Archive through 17 September 2001

** 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 **

Archive through 17 September 2001

Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Suspects: General Discussion : JACK THE RIPPER MYSTERY SOLVED!: Archive through 17 September 2001

Author: Broadcast Monday, 15 November 1999 - 01:16 am
Yes folks, it's true. You can all pack your books and papers away, stop the research and go home. Martin Fido has solved the Jack the Ripper mystery for all time, everyone can give up now. You don't believe me? Well, then, you weren't watching the British GMTV Breakfast Television show when it went out to the nation this morning. In a documentary piece, filmed in the East End and the Ten Bells pub, a reporter outlined the 111-year old Ripper story and 'the five murders.' This was followed by an in-studio interview with a Ripper 'expert,' amiable author Martin Fido ('as in the dog'). After the great Mystery build-up by the on site reporter, Fido dismissed all the mystery and then went on to categorically state that the murders were solved and that a mad Jew was the culprit. As usual he reeled out (yet again) Anderson's flawed claims, then put his own eccentric slant on it by stating the police were mistaken as to the actual name of the culprit (the name Kosminski was not even mentioned). Needless to say Fido introduced no new evidence and told the same sad old tale he has been repeating for the past eleven years. The interviewer (Penny Smith) seemed totally deflated by this, showing surprise that it was a solved case as she had always thought it was a total mystery (which it is). Fido stood by his claim and dismissed her reservation by reassuring her it was solved and giving a benign, fatherly, smile on his rather fleshy face. That's it, case over.
Author: ChrisGeorge Monday, 15 November 1999 - 02:25 am
Hey Broadcast: I thought the stage was set for R. Michael Gordon to reveal that non-Jewish Pole Severin Klosowski (George Chapman) as Jack the Ripper? The many twists and turns in the world of Ripperology know no end! Best regards Chris George
Author: Bob_C Monday, 15 November 1999 - 03:42 am
Hi all, Heavens above? Who dare suggest that Kosminki was not the culprit? With the Ladies of the east-end streets in those days being so well known for swooning in rows into the arms of unwashed, tattered, stinking, bread-from-the-gutter scavanging, voices-hearing, job-shy, tiny little nut-cases. Especially in the times of Jack the Ripper, such persons would have been in highest demand by the sisterhood for protection as well as for the untold wealth undoubtedly in the possesion of such, with one foot in the lunatic asylum mental patients. The whole Ripper story is now solved. Best regards, Bob
Author: Alan Monday, 15 November 1999 - 04:47 am
Talk about self-delusion, sounds like the only person Fido has convinced is himself. See the recent copy of Ripperologist for Paul Begg's dismissal of Fido's nonsense.
Author: John Monday, 15 November 1999 - 05:28 am
But even Begg goes along with Anderson and the Kosminski idea. He talks of little else. It seems, though, we have a point here the two of them can't agree on. They can't both be right, in fact they are both probably wrong. If Begg and Fido can't agree, or get it right, what hope is there for the rest of us?
Author: X-Files Monday, 15 November 1999 - 05:30 am
Someone out there knows the truth - and he's not telling...
Author: ChrisGeorge Monday, 15 November 1999 - 05:32 am
Hi, all: Does Begg beg to differ? Is Fido faithful to his theory? Stay tuned for the next exciting installment! Chris George
Author: Caz Monday, 15 November 1999 - 08:05 am
I can't wait! Kosminski has been a bone of contention for too long I say. Enough of this dog fight. :-) Does anyone think (particularly after reading Bob C's incisive observations) that the top cop(s) who suspected 'Krazy Kos' may have been scratching his head and clutching at prejudiced profiling straws of the era, while his pet sus was scratching his arse and clutching at himself until his death in 1919? We have a different set of prejudices these days. Barnett and Kidney immediately come under suspicion with some of us because of alleged or actual domestic rows with/violence towards their partners. Both would be studied with great care by the police today (and hopefully still eliminated as JtR if they were not found to have any connection with his crimes). However, in the days when men could physically chastise their womenfolk with the law's blessing, the police may not have given more than a passing thought to whether Barnett's alleged row with Kelly or Kidney's violence towards Stride could be an indication by itself that either man was the ripper. But just think, if Barnett had thrown himself in the Thames or Kidney had boasted about having a collection of kidneys.... The hard evidence for contemporary suspects is as lacking as that for recent ones, but the kind of person we think Jack could have been may have changed subtly over the years. In the words of the perfect wedding hymn (according to my late father-in-law), carry on all and "Fight the Good Fight" :-) Love, Caz
Author: Peter R.A. Birchwood Monday, 15 November 1999 - 09:02 am
Well perhaps it wasn't Kosminski but someone else with the same name? Is Martin still putting Cohen forward? I have my doubts about the poor polish jew theory whoever it was but at least it was a near-contemporaneous one. But speaking of TV, the greatest shock of the week so far was on "Who Wants to be a Millionaire" when a contestant was asked: "What detective appeared in "The Sign of Four." The answers were: Miss Marple, Hercule Poirot, Father Brown and Sherlock Holmes. The contestant handed the question to the audience(!) who decided by 62% that the right answer was Hercule Poirot! What are we doing to educate people? Peter.
