An experiment

[John G]

I do hope not because I specifically started the discussion by saying "In a criminal trial in England...".

And Pierre's reference to "Davidīs Judge only Criminal Trial" shows that he understood this, even though I am actually saying there were no such things.

Hi David,

Yes, I fear Pierre is getting terribly confused, which is why I asked for clarification.

[John G]

It's worth noting that jury independence, in English Law, was determined beyond question in The King v Penn and Mead (1670), more commonly known as Bushel's Case.

Following an appeal to the Court of Common Pleas Chief Justice Vaughan stated, "The jury must be independently and indisputably responsible for its verdict free from any threats from the Court." He also stated the principle that a judge, "may try to open the eyes of the jurors, but not to lead them by the nose."

[Abby Normal]

It's obvious by the amount of effort Pierre has put into arguing what judges did that he did in fact have that word in mind when he started this thread.

But like so many of his ideas, when PROVEN wrong, will not admit to it, or will say something like, oh well it wasn't central to my theory of who I think the ripper is any way.

Which by the way, he has degenerated from giving hints to who the ripper is to now only giving hints to what his hints are. Which as it turns out don't amount to much.

Now all that being said, I do still Beleive he is sincere about his theory and belief and may have some real interesting ideas and yes, perhaps even real " data".


Pierre
Many people on here have been giving you the benefit of the doubt, and trying to have serious discussions with you, so once more, and for the last time for my part, I ask you to simply lay out who your suspect is and why you think that. Is that really too much to ask?

[Pcdunn]

Is there any word in the English dictionary that starts with the root Ju-, ends with the plural -es (since it refers to "the men") and has 1-2 letters (for w = v+v) in the middle for the, with high probability misread word "Juwes" (seeing that this text has a full coherence in its meaning based on the rest of the words in it)?

Regards, Pierre

I have read far enough to know that "Judges" has been suggested-- but my first thought was that "Juries" fits much better.

[jerryd]

Since we are looking at the word "Judge" I found this interesting. I don't think it would relate to men, though.

Here is a definition for the word JUISE.

n.1. Judgment; justice; sentence.
Up [on] pain of hanging and high juise.
- Chaucer.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Juise

http://www.encyclo.co.uk/meaning-of-Juwise

[jerryd]

I'm not sure if anyone has brought this up before that I remember, but I assume someone would have figured this out before now.

IIRC, wasn't the GGG recorded on paper by authorities with the words "Will" and "Blamed" capitalized? The Juwes are the men that Will not be Blamed for nothing.

I am not a real fan of William Bury as a suspect, but those are his initials. He may have chalked up another message we all know about and misspelled one word, sellar.

[Errata]

Since we are looking at the word "Judge" I found this interesting. I don't think it would relate to men, though.

Here is a definition for the word JUISE.

n.1. Judgment; justice; sentence.
Up [on] pain of hanging and high juise.
- Chaucer.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Juise

http://www.encyclo.co.uk/meaning-of-Juwise

So he goes from being illiterate to hyper literate? I dig that.

[John G]

Erm...William Bury happens to be one of my favourite suspects, however, I believe this thread is starting to enter the realms of fantasy which, regrettably, seems to be par for the course for most threads started by Pierre (in fact, many even appear to start that way!)

For some reason I'm reminded of the Karl Marx quote: " History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce."

[Pierre]

Steve is the best scientist here.

Pierre

not debating the word here but i would like some clarification please given that you have mentioned me.

The only relevant question I can see you asked David was in post 173:

he replied to you in post 174

"I am aware of such things Pierre. But not in England in 1888 tried by judges".


what other question are you saying he has not answered? given you said I would have read the question you asked, i am confused my friend

regards

steve

Hi Steve,

Just as I said, you were able to find my question to David. Thanks.

And if you read Davidīs attempts to answer this question you will also see that he made the wrong interpretation of my question before he started his attempts. He did not answer my question but made his own interpretations of it.

I am also very impressed by your way of finding a plausible word that could be the authentic word for "Juwes". You used the connection to the word "Blamed". Before you did this you also managed to make the right interpretations of 5 of 6 of the words in the list I posted. You understood the principle.

You very quickly understood the correlation between an incorrect letter/set of letters and how to replace them.

