Hutchinson and antisemitism ?? A possibility?

[Observer]

You don't have a suspect? It's not long ago that you were proclaiming "Blotchy all the way".

Might I say at this jucture that I proclaim Hutchinson to be a suspect, a strong suspect, never have I proclaimed that he was the murderer.

No I don't believe the murderer of Kelly murdered the other women, there are subtle differences between Kelly's killing and the others, see the many posts discussing this in the Kelly threads.

Considering that he was sighted in Dorset Street, opposite Miller's Court showing an interest is the said court shortly before Kelly's Murder propels him into the suspect catagory. But much more importantly Hutchinson lied about meeting Kelly, about her being in the company of some pantomime villain shortly before her murder, why do this?

The previous MO of the Ripper prior to the Kelly murder involved him walking the streets picking up prostitutes, not known to him, and murdering them. Kelly was murdered indoors, it follows that if the murderer of Nichols, Chapman, and Eddowes murdered Kelly, then he picked Kelly up on the street. I believe whoever killed Kelly knew her. I do not believe that Kelly went out of doors after she arrived home at 11:45 p.m.8th November, how then could the random murderer of prostitutes, JTR ,murder Kelly? If Hutchinson lied about his encounter with Kelly, what propeled him into Dorset Street at 2:30 a.m. on the morning of 9th November ? In my opinion this makes him a strong suspect for the murder of Mary Kelly.


One question for you Meatwood Flack, if Hutchinson lied about meeting Kelly, if Mr A is a fiction, why did Hutchinson decide to plonk himself down in Dorset Street as he did, at 2:30 a.m. on the morning of 9th November 1888? Why was he there?

His motive? Not a clue, for unlike yourself I can not predict his actions

Observer

[Abberline2]

I believe you may have obtained this 'intelligence' from one of the many sensationalist bullshit merchants (e.g. Richard Jones, Donald Rumbelow, et al) who regularly tout this sort of garbage.

"During the 1880s Whitechapel came to have a population approaching 250,000 ..."


Whitechapel Registration District / Poor Law Union - 1888 (Click to Enlarge in flickr)
Underlying Aerial Imagery: Copyright Google Earth, 2007
Overlying Plots, Labels and Color-Shadings: Copyright Colin C. Roberts, 2010

In accordance with the Census of England & Wales, 1891 ...

Whitechapel Registration District / Poor Law Union:
- The Liberty of Norton Folgate (Green): 1,449
- The Old Artillery Ground (Aqua): 2,138
- The Parish of Christ Church Spitalfields (Blue): 22,859
- The Hamlet of Mile End New Town (Orange): 11,303
- The Parish of Holy Trinity ('Minories') (Yellow): 301
- The Parish of St. Mary Whitechapel (Red): 32,326
----- {Portion within the County of Middlesex, -1889; the County of London, 1889-1900: 32,284}
----- {Portion within the City of London, -1900: 42}
- The Liberty of Her Majesty's Tower of London (Orange): 933
----- {The Liberty of the Tower: n/a}
----- {The Precinct of Old Tower Without: 65}
----- {The Tower: 868}
- The Precinct of St. Katharine (Blue): 182
- The Parish of St. Botolph without Aldgate (portion within the County of Middlesex, -1889; the County of London, 1889-1965) (Green): 2,971

- Total Population (1891 Census): 74,462

If we assume that the non color-shaded portion of the above image, which lay south of Whitechapel Road / Mile End Road, and north of St. George Street (i.e. 'Ratcliff Highway'), was generally and colloquially referred to as 'Whitechapel', in the 1880's/1890's, ...

- The Ecclesiastical Parish of St. Augustine ('Stepney'), Civil Parish / Hamlet of Mile End Old Town: 7,277
- The Ecclesiastical Parish of St. Philip ('Stepney'), Civil Parish / Hamlet of Mile End Old Town: 8,135
- The Ecclesiastical Parish of St. John the Evangelist, Civil Parish of St. George in the East: 12,950
- The Ecclesiastical Parish of Christ Church, Civil Parish of St. George in the East: 8,615
- The Combined Ecclesiastical Parish of St. George in the East with St. Matthew, Civil Parish of St. George in the East: 10,551

- Sub-Total Population (1891 Census): 47,528

... and including the entireties of these parochial entities is a bit of a 'stretch', ...