Author: Bob_C Monday, 15 November 1999 - 09:41 am
Hi all, ...or Jay Lennox on his NBC-show for some months, outside amongst the student populace with a microphone: Jay: Who fought in the American Civil War? Member of the student populace: Err... the.. Greeks? and here in Deutchland: Weekly Q-A TV-show: Showmaster: What was Bismark known as? Contestant: Um...the butcher of .. ah.. Auswitch? Sherlock turns in his grave.... Bob
Author: Christopher-Michael Monday, 15 November 1999 - 10:59 am
Well, I must admit to always having a weak spot for Martin's theory, as - when he explains it, rather than putting it down in print - it does seem absolutely convincing. It's the curse of his being an Oxford don, you know; that mellifluous voice sweeps over you and all objections vanish. Besides, I always liked his book. He does have an engaging prose style (and if you haven't read his recent "The World of Sherlock Holmes," you should go right out and buy it). I think, however, that Caz makes an excellent and too often overlooked point in that the men we consider as prime suspects tend to be that because of our 100 years' benefit of knowing (we think) what serial killers are like. We all get our noses out of joint over Barnett, Kidney and Hutchinson, simply because their behaviour strikes we moderns as most suspicious and therefore most guilty. Modern mores tend to obscure more in this case than help, sometime. Did anyone happen to tape Martin's appearance? I should like to add it to my Ripper video collection. Just give me an e-mail at digrazias@aol.com if you can send me a copy. I'll have to check out Paul's "Ripperologist" piece as well. And, since we're bashing TV game shows. . .I didn't see this, but was told by my brother-in-law that a recent episode of "Who Wants to Be A Millionaire" asked a contestant how many notes were in an octave, and tossed him out of the game when he answered "eight." Why? Apparently Regis Philbin is an adherent of modern music and thinks there are 12 notes in an octave. I tell you, once they stopped teaching latin in American schools, the whole damned country began sliding down the tubes. CMD (Holmes turning over in his grave, Bob? The Master is beekeeping on the Sussex downs even as we speak! How dare you utter such heresy?)
Author: ChrisGeorge Monday, 15 November 1999 - 11:13 am
Hi, CMD: Then dare I ask how many arms an octopus has? :-) CTG
Author: D. Radka Monday, 15 November 1999 - 12:56 pm
Talk about millionaires--I know who Jack the Ripper was, and someday I'm going to get my million dollars by charging people $20 a head (no pun intended) for the poop. You wait and see. David
Author: D. Radka Monday, 15 November 1999 - 05:03 pm
Christopher-Michael, I agree with your comments above, except for "...we moderns..." The Victorians, it seems, were the moderns. We are the post-post-post-moderns, or, as often referred to by my former Professor Stanley H. Rosen, "the Post Toasties." Good Luck, David
Author: batman Monday, 15 November 1999 - 06:30 pm
I watched the ocatave question on the Millionaire show and was flabergasted by the answer. What are your opinions of Tumblety as a suspect? Lads
Author: Bob_C Tuesday, 16 November 1999 - 12:35 am
Hi all, Good heavens!! How could I make such an awful mistake? Sherlock, I grovel in the dust at your bee-keeping feet! About the TV-Show clowns, did they at least correct themselves later, or will they now have the latin language re-written? As I was young and irresponible instead of old and irresponsible, irish jokes were going the rounds, such as the irish pilot's intelligence test: i) Which land is the Queen of England Queen of? ii) When landing your aircraft, do you chose a)wheels up or b) wheels down? Give reasons. Now I beg forgiveness to my father and all others from the green isle. (We clearly need them now to prepare our children for university.) Best regards, Bob
Author: Christopher-Michael Tuesday, 16 November 1999 - 08:20 am
Well, Caped Crusader, you must be doing a bang-up job in Gotham City if you've got time to watch Regis Philbin. Thanks for pointing it out, though. Tell me, what did the contestant do? Wasn't there anyone in the audience or crew that realised there are 8 notes in an octave? They couldn't ALL be Stockhausen disciples! As far as Tumblety - I must be honest and say I really don't know. My initial impression was that simply because of his height and flamboyance he was unlikely to be the Ripper, based on what we have come to consider "authentic" sightings (which, if we were going to be pedantic, might be narrowed down to maybe Mrs Darell and probably Lawende). However, having discussed the case with Stewart Evans on the boards (and you should check out the Casebook "Tumblety" site), I must confess there's enough gray for me to withhold final judgement. But then again, I have never been particularly interested in the Ripper's identity! It's the ins and outs of the case that fasciante me. David - thanks for the correction. Post-post-modern, eh? I'm feeling old already. Bob C - Mr Holmes informs me he accepts your gracious apology. CMD
Author: Regis Tuesday, 16 November 1999 - 01:49 pm
Equal temperament tuning, which replaced mean-tone tuning in the 18th century and is universally accepted for Western music today, partitions the octave into twelve equal semitones.
