|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 2901
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 09, 2003 - 2:02 pm: |       |
The Jack the Ripper Suspects
70 Persons Cited by Investigators and Theorists
Stan Russo
Foreword by Christopher-Michael DiGrazia
ISBN: 0-7864-1775-7
[200]pp. notes, bibliography, index $45 illustrated case binding (7 x 10) 2004
The legendary Jack the Ripper murdered as many as ten women between the years of 1887 and 1891 in the East End of London. The debate over his true identity has never been resolved. This study lists each of the 70 suspects who have not been irrefutably cleared of any connection to the murders. The unbiased history of the different suspects, including two women, will give even the novice reader the basic ground to make an informed decision regarding the identity of the Whitechapel Murderer. Suspects include influential artist Walter Sickert, children's author Lewis Carroll, Randolph Henry Spencer Churchill (father of Winston Churchill), and others ranging from doctors and politicians to wandering lunatics.
Listed alphabetically, the encyclopedic entries provide historical features such as major events in a suspect’s life, a complete chronology surrounding the case for particular suspects, suspects’ biographical data, and a basic analysis of the relevant theories. The entries explain and analyze the suspect’s particular connection to the case and describe theorists and research that have contributed to the suspect’s positive or negative candidacy as a viable suspect. Within these pages lies the true name of Jack the Ripper—the author places all the available facts before the reader, leaving him to draw his own conclusions.
Author and screenwriter Stan Russo lives in New York City.
$45
Not Yet Published, Available Spring 2004
Stephen P. Ryder, Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper |
David O'Flaherty
Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 204
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 09, 2003 - 4:52 pm: | |
Congratulations on the upcoming release, Stan. I'm looking forward to getting to read your chapter on Druitt 
Dave |
Christopher T George
Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 467
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 10, 2003 - 11:40 am: | |
Nice work, Stan! Looking forward to reading your book. Perhaps you could arrange for your publisher to send me a review copy to review it for Ripperologist?
All the best
Chris George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info  |
Holger Haase
Sergeant
Username: Holger
Post Number: 14
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 10, 2003 - 1:20 pm: | |
Wow, this sounds like a potentially great read. Can't wait to get my hands on it. I always like suspect overviews.... or should I say overviews of the suspects in this case. :-)
Holger |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 159
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 10, 2003 - 2:42 pm: | |
this actually sounds v, interesting. i like this sort of book, which helps compare the different suspects!
jennifer |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 160
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 10, 2003 - 2:45 pm: | |
this actually sounds v, interesting. i like this sort of book, which helps compare the different suspects!
jennifer |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 441
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 10, 2003 - 3:25 pm: | |
Hi Stan
Good luck with the book. I would love to get a look at the 70 candidates you have chosen to examine. I hope you didn't spend to much time on poor Lewis Carroll.
All The Best
Gary |
Mark Andrew Pardoe
Inspector
Username: Picapica
Post Number: 154
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 10, 2003 - 6:05 pm: | |
Whatho Stan,
Your book looks interesting. Is it to be published in Britain?
Cheers, Mark |
Kevin Braun
Detective Sergeant
Username: Kbraun
Post Number: 79
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2003 - 9:50 am: | |
Congratulations Stan. "70 suspects who have not been irrefutably cleared of any connection to the murders"? Wow! Can't wait to read the book. Good luck.
Take care,
Kevin
|
RosemaryO'Ryan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 10, 2003 - 7:14 am: | |
Dear Stan,
Congratulations! But soon, you will be relieved to know, other major suspects will be introduced into the police line-up. Intuition, I guess... things have a sudden habit of of moving at the speed of light in Ripperology.
Rosey :-) |
Glenn L Andersson
Chief Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 763
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2003 - 8:04 pm: | |
Seems like an intriguing book to look forward to, Stan. Good luck with it in the mean time.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Stan Russo
Detective Sergeant
Username: Stan
Post Number: 51
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 1:59 pm: | |
To all,
Thanks for the well wishes on the book. Hope everyone enjoys it.
STAN RUSSO |
Stan Russo
Detective Sergeant
Username: Stan
Post Number: 53
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 11, 2004 - 4:44 pm: | |
To all,
I just received my copies of the book, so anyone who pre-ordered them from mcfarland should be getting them any day now. I hope you find it a valuable reference tool and feel free to ask any questions.
STAN RUSSO |
Christopher T George
Chief Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 837
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 8:29 am: | |
Hi, Stan
Many congratulations on the appearance of your book. I look forward to reading it.
