|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Chris Scott
Detective Sergeant
Username: Chris
Post Number: 78
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 02, 2003 - 1:30 pm: | 
|
Sheboygan Press (Wisconsin) 1 December 1910
 |
R.J. Palmer
Sergeant
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 50
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 02, 2003 - 4:36 pm: |
|
Chris--Hi. Thanks for this interesting article. The name 'Shaw' rang a bell, and I dug the following out of my files. It doesn't quite fit with your suspect Shaw, but I thought I'd post it anyway. Cheers.
'A Mysterious Prisoner'
Arrest of a Steerage Passenger for Wife Murder.
[New York, Nov.23]--A mysterious individual was arrested as he alighted from the steamer Wyoming yesterday. He was a steerage passenger, and registered the name "James Shaw." He was arrested on a cable message from England to the British Consul-General, Mr. Hoare. The dispatch asked that steerate passenger James Shaw be detained, as he was really James Pennock, of Pickering, North Riding, Yorkshire, England, and that he had murdered his wife on November 7. He was described as 47 years of age, 5 feet 7 inches in height, with "ginger" whiskers and hair, and having a proturbance on his head the size of a walnut.
Deputy Marshal Fed. Bernhardt took charge of James Shaw, who protested his innocence and declared that he had kissed his wife good-bye on November 9 at Leeds, near which town he lived. He was going west, and had $5. He was locked up in Ludlow Street Jail, pending further instructions from England.
Shaw somewhat answered the description of "Jack the Ripper," and there was in his pocket an illustrated account of the Whitechapel horror, but Marshal Bernhardt pumped his prisoner in his own peculiar way and satisfied himself that Shaw was not the "Ripper."
Shaw admits that that is an assumed name, his real name being Heddington, but he declines to say why he is travelling incognito.
There is no "walnut" on his head, and no scar where it might have been, and he is two inches shorter than the Yorkshire man. He cannot read nor write, and is rather confused in his accounting for the presence in his pocket of the newspaper containing the Whitechapel story.
___________
The Philadelphia Record, Nov. 24, 1888. |
Andrew Spallek
Police Constable
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 7
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 3:31 pm: |
|
I just attempted to post this and lost the whole thing. Let me try again.
I think it quite possible that the Jack Shaw arrested in Los Angeles in 1910 may have been the James Shaw arrested on arrival in New York in Nov. 1888. Note that this James Shaw was said to be heading west and carried Whitechapel muder newsclippings with him and that Jack Shaw is said to have arrived from England "several years earlier" i.e., several years before 1910 (1888?). What to make of this?
James Shaw was arrested on arrival in New York at the request of London Police, who thought he was Pennock, a known killer (who was Pennock anyway?). A US Marshal "pumped" (interrogated) him and satisfied himself that Shaw was not JTR (why?) -- and certainly not Pennock. Apparently Scotland Yard lost interest, perhaps because he was not the man (Pennock) they were looking for.
So we may have a man on the fringe of sanity, managing to get along marginally in society for several years. This is consistent with the personality of many serial killers. Several things strike me: 1. Shaw leaves England just as the murders stop. 2. Shaw bears a resemblance to witness descriptions of JTR -- though a bit younger (50 in 1910, i.e. 28 in 1888). 3. Shaw is fascinated with the Whitechapel killings (true both in 1888 arrest and 1910 arrest). 4. Police in New York and Los Angeles have reason to check into his being JTR.
It would be interesting to find out:
1. whether Shaw can be placed in Whitechapel (or at least in London) in Autumn 1888.
2. what he was doing between 1888 and 1910.
3. what happened to him after his incarceration in the LA mental hospital in 1910.
Andy
|
Andrew Spallek
Police Constable
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 9
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 4:09 pm: |
|
I should also say something about the ages given in these articles. There is an age of 47 given in the Philadelphia Record article above. However, a close reading reveals that this was Pennock's age, not Shaw's. Could Shaw have been mistaken for a man nearly 20 years his elder? Possibly, especially if Shaw looked older than he was. Furthermore, the Sheboygan article above says that Jack Shaw was "fifty" in 1910. This seems to me to be an approximation based on a reporter's observation or an offhand comment made to the reporter. Also, if the information was given by Shaw himself, he may have been lying. It could well be that the man arrested in LA in 1910 was closer to 60, which would have made him 38 in 1888, much closer to Pennock's age and exactly the right age to be a Ripper suspect.
Lots of "if's," I know.
