The Ripper's "Charm"

[Ben]

Hi Roy,

f that sketch is not officially police sanctioned, then how can we know that this newspaper report is officially sanctioned either?

We can't, but we can note that it just happened to coincide with subsequent police reports, memoirs and interviews that also just happened to lend weight to the conclusion that Hutchinson's description was subsequently discredited. In this case, we're talking about two independent press reports that attested to the same observation at around the same time. As for Galloway, we have no way of knowing if the policeman in question was ever identified, or whether or not he uttered the words attributed to him.

Hi Norma,

By always suggesting as you do that Inspector Abberline"s witness statement from Hutchinson was just a load of old rubbish you make it a bit difficult to have a reasonable discussion about what Hutchinson actually said "happened "in terms of the "exchange" in other words the rippers actual "approach" or charm factor!

I think the above provides the best example of the real obstacle to "reasonable discussion", since you've used the assumption that Hutchinson must have been telling the truth and must have seen the ripper to make bold inferences as to how "charming" Jack was. My examination of the evidence leads me to the conclusion that Hutchinson lied, most probably in an effort to deflect suspicion away from himself and his own proximity to a crime scene. We can wax lyrical about what might be inferred IF Astrakhan existed and killed Kelly, but it ultimately boils down to whether you believe Hutchinson or not. For my part, I'd argue that IF Astrakhan existed and was the ripper, he was the conveniently stereotypical paint-by-numbers amalgamation of the sinister Jewish bogeyman/toff image of the killer that had been bandied around since "Leather Apron", and that he attired himself in that fashion when out on the prowl despite press and public clamouring for the capture for precisely such a figure.

I don't find that remotely convincing, personally.

why I would like the exact details of when this "discrediting" took place you talk about, because I have never found any hard evidence whatsoever that Hutchinson was "discredited" by Abberline or anyone else

Well, I'd respectfully submit that you haven't been looking as hard as you should have been, and that it would have been advisable to have a thumb through that link I provided to the Hutchinson thread. There are plentiful and compelling indications that Hutchinson's description was ultimately discredited as a means of capturing the murderer, and they have been discussed ad nauseam on the threads that are dedicated to that topic.

just that they didnt ever catch such a man but rather may simply have "moved on" to other suspects such as student doctors etc

That's not how a responsible investigative force works. Once you've acquired evidence that you think will prove valuable in the future, you keep it in reserve until the opportune moment surfaces; for example, when a suspect is investigated and you need your star eyewitness to look him over. This occurred in this case, and yet we're informed that a Jewish eyewitness was used in identity parades, despite none of the Jewish eyewitnesses proffering a sighting or description anywhere near as detailed as the one Hutchinson claimed to have garnered. How or why would this have happened if Hutchinson was still considered a credible witness?

Take the man of respectable dress aged about 28 [ok not 35 like Hutch"s man] but similarly pale complexioned and of similar height- 5ft 7 ins and carrying a similar sized "parcel"

It wasn't "similar" sized at all.

It was completely different.

In any case, the man who was observed by Schwartz attacking Liz Stride didn't look much like Smith's man.

I have to ask; why do you always focus on the "respectable" descriptions and pay such little attention to the others, such as Lawende's sighting of a boringly shabby man in a peaked-cap? Yes, I agree with the suggestion that the killer may have been a previous client, but he needn't have possessed any excess of charm (i.e charm beyond the average member of the working class poor) to coerce the compliance of his victims.

