Do we prevent somebody being hurt by superstition or faith by rejecting and challenging those things? 

Is it mistaken to support organised religion in membership or donations?

If people do good because they are human, not because God prompts them then is it right to risk giving God any credit when they alone own their good?

 


RIPPER LETTERS REVEAL THINGS ONLY THE KILLER COULD RELATE

In 1888, the most infamous murders of all time took place in London’s East End. Five prostitutes, destitute women who knew of no other way to survive, were slaughtered and mutilated by a supposedly unknown killer who bears the nickname Jack the Ripper.

The Ripper made a display of most of his victims. His goal then was to provoke disgust and terror.

Did he make puzzles?

The Ripper was capable of writing letters to the police to taunt them or getting somebody else to do it for him. Some serial killers like creating or sending messages or letters to taunt the police, the press or the public or all three.

The writing on the wall at Goulston Street proves it. A message blaming the Jews was written above a piece of apron from the just murdered Catherine Eddowes not far from where her body was found.

He took time to make a puzzle at the scene of the Annie Chapman murder. He arranged her belongings beside the corpse. The notion that Chapman took the items out of her pockets herself and laid them out is a strange one! Do you imagine her doing that unless the killer was posing as a robber and making her empty her pockets? Nobody really deliberately does what Marriott thinks she did. After all people make mistakes about what they have in their pockets and don't want to put something of sentimental or monetary value on the ground. He liked mysteries.

He treated most of his victims like gruesome exhibitions which shows he liked to send a message.

The best supposition is that whoever wrote the Ripper letters that have been found to give information that only the killer could have knew the killer and was no better than him. The killer did not write the letters but had an input. The author was the Ripper's ghost writer.

The best candidate for being Jack is the Jewish Polish Immigrant Aaron Kosminski. The best candidates for being Ripper letters are the Dear Boss letters (and postcard) and the Lusk letter. As we will see there is in fact another.

ENTERPRISING JOURNALIST?

Sir Robert Anderson was head of the Criminal Investigation Division of the London Metropolitan Police in 1888.

Anderson said the letters were from an enterprising journalist. But Anderson refused to give a name. You can’t admit that you know somebody who has broken the law by giving false evidence and then not give a name so that the man may be dealt with by civil justice.

John George Littlechild said it was “believed to” have been written by Tom Bullen a journalist with the Central News. “Believed to” shows that he wasn’t sure.

Anderson’s bizarre behaviour in this case shows a need to convince everybody that the letter was fake.

Why go to that trouble unless your investigations show the letter is real and you don’t want it to be real. For the police to admit that they were getting letters from or definitely linked to a killer they couldn’t trace or stop would be extremely shameful.

We are led to believe that the murderer or an accomplice would not have sent the Jack the Ripper letter and post card to the Central News Agency rather than to a newspaper or the police. But why not? Then weakly we are informed by critics that only a journalist and definitely not a layman would even have an idea of the agency's address. Didn't know it was such a watertight secret! The writer, if a fraudster, could not send the items to the police in case they would not release them.

We will soon see that the letters were written by a Jew. The journalist accused of writing the letter was not a Jew and nor was he prosecuted even though Sir Robert Anderson of the Criminal Investigation Division of the London Metropolitan Police said he could name the person who wrote these letters! Certainly the letters then might have come from the Ripper or an associates’s pen. Nobody could prove they came from anybody else.

The Ripper gets his name

The notorious Dear Boss letters appeared claiming to be written by the murderer at the height of the crimes.

The Central News Agency on September 27th, 1888 received a letter claiming to be from the murderer and calling himself Jack the Ripper. This was the first letter ever signed Jack the Ripper and it gave the Ripper his gruesome nickname for the first time.

