The International Working Mens Club and the GSG.

[Sam Flynn]

In very very close proxmity!

Simple as that, I'd say.

Oh, for f*k's sake.

[ChrisGeorge]

Hello all!
I was watching a doc I have on DVD again and a thought came to me. Stride was killed near a Jewish social club and then on the same night a message believed by some to have been written by the killer makes a reference to Jews. It struck me that this may be more than a coincidence. I just wondered what other peoples thoughts might be. Appologies if this is an idea that has already banded about.

Hello Kat

The main problem in trying to go from the Jewish elements of the "Double Event" to saying the Ripper murders had "everything" to do with the Jews, is that in the other three canonical murders, the Jewish strands are harder to find.

The Polly Nichols murder site in Buck's Row was south of an old Jewish cemetery but hardly could be said to be in "close proximity" to it, to quote a phrase in this thread.

It's hard to find Jewish associations in the Chapman case, apart from the fact that some of the people residing on Hanbury Street were Jewish.

And the only possible Jewish connection I know of in the Kelly case was that the man described by Hutchinson could be described as Jewish-looking. As an aside, Barnett is a common Jewish name, although Mary Kelly's lover appears to have been of Irish background and not Jewish.

If anyone knows of other Jewish connections to the canonical murders other than the well-known ones on the night of the Double Event and those that I have described above, I would be interested to hear about them.

All the best

Chris George

[Sam Flynn]

The Polly Nichols murder site in Buck's Row was south of an old Jewish cemetery but hardly could be said to be in "close proximity" to it, to quote a phrase in this thread.

I wouldn't bank on it, Chris

[Ben]

Hi Chris,

If, as per my contention, the killer sought out opportunities to fuel the suspicions that had already been cast in a Jewish direction, the Tabram and Nichols murders don't really "count" since they pre-dated the Leather Apron brouhaha. Hanbury Street was also relatively early days, although there was an actual leather apron present at the crime scene, along with a witness who described a foreigner despite having only acquired a rear view. Both quite convenient for the ripper if he wasn't Jewish or foreign himself, and it may have been in the wake of that murder that he perceived an advantage in "helping" those suspicions along, if provided with easy opportunities to do so.

The double event we've already discussed, leaving us with the Kelly murder, and of interest to us within the context of the Astrakhan Man description is the fact that not all Jew-implicating efforts needed to be purely geographical.

Just my tuppence.

Cheers,
Ben

[auspirograph]

The main problem in trying to go from the Jewish elements of the "Double Event" to saying the Ripper murders had "everything" to do with the Jews, is that in the other three canonical murders, the Jewish strands are harder to find.

The Polly Nichols murder site in Buck's Row was south of an old Jewish cemetery but hardly could be said to be in "close proximity" to it, to quote a phrase in this thread.

It's hard to find Jewish associations in the Chapman case, apart from the fact that some of the people residing on Hanbury Street were Jewish.

And the only possible Jewish connection I know of in the Kelly case was that the man described by Hutchinson could be described as Jewish-looking. As an aside, Barnett is a common Jewish name, although Mary Kelly's lover appears to have been of Irish background and not Jewish.

If anyone knows of other Jewish connections to the canonical murders other than the well-known ones on the night of the Double Event and those that I have described above, I would be interested to hear about them.

All the best

Chris George

Good points Chris and a fair and interesting summary of the Jewish elements, or lack of, in the canonical murders. Certainly however, there were early Jewish suspects in the press reports of the murders of Chapman and Nichols that had prefabricated Jewish suspicions throughout the East End.

You appear to be implying then, because of a lack of Jewish 'localities' or indications in the other events, that Anderson was indeed wrong in declaring the certainty that the police had a firm Jewish suspect albeit without evidence.

And I'm not so sure that Berner Street could be regarded as a 'Jewish' murder in view of the fact that at that time the Worker's Club was a socialist establishment attended by Jews without affiliations to the Orthodox.

Anderson was quite specific, was he not, that he meant a suspect of Jewish decent not religion so that a case can be made for an Anarchist from Berner Street. The only problem with that is the timing because on the night of the 'double event', if Stride was indeed a Ripper victim, the Berner Street Club was under notice of the police not for political violence as is assumed, but for disturbances of Socialist idealists against fellow Orthodox Jews.

What then is your view on Anderson's statements in regards the 'Jewish elements' or lack thereof?

