Who do you think Jack the Ripper was and why?

[YomRippur]

For me I do not think JtR existed. I think out of the five Canonical victims there might have been two or even three murderers. I do not think the double event was a double event and possibly Mary Kelly was murdered by someone different from the other four.

But that would necessitate the belief that murders were quite common in those days, that in those brief 3 months, multiple murderers (and you seem to suggest at least three) were running around knifing women to death in roughly the same period of time in the same tiny area. But in fact, murders were pretty rare at the time. I found this old thread that mentions that there were only 11 adult women murdered by knife in the whole of England, while in 1888 the number was 17, exactly 6 higher. So the probability might have been quite low for the Ripper crimes to have been committed by multiple people.

[spyglass]

Hi,
Well for me..... I change with the wind.
Most of the top ten have merit in my book, except for Kosminski.
But one thing I can never shake off is the belief that they were killed for a particular reason, and not at random, certainly a message being sent out.
And I can't write off some kind of cover up either.

Regards

[spyglass]

And Liverpool cotton trader ...

And his all singing brother.

[Geddy2112]

But that would necessitate the belief that murders were quite common in those days, that in those brief 3 months, multiple murderers (and you seem to suggest at least three) were running around knifing women to death in roughly the same period of time in the same tiny area. But in fact, murders were pretty rare at the time. I found this old thread that mentions that there were only 11 adult women murdered by knife in the whole of England, while in 1888 the number was 17, exactly 6 higher. So the probability might have been quite low for the Ripper crimes to have been committed by multiple people.

A few reasons I think more than one and maybe up to three are mainly in the timings. Especially the double event. I still think it would have been hard to do the job with such a level of skill in the dark to have the time. However some days I think the bodies were killed elsewhere and dumped. Maybe the killer was not on foot... I dunno so may unanswered questions.

I also sort of blame the press. I do think there is some credence to the media hyping it up or maybe even being involved to prolong the killings. Hanbury street and Mitre Square are the same killer to me, Bucks Row, Berner St and Millers Court different. Maybe Mary Jane not by the same killer at all. The odds are maybe against by your figures yes but I've just a feeling one killer did not do all five. I think that is why it's more difficult to pin down one definite killer because it was not all the work of one person.

[John Wheat]

I think they were at least five different violent murderers in Whitechapel, murdering prostitutes in 1888

[YomRippur]

A few reasons I think more than one and maybe up to three are mainly in the timings. Especially the double event. I still think it would have been hard to do the job with such a level of skill in the dark to have the time. However some days I think the bodies were killed elsewhere and dumped. Maybe the killer was not on foot... I dunno so may unanswered questions.

I also sort of blame the press. I do think there is some credence to the media hyping it up or maybe even being involved to prolong the killings. Hanbury street and Mitre Square are the same killer to me, Bucks Row, Berner St and Millers Court different. Maybe Mary Jane not by the same killer at all. The odds are maybe against by your figures yes but I've just a feeling one killer did not do all five. I think that is why it's more difficult to pin down one definite killer because it was not all the work of one person.

The problem with the theory of victims being killed at one place and dumped at another place is that instead of having to find one safe location to do his deeds, the killer had to find two, not to mention the necessary travel between the two locations. Such a killer would have to have a pretty good reason to add another level of risk.

All canonical victims except Stride shared quite a few of the same characteristics (and Stride did share some of them): the type of women targeted by the killer, the way he approached them, the method of his initial attack (strangulation, throat-cutting), and the mutilation. Thus, the probability is low that multiple murderers would share the same characteristics and operate at roughly the same times and in the same areas.

[niko]

Hello everyone, I think the perpertator's of this crime's were the goverment, the police, the queen and the mason's working together !! why ? to prevent a revoultion !! if I'm not wrong at the time previous to the murder's there were portest going on about working condition's. I read somewhere that Warren gave order's to his officer's to open fire on the protester if needed, I think this was in Trafaulgar square, I beleive that the majority of the protester were from the East End.So the four parties I previously mentioned planned and executed the whole thing about the Jack the ripper murder's to distract attention from the protest of the working conditon's wich were going on at the time and fill the Eastender's with fear !! remember working conditon's in the East End were almost semi slavery !! remember that the majority of the protester's were Eastender's. I can't undrestand how so many year's later and the case is not solved and no clues are strong !! to me it seem's that it is being well covered up !!

all the best,

Niko

[Geddy2112]

Hello everyone, I think the perpertator's of this crime's were the goverment, the police, the queen and the mason's working together !!:

See I love that. I think that is why the From Hell, Michael Caine and Murder by Decree worked so well for me, it was a good conspiracy. The mason's doing it for whatever reason fits in with my theory that it was more than one killer. I would 'love' it to be the blackmail angle but I know it's not... it just makes for a great story, misleading but great.

Remember the FM on Mary's wall..... not Maybrick but Free Masons.. oh yes... the clues are there..

[niko]

See I love that. I think that is why the From Hell, Michael Caine and Murder by Decree worked so well for me, it was a good conspiracy. The mason's doing it for whatever reason fits in with my theory that it was more than one killer. I would 'love' it to be the blackmail angle but I know it's not... it just makes for a great story, misleading but great.

