Antisemitism as a diversionary tactic

[Observer]

i don't think so. he just took advantage of the situation the night of the double event to implicate jews, as did hutch.

If the man Schwartz allegedly saw attacking Stride was JTR how does that implicate a Jew?

[Abby Normal]

If the man Schwartz allegedly saw attacking Stride was JTR how does that implicate a Jew?

because after yelling the jewish slur lipski at him he later wrote the GSG to implicate jews.

[Observer]

This assumes that the Ripper (a) killed Stride and (b) wrote the GSG, but I don't make those assumptions, and I don't need to for the purpose of this discussion. I'm interested in whether there's any substance in the idea of killer's having wilfully used antisemitism as a diversionary tactic across the murders as a whole, not just on the night of the Double Event. Even in that context, the demographics alone (see map above) indicate that we shouldn't be surprised if Jewish connections to both murders might easily be found, even if such thoughts never crossed the killer's/killers' mind at all.

I would have thought that the overriding thought on the killer's mind as he found killed and butchered those woman was to get out of the vicinity as quickly as possible. To suggest that he took the time to seek out a Jewish tenement and to write graffiti implicating a Jew is ridiculous. Likewise the notion that the killer coaxed Stride to the confines of a yard which served a Jewish socialist club, and then to cut her throat to throw suspicion on the Jews is plain silly. Antisemitism as a diversionary tactic? I don't believe so, not at any time during the terror.

[Observer]

because after yelling the jewish slur lipski at him he later wrote the GSG to implicate jews.

Surely it would be a Gentile using such language as "Lipski". How does that implicate a Jew? It points to the fact that he's more or less admitting he's a Gentile. If his motive was to implicate a Jew, he wouldn't be using the insult "Lipski" would he? Providing he was JTR of course

[Sam Flynn]

Stride was murdered. A fact. The GSG was found above the bloody apron. A fact.

Your position on these is that you do not have to accept that these facts are connected to the crimes to make your point.

Those facts are only relevant to the question "was the Double Event perpetrated by the same killer?". They are not relevant to the question of whether the killer(s) adopted a ploy of wilfully exploiting antisemitism, versus the scenario whereby the murders simply happened to occur in areas where Jewish connections could easily be made - indeed, in areas where it would be difficult to NOT find a Jewish connection of some kind or another.

[Batman]

If the man Schwartz allegedly saw attacking Stride was JTR how does that implicate a Jew?

My view is that while murdering Stride, JtR yelled out LIPSKI, who was a Jewish murderer. I don't think this was directed at Schwartz at all who heard it. I think it was called out to make a Jew and even Schwartz seem like the person responsible. People turning up would have heard Lipski. A Jewish murderer and there is a body of a woman.

[Batman]

To suggest that he took the time to seek out a Jewish tenement and to write graffiti implicating a Jew is ridiculous.

Yet this is exactly what happened. For 40 minutes he was holding onto a bloody apron piece he could have dumped anywhere which was a major risk. You think getting out was on his mind foremost, I say sure, but how can holding onto evidence be any less risky?

Yet for 40 minutes he carried around some seriously incriminating evidence. If found with this alone, he would be nabbed bang to rights as it matched with Eddowes dress. His only excuse could be he found it.

Can you explain why he was carrying around incriminating evidence for 40 minutes? Evidence, he obviously got rid off, because it was found.

[Batman]

Those facts are only relevant to the question "was the Double Event perpetrated by the same killer?". They are not relevant to the question of whether the killer(s) adopted a ploy of wilfully exploiting antisemitism, versus the scenario whereby the murders simply happened to occur in areas where Jewish connections could easily be made - indeed, in areas where it would be difficult to NOT find a Jewish connection of some kind or another.

Sorry Sam, I can't agree. That's just omitting facts that are directly related to the question of the anti-semitic connections to the JtR murders. It isn't a just a geographic claim. It involves all the evidence of what happened to Stride and all the evidence surrounding the recovery of Eddowes bloody apron.

The fact it's also a Bloody Apron piece given Leather Apron was the original JtR Jewish suspect is more than bit ironic too. Out of all the things he could have cut away to wipe his blades on he decided on the apron.

[Observer]

Stride was murdered. A fact. The GSG was found above the bloody apron. A fact.

Eddowes murderer wrote the GSG. Pure supposition.

