Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders
Karen Trenouth
Author House, 2006
ISBN 1425934153
Hardcover. Illustrated.
Casebook Review: 
The central theory proposed in Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders is that the Jack the Ripper murders and the Cleveland Street Scandal were more or less interconnected. Trenouth suggests that Mary Kelly got wind of the pedophiliac practices going on at Cleveland Street, and she shared this information with Inspector Abberline. Soon after, a handful of aristocrats found out that their secret was outed by a woman who was only identified as "Mary," and so, according to Trenouth, "they come to an agreement to find, question, and murder prostitutes until they find Mary."
Its a new spin on the basic tenets of the Royal Conspiracy theory - the nobility using ritual murder to silence those who sought to expose the innermost secrets of Prince Albert Victor, in a vain attempt to preserve the reputation of the monarchy. The central players in Trenouth's gang of aristocrats are Lord Arthur Somerset, Henry James Fitzroy, Herbrand Arthur Russel and William Humble Ward, with Dr. Alfred Pearson performing the actual mutilations. Prince Albert Victor himself makes an appearance to slaughter Mary Kelly on November 9th - despite the well-documented fact that he was nowhere near Whitechapel at the time.
Trenouth claims to clearly see a statue of Baphomet (a demon-idol with links to devil worship and the Knights Templar) laying on Mary Kelly's table, amidst the pile of flesh in in the second Millers Court crime scene photograph. This is important according to Trenouth, who suggests that the organs extracted from certain of the Ripper's victims were used in sacrifical Baphometic rituals. Trenouth also argues that Mary Kelly's body was carved exactly in the way a hunter would "field-dress" a deer - further evidence, in her eyes at least, that Prince Eddy was (an avid deer hunter) was involved.
In the end, Epiphany offers a decidedly peculiar and convoluted theory, with very little evidence to back it up. As fiction this story might have made for an interesting book. As non-fiction, its flat and unconvincing, reminiscent of the earliest Ripper books: lots of style, but very little substance. Not recommended.
