|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** 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 June 21, 1999
Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Suspects: Specific Suspects:
Later Suspects [ 1910 - Present ]:
Barnett, Joseph:
Archive through June 21, 1999
Author: Peter Birchwood
Wednesday, 16 June 1999 - 10:27 am |        | Rabbi Leen:
Thanks for your e-mailed suggestions to me. As your own e-mail doesn't want to connect, I'm taking this opportunity to tell you that I've contacted the Historical Society. Maybe they can help me pass on about £100,000 to a deserving family. (don't all call at once!)
Peter. |
Author: Karoline
Wednesday, 16 June 1999 - 01:58 pm | | Hi all -
re. pregnancy risk, I suppose the chronic malnutrition and/or alcoholism that so many of the lowest type of working girl suffered, meant they may well not have been ovulating or menstruating regularly and would therefore have been at decreased risk of conception. Also I suppose diseases like gonorrhoea would have wrecked their reproductive systems in a large proportion of cases.
Caz- without commenting on your ideas, if I were you I'd want to find a second source for any maybrick evidence; my impression is that neither Feldman nor Harrison are sound enough researchers to be quoted as authorities without some support from a recognised authority. Is Whitington-Egan supposed to be the best?
love to all
Karoline |
Author: Jethro
Wednesday, 16 June 1999 - 03:11 pm | | Hello !
It's been a while, but I've had a thought in my head for a while now concerning Mary Kelly, and Catherine Eddowes before her, that I find quite interesting.
Mary Kelly was heard singing away in the wee hours of the morning. Catherine Eddowes was singing in her jail cell, before being deemed fit for release. It's a crazy, and very vague connection, but if you consider that Kelly was out that night scouring the streets for a few pence, and we know that she owed a considerable amount of money, so she must have been at least a little concernced over this, how could she have been happy enough to sing like this? I don't really know much about the "violets from my Mothers grave" song, I would probably guess that it is a melancholy or sad, reflective song, no (?), but still.
The point I am making is that people usually have to be in an extremely good mood (even in drink)to carry on singing to themselves. I know now that people are going to give me all sorts of different circumstances, and probably tell me this is a very silly and tenuous point, but I am a musician and I do sing to myself a lot. I write a lot of songs, but I can never write while I'm in a down or somber mood. Even quieter ballads, sad, or bluesy-type songs, I have to be in a reasonably happy sort-of mood to write anything. Then with singing to myself, I certainly don't do this, and don't think I could do this while I was worrying about where my next meal was coming from, or whether I would have a roof over my head tomorrow night.
It looks very much to me like both Eddowes and Kelly were somewhat elated for some reason. Certainly happy enough to be singing to themselves, and this does (to me) bring about a few questions on whether they may have had some great expectations, or maybe the solutions to all their worries had been found. Just a thought I know, and you'll probably think I'm a total wacko, but I think people are just-about always in a happy mood, when they actually sing to themselves outloud. Mary Kelly singing away, then scouring the dangerous streets for a few pennies is something that does makes me think.
With regards to Joseph Barnett's pipe, he wouldn't have left it behind intentionally, and I would take this item as evidence to ask him a question or two, if even to simply rule him out of the investigation totally. I know that he was interviewed for 4-hours, but suspects have been overlooked after being interviewed before. A smoker does not forget his pipe, though Barnett could have simply left it behind from his visit earlier that evening. If Joseph Barnett wasn't the Ripper, certainly someone very like him was. Someone who even looked like him, but I don't think he would have been able to satisfy any of the womens money problems, which does make me apprehensive at pointing an accusing finger at him. I do have many suspicions about Barnett though.
Jethro |
Author: Leanne
Wednesday, 16 June 1999 - 04:53 pm | | G'day Ashling,
IMHO, The discussions on 'Victorian Contraception' and 'Mary and Catherine's singing',have less to do with Joseph Barnett than my belief that part of the 'Diary' could have been written by someone early this century, (maybe Barnett, maybe someone else).
