Deeming - A closer look

[The Rookie Detective]

Some very excellent points so far on this thread.

Logical, sensible, balanced, respectful, well thought out.


This is the kind of thread I particularly enjoy the most; excellent views and comments from knowledgeable and brilliant minds.

We may not agree, but that's the bedrock of healthy discussion and debate.



RD

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock,

I think that it probably is true that he can't be definitively proven to have been in London at the time. There is an eyewitness statement or 2 that he was there, but eyewitnesses can be wrong. What has changed in recent years is that at one time it is thought that he couldn't have been in London at the time - some thought he was in South Africa, and some thought he was in prison. Recent evidence seems to show that we don't know if either was a case. So it's at least possible for him to have been in London.

The same is true of James Kelly, isn't it? He could have been in London, but we don't know for sure where he was at the time of the murders.

Hi Lewis,

Yes, the similarity with Kelly struck me too the difference being of course that we at least know that Kelly was in England.

The first week of 1888 we have Deeming and Marie left for South Africa. Whilst there he popped up in Cape Town, Port Elizabeth, Durban, Klerksdorp and Johannesburg. For most of his time in SA his wife and children remained in Cape Town as he moved around trying to make money (never honestly of course) He arrived back in England late September 1889.

At the moment I’d favour that he was in South Africa but with no proof that he couldn’t have returned. Is it likely that he arrived when he did and travelled to all of those places, settling in, taking jobs, undertaking various scams and frauds then returns to England in August, then goes back to South Africa at some point only to return to England in September 1889? Not impossible but I’d need to see some evidence that he might have been in England or else he can be compared to Feigenbaum too.

[Lewis C]

That is an incredibly valid point.

The same applies to Bury who also secreted his wife...at least for a while... until he confessed.


The Ripper was perhaps a more spontaneous hunter, who took his opportunities and whose primary focus was to mutilate and then pose his victims in such a manner as to cause shock value and torment the person who discovered the body.


Bury and Deeming killed women they knew who were close to them; whereas the Ripper seems to have been an unknown entity to the women he killed.

Unless of course he WAS known to at least some of the women he killed; in particular MJK whose identity remains illusive.

Was the Ripper the individual that Kelly spoke of as being a family member in the theatre?

Was he related to her; hence a seemingly more personal touch when dispatching Kelly?

Considering her brother Johnto (?) never came forward; it seems as though he never existed or he may have been the Ripper himself and she let him in because he was family.
The man that Hutchinson described and who allegedly laughed along with MJK when she approached him. A joke between family perhaps?


just a random thought


RD

Hi RD,

I would just point out that if JtK had killed a family member, it's very unlikely that he would have done that in an identical manner to how he killed the prostitutes. If we're going to exclude from consideration people known to have killed in a different way from JtK, that would mean only considering non-murderers as possible suspects. I would argue that not killing at all is a bigger variation from JtR than killing in a different manner.

[Lewis C]

I’m on page 110 at the moment but, as far as I can see there’s just no evidence placing Deeming in London at the time of the murders.



February 1881 he married Maria in Birkenhead.

Not long after the wedding he left for Sydney (planning to send for Maria when he could.)

Marie arrived in Sydney around June.

They moved to Melbourne for a while before moving to Queensland.

Early 1884 the Deeming’s were back in Sydney.

The first week in 1888, Deeming and family left for SA.

They first stayed three weeks in Adelaide.

They took a ship to London which stopped at St. Helena (1200 miles from the coast of Africa)

From St. Helena they sailed to Cape Town.

Deeming moved around in SA making appearances in Port Elizabeth, Durban, Klerksdorp and Johannesburg. For most of the period his wife and children remained in Cape Town.

Marie and the children arrived back in England (Birkenhead) in July/August 1889.

Deeming travelled back alone via Yemen, arriving in Aden on September 27th. Within a day or two he was back with his family in Birkenhead.

….

I don’t know what evidence, if any, the author will present later in the book to put Deeming in London but so far all he’s saying is pretty much ‘well he travelled around a lot so he could have travelled back to England.’

Hi Herlock,

I think that it probably is true that he can't be definitively proven to have been in London at the time. There is an eyewitness statement or 2 that he was there, but eyewitnesses can be wrong. What has changed in recent years is that at one time it is thought that he couldn't have been in London at the time - some thought he was in South Africa, and some thought he was in prison. Recent evidence seems to show that we don't know if either was a case. So it's at least possible for him to have been in London.

