Faecal matter on apron piece

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Lynn et al,

Those who believe in the entity known as Jack the Ripper are sometimes asked why 'he' stopped after the Kelly murder. If a stance is taken that there were two or more separate killers at work, the question becomes: why did they all stop? Did they all die? Were they all incarcerated in a lunatic asylum? Several killers all operating in a broadly similar fashion, in the same time period and the same small area of London. They all stopped. Why?

Regards, Bridewell.

Hi Bridewell,

First off you must concede that there is already evidence on the table that suggests that very thing. If Jack did not do the Torso's, and one man did, thats at least 2 working at the same time. Then you have the Whitechapel Murder file being open until 1892 with some 11 or 13 names in it. If one man did only the Canonical Group, then someone pretty darn close to that same kind of man did Alice and maybe some of the others in the file. Tabrams murderer was a very vicious man to be sure, but he didnt cut into his victims in any kind of methodical fashion.

Ive been thinking on this thread premise more and Ive come to consider that the bulk of any faeces on the knife was wiped on something he kept..like a hanky. Thats why the apron section was needed, for his hands. maybe the hanky was monogrammed and he hadnt intended to be cutting any colons at the nights beginning. Maybe its that action that truly separates this man from the Hanbury man. A stinky mistake.

Best regards,

Mike R

[Wickerman]

I'm an archaeologist - actually a pottery specialist.

Hello DrHopper, I have a question for you on another thread...
If you don't mind..

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?p=229770#post229770

[lynn cates]

Not addicted--I can stop whenever I want.

Hello Colin. Good observation. I'm sure you know my reply for the killer of Polly and Annie. Liz, I forgo.

I think Kate's killer wanted to kill Kate. I think he was imprisoned in 1892--give or take.

MJK? Don't know who "removed" her. Might he have done more? Possibly. But only as circumstances dictated.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

"I taunt you a second time-uh"

Hello Colin. Indeed. I thought that such a "taunting" chap must be clever. If I
missed it, I apologise.

Cheers.
LC

[Bridewell]

Hi Lynn et al,

Those who believe in the entity known as Jack the Ripper are sometimes asked why 'he' stopped after the Kelly murder. If a stance is taken that there were two or more separate killers at work, the question becomes: why did they all stop? Did they all die? Were they all incarcerated in a lunatic asylum? Several killers all operating in a broadly similar fashion, in the same time period and the same small area of London. They all stopped. Why?

Regards, Bridewell.

[Bridewell]

Clever?

Hello Colin. Thanks. If so, that would mean he killed Polly and Annie. But would such a clever chap:

1. Talk loudly against the shutters at Hanbury?

2. Take time to steal worthless rings?

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

I don't recall saying that he was clever.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Observer]

Not sure what you mean. Surely there were at least 2 other mutilation killings in England in 1888 (Beetmore and a young boy). And no one attributes them to the same killer.
LC

Why would they? William Waddel was arrested on the 1st October 1888, and confessed to the murder of Jane Beadmore. Young Percy Knight Searle was murdered in November a good month after Waddel was arrested.

[lynn cates]

follow the leader

Hello Chris. Thanks for that.

Sometimes I get the feeling that, when one person kills, all those with the same proclivities, follow.

Cheers.
LC

[Tom_Wescott]

Possibly A Ripper Victim Who Wasn't: The Capture of Jane Beadmore's Killer, Alan Sharp, Ripper Notes #25, January 2006.

A poor issue with a couple of hacks, one who did something on "grapes," of all things, and another who dared to write a re evaluation of the Tabram murder (Ripperologist later put him in his place).

Thanks for that, Wolf. Sharp's piece was indeed a diamond gleaming from an otherwise very rough issue, full of fluff and speculative nonsense, as you noted. Must be why this issue didn't jump right to mind.

Chris,

Thanks for that info. You must be correct as the name 'Robert Husband' is ringing a bell with me. But it was far more recent than 1999 that a poster was on here talking about this case. AP Wolf pissed him off and he posted a PM that AP had sent him, which (remarkably) got many of us to stick up for AP, under the notion that private messages shouldn't be publicized, ad infinitum. With the info you provided, perhaps a 'search' of the forums will turn up all these posts.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[ChrisGeorge]

Surely there were at least 2 other mutilation killings in England in 1888 (Beetmore and a young boy). And no one attributes them to the same killer. . . .

Cheers.
LC

My understanding is that there were suspects in the cases of the boy and Beadmore. Also, I believe a discursive essay on Beadmore was written and published in Ripper Notes or Ripperologist some time back. I also recall, a few years ago, someone posted quite a bit here about the 'young boy' case and was working towards a book on it. I wonder what became of that book. I'm sure it would be a very interesting read.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hello Lynn and Tom

The boy murder sounds as if it was the knife murder of Percy Knight Searle, age nine, in Havant, Hampshire, that Gavin Maidment, senior assistant at Havant Museum, was reportedly investigating back in 1999. Although the Havant murder has been mentioned in the press as a possible Ripper crime, another boy, Robert Husband, age 11, was charged with the murder, but was later acquitted.

See "Did Jack the Ripper kill a Hampshire schoolboy?" by Sophie Goodchild, The Independent, 31 January 1999.

Best regards

Chris

[Wolf Vanderlinden]

My understanding is that there were suspects in the cases of the boy and Beadmore. Also, I believe a discursive essay on Beadmore was written and published in Ripper Notes or Ripperologist some time back.

Possibly A Ripper Victim Who Wasn't: The Capture of Jane Beadmore's Killer, Alan Sharp, Ripper Notes #25, January 2006.

A poor issue with a couple of hacks, one who did something on "grapes," of all things, and another who dared to write a re evaluation of the Tabram murder (Ripperologist later put him in his place).

Wolf.

[Michael W Richards]

Hello Tom. It would indeed. And I MUST have a copy.

Cheers.
LC

I found the detail that his boots were poking into his chest quite informative...he stuffed his legs down with the upper body already in the barrel. My thinking is he may have intended to put a lid on the barrel,..or perhaps did.

Maybe another water bound torso?

Cheers Lynn,
Mike R

[lynn cates]

copy

Hello Tom. It would indeed. And I MUST have a copy.

Cheers.
LC

[Tom_Wescott]

My understanding is that there were suspects in the cases of the boy and Beadmore. Also, I believe a discursive essay on Beadmore was written and published in Ripper Notes or Ripperologist some time back. I also recall, a few years ago, someone posted quite a bit here about the 'young boy' case and was working towards a book on it. I wonder what became of that book. I'm sure it would be a very interesting read.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Michael W Richards]

Hello all,

The young boy in I believe Bradford who was cut in half and stuffed in a barrel during the Fall killings are yet another illustration that very disturbed people were not exclusive to London at that time, the East End, or personified by one alleged Serial killer.

More specific to the thread, and perhaps to address DrHoppers surmising, if Kate had no faecal matter in her facial cuts, there are 2 possible reasons for that. Her face was cut first, or her face was cut after he cleaned the blade first. The first is really the only logical conclusion, therefore, that act may well be yet another variance from the earlier kills.

Let me ask this.....can we even be sure Kates nose was cut after death?

Best regards,

Mike R