David Cohen

Black or White

The autor states that he knows that killer, or it is someone very similar to the person he believes it to be. At the end of the section I was to read the author says, “Therefore, I’m now prepared to say that Jack the Ripper was either the man known as David Cohen…Or someone very much like him.” (Pg 61, )

Appeal to ignorance

“I have found nothing in his murky background that qualifies him as a good suspect” (Pg 58, ) Making a certain person not guilty because their background says so.

Appeal to Misleading Authority (w/ Appeal to Celebrity & Appeal to Tradition)

The author mentions that the Police were keeping an eye on the person that he (the author) is talking about because of the failed attempts to contact the police in the first place (because of the murder, making him a suspect).

Wishful Thinking

“But Aaron Kosminski looked good for the Murder.” (Pg 59, ) The author “obviously is right because he looks good for murder. He does go on to try and prove his point but doesn’t do any good because what he brings up are also things that he “believes” are true about the person in question, but doesn’t have solid facts about.

Cum Hoc

One man he points out was a mental person that had many “signs of someone” who may be the murderer, and lived around the same time and area that the murder happened, therefore he must be the murderer “maybe”.

Texas Sharpshooter

The author draws his conclusion on who he believes the murder to be based on simple things that can make him relate to the instances that are given. As I mentioned in Black or white this is how he generalizes who he believes to be the kill, or someone much like him.

Presumptions - The likely	Some measure of (intuitive) statistical judgment.	In the story the author perceives the person he thinks to be the murderer as a specific type of person that would likely to do such a thing
Values - Abstract	Not concrete: “truth” “justice”	There is no for sure way to know if any of the people that our author blames is the killer only that he believes they are and that’s the truth of it
Presence - Time	Making it feel urgent.	The author makes me feel as if he is trying to make a huge case for a person than he immediately says that they could be the murderer
Presence - Repetition	Say it again. And again. And again.	He constantly says that it could be him or someone like him…over and over
Succession - Stages	If A→D seems hard, let’s do B and see if things look different then.	He trys to say someone is the murderer but when it gets to into depth he gives up and continues to the next person
Analogy - Theme/Phoros	One concept is similar to another, which modifies the sense of the original.	The author over and over again constantly states that there is one person and that either they did it or someone like them did, however they are never truly alike

The murderer is described as to be one person or someone like a specific person, and 3 people were targets as possible killers. I purpose that through the theories that perelman has purposed and the ideas that i set in motion towards that, i believe that there were multiple murderers in this case. I say this because my author states that there are 3 people and each time he suggest that the person who is the murder is someone who is similar but what if there were 3 people that were involved?