LEANNE |
Author: Caz
Wednesday, 16 June 1999 - 05:40 pm | | Hi All,
At the risk of staying off-topic awhile (sorry!):
Thanks, Karoline, on both counts :-)
Yep, that makes sense about the poor dears not having to worry overmuch about conceiving. They certainly did lead rough old lives, didn't they?
Which ties in nicely with Jethro's excellent post about one of my other fave subjects, music.
I have had the same thoughts for some time that the girls seemed uncharacteristically chipper as they went to meet their maker. The thought of another quick fumble in the dark for a few coppers (sorry, pence, don't want the boys in blue up in arms:-)) would not inspire me to start singing my head off or do fire engine impressions, however many gins I'd had. Gin is also supposed to make you feel even more depressed, isn't it? It's more likely to make the gals wanna cut their throats. Hmmmmm.....
One thing that caught my eye recently was in an article in the latest Ripperologist mag entitled Unfortunate Lives by Gerry Nixon. He makes a suggestion that one of the ways Victorian prostitutes may have advertised their profession was by leaving off their bonnets when walking out. If this was true, then maybe Jack was there with the 'jolly new bonnets' and other goodies to prove his good faith and intentions towards turning their sad lives around. Maybe he even taught Mary the 'violet' song.
(For more on the 'violet' theme, see my post of June 10th at 03:51am, on the Victims Board section for discussing if Mary Kelly was the woman killed at No.13.)
Perhaps this should be over there somewhere anyway, as I have nothing further to add about Barnett's pipe. Apologies to all.
Love,
Caz |
Author: Bob_c
Thursday, 17 June 1999 - 09:40 am | | Hi all,
Just a bit about Barnett. If there had been the slightest suspicion at the time against him, he would have been arrested. So in need of a culprit were the police, they would have grilled him and there would have been some evidence, somewhere, of that. He must have been able to give satisfying answers to the questions he undoubtably became, anyway.
About his pipe. We shouldn't forget that 13, Millers Court, had been (and for him probably still was) his home. Although thrown out, he return regularly and spent time 'on good terms' with Kelly. It may be assumed that he would have returned to her (and his home) if he could have. To leave his personal property such as a pipe there under such circumstances is not, I submit, solid grounds for suspecting him as Jack.
Best regards,
Bob |
Author: RLeen
Thursday, 17 June 1999 - 11:23 am | | Hello All,
Just a few quick thoughts on what is an interesting alleyway.
First of all the pipe, bearing in mind that Joe Barnett had no money to give MJK it is not inconceivable to assume that he left the pipe behind because he had no tobacco. And, as Bob C. points out, 13 Dorset Street had been his home for some time. At the risk of sounding like a pseud it is perfectly natural for Barnett to leave his pipe behind because pyschologically it could distance him from the uncomfortable truth about the perilous state of his relationship with Kelly. A case of wherever I leave my pipe that's my home.
To continue on the musical vein (ouch, sorry!) we should remember the times and the lack of external stimuli. Jethro as a musician you must be aware of the emergence of "blues" music. Even in times where there seemed little hope the slaves continued to sing their sad songs. A trait shared by the Irish and Scots. Incidentally sad songs, called blues, were sung by the English in the 1500's trivia fans.
But perhaps the peoples most associated with singing sad songs when all the odds were against them, i.e. not in a chipper frame of mind, are the Russian Cossacks. After the last war, Cossacks who served the Nazis were shipped back to certain death in Russia, (I shall refrain from comment). Prior to their execution they converged in groups and sang songs about love and death. Considering the circumstances were hardly conducive for merriment it does show that song is not neccessarily the reserve of the content.
Thanking you for considering the thoughts of a pun laden crotchetty (geddit?) old man.
