Jack The Ripper (Compendium Thread)

[Spudrick68]

Thank you Ascalon. I will report back.

 

[CarlosTheDJ]

My wife and myself will be visiting friends in high Wycombe in early September, they run a pub so we have to stay there (sigh!). One of their friends does Ripper tours in London and apparently knows tons about it. They have asked him and he is going to give us a private ripper tour around Whitechapel when we go. I'm looking forward to it.

That sounds like a cracking experience.
Enjoy!

A

We're having our wedding reception in this room!

Right, so exactly what claim do they have that JTR was there and whom do they nominate as the saucy chap?

A

No idea! Some London type I'd imagine.......

 

[Frideswide]

Didn't the north american quack doctor who had a thing for collecting uteruses (uteri? uterus?) flee the country from a boarding house?

 

[Yithian]

Encumbered by the largest moustache ever to grace a face.
Tumblety was the name.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Tumblety

 

[CarlosTheDJ]

My wife and myself will be visiting friends in high Wycombe in early September, they run a pub so we have to stay there (sigh!). One of their friends does Ripper tours in London and apparently knows tons about it. They have asked him and he is going to give us a private ripper tour around Whitechapel when we go. I'm looking forward to it.

That sounds like a cracking experience.
Enjoy!

A

We're having our wedding reception in this room!

Right, so exactly what claim do they have that JTR was there and whom do they nominate as the saucy chap?

A

No idea! Some London type I'd imagine.......

After a cursory Google I've found that it's apparently some chap called Robert Stephenson who stayed at the Cricketers before moving to Whitechapel.

Pretty cut-and-dried.

 

[Frideswide]

I'm interested inhearing how the owners use the connection - lots of leaflets? guided tour? a book to buy?

Could be very offputting for some groups of people on some occasions I imagine.

Not me though!

 

[CarlosTheDJ]

Have a look at their website, they mention it but don't go overboard!

As far as I remember there's some framed stuff on the walls in there, that might be it. It's included on the Lanes ghost walk too, although the walled-up-nun is just round the corner and probably overshadows it a bit....

 

[ramonmercado]

George Galloway has condemned this attempt to pin the blame on an immigrant. He reiterates his conviction that Queen Victoria was the guilty party.

 

[Pietro_Mercurios]

Would be really great if they've finally cracked the case using DNA. Especially if it puts a few armchair sleuths' noses out of joint. Especially, P.D. James.

At least I'll be able to look at Walter Sickert's paintings again and just appreciate them as works of art, without any niggling suspicions. :lol:

 

[gordonrutter]

Would be really great if they've finally cracked the case using DNA. Especially if it puts a few armchair sleuths' noses out of joint. Especially, P.D. James.

At least I'll be able to look at Walter Sickert's paintings again and just appreciate them as works of art, without any niggling suspicions. :lol:

That would be Patricia Cornwell not P D James

 

[Cochise]

We'll have to wait on developments. Kosminski has always been one of the more likely suspects, but there have also been major objections which have kept the debate open.

Many of the suspects raised, of course, have had no credibility at all.

But if the DNA link can withstand critical investigation, coupled with the contemporary police opinions it would be a very powerful piece of evidence, since there was already some fairly strong contemporary evidence suggesting he was the perpetrator. Two of the investigators reported him as the murderer (who could not be charged because of insanity), there was a somewhat secretive identification, due both to the sensitive racial situation and to the suspect's mental state, furthermore he was on the short list of another senior policeman familiar with the investigation.

Given the time lapse and the loss of many of the police papers I doubt it can ever be resolved 'without a doubt'. I must say I myself am a bit surprised, I had at least two other suspects down as more likely, (James Kelly, William Bury) and I wonder if the DNA match is close enough - however this will undoubtedly be explored by those who know much more about the technicalities of such testing than I do.

 

[Swifty]

I have to admit that the big question mark in my mind over this business is that there are (ahem) perfectly 'innocent' reasons why someone's sperm might end up on a prostitute's clothing.

Reading the talkback comments in the above provided link, you're not on your own questioning that factor. Proof of semen found on a prostitute's clothing isn't proof of that man being her killer, he could also just be someone who paid to have sex with her. It is interesting that he was also a suspect at the time though. This will probably all evolve into a more unsavoury Turin Shroud type situation with no one backing down from their firmly held beliefs. It does seem a bit weird that a policeman would get away with removing it from a crime scene, even if old police methods were less stringent than today, surely it would have been spotted by other officers at the scene?. Maybe he planned to wash it and give it as a gift to some other poor woman, it certainly looks like it would have been expensive? ..

