Jacob Levy

[Errata]

One of the reasons I'm a fan of all the research into him even though I don't think he's the Ripper is because he's actually a pretty fascinating case from a diagnostics point of view. He was institutionalized prior to his final illness. And there was no trace of neurosyph. Occam's Razor etc. says that his mental illness prior to his final illness was related to his final illness, and therefore he did not die from Neurosyph. But he did die. Which is not at all a common feature of your average mental illness. Leaving us with three options. 1: Both of Levy's hospitalizations were a result of neurosyphilis, and he was the only person to ever have a recovery period of that disease. 2: He was mentally ill, and he had Neurosyphilis, a few years apart. Not impossible, but the timing is suspect. or 3: He was neither mentally ill nor did he have Neurosyphilis. It was some 3rd thing.

Now if 1 is true, thats amazing. If 2 is true, thats less amazing but still begs the question of motive. If 3 is true, then thats super fascinating. If he had Huntingtons, he was not the Ripper. If he had chemical poisoning, maybe he was, but with a different motive. Or not, depending on the chemical. Neurosyphilis has a known progression, so we can deduce when he started becoming so symptomatic that he could not kill. It's tight, but it's possible in his case. And thats true of other diseases or problems, but it's all different timelines. So we would have to diagnose him to rule him in or out as a suspect. Which I find interesting.

[John Wheat]

One problem with Levy for me is that he seems to be a suspect because he matches Kosminski well.

[lilyofthevalley]

Our family is Isaac Levy who married Sarah Levy born 1777 Amsterdam,
The children are the correct ones.

Hello Tji,
Do you know Sarah's maiden name and/ or date of birth? I've looked for her in the Dutch archives, but cannot find her so far.

[curious4]

http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/4844/1/4844.pdf

Jack the Ripper and the East End Labyrinth page 5, headed "the streetscape of poverty".

"Whitechapel was one of the poorest districts in London, it had one of the largest concentrations of lodging houses.. Yet it is important also to note that the district had a wide variety of poverty, as is evident from the Booth maps. The influx of Jewish immigrants in the 1880s provided new unskilled jobs and this influx, coupled with the street layout that contained a fine grain of poverty and relative prosperity cheek by jowl, created a situation of high levels of economic interdependence between the two populations. 9 Despite perceptions of the immigrants living a ‘ghettoised’ life separate from the existing population, spatial analysis coupled with historical evidence suggests that the situation was much more complex: there was likely to have been considerable contact between the two populations."

I found this interesting

Cheers

C4

[Errata]

I think it is a mistake to compare living conditions of today to those of the East End in 1888. The one common denominator was extreme poverty (at least for the people we are talking about, that is those who stayed in lodging houses). We are straying into very murky waters if we start believing that we can judge ethnicity by appearance. Hutchinson's man stood out "like a sore thumb" because he appeared to be wealthy. And it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that Jack used different disguises.

Best wishes
C4

Good point, though the example I used was originally from Reconstruction, so 1880 ish in the American South. Not a perfect analog, but really just intended as an example of subtle methods of segregation that work. And work well.

Jews at that time did tend to self segregate, certainly being within walking distance to a synagogue originally limited how far the population would spread. And if a landlady made Jews feel unwelcome in one area where ten blocks down another landlady had no problem, that makes a difference.

It's just not Warsaw Ghetto like, is my point. Segregation does not require a hostile population mandating where the Jews lived. It was less than that, but still pretty effective. Zoning laws is one example, social ostracism, unfair renting practices, geography, self selection... it's a whole stew. So while the Jewish population was relatively segregated, it was only relatively, and it was not Nazi or American South level of legalized segregation. Which I don't think you were implying, but I added on for the sake of clarity, which apparently failed.

[curious4]

Segregation can happen in pretty subtle ways. Take Nashville for instance. There is a surprising number of Jews in Nashville, and a considerable number of Irish Catholics. And of course, black people. Now the richest neighborhood in town could have said "No blacks, Jews, or Irish" but post Reconstruction that would be problematic. So they borrowed from the English and declared that no house in Belle Meade can have more than three bedrooms. Black people, Jews and the Irish tended to have more kids, so needed more bedrooms. And they bought elsewhere. In the meantime, you had the occasional English Protestant building extra parlors to accommodate their uncharacteristically large family. Leading to some fairly peculiar structures. The law was taken off the books maybe 5 years ago? And Jews, Catholics and black people still tend not to live there.

effective segregation without technically segregating.

I think it is a mistake to compare living conditions of today to those of the East End in 1888. The one common denominator was extreme poverty (at least for the people we are talking about, that is those who stayed in lodging houses). We are straying into very murky waters if we start believing that we can judge ethnicity by appearance. Hutchinson's man stood out "like a sore thumb" because he appeared to be wealthy. And it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that Jack used different disguises.

Best wishes
C4

[lilyofthevalley]

I was glad you raised the question Errata (my background is in mental health too). I believe the killer possibly suffered some kind of trauma in early childhood. Neurosyphilis in my mind cannot be the main cause for his actions. If anything, I would think that the illness it may have aggravated his behavior, making him more erratic, and maybe it even stopped him in his tracks altogether.

[Errata]

[QUOTE=Elamarna;380118]

Dear Errata,

that is the point of these boards surely , to discuss ideas, and form views.

Of course we will never agree with each other all the time, and I say now as always that i am happy to agree to disagree with you on this particular point.


