Antisemitism as a diversionary tactic

[Batman]

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?

It is a 5 min direct walk on a normal evening for normal people. It is not a 5 min direct walk for JtR when you have the possibility of police suddenly showing up to a blowing whistle and if you look Jewish, then you are in trouble. Consider that for a moment if he was a Jew.

He had to beat the beats. Which means basically waiting. Which can explain plenty of time-wasting.

Also think, at the height of anti-Semitism, a Jew goes around the place murdering women and vanishing into the night? Does that really make sense to you? Only if you think everyone Jewish was protecting the ripper. Or PCs totally incompetent.

JtR has to do some planning. He carries a knife for example. He is both semi-opportunistic and semi-planned. He knows how to escape.

My answer is that he was waiting for the right timing to go there. He was likely standing in and out of the rain that night. The GSG just happens to be in a dry spot too, out of the rain so it won't wash off and happened to be put there where no Jew was around to rub it off. As if they would just leave it there. It was fresh work according to investigators.

Location, Condition, Content and their immediate perceptions tell us he did it.

I'd love to see proof of such graffiti duplicated elsewhere given all the photos in Whitechapel at the time. Has this even been proven as position? Or is it just a guess?

[Harry D]

The murders happened in largely Jewish areas amongst a milieu of antisemitism. Since we cannot know the credibility of many key pieces of evidence, any connection to the jews might be circumstantial at best.

[Batman]

The murders happened in largely Jewish areas amongst a milieu of antisemitism. Since we cannot know the credibility of many key pieces of evidence, any connection to the jews might be circumstantial at best.

By today's standards, they would be considered circumstantial evidence anyway if they were allowed into court. The shouting of Lipski would be circumstantial evidence and the GSG circumstantial in part because there would be the possibility of hand-writing analysis which is a bit stronger than circumstantial and may even be considered a form of direct evidence, although I don't think it could be classed as scientific evidence. That would be IF they photographed it, but didn't it seems.

Location, Condition, Content and the Immediate Perceptions of the GSG tells us it is likely not just a random chance event.

That random chance explanation relies on there being an abundance of anti-semitic graffiti in Whitechapel.

Is there any evidence this is the case?

Obviously the graffiti in chalk is easily washed away (because it was washed away), but wasn't by the very Jews that lived and worked in the very spot it appeared? Why not?

[Harry D]

The GSG couldn't have been that noticeable. It was only scribbled on a brick jamb and not scrawled across the wall. PC Long only discovered it because he was on high-alert and found a bloodied apron nearby. Also, would many of the immigrant populace be able to read or interpret the graffito? Genuine question. They might have paid no mind to it during their day, oblivious to its meaning.

If the killer had really wanted to frame the Jews, he could've left something definitive at the crime-scene, especially Miller's Court. He could've mailed the organs to the police or news, but nope. One racist slur and a piece of vaguely antisemitic graffito was the sum of his evil plan.

[Batman]

The GSG couldn't have been that noticeable. It was only scribbled on a brick jamb and not scrawled across the wall. PC Long only discovered it because he was on high-alert and found a bloodied apron nearby. Also, would many of the immigrant populace be able to read or interpret the graffito? Genuine question. They might have paid no mind to it during their day, oblivious to its meaning.

If the killer had really wanted to frame the Jews, he could've left something definitive at the crime-scene, especially Miller's Court. He could've mailed the organs to the police or news, but nope. One racist slur and a piece of vaguely antisemitic graffito was the sum of his evil plan.

Write them a letter with an organ part saying 'Hi, I am JtR, and I am a Jew'?

How is a Jew running about in the first place murdering women at the height of anti-semitism and not being noticed by anyone on the beat? Vanishing into the night.

If the GSG was no biggie then all Long had to do was hand over the bloody apron as nothing else would have mattered (at the time, not modern day forensics). Yet this is not what he did. He left everything where it was. He called his superiors and when they arrived they didn't just pick up the apron and walk away like the GSG was no biggie. They were very worried about what it could do and made the decision to remove it as quickly as they could. It was easily washed off. It looked fresh according to witnesses.

I have been reading about the GSG and one question put forward by proponents is where is the evidence that there was lots of anti-semitic graffiti in this area to make a random throwdown next one high probability? Is that a guess or is there evidence from photographs during the time period that this was the case?

I think many of them did speak the language or at least the basics and in the graffiti is the word JUWES which is hardly something someone well educated in English needs to spot as being related to Jews.

Plus why leave up something they can't read and have no clue what it says?

[Ben]

Thanks for the census info, Gareth.