Author: Guy Hatton Wednesday, 17 November 1999 - 12:30 am
Octave - eight notes? Twelve? Or should it be calculated as seven (by the same logic which says that an octave in the chromatic scale has twelve notes) or thirteen (by the logic which says an octave in a diatonic scale has eight)? Go figure! All the Best Guy
Author: Assassmon & Cujo Thursday, 09 December 1999 - 10:17 am
TO BE 99% SURE EQUALS TO BE 100% NOT SURE - AN OPEN CRITICISM TO THE GENERAL VAGUE THEORIES SURROUNDING THIS CASE During our almost 20 year long interest in this case, we can conclude that most of the researchers, including ourselves, only are speculating on specific facts that actually are no facts. If we would exclude all information which aren�t verifiedly or scientifically proved, we would have a big pile of misinformation. Do we really want to solve this case? Aren�t we fed up with all those speculations, with no back up whatosever to support these claims? We have to use modern science much better - science that wasn�t possible back then when the Ripper murders occured. To get a breakthrough in this case, we gotta cooperate instead of keeping ourselves to our own theories. If we look back, the examination of this case has virtually stood still ever since Jack cut up East End. This case isn�t about individuals own interests and profits, it is about justice; isn�t it about time after 111 years? Critic against the Maybrick diary only to mention one example that darkens the truth. Such individuals we should exclude in this case - things that can�t be proved should not get any attention: we have to concentrate on the relevant things. What is the Lusk letter worth without the kidney? How much is Steven White�s statements about the circumstances about Catherine Eddowes� death, if we can�t prove he really took the shawl? How can Stewart Evans be 100 % sure of Tumblety�s guilty when he doesn�t have 100 % sure evidence? The list of myths can be made long. If we are about to come somewhere in this case, we have to cooperate and take responsibility together. We want to link this to the introduction of this letter, to remark the weight of cooperation, and to use modern science and technic to exclude speculations and wild theories. Nobody out there have the answer. We have to build together all the pieces of this puzzle, and to check all the pieces are true - one false piece could derange the whole puzzle. We can�t have one false piece, although we have the whole puzzle; when we have laid all the pieces in place, we can�t just clap our hands and hit our breasts and cry "We did it!", everytime new so-called "evidence" surfaces - when all the pieces aren�t proved. Assassmon and Cujo
Author: Jeff D Thursday, 09 December 1999 - 01:37 pm
Hello ! Fascinating and pertinent statement made above, though I am confident that even with all the knowledgeable people out there, those who know just about every fact and aspect associated with the ripper murders, we would still fail to find the Holy Grail which we seek. I would like to say though, how I feel the standard of these message boards has improved significantly since I last used to attend. I had went away, done some reading and felt that I would have a host of questions and observations to add, yet I appear to be constantly wide of the mark with many things I had considered fact. I do hope that the standard of content remains high and whether we all agree, or agree to disagree on certain aspects, I hope the discussions continue. I for one, certainly gain a great deal of understanding of Victorian London and the Ripper murders when seeing such open debate. There is and always will be a fringe element that would stifle good debate and hurle insults for no reason, that appears to be one of the draws of this subject matter. By and large though, I do find the community of (for want of a better word) "Ripperologists" a good group of people, for whatever reason they are interested in this great, unsolved mystery. I shall endeavour to read and enjoy before I open my big trap in future, and just hope that one day I might myself make a correct contribution or telling remark in these discussions. Thanks to All ! Jeff D
Author: kurlee Friday, 10 December 1999 - 02:15 am
Here, here, Jeff. This forum has been very informative and thought provoking since I found it a week ago, though I have found a few postings to be a little less than objective. Assassmon & Cujo, I couldn't have put it better. regards, Kurlee
Author: Peter R.A. Birchwood Friday, 10 December 1999 - 10:59 am
Where is Dave Radka going to get the 50,000 people he's going to charge $20 each to, for the identity of JtR? My guess is that his suspect is Druitt and if you all want to send me just 50c, I'll be happy. Peter
Author: ChrisGeorge Friday, 10 December 1999 - 11:37 am
