Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Anti-semetism and Mary Kelly

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Anti-semetism and Mary Kelly

    i've just hit on something that i consider quite important..

    if Blotchy Face was her killer, there is no reference at the crime scene to anything Anti-Semetic, no cryptic writing and in addition, no Dutfields yard as an ideal location to commit murder...this was Millers court

    the Ripper was trying to tell us something at the Eddowes murder, ``the Jewes are the men`` and i think he chose Dutfields yard earlier on purpose too... so why is there nothing anti-semetic at the Kelly crime scene or outside in Dorset st.........or millers court.... now i think this is a bit odd.... it's a step back in his twisted mindset, in his anti-semetic crusade!

    the only anti-semetic garbage is from Hutchinson.. flipping loads of it, but nothing from the one person you'd expect it from....from the actual Ripper, this is his grand Finale'; the icing on his cake, his swan song and yet nothing.... i've never thought of this before, but it seems to be screaming at me now

    sorry, i was a fool to vote for Chapman, i'm still suspicious of Hutchinson..crafty bastard and very clever too..
    Last edited by Malcolm X; 03-23-2009, 10:22 PM.

  • #2
    Originally posted by Malcolm X View Post
    i've just hit on something that i consider quite important..

    if Blotchy Face was her killer, there is no reference at the crime scene to anything Anti-Semetic, no cryptic writing and in addition, no Dutfields yard as an ideal location to commit murder...this was Millers court

    the Ripper was trying to tell us something at the Eddowes murder, ``the Jewes are the men`` and i think he chose Dutfields yard earlier on, on purpose too... so why is there nothing anti-semetic at the Kelly crime scene or outside in Dorset st.........or millers court.... now i think this is a bit odd.

    the only anti-semetic garbage is from Hutchinson.. flipping loads of it, but nothing from the one person you'd expect it from....from the actual Ripper, this is his grand Finale'; the icing on his cake, his swan song and yet nothing.

    sorry, i was a fool to vote for Chapman, i'm still suspicious of Hutchinson..
    Hello Malcolm

    I am not sure what you have discovered is important but you are right that the only night in which there are a lot of Jewish references was the night of the Double Event with the factors that you mentioned. No apparent Jewish references in Hanbury Street. Buck's Row... well the murder occurred south of the Jews' Cemetery on Brady Street, if that meant anything. And on the night MJK's murder, the only Jewish link (maybe) is the Jewish appearance of the man described by Hutchinson, as you say.

    All the best

    Chris
    Christopher T. George
    Organizer, RipperCon #JacktheRipper-#True Crime Conference
    just held in Baltimore, April 7-8, 2018.
    For information about RipperCon, go to http://rippercon.com/
    RipperCon 2018 talks can now be heard at http://www.casebook.org/podcast/

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by ChrisGeorge View Post
      Hello Malcolm

      I am not sure what you have discovered is important but you are right that the only night in which there are a lot of Jewish references was the night of the Double Event with the factors that you mentioned. No apparent Jewish references in Hanbury Street. Buck's Row... well the murder occurred south of the Jews' Cemetery on Brady Street, if that meant anything. And on the night MJK's murder, the only Jewish link (maybe) is the Jewish appearance of the man described by Hutchinson, as you say.

      All the best

      Chris
      hi
      no my guess is he decided to start his anti-semetic crusade from the Stride murder onwards... but for some reason nothing at Kelly's... he back tracked for some reason, because he had plenty of time for something anti-semetic or a similar cryptic note..... this to me seems wrong

      removing her heart, although this has strong ocult/ black magic connections, isn't a direct link to anti-semetism or a strong enough clue for the TABLOID press/locals to pick up on.... the Ripper would need to spell out in writing his anti-semetism, or to convey it to the media/ police, either by letter or by the spoken word later on..

      just a theory but worth mentioning
      Last edited by Malcolm X; 03-23-2009, 10:44 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Perhaps the murderer didn't write the Goulston St graffiti and didn't kill Stride. Or perhaps he didn't write the Goulston Street graffiti and he DID kill Stride but he killed her where he did because that's where shw was when he found her??

