Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Batman View Post
    Out of all the Jewish places Hutchinson could have picked, of which there are many (as per the Booth poverty map we hear time and time about again to make the point that there are no ways to avoid a Jewish connection!), Hutchinson just happened to pick this one?

    A coincidence then?
    I believe you're thinking of the Arkell map representing "The Jew in London" in 1900;

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File...conditions.jpg

    Very similar in design to the Booth poverty maps. It would be interesting to compare the two.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
      I believe you're thinking of the Arkell map representing "The Jew in London" in 1900;

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File...conditions.jpg

      Very similar in design to the Booth poverty maps. It would be interesting to compare the two.
      Indeed it would, Joshua. Booth and his researchers emphasise the respectability of poor Jews in comparison to the their English/Irish neighbours. The black categorisation on the poverty map goes beyond economics and identifies the 'vicious' and 'semi-criminal'. You'd expect there to be fewer Jews in those streets.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
        Indeed it would, Joshua. Booth and his researchers emphasise the respectability of poor Jews in comparison to the their English/Irish neighbours. The black categorisation on the poverty map goes beyond economics and identifies the 'vicious' and 'semi-criminal'. You'd expect there to be fewer Jews in those streets.
        https://forum.casebook.org/showpost....0&postcount=38
        Bona fide canonical and then some.

        Comment


        • Your point is?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
            His current lodging-house, the Victoria Home, was on Wentworth Street.
            Do we know that was the case Sam? My understanding is that the lodger records would be daily check-in forms, unless a private room was rented rather than just a bed, and Hutch missed his check in that night. Thats why he was out on the street, yes?

            So we could tell whether he stayed there based on previous lodging records, but on that night, there would be no record of him.

            As I understand it there are no records that show his statement was checked with that lodging house to confirm he had resided there prior to that night..
            Last edited by Michael W Richards; 12-12-2018, 12:01 PM.
            Michael Richards

            Comment


            • Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
              Your point is?
              I was pointing out how in that discussion the view Sam has is that it is near impossible not to hit on a Jewish area, such as with the Goulston St., apron.

              Yet now in this thread, this specific market, out of all those other places, is just a coincidence that if someone was to make up seeing a Jew, they would pick the market.

              Also, another point I would make is that some claimed JtR could have been hanging out at Spitalfields market with the early morning workers, blending in. Yet here we have this Jacob Levy character, not only fleeing into a market area (yes we know it isn't active at that time of night), but living right on top of one.
              Bona fide canonical and then some.

              Comment


              • "No known bad characters are admitted. Tickets for beds are issued from five p.m. until 12.30 midnight, and after that hour if a man wants to get in he must have a pass.

                "It is by these rules, especially, and by the exclusion of women, that the Victoria Home is so greatly to be preferred to the most modern and "improved" of the lodging-houses which are strictly commercial undertakings."
                Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Batman View Post
                  I was pointing out how in that discussion the view Sam has is that it is near impossible not to hit on a Jewish area, such as with the Goulston St., apron.
                  Indeed, throughout Whitechapel there were streets with a high density of Jewish residents, and there would have been plenty of streets that Jews used and/or worked in, even if they didn't live in that particular street. All these factors applied to the area around Petticoat Lane. The fact that Hutchinson saw a man of Jewish appearance in Petticoat Lane on a Sunday is therefore about as significant/useful as someone spotting a person of Chinese appearance in Chinatown.
                  Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                  "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Batman View Post
                    I was pointing out how in that discussion the view Sam has is that it is near impossible not to hit on a Jewish area, such as with the Goulston St., apron.

                    Yet now in this thread, this specific market, out of all those other places, is just a coincidence that if someone was to make up seeing a Jew, they would pick the market.

