Victimology, MO, signature

[DJA]

You know Dave, you may be on to something. Widely ignored, Sutton may be a strong "Doctor" candidate. So say he treats Eddowes and suspects Bright's Disease. But he can't know for sure unless he operates and Eddowes won't agree. So he kills Eddowes and removes half of her kidney to conform his "external" diagnosis.

One of our early casebook contributors, Dr. Mike Villa, an Internist, was positive the murderer had been a surgeon.

And the George Lusk connection... didn't he build or own one of the buildings Sutton lived in?

Thanks for your interest Scott,

Eddowes/Conway and Nichols were both Sutton's inpatients together from December 1867. At least in my opinion.
Both were part of a published study on rheumatic fever. The strep that causes it can eventually reside in the gut.
It can infect/cause problems throughout the body.Related to neurasthenia/chronic fatigue syndrome.Some families are genetically prone.
We are looking at Gull-Sutton disease. Often misunderstood.
Due to Kate's kidney problems,that would make her a star patient research wise.
I suspect she also had cancer, due to Mitre Square mutilations. Unrelated to the above,however suggests she was still a patient.

Mary Ann Kelly had her own experiences with Sutton when she was about 9 years old.
Sutton was her church's Vestry Board medical officer (along with Thomas Stevenson).
Suffice to suggest she was blackmailing him .... again. The others joined in.
All about Sutton's sexual orientation.

Lusk might have renovated a small section of the London Hospital. Also attempted to join the Freemasons
Sutton was Gull's protege. Openshaw,who started the London Hospital Lodge, was Sutton's.
Sutton quoted St. Luke's gospel in a Freemason like manner.
Sutton was known to investigate illness by touch.

There is so much on Sutton ..... Stride's cachous,Chapman's TB,etc,etc.
He is the link between the five victims.
As the trainee nun told us ..... Mary Kelly was the key.
Really doubt Jack's identity was that big a secret in certain circles.
Look at how quickly Abberline was sent in.

One gigantic cover up.

Ciao,

Dave Adams.

[APerno]

Hello Pierre,

>>Victimology:
Poor women often addicted to alcohol selling their bodies cheaply and/or vagabonding in Whitechapel or the City<<

Mrs Nichols might be classed as addicted to alcohol.
If the stories about Mrs Chapman's "ginny" liver are true is might have been an acohiolic.
Mrs Stride wasn't an alcoholic.
Kathrine Eddowes enjoyed a drink, but I've never heard her described as addicted.
Ditto Mary Kelly.

The the vast majority of Victorian East Enders led some kind of transient life style, "vagabonding" is a very vague definition to isolate the victims by.

>>MO (modus operandi):
Execution in places with a high risk of fast discovery<<

I'm not sure how you are defining "fast" in this context, but otherwise, I agree.

>>Signature:
Honour based mutilations and posing<<

I don't believe Mrs Nichols could be described as posed or, by your definition, "honour based mutilated".

Mrs Chapman didn't have facial mutilations
Mrs Stride was not mutilated in any way and it is highly debatable that she was posed.

Inevitable might work better than fast; I thought it was accepted that Mary Kelly had a major drinking problem. (I easily could be very wrong here.) -- You are correct in that we can't allow Kate's binge define her as an alcoholic; she had just gotten back into town and could have just over enjoyed a night out.

[APerno]

I had no clue I was replying to a post from four years ago. I need to learn to look at that.

[DJA]

Wouldn't worry.
Someone would have prolly started an identical thread tomorrow or sumfin'

If Kate was that drunk,5 hours would not have sobered her up that much.

However,if she was suffering post exertion fatigue from her illness and the trek from Kent,5 hours rest would have performed wonders.

Might have just smelled heavily of grog due to sitting in a pub attempting to rest a bit and push on .... to meet Liz and BS man at Berner street

[mpriestnall]

In a BBC interview in 1973, an elderly nun at the refuge claimed that she had been a novice there in 1915 and was told by an old sister who was there in 1888 that "if it had not been for the Kelly woman, none of the murders would have happened".

How could the "old sister" know this?

Martyn

[APerno]

How could the "old sister" know this?

Martyn

She wouldn't have, but you can see how once they (the contemporaneous populace) realized that the murders had stopped, the speculations started, and the last and most brutalized victim would be given the most attention.

The conspiracy conjectures probably started early on and it makes sense that Mary Kelly's death would be the starting point for many of them.