... we have a Grand Total of 121,990 persons residing in all places 'Whitechapel', in accordance with the 1891 Census of England & Wales.

And again; this is a bit of a 'stretch', to say the least.

---

"... some 60,000 men, women, and children, were said to exist on or below the poverty line, ..."

I will expound on the issue of 'poverty', later tonight, or sometime tomorrow. But, for now ...

Charles Booth's delineations of socio-economic classification …

"In Poverty":

Class 'A': "Vicious" (i.e. vice-ridden); "Semi-Criminal"
Class 'B': "Very Poor"
Class 'C': "Poor" - Irregular Income
Class 'D': "Poor" - Regular but Inadequate Income

"In Comfort":

Class 'E': "Above the 'Line of Poverty'" - Regular "Standard" Income
Class 'F': "Highly Skilled Labour"
Class 'G': "Lower Middle-Class"
Class 'H': "Upper Middle-Class"

Whitechapel Registration District / Poor Law Union:
- The Liberty of Norton Folgate
- The Old Artillery Ground
- The Parish of Christ Church Spitalfields
- The Hamlet of Mile End New Town
- The Parish of Holy Trinity ('Minories')
- The Parish of St. Mary Whitechapel (portion within the County of Middlesex, -1889; the County of London, 1889-1965)
- The Liberty of Her Majesty's Tower of London
--- {The Liberty of the Tower}
--- {The Precinct of Old Tower Without}
--- {The Tower}
- The Precinct of St. Katharine
- The Parish of St. Botolph without Aldgate (portion within the County of Middlesex, -1889; the County of London, 1889-1965)

- Total Population (Charles Booth 1889 Estimate): 73,518

Class 'A': 2,426 (3.30%)
Class 'B': 6,543 (8.90%)
Classes 'C' & 'D': 19,850 (27.00%)

Sub-Total (Below the 'Line of Poverty'): 28,819 (39.20%)

Classes 'E' & 'F': 40,729 (55.40%)
Classes 'G' & 'H': 3,970 (5.40%)

Sub-Total (Above the 'Line of Poverty'): 44,699 (60.80%)

Mile End Old Town Registration District / Poor Law Parish:
- The Hamlet of Mile End Old Town

- Total Population (Charles Booth 1889 Estimate): 110,321

Class 'A': 772 (0.70%)
Class 'B': 7,502 (6.80%)
Classes 'C' & 'D': 20,520 (18.60%)

Sub-Total (Below the 'Line of Poverty'): 28,794 (26.10%)

Classes 'E' & 'F': 73,805 (66.90%)
Classes 'G' & 'H': 7,722 (7.00%)

Sub-Total (Above the 'Line of Poverty'): 81,527 (73.90%)

St. George in the East Registration District / Poor Law Parish:
- The Parish of St. George in the East

- Total Population (Charles Booth 1889 Estimate): 47,578

Class 'A': 714 (1.50%)
Class 'B': 7,184 (15.10%)
Classes 'C' & 'D': 15,368 (32.30%)

Sub-Total (Below the 'Line of Poverty'): 23,266 (48.90%)

Classes 'E' & 'F': 23,170 (48.70%)
Classes 'G' & 'H': 1,142 (2.40%)

Sub-Total (Above the 'Line of Poverty'): 24,312 (51.10%)

Please note that here, I have referred to the entireties of the 'Mile End Old Town' & 'St. George in the East' Registration Districts; as opposed to the relatively smaller portions of these constituencies, that might have generally and colloquially been referred to as 'Whitechapel', in the 1880's/1890's, as mentioned above.

---

"Into this mix came some 50-60,000 Jewish immigrants from Russia, Poland and Germany, ..."

In accordance with the Census of England & Wales, 1891 ...