Fascinating read though, thank you ..

 

[Cochise]

I suspect all it will do is change the pecking order of the suspects. But it would be good if it at least kept Cornwell quiet.

On Kosminski specifically, there is quite a good case for him, certainly the best as far as contemporary evidence and opinion goes (He is the only person named by more than one of the senior police involved), but there are also possibilities that he was mis-identified or confused with another mental patient. In which case the real 'Kosminski suspect' was likely incarcerated well before 1891.

It may have been felt too risky to make a statement without a trial and conviction.

The whole case, really, is fraught with so much doubt - number of victims (anything from 3 to 8 or more) - who the victims actually were, were the people seen by witnesses actually the killer or simply 'customers' - it is no wonder that none of the modern evidence so far brought forward has prevented other scenarios being discussed.

But it does sometimes get distasteful, particularly in the tendency to bring in random well known people.

Edit - Swanson, one of the detectives who identified Kosminski as the killer, also lists Francis Coles as a victim - Coles was killed a week after Aaron Kosminski was incarcerated. So either Swanson is confused, in which case his naming of the suspect who was 'identified' as JtR by a witness as Kosminski is also suspect, or the Kosminski that modern investigators have traced is not the one the police meant.

and PS... The dissection of the claim is already well under way ...

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=8296

 

[Stu73]

I think the provenance has to be questioned as well as the integrity of the DNA sample after so much time.

I've never had much truck with Cornwells theory. I think that, at best, she proves that Sickert wrote some dodgy letters.

Likewise, I'm never sure about Maybrick, i guess it depends on which "expert" you believe regarding the authenticity of the diary.

Bottom line is that too many Ripperologists have their lifes work invested in this and if it's "proved beyond a doubt" then the gravy train is well and truly derailed. This latest find will be slaughtered just like all the others at a guess.

 

[sherbetbizarre]

According to this article..

2. The chain of evidence or provenance on the shawl is less than stellar. In the piece on the Daily Mail's website, the aforementioned amateur sleuth writes that the shawl is "said to have been found next to the body of one of the Ripper's victims, Catherine Eddowes, and soaked in her blood. There was no evidence for its provenance, although after the auction I obtained a letter from its previous owner who claimed his ancestor had been a police officer present at the murder scene and had taken it from there." (Emphasis mine) I am of the camp that believes extraordinary claims require extraordinarily clean and robust evidence. A shawl with no provenance record and an association based on a family claim is not what I call extraordinarily robust.

http://www.oregonlive.com/today/index.s ... denti.html

 

[gattino]

I always thought, from the endless documentaries on tv over the years, that the most convincing suspect by far was the American fella a mysoginist and possible murderer who fled the country and was named in the US press at the time as the chief suspect.

Actually here is a full list of the the popular suspects.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_the_Ripper_suspects

 

[Stu73]

EDIT: The Maybrick 'diary' (complete with handwritten maniacal laughter!) was an obvious hoax and the hoaxer fessed up pretty soon after publication, iirc.

That's a bit simplistic to say the least. He "confessed" when in the sort of mental state where he would also have confessed to being the long lost Lord Lucan, Shergar and possibly Atlantis. AFAIK He was also unable to explain the mechanical aspects of his hoax, ageing the ink, hard to come by Historical details etc etc.

 

[lordmongrove]

Ripper murders 'solved' (again)

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/jack-ripper-m ... ml#6wUfp6x

DNA from victim's shawl used to identify Jolly Jack.

 

[Ascalon]

Well, it seems as if DNA has come to the rescue again and Aaron Kosminski has been positively identified by DNA on Catherine Eddowes' shawl.

Apologies, but the below is a link to the Mail Online, hardly authoritative but there you go.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... rders.html

I'm only gutted that Abberline was wrong - he favoured George Chapman, Severin Klosowski.

Will be interesting to see how this is challenged.

A

 

[dreeness]

another link

Redjac! Redjac!


(edited to add)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdPDvGkvbFs

 

[Pietro_Mercurios]

Merged the two recent DNA threads and my sincere apologies to P.D. James for confusing her with Patricia Cornwell.


P_M

 

[Heckler]

It is an interesting turn of events, it goes some way to proving that Kosminski 'knew' Eddows and was in a situation at some point where his seminal fluid ended up on her shawl. Bearing in mind his reputation as being a regular self-abuser (it doesn't mention whether in what context this information came (pardon the pun) to light) it is possible his fluid ended up on her in some context other than murder.