Hello, Peter: SPE thinks Radka's suspect is Kosminski. Are we taking bets? Possibly we should call it "Mishter Radka's JtR Millennium Sweepstakes"? :-) Chris George P.S. Got the goods on Bulling yet? (Nervy aren't I? Pushy Anglo Yank.... er, have a nise Xmas Mishter B'wood) :-)
Author: Jeff D Friday, 10 December 1999 - 11:53 am
Hello All ! Actually, it has to be very near the time isn't it ? I was sure that sometime, nearly a-year back, David did post and say that he would give all Ripper efficienados up to a year before he divulged to the world the solution that was right under everybody's nose all along ? David, please don't think I'm having a pop at you, I honestly would never consider such a thing. I have always read your posts, and have respected your exchange of views. You did post with utmost confidence that you had solved the mystery, and that you could link and prove all the evidence. Have you since re-evaluated or has any information come to light that might disprove your conviction ? (If so, that's OK, it happens to me all the time) I have been waiting with eager anticipation.... Cheers Jeff D
Author: Peter R.A. Birchwood Friday, 10 December 1999 - 01:37 pm
Chris: My Money's on Druitt and I'll go $10 on it. Who do you suggest as stake-holder? When I get something on Bulling, you'll be the first to know. I'm trying to find his family but suspect they've been eaten by the Great God Cthulhu. You've been there long enough to be a Yankee-Anglo! Peter
Author: D. Radka Saturday, 11 December 1999 - 12:55 pm
Ladies and Gentlemen, Who or what is SPE? Is this the acronym, perhaps, of a paladin cabal attempting to restrict the solution to the case to a limited few for private gains? Board stalwarts above have correctly remembered that I first noted I felt I'd solved the case here on December 6, 1998, and that I'd wait at least a year before speaking of it in order to give anyone who might have a financial stake in keeping the solution quiet a chance to collect their money beforehand. So, I believe I am now free to speak as I will, at any point. Since then I've continued research, and maintained absolute secrecy with respect to my views. In a sense I've been the only inhabitant of that universe in which the solution is known. I haven't half minded living in this universe, to be truthful. Mr. Scott Nelson, a regular poster here, very kindly permitted me to review his large stash of back issues of the journal 'Ripperana,' which has added to my understanding. As a result of reading what so many others have postulated over the years, I'm now convinced my idea is entirely absent from the library of books on the subject, thus that I have solved the case alone. I have a complete solution, one that fundamentally answers every significant open question in the case. It also explains why the case was not solved in eleven decades. It names JtR, why he committed the murders, how he escaped contemporaneous detection, and so on. In one sense, some of the questions that have been posed are shown as red herrings, in another, some other questions are shown actually as the solution itself. It is a matter of perspective and logic applied to published information on the case. Proof or disproof of my solution would await the efforts of a UK-based researcher, after I self-publish. My plans are to continue to proceed entirely alone on this, in my spare time. No outside publisher, editor, corporation, stockholders, or anyone else will be involved. A manuscript of 75-100 pages will be copyrighted, then I expect I'll hire a local print shop to make a paperback edition for me similar to how annual reports of corporations, are printed, or I'll run off photocopies in my office myself. At that point perhaps I'll open an inexpensive web site to sell the thesis directly to anyone who wants a copy. When will this be ready? Not soon. The chapters are laid out and under composition, a detailed summary of the solutions to the open questions has been written, and a few other things, but it is still a long way from completion. The first chapter is "To the Reader" and the last is "To the Last Ripperologist." A window of opportunity for the muse to strike me occurs for less than an hour per day; I have to make a living. Maybe another year....? It is entirely possible that someone will publish this solution before I do, given my slowness and what seems to me the obviousness of the answer to everyone. If they should, I would be gracious to them. However, I will not say a word about my views on the case to anyone until either I publish, or someone else does. I've been illustrating my pages with scans of familiar illustrations taken from published works on the case. Does anyone know if I might get in trouble doing this without written permission from the authors? Is a citation of the material in a footnote enough? To All: Thanks for your patience. Someday we'll get there. David
Author: Cabal Sunday, 12 December 1999 - 03:49 am
Whew, he's given us another year to get the final solution published.
