Joseph Hyam Levy

[Scott Nelson]

But Joseph and Amelia were living at 124 Mildmay Road, Canonbury, at the date of the 1911 census, and Joseph died at that address on 16 May 1914. So I don't think Joseph himself retired to Brighton. It may be that Amelia was in a nursing home or hospital there.

It's conceivable that a person as wealthy as Levy occasionally took holidays in Brighton.

[Bridewell]

Levys

There was a Joseph Levy living in Sussex in 1891 - at Suit Farm, Ore near Hastings - a 70-year-old retired tailor. It's a common name, but a candidate to be Joseph Hyam Levy's father perhaps as he too was born in London?

Regards, Bridewell.

[Chris]

There was a Joseph Levy living in Sussex in 1891 - at Suit Farm, Ore near Hastings - a 70-year-old retired tailor. It's a common name, but a candidate to be Joseph Hyam Levy's father perhaps as he too was born in London?

Yes, he might have been, but Joseph Hyam Levy's family and his connection with Jacob Levy have been researched by Tracy and Neil I'anson (see Ripperologist 124). His father was Hyam Levy (1811-1872).

[Bridewell]

A Joseph Levy in Brighton

Have just checked Ancestry. There was a Joseph Levy living in Brighton in 1891 - at 31, Russell Street. There were (literally) dozens of Joseph Levy's in the East End alone though, but this could be a relative of Joseph Hyam Levy. Address is 2 miles by road from Clarendon Villas.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Bridewell]

Fair Enough

Yes, he might have been, but Joseph Hyam Levy's family and his connection with Jacob Levy have been researched by Tracy and Neil I'anson (see Ripperologist 124). His father was Hyam Levy (1811-1872).

Thanks, Chris. I was amazed at how many people of that name there were in the East End. Apologies for the diversion (& the one that followed it!)

Regards, Bridewell.

[Paddy]

Joseph Hyam Levy as a witness

If Joseph Hyam Levy was the witness, the police might have said
Q: Is this the chap you saw at the entrance to Mitre Square?
A: Yes it is the man.
Q: We would like you to state this in court.
A: I will not condemn a fellow Jew on such circumstantial evidence. I did not see him go into Mitre Square. He could have been taking his leave of her.
How can I in all faith be the cause of his hanging. I saw him but this doesn't prove he was the Whitechapel Murderer.

What could the police have done?

Pat

[Phil H]

I saw him but this doesn't prove he was the Whitechapel Murderer.

Which, to me, rather suggests that whomever the witness was, he was in a position to confirm more than that.

I suggested in another post, here or in the other current Kosminski thread, that we need to REVERSE ENGINEER this purported ID. What circumstances would allow an ID to be so crucial?

Simply saying I saw X at crime scene B - would not be enough. The witness surely needed to have seen an attack in progress, or been the potential victim (but the witness, as has been pointed out was referred to as "he"). So, could it have been a policeman on surveillance who followed AK? (Against that is the pressure that could be brought on such a man to testify.) Or a relation, friend or neighbour?

Was the purpose of the ID to identify AK? Or perhaps to let AK know he was known and see what transpired, as well as having the ID?

I don't know the answers but it appears that somebody was a witness and saw something or knew something associated with "Kosminski" that was crucial to the inquiry.

Phil H

[Phil Carter]

Joseph Hyam Levy as a witness

If Joseph Hyam Levy was the witness, the police might have said
Q: Is this the chap you saw at the entrance to Mitre Square?
A: Yes it is the man.
Q: We would like you to state this in court.
A: I will not condemn a fellow Jew on such circumstantial evidence. I did not see him go into Mitre Square. He could have been taking his leave of her.
How can I in all faith be the cause of his hanging. I saw him but this doesn't prove he was the Whitechapel Murderer.

What could the police have done?

Pat

Hello Pat,

This rather opens up one thing in my mind.

