September 30,1888- The night of Clues?

[Robert St Devil]

Did the killer have motive against both prostitutes and immigrant jews?

if you could flesh out a motive that links the two, then you’d have the makings of a possibility; however, as it stands, your pondering lean towards the idea of a man who was simply killing 2 birds with 1 stone (npi).

my favored motive under these constraints (prostitute and Jew) was the killer was targeting [English|gentile|non Jew] prostitutes who were servicing Jewish men. Obviously, that rabbit-hole doesn’t resolve the religion of the murderer. For instance, if the murderer was a non Jew who had contracted an STI from frequenting back alleys at midnight, maybe his antisemitism blames English prostitutes for contracting the dirty disease from Jews. Then again, if the murderer is a Jew, maybe he considers English prostitutes as a social bane of the Jewish man & Jewish community (esp. the type who roam-about during social club hours or who stroll along Jewish neighborhoods)

A Ripperologist would be inclined to believe that the same murderous (il)logic present on September 30 would also be evident on the dates of the other murders; but as far as I’m aware, there wasn’t anything pronouncedly Jewish about an apartment in Millers Court, a backyard on Hanbury Street, or in front of some gates along Buck’s Row. However, if the murderer viewed Whitechapel as a den of English prostitutes servicing their vice to Jewish men of the vicinity, maybe these locations would be prime for his lustmord.

[seanr]

The Jewish connections between the sites of the murders goes beyond the use of the term Lipski and the Goulston Street location.

The International Working Mens Club outside which Stride was found was predominantly a Jewish working men's club.

Mitre Square was the site of The Great Synagogue, which was behind the Kearley & Tonge Fancy Goods warehouse. You'd walk past the synagogue going down Church Passage into the Square.

Duke's Place, Duke Street and Mitre Square had a long association with the Jewish immigrant community perhaps because of the Synagogue. The Orange Market which was situated in Duke's Place was a Jewish market. Many of the proprieters of businesses situated in Duke's Place were Jewish. The pubs on the Orange Market were somewhat well known for their jewellery market which ran on Sunday mornings inside the pubs, with long associations with Jewish merchants.

The fall of darkness on Saturday night was the end of the Sabbath, so was the busiest night for Jewish men to go out and enjoy themselves. This is why there was a dance on at the International Working Mens Club and why Joseph Lawende, Joseph Hyam Levy, a butcher, and Henry Harris had spent their evening at the Imperial Club, another Jewish working men's club on Duke Street.

Jewish men's recreation was associated with gambling, which was at the time illegal, but Duke's Place was known for having late night unlawful gambling places where one could have a flutter over a game of cards. One might expect the Place to be busy therefore on a Saturday night, but we are informed by the witnesses that it was quiet.

Wentworth Model Dwellings where the Goulston Street graffito and apron piece was found, was working class housing but they were many Jewish families and men living there. A 1900 estimate of the residents estimated there were around 95% - 100% Jews living there.

Outside of the dwellings was Petticoat Lane Market which was also known to be a Jewish market.

It might mean nothing, but if you wanted to pick locations which seemed to implicate the Jewish community in Whitechapel and Spitalfields, you could hardly have picked better locations than the ones in these events.

[The Rookie Detective]

The Moab and Midian letter is potentially the correspondence that links a Jewish ripper taking vengeance on non-Jewish prostitutes.

The Isrealite men were seduced by the women of Moab and Midian, who made them unpure by making them indulge in carnal sin.

It's about as misogynistic as you can get of course.


But if there was a religious element to the killings, then the Moab and Midian letter brings this into relevant context; ergo, a Jewish ripper murdering prostitutes who associates with Jewish men and corrupted their minds and body.

Of course, we only have an envelope as the original letter was inexplicably held back by Bulling.

It is almost certain however, that the author of Monday and Midian was also the person who wrote Dear Boss and Saucy Jack.

The syntax is virtually identical throughout the trilogy of correspondences.

