|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| |
Thread |
Last Poster |
Posts |
Pages |
Last Post |
  | Archive through May 01, 2005 | David O'Flaherty | 50 | 1 | 5-01-05 7:11 pm |
| |
 Closed: New threads not accepted on this page |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1867
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 4:43 am: | 
|
Just thinking on the merchant seaman factor:As someone has already pointed out the Goulston Street Apron piece doesn"t fit the theory at all.
It was 2am or thereabouts and the ripper had just committed the Mitre Square murder [if not the Berner Street one].
Why go in the opposite direction to his ship?
He had the cover of night to help over blood stains until he found one of the water pumps or troughs,many still dotted about Whitechapel.In fact there is still the old spring and water tap just outside Mitre Square so he wouldnt have had to go far, although that one would have been a bit too public possibly.
Anyway there are still Victorian and pre Victorian water pumps dotted about Whitechapel where he could have found other doorways nearby to clean his knife, deposit the cloth and possibly wash his hands without having to head in completely the opposite direction to where his ship was docked.
Natalie
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2028
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 5:41 pm: |
|
As much as I may dislike this volume, I am always willing to give credit where credit is due, and where Mr Marriot bangs on about murder victims leaving the mortuary in a vastly different state than they arrived, I must agree.
We must merely take the case of Edward Thomas, pauper surgeon for Whitechapel in 1856, who actually sold the head of one his murder victims to the London Hospital. In his defence he said that he had been doing it for some time and he had a disease of the brain which permitted him no other course than to sell heads and then publish his memoirs of this to make loads of money.
Actually and seriously folks, Guy's Hospital of London were up to their necks in this in 1871.
Buying heads I mean.
Seriously.
|
Howard Brown
Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 362
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 6:49 pm: |
|
...and Mr. Marriott may also have been aware of the pauper surgeon, Edward Thomas....as you were, A.P..... |
Tim
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 5:41 pm: |
|
i tried posting this before but i don't believe it worked so i'll give it another shot....
i believe the killer took eddowes kindney and carried it away in the apron piece. in order to get it out of her, he opened her up from the front. kidneys are located towards the back, more or less. you have to dig for them. during the process of lifting out her intestines they may have been damaged...even just slightly. bile and other intestenial muck may have dripped or downright spilled out. and if the apron piece was used to wrap up the freshly carved, fecal and or bile soaked kidney....there u have it.
seems silly to me though to take the apron piece, walk many blocks away...then decide to clean your hands and knife off. personally, i would have done this at the scene of the crime. this killer seemed VERY intelligent in my mind, and also a risk taker. strangling and disembowling a woman in a backyard in the dark is one thing....walking around town with bloody hands, bloody knife, and a kidney, during hightened police presents is quite another. i don't believe him to be as bloody as alot would expect, (once you get past the fat and flesh and the membrane, there is no blood, unless u puncture an organ) but none the less some. after all, u have to CUT OUT the kidney, which has 2 large vessels running into, and out of it.
i don't buy the seaman suspect at all. i'm confident this guy lived there. i'm sure this guy (if he were a seamen) wouldnt just rip up prostitutes in whitechapel. this kind of thing would probably happen in other port areas, not just london, or even just in the east end for that matter. london has more ports than just the ones in whitechapel. doesn't make sense if you ask me.
|
Joanne Simons
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 3:18 am: |
|
For the benefit of Glenna as a male you woulndt be able to comprehend as to why faecal matter shoud be found on the rag along with blood from menstruating.
Wih his reference to armchair detectives there is a saying "if the cap fits wear it" |
Jeff B
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 04, 2005 - 10:09 am: |
|
I just came across this article (see below). According to the article the author now names the ACTUAL SHIP he believe JTR was aboard. In Stephen's interview he only mentions a group of possible ships on which JTR may have been a seaman. Did he suddenly make this discovery in the last week or something?? Why not mention it in Stephen's interview?? Anyone know anything about this ship?
Famous 19th century British murderer may have killed abroad: report Tue May 3, 9:49 AM ET
LONDON (AFP) - Jack the Ripper, who murdered and mutilated a series of young women in 19th century London, is one of Britain's most infamous criminals, closely associated with the capital's fog-bound back streets.
But in fact the killer -- who was never caught -- might have been a sailor who interspersed his London murders with crimes in other countries, a report said on Tuesday.
The theory, detailed in the Guardian newspaper, is the product of research by retired British detective Trevor Marriott, who attempted to use modern police methods to solve the crimes.