Author: Peter R.A. Birchwood Sunday, 12 December 1999 - 07:40 am
To answer David Radka's question, it's not widely known but the initials "SPE" which as the cognoscenti know stands for: "Society of Political Economics" does indeed hide the identities of a group of authors and researchers who discovered the TRUE identity of JtR nearly 40 years ago but decided not to publish in order to increase their own profits. Obviously, if the mystery had been solved in 1961many books would not have been published and the opportunities for profit would have been greatly curtailed. Perhaps David will now be entitled to join them. If he is, then we will know by him publishing his suspects name. If it turns out to be someone so completely impossible as to invite howls of derision from everyone here then we will know that he has been bought off. I am sure that many of you would like me to break this code of secrecy and tell you exactly who Jack was. This I am forbidden to do by the byelaws of the SPE. However, in fairness, I can give you one clue: remember Morse's Law. As to the free speech issue, I must admit to having a sneaking regard for the principle in theory but not in practice as those who defend it most avidly seem to be the people who grab hold of your collar at parties and tell you in excruciating detail how they are being spied on by small grey aliens and how the CIA has bugged their bathrooms. One last thing: David wrote: "I haven't half minded living in this universe, to be truthful." Now the use of the word "half" in this context is one that I have only seen before used by English persons. Could it be... Peter.
Author: Christopher-Michael Sunday, 12 December 1999 - 09:30 am
David - As one of the Mystic Knights of Whitechapel (secret sign: a piece of chalk and a rag, shaken while saying "I've lost my handkerchief"), I can tell you that SPE stands for Stewart P Evans. Having done that, I must now ask all present to wait while I wipe your minds clean with the memory ray. There. All done. Peter - I agree with you to some extent about the advocates of free speech. I've found, though, that I can live with the people whom the CIA and MIB have probed with mind-controlling devices; it's the ones who insist THEY have every right to speak but YOU don't bnecause you're a (insert favourite derogatory epithet here) who brass me off. That's America for you. CMD
Author: Jon Sunday, 12 December 1999 - 11:47 am
CMD Do you realize what you have done ??!!! You have betrayed a secret known only to a few initiates, those who share a confidence are not permitted to divulge the meaning of ....SPE There may very well be retribution for this outrage, mark my words.... If we read about you found in a desolate backstreet alley with your throat cut, abdomen ripped open and intestines thrown over the right shoulder, ....the 'silent ones' should not be surprised. The Masons have influence, and reach far & wide. Be warned, you can run, ...but you cannot hide !!! Beware the dark !!!! signed (silent one)
Author: James Sunday, 12 December 1999 - 03:09 pm
The question on "Who Wants to Be A Millionaire?" was 'how many tones in an octave?' not 'how many notes?' These are different questions. Check your sources, and then review who it is that requires a better education. :)
Author: James Sunday, 12 December 1999 - 03:29 pm
Has Forbes Winslow ever been a suspect? "Day after day and night after night I spent in the Whitechapel slums. The detectives new me, the lodging house keepers new me, and at last the poor creatures of the streets came to know me... To me the frightened women looked for hope. In my presence they felt reassured, and welcomed me to their dens and obeyed my commands eagerly..."
