|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** This is an archived, static copy of the Casebook messages boards dating from 1998 to 2003. These threads cannot be replied to here. If you want to participate in our current forums please go to https://forum.casebook.org **
Maybe there was more than one Ripper
Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Suspects: General Discussion :
Maybe there was more than one Ripper
Author: Antoinette Randle
Friday, 04 May 2001 - 12:19 pm |        | Hi All,
All the suspects in the Ripper case seem to have some little thing that would inable them to be the Ripper. But what if the Ripper was more than one person. They would take turns killing, that way the police could not place them at the scene of the crime for all of the murders.
Just a thought.
Antoinette |
Author: Tom Wescott
Friday, 04 May 2001 - 12:34 pm | | Antoinette,
That theory has been given a lot of thought over the years. Probably too much. The Ripper was one person, and a man at that. Serial killers of this nature simply don't work in pairs or teams no matter how fun the theory is. Of course, some people don't believe that Stride was killed by the same man as the others. While I don't agree with this I will concede it was possible. However, if she was slain by another hand it was somebody who was not working in tandem with the Ripper. I hope this helps.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Author: Christopher-Michael DiGrazia
Saturday, 05 May 2001 - 10:06 am | | Antoinette -
As Tom says, the theory that "Jack the Ripper" was more than one person has been given thought. It reached perhaps its apex with Peter Turnbull's book "The Killer Who Never Was," in which it was argued that only one (or possibly two; I'm too lazy to get up and check) of the canonical victims fell to the knife of the man we know as the Ripper, and that all the rest were copycat killings egged on by a sensationalist press.
That there was more than one killer operating during the autumn of 1888 is, I think, beyond dispute, especially when the Whitehall and Pinchin Street torso cases are added to the mix. And the ever-mutable Martha Tabram may or may not have een an early experiment in slaughterhouse anatomy. As well, Alex Chisholm, quoted in Stewart Evans and Paul Gainey's "The Lodger," addresses your thought when reviewing the case against Dr Tumblety. If a suspect could not be placed at the scene of all five murders, then by default he could not be the Ripper. Some of this thinking is still evident today when the cases of Michael Kidney and Joseph Barnett are brought up - neither can be placed with certainty at all the canonical murder sites, so they are - ipso facto - ruled out as the Ripper. I don't think that a strong enough argument to rule those gentlemen out, but there are other arguments against them, so we need not concentrate on this particular fallacy.
In my own (admittedly ignorant) opinion, apart from Tom's very reasonable objection that sexual serial killers rarely work in partnerships (though Gerald and Charlene Gallego as well as Kenneth Bianchi and Angelo Buono are the exceptions that prove the rule), the notion that 2, 3 or more killers with a similar MO all living within the same one square mile of territory would strike - either in partnership or in solitary sequence - for a few weeks (or months, depending on the victims you count) and then vanish into the aether never to kill again strikes me as slightly improbable. Not impossible, but still. . .I wouldn't bet the farm on it.
But only my opinion, of course.
As ever,
Christopher-Michael |
Author: Warwick Parminter
Saturday, 05 May 2001 - 05:51 pm | | Was Pearly Poll so named because she was one of the fraternity known as Pearly Kings and Queens? I always thought of them as extrovert Cockney working class people, and I've wondered if Pearlies were around in Whitechapel at the time of the Ripper. It was a small group of costermongers who started the craze of sewing pearl buttons to their clothes to set themselves apart and make themselves stand out, if one of their number fell on hard times, the others would help him. By 1888 the practice had been going for about 13yrs and was concerned with charity raising. This made me wonder,-- what sort of people were costermongers,-- Barnett could possibly have been a c/monger after his trouble at Billingsgate, his brother Daniel was one, I think, and according to which book, or which chapter,-- Joe Fleming was a plasterer or a c/monger. Were barrows bought, rented, or part of an employed job?-- were "barrowboys small business men of that time? Barrows would have "cost" if they had to be bought-- then the produce to display on them for sale, I can't imagine doss-house nobodys being "employed" to be in charge of a barrow. Does anyone have any thoughts on that matter?
Rick |
Author: Christopher T George
Saturday, 05 May 2001 - 09:49 pm | | Hi, Rick:
I may be wrong, but I don't believe Pearly Poll had any connection to the Pearly Kings and Queens of the East End. I believe it was just the nickname for this particular prostitute. Maybe she liked and wore pearls. There were other women with similarly exotic names. I am sure Mr. Fido can give us some examples. 
Best regards
Chris George |
Author: Martin Fido
Sunday, 06 May 2001 - 05:57 am | | Hi Chris,
Thanks for the compliment - but a quick stroll through the leaky old brain only came up with 'One-Armed Liz', and the rafts of names allegedly applied to Mary Jane Kelly and Rose Mylett.
I agree with you that Pearly Poll is exceedingly unlikely to have had anything to do with the cockney pearlies, but I have no idea how she came by her nickname.