Dear Boss,
I keep on hearing the police have caught me but they wont fix me just yet. I have laughed when they look so clever and talk about being on the right track. That joke about Leather Apron gave me real fits. I am down on whores and I shant quit ripping them till I do get buckled. Grand work the last job was. I gave the lady no time to squeal. How can they catch me now. I love my work and want to start again. You will soon hear of me with my funny little games. I saved some of the proper red stuff in a ginger beer bottle over the last job to write with but it went thick like glue and I cant use it. Red ink is fit enough I hope ha. ha. The next job I do I shall clip the ladys ears off and send to the police officers just for jolly wouldn't you. Keep this letter back till I do a bit more work, then give it out straight. My knife's so nice and sharp I want to get to work right away if I get a chance. Good Luck.

Yours truly
Jack the Ripper

Dont mind me giving the trade name

PS Wasnt good enough to post this before I got all the red ink off my hands curse it No luck yet. They say I'm a doctor now. ha ha

“Keep this letter back till I do a bit more work, then give it out straight”, is certainly a sign that this letter probably had something to do with the real killer.

“My knife's so nice and sharp I want to get to work right away if I get a chance”. This all turned out to be true. The Ripper only killed at weekends and didn’t seem to be able to slaughter whenever he wanted. This wasn’t known or figured out at that time.

The Ripper liked to leave clues so was his Jack a hint that he was a Jacob? To take Jac from Jack and at the K for Kosminsky gives you Jack! Coincidence?

After the letter was received Elizabeth Stride and Catherine Eddowes were killed on the 30th September 1888. This letter was taken seriously when it appeared that the killer of Eddowes had cut a lobe off.

Surely a forger would want people to think the killer was a doctor or at least he wouldn’t put people off the impression that he was? It was more frightening and controversial if he was a doctor. A story like that would sell papers better. The suspicion was that he was indeed a doctor. And of course the Ripper was not a doctor but nobody knew that then. The letter writer did for he was in collusion with the Ripper.

The killer is said to be presented in the letter as a daring rascal and not as one who delights in his “holy” crusade against prostitutes. But we have a later letter this same person wrote that does present the killings as a “holy” crusade. It is not a daring rascal that appears in the letters – it is one who is sure that he won’t get caught as if God is protecting him and one who enjoys his work, doing what he perceives as God’s work. This was so against the grain even for 1888 and out of the way that it looks anything but a hoax.

This letter speaking of the Chapman murder said, “Grand work the last job was. I gave the lady no time to squeal”.

Chapman was heard saying, “No!” Then something was heard to hit against the fence. The writer was right that there was no scream and he had no fear of somebody saying, “Yes I heard it.” That revelation was still possible.

The letter said she was killed before she had a chance to scream which was true. Nobody heard a scream though there were plenty of people nearby and there was a door that could have been opened any time. The medical examination results that were confirmed after the letter appeared showed that she couldn’t have screamed.

The letter is boasting of how he had done such a good job of not attracting attention when he slaughtered her in such a risky spot. He should have been caught at work but wasn’t. He probably heard people out and about in the other yards. Only the Ripper could have thought of boasting. The writer was directed by the Ripper. Nobody knew but the killer that he should have been caught but wasn’t.

The killer had been more daring with Chapman than with Nichols. He took parts of Chapman away with him. This was only two murders so far. The letter then says that he was going to do more killings. That was accurate too.

When it was only two murders nobody knew but the killer that the killer was only out to kill “whores”. He could just have been an evil person attacking prostitutes because they were easy targets but who hoped to start killing any women he could get his hands on. A lot of people thought at the time that it was women not just whores the killer hated. Only the killer and the letter writer at that time knew different.

The letter declared that he would kill if he got the chance. We know that the Ripper couldn’t kill whenever he wanted – he always had to wait to the weekend. Again that information only came from somebody who knew the killer wouldn’t be free to attack women when he wanted.

The knife was sharpened after the Nichols murder. The letter boasts about the sharpness. At that time only Chapman had been killed with the sharpened knife. The letter writer knew the killer was planning to keep his knife sharp from now on. A journalist might have thought that since Nichols was killed with a knife that wasn’t too sharp that the Ripper didn’t care if the knife was sharp or not as long as it did the job.

