John Gill

[Ally]

So anyway getting back to the topic, as far as I can see, there is really not anything decisive that connects the Gill killing to the Ripper killings. The mutilations are more dissimilar than not, different victims, different methods. Is this the general consensus?

[Archaic]

Hi, Ally. We are still trying to find that out; the Gill case is very confusing, as the contemporary press reports & the few mentions of this case in books seem to offer conflicting sets of "facts".

I don't know if Dr Phillips' report on the Gill Murder is still in existence, or if anyone else involved with the Ripper Investigation ever saw it or expressed an opinion as to whether the Gill Murder shows similarities to the Whitechapel Murders.

Best regards, Archaic

[Stewart P Evans]

Sunday Chronicle

AP has requested that the following item from the Sunday Chronicle of March 17, 1889 be posted -

[silverstealth]

Poor old James Withers, Bradfords Chief Constable, A classic case of "your buggered if you do and your buggered if you don't.."

He was initially congratulated on his speedy arrest based on the evidence presented then condemmed when the Jury fails to convict on that very evidence..

[Ally]

So Silverstealth,

Are you of the opinion that the milkman did it?

[Rob Clack]

It might be worth posting a map showing where Bradford is in relation to London. The distance is about 209 Miles.



Rob

[silverstealth]

So Silverstealth,

Are you of the opinion that the milkman did it?

Barrett = best suspect but more than likely the fall guy...

[Cap'n Jack]

Thanks so much for posting that, Stewart, for I think it sums up the very real doubt of the milkman's culpability in the horrible crime.
I personally do not see any connection between him and the murder of Gill; and feel it far more likely that the butcher's apprentice mentioned by Silver had some involvement.
He's the right age for a start.

[Cap'n Jack]

II'd like to make a couple of important points here, the first of which is that this information has been available since early January 1889.
Samuel Lodge, who was in on the PM of John Gill concluded that in regard to the missing ear:
'the operation was done as cleanly as I could have done it myself'.
And then went on to state that this applied to 'all' the other parts removed.
He also believed that:
'the boy had been murdered where he was found.'
And not many of us realise that the killer had entirely cut away the boy's private parts, and I mean entirely.
The perfect virgin. Or whore.

[silverstealth]

II'd like to make a couple of important points here, the first of which is that this information has been available since early January 1889.
Samuel Lodge, who was in on the PM of John Gill concluded that in regard to the missing ear:
'the operation was done as cleanly as I could have done it myself'.
And then went on to state that this applied to 'all' the other parts removed.
He also believed that:
'the boy had been murdered where he was found.'
And not many of us realise that the killer had entirely cut away the boy's private parts, and I mean entirely.
The perfect virgin. Or whore.

Hi Jack is this a primary source or a newspaper report which cannot be relied upon?

[Archaic]

re:"The Boy had Been Murdered Where He Was Found"

SPE & Rob, thanks for those scans.

AP, I read the news report you supplied and I simply don't understand how the murder could possibly have been "committed where the boy was found". The body was found outside in the open air, a mere 60 yards from the family home, and right off the main street. It was found in a fairly busy commercial stable & coach yard which was in use during the day and checked by the constable at night.

It doesn't make any sense- the child had been missing for two days and everybody was looking for him!

When found there, the corpse had been mutilated & dissected as well as drained of blood,"rinsed", and dried; obviously requiring both time & privacy which could hardly have been afforded in that location.

In addition, it was late December with snow on the ground, so the killer would hardly have worked outdoors or in an unheated space.

I don't believe for one minute that the murder was committed where the body was found- I don't think it's even within the realm of possibility. If the Press ever reported that it was, they were 'reaching'.
The murder had to have been committed elsewhere & the body returned to this spot near the Gill home deliberately. In my opinion, this was done to horrify the family, the police, the town, & the world... and also to help frame the milkman.

Best regards, Archaic

[silverstealth]

SPE & Rob, thanks for those scans.
I don't believe for one minute that the murder was committed where the body was found- I don't think it's even within the realm of possibility.
Best regards, Archaic

Your absolutely right here. The body was devoid of all blood and there was no blood evidence found at the scene...

[Archaic]

Curious About Cutbush

There are a number of key points that sort of make me stray somewhat from the conception of a 'ritual', or a 'copy cat' crime... but both seem viable considering the circumstances.
My vague inclination at present - but I've got a whole load of more reading to do yet - is to see the hand of a genuine lunatic at work here, a young and sexually confused 'boy' atinkering with the inner workings of a universe he doesn't understand.
And this is where I see a remarkable resemblence to some of the Whitechapel Murders.

Hi, Cap'n; I was reading over this whole thread again and remembered I had meant to ask you about your above quote...
Would I be correct in assuming that the "young & sexually confused boy" you refer to is Thomas Cutbush?

I have a very limited knowledge of Cutbush.
Would you be interested in expounding on this at all?

Do you happen to know of anything potentially linking Cutbush to the Bradford case? And do you see the Gill murder as a crime expressive of a "lunatic" version of 'youthful sexual curiosity'?

Thanks, Archaic

[silverstealth]

An interesting image from 1888 Bradford



When I look at the little boy it brings the enormity of the crime home..

[Cap'n Jack]

Indeed Silver...
yes I'm quoting from a newspaper report, that is in turn quoting a medical practioner who was actually there at the site where the body was discovered; and also was a party to the PM.
I'm not saying, or even claiming, that Samuel Lodge was right, but we have to give him the respect and clarity of his opinion formed in 1889, after viewing the body and site.
Archaic, I do believe the killer would have been a very confused young man with the mental ability and agility of perhaps a child of the same age he had killed.