Regards
Spiro

[The Grave Maurice]

Now that this thread has reached its natural conclusion, I’d like to make an off-topic comment. I join Anna (post #44) in welcoming Seecomber (post #23). I like Seecomber's point that Elizabeth Long may have been confused with Long Liz, not because I think there is anything to it, but because, in all the years I have been reading about JtR, I never made the connection between Liz Long and Long Liz. Once it’s pointed out, it’s obvious, but I never saw it. It just goes to show that fresh eyes can bring fresh insights to the mystery.

[perrymason]

Just a note regarding Sams informative view on the religious or ethnic breakdown of the area.....

A disparaging remark...which in literal terms the message was, mispelling the word "Juwes", has little if anything to do with the number of Jews in that immediate area. The spelling indicates semi-literate gentile, whether Juwes or Juewes, and the proximity of the message to a piece of evidence of a murder can not be disgarded because many Jews lived nearby.

Claire.....PC Long was there, no-one here was....and saw the items in concert if you will, and no-one here can dispute that his opinion was that they were linked. Sure he could have been wrong, but no-one has ever made a valid, substantial case that he was.

Warren was surely hated by most local Socialist Jews after Trafalgar Square in 87, and his decision to erase it before properly recording it as evidence reflects his own lack of comfort with the local populations opinion of him.....not of the potential uproar in general. Riots dont start with unclear messages that may even be supportive of Jews for all we know...they start when the senior man investigating murders makes something of a connnection with Jews using a chalk message.....a risk he decided against taking.

If you dont think the police were on the verge of being overrun due to strong anti-police sentiments, look at Pizers arrest. Or Squibbys.

Best regards all.

[KatBradshaw]

Wow!

I did not expect my question to cause such a debate. Quite pleased it did though. I just wanted to clafiry what I was thinking when I asked the question. My theory (if you can call it that) was that the GSG may have been written out of Jacks frustration at being disturbed with Stride by a jewish man. Rather than some greater conspiracy theory involving anti-semitism!
That is of course assuming that Stride was a victim of JtR and that the GSG was written by the Ripper...................

[perrymason]

I did not expect my question to cause such a debate. Quite pleased it did though. I just wanted to clafiry what I was thinking when I asked the question. My theory (if you can call it that) was that the GSG may have been written out of Jacks frustration at being disturbed with Stride by a jewish man. Rather than some greater conspiracy theory involving anti-semitism!
That is of course assuming that Stride was a victim of JtR and that the GSG was written by the Ripper...................

Hi Kate,

Its obviously a contentious issue, because its quite possible Warren ordered the erasure of Jack the Rippers handwriting before it could be preserved in a photo.

Many would like it to be simply grafitti from some other stranger, placed there for inexplicable reasons and with inexplicable meaning. There is however a logical answer which many seem to bypass. The cloth and grafitto were not seen there until the second pass by Long after Kates death, more than 1 hour later. Many would have you believe he just missed seeing anything. Possible, sure.

But few seem to interpret Long's not seeing anything as evidence that nothing was there yet. I find that odd myself, but Ive learned that many Ripperologists often dismiss any ideas that deflate the notion of a Canonical Group of 5, regardless of the logic offered. Like nothing else in these stories had meaning but Macnaughtens grouping of victims.

Best regards.

[claire]

Many would like it to be simply grafitti from some other stranger, placed there for inexplicable reasons and with inexplicable meaning. There is however a logical answer which many seem to bypass. The cloth and grafitto were not seen there until the second pass by Long after Kates death, more than 1 hour later. Many would have you believe he just missed seeing anything. Possible, sure.

But few seem to interpret Long's not seeing anything as evidence that nothing was there yet. I find that odd myself, but Ive learned that many Ripperologists often dismiss any ideas that deflate the notion of a Canonical Group of 5, regardless of the logic offered. Like nothing else in these stories had meaning but Macnaughtens grouping of victims.

Hi Michael,

Not wishing to raise your ire, but it's not as if most pieces of graffito have any really 'explicable' reason for being there, apart from the fact that there's an available wall to scribble on. And, to be fair, it's not everyone's opinion that said piece of graffito (GSG) is 'inexplicable.' I think to suggest that it is is very much overcomplicating what, to many, is a quite simple message written in the context of the area and the time.

Also, it's really quite likely that PC Long's attention was drawn to the graffito after discovering the piece of apron simply because his senses, having found the apron, would have been on high alert. If there were a number of graffiti around the area, isn't it likely most people would just walk on by, without noticing it? PC Long, however, suddenly had damned good reason to notice everything around him given the jolt that piece of apron would have given to his senses.

I think to suggest that your finding it odd that people would argue that he didn't see it the first time round is suggestive of 'many Ripperologists often dismiss any ideas that deflate the notion of a Canonical 5' is both a logical leap and pretty derogatory.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Mike,

But few seem to interpret Long's not seeing anything as evidence that nothing was there yet.

