Quick Kosminski question (say that 5 times fast)

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve,

I do not have such a bias. History has it. 16 percent of the suspects on this site are described as jewish. The jewish population in England in the 1880s was not even 1 percent.

Best wishes, Pierre

Pierre

We are not talking about murders in England as a whole are we?
How does that compare to the population in Whitechapel in 1888?

So 84% of suspects are not described as Jewish, yet you feel that being Jewish was a reason to be suspected, that is not born out by those figures is it?

The failure you have, is that you do not see that these suspects as you refer to them, this 16% may be named not because they are Jewish, that is incidental, but because they may be violent, may live in the area, may have acted suspiciously or even been report by family members.

Yes there are comments by some witnesses, such as Long and Hutchinson which indicate a Jewish person, and yes that may show a bias of that individual towards members of that group, or it may be an accurate report, While there may be a tendency in some reports to anti-Semitic comments, that does not mean every report is false or inaccurate.

However such descriptions by a witness does not make an individual a suspect unless they are specifically identified by that witness.


To rule out a solution because you feel that such a solution echoes or reinforces what you consider to be a bias, is not scientific.

If such a bias did exist, and it may do, it means that you have to be very careful in analyzing the cases of individuals. However you do not appear to do this.

Instead you seem to suggest:

1.) There is a bias in history. 16% of suspects are described as of a particular race/religion, this is wrong

2.) Therefore the solution to the killer cannot be a person of that race, because to name someone of that race is bias in itself.

Result is that you exclude for the wrong reasons, and never look in depth at the cases, be that Kosminski or someone else.

Pierre your failure to see and acknowledge your own bias is a great failing for any scientist.
Such a tendency in any research is bound to bring the whole of the research by that individual into question, which is always a shame.

Regards

Steve

[Pierre]

"16% of the suspects on this site are described as Jewish." How is that reliable, or even relevant, source material in determining whether the police had an inherent bias towards Jewish suspects? For instance, what percentage of police suspects were Jewish?

And the ratio of Jews in Whitechapel was much higher than 1%.

I'm sorry Pierre but you really must learn to be discerning when discussing source material.

16 percent of the "suspects" on this site. Not even 1 percent in England in the 1880s. Embarrassing.

[John G]

Hi Steve,

I do not have such a bias. History has it. 16 percent of the suspects on this site are described as jewish. The jewish population in England in the 1880s was not even 1 percent.

Best wishes, Pierre

"16% of the suspects on this site are described as Jewish." How is that reliable, or even relevant, source material in determining whether the police had an inherent bias towards Jewish suspects? For instance, assessing what percentage of police suspects were Jewish would be a far more academic approach.

And the ratio of Jews in Whitechapel was much higher than 1%.

I'm sorry Pierre but you really must learn to be discerning when discussing source material.

[Pierre]

Agreed and that is why the possibility that they meant another person must always be considered.

Pierre,

That is an assumption you make, has to links and connections.

We do not have the documents, which almost certainly existed to know what the links were? or if they were strong or weak?

Unfortunately sometime back you decided that certain people were only named or suspected because they were Jewish, not that they were suspects or persons of interest whom happened to be Jewish.

Please allow me to point out that you have developed a bias in this area , you may not be aware of it, but it is there.
This is that you seem to rule out persons because they are Jewish, saying that the perceived anti-Jewish slant of the police was the only reason these persons were suspect.
This may or may not be the case and each occurrence needs to be looked at individually.
Jacob levy is such a case where you appear to rule out because you assume he is looked at because and only because he is a Jewish butcher, which are to me not the major reasons for looking at him. However that goes off topic, but i use it purely to demonstrate.

I am sure if you take a step back and look at the situation analytically you we see that this is happening, a failing we can all fall into.

The fact remains that someone refered to as "kosminski" was looked at by senior officers at the time and some of them believed he was a highly possible id for the killer.

They could well be wrong.
However to name an individual by 3 separate persons there must have been more than just race as a link, or else why not name say Levy whom seems a more likely fit than the Kosminski we know about?

respectfully

Steve

Hi Steve,

I do not have such a bias. History has it. 16 percent of the suspects on this site are described as jewish. The jewish population in England in the 1880s was not even 1 percent.

Best wishes, Pierre

[Elamarna]

[QUOTE=Pierre;388600][QUOTE=MsWeatherwax;388552]

Missing material can not be used as sources.

Pierre,

Firstly you still have not got the quote function under control have you, however that is not important.

I do not believe anyone is trying to use non existent sources as "sources" as such. Frankly such would be ridiculous.

However it is highly probably that information did exist which was not just:
he is poor and Jewish.

And one can suggest that such information is what the Police officers were basing their ideas on.

Seriously if you were looking to lay blame on a Jewish person, just because of race/religion, then Kosminski would not be an obvious choice.

regards

Steve

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=MsWeatherwax;388552][QUOTE=Pierre;388550]

Hi Pierre.

What do you say to the possibility that vast amounts of files and other evidence have gone missing through pilfering and two World Wars?

Given that your research is *extremely* source based, I don't understand how you can progress to a logical conclusion given the enormous amount of information that is said to be missing.