All the best,
Martin |
Author: Warwick Parminter
Sunday, 06 May 2001 - 10:31 am | | Hello Anna,
Thanks very much, it makes sense. Do you need help? if you do, Email again with your Email address.If I can't help, I'll see that someone will.
Best wishes, Rick. |
Author: John Omlor
Sunday, 06 May 2001 - 10:44 am | | Martin,
You know what they say, "Once you've had a woman with one arm, you never go back."
Yeah, yeah, I know. It was insensitive and crude.
Sorry,
--John |
Author: Warwick Parminter
Sunday, 06 May 2001 - 02:20 pm | | John, with a willing partner, six would be nice.
Rick |
Author: Tom Wescott
Sunday, 06 May 2001 - 09:36 pm | | CM,
I am surprised to hear you giving Michael Kidney consideration as the Ripper. He was far too sick and stupid to have not only committed the crimes but to have fooled the police. That's just my take, anyway.
Martin, Chris, and Rick,
The most unattractive name I've heard for one of the East End prostitutes was Liz Stride's alleged nickname of 'Hippy Lip Annie' in reference to her overly-fleshed bottom lip.
John,
I worked on a movie where the key grip was a one-armed woman. No joke. She even drove a stick shift. She was rather gross, though. We'd all ride in a van and she'd rest her stump on me. I was 19 at the time and it was all I could do to keep from hurling. I'll never forget the time, though, that I watched her carry in, by herself, a dining room table that she built for a prop. Very impressive.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Author: Martin Fido
Monday, 07 May 2001 - 06:35 am | | Tom,
What's the source of 'Hippy Lip'? Did it precede the recovery and publication of her mortuary photograph in 1988?
With all good wishes and serious interest,
Martin |
Author: E Carter
Monday, 07 May 2001 - 08:04 am | | | Antionnete, indirectly, you have hit the nail on the head, the man in Berner Street was not the same man noted in Church Row, and he, was not the same man noted near Mitre Square with Eddows; but the killers thought theycould give the impression of one killer! The woman noted to be dressed in the same atire as Mary Kelly, was indeed a woman purposly dressed in the same atire as Mary Kelly. Best wishes ED. PS Re-read the depositions from 'the night of the double event' 'with great care'! |
Author: The Viper
Monday, 07 May 2001 - 08:42 am | | Rick,
Firstly, I would agree with Chris that it is highly unlikely that the name Pearly Poll was derived from the pearly kings and queens. More probably, Connolly had a liking for cheap (i.e. fake) jewelry, or had perhaps sold it in the streets as a hawker at some time.
Which brings us to the role of street traders (costermongers) you mentioned and your questions about their employment status and how they paid for their barrows. Maybe a few of the better off ones did manage to buy their own barrows, but at least according to Henry Mayhew’s London Labour and the London Poor the vast majority rented them. Mayhew is a good source of information where working class Londoners is concerned, though it should be pointed out that his observations were made in the period between the late 1840s and about 1860. One should therefore be careful; no doubt some of the practices he described had changed by 1888. (In much the same way that it would be dangerous to rely on a book written about life in Britain in the 1960s being applicable today – a lot of it would still hold good, but some of it wouldn’t).
Mayhew documents the extent to which costermongers - who had a reputation for being poor businessmen and money managers - were ripped off by the multitude of people hiring them barrows, carts, baskets, weights, or lending them money for stock. It was good business becoming a barrow lender.
"I am informed that 5,000 hired barrows are now in the hands of the London costermongers, at an average rental of £3 5s. each, or £16,250 a year. One man lets out 120 yearly, at a return (dropping the 5s.) of £360; while the cost of a good barrow, new, is £2 12s., and in the autumn and winter they may be bought new or ‘as good as new,’ at 30s. each; so that reckoning each to cost this barrow-letter £2 – he receives £360 in rent or interest – exactly 150% per annum for property which originally cost but £240, and property which is still as good for the ensuing year’s business as for the past..."
"…it is evident, that the rent charged for barrows is most exorbitant, by the fact, that all who take to the business become men of considerable property in a few years."
He goes on to document money lending practices for the purchase of stock. Among the more interesting comments is this one:-
“The beer-shop keepers lend on far easier terms, perhaps at half the interest extracted by the others, and without any regular system of charges; but they look sharp after the repayment, and a considerable outlay in beer, and will only lend to good customers; they however have even lent money without interest.”
One local character who operated in barrow lending was a German called Fred Gehringer (also written as Gerlingher), who kept a pub called the City Of Norwich at 61 Wentworth Street, almost opposite the end of George Yard. Petticoat Lane market was held just down the road. Given that publicans were among the better-off residents in that vicinity, and also Mayhew’s comments above, it is feasible that he could have lent money to costermongers too. It was to Gehringer’s pub that attention was directed as the police sought Joseph Isenschmidt, the mad pork butcher.
Regards, V. |
Author: E Carter
Monday, 07 May 2001 - 09:05 am | | The killer was not suffering 'Folie 'a deux' .