Whitechapel Registration District / Poor Law Union:
- The Liberty of Norton Folgate
- The Old Artillery Ground
- The Parish of Christ Church Spitalfields
- The Hamlet of Mile End New Town
- The Parish of Holy Trinity ('Minories')
- The Parish of St. Mary Whitechapel (portion within the County of Middlesex, -1889; the County of London, 1889-1965)
- The Liberty of Her Majesty's Tower of London
--- {The Liberty of the Tower}
--- {The Precinct of Old Tower Without}
--- {The Tower}
- The Precinct of St. Katharine
- The Parish of St. Botolph without Aldgate (portion within the County of Middlesex, -1889; the County of London, 1889-1965)

- Total Population (1891 Census): 74,462

Enumerated Immigrants From ...
- Russia: 6,367
- Poland: 7,171
- Germany: 1,651

- Sub-Total: 15,189

Mile End Old Town Registration District / Poor Law Parish:
- The Hamlet of Mile End Old Town

- Total Population (1891 Census): 107,592

Enumerated Immigrants From ...
- Russia: 1,288
- Poland: 2,152
- Germany: 1,125

- Sub-Total: 4,565

St. George in the East Registration District / Poor Law Parish:
- The Parish of St. George in the East

- Total Population (1891 Census): 45,795

Enumerated Immigrants From ...
- Russia: 1,924
- Poland: 3,049
- Germany: 1,423

- Sub-Total: 6,396

- Total: 26,150

Please note that here again, I have referred to the entireties of the 'Mile End Old Town' & 'St. George in the East' Registration Districts; as opposed to the relatively smaller portions of these constituencies, that might have generally and colloquially been referred to as 'Whitechapel', in the 1880's/1890's, as mentioned above. But, to be fair; it was indeed the case that most Eastern European immigrants residing in these two parochial entities, in the 1880's/1890's, lived in the colloquially-speaking 'Greater Whitechapel' portions.

I will make further additions/clarifications later tonight or sometime tomorrow.

The issue of 'homelessness' will be difficult to tackle. As for infant mortality; I've heard that 50%(+) figure once too often, and I plainly and simply do not believe it!

50%(+) infant mortality in Old Nichol Street, Parish of St. Matthew Bethnal Green, ... perhaps! But, in some broader vicinity, such as 'Whitechapel'? No Way!

Again; more to follow!

C19 census material relates to people with residence, not homeless people or those who for whatever reason chose not present themselves to the inumerators. I suspect when dealing with the East End in 1891 this figure may be much larger than you might suspect. Neverthess, even if you scale down the figs to avoid that sensationalist BS you speak of, it doesn't alter the basic premise of my argument re the sig of the graffiti.

[Abberline2]

[QUOTE=Fleetwood Mac;130642]
And this is where I would depart. Your idea suggests that the author - let's assume average East Ender (as you say - possibly lacking even an elementary education) - would have a grasp of the wider political picture in London. I doubt that very much. It also assumes that the author had an interest in the wider political picture - I doubt that very much - it is a feature of English politics that we tended . I'd suggest that the author was referring to beatings adminstered to Jews because of an issue over jobs. In other words: the author is concerned with the matter of personal calculation rather than formenting grand ideas such as revolution. And this isn't Germany or France where they had revolutions and coups galore over a 350 year period - this is England where we've had a Constitutional Monarchy throughout that time - the point being that we're less predisposed toward revolution than just about any other country in the world - with only the former colonies having a similar mindset on the importance of stability and the folly of armed revolution.
QUOTE]

I'll try to be brief. I am not sure what you mean by the average East Ender but lets assume you mean poor/working-class. If you take, for example, the Chartist agitation, many of the men involved could not read or write but they were well informed. Many would have articles etc from the radical press read out to them in pubs and taverns by someone who could read. You should not discount the importance of oral transfer of information taking place in the pubs etc of Victorian England. You say that we English (yep, I am English, my dad was a miner and my heritage is working-class) come to the boil over food and jobs. Isn't that precisely what I am saying ? I am not suggesting that the average English working-class poor of the East End were going to get together and organise a revolution. There were (often self-educated) working-class radicals around to take the lead and, as I said, serious protests, such as that at Trafalgar Square, were taking place at the time. Throughout much of English history the crown/government have feared popular unrest and disorder seeing this as precusors to riots, popular risings, rebellion and, yes, even revolution. Warren was concerned that people then would do precisely what peole today do, that is link the graffiti with the JtR killing. Warren feared that this could be used by those (socialist) the government felt were seeking to encourage political instability perhaps manifest initally in the form of serious anti-semitic riots, riots which in turn could act as the catalyst for revolution. Irrespective of the assumed political apathy of the English, its more the fears of those in government that is important in interpreting the impact of the coincidence of the GSt graffiti and the piece of Eddowes' apron.