Rabbi Leen |
Author: Peter Birchwood
Thursday, 17 June 1999 - 11:24 am | | Leanne:
I really don't think that Anderson mentioned JOE BARNETT'S pipe in 1908. There was some fuss about a pipe found under the body of a later victim (Mackenzie?) which subsequently disapeared. I think you'll find that that was what Anderson was referring to. There really was no reason at the time to suspect Barnett especially as he must have been investigated after the murder. He's just one of a series of "suspects" named recently, Maybe he's more likely than some (I could name a couple even less likely but good taste prevents,) but is still way down on the Most Wanted list.
Peter. |
Author: RLeen
Thursday, 17 June 1999 - 11:26 am | | To Peter Birchwood,
Glad to have helped in the task of an early Christmas present for someone. You couldn't find out if I'm related to them could you? Only kidding.
Rabbi Leen |
Author: Leanne
Friday, 18 June 1999 - 04:30 am | | G'day Peter and everyone,
I picked up that information about Joseph Barnett's Pipe being a 'real clue', here in 'Casebook'. Under 'Dissertations/Joseph Barnett', Dr Frederick Walker writes:
On the 1st of September, 1908, Anderson stated in the 'Daily Chronicle' that 'there were only two real clues: the Goulston Street graffiti and Joe Barnett's pipe'.
I wonder what Anderson's exacts words were, in that report!
LEANNE! |
Author: Sarah R. Jacobs
Friday, 18 June 1999 - 05:32 pm | | On Fish-Gutting:
Come *on*! Some of you must be familiar with the nasty slang term for women, "fish." It could be that "fish-gutting" was translated by his sick mind to "woman-gutting," or maybe he never liked women very much (after all, being raised by Mother and not by Father is never most pleasant for any boy, and adolescence, with its hormonally-charged hatred of authority figures, would leave him hating the only authority figure close at hand -- his mother), and was just "practicing" on the fish.
LEEANNE! points out the diary's "no heart, no heart." This is a good observation. Another important thing to consider is that THE NAME OF THE MAN IN WHOSE POSSESSION THE DIARY WAS FOUND WAS "MIKE BARRETT." It's not that difficult to subtract an "N" and add an "R." One would assume that Barrett had lived with the Family Secret that he was the grandson of Jack the Ripper for too long. The Solution? I will explain, forthwith:
1) Barrett has lived for too long with the "family heirloom" tucked away in the attic.
2) He tells his wife, who, after horror, experiences a great wave of panic.
3) Barrett tells her to relax, that it is all done so as to look as though James Maybrick, who just happened to have lived across town from where the Barretts dwell, had been Jack.
4) Mrs. Barrett examines the Last Will and Testament of James Maybrick, which is on display at the Liverpool Historical Society, and discovers that granddad has done a piffle-poor job of forging the man's script.
5) The two go to a publisher with their story of Devereux's having found the diary at Maybrick's own estate.
5)Meanwhile, Devereux conveniently dies.
6) Barrett probably knew that Devereux only had a few months or weeks left. That way the story would be uncheckable.
7)After a masterful spin-job on the part of the publishers, serious Ripperologists begin to question the authenticity of the diary...
8)...which is where Barrett's "confession" comes off as genuine. His mind is quick enough to lead the Inspectors off the scent once again. Just like granddad, only Barrett's (presumably) kind to his wife and daughter. Although, they did split up. I believe she has got the daughter.
I am eager for a sample of Joe's or of Dr. Ostrog's handwriting to surface. If it is true that the diary is "early 20th c. with a median of 1921," and the handwriting is, too, then it might match with Joe's or with the Mad Dr.'s!!!
Sarah |
Author: D. Radka
Friday, 18 June 1999 - 06:18 pm | | Sarah,
To whom do you refer as "the mad Dr. Ostrog?"
David |
Author: Christopher George
Saturday, 19 June 1999 - 07:10 am | | Hello, Sarah R. Jacobs:
Michael Barrett the grandson of Jack the Ripper (Joe Barnett) and Anne Graham the great granddaughter of Jack the Ripper's wife (Florence Maybrick). The flights of fancy are really taking off aren't they?
