Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Maybrick, James: Vote the Diary - by Busy Beaver 12 minutes ago.
Shades of Whitechapel: Dennis Nilsen - by Fisherman 1 hour and 5 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - by caz 1 hour and 26 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - by caz 2 hours ago.
Non-Fiction: Jack the Ripper Suspect Dr. Francis Tumblety - by Admin 2 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - by caz 3 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Doctors and Coroners: Eddowes' gut cut - (7 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: Dennis Nilsen - (7 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - (5 posts)
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - (4 posts)
A6 Murders: scan of Hanratty statement re Rhyl alibi - (3 posts)
A6 Murders: Bob Woffinden has died - (2 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Letters and Communications > Dear Boss Letter

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-13-2014, 06:08 AM
Harry D Harry D is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 2,141
Question If the 'Dear Boss' letter is a hoax...

...then how do we reconcile Jack's promise to "clip the ladys ears off" with Eddowes' missing earlobe? Was the missing earlobe just an incidental act as Jack mutilated her face? Although this might be at odds with the precision of the killer's handiwork. Was it possible this information about the missing earlobe was leaked in time for someone to send the letter?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-13-2014, 07:54 AM
Hunter Hunter is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,734
Default

Catherine Eddowes' killer didn't "clip the lady's ears off." The writer of the postcard (same pen) apologizes for not doing so and gives the excuse that there wasn't enough time. There was time to take a uterus and kidney, however. Making good on a threat that was bound to go public seemed to not be so important. So, what's the point of the letter? Probably what the "certain high officials" at the Yard came to suspect.
__________________
Best Wishes,
Hunter
____________________________________________

When evidence is not to be had, theories abound. Even the most plausible of them do not carry conviction- London Times Nov. 10.1888
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-13-2014, 08:49 AM
bolo bolo is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Nuremberg, Germany
Posts: 343
Default

Hello Harry,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry D
how do we reconcile Jack's promise to "clip the ladys ears off" with Eddowes' missing earlobe?
A missing earlobe and a clipped-off ear are two different things.

Quote:
Was the missing earlobe just an incidental act as Jack mutilated her face?
Yes, and it's the most plausible explanation in my opinion. If Kate's murderer would have wanted to cut one of her ears off (the complete outer ear, not just a lobe), he could have done so. He concentrated on the lower parts and face instead and given the extent of her facial mutilations and bad lighting, I think it's fair to say that he accidentally cut the ear lobe in the process.

I think the Dear Boss letter was a hoax, just like most (all?) of the following Ripper correspondence. The fact alone that it was sent to Central News is the first and most important dead giveaway.

Best wishes,

Boris
__________________
~ All perils, specially malignant, are recurrent - Thomas De Quincey ~
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-28-2014, 08:24 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 6,092
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry D View Post
Was it possible this information about the missing earlobe was leaked in time for someone to send the letter?
Not possible, Harry. The letter was in police hands shortly before the double event.

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-28-2014, 08:48 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 6,092
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter View Post
Catherine Eddowes' killer didn't "clip the lady's ears off." The writer of the postcard (same pen) apologizes for not doing so and gives the excuse that there wasn't enough time.
Hi Cris,

I had assumed the lack of time was in reference to Stride's murder. The Dear Boss letter threatened to clip the ears off on his 'next' job - which was Stride according to the postcard. Of course, the author (if not the killer) could not have been sure of the full extent of the injuries to either victim when composing the postcard, in which case he (or she) would have been guessing the ears had not been attacked. Not much of a gamble, maybe, but it turned out to be a close call, given that Eddowes was the first victim to suffer facial mutilations of any sort, and in fact had the tip of her nose 'clipped off'. I assume this detail did not appear in the earliest reports, or the postcard's author would surely have exploited it in some way: "Had no time to get ears from one, but got nose from the other. Look out for it in the post".

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-28-2014, 08:53 AM
Prosector Prosector is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 158
Default

Boris
I'm not sure why sending the Dear Boss letters to Central News is a 'dead givaway.' Quite the opposite I would think. See George Robert Sims's article about it in the Referee. He correctly deduced that the writer was a journalist because it was sent to Central News but then dismisses out of hand the possibility that a journalist could also be a murderer. I wonder why?
Prosector
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-28-2014, 09:21 AM
Jon Guy Jon Guy is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 2,719
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry D View Post
...then how do we reconcile Jack's promise to "clip the ladys ears off" with Eddowes' missing earlobe? Was the missing earlobe just an incidental act as Jack mutilated her face? Although this might be at odds with the precision of the killer's handiwork. Was it possible this information about the missing earlobe was leaked in time for someone to send the letter?
Harry

It might be just me but it appears from this sketch that more than the just the earlobe was sliced off. It doesn`t look far off from "clipping" the whole ear.