On a basic note, I am not sure which 350 year period you refer to but we English chopped off our own King's head in 1649, over 100 years before the French did it.

[Fleetwood Mac]

come to the boil over food and jobs[/I]. Isn't that precisely what I am saying ? I am not suggesting that the average English working-class poor of the East End were going to get together and organise a revolution. There were (often self-educated) working-class radicals around to take the lead and, as I said, serious protests, such as that at Trafalgar Square, were taking place at the time. Throughout much of English history the crown/government have feared popular unrest and disorder seeing this as precusors to riots, popular risings, rebellion and, yes, even revolution. Warren was concerned that people then would do precisely what peole today do, that is link the graffiti with the JtR killing. Warren feared that this could be used by those (socialist) the government felt were seeking to encourage political instability perhaps manifest initally in the form of serious anti-semitic riots, riots which in turn could act as the catalyst for revolution. Irrespective of the assumed political apathy of the English, its more the fears of those in government that is important in interpreting the impact of the coincidence of the GSt graffiti and the piece of Eddowes' apron.

On a basic note, I am not sure which 350 year period you refer to but we English chopped off our own King's head in 1649, over 100 years before the French did it.

For clarity's sake - I don't assume 'the supposed political apathy' of the English. We are political - but it tends to manifest itself in matters that directly impact on our lives - food and jobs - rather than big ideas that have been a feature of German and French politics (as said 350 years - has seen a comparatively unbelievable amount of stability). It's only a small point though Abberline - so to the meat of your post.

The most I could agree with is that officials may have perceived a threat of revolution. I could go with that. But the evidence suggests that we don't do revolution - yes the glorious revolution - which wasn't much of a revolution when you compare it with the French version - and it was a long time in the distance. But yeah - officials could have perceived it - I wouldn't dispute that.

I suppose I was arguing the nature of the grafitti. And I'd contend that the author was not concerned with a revolution - or a popular uprising. I'd imagine it was a threat to any local Jews i.e. a threat of violence.

[Observer]

You don't seem to have answered my question Macca see post 211.

Observer

[Abberline2]

I suppose I was arguing the nature of the grafitti. And I'd contend that the author was not concerned with a revolution - or a popular uprising. I'd imagine it was a threat to any local Jews i.e. a threat of violence.

I totally agree with you, Mac.

I just don't think that JtR wrote the graffiti, he was fleeing from a murder scene with constables in persuit. It was dark, the GSt doorway would not have been particularly well lit if at all, and I just can't see him stopping to write that on the wall. My post was really directed at why Warren ordered the graffitti to be erased. A lot of people hold that it was because the graffiti was written by JtR. To some extent it doesn't matter wrote wrote it. I think it was erased becuase Warren feared it could lead to anti-semitic riots whoever wrote it and just because he had it erased doesn't mean it was written by JtR.

As one recent commentator puts it:

"So long as the poor were confined to their dens in east London the immediate threat to the metropolitan elites was slight, but then in a series of riots in 1886/87 the unemployed poor broke out of Whitechapel, Spitalfields, Stepney and West Ham to rampage across the West End, smashing shops and houses en route. Most worrying was the belief that the hordes were led and inspired by agitators who had been schooled in the dangerous doctrines of socialism; the prospect of the London poor organised and galvinised into action by the Social Demoncratic Federation struck terror in the heart of respectable option."

I have little doubt that Warren ordered the graffiti to be erased because of this perception among members of the government. At this distance, we may have a tendency to wholly underestimate the sense of political anxiety that was current at that time among the governing elite. To my mind, it is sheer coincidence that the blood-stained piece of Eddowes' apron was found aside the graffiti.

[Fleetwood Mac]

To my mind, it is sheer coincidence that the blood-stained piece of Eddowes' apron was found aside the graffiti.

Agreed Abberline.....I see it as you do.

[Observer]

The silence speaks volumes

[DVV]

I have to disagree, Obs.

You don't know how to quote silence and get infuriated.