That Kosminski is another example of Sir Robert Anderson's "moral guilt" perception...which SRA was famous for, and has been quoted, by H.L.Adam amongst others.

And Anderson's "morally guilty" crusade means very little indeed.

best wishes

Phil

[Paddy]

Hi Phil, I do see your point.

However if I had other evidence possibly connected to say Berner St murder or other. A sighting that I could put with a sighting of the suspect minutes before or after she died, I could build a case on strong circumstantial evidence couldnt I?
He did say there were many circumstances. He thought that the suspect was definitely guilty.
At this time I dont doubt him but I do need to read up a lot more

Anderson being brought in for his Irish experience would have a lot of eyes and ears on the ground to stem civil unrest. My relative Henry Cox had worked undercover in Whitechapel in that and later cases and had informants.(One later in Greenfield street I recall) Jack was creating a heap of civil unrest with the people of the East End. I do think Anderson was kept well in touch.

The Suspect was not convicted but Anderson was certain he was JTR.
He was just saying hand on heart he was sure it was him.

I believe Anderson gave the odd sermon. I will see if I can find any...

Pat

[Phil H]

Anderson being brought in for his Irish experience

Was Anderson made Assistant Commissioner because of his Irish experience? He replaced a man Munro, who resigned because of differences over responsibility/accountability for his Secret work at high level.

My relative Henry Cox had worked undercover in Whitechapel in that and later cases and had informants.(One later in Greenfield street I recall) Jack was creating a heap of civil unrest with the people of the East End. I do think Anderson was kept well in touch.

I don't necessarily question what you say, but would not political crime in London would have been a matter for Special Branch (Littlechild et al)? Are we certain that Anderson had contacts on the streets in London?

Cox was City police was he not? Do you have any knowledge of why he was operating on Met territory in Greenfield St?

Thanks

Phil H

[Wade Aznable]

Hello all.
I too would be extremely interested in Paddy's telling us about Cox: it's as close a "primary source" as we can get, nowadays!
Whatever story, anedoctal, unrelated to the Ripper, it doesn't matter, would be extremely fascinating for me to read.

Best regards,
W

[Bridewell]

Sermons

I believe Anderson gave the odd sermon. I will see if I can find any...

Hi Paddy,

I just know that someone will find an "interesting" anagram in any of Anderson's sermons which come to light.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Wade Aznable]

Hi Paddy,

I just know that someone will find an "interesting" anagram in any of Anderson's sermons which come to light.

Regards, Bridewell.

LOL! Absolutely! Maybe Dale Larner?

Best regards,
W

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Joseph Hyam Levy as a witness

If Joseph Hyam Levy was the witness, the police might have said
Q: Is this the chap you saw at the entrance to Mitre Square?
A: Yes it is the man.
Q: We would like you to state this in court.
A: I will not condemn a fellow Jew on such circumstantial evidence. I did not see him go into Mitre Square. He could have been taking his leave of her.
How can I in all faith be the cause of his hanging. I saw him but this doesn't prove he was the Whitechapel Murderer.

What could the police have done?

Pat

Why would Levy have told police in the first place that he recognised the man in Duke Street as a fellow Jew if he was unwilling to testify against a fellow Jew?

If he did not recognise the man in Duke Street as a fellow Jew, why would he have recognised him as a fellow Jew when presented with him by the police?

Why would Levy feel the need to tell the police that circumstantial evidence alone would be insufficient to convict the man when the police already knew that?

[Lewis C]

Why would Levy have told police in the first place that he recognised the man in Duke Street as a fellow Jew if he was unwilling to testify against a fellow Jew?

If he did not recognise the man in Duke Street as a fellow Jew, why would he have recognised him as a fellow Jew when presented with him by the police?

Why would Levy feel the need to tell the police that circumstantial evidence alone would be insufficient to convict the man when the police already knew that?

According to Paddy's dialogue, Levy is is saying that testifying against him would be enough to convict him. "How can I in all faith be the cause of his hanging." However, point well-taken on your other 2 questions.