What is interesting though; if the author of the GSG was also the ripper, then the killer may have been suggesting that they were aware of the hoax letters and was making a point that if someone wanted to try and frame the Jews, then he would duly oblige.

The timing here is crucial.

Having the correct chronological order is imperative to unravelling the truth behind the matter.

If Bulling did frame himself as a hoax author of Moab and Midian by handing in just an envelope, then he was also the man who wrote Dear Boss and Saucy Jack; leaving perhaps From Hell as the only authentic letter.

However, would Bulling effectively implicate himself?

If not, then perhaps there's more in the religious Jew murdering non-Jewish prostitutes than we care to realise.

What we do know for certain however, is that the real killer placed or dropped the bloodied and soiled piece of Eddowes apron under the GSG.

The chances of that action not being deliberate are minimal.

Therefore, ridiculous coincidences aside, the Ripper was trying to make a point when he placed the apron from Eddowes under a chalk message that was associated with the Jewish community.

It doesn't help of course that the police seemed content with trying to throw lunatic Jews under the bus and that the antisemitic rhetoric at the time was profound.

Fascinating topic indeed.

[Tom_Wescott]

Bulling hadn't written the previous letters, so he didn't risk turning one in that was in a different hand, so he 'transcribed' it and turned his copy in, which set off alarm bells. That's what likely happened.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Robert St Devil]

That would be determined by how you answer the following question: was the murder of Catherine Eddowes happenstance?

or rather, was Catherine Eddowes murdered because Jack the Ripper encountered (some form of) an interruption at the IWEC?

IF yes in fact, she was THEN we cannot inflate the relevance of the Jewish aspect surrounding the ‘Catherine Eddowes murder’ because there should have been NO Duke Street, Great Synagogue, Petticoat Lane Market since neither ‘those sites’ nor ‘a Mitre Street prostitute’ originally factored into his diabolical intention for that evening. Now, there may have been a graffito but would it have even happened on Houndsditch IF Jack the Ripper had been able to fully massacre Elizabeth Stride on Berners Street as he had done with Catherine Eddowes in Mitre Square?

By all stretches of the imagination, he simply knew where to find prostitutes… that being, larking about the social clubs about the hour that they let out. The first attempt didn’t work out, so he hustled down to another location where he knew he could easily find a prostitute.

seanr

[Wickerman]

....

It might mean nothing, but if you wanted to pick locations which seemed to implicate the Jewish community in Whitechapel and Spitalfields, you could hardly have picked better locations than the ones in these events.

Yes, but the reverse is equally true, the East End was so saturated with Jewish businesses, Synagogues, residences, cemeteries, etc. any message the killer was trying to say is lost in the fog of a Jewish East End.
Whereas, if a murder is committed outside a Jewish business in the West End, which is less Jewish overall, then the message may be a great deal clearer.
Though in my view, the idea of a Jewish Ripper is a red herring.

[Lewis C]

Hi Rookie. I don't think there's really that many natural coincidences. Most are ones we've made ourselves over the years. There's just a lot of noise that can make it difficult to separate out what's relevant and what's not. My perspective on the case as a hole, and its many parts has changed DRASTICALLY over the last twenty-plus years, and a lot of that comes to research I've done outside of Ripperology - learning all I could about crime and murder in general. Also by 'bingeing' on Ripperology for a while and then going away from it for months or years at a time, and coming back with fresh eyes.

I hope I didn't come off too prickish to you, Patrick, but I probably did. I'm just remembering myself back in the day thinking D'Onston made a good suspect (!!!!). I'm not ashamed of it. I own it. But that thinking was a product of preconceived notions, ignorance, and biases. Even some of my published essays from back in the day I disagree with now. I've seen far too many good minds get stuck on a theory early on in their journey and never find their way out of it. That's why I spoke up here.