Chris George |
Author: Leanne
Saturday, 19 June 1999 - 08:28 am | | G'day Sarah,
Well said! I've also noticed that Kelly is the ONLY victim named! Why?
I reckon that something, (possibly a scrapbook with a few poems and press clippings), was handed down in M's, not A's family and he forged James Maybrick into it, to cover up the family name.
So he's right when he says that he forged it and to 'protect' the family name, A says that it came from HER side of the family. This would explain the differing ion migration tests. |
Author: Stuart
Saturday, 19 June 1999 - 11:59 am | | Re- the contraception question. Having done a couple of presentations and essays on prostitution in both modern and Victorian times, I've come across references to the technique employed by many prostitutes of making the male client THINK he is enjoying penetration, but in reality is being gripped by the woman's thighs.
I think, but can't be sure a book called the sexual contract by C.Pateman explains (excuse the pun, but don't hold me to it!). Another book dealing with modern prostitution gave the evidence of a prostitute in her 60's in the Birminham area who had NEVER been penetrated by a client whilst they thought they had! (What are you gonna do, go to trading standards???)
Hope this adds a little more to the debate, but I imagine this factor plus the poor nutritional aspects of their lives would all contribute to the lower risk of pregnancy.
as an after-thought, perhaps the ever present risk of physical violence from some customers might well have resulted in mis-carriages.
Stuart |
Author: Leanne
Sunday, 20 June 1999 - 07:52 am | | G'day All,
Trying to fit Barnett in with the other victims, here's my little 'Timeline':
* In July 1888, JOESEPH BARNETT loses his job as a fish porter.
* On September 8th, Annie Chapman was killed. Barnett was a friend-of-a-friend of Annies.
* On September 17th, a letter was recieved by someone starting with the words 'Dear Boss'. I reckon it was George Lusks, because he was head of the 'Whitechapel Vigilantes', of which JOSEPH BARNETT had by now joined.
* On September 27, the 'Dear Boss' letter arrives at the Central News Agency.
* On September 30, Stride and Eddowes were both killed. JOSEPH BARNETT was an ex-neighbor to Eddowes, who claimed to know the Rippers identity.
* On October 1st, the 'Saucy Jacky' postcard, which says: 'I was not CODding'. 'Codding' could have been typical fish-porters language.
* On October 16th, George Lusk, (who was president of the 'Whitechapel Vigiance Committee'), recieved the 'From Hell' letter, with the kidney.
* On October 30th, JOSEPH BARNETT and Mary Jane kelly quarrel so violently a window was broken and a key was taken. JOE leaves, leaving his pipe behind.
* Every day for a week JOE visits Kelly on "friendly terms", forgets to take his pipe, after the last visit and 'goes to 'play' with his friends, (without his pipe?).
* On November 9th, Mary Jane Kelly was killed violently and JOSEPH BARNETT'S pipe is still where he left it!
NOW 'TEAR' THAT TO BITS!!!!
LEANNE! |
Author: birchwood
Sunday, 20 June 1999 - 12:17 pm | | Chris:
I suspect that Sara is having us on.
Leanne:
Do you really truly believe this? Considering that Anderson would be very unlikely to refer to a suspect as "Joe Barnett" rather than "Barnett" or "Joseph Barnett" and considering the number of things Dr Walker (what is he a doctor of?) got wrong, I would suspect that if there was such an article, he got that wrong as well. Anderson was undoubtedly speaking about another pipe supposedly found underneath a victim and subsequently lost.
Please consider that Sara may be having her little joke. This has happened in the past as you know. Any identification between Barnett and Barrett is equivalent to the Skinner and Feldman identification between Graham and Ingraham: complete and absolute silliness.
Lastly, because I haven't read too much re Barnett could you explain:
How do you know that he was a friend of a friend of Annie Chapman?
