|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Chris Scott
Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 308
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 18, 2003 - 4:51 pm: |       |
DICK AUSTIN
For those not familiar with this suspect, on October 5th 1888, the authorities in Rotherham contacted Scotland Yard to report thata discharged soldier named James Oliver had named one Dick Austin as the Ripper. Austin had allegedly threatened to kill every whore and rip her insides out and had a hatred of women.
All divisions were contacted on Abberline's oreders for information with no result. Oliver was interviewed again on or about 19th October. ON or about 24th October copies of the Dear Boss letter and Saucy jacky postcard were shown to Oliver and he asserted that the former much resembled Austin's handwriting.
Working on the premise that both may have been soldiers, I searched for any entries that may be relevant and found the following:
James Oliver: Soldier
Only one in 1881 Census
JAMES OLIVER
Infantry Camp
St Botolph
Colchester St Botolph
Essex
Soldier
Aged 20
Born 1861 in London
Unmarried
Dick Austin: Soldier
Only one in 1881 Census
RICHARD AUSTIN
Cavalry Barracks
Barrack Street
Norwich St. James
Pockthorpe
Norfolk
Private 3rd Hussars
Aged 32
Born 1849 in Bexley, Kent
Unmarried
1891 Census:
Looking for a James Oliver aged 30 born in London
Only one found
JAMES R OLIVER
17 Swanscombe Terrace
Swanscombe
Kent
Carpenter's labourer
Aged 30
Born in Bethnal Green, London
Married.
Looking for Richard Austin aged 42 born in Bexley
One found with place of birth transcribed as Beeby, Kent. Original sheet shows this to be Bexley.
RICHARD AUSTIN
18 Chapel Place
Dover
Kent
Journeyman shoemaker
Aged 42
Born in Bexley, Kent
|
Andrew Spallek
Detective Sergeant
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 53
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 19, 2003 - 2:02 am: | |
Thanks, Chris, for looking up this information. This individual immediately caught my eye while reading through Ultimate Companion a few years ago. It is interesting to note that the original letter from the Rotherham police refered to the suspect as "Dick Austen." (although in subsequent memoranda SY spells it Austin). Have you checked the spelling Austen?
He seems to fit the physical description (except that he was not stout) and seems to have the personality type we would today associate with a serial killer: particularly striking is the phrase, "He was not right in his mind, he was too sharp to be right." (Shades of a Ted Bundy!).
Andy
|
John Fogarty
Detective Sergeant
Username: Goryboy
Post Number: 62
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 03, 2003 - 2:16 pm: | |
Yes, indeed, "too sharp to be right" was a phrase that caught my eye, as well. Also, I find it particularly interesting that he is listed as a journeyman SHOEMAKER. (Shades of Leather Apron?)
Cheers,
John e-Rotten
(a.k.a., Goryboy) |
Chris Michetti
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 7:52 pm: | |
Are there any more threads or dissertations which talk about this suspect? I'm interested to read more! I don't find much about him anywhere but in this thread right here on the Internet or elsewhere. |
Chris Scott
Chief Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 896
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 3:57 pm: | |
Andy
To very belatedly (!) follow upon your suggestion, there are 10 entries in 1881 census under the name Richard Austen.
1) Aged 53, living Oxford, a farmer
2) Aged 69, living Chatham, a Shipwright
3) Aged 20, living Denbigh Street, London, Domestic Servant
4) Aged 1, Bristol
5) Aged 24, living 24, Skin dresser
6) Aged 57, living Tenterden, Agricultural labourer
7) Aged 50, living Ramsgate, Porter
8) Aged 40, living Warlingham, Labourer
9) Aged 21, living Shepherd Street, London, Butcher's Assistant
10) Aged 14, living Hoyland Nether, Colliery labourer
No 9 looks the most interesting:
his full details are:
Born 1860 in Tottenham, Middlesex
Aged 21
Butcher's Assistant
Unmarried
Residence: 17 Shepherd Street, London.
Worked for a butcher named James Ratcliffe.
Regards
Chris
|
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 684
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 3:46 pm: | |
Hi,
A couple of intresting points about Richard Austin[private hussars]
He was 39 years old.
And did not Hutchinson say , the man seen with Kelly walked sharply [ military?]
Also Tabram was seen in the company of soldiers, Tabrams fatal wound , could have been inflicted by a bayonet.
I am still a Barnett man, but food for thought.....
Richard. |
Andrew Spallek
Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 379
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 10:57 pm: | |
Thanks, Chris, for your follow-up.
I agree that your Richard Austen #9 look the most interesting. Where would Shepherd Street be? Unfortunately, his age is all wrong. The Dick Austin of SY interest was said to have been about age 40 in 1888. Dick Austen #9 would not even have been 30 yet. See pages 594ff in Ultimate Companion.
I find the spelling "Austen" interesting. It is written that way in the initial communication from Rotherham 5 Oct 1888. I presume this was a typed letter. A follow-up report by Abberline spells it "Austin." Then the file contains another letter from the same Captain (Burnett) of the Rotherham Chief Constable's Office who wrote the initial communication spells it "Austin." Another letter from Burnett then spells it "Austin." I am tempted to say that the spelling was "Austin" and that "Austin" was merely a mistake. However, "Austen" does not seem like a plausible typo for "Austin" as the e and i are nowhere near each other on the standard keyboard.
Is there any chance of tracing this fellow through British military records?
BTW -- the Richard Austin of the 3rd Hussars is exactly the right age.
Andy S.
