Antisemitism as a diversionary tactic

[Abby Normal]

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?

Hi Batman
I have also brought this up a lot in the past when people have argued that the GSG was just random coincidence to the apron as graffiti was common.


I never seen anyone successfully back up this claim in general, let alone evidence of anti semitic graffiti being common.

[Observer]

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.

If you looked Jewish? You mean looking something similar to Alec Guinness character Fagin in Oliver Twist? Police showing up? He's murdered Eddowes in Mitre Square, he needs to get back to whence he came, hanging around worsens his situation. Can you not see that? Also the police would have stopped anyone on the streets that night not just Jews.

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.

Make sense to me? nothing you are posting here makes sense to me.

Whoever committed those murders vanished into the night, he wasn't caught. He was one step ahead of everyone who was in the vicinity at that time.How would anyone know (if they had passed him on the street) that he had just committed a murder? In fact he must have passed people on the street after he had committed his murders

He carries a knife for example.

I'd hardly call carrying a knife pre-planning. He needed it to kill and mutilate those women you know

He is both semi-opportunistic and semi-planned. He knows how to escape.

Knows how to escape? Only because he had the luck of the Irish. He was one lucky fella that he did escape detection believe me.

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.

Standing in and out of the rain? In between murdering Eddowes and writing the GSG? With police on the alert in the area. If so you can not be serious. The GSG was not protected from the elements by the way, it was on the jamb of the entrance to the Model Dwellings, open to the elements. The writing was small in a double hand, and spread out using five lines. Jews was spelt Juwes. The GSG was quite innocuous, a trifle enigmatic I'd say. I doubt whether any local Jew would have took any notice of it.

L

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

I beg to differ.

[Observer]

Hi Batman
I have also brought this up a lot in the past when people have argued that the GSG was just random coincidence to the apron as graffiti was common.


I never seen anyone successfully back up this claim in general, let alone evidence of anti semitic graffiti being common.

Even if the GSG was the only piece of anti-Semitic graffitti in the whole of the East End, which I doubt, it doesn't follow that it's location, that is, in close proximity to Eddowes apron, qualifies it as being the work of Eddowes killer.

[Darryl Kenyon]

I was reading an article on this site the other day about the Butcher's row suspect by Scott Nelson [good article Scott]. Anyway, the point is at the census part I was expecting to see it being predominantly Jewish but was surprised to see how integrated it was. Jewish premises next to Gentile. But if a murder had been committed there I am sure people would read into it - murder outside Jewish butchers definitely evidence of a Gentile casting suspicion on the Jews. Point is I think you would be hard-pressed to commit a series of murders in a place like Whitechapel which didn't have some connection to the Jewish population however tenuous.

[Batman]

Standing in and out of the rain? In between murdering Eddowes and writing the GSG? With police on the alert in the area. If so you can not be serious. The GSG was not protected from the elements by the way, it was on the jamb of the entrance to the Model Dwellings, open to the elements. The writing was small in a double hand, and spread out using five lines. Jews was spelt Juwes. The GSG was quite innocuous, a trifle enigmatic I'd say. I doubt whether any local Jew would have took any notice of it.

L

I beg to differ.

All of your rebuttals hinge on one thing. That Long made a mistake and the apron piece was there all along. Yet Long himself makes it very clear that it was not there when he first looked in as Abby has already clarified with you.

Not only do you have to dismiss the connection to anti-Semitism, but you also have to dismiss Long's account of what happened as wrong, embellished or just an outright lie.

All I see is evidence being dismissed to make a suspect fit. That's the origins of all of this.

[Batman]

Even if the GSG was the only piece of anti-Semitic graffitti in the whole of the East End, which I doubt, it doesn't follow that it's location, that is, in close proximity to Eddowes apron, qualifies it as being the work of Eddowes killer.

Is that what we are saying? That it's proximity alone to the apron is all that matters? I don't think so. We have all the evidence from the Double Event to consider in this matter.

Proponents of the GSG are not making the claim that graffiti that was anti-semitic in nature was all over these Jewish quarters at the time. The burden of proof is on those who think it is just a coincidence to demonstrate that the probability of throwing something down that would land next to anti-semitic graffiti is high.

Your claim that even one piece of graffiti is sufficient to explain it, isn't what GSG doubters are presenting at all. Even most of them know that in order for this to be just another coincidence, that the probability would have to be high, meaning lots of graffiti in the area, not just one.

Your odds are so high that you are betting on a horse like it is 1000:1 if you think just one piece of graffiti can explain the coincidence. The odds are brought down by there being lots of graffiti and therefore a coincidence acceptable. In your current model, it isn't acceptable.