All my best
Chris
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 3141
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Sunday, August 22, 2004 - 4:59 pm: | |
The Jack the Ripper Suspects: 70 Persons Cited by Investigators and Theorists
Stan Russo
McFarland & Co., 2004
Hardcover, library binding. 174pp. Index.
ISBN: 0786417757
Its almost hard to believe that we’ve gone so long without a Ripper book devoted solely to the long list of suspects involved in the Ripper case. And now, within the space of just five months, we have two new titles which do just that – the self-published Jack the Ripper: Eliminating the Suspects by C.J. Morley, and most recently, The Jack the Ripper Suspects, by Stan Russo.
Russo’s book covers 70 suspects. Some are well-known to students of the case. Others are lesser-known, and several are quite new to the study. The real strength of The Jack the Ripper Suspects is that it is very much up-to-date. Russo has included all the most recent finds and theories from the various Ripper outlets, both online and in print, so that even his entries on the most popular suspects remain fresh and informative. A helpful mini-bibliography is offered at the end of each suspect review to help guide readers toward additional resources.
A fair amount of personal opinion is also injected into each entry. Russo is not shy to let his readers know which suspects he finds impossible, improbable or just plain laughable, though he is quick to note that unless a subject’s whereabouts have been firmly established on the nights of the canonical murders, they can not be entirely ruled out.
This book, it should be noted, is best suited for the experienced Ripperologist. Those with little or no grounding in the case will almost certainly be confused by the hundreds of names, dates and places which are mentioned within the various entries without elaboration or explanation. No general overview of the case is provided, and no narrative link exists between entries, so this is definitely not a book for beginners.
Overall, a commendable study of the suspects. The writing style is a bit jumpy in places, which makes it difficult to follow, but as a whole I thought it to be a very enjoyable read. Serious students of the case will likely find it quite useful as a suspect-oriented reference guide, though the price - $45US for a hardcover of only 174 pages - is admittedly a bit steep.
(Message edited by admin on August 22, 2004)
Stephen P. Ryder, Exec. Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper |
Stan Russo
Detective Sergeant
Username: Stan
Post Number: 101
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 23, 2004 - 12:22 pm: | |
To all,
I just recently did a radio interview regarding my book and the Whitechapel murders. The interview reveals whom I believe 'JTR' was and also provides information about the book and myself. For anyone who wants to listen here is the information.
Program: The Curious Mind
Program Air Dates: Sept. 27th – Oct. 10th
Days: Monday/Wednesday/Friday (with random repeats on Sunday)
Times: 12, 4 & 8 a.m. & p.m. (Eastern Daylight Time)
How to Listen:
1) Visit the Leisure Talk Radio Network website (http://www.leisuretalk.net/)
2) Click on the LISTEN button (left side of web page)
3) If you do not have RealAudio/WinAmp or Windows media software, links are provided for free download.
4) Your computer must have a sound card and either internal or external speakers.
http://www.leisuretalk.net/ Leisure Talk Radio Network – Recess for Grownups
As always feel free to ask questions and I will do my best to answer them as best as I can.
STAN RUSSO |
Dan Norder
Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 300
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, September 23, 2004 - 4:52 pm: | |
Hi Stan,
You wrote:
"The interview reveals whom I believe 'JTR' was"
Ohhh, so the closely guarded secret will be out of the bag then...?
I'll try to give it a listen, but I have a Mac and a slowish Internet connection, so these streaming online radio things don't usually work for me.
Dan Norder, editor, Ripper Notes |
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 206
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 23, 2004 - 9:34 pm: | |
Hello all,
From what I've gathered, his prime suspect is NOT 'Sooty', as has long been suspected, though Russo does not reject the idea out of hand, noting that Sooty "remains a very viable suspect, difficult to dismiss, impossible not to obsess over".
I look forward to buying this book. I hope all of you do the same, or else, how are we to discuss its merits? 70 SUSPICIOUS CHARACTERS IN ONE PLACE! This hasn't happened since Watergate, folks, so buy it (through this site of course)at Amazon.com. They have Paypal, so if nothing else, you'll get screwed over and become eligible for some serious modiggity through that lawsuit going on.