Amitiés,
David

[Abby Normal]

Hi, I'm a newbie -so forgive me if this territory has all been well covered before. I've been reading around the site the last few days and a few striking 'coincidences' leapt out at me :

Starting with the 'Double Event' - Liz Stride was soliciting outside the jewish socialist club in Berner Street when she was killed (would the man seen pulling her AWAY from the yard have been trying to discourage her from soliciting there for antisemite reasons ?). At the same time, a passing jewish man, Israel Schwartz, was insulted with the name of a jewish criminel and chased. The Berner street club was sited in the same road as St George's Settlement Synagogue.

A short while later three jewish men coming from a club near Mitre Square saw Catherine Eddowes soliciting and one of the men felt 'threatened' by Eddowes' customer,
although he doesn't specify why. I have not seen the name of the club used by Lawende, Levy and Harris, but the fact that the three witnesses were jewish and the club was in proximity to the Great Synagogue, suggests that this was another jewish club. The fact that Eddowes chose to go to this specific location (away from the lodging house and not outside a pub or around the church) might suggest that she was soliciting there for jewish men leaving this club. The fact that Levy was scared of this man strongly suggests to me that the man did not look jewish -and indeed either flashed a look of hatred at Levy or had a look of an antisemite (a sort of forerunner fascist thug ), and which made Levy scared to testify later, probably for fear of attracting violence to his family. Eddowes is found murdered 10 minutes afterwards.

Later that evening part of Eddowes' apron is found under an inflammatory graffiti accusing the jews of the crime by inference. If Jtl didn't write the graffiti either that night or at an earlier date, he knew it was there and left the apron there on purpose -although this was an act guaranteed to stir up racial hatred and cause trouble for jewish people (a fact recocognised by Sir Charles Warren).

On balance it does not look as if Jtl was jewish himself -it even looks as if he specifically targeted prostitutes soliciting for jewish customers near to jewish club meetings.

With this theory in mind, it is worth looking at the other canonical murders. Jim Leen has described the locations thus :-
Buck's Row - opposite Brady Street Ashkenazi Cemetery.
Hanbury Street - Glory of Israel and Sons of Klatsk Synagogue situated
at no. 50a. Synagogues at 19 Princelet St. and 17 Wilkes St.
Berner Street - St. George's Settlement Synagogue.
Mitre Square - beside the Great Synagogue.
Miller's Court - beside Spitalfields Great Synagogue, Church St. ( Fournier St.)
Leen seemed to think that the locations were chosen so that a jewish Jtl could find refuge in a synagogue, but given the time of day that seems very unlikely to me !

Isn't it more likely that, as in the case of Berner Street and Mitre Square, there were jewish clubs meeting in proximity to these sacred jewish sites ? Certainly Rumbelow mentions that the "Bolshevik delegation headquarters in 1907 was less than five minutes from Buck’s Row". what was this building used for in 1888 ?
Henry Mann ("Petticoat Lane Sunday Morning") talks about "Jew pubs" -were rooms in pubs near the murder sites used for jewish meetings ? and if so on what dates?
Club meetings around the weekend, once a month or near the beginning of the month sound pretty logical to me. Maybe there is still research to do on this through the jewish community?

I also think that if Jtl WAS targeting certain prostitutes seen with jewish customers, then this would explain why he sometimes took a long time to choose
a victim -not just "any old" prostitute would do. It would also explain why he did not appear to have sexual relations with the women he killed (he thought that they were dirty), although he may have used other prostitutes (and have been known amongst them as being harmless -a reason why the women weren't scared of him)..

All this inevitably leads us to Millers Court and George Hutchinson. He described in detail the supposed killer of Mary Jane Kelly as a caricature of a jew
-the sort of portrait that could have come from a racist newspaper cartoonist: the showy hat, the ostentatious watch, the twirly moustache, the astrakan, the "toff"
attitude. Hutchinson even describes his reaction to this caricature : he stopped to bend down to stare the man in the face, he eavesdropped, he followed him,
he loitered outside whilst the man was supposedly with a woman within. There is nothing benign about his description of his attitude towards this "jew".

