Real, prank, or other?

[Wyatt Earp]

It also could have been somebody that the author bribed with the promise of a few drinks to deliver the package.

I can see a couple of problems with this. First of all, if you’re going to mail out your prized Eddowes kidney, do you really want to rely on Joe from the pub, with a foreign accent no less, to get you the right address? Second, once the news broke about the letter and the kidney, Joe from the pub could start scratching his chin and putting two and two together, and he could end up putting the police onto your scent. If nothing else, he might be able to give them a very good description of you. If I’m Jack, I don’t think I’d want to involve any strangers in this caper. This would be a job for one of my buddies.

Yes, he could have been Jack's accomplice but a man six feet or more in height would have been very unusual in a working class district in those days. If he was working as an accomplice to Jack (look-out etc) you'd think that would have drawn attention of passersby, not been helpful!

What would have been the big deal about sending a man who was six feet tall to get an address for you?

I'd like to know whether other hoax letters didn't bear Lusk's complete address, either. It would be good to know the profession of this Irish bloke, too. If he was an undertaker or anything to do with the medical fraternity he could have had access to a kidney.

Why would a man with an Irish accent effect an Irish accent in the letter? Wouldn’t he just spell (or misspell) the words normally?

[Rosella]

I meant an accomplice to the murders, a friend who had been helping as a lookout etc. (I don't really think that's likely as I believe Jack was a loner). I think it's more probable that Emily's man was the sender of another hoax letter entirely, that's now completely unknown.

I think the writer of the Lusk letter (who could very well have been Jack) was a regular in the audience at Victorian melodramas at Penny Gaffs (cheap theatres of the East End.)

IMO he could have been imitating the sort of over the top Irish characters he would have seen in plays there, in some phrases of the letter. Exhibiting a black sort of humour, perhaps?

Therefore the fact that there were Irish phrases in the Lusk letter and this man appeared to be Irish was just one of those strange coincidences that pop up sometimes in the JTR annals.

[Rosella]

Just thought of something else. The Fenian Brotherhood (predecessors of the IRA) were a trouble to Scotland Yard at this time. What if the Lusk writer (whether Jack or not) was hoping that the police would seize on the Irish sounding parts of the letter and start a wild goose chase linking members of the FB in London to these murders?

[gnote]

Just thought of something else. The Fenian Brotherhood (predecessors of the IRA) were a trouble to Scotland Yard at this time. What if the Lusk writer (whether Jack or not) was hoping that the police would seize on the Irish sounding parts of the letter and start a wild goose chase linking members of the FB in London to these murders?

Interesting thought. Like everything else it brings up additional questions.

Would the writer(s) have been sure that certain phrases would be interpreted as Fenian? Being most if not all letters were treated as hoaxes in the first place, does it not diminish the relevance from the perspective of the police anyway? In other words would they have not saw through it as intentionaly misleading?

It brings us to the "kidne". If serious attention was wanted, obviously that would do it. (presumably on shock value alone) Writing a letter that's opportunistic in nature is one thing, it's quite another to obtain an organ to include. If the intention was to link Fenians with the murders it goes well beyond a simple hoax.

[pinkmoon]

If it was a prank and the prankster was identified and he struggled to produce an alibi for the night of the murder his in trouble isn't he a good chance he might end up shaking hands with the hangman.

[Harry D]

You'd a think a hoaxer would've signed off the letter as 'Jack the Ripper'. Some might argue that it wasn't necessary, what with the kidney and all, but by know the name was already in circulation and I would expect the writer to exploit it if they were trying to intimidate Lusk or playing a mean prank.

[Abby Normal]

If the Ripper never wrote the letter to Lusk, do you buy into the theory it was a prank, possibly by medical students, or some other explanation?

I think it was probably some crook, or a gang of crooks, in the area whose toes were being stepped on by the Vigilance Committee. We know that Lusk thought he was being stalked by someone, and there was that whole scene in the pub where a shady guy wanted to 'ave a word in private. It certainly seems like someone was trying to intimidate him for some reason. Whether that someone was the Ripper or not, who knows, but I'd suspect not.

Hi harry
I lean toward authentic. I have never bought the usual explanation that it would relatively easy for someone, even in the medical field, to get a hold of a human kidney. Certainly not a gang as you suggest.

And is someone in the medical field going to risk reputation, career or jail time for a hoax? I think not.

Also, as you suggest, I think a hoaxer would have signed off on it as Jack the ripper. the fact that it wasn't lends to it credibility IMHO.

As for the writers Irish bent-seems reasonable to me or at least cockney. I see similarity to the GSG. Shame they rubbed it out-could have compared.
Its also not lost on me That the GSG writing appeared with another piece of evidence from the Eddowes crime scene, or that the GSG seems to be the result of the ripper being disturbed trying to do his thing and Lusk is head of a vigilance committee, also out to disrupt the ripper from doing his thing.

Also, the fact that the lusk letter/kidney references cannibalism, and that post mortem serial killers (like the ripper was) commonly exhibit this characteristic is another factor pointing to its authenticity IMHO.

I give it 60/40 being authentic.

[pinkmoon]

[QUOTE=Harry D;342360]You'd a think a hoaxer would've signed off the letter as 'Jack the Ripper'. Some might argue that it wasn't necessary, what with the kidney and all, but by know the name was already in circulation and I would expect the writer to exploit it if they were trying to intimidate Lusk or playing a mean prank.[/QUO
In the lusk letter it is quite obvious that the author is trying his best to disguise the handwriting and give the the impression he is some poor uneducated sole why do that ?out of all the communications the lusk letter is the only one that has a chance of being genuine.

[GUT]

You'd a think a hoaxer would've signed off the letter as 'Jack the Ripper'. Some might argue that it wasn't necessary, what with the kidney and all, but by know the name was already in circulation and I would expect the writer to exploit it if they were trying to intimidate Lusk or playing a mean prank.

The absence of JtR at the bottom is, to me. a big issue.

[pinkmoon]

The absence of JtR at the bottom is, to me. a big issue.

Agree totally

[Wyatt Earp]

As for the writers Irish bent-seems reasonable to me or at least cockney.

The other communication which could have come from the “From hell” author includes what Evans and Skinner describe as “Cockney rhyming slang” (Letters from Hell, p. 60).

[GUT]

The other communication which could have come from the “From hell” author includes what Evans and Skinner describe as “Cockney rhyming slang” (Letters from Hell, p. 60).

There appear to be similarities.

[Wickerman]

The absence of JtR at the bottom is, to me. a big issue.

How so?
We have "an enterprising journalist" who invented the name, and..
an unsigned letter, presumably from the real(?) killer.

Is it necessary for the latter to acknowledge the former?

[GUT]

How so?
We have "an enterprising journalist" who invented the name, and..
an unsigned letter, presumably from the real(?) killer.

Is it necessary for the latter to acknowledge the former?

No Jon but if it was a hoax I would have expected that the author would use the name that even by that early date had became so closely connected to the killings.

[Wickerman]

No Jon but if it was a hoax I would have expected that the author would use the name that even by that early date had became so closely connected to the killings.

What doesn't ring true to me is the offer to send the tool of his trade to Lusk.
That just doesn't sound to me like what a real killer would do.
A hoaxer might write that for shock value, but wouldn't a killer be more attached to his tool of choice?