[Observer]

All of your rebuttals hinge on one thing. That Long made a mistake and the apron piece was there all along. Yet Long himself makes it very clear that it was not there when he first looked in as Abby has already clarified with you.

Not only do you have to dismiss the connection to anti-Semitism, but you also have to dismiss Long's account of what happened as wrong, embellished or just an outright lie.

All I see is evidence being dismissed to make a suspect fit. That's the origins of all of this.

I don't have a suspect, so you're wrong there.

I'm saying that it's inconceivable that Eddowes killer wandered about for 40 minutes with police officers searching the streets, and then planted Eddowes apron a mere five minute walk from Mitre Square.

You go for the outlandish notion that he hid in order to purposely dump the apron next to a Jewish tenement, and further more to write the GSG to implicate a Jew as the author of the Witechapel murders.

Long had been in the police force for four years at the time of the murders a comparative new comer. He had been drafted in, during the autumn of terror, from A Division(Whitehall) which I suspect was a damn sight safer than the environs of Whitechapel. Now I don't want to cast aspersions on poor old PC Long, but there is a chance that he wasn't exactly sticking to his beat for the whole of his shift. It's possible he took a little time out from his beat that night, he would not be the first officer or the last to do such a thing. Then of course there's also the possibility that he simply wasn't paying attention and walked past the apron before he eventually found it at 2:55a.m.

As I said earlier, the truth is most often the simplest answer. Out of the two versions as to what really happened, that is, you'rs and mine, I'd say mine is the more sensible, likely, option.

[Sam Flynn]

Can we throw the conversation a little wider than the Double Event and its associated graffito, please? There are plenty of other threads devoted to those, and I'll be happy to join you on them. However, I started this one so that we could specifically discuss the idea that the Ripper adopted an "antisemitism ploy" throughout the series of murders, not just during a couple of hours on one night.

[Observer]

Is that what we are saying? That it's proximity alone to the apron is all that matters? I don't think so. We have all the evidence from the Double Event to consider in this matter.

All the evidence from the double event? All what evidence? That Liz Stride is found murdered in a yard which is noted for it's use by prostitutes? That a Jewish man was subjected to the insult Lipski, thus suggesting that the individual was in fact a gentile, which proves beyond a doubt that he's not trying to implicate a Jew as the killer. That the killer hid for 40 minutes with police officers combing the area, in order to plant a piece of apron in the entrance to a Jewish tenement, and there to write the GSG in order to implicate a Jewish killer? I think not.

Proponents of the GSG are not making the claim that graffiti that was anti-semitic in nature was all over these Jewish quarters at the time. The burden of proof is on those who think it is just a coincidence to demonstrate that the probability of throwing something down that would land next to anti-semitic graffiti is high.

Sorry I can't follow your meaning here.

Your claim that even one piece of graffiti is sufficient to explain it, isn't what GSG doubters are presenting at all. Even most of them know that in order for this to be just another coincidence, that the probability would have to be high, meaning lots of graffiti in the area, not just one.

No it wouldn't, one would be enough.

Your odds are so high that you are betting on a horse like it is 1000:1 if you think just one piece of graffiti can explain the coincidence. The odds are brought down by there being lots of graffiti and therefore a coincidence acceptable. In your current model, it isn't acceptable.

1000:1 horses can win races.

Listen, you're set in your ways, as I am, go on believing what you want, I'm done with this

[Observer]

Can we throw the conversation a little wider than the Double Event and its associated graffito, please? There are plenty of other threads devoted to those, and I'll be happy to join you on them. However, I started this one so that we could specifically discuss the idea that the Ripper adopted an "antisemitism ploy" throughout the series of murders, not just during a couple of hours on one night.

No problem Mr Flynn. However seeing as the only evidence we have which might suggest he might have done such a thing, revolves mostly around the double event, it's going to be hard going. Can you suggest an instance which would apply to the NIchols, Chapman, Kelly murders?

[Batman]

I don't have a suspect, so you're wrong there.

You don't even have to have a suspect. I am talking about the origins of dismissing the GSG. It firmly resides with one investigator in the contemporary and with Martin Fido who had to square everything with his Cohen/Kozminski find for his book.

I'm saying that it's inconceivable that Eddowes killer wandered about for 40 minutes with police officers searching the streets, and then planted Eddowes apron a mere five minute walk from Mitre Square.

If you read back, I already pointed out it is not a five-minute walk for him. He is escaping a net of PCs. He appears to know their beats. This means taking his time to wait for windows of opportunity so he can move on.

You go for the outlandish notion that he hid in order to purposely dump the apron next to a Jewish tenement, and further more to write the GSG to implicate a Jew as the author of the Witechapel murders.