In the end -in the absence of forensic proof - we either believe Hutchinson's statement or we don't; He lied or he didn't. If he lied, what reason could he have except that he was the murderer ? I don't accept that he would cover for someone else, because these are sexual crimes by one warped mind.

I won't list all the objections to Hutchinson's story -they've all been well documented on this site. I will just add that I think that there are bits of truth woven in -
liers do add in truth, to make their lies more believable. So I think that Hutchinson HAD seen Kelly with a jewish client at one point -he may even have warned her about it in the past (is that who she was scared of ?) I think that it was the reason that she was chosen to die. I think that Hutchinson accompanied her back to her room and it was he who stood chatting a few moments and showed her the red scarf (the one he had on when picking up Eddowes); I think that he waited a long time watching her room, to make sure that she'd really gone to bed and was asleep so that he could reach through the window and unlock the door as he'd just seen her do, because she'd already refused to let him come in with her (could it be that's what they chatted about ?) I think that he relocked the door the same way that he unlocked it.

All that is necessarily surmising about Hutchinson, but once we've decided that he WAS lying and WAS Jtl then there are obvious questions to which we need to
find logical answers -and they can only be supposition now.

Why would Hutchinson come forward after the inquest and draw attention to himself ? For the same reason that we see people giving tearful 'news conferences'
begging for help to find a killer -only for us to find that they did it themselves ? . Hutchinson would have followed the inquest, if he'd done it, and may have been horrified to see that witnesses had got a good look at him -so this could have been partly 'damage limitation'. Another part could have been a 'controlling'
(wouldn't Jtl have been 'controlling' ?) desire to get close to the enquiry, to keep an eye on what direction it was taking and try and influence it from the inside ?
Influence it by pointing to a jewish culprit (hatred of the jews being his own justification to himself for the crimes). Then again Hutchinson might also have liked
the 15 minutes fame concerning the press and public (Jtl was a little bit 'theatrical' in his displays of the murder victims, and his placing of the apron piece under the graffiti), not to mention getting paid by both the police and the press for his trouble (Jtl stole those brass rings, and always took back the money that he'd paid the prostitutes, even if he was in a hurry). I think that it figures.

The next question would be (and the main reason that people reject him as a candidate) why Abberline met him as a witness and believed him, and did not
retain him as a suspect. I believe that there are three good reasons:
a) Abberline saw the 'jewish' thread (which I've already discussed) and Hutchinson was proposing an archytypal jewish suspect.
b) Abberline had actually seen the bodies of Chapman, Eddowes, and especially Kelly and I think that it must have been quite traumatic for him -I had nightmares for days after just glimpsing those old photos of Kelly's remains -and Abberline saw & smelt the reality, in their grim surroundings. I'm sure that he must have looked at, & weighed up, the witness across the table from him (and without forensics or an arrest 'in flagrante', his intuition was all he had to go on), and he decided that
Hutchinson was too normal' to be Jtl. He also showed Hutchinson Kelly's body, I'm sure to see his reaction.

It has to be said here that we have so much more experience of killers and atrocities than Abberline : who can forget all those nazi concentration camp guards ?
(you can read the statement by the camp commandant of Auschwitz), perpetrators of horrendous deeds in Japan, Vietnam, Bosnia, Rwanda, Chile ?(sadly Icould go on for a very long time), capable of going home and being perfectly loving with their friends and families -even sentimental. Then there are those serial killers such as Denis Nielson -he was capable of holding down work in a job centre, and presumably discussing last night's telly around the coffee machine with his collegues,
whilst boiling up heads and flushing bits of his victims down the loo. There are also all those seemingly 'normal' family men who get caught living double lives or viewing the most revolting violence, porn & paedophilia on the net, as part of their secret fantasy life. In short people can compartmentalise. -and Hutchinson might not have needed to act when viewing Kelly's body, some days after the murder.

c) Abberline didn't think that a serial killer with escalating violence, could stop in his trajectory -but we know that serial killers CAN stop sometimes. The FBI
profile of the likely killer says that one reason for the Jtl stopping could have been the feeling that the police were closing in. Of course, if Hutchinson were Jtl, then the fact that he had been circulating around town with policeman, giving interviews to the press, and no doubt regaling an audience in the pubs thereabouts of every detail, would make it impossible for him to sneak around as Jtl.