                    Also, another point I would make is that some claimed JtR could have been hanging out at Spitalfields market with the early morning workers, blending in. Yet here we have this Jacob Levy character, not only fleeing into a market area (yes we know it isn't active at that time of night), but living right on top of one.
                    I think what’s being being pointed out is that there would have been significantly more Jews moving through Petticoat Lane market than anywhere else and the fact that an individual jew lived in one of the streets that hosted the market is not as significant as you suggest.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
                      I think what’s being being pointed out is that there would have been significantly more Jews moving through Petticoat Lane market than anywhere else and the fact that an individual jew lived in one of the streets that hosted the market is not as significant as you suggest.
                      What I am reading here is that a Jew living near Petticoat Lane, doesn't make Jack the Ripper.

                      However, that isn't the argument I am making. It's just a bit of the argument.

                      Jacob Levy is significant, especially given the proximity to the GSG. Taken in context, it is significant because he is falling out of bed into the very place a JtR witnesses claims to have recognized his suspect from.
                      Bona fide canonical and then some.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                        Not that it was necessarily slammed, as such. Simply pulling it to would presumably have sufficed.
                        True, and was described as such in the press.

                        "The last person to have left the place must have closed the door behind him, taking with him the key from the spring lock, as it is missing."
                        Daily Telegraph, 10 Nov. 1888.

                        Even though the point of the comment was the missing key, it is also of importance to know this was a spring lock. Meaning the door bolt was spring loaded so the door locked itself when pulled shut.

                        These locks had a two knobs on the inside. One knob was slid horizontal to withdraw the door bolt. The other when slid up would retain the bolt in the withdrawn position, or if applied when the bolt was extended, would lock the door.
                        Regards, Jon S.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Batman View Post
                          What I am reading here is that a Jew living near Petticoat Lane, doesn't make Jack the Ripper.

                          However, that isn't the argument I am making. It's just a bit of the argument.

                          Jacob Levy is significant, especially given the proximity to the GSG. Taken in context, it is significant because he is falling out of bed into the very place a JtR witnesses claims to have recognized his suspect from.
                          was Jacob levy rich?
                          "Is all that we see or seem
                          but a dream within a dream?"

                          -Edgar Allan Poe


                          "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                          quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                          -Frederick G. Abberline

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Batman View Post
                            What I am reading here is that a Jew living near Petticoat Lane, doesn't make Jack the Ripper.

                            However, that isn't the argument I am making. It's just a bit of the argument.

                            Jacob Levy is significant, especially given the proximity to the GSG. Taken in context, it is significant because he is falling out of bed into the very place a JtR witnesses claims to have recognized his suspect from.
                            Was Jacob Levy in the habit of walking around wearing a gold watch and an astrakhan coat, etc? He might have been of Jewish appearance, but there were thousands more in Petticoat Lane of a Sunday. Even on a non market-day, there'd still have been hundreds of men of Jewish appearance living in, or nearby, the area known as Petticoat Lane.
                            Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                            "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                            Comment


                            • This is just the standard opposition to Hutchinson's suspect - that nobody dressed that way would be on Dorset St., at such an hour.

                              Yet this opposition tends to omit the possibility that JtR lived close by, thus any posed risks minimal compared to a night wanderer. It also omits that JtR would likely not want to be out dressed shabby, given the descriptions out there.
                              Bona fide canonical and then some.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Batman View Post
                                Is this Astrakhan man or Blotchy?

                                https://casebook.org/press_reports/m.../18881119.html

                                He was of gentlemanly appearance and manners, and somewhat resembled the description given by the witnesses at the inquest as having been seen in company with Kelly early on the morning that she was murdered. Upon being minutely questioned as to his whereabouts at the time of the murders, the suspect was able to furnish a satisfactory account of himself, and was accordingly liberated.
                                It's neither, as has been pointed out it is more likely the Britannia-man, yet Sarah Lewis did not see Kelly with this man. Lewis admitted she did not know Kelly. So something is wrong with that paragraph.

                                It was Mrs Kennedy, 30 minutes after Lewis, who noticed Kelly talking with this man outside the Britannia.
                                The only way this paragraph in the press makes sense is that the journalist has put two & two together and realized that Sarah Lewis (at the inquest) was talking about the same man as Mrs Kennedy (in the press), who had seen Kelly talking with him.
                                It just reads as though Lewis saw Kelly with him, but she didn't.
                                Regards, Jon S.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X