For what reason do we include Stride?

[Sam Flynn]

The point I was making Sam is that lots of witnesses mistook whom they saw for the respective victims.

We don't know that's true for all witenesses, besides the point I was making was that the chances of a "false positive" in Eddowes' case would be lower because of the poor weather conditions and the comparatively low population/pedestrian density in that part of town, compared to the heart of Spitalfields and St George's in the East, both of which were busier than the area around Church Passage.

[Harry D]

Abby Normal why do you think a "conspiracy" is so far-fetched? Conspiracies do happen. Every single day. You can't lump this in with chemtrails or 9/11.

You know what the climate was like at the time. Antisemitism was rife, many quarters suspected a Jew, and now a potential Ripper victim was found next to a club for jewish subversives. There had to be some kind of damage control to deflect any suspicion from the club and its members. They ABSOLUTELY had motive for cooking up a witness like Schwartz. He popped up very quickly, very conveniently, and the only word he happened to catch was an antisemitic slur from the attacker? Yeah, right.

[Wickerman]

.... Go somewhere that doesn't have a PC, and unless you know there is nobody patrolling that street, and you could wait a long time until you realize it's not being patrolled. It's efficient to "spot the PC and know the area is clear for the time you need". Knowing a particular street is not patrolled requires specific details of a specific street, knowing the general time of a beat, let's one generalize to where ever they are....

Hi Jeff.

I have to wonder though if there wasn't another aspect to the crimes that we tend to overlook.
There were abandoned houses in Mitre Square, in fact all over Whitechapel. There were passages that were not patrolled, or patrolled less frequent. and some locations where there were no streetlamps.
Why didn't he kill and leave bodies in places where no interruption was practically guaranteed?

Look at the display aspect, how Kelly was almost posed to greet the next person who came in the door?
Bucks Row was a public thoroughfare yet at the time he struck it was practically desolate. The back yard of Hanbury street can be expected to be busy, yet again he struck at a time that was quiet. Mitre Square is the same, he left Eddowes in a place where she will be found because it is a well frequented spot. There was a nightwatchman on duty in St. James Place, at the Fire Station, just seconds around the corner, and I suppose Dutfields Yard is another 'in your face' location, it just got too busy too soon for his liking?

On the one hand he needed a degree of seclusion, but it had to be in a place where the seclusion changes to public exposure in minutes, on the scale of 'shocking' the next person who comes through as soon as he leaves.

[c.d.]

Abby Normal why do you think a "conspiracy" is so far-fetched? Conspiracies do happen. Every single day. You can't lump this in with chemtrails or 9/11.

You know what the climate was like at the time. Antisemitism was rife, many quarters suspected a Jew, and now a potential Ripper victim was found next to a club for jewish subversives. There had to be some kind of damage control to deflect any suspicion from the club and its members. They ABSOLUTELY had motive for cooking up a witness like Schwartz. He popped up very quickly, very conveniently, and the only word he happened to catch was an antisemitic slur from the attacker? Yeah, right.

Hello Harry,

You and I usually agree but I am going to disagree on this one. Just because the club had a motive doesn't NECESSARILY mean that they therefore were involved in a conspiracy. If this were the first murder in the area I might be more inclined to accept the conspiracy theory but it wasn't and I am not aware of people or establishments near the other murder sites becoming immediate suspects. To me, a much more reasonable course of action would have been for the club to cooperate completely with the investigation which it appears they did.

You say Schwartz popped up very quickly and conveniently but how does he differ from all the other witnesses in that respect? Is it so hard to accept that he was simply on his way home?

And as for the slur, if he had a pronounced Jewish appearance why would an antisemetic slur being thrown his way from an angry B.S. man be so out of the ordinary?

I suspect you and Michael had a few beers together.

c.d

[Michael W Richards]

Hello Harry,

You and I usually agree but I am going to disagree on this one. Just because the club had a motive doesn't NECESSARILY mean that they therefore were involved in a conspiracy. If this were the first murder in the area I might be more inclined to accept the conspiracy theory but it wasn't and I am not aware of people or establishments near the other murder sites becoming immediate suspects. To me, a much more reasonable course of action would have been for the club to cooperate completely with the investigation which it appears they did.