I would personally heed Batman’s caution here that in the absence of the full record of Hanbury Street’s occupancy, census information isn’t necessarily the most accurate gauge of the street’s Jewishness or otherwise. Far more persuasive, to my mind, is Booth’s map, which you also provided, and which reveals the entire northern side of Hanbury Street to have been “75-95% Jewish” in 1899.

Booth also had the following to say:

Now the Jews have flowed across the line; Hanbury Street, Fashion Street, Pelham Street, Booth Street, Old Montague Street, and many streets and lanes and alleys have fallen before them.

At the very least, Hanbury Street would have been considered synonymous with heavy Jewish commerce in the area.

As for the supposed absence of Jew-implicating clues left at the Kelly murder, Stephen Senise references another intriguing possibility in his “False Flag”. But don’t worry; mindful of avoiding bringing suspects into the thread, I am not here referring to the possibility of Hutchinson’s Astrakhan description being another form of “antisemitic diversionary tactics”, but instead Senise’s suggestion that the removal and placement of Kelly’s breasts was an attempt by the killer to mimic the mutilations enacted on the continent earlier in the century that led to the “blood libel” against the Jewish communities.

All the best,
Ben

[Sam Flynn]

I would personally heed Batman’s caution here that in the absence of the full record of Hanbury Street’s occupancy, census information isn’t necessarily the most accurate gauge of the street’s Jewishness or otherwise.

That may be the case, but I somehow doubt that the stretch either side of, and including, Number 29 was wildly unrepresentative. And, even if it was, it begs the question of why the Ripper "chose" to kill in an island of largely gentile residences if he was hell-bent (or Sheol-bent?) on implicating the Jews.

Far more persuasive, to my mind, is Booth’s map, which you also provided, and which reveals the entire northern side of Hanbury Street to have been “75-95% Jewish” in 1899.

In the interest of accuracy, the map was actually by Booth's colleague, George Arkell, but that's by the by. The key thing to note is that it's dated 11 years after the murders and, as the 1881 Census for that part of Hanbury street shows very few people (possibly none) with Jewish/"foreign" surnames and/or places of birth compared with 1891. Extrapolating from that, it's hardly surprising if the Arkell map of 1899 showed a further increase in its Jewish population.

[Michael W Richards]

Thanks, Jon

My issue with that is that there are little, or no, Jewish connections adhering to the next murder after the Double Event. Did he abandon this putative antisemitism-deflection ploy after Mitre Square, or was it never really there in the first place?

Personally, I see the DE as the only time where the killer himself could be conjectured to have demonstrated a wilful attempt to implicate the Jews - and, given the demographics, I'd even question that.

I think the comment above Sam reflects a fixed point of view, in that the subsequent murder must have been committed by the same person, therefore the circumstances should have been more or less consistent.

I think that there is room for argument that more than one person committed the double event, and they needn't have any more connection than geography and timing. Like Mr Brown slitting his own wifes throat that same night.

I think anti-Semitism bleeds through Liz's to Kate's murder, assuming that the apron and the message were from the same person. And a jewish immigrant offering a story that has it in the fabric shows that the local jews were well aware of the sentiments towards them. I think the GSG is an anti-Semitic statement based on my own interpretation of its meaning, but I don't see that as a misdirection ploy. I believe it was genuine.

[Sam Flynn]

instead Senise’s suggestion that the removal and placement of Kelly’s breasts was an attempt by the killer to mimic the mutilations enacted on the continent earlier in the century that led to the “blood libel” against the Jewish communities

Actually, the murder in question was more recent (two sisters killed in Moravia), reported in late October 1888, whereas the "blood libel" had a much earlier origin. Not that this materially alters your point. What I would observe in respect of that is that it's missing the elephant in the 12x12 room: namely, that Kelly had much, much more than her breasts removed. Whether her killer was paying a grotesque homage to the Leskau killer or the blood libel, I don't see any reason to read any antisemitic connotations into a displaced liver or spleen.

[Harry D]

Write them a letter with an organ part saying 'Hi, I am JtR, and I am a Jew'?

...or 'The Juwes are the men that will not be blamed for nothing'.

[Abby Normal]

The GSG couldn't have been that noticeable. It was only scribbled on a brick jamb and not scrawled across the wall. PC Long only discovered it because he was on high-alert and found a bloodied apron nearby. Also, would many of the immigrant populace be able to read or interpret the graffito? Genuine question. They might have paid no mind to it during their day, oblivious to its meaning.

If the killer had really wanted to frame the Jews, he could've left something definitive at the crime-scene, especially Miller's Court. He could've mailed the organs to the police or news, but nope. One racist slur and a piece of vaguely antisemitic graffito was the sum of his evil plan.

