So what if the Ripper was Jewish?

[Scott Nelson]

Hey, dude. Leave the sarcasm to me.

[Observer]

Hey, dude, I didn't know you had the exclusive in sarcasm here in the fantasy factory.

[Errata]

Silly me I thought it was years of research and fact finding that put forward Jacob as a suspect. Obviously I must have just assumed that.

So tell me what facts do you think a viable suspect should have since you obviously are so against the ones put forward -

what age should he be?
what ethnicity?
what job?
what area of home and work?
what mental illness?
what prior record?
what possible motive for the killing of prostitutes?
what possible stressor may he have had?
what knowledge of the area?
what family members link to the area of the apron? (and gsg if you believe it to be linked)
what link to a possible witness should they have?
what links to the area should they have?

No suspect put forward can give you proof positive, so we are going back over as a community if this is what we are looking at when discussing suspects.

If the best answer that you can give after the case being cold for 120 year in which we have no physical evidence, barely any photograph, no living witness, information ruined, lost, stolen is 'you have no physical evidence' or it is all circumstantial then I will take that all day long.


Tracy

The idea of Levy as a suspect was first put forward because Joseph Hyam Levy declined to identify anyone, and people thought that was odd since his companion did identify a man they had seen. So people thought about why JH Levy would not identify someone, and the idea that it was a family member was put forward. After that there was a Levy identified who could have made a credible suspect if the stars align correctly. A Levy became a favorite suspect.

And the stars may have aligned. For all I know Levy was the killer. But I can't take someone's word for that based on a delicate balance of variable that may or may not have existed. There's a lot of "ifs" that have to be satisfied. And we don't know that they were.

I'm not ruling anyone out. Or in for that matter. But I'm not going to accept a suspect that comes about essentially by magic. There's some story about John Dee warning people that rats carried plague, which made him the first to put that together. But he arrived at that conclusion because both rats and disease are under the auspex of the moon or some such bullshit. It turns out he was right, but the way he got to the right answer was so wrong that it might as well have not been the right answer for all the validity it had. There were thousands if not hundreds of thousands of men whose individual stories could have made them a good Ripper for one reason or another. We could take some poor shmuck with a domineering mother, hypervigilant works as a butcher. Technically that guy could make a Ripper. But the fact that he used to cry when people were mean to him and he had no thumbs might not be preserved in living memory, so things that would exclude him are lost. There are suspects that make a good story. There are very few good suspects.

And Tracy, I'm excluding you from this, but the case against Levy is so thin (because it is contingent on so many variables) that I find myself constantly wondering if he would be considered such a good suspect if he was not Jewish. If he was C of E, would people be arguing that he was the Ripper. And I get that there are reasons that people think a Jewish Ripper is likely. And by all means they should look at Jewish suspects. But if you wouldn't bat an eye at a guy if he was Christian, then he's a bad suspect. Even if he is Jewish.

[tji]

Hi Jason

Im reminded of the last decade in Rotherham when it comes to Jack the Ripper and the Jewish question. The link may be flippant on my part, but I suspect the possibility of some co-ordinated police reaction to a strong Jewish suspect. Both cases include racial tension and a large immigrant population. Racial tensions that the police were obviously concerned with in the LVP.

Yes, I think the Lipski case the year before really caused the same effect so Police would have been treading carefully.

Oh I forgot, Levy recognised his cousin Jacob, so yes you're probably correct, the suspect was five three.

I normally am




Hi Scott

Hey, dude. Leave the sarcasm to me.

I am sure your crown is safe




Hi Observer

Hey, dude, I didn't know you had the exclusive in sarcasm here in the fantasy factory.

Pretty harsh. So, ok then who is your suspect?

Tracy

[Harry D]

The idea of Levy as a suspect was first put forward because Joseph Hyam Levy declined to identify anyone, and people thought that was odd since his companion did identify a man they had seen. So people thought about why JH Levy would not identify someone, and the idea that it was a family member was put forward. After that there was a Levy identified who could have made a credible suspect if the stars align correctly. A Levy became a favorite suspect.

And the stars may have aligned. For all I know Levy was the killer. But I can't take someone's word for that based on a delicate balance of variable that may or may not have existed. There's a lot of "ifs" that have to be satisfied. And we don't know that they were.

Hello Errata,

And what is wrong with that, per se? It looks like pretty solid sleuthing to me. If you were a detective working on the case and one of the witnesses appeared to be hiding something, wouldn't you check out his background and see if there were any family or friends who might be linked to the murders? Even if you object to the line of enquiry that brought us to a Levy, there's still the small matter of Jacob ticking a lot of boxes as a Ripper suspect than the vast majority of names out there.