You say Schwartz popped up very quickly and conveniently but how does he differ from all the other witnesses in that respect? Is it so hard to accept that he was simply on his way home?

And as for the slur, if he had a pronounced Jewish appearance why would an antisemetic slur being thrown his way from an angry B.S. man be so out of the ordinary?

I suspect you and Michael had a few beers together.

c.d

No, the reason Harry suggested what he did is because he doesnt live in a "all murders are by the ripper" vacuum like yourself and others. You seem to comprehend that there was a Motive called Self Preservation present, yet you defer to a motiveless madman anyway. Thats the problem with this study cd, people set aside far more reasonable ideas for ones that require the mad killer change his patterns almost every murder. Harry is correct, Schwartzs claims serve the purposes of anyone who seeks Self Preservation at that club rather well, and since we know now that he knew Wess, and that he is an immigrant Jew like the vast majority of that club, maybe not so hard to understand. Also not so hard to understand why the statement is completely absent from all the Inquest records...likely too fortuitous to the club to be accepted whole cloth.

3 people, 3...stated that they were by Louis and the dying woman at 12:45. Find me any other case within this study that has 3 witnesses corroberating events and times like that. Yet you prefer the Inquest absentee Israel. Someone no-one else sees or hears, like the charaters in his story. As long as you understand that three men, 1 not affiliated with the club in any way, gave that time and that scenario, believe what you wil..l at your own risk to the search for the truth. Liz wasnt seen on the street after Smith left, (unless you believe the Club savior of course, Israel), and Fanny Mortimer did not see Louis arrive between 12:50 and 1am. He says he arrived "precisely" at 1, Fannys account makes him either a liar or confused.

I set down a timeline based on witness accounts here once, just to remind people who said what, and it was abundantly clear that the times given were way off by some witnesses. Yet 2 witnesses from inside the club, one of which had only returned to the club at 12:30, agreed on a time and event in that passageway. A third outsider corroberated them. So....they likely told the truth, and the others....oddly enough the entire management staff at the club, did not. If Liz was in the passageway dying at 12:45, then Lave, Eagle, Israel and Louis lied. Lave...a club cottage resident, Eagle, a club speaker paid to be at the meetings, Israel..a friend of the radical Socialist editor for the paper printed onsite, and club member, and Louis, the club steward.

Hmm...seems like a pattern there, and evidence that the Self Preservation motive could be very viable. Much more than a Ripper who doesnt rip or even show interest in cutting into someone he kills...the very foundation of the reason he was called "Ripper" in the first place.

As to your comments about Israel...is it unreasonable to assume that at 12:45 an immigrant Jew man outside a Socialist Club just after a large meeting possibly attended that meeting? Its said he lived on Berner before his wife moved that day...is it possible he lived in one of the cottages, no-one has ever found out where he lived on that street. Is it so hard for you to accept that a Immigrant Jew would lie to protect another immigrant Jew, considering as has been mentioned, the anti semtical attitudes rife in that area at the time? And the clubs reputation for harbouring Anarchists. Anderson claimed a Jew didnt tell the truth when faced with identifying a Jewish suspect, he wouldnt squeal on a fellow Jew. If it was true, its likely for the same reason Israel lied, they had to protect each other or be lynch mobbed.

Try taking your head out of the sand for a change.

[Michael W Richards]

We don't know that's true for all witenesses, besides the point I was making was that the chances of a "false positive" in Eddowes' case would be lower because of the poor weather conditions and the comparatively low population/pedestrian density in that part of town, compared to the heart of Spitalfields and St George's in the East, both of which were busier than the area around Church Passage.

We know its true for the ones I mentioned, why not for Lawende? The volume of street traffic in that area that nights isnt well documented, but Ive no reason to accpet that Kate and Sailor men were the only ones about. I know 3 Jewish men who were also there outdoors for one example.

[c.d.]

Hello Michael,

Your whole argument simply boils down to if A then B. In other words, if you can show that the club had a motive for engaging in a conspiracy then it absolutely has to follow that they did in fact put that plan into action.