The missing bit of ear was found later amongst her clothes. Did the killer drop it and didn`t have the time to hang around looking for it, as promised?
Attached Images
 
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-28-2014, 09:32 AM
pinkmoon pinkmoon is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: north west of england
Posts: 1,813
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prosector View Post
Boris
I'm not sure why sending the Dear Boss letters to Central News is a 'dead givaway.' Quite the opposite I would think. See George Robert Sims's article about it in the Referee. He correctly deduced that the writer was a journalist because it was sent to Central News but then dismisses out of hand the possibility that a journalist could also be a murderer. I wonder why?
Prosector
I bet if you asked 100 hundred people the best place to send a letter if you wanted it published in a national newspaper the vast majority if not all of them would say post it to a newspaper.If put a letter in the post simply addressed to the Times newspaper in London I'm pretty sure it would find its way there.A journalist would know about a news agency certainly not the average man in the street also why not send a small piece of the victims clothing with the letter would take seconds to take from the body and it would leave absolutely no doubt letter was genuine.I believed the dear boss letter was genuine for years I think it was mainly because it gave such a sensational twist to this story but when you look at it and way up the facts you've got to say HOAX.I do think we owe the journalist a big thank you because he did choose a fantastic name for our killer.
__________________
Three things in life that don't stay hidden for to long ones the sun ones the moon and the other is the truth
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-29-2014, 02:17 AM
Jon Guy Jon Guy is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 2,719
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pinkmoon View Post
I bet if you asked 100 hundred people the best place to send a letter if you wanted it published in a national newspaper the vast majority if not all of them would say post it to a newspaper.
Absolutely, whomever sent the letter to the Central News Agency wanted it printing (even though in this instance the writer asked for the letter to be held back until he strikes again). Everything points to a killer following events in the newspapers, mentioning leather apron and doctors.

If you wanted the letter printing would you send it to the Police ?



In my mind there are too many coincidences for the 2 letters to be hoaxes:

After 2 murders in a week there is a lull for three weeks and the letter arrives 2 days before the next murder.

First letter threatens to clip the ears which is followed through -although it appears the ear is dropped amongst Eddowes clothing in the dark.

Second letter claims number one squealed a bit and couldn`t finish straight off. Schwartz witnesses Stride screaming.

The writer explains that he didn`t have the time to get ears as promised, and we know time was tight in Mitre Sq.

Last edited by Jon Guy : 07-29-2014 at 02:33 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-01-2014, 08:09 AM
Prosector Prosector is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 158
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Guy View Post
Absolutely, whomever sent the letter to the Central News Agency wanted it printing (even though in this instance the writer asked for the letter to be held back until he strikes again). Everything points to a killer following events in the newspapers, mentioning leather apron and doctors.

If you wanted the letter printing would you send it to the Police ?



In my mind there are too many coincidences for the 2 letters to be hoaxes:

After 2 murders in a week there is a lull for three weeks and the letter arrives 2 days before the next murder.

First letter threatens to clip the ears which is followed through -although it appears the ear is dropped amongst Eddowes clothing in the dark.

Second letter claims number one squealed a bit and couldn`t finish straight off. Schwartz witnesses Stride screaming.

The writer explains that he didn`t have the time to get ears as promised, and we know time was tight in Mitre Sq.
Jon

I agree. Even more damming I think is the third letter which is very rarely mentioned. This was the one apparently received by Central News dated and received on 5th October in which the writer vehemently denies having killed the woman whose torso was found in the basement in Whitehall. For some unknown reason only the envelope (which was apparently in the same handwriting as the two previous communications) was sent to Scotland Yard and the letter itself was transcribed by Thomas Bulling. It is this that has caused most people to presume that it was a hoax perpetrated by Bulling himself.

There are other explanations - for instance the letter might have been sent for photographing or kept back by Central News for future display. If Bulling or his colleagues were the hoaxers would it not have been much more likely that they would have claimed credit for the Whitehall torso? The real Jack had a motive for not wanting to claim that one as his handiwork - he wanted the actual killings to be connected by a distinctive 'signature' and that one fell outside both the pattern and the area.

Prosector
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.