A Local Solution

[Autolycus]

I was pondering the JTR crimes last night, comforted only by a glass of Old Mindbender. It’s the mystery of it that fascinates me. The mystery of how so much time, effort and brain power applied over the course of 121 years can raise so many questions yet provide so few definitive answers.

I feel that if we could adequately answer two key questions we would be closer to understanding what happened. I realise some will query the assumptions that underlie the following, but hey! Run with it for a while

Why did JTR’s murders cease after the killing of MJK?

Why did so many police officers and their associates seem to start behaving as if they knew the threat has passed within a relatively short time and yet show no consistency in who they “named” as the Ripper?

The following theory would explain these.

What if the Ripper was identified by residents of Whitechapel on the evening of Kelly’s murder? Maybe the later inconsistent statements of Cox, Prater, Hutch et al were because they didn’t want the police to find out what had really happened that night: after one of them had categorically recognised Jack as he left Millers Court.

It would not be unprecedented for someone who had no love of the police to seek another means of retribution. A word in the ear of an underworld figure with the right connections (McCarthy?), or an over zealous member of the Vigilance Committee and Jack’s days would be numbered. JTR could have disappeared quickly and silently at the hands of an underworld assassin whose masters had paid him to take the necessary action to remove unwelcome police attention and reinforce their own position as the people who really mattered in the East End.

Thereafter it would not have taken long for word to reach the police that the matter was “sorted”. However, it would not have been desirable for the police to even hint at what really befell JTR.

Have I solved it? Should I contact a publisher? No doubt you’ll let me know.

Regards,
Autolycus.

[lynn cates]

jigsaw

Hello Auto. I too am concerned about all the furtive solutions.

The problem, I think, can best be grasped by the following analogy. Go to a local store and buy 3 or 4 jigsaw puzzles (1000 pieces each). Dump them all out and shuffle thoroughly. Next, sweep away about 2500 of then into the rubbish.

Can you put together a coherent picture with what remains? If not, why not?

The best.

LC

[Limehouse]

I was pondering the JTR crimes last night, comforted only by a glass of Old Mindbender. It’s the mystery of it that fascinates me. The mystery of how so much time, effort and brain power applied over the course of 121 years can raise so many questions yet provide so few definitive answers.

I feel that if we could adequately answer two key questions we would be closer to understanding what happened. I realise some will query the assumptions that underlie the following, but hey! Run with it for a while

Why did JTR’s murders cease after the killing of MJK?

Why did so many police officers and their associates seem to start behaving as if they knew the threat has passed within a relatively short time and yet show no consistency in who they “named” as the Ripper?

The following theory would explain these.

What if the Ripper was identified by residents of Whitechapel on the evening of Kelly’s murder? Maybe the later inconsistent statements of Cox, Prater, Hutch et al were because they didn’t want the police to find out what had really happened that night: after one of them had categorically recognised Jack as he left Millers Court.

It would not be unprecedented for someone who had no love of the police to seek another means of retribution. A word in the ear of an underworld figure with the right connections (McCarthy?), or an over zealous member of the Vigilance Committee and Jack’s days would be numbered. JTR could have disappeared quickly and silently at the hands of an underworld assassin whose masters had paid him to take the necessary action to remove unwelcome police attention and reinforce their own position as the people who really mattered in the East End.

Thereafter it would not have taken long for word to reach the police that the matter was “sorted”. However, it would not have been desirable for the police to even hint at what really befell JTR.

Have I solved it? Should I contact a publisher? No doubt you’ll let me know.

Regards,
Autolycus.

Hello Autolycus,

This is an interesting idea, worthy of further debate.

The only problem I can see is the end bit - where the police become aware that it has been 'sorted'. I don't think the investigating officers would have just sat back and accepted that - especially as they received such criticism over the years for not solving the crime.

[kensei]

Hi Autolycus, it is a fine theory, one I like in fact since it calls to mind the capture of Night Stalker Richard Ramirez in 1985 by his own people, which always makes me grin (though they did turn him over to the police alive). My problem with it however is your first question- Why did JTR's murders cease after the killing of MJK? I don't believe they did. Alice McKenzie, Frances Coles, etc...

And as an afterthought, hadn't the Vigilance Committee organized a reward for the capture of the the Ripper? In the impoverished East End, a live capture with the promise of a large sum of money would have been hard to resist.

[Phil Carter]

Hi Autolycus, Limehouse,

An interesting thought. Retribution, "thieves amongst thieves" etc... hmmm.
I can only draw on the things I have been told from the area's own population from that time. (Have two families that lived in and around the area, and my Grandmother was born there in 1888).

The notion of an inner retribution within their own society would certainly be something had it been later on into the 20thC... with, even later, the development of gangs that "ruled the manor". There were a few gangs around at the time of the Ripper murders, the Old Nicholls gang amongst others, but these gangs were far less common than 70 years later, although their notoriety was well known throughout the area.

There WERE individuals that would deal out justice. But, that justice was more or less for less "serious" crimes, and although it may POSSIBLY NOT be done for the murder of MJK in normal circumstances, the atmosphere at the time may have been acidic enough to have whipped up such a response.

If so, it would be very interesting to see if there had been, in the 3-4 months AFTER MJK's murder, any male found dead or with suspected foul play involved. Murder in the East End wasn't uncommon, but the heightened state of tension cannot be underestimated. Trawling through a few newspapers may be a help, and having thought about it, every murder and attack on a woman, certainly, was making headline news at the time, and for a considerable time afterwards.

