The number of coincidences

[richardnunweek]

Hi Bob,
I have only just seen the thread mentioning that article, which I was unaware of.
I was not aware that one could gain entrance to that building from Dorset street, my bearings of whitechapel have obviously been completely wrong all these years.
So let me get this straight, it is now a fact that one could come out of millers court , cross the road , enter a door , and gain instant access to the kitchen of the Victoria home?
I am [ whats new] confused.
Regards Richard.

[richardnunweek]

Bob,
Hopefully, after using a certain amount of logic, we can kick that article to the kerb, as you know as well as me, using pure geographic knowledge , that article has no need to be futher discussed.
Its just not feasible... however I stick to my original point that the main entrance to The Victoria home was number 39, even if number 41 was part of the establishment.
Regards Richard.

[Bob Hinton]

Oh really...

Bob,
Hopefully, after using a certain amount of logic, we can kick that article to the kerb, as you know as well as me, using pure geographic knowledge , that article has no need to be futher discussed.
Its just not feasible... however I stick to my original point that the main entrance to The Victoria home was number 39, even if number 41 was part of the establishment.
Regards Richard.

That's a bit of a sweeping statement Richard. The writer has obviously mistaken Whites Row for Dorset Street, not a biggy. The main thing is she correctly identifies the Victoria home as being at 39-41 Commercial Street and states quite clearly it is marked 39-41. This is a fact so I don't think you can dismiss the entire article when parts of it are provably correct.

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,



Regards,

Simon

[Fisherman]

Hi Simon!

Is the guy at the bottom - who we can only just begin to make out - given as "David Cohen - confectioner"? If so, we are REALLY speaking of coincidences on this thread.
You wouldn´t know if he sold cachous, would you ...?

The best,
Fisherman

[Simon Wood]

Hi Fisherman,

Kosher Kachous were David Cohen's speciality.

Just don't tell Martin Fido.

Regards,

Simon

[Fisherman]

Deal, Simon!

The best,
Fisherman

[Debra A]

Bob,
Hopefully, after using a certain amount of logic, we can kick that article to the kerb, as you know as well as me, using pure geographic knowledge , that article has no need to be futher discussed.
Its just not feasible... however I stick to my original point that the main entrance to The Victoria home was number 39, even if number 41 was part of the establishment.
Regards Richard.

Hi Richard,
I posted the article because it was a useful description of the way the Victoria Home was run, I didn't give the access onto Dorset Street a second thought to be honest as I presumed it was a mistake (Mrs Garnett was probably geographically challenged, like me!) but I don't understand what you want to dismiss about the article? It's clearly about the Victoria home at 39, 41 Commercial Street and is an interesting insight into the way things worked, added to what we have already. For instance, did you know previous to reading that article that a lodger could obtain a free night's lodgings if they had previously stayed for 6 nights? I certainly didn't.

If the number 39 was the main address like say,how come that in the Whitechapel Infirmary records there are loads of men who's address is listed as 41 Commercial Street (this must be the Victoria Home?) and not 39 or 39, 41? In fact I have yet to see one where they use the number 39 as opposed to 41.
You can check for yourself here thanks to Chris Scott who did a great job of transcribing all the records.

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?p=24615

[richardnunweek]

Hello Debra,
Please dont get the wrong impression, I do indeed find the information about life, and rules at the home fascinating.
I also accept, that as you pointed out the number 41 was commonly used by residents.
My line being, there is a picture of the Victoria home on casebook which clearly depicts the entrance of the two buildings property as 39, and it may be simply the case that the infirmary residents had their doss at number 41.
I find it strange that the lowest number of the two buidings is not in evidence, when clearly it is depicted as the main access to the dwellings.
Anyway Debra, it is only a number....
Regards Richard.

[JSchmidt]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_sharpshooter_fallacy

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clustering_illusion

[Bob Hinton]

Very interesting,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_sharpshooter_fallacy
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clustering_illusion

Fascinating links.

