Was the killer a jew

[martin wilson]

Hi Damaso
I agree with you, it's only in fiction that serial killers overtly use biblical references.
Off the top of my head I can think of two cases where religious mania allied to mental illness corresponded exactly to the behavioral model proposed by Errata,other than the delusional state of the killers there was nothing to indicate in the murders themselves that religion played any part.
It may not be entirely true in the ripper murders, Phil made an interesting point about perversion of religious practice, and in the case of a schochet for instance there are some intriguing parallels with 'The Rules of the Knife',coincidence for some, worth at least a look for someone like me.
Rightly or wrongly, I try not to retrofit history, where modern understanding of serial killers is applied to the ripper murders, it may turn out to be the case that this approach is correct, but at the time the murders were considered extraordinary, and I think it's valid to at least explore the possibility that they were committed for extraordinary reasons.
All the best.

[Damaso Marte]

One trap I see casebook fall into again and again, especially when discussing Jewish suspects or Jewish witnesses, is to tie every strange thing the person does to some aspect of Judaism.

If we were talking about a Protestant suspect, we would not try to explain every odd thing he does by linking it to the doctrines or traditions of the Anglican church. We would rather admit that most of what people do - most of what even devout people do - is unrelated to their faith.

Jews, Catholics, Hindus, etc. are no different. There's no need to search Jewish law or tradition to explain why a Jew may have killed and mutilated prostitutes in Victorian London: the explanation likely lies instead in the realm of far more universal human behavior. I think trying to divine the killer's religion from his murders is a fool's errand.

[Cogidubnus]

If the Ripper was delusional, (which I think unlikely but not impossible) He could have been killing to gain something. He could have been trying to find something, he could have been trying to protect himself, he could have been trying to protect his victims, or he could have been convinced he was a teapot and was just also a serial killer. There are any number of crime scene clues that point to guilt or remorse, but someone who sincerely believes that he saved a prostitutes immortal soul and her corporeal form is meaningless will not experience remorse, even though he had sympathy for her. So a delusional Ripper not covering his victims means nothing.

Is this about to become an Issenshmidt thread?

All the best

Dave

[Errata]

Hi Errata
This is the problem when pursuing religious mania as a motive, I have the insanity, I don't have the direct correlation between modus operandi,signature and the religion.
The danger when looking for pointers in a religion is that things are taken out of context, and of course literal interpretation of passages that are understood as metaphor or symbolism.
I did think I had something in a Torah prohibition on sole witnesses, this could possibly explain the reluctance of Anderson's witness to testify against the suspect, and not because 'It is well known they will not give one their own up to gentile justice'
Trevor Marriot actually rang his local Rabbi to confirm it!
Essentially then,I had a suspect,an immigrant perhaps coming from a community more prone to superstition and belief in folklore, arriving in an area of London in spiritual flux, being exposed to all manner of radical and for want of a better word 'weird' ideas.
However,I agree Aaron Kosminski doesn't really fit the bill, nor do I reject the idea of a native killer being subject to the same mania, but at the moment it's difficult to move the theory forward, it's possibly a dead end,but I would like to know more about Richard's 39 theory.
All the best.

Anytime you have delusion, you aren't looking at any kind of cause and effect that is recognizable to anyone not having that delusion. It's just too complicated. Certain things make total sense within the delusion. If some guy thinks he's superman and jumps off a balcony, a lot of people would assume that he was trying to kill himself, because he is mentally ill. If you dig deeper, and look at things from the perspective of someone with his specific delusion, you would assume he was trying to fly. But 99% of the time, neither motive is true.

He may have simply wanted to escape, and jumping seemed like as good a way as any. He may have been trying to take a shortcut. He may have been challenging his delusion, with the bone deep knowledge that if he was not who he thought he was, he would rather die. It can be simple, it can be complicated, but it often cannot be predicted.

If the Ripper was delusional, (which I think unlikely but not impossible) He could have been killing to gain something. He could have been trying to find something, he could have been trying to protect himself, he could have been trying to protect his victims, or he could have been convinced he was a teapot and was just also a serial killer. There are any number of crime scene clues that point to guilt or remorse, but someone who sincerely believes that he saved a prostitutes immortal soul and her corporeal form is meaningless will not experience remorse, even though he had sympathy for her. So a delusional Ripper not covering his victims means nothing.

But the common factor in all people who are delusional is that their executive function is impaired. They cannot plan, organize, prioritize, or easily initiate action. Delusional killers typically beat random people to death, because something inspired them to do so in the moment. They don't go hunting. And this is why I don't think the Ripper was delusional. It's kind of too purposeful.