My advice to someone relatively new to serious study of the Ripper case is to read all the best books (and a fair helping of the bad ones), digest all you can from them, and then approach the case anew as though everything every writer has told you was wrong. And then see where you can prove them right. Along the way, you'll see things others missed or find something completely new. And that's fun as hell.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hi Tom,

Could you tell us what you think the best books are? Or are there too many to name?

[The Rookie Detective]

That would be determined by how you answer the following question: was the murder of Catherine Eddowes happenstance?

or rather, was Catherine Eddowes murdered because Jack the Ripper encountered (some form of) an interruption at the IWEC?

IF yes in fact, she was THEN we cannot inflate the relevance of the Jewish aspect surrounding the ‘Catherine Eddowes murder’ because there should have been NO Duke Street, Great Synagogue, Petticoat Lane Market since neither ‘those sites’ nor ‘a Mitre Street prostitute’ originally factored into his diabolical intention for that evening. Now, there may have been a graffito but would it have even happened on Houndsditch IF Jack the Ripper had been able to fully massacre Elizabeth Stride on Berners Street as he had done with Catherine Eddowes in Mitre Square?

By all stretches of the imagination, he simply knew where to find prostitutes… that being, larking about the social clubs about the hour that they let out. The first attempt didn’t work out, so he hustled down to another location where he knew he could easily find a prostitute.

seanr

That's a very interesting point.

If the man who murdered Stride was indeed the Ripper, and he had time with Stride and was able to mutilate her post mortem, then Eddowes would never have been a victim.

The written correspondence that refers to the "double event" then takes on more relevance.

But if the killer had intended a "double event" then that would imply that the killer had perhaps planned his 1st kill to be a quick cut throat (Stride) but then a planned trip west across to the COL to dispatch a 2nd victim in a deliberate attempt to fulfill his intent to murder multiple women in one night.

It's always assumed that the man who killed Stride was interrupted, but what if the quick kill was a deliberate action made by the Ripper to fulfill his need to kill 2 victims within the space of an hour or so?

Another point that I find particularly interesting and perhaps more relevant than is generally considered, is that the Moab and Modian letter directly references the Whitehall Torso and the author is quick to dismiss their involvement in that particular murder.

Now if we accept that the author of Moab and Midian also wrote Saucy Jack and Dear Boss, and that individual was the real Ripper, then his reference to the Whitehall torso is particularly significant because the torso was moved/unburied under Whitehall on the SAME WEEKEND as Stride and Eddowes were both murdered, and then discovered shortly after the double event had taken place.

This is evidenced by the fact that prior to the weekend, the vault was SEEMINGLY empty, but after Stride and Eddowes were murdered, the torso is then discovered in the vault and then the torso finding is then referenced directly in the Moab and Midian letter.

We know that the Whitehall torso was BURIED under Whitehall after 23rd August, because a fragment of a newspaper dated the 24th August was found under/next to the torso.

The Whitehall victim was likely murdered prior to the 24th August, wrapped and buried on or shortly after the 24th August, but then for some reason was uncovered/excavated by the killer at some point over the weekend Stride and Eddowes were murdered.

The torso killer evidently unburied the torso and either attempted to move it but couldn't, or deliberately placed it where it would be found; ergo, they intended the torso to be discovered shortly after the double event had taken place.

Intriguing.

[jerryd]

The Whitehall victim was likely murdered prior to the 24th August, wrapped and buried on or shortly after the 24th August, but then for some reason was uncovered/excavated by the killer at some point over the weekend Stride and Eddowes were murdered.

Are you sure, Chris? Dr. Neville would disagree with that conclusion. And so do I. Not that it matters much what I think.

On the other point you make about the torso being moved around that weekend, I am 100% on board and always have been. What better way to move a torso into a noticeable place in the New Police Headquarters than to have the cops in both jurisdictions (City and Met) tied up at the same time with not one but two murders.

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Tom,

Could you tell us what you think the best books are? Or are there too many to name?