Truthfully, regardless of how competent they are, nobody in the 21st Century can adequately research all of the sources relating to The Whitechapel Murders because frankly, many of them don't exist any more. You can't say with certainty that being poor, Jewish and institutionalised was what "linked" AK, because you have no evidence that is the truth. It's supposition, and it's a biased supposition at that.

For the record, I am neither for or against AK (or anyone else, for that matter) as a suspect.

Missing material can not be used as sources.

[Elamarna]

I doubt very much if that was the link. He was hardly unique in being a poor Jew who was put into an asylum. Why him? Why not one of the others?

Hi Bridewell

my point exactly, you put it much more concise.

Steve

[Bridewell]

What linked him was being Jewish, poor and put into an asylum.

I doubt very much if that was the link. He was hardly unique in being a poor Jew who was put into an asylum. Why him? Why not one of the others?

[Robert]

I suppose it's possible that Kosminski had some bread in the midday sun.....

[David Orsam]

No, you are wrong. I do not "believe in" what the newspapers wrote about what Lord Mayor said. What sort of a very strange suggestion is that?

It's not a 'strange' suggestion at all because you are the only person in the world who seems to be comparing Kosminsky to a mad dog.

So I'm suggesting that it is you who has been influenced by the Lord Mayer's use of the phrase 'mad dog' and you are seeing mad dogs which don't actually exist.

[David Orsam]

Dogs are found in the gutter. Search the British Newspaper Archives for "in the gutter" for 1880-1910 for example and you find dogs together with that expression.

Lots of things are found in the gutter though Pierre. Rats for example. I have no idea what newspaper reports you have found that links dogs to gutters but I note that haven't posted a single example.

In any case, the issue is Kosminsky eating food in the gutter. Why is that dog like behaviour any more than rats or other vermin?

[David Orsam]

If Kosminsky was Jack the Ripper and Jack the Ripper was a mad dog, Kosminsky was a mad dog.

But that's meaningless logic, firstly because Jack the Ripper was called lots of things, only a "mad dog" by the Lord Mayor (reportedly), and secondly because you can insert any name in there, Tumblety, Druitt, Sadler, Lechmere and they are all mad dogs. Why is Kosminsky the only mad dog?

To be clear. I'm suggesting that you are the only person in the world linking Kosminsky to a dog.

[Elamarna]

But no Aaron was mentioned in the sources.

Agreed and that is why the possibility that they meant another person must always be considered.

What linked him was being Jewish, poor and put into an asylum. That is THE ideal type for Jack the Ripper. And it is an illusion hiding other pieces of evidence and making people look into the wrong historical sources.

Pierre,

That is an assumption you make, has to links and connections.

We do not have the documents, which almost certainly existed to know what the links were? or if they were strong or weak?

Unfortunately sometime back you decided that certain people were only named or suspected because they were Jewish, not that they were suspects or persons of interest whom happened to be Jewish.

Please allow me to point out that you have developed a bias in this area , you may not be aware of it, but it is there.
This is that you seem to rule out persons because they are Jewish, saying that the perceived anti-Jewish slant of the police was the only reason these persons were suspect.
This may or may not be the case and each occurrence needs to be looked at individually.
Jacob levy is such a case where you appear to rule out because you assume he is looked at because and only because he is a Jewish butcher, which are to me not the major reasons for looking at him. However that goes off topic, but i use it purely to demonstrate.

I am sure if you take a step back and look at the situation analytically you we see that this is happening, a failing we can all fall into.

The fact remains that someone refered to as "kosminski" was looked at by senior officers at the time and some of them believed he was a highly possible id for the killer.

They could well be wrong.
However to name an individual by 3 separate persons there must have been more than just race as a link, or else why not name say Levy whom seems a more likely fit than the Kosminski we know about?


respectfully

Steve

[MsWeatherwax]

[QUOTE=Pierre;388550][QUOTE=Elamarna;388538]

What linked him was being Jewish, poor and put into an asylum. That is THE ideal type for Jack the Ripper. And it is an illusion hiding other pieces of evidence and making people look into the wrong historical sources.

Regards, Pierre

Hi Pierre.

What do you say to the possibility that vast amounts of files and other evidence have gone missing through pilfering and two World Wars?

Given that your research is *extremely* source based, I don't understand how you can progress to a logical conclusion given the enormous amount of information that is said to be missing.

Truthfully, regardless of how competent they are, nobody in the 21st Century can adequately research all of the sources relating to The Whitechapel Murders because frankly, many of them don't exist any more. You can't say with certainty that being poor, Jewish and institutionalised was what "linked" AK, because you have no evidence that is the truth. It's supposition, and it's a biased supposition at that.

For the record, I am neither for or against AK (or anyone else, for that matter) as a suspect.

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Elamarna;388538][QUOTE=Pierre;388523]

Other that is Pierre than 3 senior police officers naming him as a suspect or in the case of Macnaghten as a potential suspect.

But no Aaron was mentioned in the sources.

One assumes there was some reasoning for this, and some information( possible evidence of some sort) which is no longer available lead them to this line of thinking, of course that does not make him the killer.

Right.

However it is probably fair to say that in 1888/89/90/91 there was something which linked him, however it need not have been strong or conclusive.

What linked him was being Jewish, poor and put into an asylum. That is THE ideal type for Jack the Ripper. And it is an illusion hiding other pieces of evidence and making people look into the wrong historical sources.

Regards, Pierre