[martin wilson]

Hi Errata
This is the problem when pursuing religious mania as a motive, I have the insanity, I don't have the direct correlation between modus operandi,signature and the religion.
The danger when looking for pointers in a religion is that things are taken out of context, and of course literal interpretation of passages that are understood as metaphor or symbolism.
I did think I had something in a Torah prohibition on sole witnesses, this could possibly explain the reluctance of Anderson's witness to testify against the suspect, and not because 'It is well known they will not give one their own up to gentile justice'
Trevor Marriot actually rang his local Rabbi to confirm it!
Essentially then,I had a suspect,an immigrant perhaps coming from a community more prone to superstition and belief in folklore, arriving in an area of London in spiritual flux, being exposed to all manner of radical and for want of a better word 'weird' ideas.
However,I agree Aaron Kosminski doesn't really fit the bill, nor do I reject the idea of a native killer being subject to the same mania, but at the moment it's difficult to move the theory forward, it's possibly a dead end,but I would like to know more about Richard's 39 theory.
All the best.

[Errata]

Hi Errata

My interest stemmed from another forum where someone who knew a great deal about the occult suggested the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn were somehow involved in the ripper murders.
The briefest study of the Golden Dawn reveals their interest in and study of the Kabbalah.
My interest grew when I read that there were restrictions on who was allowed to study the Kabbalah, like Merkebah mysticism, this, as I understood it could mean that it could have a deleterious effect on disturbed minds.
As there is a suspect, Aaron Kosminski,who may have suffered from paranoid schizophrenia,and who may have been observant, I speculated on whether this was a fresh psychological insight into motive.
Once I read about Lilith and her supposed habit of visiting young men living on their own at night (which I interpreted as nocturnal emissions) I felt that,although 'out there' in terms of ripper theories,there might be something in it.

Actually On Topic:

The Kabbalah has been one of those great mysteries of Judaism, and in truth it's mostly pretty tame. But the point of the Kabbalah is to raise awareness and see connections in the world. Not terribly dissimilar to say, Zen Buddhism. In purpose at least. Not in method. It's the mysticism of our faith, and like most mysticism, it's a little odd.

The general rule is that the Kabbalah is only studied by men over the age of 35. Hassids are different, but there weren't Hassids back then (well there were, but not enough to make a difference). The reason it's men is that women have a different mysticism, and the age limit is in theory because this study requires stability and concentration, things lacking in younger men. I've read it. I haven't burst into flames, but I admit to being very uncomfortable while reading it. 23 year old girl reading the Kabbalah... yeah.

Certainly I wasn't disturbed by it, but of course I had studied about 5 forms of paganism at that point (like Asatru and Wicca), Hinduism, Ba'hai, The Golden Dawn, Satanism, I was working with a cult investigator at the time, so I had seen some stuff by that time. And in fact the only reason I read it is because we were investigating a cult that was based on Pseudo Judaism and fairies. So it was homework for an assignment.

It contains some revolutionary stuff for a 19th century man. Judaism is all about law. Intent doesn't matter, it's about law. The Kabbalah talks about being a human, what your relationship with your body should be, what traits you should aspire to attain. The Sephirot is a tool for that, and then that leads to the essence of Creation, and then leads to the Divine Feminine which is a big deal for a 19th century man. It talks about the origin of evil, the multiplicity of god, the nature of the soul, reincarnation, any number of paradoxes... it's a tough read.

Remember that Judaism is law. Good deeds are required by law. You don't have to like it, you don't have to want to do it, you just have to do it. So the contents of the Kabbalah which deals with philosophy and ethics is like the Master class of Judaism. And it's hard to assemble correctly in your mind. Crowley got some things from the Kabbalah, but he got it wrong. Can it drive men mad? No. Can it confuse an already troubled man to the point that he reacts violently? It can. Not because of it's nature, but the content is so different than the contents of the Torah that a person could read the Kabbalah and say "everything I learned before this is a lie. and Nothing prepared me for this". There is a level of abandonment that you have to be able apply to what you grew up with. An inability to do that can cause a spiritual crisis. In a disturbed man, that can lead to violence.