(Message edited by Aspallek on February 14, 2004) |
Chris Scott
Chief Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 898
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, February 15, 2004 - 9:33 am: | |
Hi Andy
I agree that agewise the Austin from the original post:
Only one in 1881 Census
RICHARD AUSTIN
Cavalry Barracks
Barrack Street
Norwich St. James
Pockthorpe
Norfolk
Private 3rd Hussars
Aged 32
Born 1849 in Bexley, Kent
Unmarried
Also, of course, not only the military connection but specifically the Hussars.
In answer to your other query, the only Shepherd Street currently in London is at the back of Buckingham Palace, just off Piccadilly.
Regards
Chris
|
Andrew Spallek
Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 382
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 16, 2004 - 1:34 am: | |
Chris,
I'm tempted to say that the Richard Austin of the Hussars is our suspect and that the "Austen" was just a mistake. I think it's likely that's him again in the 1891 census.
SY seems not to have been able to trace him in 1888. Any chance of finding a date of discharge for him? If he was still in the military during the murders, any chance of finding where he was stationed?
BTW -- I was so struck by the suspect when I first read the Companion that I went around for days annoying a particular co-worker by saying repeatedly "Dick Austen IS Jack the Ripper." I may just have been right!
Andy S.
|
Chris Scott
Chief Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 903
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 16, 2004 - 4:11 am: | |
Andy
Such information about Austin would be available as far as I can see. The 3rd Hussars became amalgamated into the Queen's Royal Hussars (QRH) in 1958 and their info says the following about research:
Historical Research
Although contact with past members of our Regiments is encouraged through this Website, requests for historical information can place a huge burden on our small team at Home Headquarters. To conduct research is very time consuming and in line with other organisations we have been forced to introduce a small charge for such requests. The money received will go to the Regimental Association.
If you would like our staff to conduct research for you then please send a written request and a cheque for £25.00 made payable to "The QRH Association"
The Assistant Regimental Secretary
Home Headquarters
The Queen's Royal Hussars
Regents Park Barracks
Albany Street
London
NW1 4AL
Please include as much detail as you possibly can regarding the individual so that the search can be narrowed and the chances of success improved. The following details would be most helpful:
Name Rank and Number of the officer or soldier concerned.
Regiment/s that he served in.
Period of service
Any other important or relevant details. (Medals awarded, countries served in etc.)
|
Andrew Spallek
Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 386
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 16, 2004 - 12:28 pm: | |
Thanks again, Chris. I have to say that I hope someone picks up the research. I'll consider it myself, but £25 is almost US$50 right now, which is a little steep for what might be a dead end. Also, it is very difficult to get a check in sterling sent from the US. There would be an additional commission.
Perhaps someone in the UK would be willing to take up the search.
Andy S.
|
Stan Russo
Sergeant
Username: Stan
Post Number: 40
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 16, 2004 - 1:11 pm: | |
All,
I would be weary of hyping a suspect investigated at the time of the murders by the police. I am all for exhausting all resources to further learn and perhaps eliminate suspects from consideration, yet if Austin's name was mentioned by the police during the time of the murders, as it was I believe in October, then I find it highly unlikely that he was not fully investigated at the time. Such suspects as these should rate lower along the suspect pool because they were known to the police, yet I agree that to dismiss Austin from consideration is a mistake, simply because there has been no proof yet to remove him as a suspect.
If Austin is to be considered a viable suspect, rather than merely a suspect mentioned at the time of the murders which should in fact hurt his viability, then the alternative must also be considered; everyone who cannot prove they could not have committed these murders must be considered a suspect.
STAN
|
Andrew Spallek
Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 387
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 16, 2004 - 3:25 pm: | |
The implication seems to be that SY attempted to investigate Austin but could not locate him in 1888. They seemed to give up rather quickly, perhaps because they found another suspect they "liked" better. I don't think Austin was ever really "investigated."
However, what you say is essentially true. If Austin was not investigated then there is almost surely no body of information that would implicate him (short of finding some hidden correspondence from him or his family). So, while it may be possible to eliminate him by establishing his whereabouts elsewhere at the time of the murders (if he were stationed, say, in India, for example), we will probably not find anything to further implicate him. I must confess, this is one of the reasons I'm not keen to spend the money for the research.
Andy S.
|
Stan Russo
Sergeant
Username: Stan
Post Number: 41
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 16, 2004 - 7:40 pm: | |
Andy,
Well said. Unfortunately we are dealing with a 116 year old murder case. Sometimes priorities have be set and perhaps the real suspect may be overlooked at this time as a causalty.
STAN
|
shelley wiltshire
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 21, 2004 - 11:21 pm: | |
Sounds interesting this fellow Austin, i haven't read the book that he was mentioned in though, thanks for the info...I will pay the money to trace his records, although i think it maybe a couple of soldiers squabbling over a private matter, the dear boss letters are 'fake', even Mr John Ross the curator of the 'Black Museum' can write similar to the 'Dear Boss' letters! and he must have been born at least 50 years after the ripper murders.Just to add, it's interesting about the watch that turned up with the 'ripper diary' with the intitals on the front 'J. O' (James Oliver?) that had the victims initials scratched on it, where the initals for Catherine Eddowes were C.B for Catherine Beddowes obviously taken from the newspaper at the time, as at first they listed Catherine as Beddowes rather than Eddowes. By the way does anyone know, if anyone has been charged for the fraudulent creation of the 'Ripper Diary?'. I'll get back to you with info on the research of Austin. After all i'd like to write my own book on 'Jack the Ripper'. |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 598
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 29, 2004 - 8:21 pm: | |
Anyone suppose this could possibly be our man? I personally think it's unlikely, but the time frame is at least plausible. The main problem is that the obituary indicates that he rejoined the Hussars at the onset of WWII, when our man would be at least 65 years old. It also seems to indicate that this man was in his boyhood forty years prior, or about 1900.
Andy S.
The Times Sept. 5, 1941
 |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