The same is true of James Kelly, isn't it? He could have been in London, but we don't know for sure where he was at the time of the murders.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’m on page 110 at the moment but, as far as I can see there’s just no evidence placing Deeming in London at the time of the murders.



February 1881 he married Maria in Birkenhead.

Not long after the wedding he left for Sydney (planning to send for Maria when he could.)

Marie arrived in Sydney around June.

They moved to Melbourne for a while before moving to Queensland.

Early 1884 the Deeming’s were back in Sydney.

The first week in 1888, Deeming and family left for SA.

They first stayed three weeks in Adelaide.

They took a ship to London which stopped at St. Helena (1200 miles from the coast of Africa)

From St. Helena they sailed to Cape Town.

Deeming moved around in SA making appearances in Port Elizabeth, Durban, Klerksdorp and Johannesburg. For most of the period his wife and children remained in Cape Town.

Marie and the children arrived back in England (Birkenhead) in July/August 1889.

Deeming travelled back alone via Yemen, arriving in Aden on September 27th. Within a day or two he was back with his family in Birkenhead.

….

I don’t know what evidence, if any, the author will present later in the book to put Deeming in London but so far all he’s saying is pretty much ‘well he travelled around a lot so he could have travelled back to England.’

[The Rookie Detective]

A rather amusing yet particularly serious piece of information I came across regarding Deeming's childhood...


As a child Deeming was nicknamed "Mad Fred' due to his particularly odd and peculiar behaviour; even as a boy.


A girl apparently mocked him...

...and he reacted aggressively, by throwing/pushing her into a canal.


Start as you mean to go on, and all that.



RD

[Michael W Richards]

I've never bought Deeming as JTR. His secreting of his known victims is diametricly opposed to Jack's methods.

Nor does it make sense to associate Jack with Torso Makers for much the same reason, and it also likely excludes people who kill slowly by poison.

The fact that this killer murdered then immediately mutilated women outdoors in publicly accessible areas means 1 of 2 things.....he didnt care if someone happened to catch him...or wasnt of sound mind to factor that possibility into the situation, or he wanted the victims to be found just as he left them. In essence, he anticipated viewers reactions and that was part of the thrill for him.

My personal opinion is that in the case of whom I consider has the highest probability of being an actual "Ripper" victim...Annie....I think the first of those 2 scenarios makes more sense. Now, in the case of Mary Kelly, I believe the second scenario was more probable.

Does that make one more probably an accurately assigned Canonical Victim of JtR than the other....no....but does that plus an indoor venue, lack of any appreciable knife skills or anatomical acumen, a victim half the age of prior victims, a venue with only 1 exit, and a uterus left behind help that along? Ok..add a known love triangle. Still no? How about evidence suggesting that he did not pick her up outside as she was actively soliciting? No-one saw her go back out after 11:45pm Thursday night, not Elizabeth before she came in at 1:30, nor Mary Ann..who passed that room several time after 11:45 Thursday. As of 1:30 am, that room was dark and quiet. So, did she go out then? Maybe. But no witness said they saw her leave that court after she came home. Sure....1 comes in 4 days later, claims to know Mary and be her friend, and says he saw her out after 2am. With what has to be the most detailed witness description of someone with the soon to be victim...and in the middle of the night on a dark street no less. From a distance too.

Back to the point of my response, I think you are spot on including public venues as something we would expect from JTR. He didnt source out then hide his compulsions in a small room in a confined court locked to the outside,.... nor did he see the need to hide the bodies so he could slowly, over days or weeks, take the victims apart piece by piece. He swiftly subdued, adjusted the body for access, and began cutting.

[The Rookie Detective]

I've never bought Deeming as JTR. His secreting of his known victims is diametricly opposed to Jack's methods.

That is an incredibly valid point.

The same applies to Bury who also secreted his wife...at least for a while... until he confessed.


The Ripper was perhaps a more spontaneous hunter, who took his opportunities and whose primary focus was to mutilate and then pose his victims in such a manner as to cause shock value and torment the person who discovered the body.


Bury and Deeming killed women they knew who were close to them; whereas the Ripper seems to have been an unknown entity to the women he killed.

Unless of course he WAS known to at least some of the women he killed; in particular MJK whose identity remains illusive.

Was the Ripper the individual that Kelly spoke of as being a family member in the theatre?