Remember the FM on Mary's wall..... not Maybrick but Free Masons.. oh yes... the clues are there..

Hi Geddy the French revolution was not so funny and took place 100 year's prior to 1888 !!! have you checked out the Bloody Sundy which took place in Trafalgar square on the 13 of November ? some feared a British revolution.

All the best,

Niko

[Steadmund Brand]

Jack was, is and will always be just that, Jack, more an invention of the media than real, but yet real enough to have been a bastard, possibly one, or several people doing terrible things in a terrible place at a terrible time and the media ran with it.....nothing sells papers like terror, fear and mystery....sadly, I feel if there wasn't so much "attention" given the police would have had a better chance of solving these crime...(less cranks and fake leads that went nowhere).
We will never know for sure who Jack was, even if some miracle piece of evidence did show up, there would be enough people who's only goal in life would be to debunk it...fair or not, that's just how it is....
Personally, I do believe that there was one "Jack", meaning an actual serial killer at large, I don't necessarily think he was responsible for "The 5" but that he was responsible for more that are not attributed to "him"....as to who it was....I really am not sure, I lean towards something like Martin Fido's David Cohen theory (or someone quite like that.. who was locked away) but at this point, my interest is more in contemporary police suspects and why the police suspected them, not that I think they were right, just the why is what fascinates me now....
That's one thing about the "Ripper", for those of us who study it, there is always something to hold our interest....I have a friend who likes to research the "witnesses".. right now, that's his filed of study, Another who just researches non London news paper accounts.. and so on...
It's sad the "Ripper community" at large can't ALL get along....but that's human nature, ego's can be fragile....luckily I have gotten along with everyone I have met or talked to in the "Ripperologist" world....and hope that trend will continue

Oh so, to answer the question, Who was Jack.... Ummmmm I don't know

Steadmund Brand

[richardnunweek]

Hi Geddy.
You may have been tongue in cheek referring to the FM but actually that interpretation has never cropped up before on here, and is more plausible then Florence Maybrick.
Regards Richard.

[SuspectZero]

Give me one name and an explanation as to why you think it was that suspect.


Parker

I'm not afraid to name my suspect and I expect to be skewered after posting this - so have at it.
Morgan Davies
Single. Surgeon at London Hospital during the time of the murders. Base of operations was Black Lion Yd in the heart of all the murder sites. Named as a suspect - but no direct police interviews ever released. Murders ceased after he started his relationship with his future wife, Margaret.

[DirectorDave]

Henry Simmons...he shows up as 39 in the 1891 census as Tailors Presser (Works with his hands) at 3 Yoakley Buildings, Whitechapel, Born Russia, Poland.

This makes him 36 at the times of the murders...he stopped because, well l will come up with some reason no doubt.

About the right age, correct gender and was probably in the area of the murders at the time. Which makes my suspect more plausible than 90% of the suspects that books are written about.

If it gets proved he has an alibi I'll just pull another name of the census.

[Mayerling]

Jack was, is and will always be just that, Jack, more an invention of the media than real, but yet real enough to have been a bastard, possibly one, or several people doing terrible things in a terrible place at a terrible time and the media ran with it.....nothing sells papers like terror, fear and mystery....sadly, I feel if there wasn't so much "attention" given the police would have had a better chance of solving these crime...(less cranks and fake leads that went nowhere).
We will never know for sure who Jack was, even if some miracle piece of evidence did show up, there would be enough people who's only goal in life would be to debunk it...fair or not, that's just how it is....

Hi Steadmund,

Personally I ve never really pushed any theory (even presently, though I suggested someone on another thread last Friday). Most likely strikes me still as a local person knowing his or her way around the East End.

However, I have to disagree with the first paragraph of your quote. It's tempting to think that the police would have had a better chance of reaching a solution had there been less attention, but in fact the reverse was true too many times in the past. In 1842 a coachman named Daniel Good had murdered his common-law wife and buried her body in a stable, when the body was accidentally uncovered. He locked the parties with the body in the stable in Roehampton and fled. It was press coverage in this case that eventually led to his being found within a month. More recently the same result happened in 1881 when the police were searching for Percy Lefroy Mapleton for the railroad murder of Frederick Isaac Gold. Mapleton had given the police the slip leaving his current house by the back door, but circulation of a poster led (after two weeks) to his being traced to a rooming house in London. And in 1894 James Canham Read would be the subject of a wide search after he fled with stolen cash from his employer in the wake of the discovery of the body of his murder victim Florence Dennis in Prittlewell.
The last case was actually solved by the Police keeping tabs on the mail to Read's brother, and tracing one letter back - Read was hiding out in a cottage with a woman he had bigamously married. But the public interest stirred up by the newspapers forced Read to head for this particular hideout.

The only difference between Good, Lefroy, and Read and the 1888 situation is that a definitive suspect was known, not an eerie and unpleasantly violent phantom. This led to nobody the news media and public could concentrate on - and the result was a shatter-shot effect where nobody but everybody could be a suspect.

Best wishes,

Jeff

[GUT]

I have three "suspects" that I find incredibly intriguing, but don't believe any of them to be Jack.

I'm pretty firmly in the SOME unknown bloke camp.

To the degree that even if we revealed his name back in '88/89 most would say "WHO?