I will give you an example of Folie that you can test for your self.
The term 'folie a deux' describes a 'delusion of two people'. But the wording can be easily misunderstood; even by Mr Phillip Sugden'.
Folie, normally comes about when person (1) becomes acutly deluded. Their partner; person (2), believes what Person (1) tells them, because person (2) knows (1) resonably well; but not well enough to realize that person (1) sometimes suffers from an acute psychotic illness.
Now, imagine that someone you had known for sometime ; person(1) had told you, person(2), that on passing your house on several times last week, they noticed a very strange man peering into your garden.
You, person 2) may, then begin to suffer, from folie! ED |
Author: Warwick Parminter
Monday, 07 May 2001 - 05:45 pm | | Hello Viper,
Many thanks for the trouble you went to to get the information on the 1888 costermongers I wanted. While my main interest is JtR, I'm also interested the working class people who surrounded him in everyday life, that part of the mystery is interesting too. My grandfather was born in 1860 so it helps me to understand what sort of working life he had in his 20s and 30s,(though he was a midlander). It seems to me that quite a bit of corruption and welshing on deals and loans could have been the order of the day in the costerbarrow world. As you say Viper, it was certainly a sit back and watch your money grow,-- for those who had money to start up. I'm printing out your info and keeping, thanks again.
I had an Email from a girl named ANNA, she told me the name Pearly Poll may have had something to do with teeth she was missing,--"Pearly Whites", she also said she was having trouble posting but she didn't give her Email address. She may be appearing on the scene soon,- I hope so.
All the Best
Rick |
Author: Warwick Parminter
Tuesday, 08 May 2001 - 06:42 pm | | Hello Jayne and Alex'
Many thanks for the article on the plight of costermomgers in 1888. It really puts you wise to what life was really like for a person trying to fend for himself and drag himself out of the gutter. No help or encouragment from authority --or church. Just barriers whichever way they turned, a nuisance if they tried to help themselves, a nuisance if they didn't. The attitude of the church surprises me, though I don't suppose it should, not in 1888. The situation brought to my mind, wheel clamping, and vehicles being towed away and impounded in todays London,-- nothing really changes does it?.
Your article kind of re-emphasises my belief that authority was not too bothered about five rock bottom common prostitutes being murdered,-- only the danger it threatened to the Westend, I do think the police would have liked it kept low profile, if the newspapers would have allowed it. But thats my opinion, thank you both again, as with Vipers article, I shall print out and keep.
All the Best
Rick |
Author: Jeff Bloomfield
Saturday, 12 May 2001 - 01:02 am | | To all,
I can't answer what PEARLY POLL stood for. I still wonder about "Long Liz" Stride. But I
feel obliged to give you a warning about
prostitutes and nicknames.
Back in the early 1980s, if you asked me what
was the reason Carrie Brown was called "Old
Shakespeare" I would have repeated the familiar
story about how she quoted the Bard when she had
a customer for the night or hour or whatever.
Then, one day I visited the Seventh Regiment Armory on Lexington Avenue in Manhattan for one of their antique shows. The Armory had cases set up detailing the history of the Regiment. In
the 1860s and 1870s, before it had the Armory as
a home, it's headquarters were in a room in
the "Old Shakespeare" Tavern.
I was floored when I read that, and immediately
read any essay I could on Carrie Brown. It turned
out that Carrie came to New York City in the late
1850s and early 1860s. She had another nickname,
"Jeff Davis". Suddenly it dawned on me that
Carrie was nicknamed according to the clientele
she picked on when she started: the Union soldiers
attached to the Seventh Regiment at the "Old
Shakespeare" Tavern. Her stand must have been at
the tavern, and the other nickname was a playful
one connected to the number one target of those
bluebelly soldiers in the Civil War.
Carrie was from a middle class background in New
England, and may have read the English classics.
Possibly she did, eventually throw in lines from
Romeo and Juliet or some other plays or poems by
Shakespeare. But the two names were based on her
professional background, not her culture.
Jeff |
Author: Caroline Anne Morris
Saturday, 12 May 2001 - 08:23 am | | Hi Jeff,
I believe that Carrie 'Old Shakespeare' Brown shuffled off her mortal coil on the bard's birth - and death - day. Seems kind of fitting, eh?
Love,
Carrie |
Author: Jeff Bloomfield
Saturday, 12 May 2001 - 05:11 pm | | Dear Carrie,
I believe you are right. Talk of irony.
I don't know if you are aware of it. In 1616
(when Shakespeare died) the English still used
the Julian Calendar. Eleven days earlier, in
Spain, Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, probably
Shakespeare's only fellow titan of literature
(on his level) died in Spain. But the Spanish
were advanced enough to use the Gregorian
Calendar. As a result, both Cervantes and
Shakespeare, although they died eleven days apart,
died on April 23rd, 1616!
Also, Shakespeare appears to have been born on
April 23rd as well, although there is some debate
about this.
Best wishes,
Jeff |
|
|
|
|