His conclusions, published in a book called "Jack the Ripper: the 21st Century Investigation", challenge the long-held assumption that the murderer was a skilled surgeon as some of the women were disemboweled.
Marriott also says that the location of the killings between 1888 and 1891, in Whitechapel, east London, near the city's then-thriving docks, suggest the murderer may have been a merchant seaman.
The author believes he has even identified the ship Jack the Ripper arrived on, a cargo vessel called the Sylph which docked in London in July 1888, just before the first murder.
It later left for the Caribbean, tying the sailor to a murder in Nicaragua which Marriott believes bears the hallmarks of the same man, in that a prostitute's throat was cut and her body mutilated.
Another crime, in Germany, is also linked to Jack the Ripper by the book.
"The detectives at the time took a very blinkered approach," Marriott was quoted as saying by the paper.
"They were convinced the killer was someone who lived or worked in the Whitechapel area. They completely overlooked the fact that there was a pattern emerging which pointed to the possibility the killer may have been a sailor who only occasionally visited Whitechapel, hence the gaps between the murders."
More than 100 people have been identified as possible Jack the Rippers in many dozens of books produced over the decades, with suspects ranging from a Polish immigrant to Prince Albert, one of Queen Victoria's grandsons.
The killings generated huge publicity at the time, both for their brutality and the letters with which the killer taunted the police, signing himself as Jack the Ripper.
The crimes also helped focus public attention on the appalling living conditions faced by many in the poverty-stricken east of London.
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2037
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 04, 2005 - 5:39 pm: |
|
Ships don’t always do what the detectives and killers expect.
As a for instance, the ‘Sylph’ was blobbing around the island of Madeira in January 1888, with her rudder carried away, and was eventually towed into the port by the steamer ‘Brittania’.
The Sylph was bound for Barbados out of London but never made it, instead limping back to England, arriving at Dover - I think - on March 27th 1888.
The Sylph eventually got herself to the London docks but it wasn’t until much later in the year, and then she sailed for Antigua.
I’m still following her progress.
(Lloyds agents 1888) |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1874
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 04, 2005 - 6:17 pm: |
|
This piece of information is fascinating AP.Perhaps there should be a separate thread on the London Docks of 1888/89 ? They were of National importance and are rich in History.
Also Professor W.Fishman"s books,especially his famous,"East End Jewish radicals" seem worthy of a thread of their own somewhere here,given their coverage of the very period we investigate and the relevance to the characters we deal with.
Natalie
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2038
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, May 05, 2005 - 1:54 pm: |
|
Thanks Natalie,
The 'Sylph' actually docked at Bristol on March 27th 1888 after her aborted journey to Barbados, so your man had a lot of running around to do.
I do plan to take an exhaustive look at the antics of this fine vessel - upon which so much rides - tonight. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1878
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, May 05, 2005 - 2:10 pm: |
|
Excellent AP.Its really important to challenge
misinformation if and when it occurs.In a sense this case has to be about sifting out the errors and the misunderstandings that arise because of them.
Natalie. |
Stan Russo
Inspector
Username: Stan
Post Number: 193
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, May 05, 2005 - 2:20 pm: |
|
Natalie,
Man, if you really and truly believe that you should see what's going on in the two other threads: The Times October 4 - 5, and Was J. Sickert really threatened by Sutcliffe.
If you value the challenging of misinformation when it occurs, you should really read through those two threads.
SJR |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2043
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, May 05, 2005 - 4:19 pm: |
|
Natalie
I am actually getting confused by the results I am getting concerning the good ship 'Sylph'.
But regardless of that, it is recorded that the 'Sylph' arrived from Barbados in London port on the 27th November 1888 and then sailed again for that island on the 29th November 1888.
As Mary Jane Kelly was killed on the 9th November 1888, I suppose we must assume that Marriot is not counting her as a victim of Jack the Ripper?
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1881
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, May 05, 2005 - 5:29 pm: |
|
Can just picture this AP.Can see you tracking the star board of the good ship "Sylph"! |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2051
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 4:54 pm: |
|
I'm doing that very thing, Natalie.
I imagine myself on the good ship 'Sylph' and that I'm a murder suspect for the killing of Mary Jane Kelly on the 9th November 1888; and that my good ship 'Sylph' outbound from Barbados will dock in London on 27th November; and that with ideal sailing conditions and without the loss of a rudder, my ship should take ten days to cross the Atlantic... but if I had killed Mary Jane Kelly on the 9th November and sailed away, then I would have been back in Barbados on the 19th November - with god and good weather prevailing - which means I would have docked in London on the 29th November, which is in fact the day the good ship Sylph sailed back to Barbados. So I would have sort of arrived after I had left.