The Americanism, Boss, was not contrived by any journalist for no journalist wanted to advocate the notion that the Ripper was an American. Better to suggest a Whitechapel man as the murderer and have everybody thinking they might know him or live beside him and have everyone quaking with fear. Fear sells papers. Any Ripper suspect may have picked up the expression from American visitors or customers at a workplace.

The journalist forging letters from the Ripper would want to support and inflame public opinion to make more stories and get more papers sold. The letter had to match what people thought of the Ripper for making unusual suggestions was more likely to result in the letter not being taken seriously.

The papers couldn’t risk saying things like that the Ripper was an American for there would be a lot of embarrassment if he was caught and it was found he was not an American. Like fortune tellers they had to play safe and make safe guesses.

No journalist would write, “I saved some of the proper red stuff in a ginger beer bottle over the last job to write with but it went thick like glue and I cant use it. Red ink is fit enough I hope ha ha”. The journalist would know that the police would expect the killer to be familiar with blood and how it thickens. It is the writer protecting himself – “Oh I know nothing about the murders for if I did I would know blood cannot be written with.”

The letter says the killer wouldn’t stop ripping until he got caught. This proved to be true for the Ripper was certainly stopped from killing by his relatives.

The letter writer wrote that the joke about Leather Apron gave him real fits. What did he mean? Surely a journalist wouldn’t write like somebody who did the writing version of thinking out loud? The Ripper at that time was nicknamed Leather Apron. Why does the writer think it’s funny? A journalist would have wanted people to believe the Leather Apron thing. It is surmised that because a leather apron was found in the yard where Chapman was slain which was assumed to have belonged to the Ripper until the real owner claimed it that this is what the writer finds funny. “I have laughed when they [the police] look so clever and talk about being on the right track. That joke about Leather Apron gave me real fits.” The police believed at that time that the killer was a butcher and indeed even suspected a mad Jewish bootmaker John Pizer of the crimes. Pizer was subsequently cleared.

The letter says the killer is laughing because the police suspected the wrong man. Now that wouldn’t be funny unless the killer was a Jewish man himself and he was similar to Pizer. Pizer and Aaron Kosminski had one thing in common – they hated women and were happy to attack them in public. Pizer was notorious for that.

The letter writer says that Jack the Ripper is his trade name. Trade name? Some say that butchers are rippers. He speaks as if his ripping women is part of his job. Is this a hint that he is a butcher? Kosminski used to go about with a pair of scissors scaring women. I’d take Ripper to refer to that for Kosminski at the time had no trade. So he was saying attacking women was his new trade.

The killer didn’t seem to be particular about washing his hands. He did not use the tap at the Annie Chapman or Mary Kelly scenes. The letter says it writer was as bad for he admitted to forgetting to wash the red ink off.

The Ripper did indeed play funny little games as the letter writer says. At that time the only game was Annie Chapman’s belongings laid out by the killer in some arrangement. After that they got stranger. Nicks in Eddowes face, the apron piece planted at a spot bearing a message from the killer, and the puzzles created in Mary Kelly’s room.

The letter has every mark of being written by the killer or somebody who was asked to do so by the killer.

The Postcard of 1st October

Referring to the previous letter the Central News Agency received the following which became known as the Saucy Jacky postcard.

I was not codding dear old Boss when I gave you the tip, you'll hear about Saucy Jacky's work tomorrow double event this time number one squealed a bit couldn't finish straight off. ha not the time to get ears for police. thanks for keeping last letter back till I got to work again.
Jack the Ripper

It may be authentic because though some think the writer got the information about the double event from the early morning newspapers. Did the police really think so when they took it so seriously? The postcard could have been posted on September 30th just after the murder of Stride and Eddowes.