I simply don't see a self preservation need on the part of the club. Simply cooperating with the police seems an equally valid strategy and one that doesn't entail the whole thing blowing up in their face with resultant jail time. You have shown zero evidence that the club actually engaged in a conspiracy. Simply having a motive is not the same as evidence.

As for myself and others living in a vacuum, there seems to be a little pot and kettle thing going on if you get my drift.

c.d.

[Sam Flynn]

We know its true for the ones I mentioned

The witnesses you mentioned made their sightings in far more busy/populous parts of town where "false positive" identifications would be more likely, simply because there'd have been more people around. Not so Church Passage at the best of times, never mind just after it had been peeing down with rain.

[rjpalmer]

It was indeed raining, but it was also Saturday night--the most profitable night of the week. I doubt if the drabs of Aldgate had the luxury to take the night off.

As with the postal worker:

"neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays these ladies from the swift completion of their appointed rounds...."

[JeffHamm]

Hi Jeff.

I have to wonder though if there wasn't another aspect to the crimes that we tend to overlook.
There were abandoned houses in Mitre Square, in fact all over Whitechapel. There were passages that were not patrolled, or patrolled less frequent. and some locations where there were no streetlamps.
Why didn't he kill and leave bodies in places where no interruption was practically guaranteed?

Look at the display aspect, how Kelly was almost posed to greet the next person who came in the door?
Bucks Row was a public thoroughfare yet at the time he struck it was practically desolate. The back yard of Hanbury street can be expected to be busy, yet again he struck at a time that was quiet. Mitre Square is the same, he left Eddowes in a place where she will be found because it is a well frequented spot. There was a nightwatchman on duty in St. James Place, at the Fire Station, just seconds around the corner, and I suppose Dutfields Yard is another 'in your face' location, it just got too busy too soon for his liking?

On the one hand he needed a degree of seclusion, but it had to be in a place where the seclusion changes to public exposure in minutes, on the scale of 'shocking' the next person who comes through as soon as he leaves.

Yes, there certainly would locations more logical than those chosen. There does appear to be aspects of displaying/posing, in terms of placement of the body and organs, though it could also due to the "process" rather than by design. Regardless, I do think the eventual "shock" value was something JtR would enjoy fantasizing about afterwards.

Also, if JtR is led to the locations by the victims, he may not have had much choice with regards to choosing more secluded areas. Getting them to enter into an abandoned building might have been too difficult, and too likely to make him memorable if he failed to convince a victim and she then escapes somehow (I'm thinking escapes pre-attack, but knowing some fellow tried to get her into a vacant building, which I assume was unusual, would make such an approach stand out).

Still, I suspect leaving the bodies on display was a big part of it for JtR, particularly for post-offense reliving.

- Jeff

[JeffHamm]

Abby Normal why do you think a "conspiracy" is so far-fetched? Conspiracies do happen. Every single day. You can't lump this in with chemtrails or 9/11.

You know what the climate was like at the time. Antisemitism was rife, many quarters suspected a Jew, and now a potential Ripper victim was found next to a club for jewish subversives. There had to be some kind of damage control to deflect any suspicion from the club and its members. They ABSOLUTELY had motive for cooking up a witness like Schwartz. He popped up very quickly, very conveniently, and the only word he happened to catch was an antisemitic slur from the attacker? Yeah, right.

The biggest problem with the conspiracy theory is that Schwartz's original report makes no sense given the proposed goal. The goal of the conspiracy is to deflect suspicion away from the club and the Jewish population. But Schwartz's original report is that "Lipski" was shouted at Pipeman. If you're going to try and deflect attention away from a Jewish club and/or the Jewish population in general, it's probably best not to have your planted witness give a story where they implicate a Jewish perpetrator. It was the police, through questioning Schwartz, realized it was probably directed at Schwartz himself, not at Pipeman, but Schwartz's initial belief was that it was directed to another one of the possible offenders.

Now we could go Area 51 on that, and propose that "yes, they knew the police would work out the Lipski thing, and that would further prove their lack of involvement", but I do hope that sort of magical thinking isn't going to be taken up and championed (Please, I'm not suggesting it - it's presented as an example of how a club conspiracy starting point falls over itself by creating problems that don't otherwise exist).