I will just finish by saying that it would be very interesting to see if there are descendents of George Topping Hutchinson (I see that there was a son living in the '70s), and what information they would be able to give about him.

I am really new to all this, so I would welcome comments and any discussion on the topic...

Hi Ruby
Interesting theory, you bring up some good ideas but overall i beleive JtR killed because he liked it, and the murder sites were random. however, he may have been antisemitic and/or just blamed jews to throw off the police. i like your idea of hutchinson's description prefabricated from someone he knew.

I have a little theory about George Hutchinson and JtR. it goes sometning like this:

The first time someone gets a good look at JtR is Israel Scwartz, causing JtR to shout out "Lipski!" perhaps to scare him away, which he did. JtR now knows he has been seen by a Jew. Later, he is seen by another person(3 really) right before he murders Eddowes. Since he beleives he has been seen now twice JtR wants to throw suspician on his witness-hence the bloody apron and GSG implicating jews.

On the night of Mary Kelly's murder, JtR knows agian he has been spotted (by E. Long) as he is waiting outside her room, perhaps for her previous client to leave. Later he expands on the jew blaming by going to the police and saying himself is a possible witness and the suspect looks like a Jew.

[Marc]

i beleive JtR killed because he liked it, and the murder sites were random. however, he may have been antisemitic

I agree, IMHO Whitechapel murders MO show more than 'simple' killing frenzy, which would satisfy itself, for instance, with repeated stabbing of
the victim, something that copes well with a profile of 'demented', outbursting violent individual.

This kind of MO, without torture before, or mutilation after, looks to
me like if the main issue is the end, taking a life, to 'empty' one's anger
and frustration.

In JtR case, or at least for murders generally attributed to him,
great effort is taken in mutilations, like if the killing in itself was only a foreplay, and the real 'show' the slicing, skinning, tentative beheading, etc...

This MO indicates IMHO that JtR goal wasn't only to kill someone 'easy' to prey on (like prostitutes are well known to be), but also to further 'punish' the victim, which COULD mean that he knew them, if not intimately, at
least closely enough to reproach them something more than simply being
'whores'.

If not demented in the most obvious way, you have to build a strong 'morally justifying' story around murders like those committed by JtR and
still be able to have a 'normal' social life.
This doesn't mean you don't derive pleasure from your deeds, rather
that you can have pleasure AND feel justified in the mean time.
Killing prostitutes who had regular jewish clients COULD be an IMHO
good 'morally justifying' story for someone who had, basically, issues
with almost every woman but choose to punish those who he could
consider as the filthiest.

[Rubyretro]

Yes, Marc, that's what I basically think now...

I still think that there is just too much coincidence in the 'Jewish' club sites, the graffiti and Hutch's description for there not to be a link..especially given the 'tinderbox' background situation viz a viz jewish/socialist immigrants.

Yet we've still got the fact that nobody but a sexually motivated killer, getting off on mutilation,could possibly have done these killings.

One doesn't exclude the other however: If we're dealing with a person who is not a schizophenric and not a 'random' psycho killer, but has a personality disorder (and after reading Corey's post on Casebook, I am convinced by his diagnostic of 'Narcisissum'), then that person could very well function enough not to arouse suspicion, be sane enough to plan the murders for (for him) a logical reason (anti-semitism), and indulge his urges (the true but subconcious reason for the crimes).

I am still convinced that it was Hutchinson who was 'Jack'.

[Abby Normal]

Yes, Marc, that's what I basically think now...

I still think that there is just too much coincidence in the 'Jewish' club sites, the graffiti and Hutch's description for there not to be a link..especially given the 'tinderbox' background situation viz a viz jewish/socialist immigrants.

Yet we've still got the fact that nobody but a sexually motivated killer, getting off on mutilation,could possibly have done these killings.

One doesn't exclude the other however: If we're dealing with a person who is not a schizophenric and not a 'random' psycho killer, but has a personality disorder (and after reading Corey's post on Casebook, I am convinced by his diagnostic of 'Narcisissum'), then that person could very well function enough not to arouse suspicion, be sane enough to plan the murders for (for him) a logical reason (anti-semitism), and indulge his urges (the true but subconcious reason for the crimes).