Notice how it rambles excitedly. That is not the work of a journalist. It goes on about a double event and then jumps from number one squealing so he could not get her ears. Stride had screamed but not with the Ripper to our knowledge. We know the killer worked fast when he slashed Eddowes for the policeman was approaching and left himself very little time to get away and get her ears. The policeman may have missed him by seconds. The ears refers to Eddowes. It reveals what only the killer knew.

A witness said Stride screamed but not loudly when she was attacked on the street. It is not certain that the attacker was the killer but the killer could have witnessed it.

If she had squealed on the street, she would have attracted attention. If the Ripper killed her maybe he was afraid for that reason to mutilate her? Maybe there was just time for a quick slash and then make a getaway? He had to be careful for she died in a place where there was a busy club with people coming and going.

It was not reported in the papers that Stride squealed a bit.

A lot of people were saying that the killings may not have been related – not much was known. But this message states it as fact that the two women were Ripper victims.

The letter says that because she made some noise he couldn’t finish straight off – this suggests that he killed her and left her there intending to come back to mutilate her later if the coast was clear but that didn’t happen. This fits in with the observation that the Ripper frustrated because he didn’t get the chance to mutilate her may have went in search of another victim to glut his macabre urge.

And it was true that the killer didn’t have time to deal with Eddowes’ ears though he nicked a lobe off. In the confusion after the murder, nobody could have known that the killer was in such a hurry but the killer. At that time nobody could say if the killer really had killed both Stride and Eddowes.

The letter of 5th October 1888

The Central News Agency got a letter on the 5th October that was found to be written by the same person as the writer of the previous letters (page 98, The Lodger).

In the name of God hear me I swear I did not kill the female whose body was found at Whitehall. If she was an honest woman I will hunt down and destroy her murderer. If she was a whore God will bless the hand that slew her, for the women of Moab and Midian shall die and their blood shall mingle with the dust. I never harm any others or the Divine power that protects and helps me in my grand work would quit for ever. Do as I do and the light of glory shall shine upon you. I must get to work tomorrow treble event this time yes yes three must be ripped. will send you a bit of face by post I promise this dear old Boss. The police now reckon my work a practical joke well well Jacky’s a very practical joker ha ha ha Keep this back till three are wiped out and you can show the cold meat

Yours truly
Jack the Ripper

The letter is saying that God approved of his murders and the killer was a Jew for he knew of Jewish doctrine and the curse on the women of Moab and Midian. He knew the Old Testament well.

Is it authentic?

The Ripper and his writer seem to be Jewish for the letter doesn’t advertise its Jewish origin but its origin can be easily seen and the “Dear Boss”, is contrived Americanism to misdirect the police towards looking for an American killer.

What hoaxer would think of capitalising the word Divine out of respect for God? What hoaxer would think of talking about the light of glory? Judaism spoke of the light of glory in memory of the glowing pillars of cloud in which God was present with Moses and God’s people during the Exodus from Egypt in the Jewish Scriptures.

The Ripper suffered from a religious mania that made him hate prostitutes so this letter rings true. It bears the marks of religious mania. No journalist would think of a line like “the women of Moab and Midian shall die and their blood shall mingle with the dust”. Only a Jew would for it is so Old Testament. It almost reads like a line from the Bible. At that time the Ripper was believed to be a sex freak who hated women.

The suggestion in the letter that the Ripper didn’t harm anyone other than prostitutes. It fits the psychological profile of the killer as a man who seemed relatively normal at least most of the time in daily life. No hoaxer would have wanted people to think that the Ripper wouldn’t attack any of them.

The real Ripper would indeed have thought that his dodging capture and the police so far would have been a sign that God blessed his homicidal exploits. The inexplicability of the killer not being caught was the main reason this case became the ultimate murder case.

