Ada Wilson - Escaped Convict

[Astatine211]

Hi all,

The case of Ada Wilson seems to usually be dismissed due to the motive of the perpetrator being money despite their method being similar to JtR's.

This had me thinking that if it was committed by Jack what could his reasoning be for focusing on money rather than just killing Ada. One of the theories of why Jack started killing was due to being an escaped convict. Say they had just arrived in London they would likely have very little money if not none. For example, James Kelly would've just arrived in London just under two months earlier in late January / early February. Being a known criminal he would've felt it was too dangerous to get a job whilst the police were freshly searching for him but could have decided that he needed money for food and shelter after a period of living rough.

I believe Jack was extremely intelligent and had enough restraint to employ his violent methods to benefit himself aside from just murder and mutilation and in Ada's case his attempt came after she refused to give him money upon him threatening her, as I believe in multiple of the other murders Jack had to leave before he was satisfied due to being disturbed.

In conclusion, I personally feel Ada Wilson was the second known 'attack' due to her survival after Annie Millwood, which alongside Martha Tabram made a trio of killings before Jack changed him MO to the canonical 5 and the ones after them. I do have a good theory for this but I don't wanna spam so I'll probably post it in a few weeks. Also if I am already posting too much or my posts aren't substantial enough pls let me know it's just I find JtR very interesting and don't really have anyone to talk to about it but if needs be a can search for more evidence as that's what key to any aspect of this case!

[caz]

Nice post, Astatine211.

I doubt our killer emerged fully formed from nowhere to murder and mutilate Nichols and the rest. I could well believe he started out rather differently, as someone who had always used and abused women he had no respect for. Taking what little money they had would have been just one more indignity to add to his catalogue, regardless of his own financial situation. It didn't need to be a prime motivator, but just part of his overall criminality, and possibly more in line with trophy taking.

All about the power he may only have had over women when he had a knife in his hand.

Stay safe.

Love,

Caz
X

[Wickerman]

Yes, the man who attacked Wilson was described:
Aged about 30, height 5 ft. 6 in.; face sunburnt, with fair moustache; dressed in dark coat, light trousers, and wideawake hat.

It's the "sunburnt face" that made me wonder, did she mean tanned, or red like flushed?
A few later suspect descriptions suggest a white face, I wonder if this is the same man. Wasn't there a skin cream or lotion used in Victorian times for skin conditions?
I seem to recall syphilis can cause a red skin rash, did they have a lotion for it back then?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi all,

The case of Ada Wilson seems to usually be dismissed due to the motive of the perpetrator being money despite their method being similar to JtR's.

This had me thinking that if it was committed by Jack what could his reasoning be for focusing on money rather than just killing Ada. One of the theories of why Jack started killing was due to being an escaped convict. Say they had just arrived in London they would likely have very little money if not none. For example, James Kelly would've just arrived in London just under two months earlier in late January / early February. Being a known criminal he would've felt it was too dangerous to get a job whilst the police were freshly searching for him but could have decided that he needed money for food and shelter after a period of living rough.

I believe Jack was extremely intelligent and had enough restraint to employ his violent methods to benefit himself aside from just murder and mutilation and in Ada's case his attempt came after she refused to give him money upon him threatening her, as I believe in multiple of the other murders Jack had to leave before he was satisfied due to being disturbed.

In conclusion, I personally feel Ada Wilson was the second known 'attack' due to her survival after Annie Millwood, which alongside Martha Tabram made a trio of killings before Jack changed him MO to the canonical 5 and the ones after them. I do have a good theory for this but I don't wanna spam so I'll probably post it in a few weeks. Also if I am already posting too much or my posts aren't substantial enough pls let me know it's just I find JtR very interesting and don't really have anyone to talk to about it but if needs be a can search for more evidence as that's what key to any aspect of this case!

You shouldn’t worry about posting too much Astatine. And don’t get discouraged if any posters disagree with any of your interpretations. It’s par for the course. No one can prove that she wasn’t an early victim and your suggestion on the cash aspect seems reasonable to me. Was Tabram a victim? Was Stride? There are very few certainties in this case apart from the certainty of there being disagreements.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Yes, the man who attacked Wilson was described:
Aged about 30, height 5 ft. 6 in.; face sunburnt, with fair moustache; dressed in dark coat, light trousers, and wideawake hat.

It's the "sunburnt face" that made me wonder, did she mean tanned, or red like flushed?
A few later suspect descriptions suggest a white face, I wonder if this is the same man. Wasn't there a skin cream or lotion used in Victorian times for skin conditions?
I seem to recall syphilis can cause a red skin rash, did they have a lotion for it back then?