Best regards,
Ben

[Natalie Severn]

Ben,

By always suggesting as you do that Inspector Abberline"s witness statement from Hutchinson was just a load of old rubbish you make it a bit difficult to have a reasonable discussion about what Hutchinson actually said "happened "in terms of the "exchange" in other words the rippers actual "approach" or charm factor! Hutchinson said he had seen Mary Kelly on the night of her murder at 2am with this well dressed man .Clearly this particular man,if he did exist, made Mary Kelly feel good----she allegedly laughed with him over a joke and went off arm in arm with him after he had kissed her.He had a certain rather "charming" or quite friendly manner with her.
Its also worth remembering that Abberline made a point of very clearly stating he himself believed Hutchinson"s account, which,Ben, is why I would like the exact details of when this "discrediting" took place you talk about, because I have never found any hard evidence whatsoever that Hutchinson was "discredited" by Abberline or anyone else-just that they didnt ever catch such a man but rather may simply have "moved on" to other suspects such as student doctors etc.
But if Hutchinson did see this man ,then the matter of his approach is actually very important to the case.It was, after all, the last time Mary Kelly was seen alive and it appears she knew this man ,perhaps from previous "business" with him and went off with him as she had before and,if he was the Ripper,then his method of approach ,was one of "bonhomie" and/ or he only approached women he had done business with previously.
Take the man of respectable dress aged about 28 [ok not 35 like Hutch"s man] but similarly pale complexioned and of similar height- 5ft 7 ins and carrying a similar sized "parcel" seen by PC Smith in Berner St at 12.35 talking to Liz Stride who was wearing a rose in her lapel.They were chatting.James Brown appears to have seen the same couple---the man was wearing the same sort of hat and a dark overcoat etc moments later,about 12.45 am and he heard the woman say,"No not tonight some other night".By this time the man had his arm up against the wall of the board school and Liz had her back to it.It sounds as though Liz may have known him from "these other nights" and if so and he was her killer did he mostly approach women he had already been with and who were quite friendly with him like the recent Ipswich murderer was with his victims?Was this man the same man in a black coat,decently dressed of middling height who William Marshall had seen with the woman he later identified as Liz Stride a good hour earlier"a kissing and a"cuddling" her by the school......sounds a bit like Hutchinson"s man this who he kissed Kelly and then walked home with her linking arms !
Cheers
Norma

[Roy Corduroy]

Hi Ben,

f that sketch is not officially police sanctioned, then how can we know that this newspaper report is officially sanctioned either?

On 15th November, it was stated in The Star that Hutchinson's account was "now discredited", and subsequent police observations bear this out in many respects.

Irregardless, perhaps the police had reasons for discounting Hutch's statements other than ones that would cause him to be a suspect. The same for the fixed point PC telling Mr. Galloway that the prior description of Blotchy Face was no longer of interest.

Maybe by this time the police were looking for James Kelly, who, by the way, was cunning enough to turn on the charm if it suited his purpose.

Roy

[Ben]

Hi Norma,

The Illustrated Police News was not a police-endorsed newspaper, despite its name, so I really wouldn't invest too much stock in the sketch featured therein. In any case, I didn't think the sketch depicted particularly "deep set eyes" and I would dispute that sallow means "pale". It refers instead to a sickly or yellowish complexion. Klosowski was in no position, as a relatively impoverished immigrant, to dress as ostentatiously as the man described by Hutchinson, and he was unlikely to have comminicated in conversational English at that time either. Then there's the total mismatch when it comes to age etc.

I couldn't caution more strongly against using either Arthur Neil or the Illustrated Police News to argue for Klosowski's candidacy or the veracity of Hutchinson's description, which was in any case discredited.

Best regards,
Ben

[lynn cates]

limp

Hello Mike. I appreciate your discussion and "limp" conjecture. I believe I read somewhere that Roslyn D'Onston had a gammy leg.

Interesting.

Cheers.
LC

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Ben,
See the now famous artists impression from the "illustrated Police News" of 24th November 1888 showing" the suspect for the Kelly murder" , the image it says is "as described by the witness George Hutchinson".In this image the man has definitely got "deep set eyes" and Hutchinson actually said he had a "pale complexion" rather than a "sallow one" but they mean more or less the same thing.
In the above image the man"s upper facial features - including the rather glowering deep set eyes ---are a dead ringer for George Chapman"s glowering deep set eyes -see them too in the photo taken of him with with Bessie Taylor.An even better example of his dress style and facial features is in Don Rumbelow"s," Complete JtR "page 176 where Chapman is sitting posing with a rose in his lapel and wearing a smart dress suit,black tie ,waistcoat etc and sporting a big black moustache.People can see these images if need be on the Casebook"s information under " Suspects.>Klosowski" see left hand column under Introduction on here.
Cheers
Norma

[Ben]

Hi Norma,

Yes, I think "regular guy" is much nearer the mark.

