Jacob The Ripper?

[Jimi]

Levy and Syphillis

Hi All
First if i may put some things right. The series Julie was talking about is Mystery Files-:Jack The Ripper and yes it is well worth watching. However their suspect would be Joseph Jacob Levy NOT Joseph Hyams Levy and Jacob was covicted of stealing meat from the butchers next door (Hyman Sampsons) NOT from his employer.
Hi Errata
You mention about Syphillis. If i could refer you to post #44 on this thread.
If myself or T.J. have at any time misled anyone into believing that Syphillis caused jacob to kill,we apologise.
You state however that Jacob does not match either dementia or psychcosis at his intake. Do you reach this conclusion from your own experience, because i know of no-one who has seen his complete intake records.

Our thinking goes more like-: around 1884-5 jacob contracts Syphillis,possibly, in 1886 he is convicted of theft and sentenced to Holloway for 12 months,instead he is sent to Essex County asylum. Does this not show mental disease before 1888? Obviously the Syphillis killed him,but underlying that was a mental disease,supported by the family history of mental problems.As Syphillis effects every individual differently,what effect would it have on Jacobs already fragile mind.
Keep Well
Jimi

[protohistorian]

And here is the wikipedia link. Beware it has some unpleasant images to convey the reality of this disease. Dave

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syphilis

[protohistorian]

Your absolutely right Jimi and I am sorry. Here is a graph of the progressions of syphilis. Dave

[Jimi]

Cool It

Hi proto
I feel i have to point out that we started this thread to let people voice their opinions and ideas about Jacob Levy as JTR. Your last post does neither.
While i do know Scott can be frustrating in some of his opinions, they are his opinions and is allowed to state them....however Scott your last post in no way helped, in what is my opinion,any help towards research or info.
So please guys COOL IT, or go start your own thread to amuse yourselves on.
Thank You
Jimi

[protohistorian]

Yes Scott, we all understand we live in your shadow and all you can muster for us is derision. Here is a clue, come down off that mountain you live on in your head and contribute something useful or shut your flaps! Dave

[Scott Nelson]

posters gone overboard

[Errata]

So, considering Jacob Levy as a suspect, what damage might that kind of gossip have on a sensitive child whose mother appears to have produced three children out of wedlock before marrying and producing him?

Gossip, what damage might that do to a child?

curious

Well, it all depends on what he heard, and who he heard. And quite frankly the circumstances surrounding the birth of those three children. The Jewish community typically doesn't have a problem with bastards, unless one wants to marry their child. One of the benefits of a matrilineal society. The problem with marrying their children comes from a lack of a business alliance, as the father is out of the picture. I mean, kids still call each other names, and women gossip, but a child would not shunned.

As for his mother, it depends on the circumstances of the births. If she had a "man" who fathered all three children, but they never married, the gossip would be centered on "what is she so unpleasant he would rather leave his children than marry her?". If the father of those children is her current husband, and they were simply not married at the time the gossip would center on "what took them so long?" If these children have different fathers, she would be branded a whore. I don't know which case it is, but I am leaning towards the second, maybe the first. I cannot imagine a member of the Victorian Jewish community marrying someone branded a whore. If he did, he almost certainly would not accept the children. Even if he could afford to, which he couldn't. Likely the children were his, simply born out of wedlock, or she had a "man", likely someone her husband knew or had met.

It is also possible that her "man" died, and Levy's father had some relationship with him, family or business partner, and he married her to settle that man's affairs. It was not at all uncommon after a death for a brother or good friend to marry the widow, to care for her as her husband would have had he lived. It is considered the honorable thing to do, and it keeps whatever business alliances that were made intact. There are several instances of it in my family, leading to a sort of creepy looking family tree. There is no shame on anyone in this arrangement.

