|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Maura
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 3:26 pm: | 
|
This is neither here nor there, but just out of curiosity I'd love to see a head count of people who think Jack the Ripper is none of the above...as in Suspected Suspects, or this list of people most commonly accused.
I would have put this in the Suspects thread but there is not area for: Others.
Though there are many good possibilities in the proscribed and most incisive list of possible perpetrators, I often like to partake of foods not on the menu when I go to a restaurant.
So too with thinking outside the brown wrapping paper, on Jack and his retinue and this unwieldy package of solutions.
So please vote..as Ripperphiles, and give me some idea of how the cognescenti really feel on this matter. Have all cards already been turned over in this game of Blackjack or are some still holed up never to be played?
Thank you to any who are willing to post their thoughts! |
Scott Medine
Detective Sergeant
Username: Sem
Post Number: 58
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 8:25 am: |
|
Not on the list of suspects.
Peace,
Scott |
Maura
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 10:31 am: |
|
Thanks, Scott!
One small step for "a" man, one giant step for mankind...Neil Armstrong said it wrong.
M |
Marie Finlay
Detective Sergeant
Username: Marie
Post Number: 113
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 1:06 pm: |
|
Hi Maura,
I think Jack is on the list of suspects, and my own top suspect is up there. But I can't commit to that 100%
I think it's also possible that he was someone we've heard of from the investigation- but that he was never suspected of the crimes, himself.
So can I vote 'almost sure', regarding list of suspects? |
Neal Shelden
Sergeant
Username: Neal
Post Number: 39
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 3:52 pm: |
|
Hi Maura,
I honestly believe that Jack the Ripper hasn't been named yet. The only one of the named that I feel has a chance of being proved to be JTR is George Hutchinson, but I get the feeling that if research finds the real GH he'll be off the list too?
So I think Jack the Ripper is still out there to be found, and I don't believe it's out of the question that he will be. I expect he lived within distance of the murder sites in 1888, and before that time. Elizabeth Long, Joseph Lawende, and probably Israel Schwartz saw him.
I feel that his name exists somewhere in the Police Court records, or Lunatic Asylum or Workhouse records.
I would bet that in 50 years time the number of named suspects for JTR would've doubled from it's current number.
All the best.
Neal
|
Maura
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 2:13 pm: |
|
Dear Marie,
You most certainly can vote "almost sure" and by the way, I've read many of your posts and really appreciate all your most astute deteective work concerning your own top suspect, who most assuredly is a good bet and one of my faves from the most wanted list.
Thanks so much for jumping in the fray!
|
Marie Finlay
Detective Sergeant
Username: Marie
Post Number: 124
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 10:55 am: |
|
Hi Maura,
Thanks so much for your kind words! Although I'm not so sure my detective work is any good at all. I think I'm just opinionated. And stubborn. 
But I'd like to return the compliment, by saying I do most assuredly enjoy your posts, and look forward to exchanging ideas with you.
Cheers,
-M.
|
Monty
Sergeant
Username: Monty
Post Number: 33
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 11:41 am: |
|
Maura,
Should have been on the list of suspects...at the time !
Monty
 |
Pettifogger
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, April 25, 2003 - 5:14 pm: |
|
I don't think the real JtR has been named by anyone. I feel he made it to McKenzie and Coles so that eliminates some of the already named suspects on this list via the timeline. |
Maura
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, April 25, 2003 - 3:07 pm: |
|
Thanks for weighing in, Sergeants Neal and Monty!
Neal, your prediction that..:
"I would bet that in 50 years time the number of named suspects for JTR would've doubled from it's current number."
..is so on the money.
Reminds me of Andy Warhol saying in the Sixties that everyone in the future would be famous for 15 minutes, and in this era of reality programming, how prescient he was...
|
R.J. Palmer
Sergeant
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 40
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 26, 2003 - 12:02 pm: |
|
I suspect that there were actually several independent hands involved in the series, and that Barnett, Kidney, Sadler, and Kosminski can never be entirely exonerated from having committed specific murders.