As for Hutchinson's discrediting, this really isn't the thread to discuss this again. You may wish to investigate this link instead:

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=2096&page=3&highlight=discredited

According to independent press sources, the police came to attach little impotance to Hutchinson's statement from around the 15th November, and probably earlier.

I don't believe Neil ever referred to Hutchinson's statement specifically, and the description he provided doesn't tally with any physical particular from the initial police statement. In fact, if his dubious claim that Klosowski's physical description tallied "exactly" with that of a witness then he ought really to have specified which witness spoke of "deep sunk black eyes" and a "sallow complexion", because Hutchinson certainly didn't.

Best regards,
Ben

[Natalie Severn]

Ben,
Could you be really specific when you state that George Hutchinson"s statement to Abberline was "discredited".By whom ,exactly,was it discredited? Can you provide the detail of the words used to discredit this police statement ? In what year and month and finally,whereabouts in the police files can it be found?

re George Hutchinson"s statemtnt. Arthur Neil spoke of it being" the only living description ever given of an eye witness of the ripper to tally exactly with Chapman in height,deep sunk black eyes,sallow complexion and thick black n moustache".

[Natalie Severn]

Thanks All,
Yes, I doubt if charm is quite the right word here.I think an ability for the ripper to have appeared a "regular guy" is more likely to be a better description.Most of us have an inbuilt fear of death ,just in order to survive the daily hazards and most of us take some sort of daily precaution to avoid accidents for example when crossing roads,so if these women were actually wanting the four pence "doss money",then they too were taking a moderate amount of survival care to avoid dying of night exposure or hunger .So even if they were exercising this small to minimal degree of selfcare, it says something of some desire to continue to survive.But its true that all the women who became victims of Jack the Ripper drank to some degree and often to excess so its quite likely they would have been a lot less likely to have feared picking him up as a customer on the night of their deaths than a sober person.However,they too would have probably taken some very "basic" care,even when in their cups,when say they were crossing roads and so wouldnt have gone off into dark alleys with someone who looked frightening or about to draw a knife on them.
Norma

The interesting thing about this charm question is of course how effective it might be as time went on and the victims added up. Even setting aside the horrendous murders, there were other women being killed by men either who were clients or were acting as one.

I wonder if someone who feigned being infirmed might have been more effective...someone with a limp they thought they could run from if needed for example. Someone seeming to be shy maybe. Someone who didnt present himself as a vibrant healthy individual....like someone with charm might come across as. Someone Kate felt she could handle with the table knife in her skirt pocket if she had to.

I just wonder how the ladies would be adjusting their personal security measures even if they were forced to continue working on the streets Jack is killing on. I dont think its reasonable to assume all the Unfortunates just said "oh well, we have to take our chances, dont we?" Surely some took steps to make it feel more safe for them....maybe adjusting their client pick-up spots...checking the potential client size and strength out for a possible struggle with him. Maybe Kates knife is an indication that some were arming themselves.

Best regards all.

[JTRSickert]

I wouldn't discard the assumption either that the Ripper's fantasies included familarizing himself with his victims before he kills them. For example, if Hutch's statement is true, the presumed killer made MK laugh and they kissed briefly before going into her room. In Stride's case, PC Smith sees her and a man talking soberly only about 20 minutes before she was killed. If he was the killer and, if we assume it was JTR, it would seem that, when he has the opportunity, he likes to get to know his victims before he kills them.

