A closer look at Leon Goldstein

[Michael W Richards]

For your theory to work, the Ripper needs to have heard about Strides murder before he killed Eddowes. How else would he know to take the apron piece that he could later use to implicate the Jews?

That is a fact, that would have to have happened sometime from 1:45 until just before 3. When we have no idea where he might have gone after Mitre Square but we know he went East at some point to leave the apron section. I believe that there may be some connection as yet undiscovered....maybe undiscoverable at this point...between the club members and the Model Homes.

[c.d.]

If he wants to kill her specifically cd, then she is not a randomly acquired target is she? Like the ones Jack seeks out?

How were you able to determine which of the victims were randomly acquired targets and which were targeted specifically?

And why would it always have to be one or the other, random or targeted?

What would prevent Jack from targeting a woman specifically if he chose to do so?

c.d.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

It may be commonly repeated, but I'm not sure how many students of the case regard it as a fact.
We should put more thought into what we read and cease regarding these details as factual. It has to stop somewhere, I personally have no theory as to who Goldstein was or what his role may have been. Details will only become clearer when we stop misrepresenting what is written.

What details do you have in mind, Jon?

There is also the possibility the reporter made an error as to which hand contained the cachous, not necessarily the witness (Spooner).

The Times, Morning Advertiser, Daily News and Daily Telegraph, all quote Spooner referring to the right hand.

As Stride was found on her left side, with her left arm under her body, but the forearm projecting out away from her. This means the back of her left hand will have been on the ground. Try that position yourself, you can't turn the palm of the hand to face the ground. So, her left palm was faced up, so if the packet of cachous was already on the ground, but her hand was positioned over the cachous, where they could be seen between the thumb & forefinger, as her fingers may clench together they may have trapped the packet of cachous between her fingers as they curled up.

The resulting appearance was that she held a packet of cachous between her thumb and forefinger - a totally unnatural position for holding anything in your hand. If the packet had been found in the palm of her hand then we could believe she was holding them. But as they were only pinched between her thumb & forefinger, I suspect the packet was already on the ground, it was just that her left hand fell partially over the packet, between her thumb & forefinger.
This cachous business has been a huge distraction to the case.

Dr Phillips: The left arm was extended, and there was a packet of cachous in the left hand.

Doesn't he mean the arm was straight? That could mean the thumb and forefinger were uppermost, with the palm and back of hand vertical to the ground.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Im not predicting anything, Im suggesting that some witnesses were either intentionally misleading or all off on their timing by around 20 minutes. I think under the circumstances the probabilities are greater for the first of those 2 options. Louis, Morris and Lave...then later, Israel.

You managed to avoid the issue of how long Spooner took to walk from the pub on Settles St, to outside the Beehive on Fairclough St.

By predict, I mean that a theory can constrain the movements of certain actors, in time and space, to the point that only a single possibility remains. According to your theory, the timing of the murder and more importantly the time of the discovery means that Eagle and Lave must see more than either man admitted to. The same seems to be true of Fanny hearing the pony and cart at close to 1am. The body had been discovered many minutes prior, in your theory, hence Fanny must have heard the pony and cart being led away.

If a theory doesn't allow for any other possibility, regarding one or more elements of the theory, opposing evidence cannot be processed in an objective-like manner.

[Michael W Richards]

How were you able to determine which of the victims were randomly acquired targets and which were targeted specifically?

And why would it always have to be one or the other, random or targeted?

What would prevent Jack from targeting a woman specifically if he chose to do so?

c.d.

Im not suggesting anything that hasnt been suggested since the murders happened cd. Most of Ripperology as far as I can tell believes that this was an organized opportunistic killer, and that Polly and Annie likely met a stranger, someone posing as a client. I think he targeted for sure, based on the situation of the moment and opportunities he saw, but I dont see any evidence that either woman were sought out by their identities. Right opportunity...pehaps overly excited first time, bad location to do what it appears he wanted to do.

Which brings up the point, the reason you keeping making suggestions within the realm of possibility to explain what we see this and not that, is that you seem to feel the man in this story is just out to kill. I think, based on what I see and the realm of probabilities, that the man in this story kills first. But he cuts after. Its that part, not any old kill, that gives him what he seems to want. Think about the risk he took each time, it had to be a meaningful opportunity I think. That more than any other point makes me open to him being in Mitre Square, because I dont see the same intense focus on objectives similar to Pollys killer had. Maybe the light?