But I also agree with something Donald Rumbelow once said: the murderer of the canonical victims had an enormous ego. I find it difficult to believe that he didn't give the game away at some point. We know the name; we just need to recognize it. RP |
Jeffrey Bloomfied
Sergeant
Username: Mayerling
Post Number: 29
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 27, 2003 - 8:46 pm: |
|
I suspect that it goes either way - and I won't
take a stand. We may have the actual killer's
name in front of us, or we might not. Problem
is, for all the clues we have they are not strong
enough to concentrate on one suspect over all
others.
Also, given the propensity of choosing a favorite
suspect and just pushing that one, it is hard to
imagine that the list of potential suspects is
closed as of yet.
Jeff |
JackbeNimble
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, July 13, 2003 - 5:51 pm: |
|
Hello all, I am new to casebooks but not to Jack the Ripper. I have been playing with the thoughts of who in the list may have been the ripper for many years and have come to the conclusion that its none of the above. I do believe, however, that one from the list played an indirect role in helping the ripper. I am currently working on a theory as to "WHY" Jack the Ripper killed and "WHY" he chose prostitutes as the victims. |
Monty
Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 182
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2003 - 8:14 am: |
|
JbN,
I would have thought he chose prostitutes because they were easy victims.
Monty
 |
James Eric Carter
Police Constable
Username: Archangel261973
Post Number: 4
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 21, 2003 - 3:01 pm: |
|
I must agree with Jeff, there is no hard evidence to say who the killer was and as such I'll not take a stand either way.
The killer may or may not be listed and untill we have rock hard evidence one way or the other, the killer could have been any one in London from June 1888 - December 1888 and that is just for the canticle victims.
Eric |
Aydan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, August 25, 2003 - 12:26 am: |
|
Have any of the Police Doctors been considered? I think Phillips knew too much. Also, I read that when Abberline retired, he was given the case notes, is this true? If so, why was this the case?
My suspects:
Frederick Abberline
Dr George Baxter Phillips
Wynne Edward Baxter
Any thoughts?
|
Birgitte Breemerkamp
Sergeant
Username: Birgittesc
Post Number: 12
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 1:14 pm: |
|
I'm still puzzled why everybody - then and now - thinks so lightly about the skills that JTR obviously must've had to remove the organs the way he did. Especially considering the fact he had a) a bad angle (having to 'operate' on the crouched on the street instead of behind an operating table) and b) an inappropriate knife for doing the mutilations (don't discount that too easily!).
The doctors who did the post mortems sometimes expressed they were impressed by the skills of the killer, but somehow the police - and seemingly most people who study/studied the case - dismiss this and state JTR was probably some common lad or a butcher or something.
Why weren't all doctors, surgeons and all people with sufficient anatomical knowledge and skills considered a suspect? I'm still convinced the killer hided in that circle of people (mostly upper class thus less suspicious apparently), where the police hardly looked (Sir William Gull also wasn't suspected at the time, was he?).
I mean, from history (even recent history  ) we've learnt that medical folks kill too...
Birgitte |
Christopher T George
Chief Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 816
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 2:26 pm: |
|
Hi, Birgitte
In fact, the police then, and writers on the case now, don't discount the possibility that a medical man might have been responsible.
It seems as if the doctors who carried out the post mortems on the victims were evenly divided on the idea of whether the killer had some type of anatomical skill which might have implied training.
Suspects at the time of the murders and subsequently named suspects, either mentioned in memoranda by top policemen at the time or later and by later authors all include medical men.
Birgitte, for your information, the European Editor for Ripperologist, Eduardo Zinna, has an editorial on the topic in the soon to be published issue of our magazine (July 2004). Eduardo also notes how the contemporary and later suspicion that Jack could have been a doctor has continued through into fiction and drama.
Best regards
Chris George
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
Maria Giordano
Detective Sergeant
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 52
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 2:57 pm: |
|
I think we're on the right trail when we look for neighborhood people such as Kosminski, Cohen etc and for that reason "none of the above" certainly ranks high on my list.
Mags
|
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 122
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 4:31 pm: |
|
Birgitte.
There are different aspects to consider on the subject of whether the killer had medical knowledge or not.
Firstly, the cutting displayed no great skill, but the apparent awareness as to position of certain organs suggested some knowledge of anatomy, but nothing greater than any butcher might have developed.