So then how protected was he? What did he hear? Well, I'm sure he heard the gossip. Only a terribly cruel or terribly thoughtless adult would have said something to him directly. But these people exist. Even if adults never said anything in front of him, likely they said it in front of their own kids, and kids are cruel. How he took it depends on how sensitive he is, how his parents handled it, and the nature of the situation. But the simple fact of the matter is that anything people heard about his family, he heard about others. Gossip is very equal opportunity. Likely his family's story was nowhere near the oddest in the neighborhood. And the gossip would not have persisted. Any sin his mother may have committed was long past. Juicier stories cropped up all the time. People do stop talking after a while. I would be surprised if the gossip persisted til he was of an age to understand it. After that, it would be some other kid who said something to him, and the reason that kid would know was because once he started hanging out with little Jake, he would have overheard his parents say some like "You know. Jacob Levy. The one with the mother who has three bastards older than him".
At which point conversations like this occur.
"Nyah Nyah Your mother has bastards!"
"Oh yeah? Well your dad is a bigamist!"
"Whats a bigamist?"
"I don't know. Whats a bastard?"
"I don't know. Wanna play ball?"

So I'm not sure the gossip would have seriously affected even a sensitive child. One would think that if he was sensitive about his mother being a whore, that he wouldn't go out and use the services of whores. Unless he has a SERIOUS Oedipal complex. Likely if the gossip affected him, he would focus his anger on those who gossiped, and try very hard to avoid gossip in the future. Clearly some people choose different routes, but that is the most logical one. Is there any evidence he shunned his mother or his parents? Or abused them?

[curious]

That's stigma. Gossip on the other hand? Boy howdy.

So, considering Jacob Levy as a suspect, what damage might that kind of gossip have on a sensitive child whose mother appears to have produced three children out of wedlock before marrying and producing him?

Gossip, what damage might that do to a child?

curious

[protohistorian]

So charging out of the office to the knife shop is out huh....son of a biatch.....i worked on this for literally seconds! Dave

[Errata]

Good evening Errata,

How about this - he contracted syphilis from prostitutes, it made him angry, so he killed them.

Roy

Well, unless he had the fastest progression of syphilis ever known, bending the laws of medicine and physics, what is more applicable is that he contracted syphilis from prostitutes, it made him angry, he stayed angry for about 1 to 10 years, and just when his body was weakening and failing him, he kills them. Which is a really long simmer for a rage killing. Not impossible, but not terribly likely.

[Roy Corduroy]

Good evening Errata,

How about this - he contracted syphilis from prostitutes, it made him angry, so he killed them.

Roy

[Errata]

Hi all
I just watched an interesting program on the National Geographic Channel, called "Mysterious"
Can't remember all the names that spoke, but 1 lady was a criminal profiler and there was a psycological dude. But I did recognise Donald Rumbalow!!
Their J T R suspect was Jacob Hyams Levy. They did have a fair amount of info on him, including the fact that he had syphilis. He apparently died of same. He worked in a meat shop on Middlesex and lived in the general as well.
They made a particular point of the fact that Polly's murder site was across from the hospital, where they assumed he had come from after getting treatment for his STD. And was enraged. As his disease got worse so did the killings and mutillations. His mind started to go, he wasn't doing his job and roamed the streets at nite. He is the same one who stole meat from his employer.
He was a butcher, blood would go unnoticed on him and he could hide his trophies unnoticed at the shop.
Apparently witness (Joseph) described JTR as 3 " talled that Polly (I think).
And he was apparently 5'3" whereas Polly was 5'. Donald Rumbalow agreed that he was a good suspect, And just as interesting Paul Roland suggested him as a suspect in his book.

Sorry I was so long winded but I tried to remember the points made on the show. I think he should be now added to our list of suspects. Hope you do too.
julie

There are a few problems with this theory, although not insurmountable ones I would think.

Syphillis only affects the mind in the tertiary stage, or if neurosyphilis develops. Neurosyphilis can occur technically at any point subsequent to infection, but is almost never seen in the primary stage. On the surface the timing adds up. Patients with general paresis mostly die within 3 years of onset of neurological symptoms. This fits Levy. Here is where it gets a little complicated.