This principle must be the one to use as a method with analysing the word "Juwes". So you worked with it like this:

Juwes
Ju-w-es
Ju-**-es
Ju-dg-es

You were the ONLY one who managed to think outside of the box in a fruitful way, since your thinking, at the first step, is based on the text itself and not on its social context.

You also managed to come up with a normal and plausible word, instead of strange and inexplicable words like "Jutes" or "Jubes".

Whereas other people have been biased by ideas about the social context in Spitalfields, and have thought about "Jew-s" which has a totally different word stem, you have used the context of the written text: "Blamed" and "the men".

Judges were men in 1888, whereas jews is a people with men and women.

So at the same time, you managed to find a word that CAN be connected to a plausible and realistic social context: the legal system in modern society.

It was an extremely important system in the British Empire, and everyone in society was depending on it in many ways.

Compare this fact to an idea of "jutes" from the 5th century or a connection between the text and some Masonic ideas.

Naturally, the legal system is more relevant for a criminal like Jack the Ripper. What he does is connected to the legal system, not to old, forgotten or hidden groups.

So my conclusion is that you have managed to:

1. Find a word that is connected to the contents of the text itself. (Internal analysis).
2. Find a word that is clearly connected to the perhaps most important system in the modern society in England. (External analysis).

This makes it highly probable that you have found a word that is connected to the killer, since the text contains a message about blame and since the killer is dependent on the legal system.

This also makes it very probable that you have actually solved the GSG, Steve.


So the method that you have used is to analyse a small bit of data and to connect it to its correct internal and external contexts. You have done a perfect internal and external critical source analysis.

And this is the method we should use all along. We should use the findings from the places where the killer left an item or a dead body in the context of the item itself only as our first step.

And this is extremely difficult, since we often lack the ability to think in terms of very few and small details, which the items is consisting of. You have this ability, Steve.

In the second step we should connect the item to the social context. Here we are often biased by theories and ideas from others, so we must be very careful.

And most people read theories and ideas from others and then they try to apply that thinking on the killer. This erases the killer from history. It erases his actions and his motives. Instead of the view and motive of the killer, we get a socially biased view on his view and motives - that is, the view of society. So while we think we see Jack the Ripper, we see only the view of others on Jack the Ripper.

Steve, you managed to get away from this view, even though you hold the view that the killer did not write the GSG. And this is one of the reasons why you managed to find the best interpretation for the meaning of the GSG, except from your own scientific thinking, which is excellent.

Regards, Pierre

[John G]

Hi Steve,

Just as I said, you were able to find my question to David. Thanks.

And if you read Davidīs attempts to answer this question you will also see that he made the wrong interpretation of my question before he started his attempts. He did not answer my question but made his own interpretations of it.

I am also very impressed by your way of finding a plausible word that could be the authentic word for "Juwes". You used the connection to the word "Blamed". Before you did this you also managed to make the right interpretations of 5 of 6 of the words in the list I posted. You understood the principle.

You very quickly understood the correlation between an incorrect letter/set of letters and how to replace them.

This principle must be the one to use as a method with analysing the word "Juwes". So you worked with it like this:

Juwes
Ju-w-es
Ju-**-es
Ju-dg-es

You were the ONLY one who managed to think outside of the box in a fruitful way, since your thinking, at the first step, is based on the text itself and not on its social context.

You also managed to come up with a normal and plausible word, instead of strange and inexplicable words like "Jutes" or "Jubes".

Whereas other people have been biased by ideas about the social context in Spitalfields, and have thought about "Jew-s" which has a totally different word stem, you have used the context of the written text: "Blamed" and "the men".

Judges were men in 1888, whereas jews is a people with men and women.

So at the same time, you managed to find a word that CAN be connected to a plausible and realistic social context: the legal system in modern society.

It was an extremely important system in the British Empire, and everyone in society was depending on it in many ways.

Compare this fact to an idea of "jutes" from the 5th century or a connection between the text and some Masonic ideas.

Naturally, the legal system is more relevant for a criminal like Jack the Ripper. What he does is connected to the legal system, not to old, forgotten or hidden groups.

So my conclusion is that you have managed to:

1. Find a word that is connected to the contents of the text itself. (Internal analysis).
2. Find a word that is clearly connected to the perhaps most important system in the modern society in England. (External analysis).