The lack of precision in cutting was suggested by Dr Philips to have been "in consequence of haste", he therefore acknowledged that no matter how skillfull a surgeon may be, once he is working against the clock in less than adequate light he is not likely to display any great evidence of surgical skill.
Having said all that, if you ever get the chance to read up on field surgeons attached to the military, I'm thinking specifically of the American Civil War, you would be dismayed at the speed at which they worked and the primitive conditions they operated under. Their speed an efficiency would put any public surgeon to shame.
If it turns out that Jack was a doctor/surgeon my bet is he saw service on the battlefield, however, thats a bit exotic. The reality is likely more mundane, until & unless the culprit is ever identified I would stay away from the doctor theory.
Regards, Jon |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, February 17, 2005 - 2:50 am: |
|
As far as an unknown suspect..
Frederic William Wilkinson,the deputy at 56 Flower & Dean St.,Cooney's, interest me as a suspect.
He is cited in a newspaper article as living in Bricklane,Spitalfields.Polly Nichols was seen walking in
Bricklane before going to Buck's Row.There is a chance the man seen talking with Anne Chapman in Hanury St. came from Bricklane,probably going to the just- opened Spitalfields Market. 22 days
after Anne Chapman the Ripper has'nt killed.Kate Eddowes came back from hop-picking just 2 days.Fred said in the inquest John Kelly told him between 7-8 p.m.(although Kate was seen and sent to jail by a cop at 8:30 p.m.) that Kate was in jail and would be out in the following morning because she was caught in city proper(he could have known this fact).He knew her.It was an oppurtunity and it was the first time a victim's face was defaced.Kate was killed only 45 minutes after she went out of jail.
|
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, February 17, 2005 - 2:46 am: |
|
As far as an unknown suspect..
Frederic William Wilkinson,the deputy at 56 Flower & Dean St.,Cooney's, interest me as a suspect.
He is cited in a newspaper article as living in Bricklane,Spitalfields.Polly Nichols was seen walking in
Bricklane before going to Buck's Row.There is a chance the man seen talking with Anne Chapman in Hanury St. came from Bricklane,probably going to the just- opened Spitalfields Market. 22 days
after Anne Chapman the Ripper has'nt killed.Kate Eddowes came back from hop-picking just 2 days.Fred said in the inquest John Kelly told him between 7-8 p.m.(although Kate was seen and sent to jail by a cop at 8:30 p.m.) that Kate was in jail and would be out in the following morning because she was caught in city proper(he could have known this fact).He knew her.It was an oppurtunity and it was the first time a victim's face was defaced.
|
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, February 17, 2005 - 1:13 am: |
|
Hi.As far as an unknown suspect..
Frederic William Wilkinson,the deputy at 56 Flower & Dean St.,Cooney's interest me as a suspect.
He is cited in a newspaper article as living in Bricklane,Spitalfields.Polly Nichols is seen walking in Bricklane before going to Buck's Row.There is a chance the man seen talking with Anne Chapman in Hanury St. came from Bricklane,probably going to the just- opened Spitalfields Market. 22 days after Anne Chapman the Ripper has'nt killed.Kate Eddowes came back from hop-picking just 2 days.Fred said in the inquest John Kelly told him between 7-8 p.m.(although Kate was seen and sent to jail by a cop at 8:30 p.m.) that Kate was in jail and would be out in the following morning because she was caught in city proper(he could have known this fact).It was an oppurtunity.
But i know very little of him.
|
AIP
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, February 17, 2005 - 6:23 pm: |
|
What was that about if you say something three times then it must be true?
(Hunting of the Snark or something like that). |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, February 18, 2005 - 1:41 am: |
|
It took only 45 minutes for Eddowes to be killed after she got out of jail.There is a chance somebody was waiting.The direction Eddowes apron was dropped was toward where his victims lived.
On the first 2 mutilations,Nichols & Chapman, Bricklane seems to be the main road on which the killer found his victims.
The conversation at past 5:15 a.m. "Will you"---"yes" or "alright" means a "short-time" talk and meeting.Still has'nt been decided if Anne is gonna "do it" or not.If they walked towards 29 Hanbury I would think that the above question has already been settled.Also the killer won't risk a long conversation..