The Sephirot, which is the most important tool in the Kabbalah also corresponds to parts of the body. So heres where it gets a little weird. The sexual organs are governed by Yesod, or the foundation. This Sephira is about connecting to a task at hand, or attaining full comprehension. The left kidney is governed by Hod, and is about submission and surrender to Splendor. The heart is governed by Binah, or Understanding.It can bring a return to god. It also represents the divine feminine. If you were a disturbed man struggling with reconciling this new information with your faith, these are the Sephirot that you want to invoke. None of the others particularly apply.

If I were going to throw out a crazy Jewish guy theory, this would be it. On the other hand, there seems to be no point in reconnecting with god while being ritually unclean by being covered in human blood. And it fact, it wouldn't even have to be a Jewish man using this. Christians used the Kabbalah, and it was out there to be read by anyone who wanted to plow through it. Any disturbed man in a serious spiritual crisis could conceivably use this as some kind of map.

I don't think this is what happened, but I could make an argument for it. Kosminski on the other hand did not suffer from anything like this. He suffered from Scrupulosity, but his delusions seem to be fixed on him dying, him being diseased, him being judged and receiving instructions from god as to how to cleanse himself. Which sounds like it could go towards that whole spiritual crisis thing, but his delusion is actually one of the more common ones. People get that one all the time. More people get straight paranoia, but this delusion is more common than thinking you are someone else, like superman or the queen. If we are looking for someone with delusion, I think we are looking for a very uncommon one.

[Errata]

Hi Errata
You are very kind,but the truth is I have been thoughtless and downright ignorant, I shall be more careful in the future.

My interest stemmed from another forum where someone who knew a great deal about the occult suggested the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn were somehow involved in the ripper murders.
The briefest study of the Golden Dawn reveals their interest in and study of the Kabbalah.
My interest grew when I read that there were restrictions on who was allowed to study the Kabbalah, like Merkebah mysticism, this, as I understood it could mean that it could have a deleterious effect on disturbed minds.
As there is a suspect, Aaron Kosminski,who may have suffered from paranoid schizophrenia,and who may have been observant, I speculated on whether this was a fresh psychological insight into motive.
Once I read about Lilith and her supposed habit of visiting young men living on their own at night (which I interpreted as nocturnal emissions) I felt that,although 'out there' in terms of ripper theories,there might be something in it.
Hence my interest in Judaism, and my poor understanding of it which is inconsiderate of the feelings of others,for which I again aplologise.
All the best.

No worries. The truth is there aren't a lot of us, and we don't get a lot of press, so to speak. Any pursuit of knowledge is appreciated. You learned some stuff, and even if you aren't solid on application, I appreciate that. I imagine all the other Jewish people here appreciate that. And there is some truth in your line of reasoning.

I don't have a solid understanding of Christianity, mostly because even though I get the concepts, not having been raised that way I don't understand the nuances. For example in our culture, we understand that jaywalking is against the law, but we know it's rarely enforced so we do it anyway. Bring in someone from a different culture, and they will learn that Jaywalking is against the law, but it takes a lot of time to learn that it's a law a person can safely ignore. Usually. So I know the laws of Christianity, but i don't know which ones everyone ignores, or what is acceptable in certain contexts. You are the same with Judaism, and that is not at all disrespectful. As long as you are willing to listen (you don't even have to agree) to the nuances, and what they may mean, you are golden. Seriously.

I really didn't mean to derail the thread like this. I have not been offended by anything in here. I have been conditioned to react a certain way when someone refers to someone as "A Jew". Not all Jews have been conditioned this way, but for me it's one of those things that makes me hold my breath to see what comes next. Because in the past it has been something bad. It's not a bad word. It's like when the teacher asked you stay after class for a minute, and you catch your breath because you think "Oh god what did I do?" but it could just be "Hey, nice job on the test, keep it up". But the initial reaction is anticipation of something bad.

But that's my psychological baggage, and I don't want to impose it others. My preference is that someone be referred to as Jewish, as opposed to being a Jew. But there is a very valid argument that "Jewish" implies faith and "Jew refers to ethnicity. So a non religious person born in that community would be a Jew. In truth we don't see that distinction, we use the two interchangeably. But there aren't that many cultures that may have a huge distinction between the religion and the culture. So I realize that trying to distinguish between the two is problematic. I can't always convey that clearly, and it's my dang culture. Frankly I envy the term "lapsed Catholic". We should have something like that.

