz
There isn't one person who can convince me that Jack wasn't targeting prostitutes. I agree with you. And they sure were easy targets, especially if they were intoxicated. One tends to let our defences down under drunken conditions.
It has of course been pointed out that these gals were not all necessarily full time prostitutes, however can anyone actually dispute the fact that they did indeed partake of that forbidden fruit when it was their only chance of survival?
If he just wanted to kill women in general and not prostitutes, why prowl at the hours that he did, or for that matter why not watch for those women going of early to work, or going out late to get their husband's dinner?
I sincerely believe that Jack targeted prostitutes, and he did so for a specific reason. The problem we have is realizing that reason or reasons.
regards
Julie
|
Julie
Inspector
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 187
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 10:44 pm: |
|
Stanley Reid
I do agree 51% that Jack may have written the very controversial message on Goulston Street, however let's not forget that he may himself have been a Jew.
He would not be the first person to not like his religion, his birthright, his place of birth or whatever his parents and their parents represent, nor would he be the last.
He may have resented being brought up as a jew, depending on whether or not he was brought up as a reform jew, conservative jew or othodox jew.
regards
Julie
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 433
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, October 30, 2005 - 4:01 am: |
|
Julie,
If Jack was a Jew, then the GSG takes on a whole new meaning (as I'm sure you allready know)
The Jews (and in particular me, Jack) are the men that will not be blamed for nothing. In other words, you guys blame the Jews, well, this time you need not blame us for nothing!
That actually works for me, inasmuch as I see it as a possibility.
But we need to assume then that Jack did not mind telling the police that he was a Jew. And actually, that MIGHT have been part of his game...
But I'm personally more inclined to consider Jack basically a coward than a criminal gamester.
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 434
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, October 30, 2005 - 4:06 am: |
|
All,
In a sense I think Jack actually did target prostitutes. Not necessarily because he had anything particularly against them because they were prostitutes... But because he wanted to survive, and they were the ones he could kill and still have a good chance of getting away with it.
That said, any woman caught under somewhat the same circumstances would probably be at risk as well.
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
john wright
Sergeant
Username: Ohnjay
Post Number: 13
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, October 30, 2005 - 5:19 am: |
|
To All,
I would just like to say that if Jack was trying to stir up feelings against the Jewish people would he have not left messages and/or clues (piece of clothing?) at all the murder sites.
Is it also not possible that Jack did not just wander the streets but had a definite plan about where to strike, for example street walkers today have there own turf which I assume they or there minder protects with violence, if need be. If the regulars in victorian Whitechapel did the same Jacks victims would have to go where ever they could, So if he was accustomed to the area he would know the regular girls and would be able to pick out the "Amateurs"
john |
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 435
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, October 30, 2005 - 11:14 am: |
|
John,
And exactly how focused was Jack?
And why should he care about picking out amateurs?
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
john wright
Sergeant
Username: Ohnjay
Post Number: 14
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, October 30, 2005 - 11:31 am: |
|
Helge
If the regulars did have minders would they have not been somewhere near by to keep an eye on there girls and wouldn't this have made him hunt amateurs who had no regular beat or minder.
I use the word amateur in the sense that they only turned to prostitution when in need.
I would say he was very focused in dispatching and mutilating them at top speed. |
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 436
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, October 30, 2005 - 11:50 am: |
|
John,
Valid point, insofar as any minders present would definitely be a turn off...
But where there indeed such minders present in most cases?
I think not, but would love to hear otherwise if that was the case.
Anyway, again, I think it certainly is a case where availability is more important than regular/non regular or prostitute/non prostitute to Jack.
And I guess the level of protection is part of the level of availability anyway.
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Stanley D. Reid
Chief Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 513
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, October 30, 2005 - 12:06 pm: |
|
Hi Helge and Julie,
Helge, how about 'The clones are the men....'? Sorry,just kidding.
Julie, the thing that makes me 51% "sure" that Jack wrote the message is the 'blamed for NOTHING' phrase. Eddowes gave her name at the police station that night as "Nothing". Was the message referring to Eddowes as "Nothing"? It makes one wonder if Jack was someone who was at the police station that night.