Andy
|
Chris Scott
Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 221
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 7:11 pm: |
|
From the info in the Philadephia I think I have traced our man Pennock:
1881 census
14 Pennyman Street
Ormesby
York
Head:
James Pennock
Born 1839 in Sunderland, Durham
Iron Dresser
Wife:
Hannah Pennock
Born 1861 in Port Clarence, Durham
This is the only match on name, age range and York location
Chris
|
Andrew Spallek
Sergeant
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 29
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 07, 2003 - 1:33 pm: |
|
Anyone in a position to research the "Jack Shaw" that was arrested in Los Angeles on or about 4 December, 1910? Anything in the LA papers about it? Census records would be difficult given the common name.
Andy
|
R.J. Palmer
Detective Sergeant
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 93
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 07, 2003 - 10:36 pm: |
|
Andrew--While on a recent visit to Sacramento, I looked in the Los Angeles Times, but couldn't find the story. I was strapped for time, however, and didn't have a chance to check too many dates in late November, 1910...I agree that this would be interesting to chase down. All the best, RP |
Chris Scott
Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 285
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 08, 2003 - 8:33 am: |
|
Hi Andrew
Apart from the article I posted at the head of this thread, there is another at
http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/atlanta_constitution/101204.html
By the way, the Sheboygan Press article at the head of the thread is misdated - it should read 5 December and not 1 December
If the age stated is accurate - 50 years old in 1910 - then he would have been born around 1860 (i.e. 28 years of old at the time of the murders).
In the 1880 US Census he would have been 20 years old (or possible 19 as this took place much earlier in the year than the arrest which was in December)
In that Census there are 23 Jack Shaw's but only one is registered as born in 1860. His details are as follows:
JACK SHAW
Born in Texas in 1860
Age 20
Occupation: Day hand
Race: Black
Head of Household: J C Shaw, Restaurant Keeper
Address: Precinct 5, Fannin, Texas
There were only two others near in age, one born in 1862 (Single black Turpentine worker from Santee, South Carolina) and one born in 1857 (Married black Farm Worker from Harrison, Texas)
I will be looking at the Ellis Island archives in case he emigrated to the US after 1880
Regards
Chris
|
Andrew Spallek
Sergeant
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 36
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 08, 2003 - 10:53 am: |
|
Thanks, Chris for your work. We have to remember several things. "Jack" is probably not his given name. Normally I would assume that Jack is a nickname for John. However, it could also be James. This fits with our James Shaw who arrived in New York in Nov. 1888, in which case you won't find him being born in America.
But his statement that he fled from England 15 years ago would seem to place his arrival in about 1895 (although he does not say that he came directly to America). One has to remember that Shaw was seemingly on the borderline of lucidity and "15 years" might be an approximation which would not exclude his arriving in New York in 1888. Nevertheless, this is damaging to our theory of his being one and the same James Shaw.
The Ellis Island records (which I have not examined in detail yet) do list a John Shaw from Belfast as having arrived from Liverpool in 1903 at the age of 41. He was married at the time. This would be a good fit, but would presumably exclude his being the James Shaw who arrived in 1888 (unless he returned to Europe in the interim, which is unlikely). [There is also an Irishman John Shaw who arrived from Londonerry in 1901 but at the age of 29 at the time, he is a bit young].
Andy
|
Chris Scott
Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 475
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 11, 2003 - 11:32 am: |
|
Hi
I have found another version of the Shaw story - very similar to the Philadelphia Record article posted above.
This one is from the Frederick News of 26 November 1888
Chris
 |
emma
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, November 02, 2003 - 12:52 pm: |
|
i think this man is the original killer but what i want to know is if the letter signed jack the ripper wasn't a hoax where did he get the jack from |
Anna Beaumont
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 2:17 pm: |
|
Seeing the name "Shaw" here gave me a fright. I've been researching my ancestors, and was surprised to learn my great-great-grandfather Robert Augustus Shaw was born in Whitechapel in 1830. His father John Shaw was a butcher, as was Robert. Robert came to Australia c.1860. I have no idea how many siblings/relatives he had.
Very very interesting; I've always had a morbid interest in Jack the Ripper too. Chances are so did "Jack Shaw". |
Ned
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 30, 2005 - 1:06 pm: |
|
Hidely Ho, Niebourinos
How many nutters out there have an interest in Jack the ripper? There could be thousands, or millions. He is a household name everywhere in the world.As I have said with Fogelma,Sickert, and others - they were just 'nutcases 'fixated with the 'king of nutcases'. Okaly Dokaly!
Ned Flanders |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