With an un-captured murderer, and MK her being his last victim, it seems likely she would become more important than the others. I'd bet they were spinning MK stories as early as Christmas of that year.

"Old sister" wouldn't have know, but like almost everyone else she had a story to tell she was certain was true, and the novice would certainly believe her.

[mpriestnall]

She wouldn't have, but you can see how once they (the contemporaneous populace) realized that the murders had stopped, the speculations started, and the last and most brutalized victim would be given the most attention.

The conspiracy conjectures probably started early on and it makes sense that Mary Kelly's death would be the starting point for many of them.

With an un-captured murderer, and MK her being his last victim, it seems likely she would become more important than the others. I'd bet they were spinning MK stories as early as Christmas of that year.

"Old sister" wouldn't have know, but like almost everyone else she had a story to tell she was certain was true, and the novice would certainly believe her.

Thanks for your answer. Your suggestion makes sense that MJK's murder would be the start point for "conspiracy conjectures.". Maybe her age, murder location
somehow played into this.

It's always intriguing to think some hearsay might have a grain of truth in it though...one (unfortunately) never knows...

Martyn

[DJA]

How could the "old sister" know this?

Martyn

Thank you for your question Martyn.

Surmise that she read "Strange Case of Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde" and like others worked out that ......

Inspector Newcomen was based on the author's cousin Major Henry Smith

Dr Jekyll on the Queen's surgeon Sir William Withey Gull (Henry G Kill ..... get it)

Mr Hyde on his protege Henry Gawen Sutton,MB not MD hence Mr not Dr

The young girl "trodden on" by Hyde was Mary Ann Kelly.

The novella was written after the Labouche Amendment and the death in June 1885 of the person on whom Sir Danvers Carew MP was based .

There are many clues in that tale which returned to London as a stage play immediately before Nichols murder.

The story commenced circa 1867/68 when Sutton lived next door to Gull.

The author had a lot of fun planting those clues,so you have fun finding them.

Report back after you find at least three and not before.

That applies to everyone else.

Give you a few clues ...... Carew refers to the Prayer Book Rebellion of 1549, have a look at a map of Soho Square,find a painting of an historical Edward Hyde.

Enjoy

PS. Gutenberg has the novella free online.

[mpriestnall]

Gooday! Your'e Dan Brown and I claim my prize!

[mpriestnall]

Hi DJA,

Thanks posting your puzzle. Not sure if I understand any of it right now. Will check back tomorrow to see how it's coming along.

Martyn

[DJA]

One of our early casebook contributors, Dr. Mike Villa, an Internist, was positive the murderer had been a surgeon.

Small world,my cancer surgeon was educated at St Lukes.

[Michael W Richards]

Seems to me we have a story that is being forcibly created, not one that has any natural flow to it. People living beside a name connected with either surgeons, politicians or local figures isn't anything of interest to Ripper students, it certainly cant be used to create anything but a fictional storyline without any proof of any wrongdoing by anyone. Victims going to the same doctor, or the same hospital is just another factoid, its proof of nothing. And the fact that much of this new story being espoused is a strong reminder of one that has been debunked many times since its arrival, it made a half baked all fiction screenplay, but gave us no real answers to anything.

Im reminded of how vehemently people have defended a flat earth proposition, some even after we have space POV images that disprove it entirely.

[DJA]

Are you drunk?

[Michael W Richards]

Are you drunk?

Not drunk, but Ive definitely had my fill of somethings. Based on some of your posts, Id be inclined to ask you about more hallucinatory substances. Gull, Sutton, Eddy...you seemed to have joined the discussions about 2-3 decades too late, currently those kinds of speculations have no relevance. I keep reading for one...just one...piece of actual new evidence that might support anything you are saying, instead of just this fractured theorizing and reintroducing dated, erroneous concepts without any merit. Albeit, tweaked to your own satisfaction.

[DJA]

Not drunk, but Ive definitely had my fill of somethings. Based on some of your posts, Id be inclined to ask you about more hallucinatory substances. Gull, Sutton, Eddy...you seemed to have joined the discussions about 2-3 decades too late, currently those kinds of speculations have no relevance. I keep reading for one...just one...piece of actual new evidence that might support anything you are saying, instead of just this fractured theorizing and reintroducing dated, erroneous concepts without any merit. Albeit, tweaked to your own satisfaction.

At no stage have I ever mentioned Eddy.

Some well known members are currently making enquiries in London.

Sutton has been eliminated as a possible Freemason.