Best wishes,
Stan |
an armchair detective
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 4:18 am: |
|
Hello Stan,
This is what I wrote:
That's a pretty deep gash, but not nearly as deep as Chapman's, Nichols' or Eddowes' which severed everyting down to the spine: these wounds must have been at least three inches deep.
So where do I characterize Stride's wound as light?
Kindest regards,
Martin |
rgrace craig.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, October 30, 2005 - 1:49 pm: |
|
i've been reading through all the posts in this forum...and the one thing that was very aparent to me was how strongly people feel about their own theory on what happened...but it is just that, a theory... although they are all equally good, and could all equally be the truth - so please don't think i am sounding arrogant, as i have no more idea than anyone, infact probably less.
i do know that what has made the ripper murders/ripper case...whatever you want to call it...so interesting is simply because it has never been solved...
to this day, with all our technology, knowledge etc...we are no closer to uncovering the mystery than those people who lived through it were.
i am involved in psychology, however, and i do know that - due to the enigma of jack the ripper, it does hold interest... we have no idea, and cannot prove exactly who did it...i have read the book 'ripper case closed', and althought i feel the author may have stumbled apon it...we will never know.
i cannot help, though, but think that 'jack the ripper' was fictional....i know this sounds strange, but hear me out.
i believe that this 'person' was not one, nor two, but at least three or more people who performed the murders and jumped on the band wagon, quite happy to let them think that they were 'the ripper'.
but then, perhaps, the real ripper did exist, commited possibly two murders at most, before someone caught wind and commited, what we call today, copy-cat murders.
the people of that time would have been incredibly scared, especialy with the lack of knowledge that we now have today.
it would have been very possible for it to have been more than one person, and none of them linked.
as we all know, the majority of letters were fake, anyway. and it was no secret in the newspapers that ripper was 'corrisponding.'
it could also be that walter sickert - who was, shall we say disturbed? decided to 'try it out.' could he not have murdered a prostitute, and then he too decided to mail the police? after all...the ripper changed his alias many times in the letters.
the more i hear about the ripper story, the more i find myself believing that this one person - the infamous jack the ripper - did not exist, but infact it was, however, very sick people commiting murders against prostitutes.
i expect, if other case files of the time were looked through, it was not just prostitutes being murdered.
|
an armchair detective
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 6:01 am: |
|
Hello Helge,
You wrote:
Chapman's is by far the deepest.
I don't think so.
From Dr. Lewellyn's inquest testimony on Nichols:
That incision completely severed all the tissues down to the vertebrae.
From Dr. Phillips autopsy report on Eddowes:
All the deep structures were severed to the bone, the knife marking intervertebral cartilages.
How could a knife go deeper than the spinal column?
Kindest regards,
Martin |
Stanley D. Reid
Chief Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 516
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Monday, October 31, 2005 - 12:48 pm: |
|
Hi Martin,
I didn't say that you said it was a light cut but it has been characterized as such by some, including at least one famous author.
Best wishes,
Stan |
an armchair detective
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, October 31, 2005 - 2:12 pm: |
|
Hello Stan,
You wrote:
Way, way back there I asked for a comparable example in the total history of crime and still don't see one so the odds must be extremely low.
To which I answer:
As low as the odds that you would find a comparable example in the total history of crime where two very similar murders (Eddowes and McKenzie), occur in the same neighbourhood, not one hour, but exactly nine months, seventeen days and twentythree hours apart. Mind you, 6,959 hours apart, not one hour more or less.
We'll probably have to agree to disagree on this one.
Well, then there's at least one thing we agree on.
Kindest regards,
Martin |
Julie
Inspector
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 193
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Monday, October 31, 2005 - 6:16 pm: |
|
Stanley Reid
Hi Stanley
This message written on a goulston Street door is certainly very controversical.
It is as much possible that Jack wrote this message as it is that he did not.
If he did, why? What a chance he took by writing this message after just killing his second victim (possibly) of the night. No doubt he was a chance taker but to what extent?
Did a very scared Jewish worker find the body but not wish to call the police, as not to be himself implicated.
Did a person actually witness the murder and know the person was not of his sect? Or was there another person who may have witnessed the events and want to blame the jews?