P.S. I was able to confirm it was, in fact, Stride who had the rose on her dress. So, even if Packer's story is untrue, I believe it's possible he gave her the rose in orderto show he was a harmless person. Remember, the papers had already covered the murders of Smith, Tabram, Nichols, and Chapman. So, most of the area prostitutes were aware that a maniac was on the loose nd, even though they had little choice but to earn some money on the street, I do think they would've been a little cautious about who they pciked up. They probably might have to stuck to either regular clients or men who gave off a positive attitude. And, if Jack did in fact do the things I've mentioned above, he would've been assuring the women.. "C'mon, dear, do you think a chap like me could hurt you? I'll treat you good."

[Ben]

Hi Norma,

If Kelly wasn't murdered by an intruder who killed her as she slept, then she likely fell victim to someone posing as a client or acquaintance, and the "poser" in this instance needn't have been excessively charming or engaging to pull off such a false guise. The killer didn't need to be impressive so much as reassuring, and I suspect that if I found myself Kelly's shoes, I'd be most reassured by the type of individual described by Mags - a regular customer or nodding acquaintance. Prostitute killers tend invariably to be prostitute users, and the likes of Peter Sutcliffe and Steve Wright were no exception. The same was true, I suspect, in Jack's case.

I know YOU may think George Hutchinson made it all up but I dont and neither did Abberline nd several other police about at the time.

Not initially, perhaps, but given the strong indications that the statement was subsequently discredited, it's more than possible that Abberline came to revise that opinion. Who were the "several other police about at the time" who believed Hutchinson's statement?

Best regards,
Ben

[mariag]

Hi, Nats--

Yes, the women were scared but obviously they still plied their trade or they otherwise would have died of starvation. Unless they were approached by the kind of man they feared in their imagination-- slavering lunatic with a bright shiny knife- they would have to go with whoever could put up the money. He guy didn't have to be charming or even nice. I'm sure they were very used to not nice.

It's likely, I think, that the killer was a regular customer of at least some of them and that his face was familiar around the area.

[Natalie Severn]

You didn't need to be "charming" or "charismatic" to put an alcoholic, middle-aged Spitalfields prostitute at ease. I think Poorhoney makes an excellent point regarding Bundy. He didn't coerce their submission through any excess of charm. He simply resorted to lies and subterfuge. I believe Dennis Nilsen observed once that if he was as charismatic as Hannibal Lector, he would never have become a serial killer, and that his actions derived from "a feeling of inadequecy, not potency".

There is most assuredly no evidence that the killer of these prostitutes had any more charm or charisma than the average hawker or dock labourer.

Ben,
I know what you are saying here and you are possibly correct but it is recorded that many of the women who worked as part time prostitutes in the East End during the Ripper scare were just as terrified of being murdered as many other East Enders were.Mary Kelly was pretty scared,according to Joe Barnett.So how was the ripper able to allay any suspicion on her part that night?Granted she may have been out of her mind drunk but Georger Hutchinson doesnt say in his testimony that she was---only a bit "spreeish".But she was happy,apparently,to take him back to her room without any apparent worries.Why was that?
Best Norma
psst!I know YOU may think George Hutchinson made it all up but I dont and neither did Abberline nd several other police about at the time.

[smezenen]

[QUOTE=JTRSickert;101166]
Also, lynn (and everyone else), one thing I forgot to mention. If Hutch's statement is true, doesn't anyone find it coincidental that Kelly complains of losing a red handkerchief and, lo and behold, this stranger brings one out of his pocket and puts it on her neck? Coincidence...probably. But there is also an equally interesting hypothesis.

Perhaps JTR lifted it off MK when she wasn't looking or paying attention and, afterwards, presents her with the same neckerchief when they meet later. What better way to charm one into a woman's heart (in the Ripper's case, this statement can be taken both figuratively and literally)

QUOTE]

Maybe she knew JTR and mentioned the missing handkerchief to him earlier in the day and he brought her one that night when he visited.

I think all of his victims knew him and maybe even quite well. As in he was a long time aquanitance, friend, or regular customer. What better way to put them at ease he doen't need to woo or charm them. They dont suspect him of being the Ripper becouse they have known him for a while. Buying grapes, giving a rose, replacing a missing handkerchief are all things one might do when you are a long time aquanitance or friend.