Who do you think Jack the Ripper was and why?

[Rainbow]

I think he killed these five women because he had to. He was told to remove them from the planet earth by someone with/in power.

You may be right here, but we have to ask Lechmere why he had to kill them

I also think that Catherine Eddowes (who called herself Mary Ann Kelly when she was released from prison for being drunk some hours before her murder) was mistaken for Mary Kelly.

Again you may very well be right here, Lechmere had the answer for that mistake

Nothing I have read about JTR and the murders have yet swayed me into any other direction.

Me too

This was not a mental patient, he knew exactly what he did, and what was at stake.

I tend to agree with you completely here

I know this theory is mostly ridiculed in here, so please be gentle with me.

Did you read about Bury ? you will find that your theory is much more rational than what you imagine..


Rainbow°

[Marie Antoinette]

I think he killed these five women because he had to. He was told to remove them from the planet earth by someone with/in power.

I also think that Catherine Eddowes (who called herself Mary Ann Kelly when she was released from prison for being drunk some hours before her murder) was mistaken for Mary Kelly.

Nothing I have read about JTR and the murders have yet swayed me into any other direction.


This was not a mental patient, he knew exactly what he did, and what was at stake.

I know this theory is mostly ridiculed in here, so please be gentle with me.

[Harry D]

do you think he burned Marys heart in her fireplace for this reason, or would he have to do it somewhere with religious significance?

I don't know about the heart, he might have saved that for later, but I bet something nasty was cooking in the grate.

A priest must kill the guilt offering in the same place where they kill the burnt offerings. Then he must sprinkle the blood from the guilt offering around the altar.
The priest must offer all the fat from the guilt offering. He must offer the fat tail and the fat that covers the inner parts. He must offer the two kidneys and the fat covering them at the lower back muscle. He must also offer the fat part of the liver. He must remove it with the kidneys. (Lev 7:2-4).

[Fleetwood Mac]

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


Parker

I don't think it's a given that the killer lived in the East End.

Whomever was murdering those women didn't need to know the streets as by the time the police were on the scene he had a good 10 minutes head start to simply walk down the street.

There is this assumption that he was ducking in and out of warrens, ginnels and doorways and the like. Why? There is no reason to think he was doing such a thing.

The main reason to think that the killer lived in the East End is not because he must have known the streets, but because there were plenty of places in London where he could have plied his trade so why travel so far in the event it's on your doorstep?

I would have thought that he did live in the East End, or at least not far outside of that area, but it's not the given that some suggest.

I think it is likely that he was acquainted with the East End, either through work or habitat, because he certainly felt it was a good hunting ground and he must have experienced the place to understand that.

Again, not because of tip-toeing through ginnels but because of opportunity.

Of all the suspects I've read about, not many register as decent propositions, but I do like Cutbush as a suspect.

Problem is we don't know what is myth, fantasy and reality when it comes to Cutbush. Where I think he fits the bill is that to me the murders seem to be the work of someone experimenting, highly disturbed mind you, but experimenting all the same.

That said, assuming the Swanson Marginalia is not fraudulent then there is some explaining to do as to how and why Kosminski was not the murderer. I for one don't think that Swanson was confused and forgetful simply because he was in his 50s or 60s.

[Abby Normal]

Entirely possible. Leviticus lists cannibalism as one of the punishments for disobeying Yahweh (Lev 26:29).

do you think he burned Marys heart in her fireplace for this reason, or would he have to do it somewhere with religious significance?

[Harry D]

interesting.

do you think he cannibalized any of the organs he took?

Entirely possible. Leviticus lists cannibalism as one of the punishments for disobeying Yahweh (Lev 26:29).

[spyglass]

Hi,
Over the last few months, I'm actually beginning to doubt that Kelly was a victim of JTR as such.
I'm now more in favour of just the four victims, with Kelly being separate.
I wonder which of the many suspects odds lessen if that was the case.

Regards.

[Abby Normal]

I would identify our man as a religiously-motivated, mission-oriented serial killer. Not only was he cleansing the streets of these women of ill-repute, but the victims would serve as the sacrificial offerings for his own atonement. These murders were ritualistic in nature, and one only has to look at the Book of Leviticus to see where the killer got his inspiration from. The victims were ritualistically slaughtered and their missing organs used as burnt offerings. I am agnostic as to the extent of his victim tally. Theoretically, any of the Whitechapel Murder victims, as far as Frances Coles, could've been done by his hand. The lapse between murders is explainable if the killer was in and out of workhouses or otherwise detained. We've seen that serial killers can change their MO, and there's the possibility that his physical/mental state forced him to de-escalate.

interesting.

do you think he cannibalized any of the organs he took?