It's unlikely that not knowing who and where his victim is gonna be,the killer is (still)looking for a victim near the market of all places, near sunrise with Spitafields Market open and workers and buyers already there are or are coming.
There is a chance the killer must have been going to the just-opened busy Spitalfields Market from Bricklane.So the killer might have lived north of Bricklane and Hanbury Street.
|
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, February 19, 2005 - 1:37 am: |
|
Sorry for the repeated posts.
The conversation at past 5:15 a.m. "Will you"---"yes" or "alright" means a" short- time"talk and meeting.Still has'nt been decided if Anne is gonna "do it" or not.If they walked towards 29 Hanbury I would think that the above question has already been settled.Also the killer won't risk a long conversation..
It appears less likely...not knowing who and where his victim is gonna be,the killer is (still) looking for a victim near the market of all places, near sunrise with Spitafields Market open and busy and workers and buyers already there are or are coming out.
On the first 2 mutilations,Nichols & Chapman, Bricklane seems to be the main road on which the killer found his victims.
It might possibly have been a chance meeting.
There is a chance the killer must have been going to the just-opened Spitalfields Market from Bricklane.So the killer might have lived north or east of Bricklane and Hanbury Street. At least the previous night.A 10-15... minutes walk perhaps. |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, February 17, 2005 - 9:55 pm: |
|
On the first 2 mutilations,Nichols & Chapman, Bricklane seems to be the main road on which the killer finds his victims.
Kate was killed only 45 minutes after she went out of jail.There is a chance somebody was waiting.
Also the direction Eddowes apron was dropped was towards where the 4 victims live. |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, February 20, 2005 - 12:06 am: |
|
Another thing that he is new or from near Whtechapel is, he's in a way kinda confident he won't be identified by any of the witnesse(Long,Lawende,etc.). |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, February 21, 2005 - 8:51 am: |
|
It is interesting to note that 2 days after Eddowes came back from hop-picking she was killed.2 days after Maria Harvey stopped staying in Kelly's room Mary Jane was killed.The killer have to be livng or working in Flower & Dean or Dorset St. to have or come upon these kinds of information.With increase patrols the manner in which he chose his victims became more limited.He was quick to act. |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, February 21, 2005 - 6:39 pm: |
|
There were 1200 unfortunates (Met estimate-Oct. 1888) in Whitechapel at that time,the possibility of only one victim not coming from Flower & Dean and Dorset St. is "enormous", if it were random killings. After some changes after Chapman's murder,more police presence,vigilante groups,amaateur detectives,news ,resident's awareness,the victims still came from these 2 streets. |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, February 20, 2005 - 3:57 am: |
|
The other main road, as far as going in and out,is Old Montague St.(perhaps even likelier than Brick lane).Just a thought- it's possible he must have taken the shortest route to Spitalfields market through Hanbury St. |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - 8:02 pm: |
|
It is interesting to note that 2 days after Eddowes came back from hop-picking she was killed.2 days after Maria Harvey stopped staying in Kelly's room Mary Jane was killed.The killer have to be livng or working in Flower & Dean or Dorset St. to have or come uponor happen upon these kinds of information.With increase patrols the manner in which he chose his victims became more limited.Kind of quick to act.
There were 1200 unfortunates (Met estimate-Oct. 1888) in Whitechapel at that time,the possibility of only one victim not coming from Flower & Dean and Dorset St. is" enormous", if it were random killings. After some changes after Chapman's murder,more police presence,vigilante groups, amateur detectives,news ,resident's awareness,the victims still came from these 2 streets.He was tied-up to these 2 streets.Of a permanent kind.If he was a lodger he could have gone to other places.Same thing if he lived elsewhere. |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, February 19, 2005 - 11:16 pm: |
|
Sorry for the repeated post.If i don't see it on the boards I post it again.A mistake.