        Having said that, if the graffiti was written by the murderer, you might be on to something. By the time of the double event, the idea that the murderer might be a Jew (because, one newspaper concluded, such crimes could not be committed by an Englishman - but also because John Pizer had been identified as a possible suspect) had taken shape. The killer may have wanted to capitalise on this theory.

        Comment


        • #5
          Hi Mal,

          For what it's worth, I agree entirely.

          The killer would have been churlish in the extreme not to have taken advantage of the anti-semitic undercurrent in the district and the impact it had upon the Whitechapel murders. The "Leather Apron" brouhaha came to the fore between the Nichols and Chapman murders, and in the aftermath of the latter murder, the latest suspect description had implicated a "foreigner".

          If the killer was a local gentile, I can cheerfully picture him adding fuel to that particular fire whenever and wherever an opportunity presented itself, which may explain why both double event murders were committed in close proxmity to two Jewish clubs (one for each double event murder) and a synangogue near Mitre Square. Add the GSG to the whole caboodle, and it's little wonder that Philip Sudgen saw so much merit in Martin Friedland's suggestion that the ripper sought to deflect as much suspicion onto the Jews as possible, an idea that found favour with Sir Charles Warren, Sir Henry Smith and others.

          As you note, it may be more than coincidence that Hutchinson also sought to implicate a Jew where he perceived an advantage in doing so.

          Best regards,
          Ben
          Last edited by Ben; 03-24-2009, 03:17 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Ben View Post
            Hi Mal,

            For what it's worth, I agree entirely.

            The killer would have been churlish in the extreme not to have taken advantage of the anti-semitic undercurrent in the district and the impact it had upon the Whitechapel murders. The "Leather Apron" brouhaha came to the fore between the Nichols and Chapman murders, and in the aftermath of the latter murder, the latest suspect description inplicated a "foreigner".

            If the killer was a local gentile, I can cheerfully picture him adding fuel to that particular fire whenever and wherever an opportunity presented itself, which may explain why both double event murders were committed in close proxmity to two Jewish clubs (one for each double event murder) and a synangogue near Mitre Square. Add the GSG to the whole caboodle, and it's little wonder that Philip Sudgen saw so much merit in Martin Friedland's suggestion that the ripper sought to deflect as much suspicion onto the Jews as possible, an idea that found favour with Sir Charles Warren, Sir Henry Smith and others.

            Best regards,
            Ben
            oh thanks mate

            yes i'm trying to see these murders the other way around... trying to tackle this form another perspective....i'm not 100% sure on those signatures any more either, i think they match; but this still doesn't rule out HUTCH... NO WAY... he took the media/ police on a wild goose chase to catch this LA DE DA jew....down Petticoat Lane.... it's actually quite ``black humour`` isn't it, it's a Mickey take and highly anti-semetic

            but, we have nothing concrete either way, because we still have this one massive problem....``BLOTCHY FACE``

            the most offbeat and crazy theory i have is;- BLOTCHY FACE and HUTCH were a dastardly duo......... the same duo seen attacking STRIDE!

            one of the dastardly duo shouted ``LIPSKI`` a warning to his friend, ``look out; there's a JEW over there``....very interesting indeed, but dont take this too seriously
            Last edited by Malcolm X; 03-24-2009, 03:30 AM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Hi Mal,

              It's also possible that Blotchy and Wideawake were the same person, which would indicate that the 11:45 "visit" was a reconnaissance misson of sorts, during which the premises were "staked out" prior to the offender returning when he knew the coast was likely to be clear. Both descriptions implicated an individual who was not tall, but stout, and they both wore the same rather distinctive headgar; a "wideawake" otherwise known as a "billycock". I say " distinctive" on the basis of the pictorial evidence I've seen, and judging by the mass of peaked caps, I have little doubt that the headgear described by Lewis and Cox (and Wilson, for that matter) was far from the norm.