Author: Christopher-Michael Sunday, 12 December 1999 - 04:26 pm
James - If you would look back on my original "Millionaire" post, I did say that I had not seen the show in question, but was only repeating what I had been told. Perhaps, then, I should have made that clearer, and allowed for the possibility that my informant was wrong. My education, however, has been quite adequate, thank you. With regards to the batty Dr Forbes Winslow, he wrote that because of his supposed omnipresence in Whitechapel he was himself suspected of being the Ripper, but to the best of my knowledge, I do not believe he was ever considered as such by the police. On the contrary, they regarded him as a crank, a forger and a troublesome busy-body. CMD
Author: Peter R.A. Birchwood Monday, 13 December 1999 - 11:54 am
CMD: How on earth can you believe that SPE stands for something as simple as Stewart P. Evans? Surely, in this particular environment it's much more likely to be a sign of the Great Conspiracy. Or are you to (Horrors!) in their pay? Peter
Author: Assassmon & Cujo Tuesday, 14 December 1999 - 10:49 am
THE POWER OF PARANOIA We want to refer to our last post, called "99 % sure equals 100 % not sure". The only thing in this case we can be sure about is that the Canonical victims were really murdered -- and that may be the only thing we can be 100 % sure of. To get a real view of the event, we almost have to be there in East End 1888 to understand the panic and paranoia that spread. Common with such murders is that the public creates a myth, one single man going around ripping his victims. Why does it have to be only one man? It�s natural that the mind of the individual creates one man behind the murders -- one wants to link the evil power to one person, but history has showed us that evilness can have many faces and names. Sceptic persons claim it couldn�t have been multiple murderers in such a small area at the same time. As we have pointed out we casn�t be 100 % sure that it is that way, and so-called researchers have pointed out several different murderers which ironically shows that there really were severel murderers; researchers are obviously contradicting themselves. Most researchers seem to choose between head and tail, unfortenately. When we are chatting we can feel free in our speculations, but when we are publically expressing our theories we have to have back-up. Can anyone show 100% authencity in our material? Assassmon & Cujo
Author: R.J.P. Thursday, 16 August 2001 - 03:01 pm
HE THINKS HE KNOWS THE MONSTER "George M. Dodge, a seaman who has visited many ports thinks he knows the wretch who has committed the atrocious murders in the Whitechapel district of London. He says that he left here on January 6, as third mate of the clipper Wandering Jew. Arriving at Shangai China, he was paid off and shipped as quartermaster on the English steamship Glenorley. The vessel stopped at various ports on the China coast, and arrived at London on Aug 13. Dodge went to the Queen's music hall High St. Poplar, with the ship's mate, and there met a Malay cook called Alaska. The Malay said that he had been paid a few days before two years' wages, amounting to more than $500. He had purchased clothing and fine gold watch. Going to the Whitechapel district, Alaska said, he had been robbed by a woman with whom he had consorted, of all he had. Dodge says that in his presence that Malay cook threatened that, unless he found the woman that robbed him and recovered his property from her, he would murder and mutilate every Whitechapel woman he met. As an earnest of his boast he showed a knife, the blade of which was fully fifteen inches long and sharpened on both edges. The Malay is described as five feet seven inches high; weight 130 pounds; has straight, black hair, black eyes, black mustache, fine features and is about thirty-five years old." --New York Tribune, 5 October, 1888. The search is over.
Author: Stephen P. Ryder Thursday, 16 August 2001 - 03:24 pm
Hey R.J.P. - Thanks for the article - I've just now added it to our Press Reports section. :-)
Author: R.J.P. Friday, 14 September 2001 - 05:13 pm
At LAMBETH, JOHN BENJAMIN PERRIMAN, 40, hairdresser, living in Pennethorne-road, Peckham, was charged with being drunk and disorderly in Old Kent-road. On Wednesday night detectives Leek and Reed were in the Old Kent-road, and hearing a disturbance, went to that spot. They found the prisoner surrounded by a crowd, and it was feared he would be roughly handled as he had declared himself to be "Jack the Ripper," and had acted in a very violent manner. He flourished his arms about, and exhibited a black leather bag, about which he made some remarks. He caught hold of several women, and caused much alarm. The officers, after much difficulty, got the prisoner to the station, being followed by an excited mob. At the station the bag carried by the prisoner was searched, and in it were found two pairs of scissors, a dagger and sheath, and a life preserver. Mr. Partridge asked whether the prisoner wished to account for carrying these things about, and the prisoner said he was going to have them ground. It was further stated that the prisoner was known as the "Mad barber of Peckham." A sister of the prisoner said he had been intoxicated for a long time. She knew he had a dagger, but for what purpose he kept it she did not know. Mr. Partridge said he should remand the prisoner, and if he was not right in his mind it would, perhaps, be necessary to send him to an asylum. The prisoner, who seemed to treat the matter as a joke, asked to be allowed out on bail, but Mr. Partridge declined to accede to his request. Times [London] 16 November, 1888 The search is over.
Author: Jason Mullins Monday, 17 September 2001 - 02:01 pm
Hello All - I am just now getting into these murders, and I must say that this message board and associated website are a wealth of information. However, I came across this post and I have a question. (Be gentle, this is one of my first posts) Would it be a safe presumption that the proclamation "The search is over" is a bit facetious, or have we finally discovered the identity of the killer? Also, I have not been able to find much about the person named in that news blurb, does anyone have any information available?