The thing that perhaps IS significant though, is that HAD there been such retribution, the word on the street would have caused tounges to wag, and the answer would certainly have been known GENERALLY amongst the local population at a fairly early stage. If it HAD happened, it seems likely that this notion would have become apparent certainly within a short time of it having occured. Newspapers would have picked it up quickly from the lowest of classes, who would have dropped hints and we would have seen such a theory very quickly in print.

On balance, I would say that this idea, although worth discussion, dries up with lack of notion from the very time it happened. There is absolutely no way that locals , one and all, could keep their mouth shut for the rest of their lives. Someone always knows something. It is as prevelant today amongst police work as it would have been then.

best wishes

Phil

[Observer]

Hi Autolycus

With regard to your above theory, far too many people would have been in the know, and knowing human nature this story would have leaked out I suspect, especially( as Kensei points out) the reward element was in place. It's an interesting theory though.

all the best

Observer

[Observer]

Apologies to Phil, I only read your post after I'd sent mine, but as you can see I endorse what you posted.

all the best

Observer

[Autolycus]

Yes, but

Thank you all for the constructive feedback. I’d just like to respond to a couple of points that have been made.

If the chain of events which I postulate had taken place its revelation would have caused more than general embarrassment to police officers. Unprecedented political “flak” was guaranteed if it was thought that the East End was out of control to the extent that it administered its own justice. The sort of high-ranking officials threatened by this were also the ones who had the authority to suppress loose talk whilst quietly reducing the number of men on the street.

The point regarding the contemporary silence on such an eventuality is, of course interesting. However, those who organised and committed any killing of retribution are likely to have been few in number and would not have wanted the details known for reasons of self-protection. After the event, a general “nod and a wink” and the growing feeling that the crimes had stopped would have been sufficient.

Whilst I am tempted by Phil Carter’s observation that “someone always knows something” this case has never resulted in anyone saying something definitive – whoever the perpetrator and however he met his end.

Regards,
Autolycus.

[dixon9]

good stuff auto

i can see were you are coming from(and there have been alot more wackier theories) but maybe one/two stumbling blocks,would they have not wanted the reward money as well?

And another thought,would one of the 'insiders' to this deed not have wrote it in his/her memoirs,or tried to sell the story later in life,if short of a few bob?

Dixon9
still learning

[Observer]

Hi Dixon, I agree, I don't think it would have taken long for the press to have been informed, for a nice juicy fee of course. In my mind this theory is a non starter

all the best

Observer

[Observer]

Whilst I am tempted by Phil Carter’s observation that “someone always knows something” this case has never resulted in anyone saying something definitive – whoever the perpetrator and however he met his end.

Regards,
Autolycus.

Hi Aotolycus

Proof that the killer took the secret to the grave perhaps? That is he told no one, and left nothing to incriminate himself.

all the best

Observer

[Autolycus]

Try This..

Like any other theory on the case, too much time has elapsed and too many of the players are gone for me to give definitive answers to some of these excellent questions. However, I can think of certain scenarios that would explain them.

So here’s an example, just for jolly:

Hutch’s suspicious behaviour is because he was sweet on MJK and keeping an eye out for her. He saw and recognised her last client. Not wishing to hang around while business was transacted, he went elsewhere. On his return he discovered the carnage and left pronto.

Furious with rage he tracked jack to a pub that he knew he frequented. As he emerged, he slit his throat and dumped him in the river.

Amongst other things this would explain:
Why he couldn’t claim the reward.
Why his statements were so inconsistent.
Why nobody talked.

My point is that, whatever happened, a nice, small scale, local solution may explain why the trail goes completely cold.

Regards,
Autolycus.

[kensei]

I know I'm being nit-picky here, but I'm about to go off to bed and I'm tired. When you bring up Hutch, just like Barnett I've always thought the guy has gotten a really bad rap for nothing. Indeed I believe he was "sweet on" Mary Jane and that that is why he followed her. But if the rest of your theory was to hold true- it is quite a walk from Whitechapel/Spitalfields to the Thames whilst carrying a dead body, isn't it?

Sorry, good night.

[Phil Carter]

Hello all, again...
This certainly is interesting, certainly not that wacky.. (we who have been in this game for a while have seen FAR worse!)
It is a truism to say that if someone knew something at the time, nothing came out.
Which made me think... on two counts.
1) That fact is HIGHLY unusual in itself, given the intensity and publicity of the case in the area, with all sorts of manners and means being tried. Both officially, and from "within". We must remember that the atmosphere created led to panic, fear and a very urgent need from the locals to see this man caught. To a higher degree perhaps than with other criminals.
2) WHY didnt the locals "know" anything? Could this lead us to ponder the possibilty is now stronger that an un-known.. a stranger to the area, is at the centre of all this. In my mind the thought becomes stronger when thinking of it from the "other way around".

Yes, Auto, I can certainly see where you are coming from. This certainly DOES open up retribution as a possibility.
However, upon weighing this up carefully, like Observer and others, I cannot possibly see that this could or would stay quiet. Even if it were a small group "in the know", someone, somewhere, would try to make gain of it, at some point. That an entire community stayed quiet forever, I find difficult to believe. I myself, have been told story after story from my OWN elderly relatives, when I was younger, all basically innocent, but talk they did. This affected the community of the East End as a whole for many many years afterwards.

I would really like to say...hmm you have cracked it with this, because it is different enough and stable enough to warrant investigation... but I fear that the power of the status as the "one to tell the truth" would be way too magnetic, given the financial rewards to be gained. Especially as time went on.

Has certainly got me thinking though...well done!

best wishes

Phil

[C. F. Leon]

I'm surprised that no one ever has mentioned that this is basically the plot of the 1931 German Film M- directed by Fritz Lang, with Peter Lorre.

- CFL