              All the best,
              Ben
              Last edited by Ben; 03-24-2009, 03:39 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Ben View Post
                Hi Mal,

                It's also possible that Blotchy and Wideawake were the same person, which would indicate that the 11:45 "visit" was a reconnaissance misson of sorts, during which the premises were "staked out" prior to the offender returning when he knew the coast was likely to be clear. Both descriptions implicated an individual who was not tall, but stout, and they both wore the same rather distinctive headgar; a "wideawake" otherwise known as a "billycock". I say " distinctive" on the basis of the pictorial evidence I've seen, and judging by the mass of peaked caps, I have little doubt that the headgear described by Lewis and Cox (and Wilson, for that matter) was far from the norm.

                All the best,
                Ben
                it is indeed possible.... but...HUTCH risks being identified as blotchy face by Sarah Cox, dont forget that he went to the inquest and would've thought ``damn it, that woman that saw me enter Kelly's has gone to the police, i'm in real trouble now.. i've got to sneak out of here quietly`` .....

                but no he went to the police, therefore HUTCH isn't BLOTCHY, in my opinion; not a hope in hell.... more likely he's his accomplice

                if he's identified by Sarah Cox after he's gone to the police, not only is he lieing about all of his statement, but he's definitely the Ripper and i'm sure that he would've realised this.

                being seen waiting outside is dodgy enough ... but still believable for a short time, because being dismissed as a liar/ media attention seeker... is exactly what the Ripper wants, after all; it's better than remaining a top suspect, plus he's already hammered home his anti-semetic garbage for all of London to read, barely two weeks ago!

                anyway just a theory of mine!
                Last edited by Malcolm X; 03-24-2009, 04:14 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  One Step Farther

                  I admit this is pure speculation. Lets take it one step farther. Every wacked out possibility has been suggested for the Ripper's motive. What if he was such a rabid antisemite that the whole thing was an elaborate plot to cause an antisemitic backlash, possibly even a pogrom in London.

                  Admittedly Nichols and Chapman don't seem to have any Jewish connection. The first step would be to perpetrate some really ghastly murders and get the public's attention. As has already been pointed out, the night of the double event is loaded with Jewish associations.

                  My main reason for doubting that Jack was the author of the GSG was that it would be irrational for a man fleeing a murder to stop and do that. However, if the whole point of the killings was to stir up hatred of the Jewish people then the GSG makes a whole lot more sense.

                  Sir Charles Warren certainly thought that if the GSG were seen it would lead to antisemitic riots. Maybe erasing it was really a good thing.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by diana View Post

                    My main reason for doubting that Jack was the author of the GSG was that it would be irrational for a man fleeing a murder to stop and do that. However, if the whole point of the killings was to stir up hatred of the Jewish people then the GSG makes a whole lot more sense.

                    Sir Charles Warren certainly thought that if the GSG were seen it would lead to antisemitic riots. Maybe erasing it was really a good thing.
                    hi Diana

                    he was fleeing mitre square yes, but Ghoulston st was probably relatively safe that time of night, he was probably on his way home, but had to leave the bloody fragment of apron, to link the graffiti to the victim..

                    this graffiti was probably intended for Dutfields yard, but of course he was disturbed and yet again, was disturbed at Eddowes, hence the GSG further away...

                    this spooked him, so he took a month break to let the streets quiet down again, he then went in search of a victim that he could seriously butcher without being disturbed YET AGAIN........so this has to be indoors.

                    No Anti-semetism this time?.......... yes there is, from Hutchinson ( loads of it) , in addition; Victoria homes where he was staying, is on his way home from GHOULSTON STREET.....

                    is this a crazy theory?... not really, but the Ripper was very foolish going to the police............... or was he:-

                    1..... we have no descent suspect descriptions....not one of them would stand up in a Court of law.
                    2.....all these so called suspects could all have been innocent punters.
                    3.....HUTCHINSON has left no clues at the Victoria homes.... not one shred of evidence.........even if the police find a knife, well what this means nothing
                    4.....you could not convict HUTCH as the ripper back then without modern forensics/ DNA, you would have to catch him committing murder or fleeing the scene.

                    if HUTCH was the ripper, he took a huge risk going to Abberline, but you can see that it was risk that he thought was worth taking... due to all the anti-semetic press coverage he got...