LOL. No, there's not too many good ones to name. And thanks for asking. I suppose to discuss this, you'd have to break the books down into categories. Best suspect books, best reference books, best books for newbies, best books that are good in spite of themselves.

Without thinking too hard, I can tell you that after I've taken a hiatus and come back to research and write something new, as I'm doing now, there are certain books I return to as a refresher and as a dependable resource for research. Most of these are obvious - Sugden, Begg's the Facts, and Evans & Skinner's 'Ultimate'. Some not so obvious ones are Simon Wood's densely sourced 'Secret History', Neil Bell's 'Capturing JTR', and my treasured back issues of Ripper zines. Rob Clack's work, scattered over a dozen old zines and e-zines, is worth more than most Ripper books. And not just Clack, but Jon Simons, Gavin Bromley, and scores of others. I also haunt the forums and (to a lesser extent) Casebook and read posts and threads by certain commentators. Much of the gold isn't found in books. NONE of it is found in documentaries. It's in random posts from 2008, long forgotten, that now have new meaning to you because of something else you read or found of thought of.

As for other favorites, I recommend Bruce Paley's JTR: The Simple Truth even though the core theory is silly, the research and writing is incredible. Wilson and Odell's Summing Up and Verdict is factually a hot mess, but a ton of fun, and it's important to be reminded that, first and foremost, people read for enjoyment. Jack and the Thames Torso Murders by Andrew Wise and Drew Gray is probably my favorite parody because it doesn't know it's a parody and yet is so successful at it. Evans & Connell's The Man Who Hunted JTR is wildly under-appreciated. Short, concise, yet so full of stuff you find something new each time you read it. Evans & Gainey's 'The Lodger' is a great example of a suspect book written before the digital databases. For all it's faults, I'd say it set a new standard. For all the word-vomiting he does in his forum and FB posts, I admire the restraint shown by Christer Holmgren in Cutting Point. I've learned a lot from all the above (and many others), and not just Ripper facts and stuff, but how to write, be humble, how not to be humble, and how to take more care in how I think something through and present it to others. Especially when you're asking for their money in exchange for your thoughts. You've got to play fair.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Lewis C]

LOL. No, there's not too many good ones to name. And thanks for asking. I suppose to discuss this, you'd have to break the books down into categories. Best suspect books, best reference books, best books for newbies, best books that are good in spite of themselves.

Without thinking too hard, I can tell you that after I've taken a hiatus and come back to research and write something new, as I'm doing now, there are certain books I return to as a refresher and as a dependable resource for research. Most of these are obvious - Sugden, Begg's the Facts, and Evans & Skinner's 'Ultimate'. Some not so obvious ones are Simon Wood's densely sourced 'Secret History', Neil Bell's 'Capturing JTR', and my treasured back issues of Ripper zines. Rob Clack's work, scattered over a dozen old zines and e-zines, is worth more than most Ripper books. And not just Clack, but Jon Simons, Gavin Bromley, and scores of others. I also haunt the forums and (to a lesser extent) Casebook and read posts and threads by certain commentators. Much of the gold isn't found in books. NONE of it is found in documentaries. It's in random posts from 2008, long forgotten, that now have new meaning to you because of something else you read or found of thought of.

As for other favorites, I recommend Bruce Paley's JTR: The Simple Truth even though the core theory is silly, the research and writing is incredible. Wilson and Odell's Summing Up and Verdict is factually a hot mess, but a ton of fun, and it's important to be reminded that, first and foremost, people read for enjoyment. Jack and the Thames Torso Murders by Andrew Wise and Drew Gray is probably my favorite parody because it doesn't know it's a parody and yet is so successful at it. Evans & Connell's The Man Who Hunted JTR is wildly under-appreciated. Short, concise, yet so full of stuff you find something new each time you read it. Evans & Gainey's 'The Lodger' is a great example of a suspect book written before the digital databases. For all it's faults, I'd say it set a new standard. For all the word-vomiting he does in his forum and FB posts, I admire the restraint shown by Christer Holmgren in Cutting Point. I've learned a lot from all the above (and many others), and not just Ripper facts and stuff, but how to write, be humble, how not to be humble, and how to take more care in how I think something through and present it to others. Especially when you're asking for their money in exchange for your thoughts. You've got to play fair.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Thanks, Tom!