A fraudulent writer would have wanted people to think the Ripper maybe did or actually did commit the Whitehall Murder. In this murder, the body of an unknown and dismembered woman was found wrapped up in a package found in the cellars of new Scotland yard. The killer was never found. The letter starts off by claiming that the writer was innocent of this crime which looks like he was outraged at the thought that he ripped her up. The real killer might react that way. It was prostitutes he wanted dead. To suggest to him that he could kill an honest woman might have offended him terribly.

The “show the cold meat" is like something a butcher of some sort would think of and as Jews needed butchers so much it can point to a Jew.

Why does the letter promise three murders soon? This is a nasty joke and it says he is a joker. A journalist wouldn’t want to give that impression for a journalist would want people to expect three murders. It is a hint that there was going to be a treble event after the double event so the writer was sure the Ripper killed Stride and Eddowes in the infamous double event. That was risky if it were made up for the police could have put Stride down to another killer.

The letter says the sender will send a bit of face. Soon after, Kelly’s face was cut off. The murderer made no effort to cut off the face of Catherine Eddowes whose murder had just taken place not long before. The writer said he planned to kill three women the next day. For this reason the letter was thought to be inauthentic. But what does he mean by Jacky being thought to be a practical Joker? Its that he didn’t intend to kill three women at all. The letter puts divine in as Divine so God means something to him.

The letter writer didn’t mean it when he said he would rip three up. But what did he mean by “Keep this back till three are wiped out and you can show the cold meat”?

The “cold meat” expression shows that the murderer intends to kill a woman or women indoors for only that way can he present them for display like meat. And only that way can he make sure they are cold meat when found for he can close the door behind him or lock it. This actually happened with Mary Kelly.

This letter was determined to have been originated by the same person as who wrote the postcard on October 1st saying he had no time to get the ears cut off to post to the police.

These are the only letters which may show knowledge of the murders and so which were directed by the killer. The author knew of the religious element to the murders which has been proven to exist only recently.

The Eddowes clue

Would it be too much to suggest that ^ cut into each of Eddowes cheeks make ^^ when put together an M for Moabite or Midian? Is the letter trying to get at that? Did the killer put his mark on her to show she is a Moabite or a cursed person in his view? The marks stood for something – the Ripper despite being in a hurry and knowing the policeman could catch him at any minute didn’t put them on her face for nothing.

The Letters and Goulston Street

Notice how the letter above makes grammar errors, starts a new line with small letters, has poor sentence construction at times. It has all the same characteristics as the Goulston Street message. The letter explains how a Jew could put the blame on a Jew by writing nasty graffiti on a building there inhabited by Jews. He believed they weren’t doing anything wrong if they killed prostitutes and should be praised for it.

Analyse The Juwes are The men that Will not be Blamed for nothing.

Notice how its correctly capitalised at the start. But The starts off with a capital letter as does Will and Blamed. There are no punctuation marks. It is written with bad grammar, it should have been The Jews are the men that will not be blamed for anything. It follows popular speech.

Compare this with lines from the letters.

“I keep on hearing the police have caught me but they wont fix me just yet.” It follows popular speech and bad grammar and betrays carelessness with punctuation. It should be I keep hearing that the police have caught me but they won’t catch me just yet. Here’s the whole letter with the errors explained.

Dear Boss,

I keep on hearing [should be I keep hearing that] the police have caught me but they wont [won’t] fix [catch me – fix me is popular speech] me just yet. I have laughed [I laugh] when they look so clever and talk about being on the right track. That joke about Leather Apron gave me real fits. I am down on whores and I shant [shan’t] quit ripping them till I do get buckled. Grand work the last job was. I gave the lady no time to squeal. How can they catch me now. [no question mark] I love my work and want to start again. You will soon hear of me with my funny little games. I saved some of the proper red stuff [popular speech] in a ginger beer bottle over the last job to write with [no comma] but it went thick like glue and I cant [can’t] use it. Red ink is fit enough I hope ha. ha. [should be ha ha and then full stop] The next job I do [no comma] I shall clip the ladys [lady’s] ears off and send to the police officers just for jolly [no comma] wouldn't you. [no question mark] Keep this letter back till I do a bit more work, then give it out straight. My knife's so nice and sharp I want to get to work right away if I get a chance. Good Luck. [capitalised luck unnecessarily]

Yours truly
Jack the Ripper

Whoever wrote or dictated this letter wrote the message at Goulston Street.