                    Abberline dismised him later on as an:- attention seeking time wasting liar, yes exactly... that is exactly what Hutch was.

                    he never saw Kelly outside, not in a million years.... but did he lie because he was the Ripper or not, well; i'm not sure, just a theory i've had for years

                    because the ripper is either him or BLOTCHY FACE
                    Last edited by Malcolm X; 03-24-2009, 11:37 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Hi,
                      Certainly speculation is in fine form here.
                      I am lost for words , I have a reputation for speculating, but how can we believe that Hutchinson was also Blotchy face /Flemming, and that this person actually went to the police to offer his services, either 'just for jolly', or to shield an accomplice.
                      Recently on Casebook we have been treated with three signatures to compare, and that has given more favour that GWTH, was the witness known as Hutchinson, we have no reason to believe[ infact the opposite] that this person, was either a homicidal maniac, or an accomplice to one. back in 1888.
                      So why is it many members like to place him in the frame?
                      Why can we not simply adjust to the most logical explanation , ie.. he was speaking the truth, he saw a fancy dude with his friend Mary Kelly, he witnessed them meeting , he heard the laughter, hew witnessed them both walk back pass him, he followed them to Dorset street, and he witnessed the kissing before the couple entered the court.
                      Why is it impossible[ words used by Bob H] that such a meeting took place?
                      Question did this person Astracan, kill Mjk?
                      It would appear so, his approach is very similar to Marshalls [ Berner street] man of clerk appearance, his age, and the kissing of the victim, and of decent dress.
                      But it accepting this, we have to disregard Maxwells. M lewis, morning sightings.
                      I firmly believe that the man hutchinson, believed he was the last person to have seen Mary Kelly alive, and because of this he saw JTR.
                      But was this the case?
                      Regards Richard.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Certainly speculation is in fine form here
                        You'd fit right in then.

                        Richard, you've got a problematic habit of asking a succession or rhetorical questions as a substitute for actually addressing the points raised "Why can't we just believe? Oh, why can't we just accept?". If you find the speculation here to be not in allignment with your world view, show us where we're going wrong, but don't keep asking crass questions that have been addressed countless times before.

                        how can we believe that Hutchinson was also Blotchy face /Flemming, and that this person actually went to the police to offer his services, either 'just for jolly', or to shield an accomplice
                        Blotchy and Wideawake have a very similar appearance, and in light of Lewis' and Hutchinson's evidence, there is reason to suspect that Hutchinson may have been the wideawake man. Since serial killers have been known to insert themselves into police investigations where they perceive an advantage of necessity in doing so (in the wake of being seen at the crime scene, for example) Hutchinson is therefore a legitimately suspicion character. Fleming is simply one possible suggested identity for Hutchinson, given that none of the Hutchinson's in London appear to fit, in my view at least, and that the circumstances of the two men tally somewhat. Of course, none of those are cherished theories of mine. Just some of the more reasonable explanations permitted by the extant evidence.

                        Why can we not simply adjust to the most logical explanation , ie.. he was speaking the truth, he saw a fancy dude with his friend Mary Kelly, he witnessed them meeting , he heard the laughter, hew witnessed them both walk back pass him, he followed them to Dorset street, and he witnessed the kissing before the couple entered the court.
                        That's not accepting the "most logical" explanation.

                        That's just taking the whole thing at face value.

                        Why is it impossible[ words used by Bob H] that such a meeting took place?
                        Rhetorical questions again. Because the contents of his statement tell us as much, as far as I'm concerned.

                        It would appear so, his approach is very similar to Marshalls [ Berner street] man of clerk appearance, his age, and the kissing of the victim, and of decent dress.
                        Forgetting of course that Hutchinson could have read about all of this, and incorporated the details into his own account to give it a veneer of plausibility. Considering the indications that he borrowed rather liberally from other witness descriptions, I'd say that's a very reasonable explanation.

                        Now, not another generic, generalized Hutchinson debate please, but rather back to the original premise of the thread, which was anti-semitism and Mary Kelly.

                        Best regards,
                        Ben

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Ben View Post
                          ...back to the original premise of the thread, which was anti-semitism and Mary Kelly.
                          And I don't understand or buy into that premise.