Was he related to her; hence a seemingly more personal touch when dispatching Kelly?

Considering her brother Johnto (?) never came forward; it seems as though he never existed or he may have been the Ripper himself and she let him in because he was family.
The man that Hutchinson described and who allegedly laughed along with MJK when she approached him. A joke between family perhaps?


just a random thought


RD

[Tel]

I've never bought Deeming as JTR. His secreting of his known victims is diametricly opposed to Jack's methods.

[The Rookie Detective]

Frederick Deeming was also a Freemason.


He was initiated into the "Lodge of Tranquility" in Sydney NSW)

Initiated on 11th November 1886
Passed on 9th December 1886
Raised in January 1887

That confirms he was in Sidney at least between November 1886 to January 1887.


Interesting that despite so many different names and aliases, he used his real birth name when he joined the Freemasons.

He also stated he was a Plumber; which is accurate.

Is it significant that he told so much truth when he became a Freemason?

For a man who was a compulsive liar, cheat and fraud; it is perhaps rather telling that he told the truth when joining the Lodge of Tranquility in Sydney; a place exclusively for men at the time.



RD

[The Rookie Detective]

Hi RD,

1.) I believe the theory that he was in South Africa originated at the time of his arrest in Australia. Two detectives came from South Africa as part of an investigation into a murder in South Africa. When they saw Deeming in jail they declared that he was not the man for whom they were looking, but this part was lost in the story.

2.) The woman who stated she saw him the night Eddowes was murdered saw a published photo of Deeming after his arrest, but she said his name was Lawson. It would be of value to know if this known alias used by Deeming had been mentioned in the press at, or before, that time.

IF Deeming was the ripper, then he would have unique knowledge of the identities of his victims, and would not include those who were not his victims in his statement. So if he were the ripper, and MJK was his last victim, he would be counting back from her in the knowledge that he, as the ripper, had nothing to do with any victim after MJK.

Cheers, George

Some excellent points


In particular your 2nd point.

Deeming was known to go by the name of both Lawson and Dawson, and as you say; it would be interesting to know the correct chronology of when the name Lawson was first referenced in the press.

It would go a long way to either enhancing her claim as being truthful and accurate; or dismissing it as unreliable if the name had been plastered all over the press before she said anything.


Regarding Deeming's alleged claims that he was responsible for the last 2 murders, the inference was on Alice Mckenzie being one of those 2 because at the time Alice Mckenzie was considered a Ripper victim regardless of any modern day view that she wasn't.

But you're correct in that IF Mckenzie wasn't a Ripper victim and the press assumed that Deeming was talking about Mckenzie and Coles; then Deeming may have been referring to MJK.

However Deeming was asked about "the other murders' (presumably regarding the autumn of 1888) he denied having any knowledge of them.


It makes me wonder why Deeming wouldn't just say he was the Ripper and claim to have been the infamous Whitechapel slayer.

But he doesn't elude to that at all and just refers to "the last 2"

Chronologically speaking that should mean Coles and Pinchin Street BUT crucially it is Alice McKenzie who is highlighted as one of the last 2.

So does that mean McKenzie and Pinchin, Mckenzie and Coles, or McKenzie and MJK?

Or MJK and Eddowes?


Another interesting titbit regarding Deeming; he often carried Sovereign coins and had a necklace (with diamonds) that he carried around with him to seduce women.

The idea of Deeming dressed as a Doctor, Soldier, Engineer or aristocrat and going around showing women his necklace, is to me reminiscent of the Ripper.



RD

[The Rookie Detective]

Hi RD.

The man who entered the "Herald" offices and told the press about the body was John Arnold. Arnold is not the name he gave them initially, but after the investigation that man was in fact the newsvendor, John Arnold. He turned himself into the police and was questioned. He admitted to being the man at the "Herald" offices.

Claude Mellor, a journalist for the Star Newspaper, had his suspicions raised when he heard the name Cleary and Backchurch Lane. He told the police he knew a man named Cleary that lived at #2, Savoy Buildings, age 35, bald and spoke as if he had no roof to his mouth was a man of interest. He was an ex-compositor for the Globe. A few years ago on the forums I did some research into a man named Matthew Cleary that lived at the right time at #3, Savoy Buildings and was a compositor. The Globe offices were directly across the street from his address so without being 100% certain, I am fairly certain this is Mellor's man. Living at #2, Savory Buildings, incidentally, was a man named C.H Fox. I would say with high confidence this was Charles H. Fox, the famous wigmaker and master of disguise. The reason I am so confident is across from Savoy Buildings was Terry's Theatre. Fox designed outfits for actors and actresses.

