Did he always believe Chapman was the ripper?

[HelenaWojtczak]

In the Southwark News, 24th April 2003, Debra Gosling wrote:

‘Until his dying day Godley believed that Severin Klosowski was the infamous Jack the Ripper’.

I know it's a long shot, but does anyone know from where she might have got this information? I suspect she made it up (like most of the rest of the article) but, "just in case"....

Helena

[ChrisGeorge]

In the Southwark News, 24th April 2003, Debra Gosling wrote:

‘Until his dying day Godley believed that Severin Klosowski was the infamous Jack the Ripper’.

I know it's a long shot, but does anyone know from where she might have got this information? I suspect she made it up (like most of the rest of the article) but, "just in case"....

Helena

Hi Helena

I think it is possible that, as with Abberline's reported comments, Godley may have believed that Klosowski (George Chapman) could have been the Ripper once the man was arrested, tried, and hanged. But not that he thought Klosowski was the Whitechapel murderer from any enquiries into him around the time of the murders, despite the fallacious claims of Donald McCormick derived (apparently) from Dr. Thomas Dutton's The Chronicle of Crime that say otherwise. That is certainly reasonable to assume. I don't know where Debra Gosling might have got the information, although it's quite possible that she was extrapolating from Abberline's comments about Chapman in the Pall Mall Gazette of 1903 and not going from anything Godley himself said or wrote. In other words, she was attributing to Godley the same ideas about Klosowski that his former superior, Abberline, voiced.

All the best

Chris

[HelenaWojtczak]

Cheers Chris. Thanks for replying.

What I am wondering is, whether there is any evidence that either Godley (or Abberline) believed it till their "dying day" -- that is, long AFTER the 1903 speculations?

Helena

[Malcolm X]

speculations only......

G.Chapman never even admitted to the poisonings, he always maintained that he was innocent.... i think !

i think Abberline believed him to be highly suspicious only, just like us, this might have been on his arrest, or more likely later on at his trial, when the full story of his life was revealed, because i doubt before this that Abberline knew enough about him, only Godley might have...Arthur Neil was also suspicious too.

one thing that is really odd is this, if they were suspicious why didn't they ask GH to take a look at Chapman, either via a photo, or whilst he was locked up......uuuuuuuuuuuuuummm

how long would Abberline have been suspicious ? no idea, but like me, probably to his dieing day !

[ChrisGeorge]

Cheers Chris. Thanks for replying.

What I am wondering is, whether there is any evidence that either Godley (or Abberline) believed it till their "dying day" -- that is, long AFTER the 1903 speculations?

Helena

Hi Helena

George Godley died in 1941, twelve years after his former superior Fred Abberline, who passed away in 1929. In the absence of any information (press reports or writings) that confirm that Godley believed Chapman to have been the Ripper "Until his dying day" I would suspect it is just writer Debra Gosling making that assumption.

All the best

Chris

[DVV]

Hi Chris

In the absence of any information (press reports or writings) that confirm that Godley believed Chapman to have been the Ripper "Until his dying day" I would suspect it is just writer Debra Gosling making that assumption.
Chris

...and then chances are he was far from convinced ("at last").

Dvvvv

[HelenaWojtczak]

Malcolm makes a good point, actually: why did they not (assuming they did not) either question Chapman about the Ripper killings, or ask any eyewitnesses to take a look at him.... mind you, it was 15 years before...

Helena

[HelenaWojtczak]

Gosling also disputes Godley's own sworn testimony about the way he arrested Chapman in October 1902.

Godley stated that Chapman came quietly; Gosling says he hid behind barrels in the cellar and shot at Godley and his mates with two revolvers.

I don't suppose anyone knows whether that is her invention or that of someone earlier?

Helena

[DVV]

Malcolm makes a good point, actually: why did they not (assuming they did not) either question Chapman about the Ripper killings, or ask any eyewitnesses to take a look at him....

Helena

Because nobody believed he was the ripper, except Abberline, whose arguments were absurd (surgical skill, murders in America). Now I can't figure a man claiming his innocence and confessing he was the ripper at the same time.