Hi harry
As ive said, i think the ripper probably only implicated jews the night of the double event. More than likely as a result at having been interupted by some of them that night. And if hutch was the ripper then on the night of kellys murder also.

However, the rippers writing the gsg was a pretty brilliant evil plan, because it seems to have the desired effect. And then some. It caused confusion, especially among the police, threw suspician to a jewish killer, and helped settle the hash of the commish. The ripper was probably snickering in his boots on that one no doubt.

[Observer]

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.

Hold on let me see. JTR plans to murder Stride so he thinks, I know what I'll draw unwanted attention to myself by shouting Lipski, that way anyone in the immediate vicinity will find Stride's dead body, and because they heard the name of Lipski being called out they'll associate the culprit as being Jewish. Brilliant! I'm sorry, the notion is absurd.

[Observer]

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.

Hi Abby

First let me say that this thread, in my belief, is wandering into the realms of complicated fantasy. The truth is always somewhat simpler than the meanderings that we as posters drift into here in this Forum. However I'll give it a go

By shouting Lipski at Schwartz he's blown the gaff as to creating an impression that a Jew was responsible for the Whitechapel murders. Why would he do that, and then with this in mind go ahead and write the GSG to implicate a Jew? Surely the police if they believed Stride was a JTR victim, and they believed Schwartz had seen the Ripper in action would have picked up on this contradiction too.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby

First let me say that this thread, in my belief, is wandering into the realms of complicated fantasy. The truth is always somewhat simpler than the meanderings that we as posters drift into here in this Forum. However I'll give it a go

By shouting Lipski at Schwartz he's blown the gaff as to creating an impression that a Jew was responsible for the Whitechapel murders. Why would he do that, and then with this in mind go ahead and write the GSG to implicate a Jew? Surely the police if they believed Stride was a JTR victim, and they believed Schwartz had seen the Ripper in action would have picked up on this contradiction too.

he yelled lipski in anger I think at having been spotted by Schwartz while he was attacking stride. he wrote the GSG because he was pissed off about it and to throw suspicion on them.

I agree that yelling lipski blows the gaff, however, I think even some of the police were confused about it.

either way, just mentioning the word jew, or something jewish like the slur, being in connection to the murder could create confused/suspicion.

But to me it seems like the yelling of Lipski is a clear indciator that the ripper was gentile. and also the GSG that the ripper was a gentile, trying to throw suspician on the jews.


as Ive said before several times, i think the other jewish connections were probably coincidence. but who knows? i dont find it totally outrageous that he might have finagled it so murders took place in our near jewish places.

I mean it seems like he picked the wentworth buildings as the obvious jewish location to drop the apron and write the GSG so thats not so far off is it?


but like I said, if I had to bet my life on it, the other jewish connections were more than likely a coincidence.


as you can see, im sort of in the middle on this one Observer.

[Batman]

Hold on let me see. JTR plans to murder Stride so he thinks, I know what I'll draw unwanted attention to myself by shouting Lipski, that way anyone in the immediate vicinity will find Stride's dead body, and because they heard the name of Lipski being called out they'll associate the culprit as being Jewish. Brilliant! I'm sorry, the notion is absurd.

Do you think JtR wanted to be seen assaulting Stride?

JtR botched the attack. He had already drawn attention to himself by being seen assaulting Stride seemingly unaware that Schwartz was behind him for a good distance walking along the same street as him. Schwartz crossed the road and obviously, JtR saw him then.

So that's one person who could be confused with the killer being there at the same time and place and Jewish.

If it is so absurd then why do you have people here thinking Stride's murderer is a Jew and even a Jew who is part of the socialist club next door and not even JtR?

Heck, even a bunch of investigators concluded it was a Jew.

A few astute ones though got that these are all related attacks of the Jewish community.

I think some people here think JtR was just attacking unfortunate women. He was doing much more than that. He was attacking an entire type of society. That is why he left victims in positions of horror (he posed them) where they would be found and shock people. It still resonates till this day.

JtR was attacking in impoverished Whitechapel low-class society because he hates Whitechapel's low-class society. Also, these types of offenders very often strike in their own society. Meaning JtR was likely a Whitechapel low-class society himself.

To finish I notice this statement I said a while back goes completely unchallenged.

I have been reading about the GSG and one question put forward by proponents is where is the evidence that there was lots of anti-semitic graffiti in this area to make a random throwdown next one high probability? Is that a guess or is there evidence from photographs during the time period that this was the case?