Claude Mellor found the thigh of Elizabeth Jackson in the garden of the Shelley Estate. That is a story in and of itself.

And last, for coincidences related to this, William Wallace Brodie (made a confession that he killled Alice McKenzie) lived twice at the same address as John Arnold. Once when he was released from prison in August 1888 and again when he returned from South Africa in July 1889 just before Alice's murder. Both men lived at #2 Harvey's Buildings, Strand.

There are some very odd coincidences there indeed.


Could a group of men associated with the Savoy Building and Globe offices have been part of a group of killers?

Did they form part of a gentleman's club that included individuals with a lust for cutting, mutilation, and cannibalism?

A kind of underground fight club that dealt with the macabre and sexual deviance instead of fighting.

A club that included Policemen, Surgeons, Actors and Reporters.

It's also interesting for me that as well as an Engraver; Albert Bachert also once described himself as "a compositor and reporter"


There has always been a theme of Reporters and Theatrics running through the Ripper murders and I have always wondered whether the Ripper AND Torso killings were the work of multiple individuals who acted as part of some secret cult.


Regarding Deeming; it's also interesting that he posed as an Engineer, a Doctor, an army officer, a farmer etc...

The only thing he was trained in was as a plumber and gas fitter, and yet he plays a multitude of roles and persona over time.

He is constantly in character and for me that fits my idea of the kind of man who was the Ripper.



RD

[GBinOz]

1.) I had always believed that Deeming had been conclusively ruled out due to him having been in South Africa at the time of the killings; but it would appear that there is no definitive proof either way.

2.) However, there were witnesses who claimed he WAS in Whitechapel; including the woman who stated she saw him the night Eddowes was murdered, and the man on the bus who claimed Deeming was a passenger who produced a spring back clasp knife and mentioned the Ripper.

These could be just stories and there's no way to prove they're genuine.


3.) It is important to highlight that it was alleged that Deeming claimed he was responsible for the "last 2 murders" ergo, Mckenzie and one other.
It was also alleged that when asked about the other murders; he claimed to know nothing about them.

He therefore doesn't say he was responsible for the Canonical 5, but only Mckenzie and one other.

It has always been assumed that he was referring to Coles, but we know for certain that Deeming was NOT Coles killer because he was in prison at the time she was murdered.

It seems that once it was established that he couldn't have been Coles killer; that he was just lying about the entire thing and had no link to the murder of McKenzie either.

However, my point is that he may have been referring to the Pinchin Street torso and NOT Coles.

Hi RD,

1.) I believe the theory that he was in South Africa originated at the time of his arrest in Australia. Two detectives came from South Africa as part of an investigation into a murder in South Africa. When they saw Deeming in jail they declared that he was not the man for whom they were looking, but this part was lost in the story.

2.) The woman who stated she saw him the night Eddowes was murdered saw a published photo of Deeming after his arrest, but she said his name was Lawson. It would be of value to know if this known alias used by Deeming had been mentioned in the press at, or before, that time.

IF Deeming was the ripper, then he would have unique knowledge of the identities of his victims, and would not include those who were not his victims in his statement. So if he were the ripper, and MJK was his last victim, he would be counting back from her in the knowledge that he, as the ripper, had nothing to do with any victim after MJK.

Cheers, George

[jerryd]

I find that fact that the name Leary can be connected to the man who appeared to predict the murder before it happened is a striking coincidence.

What if the man who told the press that about the Pinchin Street torso BEFORE any body was dumped, was actually Deeming himself?

Did Deeming have any connections to the press?

Does the description of Deeming fit into the description of the man who gave his name as Arnold and is later linked to the name Leary?

RD

Hi RD.

The man who entered the "Herald" offices and told the press about the body was John Arnold. Arnold is not the name he gave them initially, but after the investigation that man was in fact the newsvendor, John Arnold. He turned himself into the police and was questioned. He admitted to being the man at the "Herald" offices.