About 1/4 of syphilis patients developed neurosyphilis. And general paresis is typically a late stage development. Levy would have had the initial lesions (by no means small or unnoticable) of primary syphilis about a month after exposure, symptoms of secondary syphilis 1-8 months after that. Neurosyphilis signs would have showed up 6 months - 10 years after the initial lesions. And the psychosis is not the first sign. Neuromuscular issues come first, personality change is the first psychiatric symptom, psychosis comes later. Often after some wasting of the body has occurred. For simple tertiary syphilis, you are looking at the same timeline. 1-10 years after the first lesions before symptoms occur.

The other problem is in the psychosis itself. Psychosis derived from syphilis is due to the physical changes of the brain. Usually atrophy, it can get a little spongy, etc. Because syphilis is degenerative, the brain almost never "snaps out of it". Even in the exceedingly rare cases that it does, people become symptomatic again within months. The initial psychotic break is abrupt, severe, and permanent. There are no moments of lucidity.

From what little we know of Levy, he seems to have in fact had Neurosyphilis, but at the time of his commitment, the symptoms described fit with menigovascular syphilis. Personality change, insomnia, and prodromal symptoms. Prodromal symptoms are things like euphoria, seeing halos, strange smells, hearing things, aphasia, even headaches as a precurser to illness (it is very typical in migraine sufferers). They are transient however, lasting one or two minutes usually. Typically they are not described as distressing, merely annoying. He died of general paresis of the insane, but he appears to have developed it while in the asylum, or possibly it was just beginning. The symptoms described at his intake do not match dementia or psychosis.

So in order for the timeline to fit, he would have had to have ignored the primary and secondary symptoms for up to ten years, been well into the neurological symptoms like numbness, muscle weakness, insomnia, etc. to get checked out, and then become enraged, and commit the crimes while at his physically weakest. Or alternatively, he had to have had the fastest progression of syphilis known to man, and nobody decided to mention the fact that he was barking mad at his intake. I mean we are talking about the offensively cartoonish sterotype crazy you see in the movies. Not disturbed, not with emotional issues, but stand back and admire the fireworks crazy. Tinfoil hat crazy. Communists are bugging my fillings crazy. I keep an invisible tiny man in my pocket so he can whisper to me the word of god and charles dickens his only begotten son crazy.

I've also tried to find something on a commonality of features for children born infected with syphilis. A: I don't recommend it B: I didn't find anything. The deformities appear to cover the spectrum. I don't doubt that some children were born looking hollow cheeked and noseless, but an equal number appear to have been born with bony growths, severe mouth malformations, and giant tumors. There was certainly nothing to suggest that if a child had born that way, the immediate conclusion would be that the child was syphilitic. There is no "syphilis baby" face. And let's face it. This is the height of the Industrial Revolution, and the absolute lowpoint in worker safety and hazardous material containment. Deformations could be due to anything.

so ahh yeah. and I rambled on as well.

[judyj]

Jacob the Ripper

Hi all
I just watched an interesting program on the National Geographic Channel, called "Mysterious"
Can't remember all the names that spoke, but 1 lady was a criminal profiler and there was a psycological dude. But I did recognise Donald Rumbalow!!
Their J T R suspect was Jacob Hyams Levy. They did have a fair amount of info on him, including the fact that he had syphilis. He apparently died of same. He worked in a meat shop on Middlesex and lived in the general as well.
They made a particular point of the fact that Polly's murder site was across from the hospital, where they assumed he had come from after getting treatment for his STD. And was enraged. As his disease got worse so did the killings and mutillations. His mind started to go, he wasn't doing his job and roamed the streets at nite. He is the same one who stole meat from his employer.
He was a butcher, blood would go unnoticed on him and he could hide his trophies unnoticed at the shop.
Apparently witness (Joseph) described JTR as 3 " talled that Polly (I think).
And he was apparently 5'3" whereas Polly was 5'. Donald Rumbalow agreed that he was a good suspect, And just as interesting Paul Roland suggested him as a suspect in his book.

