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, 12:16 PM   #11
Anna Morris
Registered User
 
Anna Morris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Idaho, USA
Posts: 2,577
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 offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2015, 01:46 PM   #12
Emanuele Cianto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Italy
Posts: 85
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anna Morris View Post
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!
Hi Anna, and thank you!

I was just saying it seems to me Tumblety could NOT be rouled out of our list only because he doesn't fit Lawende's man. It is very probable if not sure the police was keeping some detail secret, probably in order to prevent the killer escaping, and it is possible this was the man's big moustache.
As I said, I prefer a theory where Tumblety is working together with another man, but Lawende's sight ca not roule him out DEFINETLY, in my view.

Yours respectfully,
Emanuele
Emanuele Cianto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2015, 01:48 PM   #13
Emanuele Cianto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Italy
Posts: 85
Default

However, regarding the two-man what do you all think about James Blenkingsop?
I read a discussion time ago about this but I don't remember if there was a definitive conclusion.

Thank you all.
Emanuele Cianto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2015, 02:01 PM   #14
Lynn Cates
Researcher & Author
 
Lynn Cates's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 7,077
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, 02:11 PM   #15
Emanuele Cianto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Italy
Posts: 85
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Cates View Post
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
Hi Lynn and thank you!

I did not understand your point very well...
James Blenkingsop's sight of a man who asked him if he had seen a man and a woman there was timed 01:30 a.m., just about five minutes before Lawende's sight. It was in St James Place. Is it possible the man was the killer's accomplice?

This is from Casebook: Jack the Ripper - A Curious Find in Goulston Street - from Derek Osborne:

[As to Mitre Square, this could be entered by any one of three passageways; from the east by way of Church Passage, from the west by way of Mitre Street, or from the north by way of St. James' Square. At about 1.40 am, PC Harvey came along Church Passage and looked into the square, but he did not enter. A pity, for had he done so, he would surely have stumbled across the murderer in the middle of his ghastly butchery. Five minutes later, PC Watkins entered the square from Mite Street and came across the body of Catherine Eddowes lying on the pavement in the southwest corner. Yet neither Watkins nor Harvey reported seeing a man pass them or leaving the square hurriedly around the time of the murder. Therefore, presumably, the only route the killer could have taken was the north passage leading towards the City. - St James Place -]

What do you think?
Thank you.

Yours respectfully,
Emanuele
Emanuele Cianto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2015, 03:30 PM   #16
Lynn Cates
Researcher & Author
 
Lynn Cates's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 7,077
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, 03:54 PM   #17
Emanuele Cianto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Italy
Posts: 85
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Cates View Post
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
Hi Lynn,

Thank you.
Now I know the Ripper murders didn't conceal him.

However: if the man who approached him was a policeman, he should have asked him:

"Have you seen where the dead woman is?"

and not

"Have you seen a man and a woman going through here?"

because this question seems to involve a man and a woman who are walking, so who are live. And where does the time-wrong information come from?
However thank you again.

Yours respectfully,
Emanuele
Emanuele Cianto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2015, 04:31 PM   #18
Anna Morris
Registered User
 
Anna Morris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Idaho, USA
Posts: 2,577
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 offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2015, 04:37 PM   #19
Emanuele Cianto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Italy
Posts: 85
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anna Morris View Post
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.
Hi Anna,

Again thank you very much!

Yours respectfully,
Emanuele
Emanuele Cianto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2015, 04:51 PM   #20
Lynn Cates
Researcher & Author
 
Lynn Cates's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 7,077
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 02:19 AM.


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