Claude Mellor, a journalist for the Star Newspaper, had his suspicions raised when he heard the name Cleary and Backchurch Lane. He told the police he knew a man named Cleary that lived at #2, Savoy Buildings, age 35, bald and spoke as if he had no roof to his mouth was a man of interest. He was an ex-compositor for the Globe. A few years ago on the forums I did some research into a man named Matthew Cleary that lived at the right time at #3, Savoy Buildings and was a compositor. The Globe offices were directly across the street from his address so without being 100% certain, I am fairly certain this is Mellor's man. Living at #2, Savory Buildings, incidentally, was a man named C.H Fox. I would say with high confidence this was Charles H. Fox, the famous wigmaker and master of disguise. The reason I am so confident is across from Savoy Buildings was Terry's Theatre. Fox designed outfits for actors and actresses.

Claude Mellor found the thigh of Elizabeth Jackson in the garden of the Shelley Estate. That is a story in and of itself.

And last, for coincidences related to this, William Wallace Brodie (made a confession that he killled Alice McKenzie) lived twice at the same address as John Arnold. Once when he was released from prison in August 1888 and again when he returned from South Africa in July 1889 just before Alice's murder. Both men lived at #2 Harvey's Buildings, Strand.

[The Rookie Detective]

It was thought at one time that Deeming was either in jail or in South Africa at the time of the Ripper murders, but I think it has since been shown that there's no evidence that either of those is the case. So the interest in Deeming declined for awhile, but has increased in recent years.

One other point about Deeming is that he strangled some of his victims. So he strangled and cut throats, same as the Ripper. No abdominal mutilations, but Bury is the only Ripper suspect who did that. The known murderers who are Ripper suspects all killed people that they knew, all killed wives, but doing so would have required they do some things differently from the Ripper, such as concealing what they did.

I don't think that Deeming's description matches the man that Hutchinson saw. Basically, he doesn't look Jewish. But I'm very doubtful about Hutch's credibility, so that doesn't affect my view of Deeming as a suspect. I think he's one of the 9 best Ripper suspects.

I had always believed that Deeming had been conclusively ruled out due to him having been in South Africa at the time of the killings; but it would appear that there is no definitive proof either way.

We know he was in Hull in England in 1889 and so that indicates that he travelled often and under different names and guises.

Another point that goes against him is that he wasn't a local to Whitechapel; unlike someone like Bachert who lived within the Ripper kill zone throughout the entirety of the murders.

We therefore have no means to connect Deeming to Whitechapel; and that is a very long nail in the coffin and goes against him being the Ripper.

However, there were witnesses who claimed he WAS in Whitechapel; including the woman who stated she saw him the night Eddowes was murdered, and the man on the bus who claimed Deeming was a passenger who produced a spring back clasp knife and mentioned the Ripper.

These could be just stories and there's no way to prove they're genuine.

Now of course; if there's a way of proving he was in Whitechapel through the use of one of his many many names; then that may swing the balance to Deeming being a key suspect in the case.

It is important to highlight that it was alleged that Deeming claimed he was responsible for the "last 2 murders" ergo, Mckenzie and one other.
It was also alleged that when asked about the other murders; he claimed to know nothing about them.

He therefore doesn't say he was responsible for the Canonical 5, but only Mckenzie and one other.

It has always been assumed that he was referring to Coles, but we know for certain that Deeming was NOT Coles killer because he was in prison at the time she was murdered.

It seems that once it was established that he couldn't have been Coles killer; that he was just lying about the entire thing and had no link to the murder of McKenzie either.

However, my point is that he may have been referring to the Pinchin Street torso and NOT Coles.


It is alleged that Deeming went by the name of Leary at one stage.
I find that fact that the name Leary can be connected to the man who appeared to predict the murder before it happened is a striking coincidence.

What if the man who told the press that about the Pinchin Street torso BEFORE any body was dumped, was actually Deeming himself?

Did Deeming have any connections to the press?

Does the description of Deeming fit into the description of the man who gave his name as Arnold and is later linked to the name Leary?


Deeming was fair, blur eyes, handsome, with a ginger (ish) colour moustache, and aged in his mid to late 30's at the time.


How does that tally with the man Leary?


Whats interesting is that Deeming also seems to have used the name Levy.

Levy is Jewish of course.


But Deeming wasn't Jewish and didn't look Jewish.


Does that suggest that Deeming actively changed the colour of his facial hair depending on the alias he was going by at the time? I.e. did he alter his appearance to look more Jewish when he was alleged to have gone by the name Levy?


Fascinating character indeed



RD