Census

[Mike Covell]

Unless we find an entry that states, "Occupation; East End Serial Killer"

[Sam Flynn]

NB: This thread is about the census

All this is very interesting, but has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. The census may or may not be useful in tracking down the Ripper, but as sure as eggs is eggs it won't tell us anything about his MO, how he lived, or the constraints he may have encountered in shared accommodation.

Which conditions/constraints would apply if he lived in a lodging-house is an interesting enough topic in itself, and it's easy enough to start another thread - e.g. "Could Jack have lived in a doss-house?". As to whether Jack "wanted" to leave his victims in the street - that's yet another topic in itself, more to do with motives/psychology than censuses or the layout of buildings.

At least by keeping discussions broadly on track, and "budding" threads where necessary, readers of this site stand a fighting chance of finding appropriately "filed" headings that might interest them.

Just trying to be helpful.

[Ben]

Leaving the mutilated bodies out in the open was something he wanted, otherwise there'd have been signs of him having tried to dispose of the bodies

Again, you're just highlighting an assumption that I personally consider to be baseless, M&P. I don't see any evidence that he particularly wanted to kill on the streets and display their bodies there (etc etc). I believe he was making the most of what limited domestic and financial options he had available.

Leaving the bodies out in the open was not a reflection of his unwillingness to dispose of the bodies, but more of an indication of the lack of time he had available at each crime scene. If he'd tried budging Eddowes' body to a more secluded location, he'd have been caught by PC Watkins. However, if he had private accomodation, it's arguable that his ability to bring his victims home would have ennervated the time/disposal factor.

Why take someone back to his place only to kill them and then dump the bodies back onto the streets?

Any killer with private accomodation could have buried his victims at home, thus delaying both the discovery of the body and a realization that the victim had even gone missing. It's just assumed that he wanted them found as quickly as they were.

One would think bringing home a women would increase the probability of being seen with said woman

Didn't see to bother Nilsen and Dahmer though, Greg.

All the best,
Ben

[GregBaron]

Indoors or Out?

That's an interesting one Ben and M & P...........!.......One would think bringing home a women would increase the probability of being seen with said woman. And when she never left some might become suspicious. Of course, here I'm assuming a not terribly private East End residence. If one were to drag the body away, again, the chance of being caught seems to go way up.....But then, like Dahmer, the psycho might decorate his home with the viscera. Look what he did to MJK! Who knows? I do know Dahmer's neighbors repeatedly complained of the smell........I agree with M & P that JTR most likely enjoyed making fools of the police, horrifying the public and experiencing the thrill of near capture...........

Sincerely,

Greg

[Mascara & Paranoia]

It's also assumed that Jack killed on the streets because he particularly wanted to. I don't buy that at all. Jeffrey Dahmer and Denis Nielsen took strangers home and killed them there because they could. They lived alone. Who's to say the ripper would not have made similar use of private accomodation if he had some?

I don't know, I think Jack actually wanted to kill them on the streets. Leaving the mutilated bodies out in the open was something he wanted, otherwise there'd have been signs of him having tried to dispose of the bodies. I think he wanted people to see his handiwork.

Why take someone back to his place only to kill them and then dump the bodies back onto the streets? Might as well kill his victims where they were found.

[Ben]

This is the area where most of the prostitutes lived and is mainly made up of lodging houses. Combine this with the question: do we REALLY believe that Jack operated out of a lodging house? I find this almost inconceivable

No, I'm afraid you're quite wrong about this, Pinkerton.

Firstly, "private" accomodation was very difficult indeed to secure in so densely populated a district as Whitechapel and Spitalfields, and with shared accomodation (i.e. with a handful of others), you had the problem of others being able to home in on your activity. In the larger doss houses, sheer numbers prevented this from being a problem. You simply couldn't "home in" on one out of 500 lodgers a few beds to the left, unless the activities of one in particular stood out from the rest. If the real killer kept himself to himself and remained, for the most part, inconspicuous, he was just one of the masses coming and going throughout the night; a proverbial needle in a haystack.

Many lodging houses were open all night for patrons with money to pay for a bed, while others closed at a late hour to any lodgers not in possession of a daily or weekly ticket. If the killer had secured such a ticket, he'd have no problem. Nor, as Greg pointed out, would he have had any trouble returning home with extracted viscera. The large, foul-smelling kitchens (see Jack London's book) provided lodgers with a means of cooking their less-than-prime cuts from the butcher.

It's also assumed that Jack killed on the streets because he particularly wanted to. I don't buy that at all. Jeffrey Dahmer and Denis Nielsen took strangers home and killed them there because they could. They lived alone. Who's to say the ripper would not have made similar use of private accomodation if he had some?

Best regards,
Ben

[GregBaron]

Lodging and JTR.....