[jerryd]

And don't forget about The Bank Holiday Murders, Ripper Confidential and the Rippercast article on LeGrand by one Tom Wescott.

[Patrick Differ]

It would be hard to believe that not one of the witnesses actually saw the killer. Ironically not one of the witnesses could or would identify him except Hutchinson. The 2 Gentiles Long and Hutchison implicated a man of foriegn or Jewish appearance. Of the remaining 3, Schwartz and Lawende were Polish immigrant Jews and Levy was an Anglicized. The latter 3 only described height and dress. The dress pretty much meaningless except for perhaps Hutchinson and Long both describing a look of shabby gentile.
it's not clear to me that you can discount JtR as somehow not affiliated with the Whitechapel Jewish community. Again this assumes Long and Hutchinson were not credible.
Since JtR was not caught in the act it is highly unlikely that any person would have come forward. Of those that did only Hutchinson said he could identify him and stated he saw him again after Kelly's death...on Middlesex Street. Abberline after 3 interrogations of Hutchinson believed he was telling the truth.
I don't know the timeline between Hutchinson and Robert Sagars Jewish Butcher Theory. But wonder if they were possibly connected?

[Wickerman]

It would be hard to believe that not one of the witnesses actually saw the killer. Ironically not one of the witnesses could or would identify him except Hutchinson. The 2 Gentiles Long and Hutchison implicated a man of foriegn or Jewish appearance. Of the remaining 3, Schwartz and Lawende were Polish immigrant Jews and Levy was an Anglicized. The latter 3 only described height and dress. The dress pretty much meaningless except for perhaps Hutchinson and Long both describing a look of shabby gentile.
it's not clear to me that you can discount JtR as somehow not affiliated with the Whitechapel Jewish community. Again this assumes Long and Hutchinson were not credible.
Since JtR was not caught in the act it is highly unlikely that any person would have come forward. Of those that did only Hutchinson said he could identify him and stated he saw him again after Kelly's death...on Middlesex Street. Abberline after 3 interrogations of Hutchinson believed he was telling the truth.
I don't know the timeline between Hutchinson and Robert Sagars Jewish Butcher Theory. But wonder if they were possibly connected?

You seem to lean towards Hutchinson as being reliable, not a popular view on here but I for one agree with you.
Hutch was, in my view, telling the truth. Where I disagree with you is that Hutch did not see the killer, Astrachan was not the Ripper. Mary Kelly was out about 3:00 am standing outside the Britannia, with another man, seen by a witness named Kennedy.
Her statement is like a thorn in the side of many who suspect Blotchy to be the killer, they prefer to believe Kelly never left her room. According to Kennedy, who's parents lived in the Court opposite Kelly, she must have.

[Robert St Devil]

The Rookie Detective

I’m not inclined to believe that the 2nd murder was intended, not when there is evidence on-hand for why a mutilation of Elizabeth Stride would have been impossible given the circumstances ie. the pitch gloom of that gateway recess made it impossible to see anything at ground level.

however i will paint a picture of a possibility for how that evening could have played-out given the “suggested evidence”. Imagine the Dutfields Yard gateway is a few shades brighter than what it was that night, and imagine that Jack the Ripper was able to eviscerate Elizabeth Stride and harvest her organs {which Catherine Eddowes murder proves was his intent}, and scribbled in chalk above her body on the brickwork of the IWEC is the graffito: “The Juwes are not the men to blame for nothing”.

In that context, RD, how would you interpret the scene of the crime? The graffito?