Your view is a modern view. My view is in the contemporary one held by the people who were there at the time. My view isn't that he hid just to purposely dump the apron, but that he had to hide anyway to find a window of opportunity to beat the beats. He could have dumped it on any Jewish street and done the graffiti there, but Goulston St., provided the best avenue for him to also get away.

Not only that but you are omitting that the very spot where he dumped the apron (and hopefully you believe that much) is a type of hiding spot. So your claim he isn't using hiding spots becomes questionable when one has been identified in this very series of events.

Long had been in the police force for four years at the time of the murders a comparative new comer. He had been drafted in, during the autumn of terror, from A Division(Whitehall) which I suspect was a damn sight safer than the environs of Whitechapel. Now I don't want to cast aspersions on poor old PC Long, but there is a chance that he wasn't exactly sticking to his beat for the whole of his shift. It's possible he took a little time out from his beat that night, he would not be the first officer or the last to do such a thing. Then of course there's also the possibility that he simply wasn't paying attention and walked past the apron before he eventually found it at 2:55a.m.

Long was adamant it wasn't there. How do you explain how he could be so adamant? Like saying clearly it wasn't there and he is certain of it.

As I said earlier, the truth is most often the simplest answer. Out of the two versions as to what really happened, that is, you'rs and mine, I'd say mine is the more sensible, likely, option.

The truth is the one that explains all the evidence and not just some of it. Simplifying in your version appears to mean let's make it less complex by removing evidence, IMO. That's not how parsimony works.

[Batman]

1000:1 horses can win races.

Listen, you're set in your ways, as I am, go on believing what you want, I'm done with this

I am actually willing to 'change my ways' based on the evidence. Have done it plenty of times and will again likely. I thought Kozminski was a great suspect. Even read the book on him. Now I don't any more.

1000:1 horses can win races, but how do you square that with your explanation being more likely? Those odds are not likely. They are highly unlikely. That's the point of having odds to begin with.

[Abby Normal]

Even if the GSG was the only piece of anti-Semitic graffitti in the whole of the East End, which I doubt, it doesn't follow that it's location, that is, in close proximity to Eddowes apron, qualifies it as being the work of Eddowes killer.

no it dosnt. but the rest of the circs that night do, IMHO.

frankly, if the ripper hadn't been disturbed by a bunch of jews that night, I can honestly say I would bring down its likelihood of being written by the ripper way down. Its the proximity to the apron and the events that night, mainly the ripper being interrupted/seen by several jews, that qualify it as being the work of Eddowes killer IMHO.

[Busy Beaver]

You will always find that in any tense situation, groups of people will always blame each other for something that has happened. And like so many coincidences within the Autumn of Terror period there just happened to be a large influx of Jewish people arriving from Europe and the Baltic to London, escaping their miserable existence. So guess who's going to get blamed for anything out of the ordinary that is going on- The Jewish Community.
As many Jewish people spoke little or no English, they too would be a little confused and bewildered if a someone came up to them and said "You, you're Leather Apron, or Jack the Ripper", so it was easy to pick on a non-English speaker because they could not answer you back. And of course other people who were present would start to get restless and then you have a situation were Jewish people are viewed with suspicion. Jack probably wasn't interested in all the fuss of the Jewish Community being picked on, and I don't believe Jack himself was Jewish. As far as we know four of his victims were Protestants and one was Roman Catholic, again, that wouldn't have mattered to Jack. It doesn't mean to say that there were no Jewish women out on the streets, perhaps they were in another part of town, or were wise enough to go home before midnight.

[Darryl Kenyon]

Jack is on a roll, he has successfully cast suspicion on the Jews after the double event by killing one victim in the yard of a club known to be frequented by Jews and by getting the police to erase the graffiti in case there is an antisemitic outbreak. Plus the words themselves became quite well known. So what does he do? He lays low for over a month, [why? if he feels the heat is off him and the police are just concentrating their efforts on Jewish males who they are stopping with regularity at night]. No matter when he does kill again it turns out to be his most horrendous murder yet and he has a perfect opportunity to turn the screw even tighter against the Jewish population plus the added bonus to lead the police even further in the wrong direction by writing something like "Stop the persecution of the Jewish people" on the wall of Mary's room or sending a letter to whoever at a later date with say, a part of Kelly's clothing. But what does he do? nothing, not a single piece of evidence whatsoever which may lead to the Jewish people. Place of crime, clues purposely left, graffiti etc Does this sound like a clever killer who was trying to lead the police in the wrong direction, whether he was anti-semitic or not? Sorry, but not to my mind it doesn't.