If you include Martha Tabram, George Yard is a block from Brick lane.Brick lane is probably his way in and way out.It's not far-off to say that north Brick lane is one of the target when he run from Mitre Square.Probably he came from Bethnal Green.He is probably a new resident.The significance of Fridays-Sundays and Dorset St. & Flower & Dean St. is,is probably, he used a common sense approach to seeking the most desperate(drunk) unfortunates and that is to find them in the worst streets and on Friday and weekends.Also "will you'-"alright" means a new customer. |
Jeff Leahy
Sergeant
Username: Jeffl
Post Number: 12
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, February 24, 2005 - 12:36 pm: |
|
Sorry to disagree but surely Whitechappel Road was the most likely place that Nichols met her killer not Brick Lane.
Jeff |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, February 24, 2005 - 9:32 pm: |
|
As far as the police watching Flower & Dean and Dorset St.,or the nature of it,in the early morning hours when MJK was killed no cop was there. |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, February 24, 2005 - 3:31 pm: |
|
Jeff,
You might be right.It's a toss-up.I remain open.
If i might add Frederic Wilkinson worked alone.There was no mention of an assistant,in the newspaper and in the inquest.Eddowes hand on the
man's chest suggest familiarity with the man.Although it's not uncommon.I assume with clients.
Also after Chapman's murder,with all the changes
in the community,mobility was'nt the killer's best option,but oppurtunity was. |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 01, 2005 - 3:33 pm: |
|
The Daily Telegraph says referring to 1:00 a.m.-
2:00 a.m.-No stranger come in then".I don't know which is more accurate.He could account for John Kelly not leaving between 10:00 p.m.-12:00 a.m.(known him for years-good memory of him),
1:00 a.m.-2:00 a.m.and 3:00 a.m. but not 2:00 a.m.
to 3:00 a.m..When he returned,maybe to verify,there were only x's for the beds taken.He should have known this.
Maybe I'm just seeing a mirage.
|
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 01, 2005 - 1:38 am: |
|
ideal time to kill,I think
2:30-2:35 a.m.-in MJK's murder sighted by Sarah Lewis checking the murder sight
2:30 a.m.-Nichols-last sighted by friend
Chapman-possible chance meeting or sighting
Eddowes-different...early.
The Star
LONDON. THURSDAY, 4 OCTOBER, 1888.
Eddowes inquest.
Frederick W Wilkinson -deputy of the lodging-house
A Juror: Is it usual to have your house open at two in the morning? - Yes, till about half-past two. |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, February 27, 2005 - 6:13 am: |
|
Killer's MO
Eddowes- in 45 minutes killed
Nichols-last sighted-2:30 a.m.-killed in 45 minutes to 75 minutes
Kelly-Mary Cox's return 3:00 a.m.to Oh! murder cry
-45 minutes to 1 hour killed
Chapman-possible chance meeting or seen passing Spitalfields Market
ideal time to kill
Eddowes-different...early.
2:30-2:35 a.m.-in MJK's murder sighted by Sarah Lewis
2:30 a.m.-Nichols-last sighted by friend
Chapman-possible chance meeting or sighting
Eddowes killed within time-frame of 45-75 minutes but not within time of day.She was a different oppurtunity. |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 01, 2005 - 6:52 pm: |
|
sorry for the bits and pieces above..
If I look at the sequence of events Flower & Dean St. is the main street where the victims come from
not Dorset St.,it seems.Polly Nichols came from a doss-house there,Chapman(from Dorset St.) likely was a chance meeting or sighting,next is Eddowes again from Flower & Dean,and then MJK from Dorset St.. |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 01, 2005 - 7:01 am: |
|
Ripper's ideal time to kill,I think..
2:30-2:35 a.m.-in MJK's murder sighted by Sarah Lewis checking the murder sight.
2:30 a.m.-Nichols-last sighted by friend
Chapman-possible chance meeting or sighting
Eddowes-different...early.
The Star
LONDON. THURSDAY, 4 OCTOBER, 1888.
Eddowes inquest.
Frederick W Wilkinson -deputy of the lodging-house
-A Juror: Is it usual to have your house open at two in the morning? - Yes, till about half-past two.
- I am quite positive Kelly did not go out again on Saturday evening after coming in at about ten.
-Can you tell me whether any one came into your lodging-house, either a stranger or anyone you knew, and took a bed between one and two? - No,I don't think so.
-And cannot you tell me if any one of them came in about two on Sunday morning? - I cannot.
-Two detectives came about three.