The Sept. 17th Dear Boss letter is a hoax as explained earlier.We only have the word of its supposed discoverer that it was actually in the Home Office files. George Lusk didn't get his until Oct. 16th.
How do you know that Barnett was an ex-neighbour to Eddowes?
Codding? OK, the term "double event is used in the racing world: Jack must have been a jockey. "squealed"
Pigs squeal, rabbits squeal: Jack was a farmer. "keeping last letter back" a term used in business and journalism: Jack was a businessman or journalist."Right track" Obviously Jack worked on the railways. Need I go on?
What do you mean, "play" with his friends? And why shouldn't he leave his pipe behind, possibly by mistake? If it was a "clay" they were extremely cheap and he could pick one up very easily. Considering that he had lived in the room, how could it possibly be a clue to anything other than he had lived in the room?
Sorry, although there may be grounds to suspect Barnett, your comments haven't added to them.
Peter. |
Author: Sara
Monday, 21 June 1999 - 02:00 am | | Peter:
Add an "h" to that Sara, as I'm having none of that noise! ;-)
Sara |
Author: Leanne
Monday, 21 June 1999 - 05:15 am | | G'day Peter,
If you believe that Anderson was referring to the blood smeared pipe, found near the body of Alice McKenzie on the 18th of July, why would he mention it after the Goulston St graffiti? In a footnote, to his memoirs, Anderson added: 'I am assuming that the murder of Alice McKenzie was by another hand'.
About Barnett being a neighbor of Eddowes: In his book, 'The Simple Truth', Bruce Paley writes that Eddowes often stayed in the empty shed that was next door to Barnett and Kelly's room.
I got the information of Chapman being a 'friend-of-a-friend' here in 'Casebook', under 'Dissertations/Odd Omissions: Scott Morrows plea for Barnett's innocence'.
The September 17th 'Dear Boss' letter, was in a similar handwriting to the 'Lusk Letter'. It contained the phrase 'catch me when you can', as does the 'Lusk Letter'. It was scruffy and badly spelt as was the 'Lusk Letter', and was signed 'Jack The Ripper'.
No one knew knew about the expressions: 'Dear Boss' or 'Jack the Ripper', until the September 27th "Dear Boss' letter was first published on the 1st of October.
By 'PLAY' with his friends, I am referring to Barnett's alibi of going to 'Buller's Lodging House', where he lost himself in a game of 'whist' with friends, before retiring at 12.30. Kelly's cry of "MURDER!", was heard between 3.30 and 4am!
At Kelly's inquest, Barnett contradicted a statement he made earlier to Abberline, referring to the reason he seperated from Kelly. Barnett had told Abberline, that he left her because she resorted to prostitution, because he couldn't earn sufficient money to give her.
At the inquest he stated: 'Because she took in an immoral woman. My being out of work, had nothing to do with it'.
The next day, he spoke to the 'Central News Agency', telling them a similar story but revealing that Kelly had taken in TWO prostitutes.
NOW TEAR THAT TO BITS!!!
LEANNE! |
Author: Caz
Monday, 21 June 1999 - 04:27 pm | | Hi Leanne,
He will, he will. :-)
This 'codding' bit sounds so typical of all the coincidental plays on words in the letters. See also the Suspects Board on William Withey Gull and 'gulling' the public, which appeared in one of the Yours Truly letters. You couldn't plan it better if you tried, could you?
A play-on-words anecdote and a couple of silly 'jokers' might go down well at this point:
My own suspect's brother, George, once went with his wife to a ball and had themselves announced by the MC as Sir Walter and Lady Closet. Not one of the pompous gits turned a hair!
The two brothers, George and Weedon, once stood by the Niagara Falls, asking other tourists directions to said beauty spot. They did the same in front of Madame Tussaud's in London.
(They were probably the only ones roaring with laughter :-))
See y'all.
Love,
Caz |
|
|
|
|