[MrTwibbs]

Bob Maybe you are right in some cases
But saying tens of thousands of people leave Whitechapel a month after the last murder and tens of thousands commit suicide a month after the MJK murder in whitechapel, is quite a sweeping statement to make isn't it? We are of course concerned with Whitechapel not the whole of London.
That would mean that the number of people either vacating Whitechapel a month after the last murder was 20,000 to 99,999
Wasn't that over the population of Whitechapel as it was about 8000 to 10000?

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
A very intellectural explanation for all numerology, I have never gone into explanations, my entire 'Thirty nine theory', infact any theory based on juggling numbers around, can only be looked upon as intresting, and no more.
However recent killers like 'Zodiac' etc, have been numbers orientated, so it is possible that the number 39 may have had some significance to the killer, only if one takes the dates.
31st of the 8 month
30th of the 9th month
39 full days elapsed between eddowes-kelly[ counting the 1st october, and including the 8th Nov]
And to top it all house 26, room 13.
The latter, if part of a sequence would point to a killer that had intimate knowledge of Millers court.
Again ,all good fun.. and whoknows.
Regards Richard.

[Krinoid]

What about that the first couple of murders fall onto important dates inthe Jewish calendar?

[Bob Hinton]

Very interesting but,

But saying tens of thousands of people leave Whitechapel a month after the last murder and tens of thousands commit suicide a month after the MJK murder in whitechapel, is quite a sweeping statement to make isn't it? We are of course concerned with Whitechapel not the whole of London.
That would mean that the number of people either vacating Whitechapel a month after the last murder was 20,000 to 99,999
Wasn't that over the population of Whitechapel as it was about 8000 to 10000?

But what is happening here is that you are ‘forcing’ the so called coincidences. For example in your last post you say:

“But saying tens of thousands of people leave Whitechapel a month after the last murder”

But I didn’t say that and to be accurate neither did you. You said:

“Tumblety leaves around the time of the death of MJK”

There is no mention there of a month or a specific area such as Whitechapel. What I said was that in addition to Tumblety leaving around the time of death of MJK, so did tens of thousands of others, which is in all likelihood accurate. I am quite sure that tens of thousands of people left London during October and December 1888, which is around the time of death of MJK. Now I am not saying that they all left permanently, some may have just have left for the day and returned later. But unless you can establish that anyone involved with the case must have left permanently, there is no coincidence.

As to the suicides. Here again you are forcing. In your last post you say:

“and tens of thousands commit suicide a month after the MJK murder in whitechapel, is quite a sweeping statement to make isn't it?”.

It would be if I made it, I didn’t. In your original post you say:

“Druitt commits suicide a few weeks after dead of MJK” (sic)

There is no mention here of a specific time or place. I stated that:

“And so did tens of thousands of other people”.

I am quite sure that throughout the world tens of thousands of other people did commit suicide a few weeks after the murder of MJK. Now for there to be a real coincidence you have to show that anyone involved with the murders would only commit suicide in London. What about the seamen who threw themselves into the docks at Liverpool? Or the miner who slit his throat in Sheffield? Or the solicitor who threw himself under a train in Swansea? Or the clerk who jumped to his death from the Eiffel Tower as it was nearing completion? You see unless you can link a specific action to a specific cause there is no coincidence.

A coincidence is only a coincidence if nothing else like it happens. For example if one of the victims was killed by a curiously carved oriental dagger, one of only two like it in the world, and a person was seen buying the same or the twin of the said dagger- that’s a coincidence.

Did you ever see the original “Twelve Angry Men” with Henry Fonda? It’s about a murder trial and part of the prosecution case is that the murder weapon, a flick knife of exotic design, is exactly the same as owned by the defendant. The prosecution alleges it is unique. This carries great weight with the jury until Henry Fonda takes an identical knife out of his pocket and stabs it into the table announcing he bought it at lunchtime for a few dollars. When they realise the knife is nowhere near unique it of course loses all value as evidence.

Here’s a starter for 10. What was the name of the character played by Henry Fonda in the film?