-Can you tell me whether when you saw deceased on Saturday she was wearing an apron? - I believe she was.
All those also make me think about Wilkinson and also the night of Eddowes murder.In a newspaper article it was written he said he was busy after 12:00 a.m..I could be all wrong.It could have been just an ordinary day for him. |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, March 04, 2005 - 3:26 am: |
|
Just Thinking
If I look at the sequence of events Flower & Dean St. is the main street where the victims came from
not Dorset St.,it seems.Polly Nichols came from a doss-house there,Chapman(from Dorset St.) likely was a chance meeting or sighting,next is Eddowes again from Flower & Dean,and then MJK from Dorset St..
ideal time to kill,I think
2:30-2:35 a.m.-in MJK's murder sighted by Sarah Lewis checking the murder sight
2:30 a.m.-Nichols-last sighted by friend
Chapman-possible chance meeting or sighting
Eddowes-different...early.
In an article on doss-houses,12:00 a.m.,3:00 a.m,and all night.were mentioned as times of closing.
The Star
LONDON. THURSDAY, 4 OCTOBER, 1888.
Eddowes inquest.
Frederick W Wilkinson -deputy of the lodging-house
A Juror: Is it usual to have your house open at two in the morning? - Yes, till about half-past two.
----I think there is something wrong with Frederic Wilkinson's testimony in the inquest
In theThe Daily Telegraph, Friday, October 5, 1888, Page 3
Mr. Crawford: Did any one come into your lodging-house and take a bed between one and two o'clock on the Sunday morning? - No stranger came in then.
[Crawford] Did anyone come into your lodging-house about two o'clock on Sunday morning whom you did not recognise? - I cannot say; I could tell by my book, which can soon be produced.
---BUT
The deputy was dispatched for his book, with which after an interval he returned. It merely showed, however, that there were fifty-two beds occupied in the house on Saturday night. There were only six strangers. He could not say whether any one took a bed about two o'clock on Sunday morning.
Can you tell me whether any one came into your lodging-house, either a stranger or anyone you knew, and took a bed between one and two? - No, I don't think so. Two detectives came about three.
---AND in the Star, THURSDAY, 4 OCTOBER, 1888.
Can you by referring to your books see if any one came in between one and two? - Yes, by my books.
---WILKINSON,the lodging-house deputy, had by this time returned
Does your book enable you to say whether any person came in about two on Sunday morning? - It does not indicate what time anyone would come in.
No register is kept of names of any kind? - No, sir. It's all done by crosses and numbers.
He was asked,depending on which newspaper,if someone came in at a certain time and his answer is to the effect that he could answer this by his book but the book does'nt answer the question.
(Presumably there would be a different marking for a regular and a stranger and also 1:00 a.m.-3:00 a.m. would indicate a different day)
He should or would have known that the book would'nt indicate the time.
If anything this is a daily occurence.And he was a deputy for years(if the time he'd known Kelly and Eddowes would indicate that).And ,I strongly assume,there would have been a one way of logging lodgers. |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, March 06, 2005 - 4:39 pm: |
|
(courtesy of Chris Scott and David O'Flaherty)
Wilkinson in the 1891 census, listed at 55 Flower and Dean Street, listed as a lodging house.
His entry reads as follows:
Frederick W Wilkinson
Married
Aged 35
Lodging House Manager
Born Manchester
His wife was Mary A Wilkinson, aged 24 born Whitechapel.
No children are listed. |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, March 07, 2005 - 4:41 am: |
|
The Flower & Dean St. victim's doss-houses are next to each other one of them being Wilkinson's.