[Errata]

Hello Errata,

And what is wrong with that, per se? It looks like pretty solid sleuthing to me. If you were a detective working on the case and one of the witnesses appeared to be hiding something, wouldn't you check out his background and see if there were any family or friends who might be linked to the murders? Even if you object to the line of enquiry that brought us to a Levy, there's still the small matter of Jacob ticking a lot of boxes as a Ripper suspect than the vast majority of names out there.

IF the detective working on the case thought that Levy's inability to identify a suspect was suspicious, which there is no evidence the cops thought it was unusual. The newspapers had a lot of loaded innuendo, insinuating he was afraid to testify. And he did testify, so maybe the papers were not so tuned in to the nature of the witness. So if I'm a detective and some guy saw another guy just long enough to notice that "hey, there's some guy there" but not long enough to commit any details to memory... no I don't think that's suspicious. That happens to everyone dozens of times a day.

You seem to be under the impression that Jacob ticks a lot of boxes as a Ripper suspect. I can think of four, one of which I think actually rules him out as a suspect.

[Abby Normal]

IF the detective working on the case thought that Levy's inability to identify a suspect was suspicious, which there is no evidence the cops thought it was unusual. The newspapers had a lot of loaded innuendo, insinuating he was afraid to testify. And he did testify, so maybe the papers were not so tuned in to the nature of the witness. So if I'm a detective and some guy saw another guy just long enough to notice that "hey, there's some guy there" but not long enough to commit any details to memory... no I don't think that's suspicious. That happens to everyone dozens of times a day.

You seem to be under the impression that Jacob ticks a lot of boxes as a Ripper suspect. I can think of four, one of which I think actually rules him out as a suspect.

would that be the mental illness one?

[Errata]

would that be the mental illness one?

Not as such. It's not that mental illness rules him out. It's the specifics of his mental illness that rules him out. A person can kill because of a mental illness. It's not common, but it happens. A person can also kill in spite of a mental illness, because the mental illness does not inform the motive or the method. It's like being white and male. Being white does make you male, and being male does not make you white.

Mania rules in violence. Theres no doubt. It's the more common diagnosis in people who lost it and killed someone. It does however rule out planning, logic, and concentration. It's like being on meth without all the hallucinations. Spree killing, sure. Serial killing is a tough sell. Serial killing without getting caught is an even tougher sell. Having no filter, no sense of right and wrong, having a raging high, and feeling like the most powerful person in the universe does not create a careful killer. And the sense of invincibility that goes along with mania is pretty all encompassing. Manic people don't keep secrets, which is why it's tough for Bipolar people to sustain a romantic relationship. If a guy cheats while manic, he will cop to it because he doesn't think anything bad can happen. Shame and secrecy don't kick in until after the mania passes.

And if the Ripper was manic, he would have said he was the Ripper. Not even as a confession, it could be as simple as "give me my tapioca or I will cut you like I cut those whores a few years back. " Mania is like a truth serum. If he thinks about being the Ripper, he is going to talk about being the Ripper. No filter.

So Mania is a bad fit. OCD is a bad fit. Schizophrenia in 1888 is also a bad fit. Schizophrenia now is a better bet, because the disease has changed now that it is relatively understood. Even depression is a better fit for a serial killer. Most serial killers don't even have a genuine axis 1 diagnosis at all. Axis 2 is much more in line. Narcissism. Borderline. Psychopathy. Paraphilias. All routinely found in serial killers. But personality disorders don't make people lose it the way an Axis 1 diagnosis does, and they are far less likely to be treated at all, much less treated successfully. They are far less likely to end up in an asylum, even in 1888. Axis 1 disorders are recognizable as a disease. They have an onset, a period, and a recovery. Axis 2 disorders are just how people are. There is no onset. Their behavior doesn't change. It's always been dysfunctional. Commitments into an asylum were and are largely based on comparing a person's behaviors. I am normal until the onset of depression or mania, and then I am clearly not myself. That doesn't work with Axis 2. They are their behavior, and always were. They don't change. If you know a narcissist, they have been one for as long as you've known them. It's not like a switch goes on and off. So without "sane" behavior to compare to, Axis 2 diseases tends to look like someone is just kind of a dick, instead of being mentally ill.

So I think if we are going to find a mental illness, it's going to be Axis 2.

[Abby Normal]

Not as such. It's not that mental illness rules him out. It's the specifics of his mental illness that rules him out. A person can kill because of a mental illness. It's not common, but it happens. A person can also kill in spite of a mental illness, because the mental illness does not inform the motive or the method. It's like being white and male. Being white does make you male, and being male does not make you white.