I was not codding [joking] dear old Boss [unnecessary capitalisation] when I gave you the tip, you'll hear about Saucy Jacky's work tomorrow [no full stop] double event this time [no full stop] number one squealed a bit couldn't finish straight off. ha [no capitalisation] [Didn’t have] not [bad sentence construction] the time to get ears for police. thanks [no capitalisation] for keeping last letter back till I got to work again.

Jack the Ripper

Whoever wrote this wrote the first letter and admits it and it shows all the characteristics of the Goulston Street message. The capitalisation has been watched for some reason with this letter. The killer probably heard that the police were on the look out for somebody that wrote the way the Goulston Street message was written.

In the name of God hear me I swear I did not kill the female whose body was found at Whitehall. If she was an honest woman I will hunt down and destroy her murderer. If she was a whore God will bless the hand that slew her, for the women of Moab and Midian shall die and their blood shall mingle with the dust. I never harm any others or the Divine power that protects and helps me in my grand work would quit for ever. Do as I do and the light of glory shall shine upon you. I must get to work tomorrow treble event this time yes yes three must be ripped. will send you a bit of face by post I promise this dear old Boss. The police now reckon my work a practical joke well well Jacky’s a very practical joker ha ha ha Keep this back till three are wiped out and you can show the cold meat

Yours truly
Jack the Ripper

This letter too deliberately avoids the strange capitalisations of the Goulston Street message. We know he was contriving this because the first letter has the same bizarre capitalisations of the Goulston Street message. A hoaxer wouldn’t do that.

The assertion in the Pall Mall Gazette that the writing at Goulston Street according to witnesses was similar to the Dear Boss letters is often dismissed as nonsense. You would wonder.

If the Ripper didn’t write the letters then he had huge control over what he got the writer to write. Or if it was a brother who wrote the letters for him who had similar writing ability and education it would explain a lot.

The Lusk Letter

Scholarly analysis has decided that the infamous Lusk Letter which claimed to be from the killer could well have been really his work. Mr George Lusk of the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee, which patrolled the streets trying to capture the Ripper, got a parcel in the post containing half a human kidney. There was a letter in the parcel.

From hell.
Mr Lusk,
Sor
I send you half the Kidne I took from one woman and prasarved it for you tother piece I fried and ate it was very nise. I may send you the bloody knif that took it out if you only wate a whil longer
signed
Catch me when you can Mishter Lusk

Let’s examine this curiosity.

The letter sought to give the impression that the kidney piece came from Catherine Eddowes. Upon examination it was thought it could indeed have come from Eddowes. This of course could not be proved. The kidney part carried signs of Bright’s Disease – and Catherine Eddowes had Bright’s Disease. Dr Openshaw stated that the kidney belonged to a woman of Catherine Eddowes’ age and was in a similar diseased state to the remaining kidney. Major Smith of the City Police said that two inches of renal artery were left in Eddowes when her kidney was removed and the kidney portion received by Lusk still had one inch left on it as if it would fit in her body. Some doubt the declarations at the time that the kidney was indeed human. It was preserved for several days before it was sent raising the question of why the killer or the sender took so long to send it. To many, the reason would be that he wanted to think carefully and took his time to think and be sure he wasn’t leaving a trail to himself. He believed that what he was sending should convict him as the killer should he be found to be the sender of the parcel.

