Jack The Ripper Forums  - Ripperology For The 21st Century  

Go Back   Jack The Ripper Forums - Ripperology For The 21st Century > Newcomers Forum

Newcomers Forum Forum for newcomers to the mystery of Jack the Ripper and/or JTRForums.com

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old September 12th, 2015, 08:19 AM   #1
Emanuele Cianto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Italy
Posts: 63
Default Another Look at Lawende's Description?

Kklllll
Emanuele Cianto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2015, 08:32 AM   #2
Howard Brown
Proprietor-Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Eagleville, Pa.
Posts: 73,897
Default

Welcome Em !
Emanuele is an Italian teen whose English language skills are remarkable. Lets keep that in mind when responding. He had been asking me questions on Facebook Forums and I asked him to register here.
Thanks.
__________________
To Join JTR Forums, Contact :
Howard@jtrforums.com
Howard Brown is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2015, 09:07 AM   #3
Robert Linford
Researcher Extraordinaire
 
Robert Linford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 18,606
Default

Hi Emaunele, and welcome.

I have Tumblety on my list of possibles, and I certainly don't think he's been ruled out. However, one problem with the Lawende sighting is Levy. He estimated the woman's height at 5 ft. I don't know if we have any other evidence of Eddowes's height, but the thing is, even if Levy was wrong about her height he nevertheless said that the man was about three inches taller than the woman. It's probably easier to estimate height differences than absolute heights. If the man was indeed about three inches taller than the woman, then if the man was Tumblety, it would make Eddowes a bit on the tall side.
Robert Linford is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2015, 11:03 AM   #4
Robert Linford
Researcher Extraordinaire
 
Robert Linford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 18,606
Default

Hi Emanuele

Yes it's possible that Levy was holding back information, at the request of the police. But I don't think that the police would have wanted him to actually perjure himself, so why didn't they just intervene, as they did with Lawende, and say that they didn't want Levy to give a description? So I feel the 3 inches height difference was indeed Levy's genuine view. Likewise his estimate of the woman's height.

Re how much Levy observed, in his actual inquest evidence (at least in the version on Casebook) Levy says that he did not take any notice of them - which may be true - and that he could not give any further description - which would have been true if the police had already asked him not to. But he does say that the woman was about 5 ft tall and the man about 3 inches taller. I don't think the police would have wanted him to lie when they could simply have intervened.
Robert Linford is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2015, 11:39 AM   #5
Robert Linford
Researcher Extraordinaire
 
Robert Linford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 18,606
Default

Hi Emanuele

But I can't see why the police would lie to one another in their internal communications.
Robert Linford is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2015, 12:16 PM   #6
Anna Morris
Registered User
 
Anna Morris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Idaho, USA
Posts: 3,337
Default

There is another recent thread here on what Joseph Levy said. I agree with Andrew who started that thread that Joseph's statement is one of the most important statements even made in the case. But I don't know what it means and never have.

I believe at the time of the "Double Event" the police would have given the best description they had of a suspect, to the public. There was a lot of pressure on them. Unfortunately there were several descriptions of men from that night ant they do not all match.

That said, I also believe at the time of Mary Jane Kelly's murder the police were holding back something, including a description of a suspect, but that is another discussion.

What Levy and Lewende had to say enters into the question of whether Jewish men were protecting a fellow Jew. Rather than police withholding information I question whether or not the witnesses made their testimony just a little vague so they did not have to identify a fellow Jew. I have also previously noted a point in Jewish law that forbids witnessing against a person based on circumstantial evidence alone.

What if the man with the woman presumed to be Eddowes actually had a dark moustache for example but the witnesses said "fair" or "light"? Perhaps this does not matter as much as I think it does because it would not have been hard to change the color of a moustache, even in those days.

I have always rejected Tumblety in my suspect list because he was said to be tall, eccentric and American. I strongly believe Jack had contacts with more women than he killed. He may have chatted up other women he never killed on the actual murder nights. I really believe if Jack was decidedly odd or foreign beyond the basic British subject, that information would have come out. There would have been talk of a weird Yankee or a weird Polack or Russian Jew or some such.

(He could have been a Jew born in the UK for example, but I reject the idea of Kosminski the immigrant and others like him.)

Chances are Joseph Levy knew the man with the woman. If he did not know the man personally perhaps he knew him by reputation. I think it is believable that for some reason Levy and Lewende weakened their testimony to protect someone or to save themselves from trouble.

Many believe Joseph was protecting a cousin, Jacob Levy. Possible. If the chalk writing in Ghoulston street, left just above a piece of Eddowes' bloody apron, and written on a Jewish apartment building, was for specific "Jewes", not Jews as a population, then this argument gets stronger.

Or perhaps Joseph and his friends feared an anti-Semitic man? Maybe a man like Tumblety, if he was anti-Semitic? And that is how Ripperology goes around in circles and the answers are never proven and the mystery goes on.

Welcome to our group, Emanuele!
__________________
If the shawl doesn't fit, you must acquit.~~Henry Flower, Casebook post
Anna Morris is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2015, 02:01 PM   #7
Lynn Cates
Researcher & Author
 
Lynn Cates's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 7,204
Default watchman

Hello Emanuele. Welcome to the boards.

Blenkingsop seems to have been just a watchman. Moreover, his position to the east of the action does not to enhance the importance of his testimony--unless Kate's assailant were returning to West London.

Cheers.
LC
Lynn Cates is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2015, 03:30 PM   #8
Lynn Cates
Researcher & Author
 
Lynn Cates's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 7,204
Default points

Hello Emanuele. Thanks.

1. It is often conceded that Blenkingsop was off in his time by about half an hour.

2. It is highly likely, then, that his original questioner was a City detective seeking information about Kate and her assailant.

3. IF he had exited by St. James Place, then Blenkingsop or one of the fire personnel should have seen him. (In my mind, he exited south on Mitre st--likely in a direction OPPOSITE to the approaching Ed Watkins. I think I started a thread on this some time back.)

Cheers.
LC
Lynn Cates is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2015, 04:31 PM   #9
Anna Morris
Registered User
 
Anna Morris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Idaho, USA
Posts: 3,337
Default

Emanuele: I think the police were under sudden and unusual pressure when these murders increased. There was all the fury over Leather Apron after Annie Chapman's death. If the police were quiet on anything I think it would have been to prevent massive unrest or what we in the American wild west would have called "lynch mobs".

It was bad enough that there had been Tabram, then Nichols, then Chapman...and the papers were adding a few more such as Fairy Fay...and then the Double Event which was a real slap in the face for the police, to use an English idiom. In addition with the double murder there was the chalked message in Ghoulston Street which mentioned "Jewes" on a largely Jewish building. I am sure the police were very afraid of anti-Semitic attacks or perhaps riots if things got too far out of control. (Others here can speak to this better than I.)

I would not be surprised nor critical if the police kept some things quiet at the time, but like Robert said, I don't think the police would have kept the information from each other throughout the departments.

Keep in mind too that Eddowes' murder was in another police jurisdiction. Again others here can better address this issue than I can.
__________________
If the shawl doesn't fit, you must acquit.~~Henry Flower, Casebook post
Anna Morris is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2015, 04:51 PM   #10
Lynn Cates
Researcher & Author
 
Lynn Cates's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 7,204
Default establish

Hello Emanuele. Thanks.

The detective was trying to establish if Kate were with someone and heading into the square.

The timing represents that hypothesis.

Cheers.
LC
Lynn Cates is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10 Beta 2
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright @ Howard & Nina Brown 2015-2022