There is no way a crew member or passenger of the Sylph could have murdered anyone in London on the 9th November when that ship Sylph redocked back in London from Barbados on 27th November.
Unless she had engines.
That is a lifebelt I'm prepared to throw.
But even that is a straw.
For ten and ten is twenty. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1886
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 6:28 pm: |
|
Quite So AP!
Amazing information tucked neatly into all this
wish I had those search skills[but better still your colourful prose skills]
Natalie |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2054
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, May 07, 2005 - 6:46 pm: |
|
Still having problems with this pesky boat called 'Sylphillis'!
She seemed to prefer the smaller docks,like Bristol, Dover and Deal.
I'm told she carried killers of whores, but I haven't been able to dig out her manifesto yet.
But I will. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1894
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, May 07, 2005 - 7:11 pm: |
|
I can see you now with that telescope clapped to your eye ,a flask of brandy,and that deer stalker hat"s ear flaps going ten to the dozen on the ocean waves !
"Sylph" had better watch out.Detective Wolf is about to reveal all! |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2055
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, May 08, 2005 - 4:32 pm: |
|
Natalie, I’m afraid you are exactly right.
I really was not aware what a sad situation Mr Marriot was in until I read the following, taken from a review of Joseph Conrad‘s ‘Victory‘ by Robert Hampson of the Feng Chia University in 2001 (errrrr… this was four years ago) :
‘As Bagnall notes, Conrad is probably referring here to the series of murders which took place in Whitechapel between 31 August and 9 November 1888.When the series of murders ended, it was thought that the murderer had committed suicide at the end of 1888, or had been locked up (perhaps in an asylum), or had emigrated. Another suggestion was that he might have been a sailor. Thus the Gazette (18 February 1889) made the following report:
‘We now learn that at the beginning of January similar atrocities were taking place in Nicaragua, and that about the end of December equally barbarous mutilations are reported from Jamaica.
It would be interesting to know whether any steamer left the Thames after the 9th of November, and after calling at Jamaica in December proceeded to Central America. If such a steamer exists, there seems a strong probability that the murderer will be found among her crew.’
New theory my asp!
This is just so sad. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1897
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, May 08, 2005 - 5:37 pm: |
|
Really,really sad!
Anyway quite an enjoyable voyage of discovery AP! |
RoseyORyan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, May 08, 2005 - 6:55 am: |
|
Hi All,
Any idea why this book title includes the words: "21st Century Investigation"? Since I arrived there only five years ago...I think it should be filed away under 'presumptuousity'!
Rosey :-) |
Joanne Simons
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, May 05, 2005 - 5:37 pm: |
|
I think before jumping to conclusions some of the people on here should read Marriotts book. The article mentioning the Sylph appeared in The Guardian Newspaper and has obvioulsy been wrongly published. In the book he mentione the Sylph and a anumber of other boats,but dooes not suggest that boat was the one the killer came from. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2060
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 10, 2005 - 2:16 pm: |
|
Quite right, Joanne.
But these addled old authors just can't help themselves.
Forgive me for my sins and do pray for me that one day I might have a bank balance like Marriot. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2061
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 11, 2005 - 4:30 pm: |
|
Right, I know I’ve been told off for this already, but I just can’t help chasing information and then playing chess with it.
The first problem with the good ship ‘Sylph’ is that there were hundreds of them, but discounting ‘Sylph’s’ that carried HMS or were under 500 tons, there is only one from the LVP.
There was a powerful steamship, called ‘Sylph’ built in the 1850’s but she were Irish and only navigated European waters, she steamed around the English and Emerald isles and ported in Germany, Russia and Denmark, but because of her tonnage she never took on the Atlantic. She were a mere 255 tons.
But she did steam to Germany in the years under discussion, however the closest she got to the Caribbean was a rum in Southampton docks.
Now we must look at the real ‘Sylph’, the girl who crossed the Atlantic year after year from Barbados to London docks and back again… by god that poor old girl must have creaked, for she was at it from the 1850’s to the present century.
The ‘Sylph’ was a sailing ship, 500 tons, but more than that, she was a ‘Sugar Ship’.
All she did was sail back and forth across the Atlantic, time after time, collecting the sugar cane harvest in Barbados and bringing it back for the sugar makers of Whitechapel.
The ‘Sylph’ never went elsewhere, she never went to South America, she never went to Germany, she only went to Madeira because her rudder fell off, she went to Trinidad in 1891 when the harvest failed in Barbados; and all she ever did was plod relentlessly over the Atlantic full of sugar and then haul a few passengers and bits of cargo back again.