It's worth noting that Long only noticed the apron the second time round. Presumably the relative "whiteness" of the cloth caught a flash of light as he was passing, drawing his attention to the doorway. Whatever, the salient point is that Long noticed the graffito only after having picked up the apron, as he started to examine the surroundings. In other words, it's fair to say that Long failed to notice the graffito twice.

I believe that this little fact reveals something interesting. If Long didn't immediately notice the writing the second time, then maybe it was because he was unsighted (e.g., his beat went north → south and the writing was "behind" him on the northern pillar of the doorway, or vice versa), or the writing wasn't particularly conspicuous in the gloom. It may have been a combination of both factors.

If so, and the same lighting/sighting conditions applied to the bobby on the previous shift, then it's quite possible that the writing was on the wall already, unnoticed, before Long even started his beat.

[perrymason]

Claire,

I happen to agree that in proper context the message is anything but unclear. The writer suggests that the Jews evade blame. Now,.....did Jews blame someone for Liz Strides death? Someone with no link or ties to themselves? Yes.

They ran into the street yelling "another murder" was committed, and anyone who lived in that area at that time would know who they referred to. The madman at large. Well, what if the madman didnt kill Liz, and upon hearing commotion on his return home, discovers that people are running around blaming him for a kill he knew nothing about? He hears its at the International Club....a Jewish Socialists club with known anarchist tendencies. And yet they paint themselves as shocked and scared...Eagle is scared of blood apparently, but rushed down the stairs to look. Diemshutz was scared and shocked, but a few months later, takes a club to policemen. Diemshutz was young, Kozebrodski was 17, and Diemshutz is young. And yet they act like scared rabbits,....Act may be the key word there...and a Jewish witness with a theatrical appearance...hmm.

Sam, your point on the direction, lighting and the fact that the apron was not seen is fair. But I wouldnt use that to conclude the message was already there, myself. They were found together, and for all we know, they arrived together. And that wasnt until just before 3am.

Maybe the GSG was there already. Maybe. But all we know is that nothing was seen by Long until the time mentioned. To suggest they were put there by the same person just before they were found is not fanciful at all. And in context, the message might well explain why only one murder that night is represented, by the physical evidence left by the Mitre Square killer. Because he only committed one. Since the killer has never killed twice in one night, before or after this event, and since International Club Jews were blaming the killer at large from the very outset, I think thats a reasonable perspective.

Best regards.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Mike,

They were found together

They may have been found at the same time, but Long didn't spot them at the same time - indeed he didn't spot the writing until he was engaged in a purposeful inspection of the venue, after first glimpsing the apron.

and for all we know, they arrived together.

The fact that Long failed to glimpse the writing, on both occasions he passed by, demonstrates that we can be less certain about that assumption than perhaps we could have been.

[perrymason]

Hi Mike,They may have been found at the same time, but Long didn't spot them at the same time - indeed he didn't spot the writing until he was engaged in a purposeful inspection of the venue, after first glimpsing the apron.
The fact that Long failed to glimpse the writing, on both occasions he passed by, demonstrates that we can be less certain about that assumption than perhaps we could have been.

Hi again Gareth,

Its my belief that the apron was left conspicuously to draw the attention, and the message was to be noticed once that had occurred. "I did this"...but "didn't do that" kind of sequence.

I do feel that there is sensibility in the meaning if placed in context, and one context is the refutation of a murder assignation due to misrepresentation by the "Juewes/Juwes/Jewes"....or whatever the actual word was. The only Jews I can think of that night that might fit would be the ones that blamed Jack for Liz Stride...almost immediately after finding her.

It seems strange to me that they would be unrelated when there is a literal meaning to the message possible,.. that involves one of that nights murders.

Not saying they were both from Jack, or either, but one surely was from a killer that evening.

Cheers Sam.

[Supe]

Michael,

One of the major problems in trying to make any reasonable timeline for the GSG and apron half isthat we are almost entirely dependent on the observations and testimony of PC Alfred Long and as luck would have it he is about the worst PC imaginable to be in that position. Not only was it his first night on that beat but he was drafted in from A Division and that raises firther questions about him. Perhaps the MET was different, but almost any military or para-military unit, when given an opportunity to lose a few members, while eagerly riid itself first of any slackers, idlers or troublemakers--and we do know that he was dismissed from the force the following June.

Thus, just how assiduously PC Long conducted his 40-minute (!) beat and how carefullyy he checked the entrance at 108-19 at 2:20 (if at all) is open to considerable doubt.

Don.