It was completely unfair of me to try and limit your ways of communicating ideas simply because I had a bad experience. I've been on here for years, and I know nobody in this conversation is a threat to me or mine. I overreacted because I was stressed out by stupid things. Because I am a cultural minority, and none of you meant any offense, I put you on your toes, and you shouldn't be there. This topic is not out of line, the suppositions and assumptions are not out of line. Nothing here is offensive. I was wrong to interject in this way. I could have simply joined the conversation, and instead my paranoia derailed it completely. I was wrong, and I apologize. There really is no excuse for my request. I reacted instead of acting, and I hate that. I hate it even more when I do it. Nothing said in respect is offensive, and there is no reason, none, why I should try to impose limits on you at all.

So please, forget what I said. I greatly appreciate your willingness to accommodate me, and your sensitivity. That means the world to me, and I imagine to a lot of people. But it was unnecessary. I was wrong.

[martin wilson]

Hi Errata
You are very kind,but the truth is I have been thoughtless and downright ignorant, I shall be more careful in the future.

My interest stemmed from another forum where someone who knew a great deal about the occult suggested the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn were somehow involved in the ripper murders.
The briefest study of the Golden Dawn reveals their interest in and study of the Kabbalah.
My interest grew when I read that there were restrictions on who was allowed to study the Kabbalah, like Merkebah mysticism, this, as I understood it could mean that it could have a deleterious effect on disturbed minds.
As there is a suspect, Aaron Kosminski,who may have suffered from paranoid schizophrenia,and who may have been observant, I speculated on whether this was a fresh psychological insight into motive.
Once I read about Lilith and her supposed habit of visiting young men living on their own at night (which I interpreted as nocturnal emissions) I felt that,although 'out there' in terms of ripper theories,there might be something in it.
Hence my interest in Judaism, and my poor understanding of it which is inconsiderate of the feelings of others,for which I again aplologise.
All the best.

[Errata]

Hi Errata
As always I am grateful for your informative and rational response.
In common with other posters here I mean no offence by the word Jewish.
However,I think it's fair to say that if I were to start a thread asking 'Was the killer a catholic' I could expect responses from people who may think I am implying some sort of connection between their faith and the actions of a killer.
It's right then that if I mean someone observant of Judaism I should show that clear connection, besides mights and maybes I have not done that,for which I apologise.
If I mean Jewish as of a particular ethnic minority, I am at somewhat at a loss as to how else to describe them, although perhaps stating Aaron Kosminski, for example, was an immigrant from Poland is the way to go.
All the best.

No you aren't wrong. And there is a century old argument about whether or not Judaism is a "race" (it is not) but it is clearly enough of an ethnicity to have its own set of genetic congenital diseases, so we are genetically linked enough for that to have happened.

The only reason I mentioned the religious part is because it does clearly have a ritualistic component to these murders, and you mentioned folklore and superstition. Folklores and superstitions that have had far more impact on the daily lives of Jews than the actual Torah. Which doesn't actually say a whole lot on death practices, and our death practices are about 80% based on avoiding the consequences of magic, demons, bathroom gnomes, what have you. Given that, these mutilations could be seen as a Jewish equivalent to a stake in the heart of a Christian corpse. And that has been a theory before on this board, so some of this was anticipation that may not have been warranted. But mostly we are a pretty pragmatic bunch, especially then with all the moving and the Pograms, and the loss. You do what you can, and you don't spend a lot of effort wishing you could do more. And that was well known.

But yeah. Someone did have a theory about the mutilations being some sort of spiritual kryptonite by an angry Jew. And I can't swear that didn't happen, but if it did he was either completely round the twist or had somehow never had contact with other Jews.

And the culture is important. There are maybe three or four prayers I can recite from memory, but the little prayer my mother whispered under her breath every time my grandmother came to visit (which evidently dispelled demons?)... THAT I know. And because I did a lot of musical theater, I know the prayers from Fiddler on the Roof better than the ones from synagogue because I spent so much time trying to plan how to get out of the chapel before the point in the service during which everyone has to stand for like an hour, and no one can leave. Cause I was a kid, and we actually had a pretty damned entertaining bathroom.

[martin wilson]

Hi Errata
As always I am grateful for your informative and rational response.
In common with other posters here I mean no offence by the word Jewish.
However,I think it's fair to say that if I were to start a thread asking 'Was the killer a catholic' I could expect responses from people who may think I am implying some sort of connection between their faith and the actions of a killer.
It's right then that if I mean someone observant of Judaism I should show that clear connection, besides mights and maybes I have not done that,for which I apologise.
If I mean Jewish as of a particular ethnic minority, I am at somewhat at a loss as to how else to describe them, although perhaps stating Aaron Kosminski, for example, was an immigrant from Poland is the way to go.
All the best.

