Anderson in NY Times, March 20, 1910

[Chris]

The phrase "his people" could mean "his family" (as in "I don't know him. Who are his people?"). I think that's the sense in which Anderson used it.

[Jeff Leahy]

Interesting thought David, since I happen to be one of the few that believed Pizer and his family when they claimed none of them had ever heard "Leather Apron" being used to refer to Pizer.

Best regards ami

Just to rremind everyone that Paul Begg covered this topic in some detail at this years conference and the full DVD is now available from Adam Wood at only £15...

Jeff

PS I think the DVD's got to Adam eventually, apparently I sent them to the wrong address but luckily found there own way back via Rob Clack...cheers for that I do appologuize.

[DVV]

The phrase "his people" could mean "his family" (as in "I don't know him. Who are his people?"). I think that's the sense in which Anderson used it.

Yes Chris, that's it,

and given the context, the word is well chosen.
The French translation would be: "ses gens", meaning "his family", but with some sort of "clanic" connotation.

Amitiés all
David

[Jeff Leahy]

Even more interesting if Robs Theory about the Crawford letter and Aaron's sister were the case?

Pirate

http://www.casebook.org/podcast/listen.html?id=74

PS http://www.ripperconference.com/dvd/promo.html

[DVV]

I do remember reading a dissertation on casebook that suggests these Polish Jews were wary of "Gentile justice" due to the persecution they had received in Poland/Russia. Gentile justice in mainland Europe(and at times in Britain) was a story of persecution and mob rule.

Perhaps Jews as persecuted minority may make you more open minded to these prejudices of Anderson rather than the traditional Gentile anti Jewish beliefs.

Jason, I agree. Anderson's theory doesn't make Anderson an Anti-Semite, at least, not in the sense it has for us now.

That immigrants may display a tendency to mistrust the police is something understandable. But it couldn't be to the extent suggested by Anderson.

Sincerely, do you think Kosminski's brother in law was mad enough to let Jack the Ripper sleep with his wife and daughters ?

Protecting a thief is one thing. Sleeping with Jack is another.

Amitiés,
David

[Chris]

We do know that Aaron's brother Woolf had no general objection to calling in the agents of "Gentile justice", as Anderson calls it. When he caught one John Isaacs burgling his house in Greenfield Street in 1886, the first thing he did was to send for a constable.

[DVV]

We do know that Aaron's brother Woolf had no general objection to calling in the agents of "Gentile justice", as Anderson calls it. When he caught one John Isaacs burgling his house in Greenfield Street in 1886, the first thing he did was to send for a constable.

"...and that proves Anderson's diagnosis to be false on every point..."

1: Bloodstains aren't so relevant, and the ripper may have lived in a common lodging house

2: Mr Abrahams was ready to call the police when necessary.

Bravo Chris!

[Cap'n Jack]

I believe the bark may have to be stripped further from the tree to allow us to see the wood beneath, for some long time ago I posted some details from this period of time where Metropolitan police officers were complaining about the recently arrived Jews from Eastern Europe because they were always at the police stations trying to bring charges against family, friends or neighbours. One quote - which I've now lost but it must be in the archives here - from a station inspector more or less was 'You can't move in the station for Jews trying to dob each other in, brothers, sisters, fathers, mothers, they are all at it...'
So I think Anderson was making one of his many false assumptions based on his direct lack of knowledge of the true circumstances... so yes he was being racist by using one of the many myths about the Jews that had followed them over the sea from Eastern Europe, just like the myths about blood sacrifices etc.
By god if it was in The Times, then it must be true.

[Jeff Leahy]

Unless of course he was basing what he said on first hand experience of Aron Kosminski his family and the identification..

Perhaps the family themselves were uncertain at first and grew suspecious before they appraoched Anderson via Crawford?

As has been stated several times there is NO direct evidence that Anderson was Anti-semitic (at least ny the modern interpretation of that meaning). So perhaps what he says is from his first hand experience?

Merry Xmas

Pirate Jack

[DVV]

Hi Pirate,

Anderson's own words from 1888, 89 and 92 show that he had no Polish Jew theory in mind at that time.
At least not a firm and elaborated one.
So what you call a "first hand experience", in this case, would rather be a late memory of such an experience.
But AP's last post and that of Chris prove Anderson wrong in his assertion that Polish Jews would have protected the Ripper.

The only thing Anderson was sure of, before the Macnaghten memo, is that the murderer had to be a "maniac" (1892).

Joyeux Noël,
David

[jason_c]

Jason, I agree. Anderson's theory doesn't make Anderson an Anti-Semite, at least, not in the sense it has for us now.

That immigrants may display a tendency to mistrust the police is something understandable. But it couldn't be to the extent suggested by Anderson.

Sincerely, do you think Kosminski's brother in law was mad enough to let Jack the Ripper sleep with his wife and daughters ?

Protecting a thief is one thing. Sleeping with Jack is another.

Amitiés,
David

IF Kosminski's relatives knew he was JtR then I agree they would likely have informed the police at once. IF they simply had suspiscions then it is perhaps more likely they kept quiet.

A mixture of "Gentile Justice" and persuading oneself that the blood stained knife found under brother Aaron's bed was there for an innocuous reason.

[DVV]

IF Kosminski's relatives knew he was JtR then I agree they would likely have informed the police at once. IF they simply had suspiscions then it is perhaps more likely they kept quiet.

A mixture of "Gentile Justice" and persuading oneself that the blood stained knife found under brother Aaron's bed was there for an innocuous reason.

I'm afraid suspicions could be enough, sometimes...
And even if you don't call the police, you take your rippin brother and tell him to get off quickly.
Especially when you have a wife and three daughters, Jason...
Which was the case of Mr Abraham.

Amitiés,
David

[perrymason]

What you seem to be discussing is under what conditions "his kind" would be inclined to shelter a man that they either knew outright or strongly suspected was killing and cutting women open.

My answer would be fairly simple.....no relatives of anyone would hide a man like that.....for one simple reason, they couldnt be sure that they were safe in his presence if that was the case.

Now, AP remarks about Bury are another matter, because what may have been covering up in that case is a maniac who did in fact stab women....thats a far cry from the kind of act or mind that cuts women to pieces.

Not to say Bury wouldnt warrant some concern from his family as well, but some stabbings pale in comparison to the crimes that caused an entire nation and in fact the world to hold its breath.

My best regards

[Jeff Leahy]

Sorry Michael but this rearly is the same old 'Kosminski' was a looney eating out of the gutter MANTRA..

It anoys me because it shows little concern or consideration about a serious illness: SCHIZOPHRENIA

Not only is it possibe Aaron was a relatively high acheiving but also that his family might have been seriously confused by his behaviour.

What you are trying to do is rationalize the un-rational.

Pirate

[DVV]

Hi Pirate,

the problem is more about Anderson point of view.
He said his "people" sheltered Jack - I mean, knowing that he was Jack.
Impossible, in my opinion.

Amitiés mon cher,
David