There are so many questions and so few facts to back up these theories one way or the other.
regards
Julie
|
Steve Swift
Detective Sergeant
Username: Swift
Post Number: 55
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Monday, October 31, 2005 - 6:47 pm: |
|
If he just wanted to kill women in general and not prostitutes, why prowl at the hours that he did,
It fitted his Job?
Less people around?
After he left the pub?
or for that matter why not watch for those women going of early to work, or going out late to get their husband's dinner?
Speaking of which.....with the exception of Eddowes all these women HAD just ended relationships and how do we know that this is not exactly what he did,especially with Kelly.
There is no indication whatsoever that this killer targeted his victims specifically because they were prostitutes - none. Prostitutes were NOT the only females on the street in the early hours either.
Bill Shankly to a Liverpool fan:
"Where are you from?"
"I'm a Liverpool fan from London."
"Well laddie . . . . What's it like to be in heaven?"
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1963
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 7:46 am: |
|
Helge,
"But only if we dismiss the evidence we do not like."
Ok, how else do I put it?
I cant, I can only repeat.
The evidence (that includes all) does not hint at a certain (as in sure, settled etc) Jewish connection.
Name this dismissed evidence.
Cheers,
Monty
It begins.....
|
Steve Swift
Detective Sergeant
Username: Swift
Post Number: 57
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 8:22 am: |
|
Monty,
You do have a very valid point,none of the evidence points to a Jewish connection.
Helge,
What Monty means here is that the Jewish connection is a theory not supported by the evidence of the time (but then again the evidence of the time does not really support much).
Which leads me to comment on the tone of these boards of late. If people can not come up with an idea that may lead to new avenues of investigation then WHAT is the point of these boards?
The evidence from 1888 is very very sparse indeed for an investigation of this type, and not helped in the least by the fact that the suspects folder is missing. So all we have is each other,and if we can not,at the very least,agree to disagree then we are never going to get anywhere.
Bill Shankly to a Liverpool fan:
"Where are you from?"
"I'm a Liverpool fan from London."
"Well laddie . . . . What's it like to be in heaven?"
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1964
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 9:08 am: |
|
Steve,
A certain Jewish connection.
Im all for summarisation and conjecture simply for the reasons you give, we have little evidence (of the time or since) to work with.
Helge and myself have crossed paths a few times now both in agreement and disagreement. I like to think that I can question his opinions without receiving a negative response. In fact, I can honestly say, I have never read a hostile word in Helges responses to me, only questioning ones. If I have sometimes come across blunt then that’s my way, blame my job, and if that offends I can only apologise. I shall endeavour to do better.
As for your final paragraph, totally true. The bouncing of ideas and theories off of each other is all we have…….until that diary turns up !
Oh wait, that one has already been done !!!
Cheers,
Monty
It begins.....
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 2258
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 9:56 am: |
|
Hi Steve,
There is no indication whatsoever that this killer targeted his victims specifically because they were prostitutes - none. Prostitutes were NOT the only females on the street in the early hours either.
Are you saying then, that he crept up on each of his victims and killed them before they knew what was happening?
Surely that's the only way he could have done it if the woman was respectable and would have resisted any male advances.
Love,
Caz
X |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1966
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 11:21 am: |
|
Caz,
I understand your point and agree.
However, in my Devils advocate role, I cite Eddowes. Who has no record of being arrested for prostitution and no hearsay evidence (family, friends or casual acquaintance) stating that she was indeed a casual or full time prostitute.
Granted her reasons for being in such a well frequented prostitue area are questionable but, unfortunately, the only negative side that we can attach to Catherine is the possibilty that she liked to sup the liquor a tad.
So if this was the case, and Eddowes was NOT a prostitute, then it begs the question of how did he approach his victims?
That said, the majority of victims were prostitutes and seeing as Eddowes did not seem to have a regular source of income at that precise moment in time, the possiblity she was prostituting herself is a highly realistic one.
Cheers,
Monty
It begins.....
|
Jennifer Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 3053
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 11:50 am: |
|
Doesn't it depend on what we mean by a prosititute. I am not being graphic here. all I mean is, there must be a first day someone tries to do such a thing etc
Is this making sense?