Sorry I was so long winded but I tried to remember the points made on the show. I think he should be now added to our list of suspects. Hope you do too.
julie

[tji]

Hi Mortis

Good post - couldn't have answered better myself.

I have to say I really think I need to buy this game - quite a few people are commenting on it - and if Jacob Levy is good enough for Mr Holmes who are we to argue?



Hi Scott

The fat joke was a bad joke, so sue me

Well no-one can accuse you of not having a sense of humor anyway

Tj

[Errata]

If i may, Errata,could i ask a question?
You seem to have an insight into Jewish family, Jacob had 2 step sisters,Jane and Rebbeca, they used the family name Solomons in 1841 but later become Levys. However we cannot find any reference to the father of these children, both of these children plus jacobs eldest sister were born out of wedlock, for a fact.
How much of a stigma would this be to the jewish community around them?
Any info. would be helpful and thank you for your input so far.
My thanks to Granny Oy Vei too most useful
Keep Well
Jimi

Wow. Great question. The answer of course is "It depends".
According to Biblical law, clearly sex outside marriage is not okay. Like getting stoned to death not okay. But obviously that sort of biblical law was no longer practiced. In practice, a blind eye was often turned towards it if a couple was established and going to marry. It was sometimes just considered a proof of fertility. Especially in poorer parts of eastern europe.

Here is where it depends. Children are incredibly precious in Jewish communities. All things being equal, I would be very surprised if the children of an unmarried couple were punished for being bastards. But things are never equal.

To illustrate: A Jewish woman in a remote shtetl in Russia gets pregnant by a local boy. Unless he runs away, there is no way he is not going to end up marrying her. The elders of the village would permit no other outcome. The family of the boy would be heavily fined for the duration of the child's life, a fine they would not be able to afford. Marriage is not about love. It is about combining property and having children. And children grow up knowing this, and knowing it is exceedingly unlikely they will be able to choose their own spouse. In this scenario, no stigma would be attached to the girl or the children, even if the boy does run away. There may be some question as to why the boy would rather run away than marry her, is she so unpleasant, etc. but it would fade quickly. There is no stigma attached to marrying a woman with a child. He may never be as fond of that child as he is his own, but that happens everywhere.

In Victorian London, a girl gets pregnant by a boy. Heavy pressure would be placed upon him to marry her, but mostly by the girl's family. Her best chance is to hope that his family cannot afford offending her family. Otherwise she will be sent away to have the child, the baby would be taken away and given either to an orphanage or some servant couple to raise, depending on her status. If she is somehow astonishingly lucky, she will still have a home to come back to after the birth. Everyone will know what happened. Her reputation will be ruined. Her only hope of ever getting married will be either to find someone who truly loves her, or to go far away and hope the knowledge of her circumstance does not follow. If she is lucky. If she isn't, then she is kicked out onto the streets.

So the question about how stigmatized the woman and her children would be depends on how westernized the community is. Have they adopted Victorian morals? To what extent? How many different fathers do the children have? Was their father Jewish? Was the relationship consensual? Does the community even know that they were born out of wedlock? And even if the worst is true, it remains that the children are Jewish, and they are blameless according to Jewish law.

Only a very westernized Jew would ostracize the children. The worst that these kids are likely to face growing up is the constant explanation of why they don't have a father. And they will have less options in marriage, but only because they have no father either to dower them, or to combine business with a boy's family. If their mother marries and they are accepted by her husband, then little stigma will remain.

In a way, the matrilineal nature of Judaism provides some protection. Women in the Jewish community had power that Victorian women did not. It is the women who would decide how such a woman and her children would be treated. It is the women who would decide how suitable they would be for their sons. It is the women who would decide what stigmas should be attached if any. The men would abide their decisions.

That's stigma. Gossip on the other hand? Boy howdy.