This makes it highly probable that you have found a word that is connected to the killer, since the text contains a message about blame and since the killer is dependent on the legal system.

This also makes it very probable that you have actually solved the GSG, Steve.


So the method that you have used is to analyse a small bit of data and to connect it to its correct internal and external contexts. You have done a perfect internal and external critical source analysis.

And this is the method we should use all along. We should use the findings from the places where the killer left an item or a dead body in the context of the item itself only as our first step.

And this is extremely difficult, since we often lack the ability to think in terms of very few and small details, which the items is consisting of. You have this ability, Steve.

In the second step we should connect the item to the social context. Here we are often biased by theories and ideas from others, so we must be very careful.

And most people read theories and ideas from others and then they try to apply that thinking on the killer. This erases the killer from history. It erases his actions and his motives. Instead of the view and motive of the killer, we get a socially biased view on his view and motives - that is, the view of society. So while we think we see Jack the Ripper, we see only the view of others on Jack the Ripper.

Steve, you managed to get away from this view, even though you hold the view that the killer did not write the GSG. And this is one of the reasons why you managed to find the best interpretation for the meaning of the GSG, except from your own scientific thinking, which is excellent.

Regards, Pierre

Hello Pierre,

Of course the disputed word isn't "judges"!. It's almost certainly a misspelling of "Jews", probably written by someone who was only semi-literate, or for whom English was only a second language (a perfectly plausible explanation given Whitechapel's large immigrant community.)

This was clearly the unanimous view at the time by the sensible officers of the Metropolitan police force (see also Abby's post, 192). And, of course , it makes perfect sense, in a way that "judges" certainly doesn't, given the wider social and historical context: the graffiti was found in a neighbourhood with a significant Jewish population; and Jews have constantly been the victims of persecution throughout European history, i.e. blamed for numerous things, such as the death of Jesus and even the black death.

In fact, between 1881 and 1884 there was a wave of anti-Jewish pograms in the Russian Empire following the assassination of Tsar Alaxender II, for which some (wrongly) blamed the Jews. This resulted in a flood of Jewish immigrants, fleeing persecution, many of whom settled in the East End of London, i.e. Whitechapel.

I'm sorry to have to say this, Pierre, but your approach at times seems less than academic-ironic given your earlier claims-relying instead on the purely whimsical: applying fanciful and elaborate solutions to simple problems; a reliance on metaphors that only you, apparently, can understand; and, on one bizarre occasion, resorting to a near homonym by way of a explanation!

If you genuinely wish to improve your credibility, may I respectfully suggest that you read Philip Sugden's book. After all, he was a respected historian, and his academic approach was meticulous and substantive.

I also agree with Abby; it's surely time that you named your suspect. I realize that, by now, you probably fear subjecting yourself to public ridicule, as your evidence is probably quite thin, given your approach to research, but I think it's probably time to just get things over with.

Then we can all just move on.

[Pierre]

Since we are looking at the word "Judge" I found this interesting. I don't think it would relate to men, though.

Here is a definition for the word JUISE.

n.1. Judgment; justice; sentence.
Up [on] pain of hanging and high juise.
- Chaucer.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Juise

http://www.encyclo.co.uk/meaning-of-Juwise

Hi,

"juise" are not "men". "Juise" can not be "blamed".

Regards, Pierre

[David Orsam]

Pierre, I must congratulate you on the way this experiment has worked out. Based only on pure scientific principles, the application of logic, and some thinking out of the box, you predicted at the outset that there must be another word in the English dictionary that would meet your arbitrary criteria and which must have been mistaken for "Juwes". Then, lo and behold, almost miraculously, Steve found such a word. Considering that it was literally impossible for you to have known that such a specific word would exist, absent rigorous scientific thinking, this thread has been a masterpiece of how the application of science could potentially solve the entire JTR mystery. In fact, had I not known that this experiment was conducted using the highest scientific principles I would probably have thought it was nothing more than a cheap magic trick.

Once again, well done for carrying out such a successful experiment, it is only a shame that the letters "d" and "g" in lower case look nothing like a "w" so that it is highly unlikely in real life, on planet Earth, that there was any such confusion between the two words.