Jenni
"Don't you know it's true what they say, Things happened for a reason,"
|
Sir Robert Anderson
Chief Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 582
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 12:19 pm: |
|
"Doesn't it depend on what we mean by a prosititute. I am not being graphic here. all I mean is, there must be a first day someone tries to do such a thing etc
Is this making sense? "
I don't want to put words in your mouth, Jenni - but do you mean something along the lines of "a woman may have never sold herself before, but was loitering in a known pick up area, conflicted as to whether to go down that path..."
Is that it ?
Sir Robert
'Tempus Omnia Revelat'
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2754
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 12:27 pm: |
|
I thought the following method of swift attack might be of interest to the discussion.
The case is the attempted murder in December 1888 of Lucretia Pembroke, 15, by William Atkins, 21, in an East End coffee house in broad daylight.
Atkins entered the coffee shop, ordered a tea and sat down at a table. After the young girl had served his tea to table, and the very second she turned her back on him he:
‘Seized her by the back of the neck and cut her throat, inflicting a fearful wound, extending from a point just clearing the windpipe to the right ear, the lobe of which was struck off.’
The crime was without motive.
Interesting though, especially the lobe of the ear being cut off in the attack carried out from behind the victim. |
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 437
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 1:24 pm: |
|
Hi all,
Ap,
You have some stories to tell..
I just wanted to say that we don't really know how Jack approached his victims. Some times he may have played the part of a John, sometimes he may have attacked suddenly. Certain murders seems to indicate the first, others might (and I say might) indicate the latter.
In the case of, say, Chapman, I think it is fairly certain that she was in that yard to solicit. In the case of Nichols, for example, it might have been both ways. It is not impossible she was picking up Jack where she was killed, it is even possible she intended to do her business there, OR Jack could have made a surprise attack. It was in a street, who can say?
There is no way of being certain, I think.
Stride also seem to fall in the category of probable soliciting, because she was in the yard. But we simply don't know what she was doing there. Was she waiting for someone in the Club? Did she follow someone she knew to the club, and did that someone kill her?
Just speculation, but my point is, we can't be certain either way.
Jenni,
I made the point some time ago that whether a woman is a prostitute or not, all depends on definition. We sometimes seem to think all women back then prostituted themselves from time to time, and yet that is clearly not the case. However, many did out of pure necessity. And those who did it occasionally were they "real" prostitutes or not? I guess you could call them occasional prostitutes or whatever, but my humble point is that it is a matter of definition.
Monty,
Again definition is the "problem" I guess. When I say evidence, I speak of the things we know happened, even if we do not necessarily know the full circumstances. The GSG is a good example. We know it was there. We still argue what it meant and who wrote it. I say that IF Jack wrote it, then it clearly indicates he had an issue with Jews one way or another.
If we disregard this "evidence", then there is no connection here at all. But to dismiss the GSG is based on opinion only, because there is no way we can know for sure. And, although I think Jack wrote it, and I even think I have a good hunch why, you, and anyone else may obviously disagree with me, or any other pro-graffito armchair detectives.
But that does not mean you can claim you know the truth. So I still think I'm right in saying what I said. IF we disregard the evidence (which I freely admit is questionable), then there is no link, if we don't, in this particular instance, then there is most definitely a Jewish link!
So, neither of us are necessarily correct. But therefore to say that the evidence supports no Jewish connection at all, is obviously no more correct than to say it does. And I did say: "but only if..."
So actually, I think I'm slighly more correct
This is what I meant. If you disregard the known "facts" (I made a list of some above somewhere), then there is no connection whatsoever. But that is true for ANYTHING!
Anyway. I have never ever considered our disagreements as a problem, Monty old boy. Sometimes I HAVE responded pretty harsh to other people's opinions in the past (and that is probably a problem I have with my temper), but that was because of their method of argument, NOT because I do not accept that people disagree!
And you disagree in a way I can live with, hahah
Steve,
What you say about this case and lack of evidence, makes perfect sense. EVERYTHING seems open to interpretation. And that is obviously a major problem unless we agree that nothing is written in stone when it comes to Jack. We know some women were killed. We know SOMEONE did it. We don't know who, and we don't know how many the person we call Jack accounted for.