With Wilkinson as a suspect a lot of little things connect to each other. |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, March 06, 2005 - 5:14 am: |
|
Moderator,can you please delete this posts,
February 17, 2005 - 2:50 am:
February 17, 2005 - 1:13 am:
February 18, 2005 - 1:41 am:
February 17, 2005 - 9:55 pm:
February 20, 2005 - 12:06 am:
February 21, 2005 - 6:39 pm:
February 20, 2005 - 3:57 am:
February 19, 2005 - 11:16 pm:
March 01, 2005 - 3:33 pm:
March 01, 2005 - 1:38 am:
February 27, 2005 - 6:13 am:
March 01, 2005 - 6:52 pm:
March 01, 2005 - 7:01 am:
I've messed up this thread..thanks |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, March 06, 2005 - 1:56 pm: |
|
It appears to me like he was nervous,and his retrieiving the log book to determine if anyone came in at a particular time was a show. |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, March 07, 2005 - 11:38 am: |
|
It appears to me like he was nervous,his recollection of at least one of the hours between 1:00 a.m.-3:00 a.m. is uneasy and his retrieiving the log book to determine if anyone came in at a particular time was a show. |
beef
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 4:12 am: |
|
I very strongly suspect it is none of the above, and someone upthread came eerily close to my own conclusion. I also suspect it is common knowledge in some quarters. |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 12:21 pm: |
|
With Wilkinson the concidence,and this may only point to a "local man",that 2 days after Eddowes returned from hop-picking and Maria Harvey leaving MJK's room both of them were killed, is'nt surprising.I'm maybe wrong but those coincidences and the 22 days interval after Chapman's murder when Eddowes was killed and 39 days interval after Eddowes murder when MJK was killed gives the impression that the killer became cautious and selective,after Chapman's murder,and just waited(also after Eddowes murder MJK would'nt have been a target and he would'nt have known MJK would split with Barnett),although when he got a target he was brazen.
On when drunks,like Eddowes on that night,are released from Bishopsgate police station,the testimony of Constable George Henry Hutt, 968, City Police:"I am gaoler at Bishopsgate station. On the night of Saturday, Sept. 29, at a quarter to ten o'clock, I took over our prisoners, among them the deceased. I visited her several times until five minutes to one on Sunday morning. The inspector, being out visiting, I was directed by Sergeant Byfield to see if any of the prisoners were fit to be discharged."(THE DAILY TELEGRAPH
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1888)is telling on the norm. |
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 7:05 am: |
|
It crossed my mind that after only two days since Maria Harvey vacated MJK's room,the killer went for Mary Kelly.He must have already known that there was no police or vigilante activities in Dorset St.He must have had a good eye on who are the regulars and who are the transients.Or he knows some people there who told him.Prior to MJK's split with Barnett(a month after Eddowes),MJK woul'nt have been a target so the ripper would have no"business"there.
Unless he lived in the neighborhood.
After the Chapman murder with the increased police activity,vigilantees,residents awareness(mobs,etc.)the ripper was cautious,selective and just waited(he would'nt have known MJK would split with Barnett). |
Restless Spirit
Sergeant
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 44
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 8:35 am: |
|
Zxcter
Jack did not necessariley live in Whitechapel, he may have worked there, or even outside of Whitechapel for that matter. He may have frequented the pubs in Whitechapel looking for his victims. What better place to hear all the gossip (aside from hairdressers or barber shops) When people are drinking they (we) tend to get quite a bit louder, and generally everyone hears the juicy stuff. He may have overheard Mary's friends discussing her situation, since pretty well all of the victims frequented the pubs and I do not doubt that many of the prostitutes knew each other ,be it causual or otherwise.
There again are pros & cons for HIM living in the area, as well as not. The whole case of Jack the Ripper is full of pros, cons, ifs, buts and maybes etc, etc.
Maybe one day we will know for sure.
regards
Restless Spirit
|
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, April 15, 2005 - 3:01 am: |
|
Yes,that's a good point Spirit,all the gossip and all that.And yes there are lot's of possibilities.
The line between certain evidence and theorizing,it's tempting sometimes to go to the latter.Part of it,maybe,due to a lack of more facts. |
RIGEL
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 07, 2005 - 9:17 pm: |
|
National geographic recently sent a program about
profiling..with Paul Britton, Brad More, Neil Trainer++
Apparently to the new successive geographic profiling
system RIGEL, which successfully had pin-pointed
now a-days killers. (they did not say how often it failed!)
Applied on jack the ripper case it pointed out crossing
of Flower, Dean and "thrall?" as most likely.
(not sure how RIGEL work, if its only threatassement
I guess the poverty-map might be just a good source..
hence RIGEL does not add anything new??)
However if true they claimed that none of the 1880
suspect fitted. |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