Congratulations, Stan. Writng a coherent book is not an easy thing. Getting one published is even harder. I wish you nothing but success.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
AIP
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, September 23, 2004 - 5:00 pm: | |
Let's hope he wasn't too hard on Macnaghten who was a good man. |
Stan Russo
Detective Sergeant
Username: Stan
Post Number: 103
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 29, 2004 - 8:48 pm: | |
AIP,
Of course you hope that. From what I gather you seem to be in the mindset of the 1960's, when MacNaghten was viewed as an unchallengeable source. Now that we are living in the 21st century us researchers and historians know that Monty, while probably a good man, was mostly incompetent as an officer and mainly erroneous in his recollections on the murders.
STAN RUSSO |
AIP
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, September 30, 2004 - 1:10 am: | |
For someone who was mostly incompetent he did very well at Scotland Yard remaining second in command to Anderson in the CID and then getting promoted to Anderson's rank of Assistant Commissioner. He was a high-ranking boss for many years until 1913. As for erroneous recollections - well he wasn't the only one was he? |
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 227
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 30, 2004 - 11:37 pm: | |
Hello all,
Macnaughten, as all his contemparies, is valuable to us in that he left us information to pursue. Whether or not any of his three suspects were Jack is irrelevant, because through his writings we were given further insight into the investigation and the mindset of the police at the time. By the same token, I agree with Stan's sentiment that to focus in only on his memoranda would be a mistake, as it was not a shortlist of primes suspects, as is often thought, nor by any means a complete suspect list. Nevertheless, it is an important document. As for 'erroneous recollections', that award would have to go to Edmund Reid, who repeatedly postulated that the Ripper never took any organs from his victims! Even Smith can't compete with that.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Stan Russo
Detective Sergeant
Username: Stan
Post Number: 104
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - 4:09 pm: | |
To all,
I am doing a book signing on November 17th at 6:30 PM. The bookstore is Coliseum Books, on 42nd street between 5th and 6th Avenues in New York City. All are welcome and I hope to see whoever can make it there, even AIP. Just kidding.
STAN RUSSO |
AIP
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - 5:34 pm: | |
But it is interesting to see that there are now modern authors (Begg, Hinton) postulating that no organs may have been taken! |
Howard Brown
Detective Sergeant
Username: Howard
Post Number: 87
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 20, 2004 - 1:28 pm: | |
"But it is interesting to see that there are now modern authors (Begg, Hinton) postulating that no organs may have been taken!
Huh ? Did I miss something, AIP ?
Is this information/declaration in Mr.Begg's latest book?
Just from what people have said, Mr. Hinton once stated or wrote,that rats took the organs away...Does he also now say there was no organ removal ?
Thanks ! How |
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 239
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 21, 2004 - 1:15 am: | |
Hello all,
Paul Begg does not believe that rats took any organs away. I've asked him this in an e-mail weeks ago. To my knowledge, he accepts that the Ripper took away Chapman's uterus, Eddowes' uterus and kidney, and may have taken away Mary Kelly's heart. As for Hinton, he only put forth the 'super-rat' theory to explain how Hutchinson could return to his overcrowded lodging house with organs in tow.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
AIP
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, October 21, 2004 - 12:04 pm: | |
From 'Jack the Ripper The Facts' by Paul Begg, on Chapman, "That organs were missing (i.e. removed and taken away by the murderer) is almost writ in stone, but Dr Philips said that, although he had 'carefully closed up the clothes of the woman' before leaving the murder scene, he was not present when the body was moved to the mortuary and acknowledged that the body parts 'might have been lost'."
And, on Eddowes, "The murderer had carefully removed the left kidney and the uterus was cut away with the exception of a small portion, both organs being absent, presumably taken away by the murderer."
And, on Kelly, "Dr Bond seems to have meant that the heart had been taken from the place where it should have been, not that it was absent from the room (i.e., taken away by the killer)...Apart from Dr Bond's reference to the absence of the heart (meaning removed from the body), no mention was made of any part of Kelly's body being missing and the Daily Telegraph reported that the Central News claimed 'upon what is described as indisputable authority, that no portion of the murdered woman's body was taken away by the murderer'."
Looks to me like there were possibly no body parts taken except maybe Eddowes. |
Stan Russo
Detective Sergeant
Username: Stan
Post Number: 105
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 26, 2004 - 9:07 pm: | |
To AIP,
Perhaps this is a dumb question, but why did you include this whole organ taking theory in this particular section?