Martin,
When I say that Chapman's wound is by far the deepest, I base that on an article by Karyo Magellan in Ripperologist (September 05). By examining the diagrams there, I'm sure you will come to the same conclusion.
Eddowes' wound was almost as deep on the left side, but significantly shallower on the right side, whereas Chapman's head was almost severed.
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Jennifer Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 3067
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 3:38 pm: |
|
Yo everyone,
yo Robert,
no that's not what I meant. there are kinda two things i mean. the first is that just becaue someone doesn't have previous doesnt mean they were a whatever. And in this case what i mean is there is it would seem (i don't know!!) a day when you aren't a prostitute and a day when you are a prostitute, maybe that was the day (ok i know its unlikely but all im saying is etc)
Secondly, we seem to have this idea that women are prostitutes like women are nurses or plumbers or whatever. As though it is a regular job. and I'm not saying that wasn't how it was, i'm saying is there is no reason why it could not have been more (for want of a better word) casual. In that sometimes maybe they would do it, but othertimes they did not have to.
Yo Helge,
yes it is a matter of definition, which unless i am very much mistaken was my point when i said "Doesn't it depend on what we mean by a prosititute". I'm not syaing what does or does not make someone a prostitute. Don't think I'm being some raving feminist here. All I'm saying is its not a term thats so easy to define.
oh and i certainly don't think all women prostituted themselves from time to time in any literal way (or at all) and wasn't intended to imply that
yo
Jenni
"Don't you know it's true what they say, Things happened for a reason,"
|
Sir Robert Anderson
Chief Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 584
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 5:34 pm: |
|
"We sometimes seem to think all women back then prostituted themselves from time to time, and yet that is clearly not the case. However, many did out of pure necessity. "
Absolutely. I'm sure that to many, it was a last resort. The thing with Stride, however, is that we know a fair amount about her earlier life in Sweden, and she seems to have turned to prostitution at an early age.
Sir Robert
'Tempus Omnia Revelat'
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 439
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 5:35 pm: |
|
Yo Jenni!
I just had to hammer it through that I said it first!
My point is that times were hard, and prostitution was the only solution for many when they could not get a job, or a man to support them (and I'm not being sexist here, this were different times..but I know you knew that)
I doubt Jack cared for any of this, though.
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 440
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 5:38 pm: |
|
Robert,
Good point about Stride. I'm slightly more cautious about calling Eddowes a prostitute, though.
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Julie
Inspector
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 195
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 6:15 pm: |
|
Monty
I certainly agree with you with respect to Eddowes being a full or part time prostitute.
I know many disagree with me however, no one will convince me that Jack did not specifically choose prostitutes. I don't necessarily know his reasons for same, but he chose prostitutes.
I firmley believe he knew who were or were not prostitutes. Maybe because he lived in the area, lived in the same doss house, or was a customer, who knows.
regards
Julie
|
David Cartwright
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 10:24 am: |
|
Hi Caz.
Great point young lady.
I think it's pretty clear that the Ripper targeted prostitutes. He would have known that they were unlikely to reject his advances, which I would think were made in an inoffensive and disarming manner, then obliged him by leading him to the places where they were slaughtered.
There would have been far too much risk in trying to proposition "respectable" women, especially while the police and private patrols were out in force. No respectable woman would have gone into the backyard in Hanbury St., or a deserted Mitre Square.
We can't be sure about very much in the Ripper case, but I'm certain in my own mind that prostitutes were deliberately sought out for his killing spree.
Best wishes Caz.
DAVID C. |
David Cartwright
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 10:26 am: |
|
Hi Caz.
Great point young lady.
I think it's pretty clear that the Ripper targeted prostitutes. He would have known that they were unlikely to reject his advances, which I would think were made in an inoffensive and disarming manner, then obliged him by leading him to the places where they were slaughtered.
There would have been far too much risk in trying to proposition "respectable" women, especially while the police and private patrols were out in force. No respectable woman would have gone into the backyard in Hanbury St., or a deserted Mitre Square.