[Sam Flynn]

Sorry Sam, I can't agree. That's just omitting facts that are directly related to the question of the anti-semitic connections to the JtR murders. It isn't a just a geographic claim. It involves all the evidence of what happened to Stride and all the evidence surrounding the recovery of Eddowes bloody apron.

It involves attributing Stride's murder and the authorship of the GSG to Jack the Ripper and, furthermore, the interpretation of what the GSG might mean.

Fun though discussing the Double Event and the GSG are (and they have their own threads), we don't KNOW any of the above for certain. Let's stick to what we DO know, and let's not just focus on the Double Event; not least because, if we can only discern an apparent "antisemitism ploy" at work on just one night during the entire Autumn of Terror, then how can we have any confidence that the Ripper was actually using such a tactic?

[Observer]

Yet this is exactly what happened. For 40 minutes he was holding onto a bloody apron piece he could have dumped anywhere which was a major risk. You think getting out was on his mind foremost, I say sure, but how can holding onto evidence be any less risky?

Yet for 40 minutes he carried around some seriously incriminating evidence. If found with this alone, he would be nabbed bang to rights as it matched with Eddowes dress. His only excuse could be he found it.

Can you explain why he was carrying around incriminating evidence for 40 minutes? Evidence, he obviously got rid off, because it was found.

Long missed the apron piece first time around, it's as simple as that. He didn't carry it around for 40 minutes. But please, you believe JTR killed Stride. If JTR's motive was to implicate a Jewish man as the killer of those women, why did he aim the insult "Lipski" at Schwartz as he was assaulting Stride? By that action he's labeling himself a Gentile.

[Abby Normal]

Surely it would be a Gentile using such language as "Lipski". How does that implicate a Jew? It points to the fact that he's more or less admitting he's a Gentile. If his motive was to implicate a Jew, he wouldn't be using the insult "Lipski" would he? Providing he was JTR of course

Hi Observer

Yes a gentile yelling lipski-I agree. To clarify, I think the lipski event and also being interupted by a bunch of jews that night was the catalyst for the ripper to implicate them by writing the GSG. and im sure he was aware of the jewish suspect angle in general too.

I only think he used it starting with the night of the DE and if hutch was the ripper then also with marys murder. If hutch wasnt the ripper, he used it to bolster his fake Aman story.


I think any other jewish "connection" is probably a coincidence.

[Abby Normal]

Long missed the apron piece first time around, it's as simple as that. He didn't carry it around for 40 minutes. But please, you believe JTR killed Stride. If JTR's motive was to implicate a Jewish man as the killer of those women, why did he aim the insult "Lipski" at Schwartz as he was assaulting Stride? By that action he's labeling himself a Gentile.

Hi Obs

Long missed the apron piece first time around, it's as simple as that. He didn't carry it around for 40 minutes.

Its not as simple as that. Long categorically denies it was there the first time around-he is adamant about it.


and considering the events of the eveining, with the ripper being interrupted and apparently pissed off at the jews for it, the GSG fits that.

[Observer]

Yet this is exactly what happened. For 40 minutes he was holding onto a bloody apron piece he could have dumped anywhere which was a major risk. You think getting out was on his mind foremost, I say sure, but how can holding onto evidence be any less risky?

Yet for 40 minutes he carried around some seriously incriminating evidence. If found with this alone, he would be nabbed bang to rights as it matched with Eddowes dress. His only excuse could be he found it.

Can you explain why he was carrying around incriminating evidence for 40 minutes? Evidence, he obviously got rid off, because it was found.

Also, you tell me how this well informed Gentile of all things Jewish, who pre-planned the events on the night of the double event to implicate a Jewish Ripper took 40 minutes to find a Jewish tenement when in actual fact the distance from Mitre Square to Goulston street is a mere 5 minute walk. He didn't plan that very well did he? Where was he for the other 35 minutes?

[Abby Normal]

Also, you tell me how this well informed Gentile of all things Jewish, who pre-planned the events on the night of the double event to implicate a Jewish Ripper took 40 minutes to find a Jewish tenement when in actual fact the distance from Mitre Square to Goulston street is a mere 5 minute walk. He didn't plan that very well did he? Where was he for the other 35 minutes?

Well in my view, since he wasnt planning it, he didnt go out that night witth any chalk, so in that time span went to his bolt hole and got some.