I am still convinced that it was Hutchinson who was 'Jack'.

Hi Ruby
Posted below yesterday, but not sure if you saw it-what do you think? IMHO I think GH is a top candidate for JtR.


I have a little theory about George Hutchinson and JtR. it goes sometning like this:

The first time someone gets a good look at JtR is Israel Scwartz, causing JtR to shout out "Lipski!" perhaps to scare him away, which he did. JtR now knows he has been seen by a Jew. Later, he is seen by another person(3 really) right before he murders Eddowes. Since he beleives he has been seen now twice JtR wants to throw suspician on his witness-hence the bloody apron and GSG implicating jews.

On the night of Mary Kelly's murder, JtR knows agian he has been spotted (by E. Long) as he is waiting outside her room, perhaps for her previous client to leave. Later he expands on the jew blaming by going to the police and saying himself is a possible witness and the suspect looks like a Jew.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Ruby
Posted below yesterday, but not sure if you saw it-what do you think? IMHO I think GH is a top candidate for JtR.


I have a little theory about George Hutchinson and JtR. it goes sometning like this:

The first time someone gets a good look at JtR is Israel Scwartz, causing JtR to shout out "Lipski!" perhaps to scare him away, which he did. JtR now knows he has been seen by a Jew. Later, he is seen by another person(3 really) right before he murders Eddowes. Since he beleives he has been seen now twice JtR wants to throw suspician on his witness-hence the bloody apron and GSG implicating jews.

On the night of Mary Kelly's murder, JtR knows agian he has been spotted (by E. Long) as he is waiting outside her room, perhaps for her previous client to leave. Later he expands on the jew blaming by going to the police and saying himself is a possible witness and the suspect looks like a Jew.

Correction:

not E. Long but S. Lewis

[Rubyretro]

Sorry Abby -I've just gone back and read your post...

I just totally agree that the murderer was not someone who killed in a 'random frenzy' (he'd have been caught if he had), but was rather very intelligent and cool headed. Even the dates suggest that he waited for specific times rather than just let rip ( so to speak) when he had the urge.

I also totally agree that if he was someone who functioned normally the rest of the time, then it is probable that he needed to give himself a moral justification -as you said- for killing those particular women; there were alot of prostitutes in London out every night.

Personally, I think that his MO went back before Berner Street. I said at the
beginning of my thread that there were jewish sites near the place of every murder :
(Buck's Row - opposite Brady Street Ashkenazi Cemetery.
Hanbury Street - Glory of Israel and Sons of Klatsk Synagogue situated
at no. 50a. Synagogues at 19 Princelet St. and 17 Wilkes St.
Berner Street - St. George's Settlement Synagogue.
Mitre Square - beside the Great Synagogue.
Miller's Court - beside Spitalfields Great Synagogue, Church St. ( Fournier St.)

That Jack was an anti-semite would make him similar to alot of men of his time. By choosing to leave the apron piece under the Goulston Street Graffiti (whether he wrote it, wrote it earlier or chose the spot for existing graffiti) he makes it clear that there is a jewish link. His action was inflamatory, as Sir Charles warren recognised. That Hutch was anti -semite -if you believe that he made up Astrakhan Man- is clear by his choice of 'villain'.

After that -I don't really take much notice of the witness accounts at Berner Street or Mitre Square : try coming home from an evening out and describing someone accurately that you passed for a minute !
two examples : 1) my step daughters were caught up in Poland in a murder enquiry and had to give a description to police for a 'robot portrait' of some guys that they had spent the evening with -they had a terribly hard job and even left the mostache off one guy !!
2) I once accused a guy in the street of being a shoplifter in my shop; I am a
very mild and shy person, and I did it because I was certain -having talked to the guy in broad daylight. but I was wrong (as it turned out).
If you add in that there are lots of witness statements and some plainly are of different people, in the dark, for a few minutes -then I don't think that they're worth anything..

I don't think that any of them worried Jack either -until the MJK murder.
I think that it is different both because it may have been alot more personal, and also I think that Sarah Lewis really DID get a good look. If you imagine that Hutch knew very well who SHE was, and was afraid of being recognised in the street after the inquest, then you have a reason for him coming forward as 'damage limitation'.