[Michael W Richards]

You managed to avoid the issue of how long Spooner took to walk from the pub on Settles St, to outside the Beehive on Fairclough St.

By predict, I mean that a theory can constrain the movements of certain actors, in time and space, to the point that only a single possibility remains. According to your theory, the timing of the murder and more importantly the time of the discovery means that Eagle and Lave must see more than either man admitted to. The same seems to be true of Fanny hearing the pony and cart at close to 1am. The body had been discovered many minutes prior, in your theory, hence Fanny must have heard the pony and cart being led away.

If a theory doesn't allow for any other possibility, regarding one or more elements of the theory, opposing evidence cannot be processed in an objective-like manner.

Actually I believe I did...I suggested about 20 minute casual walk with the young lady to just outside the Beehive, then about 25 minutes loitering there...and then he sees the men running. Around 12:40-45. When Israel says he saw Liz and 2 other men on the street in front of the gates, and James Brown says he saw Liz with a young man down the street, and 15 minutes before Louis said he even arrived there. Around the time Eagle says he saw nothing but "couldnt be sure" a body wasnt just behind that open gate, and the time Lave says he was looking out into the street from the entrance. About 10-15 minutes before Lamb gets there with Eagle, almost half an hour from Johnson arriving there. Around the time 3 witnesses stated they were alerted to a body in the passageway, and a few minutes before Issac K, Louis and Issac[s] the men seen by Spooner, and Eagle, go for help.

Its really a very workable storyline using the witnesses that A) had no direct financial gain from that club being in continued operations, and B) had senior responsibility for what transpired on the property at that time. Those men had mitigating circumstances which could lead them to be self protective in whatever way they could. Maybe just by seeing nothing and later adding someone from off the property as the most probable killer? Im still surprised many dont see that logic also.

[caz]

Hello again,

I would think immediately associating this new murder with the last assumed Ripper kill, Annie Chapmans, is something that brings to mind the apples and oranges analogy. Both fruit, but completely different. Far more knife attacks happened in that city than ones that included abdominal mutilations, and in fact a third one happened on that same night. Not unsolved, and a domestic murder, but that doesnt alter the fact that 3 women that night had their throats slit.... with knives. Something Im sure you have done at one point or another is to look at ALL the murders that year in London. I believe just over 50 some odd. Not just Unsolved, and not just within a square mile of each other, but all of them. Note how many were committed with knives or other implements vs how many involved knives used for organ extractions. Its not a fair contest. Knives were by far the most commonly used weapon, and organ extractions as part of a murder were exceedingly rare. Liz Strides death by definition was within that first predominant grouping. Annies decidely wasnt. To immediately claim that "another murder" has happened, based on the fact that the only murderer on peoples minds at that time was the serial mutilator, is effectively intentional misdirection.

Remind me, Michael, which organs were extracted from Emma Smith, Martha Tabram and Polly Nichols. When Stride was knifed to death, Chapman was the odd one out in that respect, and I rather doubt any of those shouting that "another" woman had been found murdered would have lingered over the victim's body to satisfy themselves as to the differences or similarities in this case compared with the others. Even if they'd read up on all the gruesome details in those cases, they'd have found each one had their differences. You seem to imagine they would only have been thinking of Nichols and Chapman in terms of "another" murder, and would therefore have seen those two as apples and Stride as an orange. But Smith and Tabram wouldn't have been apples or oranges, and all four women had ended up brutally murdered outdoors and away from their lodgings, so Stride was "another" with those aspects in common.

If youd noted, I suggested that the man came from that property....substantiated by the fact that the ONLY men known to be near that kill site at that time were the men still in attendance at that club. I dont believe he had to be a member, and in fact if we accept portions of what Israel said he saw, he may well have been an antisemitic gentile. The evidence suggests that no other men were anywhere close to those gates, and multiple witnesses said the street was deserted that last 25 minutes, other than Goldsteins pass by seen by Fanny. You may find it "unlikely" a club attendee committed this murder, but the fact remains that they were the only people who could have done it and not be seen from the street.