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=John G;373330]Hello Pierre,

Of course the disputed word isn't "judges"!. It's almost certainly a misspelling of "Jews", probably written by someone who was only semi-literate, or for whom English was only a second language (a perfectly plausible explanation given Whitechapel's large immigrant community.)

Comfortably living a quiet life in the old box.

This was clearly the unanimous view at the time by the sensible officers of the Metropolitan police force (see also Abby's post, 192).

The earth is flat. This was clearly the unanimous view at the time before the classical period by the sensible Greeks.

And, of course , it makes perfect sense, in a way that "judges" certainly doesn't, given the wider social and historical context: the graffiti was found in a neighbourhood with a significant Jewish population; and Jews have constantly been the victims of persecution throughout European history, i.e. blamed for numerous things, such as the death of Jesus and even the black death.

At one of the murder sites of American serial killer David Berkowitz, the police found a letter near the bodies. The letter contained the phrase "I am the Son of Sam". It makes perfect sense, given the wider social and historical context: the letter was found in a neighbourhood with a significant male population where many were called "Sam". Uncle Sam is also a metaphor for the United States, and that was widely known among the folks in that neighbourhood.

In fact, between 1881 and 1884 there was a wave of anti-Jewish pograms in the Russian Empire following the assassination of Tsar Alaxender II, for which some (wrongly) blamed the Jews. This resulted in a flood of Jewish immigrants, fleeing persecution, many of whom settled in the East End of London, i.e. Whitechapel.

In fact, during the times of Berkowitz and especially in his fathers generation, there was a wave of naming boys Sam and Samuel. It was very popular. This resulted in a flood of people called Sam. It was so popular that women called Samantha also used it. Many of those lived in New York at that time, where the murders took place.

I'm sorry to have to say this, Pierre, but your approach at times seems less than academic-ironic given your earlier claims-relying instead on the purely whimsical: applying fanciful and elaborate solutions to simple problems; a reliance on metaphors that only you, apparently, can understand; and, on one bizarre occasion, resorting to a near homonym by way of a explanation!

If you genuinely wish to improve your credibility,

I donīt. I donīt care for "credibility", you see.

may I respectfully suggest that you read Philip Sugden's book.

I have. But it is incomplete. You need the original sources, not the opinions of a single historian. And he did not manage to solve the case. He did not even try, as far as I know (I might be wrong).

Regards, Pierre

[David Orsam]

Comfortably living a quiet life in the old box.

As I mentioned earlier Pierre, the word "judges" was proposed as the solution to the puzzle at least seven years ago (and probably much longer before that, as others have noted).

It is you who is living in an "old box" my friend.

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=David Orsam;373343]Pierre, I must congratulate you on the way this experiment has worked out. Based only on pure scientific principles, the application of logic, and some thinking out of the box, you predicted at the outset that there must be another word in the English dictionary that would meet your arbitrary criteria and which must have been mistaken for "Juwes".

Then, lo and behold, almost miraculously, Steve found such a word.

It is not almost a miracle. Steve is intelligent. And very detailed. His ability to remember what other people write, his critical thinking when he analyses a source internally and externally, as well as his ability to step out of his own ideas without abandoning them, is remarkable. You could learn a lot from him.

Considering that it was literally impossible for you to have known that such a specific word would exist, absent rigorous scientific thinking, this thread has been a masterpiece of how the application of science could potentially solve the entire JTR mystery.

You are ironic so it seams meaningless to give you some feedback on that. But for those who does not see what you are writing here: No. An hypothetical solution for the GSG does not mean a solving of "the entire JTR mystery".

In fact, had I not known that this experiment was conducted using the highest scientific principles I would probably have thought it was nothing more than a cheap magic trick.

Today you seem to be all miracles, mysteries and magic, David. Have you read Harry Potter?

Once again, well done for carrying out such a successful experiment, it is only a shame that the letters "d" and "g" in lower case look nothing like a "w" so that it is highly unlikely in real life, on planet Earth, that there was any such confusion between the two words.

Back in the old box, I hear. Being convinced that the letter in the middle of a word written on a black brick wall in 1888 was a "w" and could never have been anything else. Convinced that it had to do with "jews". Steve managed to forget that. You didnīt.

Regards, Pierre