Or it could be sunburn from playing a certain popular English outdoor summer sport Wick

[Stacker]

There is no reason to believe that Jack the Ripper was short on money in general, or that he would commit crimes of the level where getting money was the objective.

[Astatine211]

Yes, the man who attacked Wilson was described:
Aged about 30, height 5 ft. 6 in.; face sunburnt, with fair moustache; dressed in dark coat, light trousers, and wideawake hat.

It's the "sunburnt face" that made me wonder, did she mean tanned, or red like flushed?
A few later suspect descriptions suggest a white face, I wonder if this is the same man. Wasn't there a skin cream or lotion used in Victorian times for skin conditions?
I seem to recall syphilis can cause a red skin rash, did they have a lotion for it back then?

Just some food for thought but in 1883 James Kelly was diagnosed with a venereal disease. I couldn't find what the specific STD was but due to being distrustful of doctors he decided to self medicate. This could easily mean the disease was never treated properly and not cured.

If the disease he had was syphilis it is know to come and go in multiple reoccurring stages with the latent phase of the syphilis occurring as late as ten years after the initial infection.

Therefore if James Kelly did have syphilis he could've easily been suffering from its latent phase in 1888 especially if it wasn't treated properly initially.

[Astatine211]

You shouldn’t worry about posting too much Astatine. And don’t get discouraged if any posters disagree with any of your interpretations. It’s par for the course. No one can prove that she wasn’t an early victim and your suggestion on the cash aspect seems reasonable to me. Was Tabram a victim? Was Stride? There are very few certainties in this case apart from the certainty of there being disagreements.

Thank you Herlock! It means a lot coming from one of the people I look up to the most on this forum.

[Wickerman]

There is no reason to believe that Jack the Ripper was short on money in general, or that he would commit crimes of the level where getting money was the objective.

Which raises a point of trivia...
Though it was clear in some cases that the victims pocket content had been scattered, and yet, there was never any money found on the bodies.
If not money, what was he looking for?

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

There are very few certainties in this case apart from the certainty of there being disagreements.

Sorry Herlock, but I have to disagree with you there.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Sorry Herlock, but I have to disagree with you there.

You’re wrong

[Michael W Richards]

Nice post, Astatine211.

I doubt our killer emerged fully formed from nowhere to murder and mutilate Nichols and the rest. I could well believe he started out rather differently, as someone who had always used and abused women he had no respect for. Taking what little money they had would have been just one more indignity to add to his catalogue, regardless of his own financial situation. It didn't need to be a prime motivator, but just part of his overall criminality, and possibly more in line with trophy taking.

All about the power he may only have had over women when he had a knife in his hand.

Stay safe.

Love,

Caz
X

I guess that helps explain why a length of a series or grouping is over-presumed. Just broaden the motivation. No need for physical and circumstantial evidence to dictate what actually happened, just presume. As I recall the medical expert who examined Annie suggested her killer did exactly what would be expected of him had his goal been ultimately what he achieved, taking a complete uterus. "No meaningless cuts". But what did he know...he just saw the results. He didnt have the luxury of presumptions.

[Michael W Richards]

You shouldn’t worry about posting too much Astatine. And don’t get discouraged if any posters disagree with any of your interpretations. It’s par for the course. No one can prove that she wasn’t an early victim and your suggestion on the cash aspect seems reasonable to me. Was Tabram a victim? Was Stride? There are very few certainties in this case apart from the certainty of there being disagreements.

But there are those who can read and understand the evidence, and those who like to question and play with the facts. Your uncertainty is because youve made up stories instead of making stories using evidence. Not as hard to make sensible decisions from facts, just hard to make your stories hold water. Interruptions my a**.

[Herlock Sholmes]

But there are those who can read and understand the evidence, and those who like to question and play with the facts. Your uncertainty is because youve made up stories instead of making stories using evidence. Not as hard to make sensible decisions from facts, just hard to make your stories hold water. Interruptions my a**.

You continue to allow your arrogance and bias to make a fool of yourself. You’ve made no constructive addition to this thread but you just thought that you’d pop up for yet more boasting.

Anyone that says that the killer of Stride couldn’t have been interrupted deserves nothing but derision. Caution is sensible. Asserting opinions as facts is dishonesty. I choose the former you choose the latter.

[Stacker]

Another thing that needs to be considered is that its a near certainty that the Ripper was a very religious man, who only committed crimes in accordance to it. Taking money in the process of said crimes would likely be off limits to their religion.