Times reported by witnesses are all relatively close to each other, the exact times people indicate, however, will be error prone. They're not "lying" per se, they just are estimating a time and that is error prone.

- Jeff

[Michael W Richards]

The biggest problem with the conspiracy theory is that Schwartz's original report makes no sense given the proposed goal. The goal of the conspiracy is to deflect suspicion away from the club and the Jewish population. But Schwartz's original report is that "Lipski" was shouted at Pipeman. If you're going to try and deflect attention away from a Jewish club and/or the Jewish population in general, it's probably best not to have your planted witness give a story where they implicate a Jewish perpetrator. It was the police, through questioning Schwartz, realized it was probably directed at Schwartz himself, not at Pipeman, but Schwartz's initial belief was that it was directed to another one of the possible offenders.

Now we could go Area 51 on that, and propose that "yes, they knew the police would work out the Lipski thing, and that would further prove their lack of involvement", but I do hope that sort of magical thinking isn't going to be taken up and championed (Please, I'm not suggesting it - it's presented as an example of how a club conspiracy starting point falls over itself by creating problems that don't otherwise exist).

Times reported by witnesses are all relatively close to each other, the exact times people indicate, however, will be error prone. They're not "lying" per se, they just are estimating a time and that is error prone.

- Jeff

Schwartz' statement puts the victim off premises when first assaulted, by someone who was likely a Gentile, by virtue of the Lipski remark. It was almost certainly meant to infer it was directed at Israel, not Pipeman...remember he had an interpreter...and that is the best possible scenario for the Jewish immigrant Anarchists who ran the club. Off site gentile.

[Michael W Richards]

Hello Michael,

Your whole argument simply boils down to if A then B. In other words, if you can show that the club had a motive for engaging in a conspiracy then it absolutely has to follow that they did in fact put that plan into action.

They had no choice if they intended to stay open and keep generating cheques for Louis and Morris. If the police found a dead woman on their property without any indication that A) she was actually killed off property, and B) no one but club attendees were there at the time, that club would have been closed for good that night. But Louis says he arrived at 1am, contradicted directly by Fanny Mortimers account and 3 other witnesses. They likely had 15 minutes to figure out what to do, Louis sent Issac K out by himself just after 12:45 to get help and he came back empty handed in time to see Eagle arrive back.

Then Sunday night the friend of Wess says he saw an assault on the victim outside the gates by a gentile....a story likely given by the translator..who was likely Wess. Wess translated for Goldstein on Tuesday night.

[JeffHamm]

Schwartz' statement puts the victim off premises when first assaulted, by someone who was likely a Gentile, by virtue of the Lipski remark. It was almost certainly meant to infer it was directed at Israel, not Pipeman...remember he had an interpreter...and that is the best possible scenario for the Jewish immigrant Anarchists who ran the club. Off site gentile.

Hi Micheal,

Unfortunately, Schwartz originally told the police Lipski was shouted at Pipeman. There was a lot of back and forth between HO and the police, and MPs, etc, all pushing for locating this "Lipski", until Abberline explained that it was used as an insult, and probably directed at Schwartz himself, not at pipeman. The story, as originally told by Schwartz, increased suspicions that JtR was a Jew. There is no way a conspiracy as organized as the one you suggest, with the sole purpose of directing attention away from the Jewish Socialist groups, would include that sort of detail. They would have chosen a non-Jewish name, whether an English one or foreign, wouldn't matter, anything but a Jewish name. It doesn't make sense, and blaming the interpreter, or hoping the police worked out that Schwartz was wrong, is stretching plausibility to breaking. All of the evidence points to the club doing everything they could to assist the police.

- Jeff

[Herlock Sholmes]

If the police found a dead woman on their property without any indication that A) she was actually killed off property, and B) no one but club attendees were there at the time, that club would have been closed for good that night

This seems to be a very large leap to me. In the midst of a series of prostitute murders, where the police hadn’t previously connected the potential murderer to the location, why would they start now when another prostitute was found murdered? Why didn’t they wrap the body in a sheet and chuck it onto the back of Diemschutz cart for him to dump a couple of miles away whilst a club member washed the blood away?