I do however echo your view TJI, certainly the expert here on Levy.

steve

One would hope... which is why I don't feel like I need protection from opposing views.

I have always seen TJI as the expert here. Where we differ is when I plug in my experiences and knowledge of mental health issues, and I come up with a different answer. Not a better one, just a different one. We can easily agree to disagree.

[Elamarna]

[QUOTE=Errata;380080]

Thanks for the implicit belief that I might be smart enough to make up my own mind, no matter what opinions might be thrown my way.

I'm sturdy, lads. I can take a hard sell as well as anyone and come out unmoved. I try to only be swayed by the success of an argument, not just side with the last person to speak. And if anyone was going to persuade me on this suspect it would be TJI. And probably no one else. Nothing personal, but I tend to favor horse's mouths whenever possible. Though I love a good argument.

So I'm good. I promise. Bring on the hammers. I can take it.

Dear Errata,

that is the point of these boards surely , to discuss ideas, and form views.

Of course we will never agree with each other all the time, and I say now as always that i am happy to agree to disagree with you on this particular point.


I do however echo your view TJI, certainly the expert here on Levy.

steve

[tji]

[QUOTE][QUOTE=Errata;380080]

Thanks for the implicit belief that I might be smart enough to make up my own mind, no matter what opinions might be thrown my way.

Take note of it Errat, people allowing you your own opinion doesn't happen very often round here

I'm sturdy, lads. I can take a hard sell as well as anyone and come out unmoved. I try to only be swayed by the success of an argument, not just side with the last person to speak. And if anyone was going to persuade me on this suspect it would be TJI. And probably no one else. Nothing personal, but I tend to favor horse's mouths whenever possible. Though I love a good argument.

Wow that's quite the compliment, thank you Errata

(I do understand you haven't said I have changed your mind lol but still the compliment was gladly received!)

I enjoy a good argument too as long as the information is factual and people don't use 'their opinion' to dispute facts, I'm not saying you do this but it does happen.
Now I will accept that some people have enough information/experience to be able to hazard guesses or the logical outcome at times and i'm fine with this but if someone who knows nothing about a subject demands you listen to them, just becasue, it gets tiring very quickly.

Tj

[Errata]

Was the East End that segregated?

Both Liz and Kate cleaned for Jewish families. I doubt there were border controls.


Best wishes
C4

Segregation can happen in pretty subtle ways. Take Nashville for instance. There is a surprising number of Jews in Nashville, and a considerable number of Irish Catholics. And of course, black people. Now the richest neighborhood in town could have said "No blacks, Jews, or Irish" but post Reconstruction that would be problematic. So they borrowed from the English and declared that no house in Belle Meade can have more than three bedrooms. Black people, Jews and the Irish tended to have more kids, so needed more bedrooms. And they bought elsewhere. In the meantime, you had the occasional English Protestant building extra parlors to accommodate their uncharacteristically large family. Leading to some fairly peculiar structures. The law was taken off the books maybe 5 years ago? And Jews, Catholics and black people still tend not to live there.

effective segregation without technically segregating.

[curious4]

Was the East End that segregated?

Both Liz and Kate cleaned for Jewish families. I doubt there were border controls.


Best wishes
C4

[Errata]

[QUOTE=tji;380040]

I saw nothing wrong with Steve's post and it's not like he was smacking his opinion round Erratta's head. He has every right to explain his opinion when it's being questioned.

Thanks for the implicit belief that I might be smart enough to make up my own mind, no matter what opinions might be thrown my way.

I'm sturdy, lads. I can take a hard sell as well as anyone and come out unmoved. I try to only be swayed by the success of an argument, not just side with the last person to speak. And if anyone was going to persuade me on this suspect it would be TJI. And probably no one else. Nothing personal, but I tend to favor horse's mouths whenever possible. Though I love a good argument.

So I'm good. I promise. Bring on the hammers. I can take it.

[tji]

[QUOTE]

[B]Now you are trying to change the view of Errata. Let people use their own brains, Steve.

I saw nothing wrong with Steve's post and it's not like he was smacking his opinion round Erratta's head. He has every right to explain his opinion when it's being questioned.

QUOTE=Pierre;379974]Hi,

causality is another thing. It can be described as x > y.

The hypothesis of Jack the Ripper being a jew is a matter of selection, where the sampling frame is biased.

Although in 1888 people who thought Jack the Ripper was a jew probably were thinking x > y.

And therefore we have a biased sampling frame (jews), and a biased sample (suspected jews), today.

Levy is one of the men in that sample.

Regards, Pierre[/QUOTE

No you believe we have a biased sample - that isn't mathematical theory that is your own opinion applied.
You can't know that all the people of the time thought it was a Jew so you can't put that as fact. Did you ask every single person of 1888 their opinion, what fraction believed it, what fraction didn't?

From the posts you have made on this forum so far, would I be correct in thinking that the proper approach is:

x + y = z

where x is 1, y is 3 and z is 5.

The murderer (if jewish) would have to have been extremely stupid as well as mad to commit a murder in his own back yard, so to speak, particularly as it had already been suggested that this was the case.

Best wishes
C4

.......Or he could go into an area where the population was mainly Irish or English and stick out like a sore thumb

[tji]

Hi Mystery singer


Even more circumstantial when you find Hyman Samson died very shortly after Jacob was released from the asylum in 1886


I can't say it's impossible but the 1888 business directory has his business at 36 Middlesex street and Sarah was still having children then so I think the Jacob Levy of Wentworth street was a different Jacob - it was quite a common name at the time.