[Errata]

There was an interesting reminiscence on Jewish East End History from a woman who gave birth to her first child.
She was visited in hospital by her Rabbi who put an amulet, in the form of a written document on the wall to protect her and her child against the 'lilit' who I am guessing is Lilith, a demoness who would steal babies in the night.
This was in 1938, and it's interesting that such practices were still extant at that time and still are for all I know, I make no value judgements, but I do wonder if what are considered harmless traditions nowadays were understood differently and more seriously at an earlier time?
I'm also reliably informed by wiki on Jewish Folklore that the only way to kill an estrie was decapitate her.
I know, too outlandish.

It's actually still a tradition. It's considered superstition and folklore, but it's a common birth gift, as is a hamsa with an eye as an amulet against... well just about everything. We also never leave a body unattended because (I'll say demons even though thats not technically true) demons can enter a corpse and live again. So we have as many of these little traditions as any other people. Most of them harmless.

The thing to remember is that in order to buried, a corpse could not be opened. Back then we still didn't pierce ears, get tattoos, nor could we be autopsied. You go in with what you came out with (barring a foreskin or anything required to save your life) or you don't go in at all. It wasn't until the seventies that MEs and Rabbis could get together on a way to autopsy a Jewish corpse without defiling it, and I'm pretty sure that coincided with the invention of the plastic baggie. All of which sounds very provocative given what was done to these women.

But we never applied that to other cultures. We didn't even observe it for people of a different religion, and it happened often enough that Jews were left to bury a non Jew. If a Jewish killer takes a kidney out of a woman, he doesn't keep her out of heaven or whatever. Even if she was Jewish. Stuff happens. Death is not always neat, and some people go in the ground missing things. Every effort has to made to find it, and you can't defile yourself on purpose, but if dogs got to you, that's workable. And remember that the rabbis were trying to keep up with industrialization, and the things those machines could do to a body was appalling. There was leeway to be had, and that was common knowledge.

The truth is I always thought these women endured torments akin to Catholic saints if any religious motivation could be seen in these deaths. But in truth there is nothing of Judaism, nothing of Christianity, nothing of Islam and nothing of Hinduism. There is ritual, but it is not religious ritual. If he was Jewish, Christian, Muslim, whatever, he wasn't a good one, and he wasn't killing based on any religious motive. This is a secular act.

[martin wilson]

There was an interesting reminiscence on Jewish East End History from a woman who gave birth to her first child.
She was visited in hospital by her Rabbi who put an amulet, in the form of a written document on the wall to protect her and her child against the 'lilit' who I am guessing is Lilith, a demoness who would steal babies in the night.
This was in 1938, and it's interesting that such practices were still extant at that time and still are for all I know, I make no value judgements, but I do wonder if what are considered harmless traditions nowadays were understood differently and more seriously at an earlier time?
I'm also reliably informed by wiki on Jewish Folklore that the only way to kill an estrie was decapitate her.
I know, too outlandish.

[Phil H]

Caz - I fell to the floor - and wonder of wonders, the packet of cachous remained in my hand!

Phil

[caz]

Don't faint Phil, but I completely agree with both of your posts.

Armed with evidence beyond reasonable doubt, the police and the justice system would surely have coped just fine, no matter who the killer had turned out to be. Serial killers have simply always been notoriously difficult to pin down without today's forensic helpers like fingerprints, DNA and cctv. They can be of any race, nationality, class, profession or intellect, and in most cases they do not drop the slightest hint about their offending behaviour to anyone around them, not even their nearest and dearest. But when they are caught, prosecuted and found guilty, I don't think I have ever heard of any social unrest due to the convicted man's race, religion, colour and so on. The reaction is generally "Who'd have thought it was him, but thank goodness they got the bastard before he could kill again".

This is precisely why I think most of the murders were committed by a lone serial killer. For me, it's the most satisfying explanation for the failure to clear up a single one of the murders.

Love,

Caz
X

[martin wilson]

My take on it is that the politics seem pretty clear,Warren obviously resented having to obtain approval from Matthews before doing anything, the reward offered by the City of London police can only have exacerbated the situation.
The article he wrote for Murray's Magazine and it's consequences clearly show Warren's attitude to his brief, although I don't rule out the possibility that it acted as a convenient escape clause for both Warren and Matthews.
Throw Munro into the mix and it proves that the fallacy of conspiracy seekers,that organisations all act of one mind,is clearly disproved.