We can't be sure about very much in the Ripper case, but I'm certain in my own mind that prostitutes were deliberately sought out for his killing spree.
Best wishes Caz.
DAVID C. |
Cludgy
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 8:34 am: |
|
If JTR was targetting prostitutes, the fact that they were an easy target need not necessarily have been the reason for the attacks on said prostitutes
I've had a look at the dates of the murders, they occcur at the beginning at ends of the month. There could be a reason for the repetitive nature regarding the dates of the murders
Could it be that JTR did indeed contract a venereal disease from a Whitechapel prostitute. The most likely disease in my mind would be Gonnorea, this has a short incubation time, and it manifests itself in a very painfull and alarming manner
If he did contract a venereal disease, could he have been recieving treatment at the beginning and ends of each month, and every time he recieved the treatment it reminded him of the prostitute who had infected him, thus inciting him(after a night out in the boozer) to murderr and mutilate prostitutes.
Now I realise that in order to carry out such barbarous attacks on the women he murdered required JTR to be physcopathic, (ordinary people don't go butchering prostitutes just because they contract VD from them) but could the fact that he contracted VD from a prostitute have triggered JTR to commit those crimes?
How long would it (successfully) take to treat Gonnorea in late Victorian times? Was it treatable? Were the suffers treated monthly? Could he have infected a spouse?
I know the above is highly speculative, but it's just a thought
Regards Cludgy |
Steve Swift
Detective Sergeant
Username: Swift
Post Number: 59
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 8:43 pm: |
|
There would have been far too much risk in trying to proposition "respectable" women, especially while the police and private patrols were out in force. No respectable woman would have gone into the backyard in Hanbury St., or a deserted Mitre Square.
I must admit this annoyed me back in Sutcliffe's day and it annoys me now.
Tell me something - at what point does a woman become any less 'respectable' because she has no other choice but to resort to selling her sex to feed herself or her family? That is both judgemental and offensive.
I well remember the comments of senior officers who more or less told the public that 'respectable' women had nothing to fear from the Yorkshire Ripper too - didnt quite get that right now did they.
I think it's pretty clear that the Ripper targeted prostitutes. He would have known that they were unlikely to reject his advances, which I would think were made in an inoffensive and disarming manner, then obliged him by leading him to the places where they were slaughtered.
Really? Polly Nichols and Kate Eddowes were killed in the street,Liz Stride outside a Club full of people, so in fact three of the five accepted victims died,not in places of 'business',but out in the open.
There was no evidence that any sexual activity took place during any of the murders.Apart from Annie Chapman we also have no reason to suppose that the killer engaged his victims in conversation of any kind and is just as likely to have conducted a 'blitz' style attack.
Let us just consider something for a moment. None of these women were full time working prostitutes. They were all 'casual', selling themselves when no other option was available. A casual prostitute does not have a set routine, so it is rather unlikely the killer selected his victims that way.
Most of the victims were also alcoholics,again no set routine,none were in full time employment,only Kelly had a regular place of abode, so what does that leave us?
Public houses? Or this killer was an opportunist.
Much has been made of the fact that these women were, at one time or another, prostitutes.Yet the evidence says that in three out of the five cases they were in puplic places at the time of death, according to one witness we even hear Liz Stride turning one man down.
Basically that is why I think JtR killed women specifically, the fact that some were casual prostitutes mattered not one jot, it just made it easier.
Bill Shankly to a Liverpool fan:
"Where are you from?"
"I'm a Liverpool fan from London."
"Well laddie . . . . What's it like to be in heaven?"
|
Sir Robert Anderson
Chief Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 586
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 9:01 pm: |
|
"If Jack was a Jew, then the GSG takes on a whole new meaning (as I'm sure you allready know)
The Jews (and in particular me, Jack) are the men that will not be blamed for nothing. In other words, you guys blame the Jews, well, this time you need not blame us for nothing!"
As long as we are speculating, let me throw another interpretation into the ring. Look at the GSG from the point of view that Jack attacked Stride because she was servicing Jews..."The Jews were responsible for this".
Sir Robert
'Tempus Omnia Revelat'
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