The killer disguised his writing and wrote to give the false impression of being very illiterate. The spelling is mostly good and easy words are misspelled – he obviously misspelled on purpose. Why spell hell right and spell nice wrong? Nice is a more commonly known and used word than hell. Again you have the strange capitalisations that took place with the Goulston Street message. It is interesting that the only three words relevant to a butcher, kidney, preserved and knife are spelt wrongly. The writer was trying to hide his occupation. He tried too hard and gave himself away! From hell may indicate a religious interest.

The Ripper appeared attached to his knife like it was his friend. That he said he might send it if Lusk could wait a while shows that he planned to stop killing soon. This turned out to be true. The killer killed Kelly and there were no more murders. He writes as if he planned to keep the knife to kill one more woman and then think about posting the knife to Lusk. The killer may even have used a kidney from a butcher’s shop to post to Lusk.

If the Ripper indeed ate a diseased piece of kidney then was it because he didn’t care for he was already diseased like a syphilitic?

The letter was not written to the police or the papers to keep the papers and the world blazing with speculation and to create a big sensation. It was sent to Lusk to create a Whitechapel-confined mystery. The killer was a local man. The absence of effort to make publicity with this letter lends support to its authenticity.  Lusk was targeted as a taunt - he had his men hiding everywhere and the Ripper was still able to walk past them undetected.

THE RIPPER LETTER FOR JOSEPH HYAM LEVY

A newspaper in Whitechapel received a letter in October 1888 claiming to be from the Ripper. It was thought to have been intended for Israel Schwartz or Joseph Lawende.

Schwartz saw the attack on Elizabeth Stride but it is known this attack was not down to the killer.  She was killed after that by somebody else.

Joseph Lawende saw the killer take Catherine Eddowes into Mitre Square. She was found slaughtered shortly after.

Here is the letter:

You though your-self very clever I reckon when you informed the police. But you made a mistake if you though I dident see you. Now I known you know me and I see your little game, and I mean to finish you and send your ears to your wife if you show this to the police or help them if you do I will finish you. It no use your trying to get out of my way. Because I have you when you dont expect it and I keep my word as you soon see and rip you up. Yours truly Jack the Ripper.

PS You see I know your address

Genuine or not the letter was a threat and thus was a crime. The writer was never caught. And why has the recipient’s identity been a guarded secret? The letter was treated as revealing what only the killer could know.

Schwartz and Lawende both talked to the police about the man they thought was the Ripper. The letter was not meant for Lawende because Lawende wasn’t of much use to the police and didn’t do the Ripper much harm. Schwartz was not the man intended because he gave no indication of being able to identify the man he saw at the scene of the imminent murder of Stride and there was no reason to think he saw the killer. Also there was absolutely no doubt that the men there did see Schwartz but here the letter writer speaks as if the man had reason to think that the killer didn’t see him. The men who passed by as Eddowes flirted with the killer shortly before her murder acted as if they thought the killer did see them. This would mean that one of these men was the man intended in the letter.

The man intended had to have been Joseph Hyam Levy who spoke to the police but acted as if he was afraid to say too much. We know he knew the Ripper suspect Jacob Levy. We know that Joseph Hyam Levy behaved as if he recognised the man with Eddowes and tried to get away as quickly as he could from the scene. These coincidences show that the letter was authentic. Joseph Hyam Levy did indeed play a “little game” with the police. The others didn’t. No hoaxer would have written a letter that fits facts that are so difficult to figure out. We must remember as well that Joseph Hyam Levy was very careful after he went to the police as if he were afraid of someone.

The letter is confirmation that Joseph Hyam Levy and the Ripper knew each other. If the Ripper did not write the letter he had got somebody else to write it.

Finally

The letters show that somebody was writing letters under the guidance of the Ripper. They reveal things only the killer could know. The Lusk letter could be really the killers handwriting.  The enterprising journalist thing could be right after all for a gutter journalist could have met the Ripper.  It could be right yes but not in the way people think.  The journalist could have been trying to leak things to help the police while the Ripper's intention was to boast.