[HelenaWojtczak]

Because nobody believed he was the ripper, except Abberline, whose arguments were absurd (surgical skill, murders in America). Now I can't figure a man claiming his innocence and confessing he was the ripper at the same time.

Except Abberline and Godley, you mean?

I didn't say he would have confessed, but the police don't only question those suspects that they believe will confess.

It's a pity they didn't question him about his whereabouts in 1888 though, then maybe I would not have to tolerate reading time and again that he was living in George Yard....

Helena

[Malcolm X]

G.Chapman didn't admit to anything let alone JTR, yes he had guns too but he didn't fire them over here, only threatened too.

he looks very suspicious yes and what Sugden sais makes sense, but i think this is because he resembles LA DE DA so closely, because without this he looks far weaker.

the trouble with GC is, his movements and timing tally perfectly with JTR and explain many things, that right now DONT MAKE SENSE AT ALL.

there are 3 things about Hutchinson as JTR that dont make sense at all, and this applies to many other top suspects..... it's only Chapman that fits these scenarios, if you try to vision JTR coming to Whitechapel, killing, not going insane and leaving within the next year, which it looks like he's done, then only GC fits the bill.

all our other top suspects are either still around, going insane, have never been proven to even have killed before, or simply too rediculous to bother with.

add to this, GC retuned again.... why here ! why crappy Whitechapel, why not San Francisco, Washington DC, New England, Florida,....... no, he returned here and started killing again !

and why poison !!!!! because there's no need to kill anyone, no money in it, no nothing, and why only later in life, why not earlier on as well.

but for JTR to be a poisoner now instead is very odd, unless he'd grown out of being a mutilator, or having these women as wives meant that he couldn't mutilate them anymore.

because if he was JTR, he would kill back out on the street like he once did and either turn his wives into Torsos, or indeed poison them.

but i doubt that he would only poison, more like mutilate and poison at the same time. ....... i think, not sure !

but both Sugden and Abberline make sense in what they say, JTR could quite easily have switched, and maybe he was planning to start mutilating again anyway, maybe he was getting bored with poisioning and about to return to the street, we dont know, but got discovered instead.

this era in time was infamous for poisoners, many back widows killed their husbands, so G.Chapman was a bit foolish and careless

[Malcolm X]

well, maybe GEORGE HUTCHINSON wasn't around anymore to question, maybe he cleared off in late 1889!!!

because if he was JTR, he would definitely have lied about his name and behaved very similar to GC..... I.E he came here and cleared off again, which it definitely looks like JTR did.

but .... there is one massive problem with GH, he needs to stop killing right after MJK, because at least 20 coppers now know what he looks like.

and if GC is JTR, he needs to stop killing too, because GH knows exactly what he looks like...... not maybe..... not close...... EXACTLY !!!!

[Scott Nelson]

Hitting the sauce while posting, are we Mr. X?

[ChrisGeorge]

but both Sugden and Abberline make sense in what they say, JTR could quite easily have switched, and maybe he was planning to start mutilating again anyway, maybe he was getting bored with poisioning and about to return to the street, we dont know, but got discovered instead.

this era in time was infamous for poisoners, many back widows killed their husbands, so G.Chapman was a bit foolish and careless

Hi Malcolm

But what you are saying doesn't quite make sense.

"JTR could quite easily have switched,"

Really? To change from all ripping, all the time, the quick throat cut and then the disembowelment, and the display of the victim, like a trophy, to the slow, secretive work of poisoning, and pretending you didn't do it. Does this really sound like the same man?

Then you say--

"this era in time was infamous for poisoners, many black widows killed their husbands, so G.Chapman was a bit foolish and careless"

But it seems the Ripper wasn't foolish and wasn't careless, got away with it time and time again, the murder of strangers. Whereas G. Chapman didn't get away with it, because he was murdering people he knew time and time again, and got caught.

I really think there is a better basis for thinking they were not the same killer than that they were one and the same man. Sorry.

Best regards

Chris

[Wickerman]

because if he was JTR, he would definitely have lied about his name ....

Malcolm, if GH was JtR, he would not have gone to the police in the first place. No amount of ducking and weaving will ever change that.

Regards, Jon S.