Your resistance is based on your hunches. The question of who could have done it needs no hunch to figure out. He was almost certainly from that property.

So the police did a rotten job then, and failed to round up everyone who was around at the time, because the killer could only have been one of them? Is that what you are saying? Was there not even a window of thirty seconds, in which the killer could have walked along the street unobserved, seen Stride and killed her before walking swiftly away? Whoever he was, he wasn't observed committing the murder itself, despite this happening on the club's premises, close to most of the potential witnesses.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Who do you suppose the police would have spoken to at the "coffee house"?

I don't have the police down as complete fools, so I am assuming they were able to satisfy themselves that Goldstein was in the clear. This was not the 1970s, when fitting up some foreign sounding Joe might have seemed like a good way to 'clear up' an unsolved crime.

Love,

Gene Hunt
X

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I don't have the police down as complete fools, so I am assuming they were able to satisfy themselves that Goldstein was in the clear. This was not the 1970s, when fitting up some foreign sounding Joe might have seemed like a good way to 'clear up' an unsolved crime.

Love,

Gene Hunt
X

Goldstein's known visit to the Spectacle Alley cafe (or whatever it was) that night, could not have cleared him of the murder on Berner St any more than it could have cleared him of the murder at Mitre Square. It's no wonder he was reluctant to go to the police, in contrast to Wess, who seems to have been a reader of the Star.

[caz]

But what if he specifically wanted to kill Stride and she said it is here or not at all?

c.d.

Hi c.d.,

I doubt that Stride said "you kill me here or not at all". Sorry, I knew what you meant.

I do think it's entirely reasonable to suppose that if a predator like the ripper saw Stride earlier that evening, or just spotted her at the club's entrance, he could have made up his mind to target her. He didn't need to kill where he encountered his prospective victims. Quite the reverse, if it was too busy and they were willing to lead him somewhere they could be alone together for the time they both needed. Appreciating that the club's yard was far from ideal in that respect, he could have tried - evidently without success - to persuade Stride to accompany him to a quieter spot, but he could not have forced her without drawing unwanted attention. Depending on her reaction and his state of mind and mood, he could have passed the point of no return and cut her throat with ruthless efficiency before running off to try his luck in another part of town.

Why this would be considered 'out of character' by some posters, I really haven't a clue.

Love,

Caz
X

[c.d.]

Hi c.d.,

I doubt that Stride said "you kill me here or not at all". Sorry, I knew what you meant.

It's a good thing you added that "Sorry" or you would be on the list. Maybe on the bottom of the list but still on the list.

c.d.

[caz]

Goldstein's known visit to the Spectacle Alley cafe (or whatever it was) that night, could not have cleared him of the murder on Berner St any more than it could have cleared him of the murder at Mitre Square. It's no wonder he was reluctant to go to the police, in contrast to Wess, who seems to have been a reader of the Star.

I wasn't there, so I don't know how the police decided not to investigate Goldstein further; only that they left him in peace.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Hi c.d.,

I doubt that Stride said "you kill me here or not at all". Sorry, I knew what you meant.

It's a good thing you added that "Sorry" or you would be on the list. Maybe on the bottom of the list but still on the list.

c.d.

Ha ha.

[New Waterloo]

What about another theory (big yawn by some! I don't blame them) What about if everyone's involved. Please don't give up at this point. What about that when BSM arrives and he starts his pushing and pulling a larger confrontation takes place. You know. Big argument, Fanny Mortimer and many others says rowdiness is quite normal at the club. Bit of a punch up. Liz gets her throat cut. In that dark gateway who knows whos pushing pulling who. Gets out of hand. The participants clear off back into the club or the street. The Louis drives his cart in and sees the body. Participants deny all knowledge. Don't want to be involved in a murder. Who the participants were well thats anybody's guess but clearly some are keeping their mouths shut because there was activity in the street it would be impossible not to see anything such as suggested by Lave.

I think we are viewing the club in the wrong light. It was a busy venue. I think it was 11.30 approx when about 70 people left the club, I think. I don't suppose they all went straight home?

May be a silly thought

NW

[c.d.]

May be a silly thought

Hello NW,

A friendly suggestion from a veteran of these boards. Keep both hands up in front of your face when you post. You'll thank me.

c.d.