I'll have to have another read through of the literature around Kosminski as I I dimly recall him mostly being a good suspect at the time, simply because he was visibly hatstand (in the Victorian understanding of mental illness) and therefore capable of the murders. It was this lack of lucidity for much of the time that to my modern mind eliminated him as a suspect.

 

[Ascalon]

Indeed, there are a number of key points here, not least of which is the provenance of the shawl.

First of all, the shawl is not thought to be Eddowes, but rather Kosminski's. The author of the book alleges that the Michelmas daises that adorn the scarf/shawl show his future intent after the Eddowes murder to go on and kill again, Mark Kelly having died on the one of the Michelmas days.

He also says that the scarf was too fine an item to have belonged to Eddowes, who had pawned her boots the day before. He says that analysis shows that the item is of Eastern European manufacture anyway.

All this notwithstanding, the DNA evidence says that Kosminki's semen and Eddowes blood and possible organ cells were on the shawl.

Now, when you delve into the detail what it says is that mitochondrial DNA of the same type as Eddowes and Kosminski were present on the scarf. This is far from a positive DNA match, it merely means that it narrows it down to thousands with this type of mtcDNA.

Again, all this notwithstanding, the likelihood of an item relating, however tenuously, to an undisputed Ripper victim having modern DNA techniques reveal that mitochondrial DNA relating to both the victim and a well known, and highly favoured (even by modern techniques) suspect, being false at this stage is very slim indeed. The experts all seemed to agree that the shawl and its DNA were indeed of the right age.

The only thing that is in real question is whether there were two Kosminskis. I'll have to look it up, but I believe it was Philip Sugden who suggested that the Kosminski of police suspicion and the poor soul that was later locked up may have been different people as the one locked up never showed even the slightest sign of violence and may have been considerably older than the former.




A

 

[Yithian]

The only thing that is in real question is whether there were two Kosminskis. I'll have to look it up, but I believe it was Philip Sugden who suggested that the Kosminski of police suspicion and the poor soul that was later locked up may have been different people as the one locked up never showed even the slightest sign of violence and may have been considerably older than the former.

IIRC Martin Fido goes into considerable depth on this question in one of the ripper-cast podcasts. I'll try and track it down.

Edit:
http://www.casebook.org/podcast/listen.html?id=57 - This is the one I recall - near the start.
http://www.casebook.org/podcast/listen.html?id=74 - This one is generally on Kosminski.

 

[Heckler]

I don't see where you've got the reading that the shawl was Kosminski's. I can't see that claim anywhere in the article.

The description of the shawl -- colourful, with a daisy motif -- means it's hardly likely to be a Victorian gentleman's attire, insane or not.

I reasoned that it made no sense for Eddowes to have owned the expensive shawl herself; this was a woman so poor she had pawned her shoes the day before her murder. But could the Ripper have brought the shawl with him and left it as an obscure clue about when he was planning to strike next? It was just a hunch, and far from proof of anything, but it set me off on my journey.

From the article.......

But I concur with your second point.

 

[Yithian]

Good thread here - lengthening by the minute:
http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=8296

An article on the shawl that precedes this publicity:
http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/dst-amos.html

 

[Yithian]

Opening pages of the new book here:
HERE

 

[Cochise]

Apparently the piece of cloth is not a shawl and not 19th century - its 8ft by 2ft and is printed with a pattern introduced in 1902. It was extensively researched previously during the period when it belonged to the Black Museum and it was decided that it was not suitable for an exhibit , which is why it was sold off.

There are serious questions about provenance - the policeman who said he acquired it belonged to the Met, not the City Police investigating Eddowes' murder. He would not be at the crime scene, and nor does it seem likely that one force would give a piece of evidence to a junior member of another force as a present.

 

[Cochise]

I believe it is discussed at length in The Jack the Ripper Whitechapel Murders (London, 1997) by Andy and Sue Parlour. The dating of the cloth was done by experts at the Victoria and Albert museum.

 

[Yithian]

I don't object to the hand-me-down idea, but I do baulk somewhat at the idea that a police officer (working for another force) would be allowed to take home evidence from an investigation in progress - evidence that doesn't feature in the inventory of items found with, on or around the victim's body.

According to the opening pages of the book (see my link above), Acting Sergeant Amos Simpson actually removed this 'shawl' from the body.

('Shawl': it's enormous!).