Hey Pinkerton,

I thought this same thing about lodging houses and JTR but Ben chimed in that these places were crowded as hell and filled with butchers and people bringing in hunks of meat to eat so someone coming in bloody and with a knife would have been no big deal. Now I don't know if one could come in at 3 or 4 in the morning even if they had paid their doss money? Someone else might be able to answer that? But I tend to agree with you, I imagine JTR had his own residence or a shared residence (as he probably had a job and maybe a decent one?) from which he could escape to whatever post murder rituals he indulged in.............?

Sincerely,

Greg

[Chris Scott]

Hi Pinkerton
the first 100 records Ive just posted on a new thread
the name David Cohen appears as such in the admissions register and it is undoubtedly the case that this is the same man referred to in court as Aaron Davis Cohen. It was Martin Fido's thesis that "David Cohen" was a Jewish equivalent of "John Doe" in that it referred to a Jewish man whose real name was unknown.
The whole three-way argument (Kosminki/Cohen/Kaminsky) is complex and it would be worth reading Martin's piece on the subject in the Dissertations section
regards
Chris

Below are the records for 7 December 1888. Cohen is the last entry

[Pinkerton]

Thanks Chris. Your contribution to this site is invaluable! Needless to say when this data is released, I will also be scanning for any name that sounds anything like "Mary Jane Kelly". Especially if the person is listed as a prostitute...

Of course! I thought the name "Mary Connely" looked familiar. Chris, is the Whitechapel infirmary the place that "David Cohen" acquired his pseudonym? I thought this name was a pseudonym acquired when an unknown Jewish man who presumably was too mentally ill to give his name was committed to Colney Hatch?

[Chris Scott]

Hi Pinkerton
Thanks for the comments
Apart from the case related names that Gareth mentions, there are also David Cohen and two mentions of James Evans, who some think may be the Joseph Fleming related to the Kelly case, as this was the name under which he was committed to an asylum
Regarding the registers, Im currently transcribing the entries from 1885 to 1887
regards
Chris

[Sam Flynn]

Thanks, Pinkerton, and - again - Chris for transcribing the original records. Re the JTR-related characters, you'll also find Nathan Kaminsky and Pearly Poll (Mary A Connelly) there - as well as a possible explanation for her deep, husky voice. Perhaps she caught her laryngitis from John "No-boots" Kelly, who's also listed there.

[Pinkerton]

I want to thank Chris Scott and Sam Flynn for compiling that spreadsheet. Its quite remarkable. I don't want to sound pushy but is there data about the Whitechapel infirmary available for the years BEFORE 1888? The reason I ask is that I don't see any JTR related characters (with the exception of William Henry Piggott) on the list. For some reason (maybe I imagined it?) I thought that one of the victims was on one of these infirmary lists (like Polly Nichols or Annie Chapman). Does anyone know where the next nearest infirmary was located to the Whitechapel/Spitalfields area besides the one in Whitechapel?

Though I think geographical profiling can often be helpful to the case of a serial killer, I am skeptical that it is very helpful in this case. If you look at all of the entries for women listed as prostitutes in the Whitechapel infirmary, you can quickly get a good idea of where most of the prostitutes of the area resided. From memory I seem to recall the number #1 street by far being Flower and Dean, with Dorset being second, followed by Thrawl, Fashion, and White's Row (perhaps "Flower and Dean" was actually the WORST street in London, and not Dorset...). This area is EXACTLY the area the geographical profiler brings up. Therefore I wonder just how credible this is. This is the area where most of the prostitutes lived and is mainly made up of lodging houses. Combine this with the question: do we REALLY believe that Jack operated out of a lodging house? I find this almost inconceivable. Jack needed immediate shelter after butchering his victims. And he is unlikely to have come back to a lodging house in the middle of the night (most wouldn't have even let borders in after a certain time), since this would have drawn attention to himself.

Of course not all the houses in this area were lodging houses, but I believe a fairly high percentage of residents of this area (area around Flower & Dean and Dorset) were living in lodging houses. Does anyone disagree with this?

[Sam Flynn]

Re Fitzpatrick - note that many of the Flower & Dean Street residents seem to have had Irish names (among them Cooney and Donovan).

[Ashkenaz]

1881 Flower and Dean Street

The Fitzpa?? - The original reads Fitzpatrick

Jewish and possible Jewish names:

M Beareek (possibly Dutch jewish)
David Birman
Isaac Cohen
Frederick Gehringer
Jacob Gleisinger
Joseph Isaacs

Interesting that Fashion Street in the same census was overwhelmingly Jewish

Hi Chris

Fitzpa is what is listed in Chris's list. I wondered if it was a Jewish name I'd never encountered before ! So it was Fitzpatick then. lol.

I haven't gone over Fashion Street, or Thrawl St yet. What a shame. I was hoping for a similar result.

[Chris Scott]

1881 Flower and Dean Street

The Fitzpa?? - The original reads Fitzpatrick

Jewish and possible Jewish names:

M Beareek (possibly Dutch jewish)
David Birman
Isaac Cohen
Frederick Gehringer
Jacob Gleisinger
Joseph Isaacs

Interesting that Fashion Street in the same census was overwhelmingly Jewish