Mania rules in violence. Theres no doubt. It's the more common diagnosis in people who lost it and killed someone. It does however rule out planning, logic, and concentration. It's like being on meth without all the hallucinations. Spree killing, sure. Serial killing is a tough sell. Serial killing without getting caught is an even tougher sell. Having no filter, no sense of right and wrong, having a raging high, and feeling like the most powerful person in the universe does not create a careful killer. And the sense of invincibility that goes along with mania is pretty all encompassing. Manic people don't keep secrets, which is why it's tough for Bipolar people to sustain a romantic relationship. If a guy cheats while manic, he will cop to it because he doesn't think anything bad can happen. Shame and secrecy don't kick in until after the mania passes.

And if the Ripper was manic, he would have said he was the Ripper. Not even as a confession, it could be as simple as "give me my tapioca or I will cut you like I cut those whores a few years back. " Mania is like a truth serum. If he thinks about being the Ripper, he is going to talk about being the Ripper. No filter.

So Mania is a bad fit. OCD is a bad fit. Schizophrenia in 1888 is also a bad fit. Schizophrenia now is a better bet, because the disease has changed now that it is relatively understood. Even depression is a better fit for a serial killer. Most serial killers don't even have a genuine axis 1 diagnosis at all. Axis 2 is much more in line. Narcissism. Borderline. Psychopathy. Paraphilias. All routinely found in serial killers. But personality disorders don't make people lose it the way an Axis 1 diagnosis does, and they are far less likely to be treated at all, much less treated successfully. They are far less likely to end up in an asylum, even in 1888. Axis 1 disorders are recognizable as a disease. They have an onset, a period, and a recovery. Axis 2 disorders are just how people are. There is no onset. Their behavior doesn't change. It's always been dysfunctional. Commitments into an asylum were and are largely based on comparing a person's behaviors. I am normal until the onset of depression or mania, and then I am clearly not myself. That doesn't work with Axis 2. They are their behavior, and always were. They don't change. If you know a narcissist, they have been one for as long as you've known them. It's not like a switch goes on and off. So without "sane" behavior to compare to, Axis 2 diseases tends to look like someone is just kind of a dick, instead of being mentally ill.

So I think if we are going to find a mental illness, it's going to be Axis 2.

Good post and I agree.
I think a suspect who winds up staying in an asylum is actually a negative against their viability as a suspect.

[Abby Normal]

I wonder how many serial killers who's sig was post mortem mutilations (or any serial killer for that matter) wound up having a serious (as errata states-Axis 1) mental illness. Just off the top of my head I can only think of Chase.

Therefor it seems that the chances of the ripper having a serious mental illness would be extremely small.

[Errata]

I wonder how many serial killers who's sig was post mortem mutilations (or any serial killer for that matter) wound up having a serious (as errata states-Axis 1) mental illness. Just off the top of my head I can only think of Chase.

Therefor it seems that the chances of the ripper having a serious mental illness would be extremely small.

Axis 2 can be extremely serious. Especially because it cannot be managed with medication. They also tend to be just a neurologically based, but many of them are coping mechanisms a sufferer has no intention of getting rid of. While the suffering of an Axis 2 diagnosis may not be as acute, it is often far more damaging to the people around them. Ed Gein's mother sounds like a classic case of Borderline. And we all know what that did to Ed.

Had Chase lived in the LVP he would have been committed by 12 and never gotten out. He would not have had the chance to kill. Likely the same would hold for Kemper, though in Kemper's case even despite his later actions, it would have been an injustice.

[Harry D]

All we can surmise about the Ripper's mental state is that he was compos mentis enough to approach women for business, do his thing furtively, and then make a quick getaway. And that's if he even solicited the women for sex in the first place, we don't know that he did. We can debate the peculiarities of his mental illness but none of it is cut and dry. If Jack was a maniac, perhaps he had an episode and let slip he was the Ripper, perhaps he didn't? And if he did, then what of it? That would depend on a whole host of circumstances.

Incidentally, Jacob Levy was still running a business with his wife and family in 1888. He wasn't admitted to the insane asylum until some two years later. So he was still a semi-functioning member of society, and had he been a complete loony tune he wouldn't have lasted as long as that before he was eventually shut away.