                          Hutchison's statement is shaped by his worldview. The victorian music hall villain, the prejudices against foreigners. This is exactly one thing. Him and his statement. There is nothing else in the Kelly murder that qualifies as anti-semitism. (AS)

                          But somehow a conection is attempted between AS with other things. First of all, Liz Stride had her throat slit and was left to die in a dark "yard." In England, a "yard" is an enclosed place between structures. The kind of place this serial killer favored. The fact that there was a revolutionary workingmen's club next door is a coincidence. It only shows that this happened in a working class area, with some immigrants located there.

                          The grafitto mentions Jews. That is one thing. It connects to the Eddowes apron. It doesn't connect to Mary Kelly.

                          The police were concerned about AS and took steps to control. These are know facts.

                          Mary Kelly & AS is a non-starter. And that's not meant as a put- down, Malcom, I'm just giving my opinion. It seems just another backdoor way to discuss Hutch in General Discussion. Aren't there already like loads of Hutch threads? Under, what, Suspects, Witnesses?

                          But having said that, carry on please.

                          Roy
                          Sink the Bismark

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            The fact that there was a revolutionary workingmen's club next door is a coincidence. It only shows that this happened in a working class area, with some immigrants located there.
                            Actually, it's only your opinion that it's a mere "coincidence". It might be more significant than that, especially when we know that the Eddowes murder was also committed in close proxmity to a Jewish club. I've no doubt that both locations were attractive because of their secluded nature, but that doesn't eradicate the possibility that he sought to take advantage of popular Jew-scapegoating in the process. Both Philip Sugden and Martin Friedland recognise the merit in the suggestion.

                            That doesn't mean, necessarily, that the killer was an anti-semite himself; simply that he took advantage of anti-semitic sentiment where he perceived an advantage in doing so.

                            The grafitto mentions Jews. That is one thing. It connects to the Eddowes apron. It doesn't connect to Mary Kelly.
                            True, but since Eddowes is connected to Kelly by virtue of them having been murdered, most probably, by the same hand, it naturally allows for the possibility that potential Jew-implicating antics from one murder might have been adopted with some of the others.

                            All the best,
                            Ben
                            Last edited by Ben; 03-24-2009, 06:14 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The only thing that even could remotely connect the killing of Mary Kelly to any ethnicity is Astrakan Man, and the assumption that her killer was involved with the ONLY night that does have many Jewish overtones, the Double Event. Since.... much to our own Richard's frustration... Hutchinson's suspect was discarded by the officials 120 years ago, and since we dont know that Marys murder was by the same man who killed on the night when Judaism plays a large role in the witnesses and locations....there is nothing that is believed to be evidence that links Marys death to anything Jewish.

                              In the case of the second, we can be fairly certain that the man called Jack the Ripper may have been involved in the Mitre Square murder, with Jewish witnesses that may have seen the pick-up,.. coming from a Jewish Club, with the Great Synagogue looming over the square itself. But there is nothing that would tie that killer to any ethnicity in evidence....unless its that he chose to drop the apron near where he himself lived.

                              In the case of the first, a murdered woman is found dead on Jewish Socialists property, after a meeting for members and visitors who were part of that same demographic, with some 28 of them still in attendance.

                              Without Israel Schwartz, a Socialist Jew who happens to be in the immediate area of a Jewish Socialists Club... and an altercation with the deceased just before she dies happening OFF property...the Jewish Socialists on site would be....without doubt... the primary suspect pool for that murder.

                              Judaism in any form or manner is not present in accepted testimony, nor in the accepted evidence, in the investigation into the death of Mary Kelly.

                              Its is relevant in the location, site witnesses and eyewitnesses in the death of Liz Stride,... and it is in witness form, and marginally the location.. and in the apron section location, in the death that occurs in Mitre Square.

                              Sorry, but the thread premise is baseless really....anti semetism and Mary Kellys death have no evidence that is present or believed to connect them....other than the authorities view and opinion that the two murders that did have Jewish influences The Double Event were by the same fellow as the killer in room 13...a view I dont personally share.

                              Best regards

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X