She was like the number 1 bus, just back and forth forever.
Now I think this chap with this book has mixed up the steamer ‘Sylph’ and the sugar ship ‘Sylph’.
He has filed his returns and come up with the final solution.
Perhaps he should have taken some sugar in his tea. |
an armchair detective
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 4:50 pm: |
|
Mr Marriot is quite puzzled over the faecal matter on Catherine Eddowes' apron. So puzzled, in fact, that he felt compelled to devise a whole new theory about its origin.
However there is such a thing as Ockham's Razor which says that "plurality should not be posited without necessity". So if the evidence at the crime scene would suffice to explain this faecal matter, no additional theories are necessary.
Now, unlike Mr. Marriot, Dr Brown apparently wasn't puzzled at all. And why should he be?
When he entered Mitre Square at 2.18 in the morning he noted that "the intestines were drawn out to a large extent and placed over the right shoulder; they were smeared over with some feculant matter; a piece of 2 feet was quite detached from the body and placed between the body and the left arm, apparently by design"
Smeared over with feculant matter.
Small wonder that Dr. Brown wasn't surprised when he noted faecal matter on the missing piece of apron.
Martin |
shirley44
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - 1:28 am: |
|
I am very new to this, but I do not understand the issue about the fecal matter. Catherine E was butchered very quickly and her intestines removed and also cut ( one piece about 2 ft long laid out between arm and body) since food is digested and passed through the large and then small intestine, I have always assumed that the material was "feculant", and came from the ripped intestine. Does this not make sense ? |
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 937
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 16, 2005 - 10:17 am: |
|
Hi Shirley,
What you say makes perfect sense (also see Martin's post above yours). I don't know why Mr. Marriott wishes to disassociate the apron from the Ripper; perhaps he doesn't care for the implication that the Ripper went in a northeasterly direction from Mitre Square.
Dave |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1750
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 04, 2005 - 11:15 am: |
|
Just finished this book.
Man, some mistakes in this isnt there. Maybe Im being too picky.
As for the idea that Hutchinson was waiting outside Millers Court inorder to mug the chap he saw walk off with Mary.... Ive heard this before, check this post by our own Frank Van Oploo below.
Posted on Monday, March 22, 2004 - 5:57 pm:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, dear ol' Glenn,
We seem to agree on the important thing regarding GH: I don’t think Hutchinson told the truth either. Although he probably stuck to the truth as much as possible in order to make his statement as credible as it could be, his story stinks, from whichever side you look at it.
As I’ve said before, his story fits nicely with the scenario where MJK was killed by an intruder who woke her up just before he struck, but doesn't mean GH actually was Jack the Ripper. If he were, he took a lot of risk by coming forward with his statement. And he seems to have been quite readily believed by the police, but a bit too readily if you ask me, considering the things he told them. So that smells, too. He comes forward, makes his statement, is officially believed by the police, is taken to the morgue to identify MJK’s remains and is guided around the neighbourhood a couple of times and then disappears. Forever. Very odd.
Your suggestion that he intended to mug MJK’s client is a possible one, but the fact that he described MJK’s client as obviously wealthy seems a stupid thing to have done. But like you have suggested before, maybe Hutchinson just wasn’t that smart.
All the best,
Frank
I couldnt find Glenns post that Frank refers to but to state this as a fresh observation just shows how 'thorough' modern investigating methods really are.
Monty....with tongue firmly in cheek.
I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die.
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2634
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 04, 2005 - 11:29 am: |
|
So you managed to find a copy?
Jenni
"By the power of Greyskull - I have the power!"
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3671
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 04, 2005 - 11:44 am: |
|
Monty 'Mr Tongue in Cheek',
I am not sure what you mean, to tell you the truth, but the fact that he might have stood outside Miller's Court in order to rob one of Mary's clients, or because he himself might have wanted a free ride after the fellow's gone, are not exactly fresh suggestions. I concur with those ideas as valid possibilities, but they are not really new, and certainly no results of brain-storms of mine.
All the best
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1752
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 05, 2005 - 4:47 am: |
|
Glenn,
but they are not really new
Thats exactly what I mean.
Jenn,
Yeah....W H Smiths.
Monty now awaits cheque !!
Monty
I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die.
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2636
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 05, 2005 - 5:34 am: |
|
WH Smiths?
they have a true crime section. Oh well.
Jenni
"By the power of Greyskull - I have the power!"
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