[Errata]

All we can surmise about the Ripper's mental state is that he was compos mentis enough to approach women for business, do his thing furtively, and then make a quick getaway. And that's if he even solicited the women for sex in the first place, we don't know that he did. We can debate the peculiarities of his mental illness but none of it is cut and dry. If Jack was a maniac, perhaps he had an episode and let slip he was the Ripper, perhaps he didn't? And if he did, then what of it? That would depend on a whole host of circumstances.

Incidentally, Jacob Levy was still running a business with his wife and family in 1888. He wasn't admitted to the insane asylum until some two years later. So he was still a semi-functioning member of society, and had he been a complete loony tune he wouldn't have lasted as long as that before he was eventually shut away.

In fact he was institutionalized in 1886 for a year due to what appears to be a prolonged manic episode. And he was not running a business with his wife and family, he was tanking a business his wife and family were trying to save. All the while exhibiting strange behaviors that frustrated his wife enough to dump him in an asylum after two years of freedom. I think he was likely a raving lunatic a few times, but I think that mostly he was essentially non functional. Not necessarily dysfunctional, which would be acting in a manner that was contrary to his continued survival, health and/or freedom (though manics do bust out with those from time to time), but I don't think he was contributing to his ongoing survival, health, and/or freedom either. Clearly his job wasn't working out for him. Nor his marriage particularly.

I gotta tell you, I don't see a manic person having the concentration necessary to plan and execute a crime in circumstances where 30 seconds could be the difference between freedom and jail.

One thing I have always wondered is whether or not the neighborhood knew he had been in an asylum. I sort of picture 1888 East End like Harlem in the 70s. Everybody knew everybody's business. So if it was generally well known, I sort of have to wonder if he could solicit a prostitute who had worked the neighborhood for years. Would she have heard the gossip and refuse him on that basis?

[Fisherman]

I gotta tell you, I don't see a manic person having the concentration necessary to plan and execute a crime in circumstances where 30 seconds could be the difference between freedom and jail.

And I got to tell YOU, Errata, that you make more sense on this thread than a good number of other posters taken together.

126 years have passed, and we have had all the time in the world to study psychotic and manic people. They make incredibly bad bids for the Ripperīs role, end of story.

Thatīs not to say that they could not kill - clearly they can. It IS, however, to say that they could not approach a person, kill that person, eviscerate that person and leave the killing site cleanly, silently and efficiently and stay undetected. And the more killings of this type we have, the less credible it becomes that a manic or psychotic person have perpetrated them.

The Victorian police bought into the idea that the killer could be raving mad, and thatīs excusable to some extent since they knew a lot less than we do.

We should not fall into such a simple trap, though.

All the best,
Fisherman

[tji]

In fact he was institutionalized in 1886 for a year due to what appears to be a prolonged manic episode

.

Yes he was having 'episodes' that meant that he was also lucid and able to interact. Obviously as the time went on and the illness overtook him he became worse but not yet

Even in 1890 he had good days and is working on the farm and asking when he can go home, it is commented he is eating, sleeping well and has put on weight.

And he was not running a business with his wife and family, he was tanking a business his wife and family were trying to save.

We don't know this, we assume he would have lost his trading license, however Sarah doesn't complain until 1890 that he was ruining her business, not giving out correct change and pocketing anyhting he could.

All the while exhibiting strange behaviors that frustrated his wife enough to dump him in an asylum after two years of freedom

.

What two year freedom?

I think he was likely a raving lunatic a few times, but I think that mostly he was essentially non functional. Not necessarily dysfunctional, which would be acting in a manner that was contrary to his continued survival, health and/or freedom (though manics do bust out with those from time to time), but I don't think he was contributing to his ongoing survival, health, and/or freedom either. Clearly his job wasn't working out for him. Nor his marriage particularly.

I gotta tell you, I don't see a manic person having the concentration necessary to plan and execute a crime in circumstances where 30 seconds could be the difference between freedom and jail.

Have you read the info on him at all?

He wouldn't have been a 'raving lunatic' in 1886 or even 1888, he had neuro-syphilis which was slowly killing him, attacking his brain and eventually after 5 years of slow deterioration, killing him die from paralysis of the insane.
He didn't wake up in 1886 and start drooling at the mouth, unable to talk or function, it took 4 years for him to go from a functioning adult to being admitted to an asylum for good. Even then he was lucid at times.

A passage from his medical records states-

Dec 4 1890 -

Always bright and lively - no despondency since last note.

So while he does get 'episodes' Dr Sequira states on his intake record he feels unless restrained he will do violence to someone he does seem to be able to have lucid moments.

So for all the questions of how could a madman escape notice, this is how, he was slowly losing the fight with a disease of the brain, but could still control his thoughts and actions at times.