STAN RUSSO |
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 242
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 26, 2004 - 11:45 pm: | |
AIP,
From Begg's works it can clearly be drawn that he accepts, albeit cautiously, that the Ripper took away Chapman's uterus and Eddowes' uterus and kidney. As he rightly should, he questions whether or not Kelly's heart was taken away. There's conflicting reports. Doctors were called to the scene later for the sifting of the remnants of the fire. The presence of the doctors suggests they expected the heart may have been burnt, which would indicate it was not found in the room. Was it burnt in the fire? We do not know for sure. As for the Daily Telegraph report, it is contradicted by another which says an organ was indeed missing. It's frustrating that we don't have an iron-clad document to tell us the story as per Kelly, but from the available evidence it is likely that her heart was not to be found in the room. In the cases of Chapman and Eddowes, we know for a fact that organs were missing, and it's ludicrous to think that 3 organs disappeared and nobody was the wiser. The Ripper took them.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott
P.S. Stan...I don't know how this topic got started in this thread, but since it did, what's your take on it? |
Stan Russo
Detective Sergeant
Username: Stan
Post Number: 106
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 - 3:11 pm: | |
Tom,
I have to bow to the medical reports on this one. As far as documentation go those are mainly indisputable. Dr. Bond said the heart was absent. I doubt the woman removed it herself. As far as Chapman's missing organs, that may be a result of Coroner Baxter's comments on September 26th at the inquest, which incidentally are mentioned in the "Dear Boss" letter, if the time is taken to analyze that letter.
STAN RUSSO |
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 476
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 - 7:17 pm: | |
Mr. Westcott--I believe AIP refers to the following idea of Paul Begg's, previously posted by Dan Norder (Aug., 18, 2004) on the "Missing Organs" thread.
"But as long as we are on the topic of mixed up organs, Begg's new book raises the interesting point that it's possible that the parts missing from Chapman may have been misplaced rather than taken by the killer. '
I demur. The constable at the Hanbury scene stated catagorically that nothing was left behind, and the mortuary shed was gaurded until the time of the post mortum. The injuries to Chapman's body strongly suggest that the organ was removed with conscious intention. RP |
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 477
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 - 7:22 pm: | |
Mr. Westcott--I believe AIP refers to the following idea of Paul Begg's, previously posted by Dan Norder (Aug., 18, 2004) on the "Missing Organs" thread.
"But as long as we are on the topic of mixed up organs, Begg's new book raises the interesting point that it's possible that the parts missing from Chapman may have been misplaced rather than taken by the killer. '
I haven't seen Mr. Begg's actual statement, but I believe the evidence clearly shows that this could not have been the case.
RP |
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 478
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 - 8:07 pm: | |
sorry for the double post; I seemed to have sent it while editing it. |
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 243
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 28, 2004 - 10:30 pm: | |
Stan,
I'm not disagreeing with Dr. Bond. How could I? He was there. I don't doubt for a moment that the heart was missing from the body, as he stated. There's just no iron-clad proof it was missing from the room, something Dr. Bond did not comment on. However, as I've stated, it seems most likely it was.
As for what Begg was saying, it's simply that at the time, it was acknowledged as a possibility, albeit a highly unlikely one, that an organ could have been lost when the body was in transit. Begg was not endorsing this idea, nor would he have reason to it. If someone wants to play around with history and have all these organs falling away and getting lost, or carted off by a super-rat, then go at it and have fun. But it's careless to try to back up such a ridiculous assumption by adding the weight of Begg's name, and misrepresenting his words, when he clearly does not believe these organs were lost.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott
P.S. Has everyone posting on this thread purchased Stan's book, or are you just freeloading on his space? |
AIP
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, October 29, 2004 - 3:46 am: | |
Begg seems to be suggesting that both Chapman's and Kelly's murder scenes did not have organs taken away.
In the Chapman case he suggests as much by saying that till now it has been 'writ in stone' and he's changing that by suggesting otherwise and they might have been lost.
In the Kelly case he is clearly saying that Bond's words mean only that the heart was taken from the body, not the room, and that if Bond only means taken from the body there is no evidence it was taken from the room. Or can't I read? |
Adam Went
Police Constable
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 6
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, December 11, 2004 - 2:13 am: | |
Well, I'm a bit late, but my copy of Stan's book arrived at the bookstore only about 2 weeks ago, and, like usual, I'm speeding through it, and find it very interesting. Several of the suspects I had never even heard of. Congratulations Stan, it's a good book and an interesting read.
My only problem with it, though, is that there are no photos of any of the suspects in it, and I know for a fact that photos exist of many of the suspects listed. It would have certainly livened up the 180 pages or so of the book to have included atleast a few photos.
Omitting that complaint though, it is a straight to the point, interesting book, and the sources listed at the end of each suspect are very helpful.
Regards,
Adam. |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
