Assessing Cutbush

[rjpalmer]

So far on this thread we've learned:

1. Cutbush is a good suspect because he raped a prostitute.
2. Cutbush is a bad suspect because he raped a prostitute.

Meanwhile, there is no legitimate historical source showing that Cutbush ever raped a prostitute.

[Herlock Sholmes]

On the subject of syphilis and revenge Tracy said this in The Sun:

“The writer of this article once saw a soldier - a quiet, almost gentle creature, with fine brown eyes and an intellectual face and mind - tried for the murder of an unfortunate woman whom he had not seen for nearly 20 years, and whom he murdered immediately after his return from a long period of service in India.

The originating cause of this mania in most cases is the ravages of the mind caused by constitutional disease, and the desire to avenge the wrong on the class from which it was supposed to have spring. This is one of the many reasons which make it plain that Jack the Ripper would be a man past his first boyhood; old enough to have undergone years of severe suffering - mental and physical. It is often found that the idea of having contracted the disease, though unfounded, produces the same form of mania.”

From this Bullock got to this:

“Travelling back to Tudor Street, he contemplated what might have led Cutbush to assault the prostitute. Sitting inside the cab as it traversed the irregular cobblestones leading towards London Bridge, his mind wandered to a man he had once known during his time working in India, a soldier of quiet temperament and gentle nature, who went on to commit a most horrendous crime. Tracy recalled the surprise he had felt when, after serving twenty years, the soldier returned to his homeland and on arrival in England, without warning or hesitation, murdered a prostitute in cold blood. From what he knew of him, the soldier had contracted syphilis from the same prostitute two decades earlier and though many years had passed, on returning home he was overtaken with the desire for revenge. It threw up the possibility that Cutbush had come to believe that the prostitute whom he attacked had given him syphilis, the disease for which he had sought treatment when contacting Dr Brooks in July of 1888.”

We have no clue of course how Bullock got this:

“Unable to look directly at her guest, choosing instead to cast her gaze towards the parlour window, Clara replied: ‘There was one woman. He saw her often, so we were led to believe. Our nephew wasn’t inclined to keep such matters from us, Mr Tracy, though most men would, I’m sure. The relationship, if you can call it that, stopped quite suddenly.’ ‘And this happened – when?’ asked Tracy. ‘The exact date escapes me, though it was prior to 1888, of that I am sure,’ replied Clara. Though seemingly hesitant to explain fully the reason behind the relationship ending, Clara eventually admitted all she knew, stating that while in a fit of rage her nephew had viciously attacked and raped the woman whom he had been seeing.”

[The Rookie Detective]

It may also be worth noting that there are several newspaper articles that reference Cutbush as "James Cutbush" rather than Thomas.

With an apparent use of "cut and paste" it is difficult to ascertain where the initial report on Cutbush actually originated, and which publications simply reprinted the original without verifying their facts.

[etenguy]

I am a little late to this thread, having been away from the Boards for a while. But having seen it, and in light of Herlock's initial well argued post, I decided to vote on the basis of what I knew about this suspect. Herlock makes some good points concerning Cutbush attributes that would match those of the whitechapel murderer, but nevertheless, I voted 'an unlikely possible'. Possible for the reasons Herlock provides, but the reasons I find him an unlikely suspect are:

a - there is no direct evidence linking Cutbush to the ripper crimes
b - although Cutbush did attack women, none of the crimes that we know he committed involved the distinctive mutilations associated with the Ripper killings, nor anything like them.
c - MacNaughten stated that other men were more likely to be the ripper than Cutbush and while not ruling him out, was clear he was not high on his list of suspects.
d - Professor David Wilson (and a number of other experts), argue that people with severe mental illnesses like Cutbush generally do not possess the ability to carry out ripper like murders - that type of murder requires traits that don’t align with Cutbush’s mental condition.
e - while Herlock rightly states that serial killers do just stop or have long gaps sometimes, there is no obvious reason for Cutbush to have stopped (such as incarceration, illness or death - which provide reasons for some other suspects).
f - while Herlock does not find the change in later attacks on women an issue with Cutbush's candidacy, I do. He was no doubt violent, but throat cutting and mutilations of the genital and abdomen replaced by stabbings in back, I think show a quite different intent and process.

I am open to arguements and new evidence, but based on what I know about Cutbush I don't find him a likely candidate.