[Harry D]

I would identify our man as a religiously-motivated, mission-oriented serial killer. Not only was he cleansing the streets of these women of ill-repute, but the victims would serve as the sacrificial offerings for his own atonement. These murders were ritualistic in nature, and one only has to look at the Book of Leviticus to see where the killer got his inspiration from. The victims were ritualistically slaughtered and their missing organs used as burnt offerings. I am agnostic as to the extent of his victim tally. Theoretically, any of the Whitechapel Murder victims, as far as Frances Coles, could've been done by his hand. The lapse between murders is explainable if the killer was in and out of workhouses or otherwise detained. We've seen that serial killers can change their MO, and there's the possibility that his physical/mental state forced him to de-escalate.

[Abby Normal]

I think it might be this guy

[Darryl Kenyon]

I feel that Jack was interviewed by the police, possibly after the double murder, probably after the Kelly killing, he lived in the area and he was physically strong.
I think that he was almost certainly seen by Lawende and he could have been the man seen loitering on Dorset st by Sarah Lewis [not Hutchinson]. Finally he could have been in the IWMC on the night of the double event. That's as far as i would like to guess.

[Abby Normal]

Hi .
Back around the time of the Millennium .I started a thread''Joseph Barnett , number one suspect'' which went on and on.
But as time advanced, I dismissed him as a poor suspect , and the next contender was Joseph Fleming. I thought it more then a coincidence that three players in the last victims life [ Kelly] all resided in the Victoria home,these being Dan Barnett, Joe Fleming , and George Hutchinson. two of these we know saw Mary Kelly on the night/morning of her death, maybe all three?
But although I will not completely rule out at least one of those three having some involvement I would prefer to look for someone else who may have had a motive , and was unaware where Mjk lived during the earlier killings, whereas the above knew of her address.
I would plump for an ex client of Mary Kelly, who she may have lived with at one time, and most likely absconded with some assets of his , I believe he knew her under a assumed name, and initially had no idea where he could find her, he killed the others , because he had hated prostitutes , ever since that betrayal by Kelly.
It was after Eddowes , who I believe informed him that the woman he was looking for might be living with a man named Kelly in Dorset street, that he began to track her down, but Kelly was Barnett , and he would not have known that.
I would bet a £ to a penny, that this was the man, that made inquiries to McCarthy, for information about one of his residents,and he was sent packing.
Was this Mary Kelly's killer, was he the man dressed to the nines, that accosted her , seen by Hutchinson, was he the one who said''You will be alright, for what I have told you''.
And is this McCarthy's suspect handed down generations,?
Regards Richard.

possibly Richard but definitely not the man Hutch saw.
and your motive, while possibly the trigger, or secondary motive would probably not be the main reason. The ripper was a serial killer, and enjoying killing and mutilating women was his reason.

But I agree it was someone who knew mary. and I wouldn't rule out Barnett at this time either.

four men were with her that night-Barnett, Blotchy, hutch and A-man.

A-man was a fig newton of hutchs imagination.

Barnett had an alibi and nothing in his behavior suggests suspicion.

That leaves Hutch and Blotchy and both fit the bill as her killer in my opinion. I give it slightly better than 50-50 one of these two men was the ripper.

[richardnunweek]

Hi .
Back around the time of the Millennium .I started a thread''Joseph Barnett , number one suspect'' which went on and on.
But as time advanced, I dismissed him as a poor suspect , and the next contender was Joseph Fleming. I thought it more then a coincidence that three players in the last victims life [ Kelly] all resided in the Victoria home,these being Dan Barnett, Joe Fleming , and George Hutchinson. two of these we know saw Mary Kelly on the night/morning of her death, maybe all three?
But although I will not completely rule out at least one of those three having some involvement I would prefer to look for someone else who may have had a motive , and was unaware where Mjk lived during the earlier killings, whereas the above knew of her address.
I would plump for an ex client of Mary Kelly, who she may have lived with at one time, and most likely absconded with some assets of his , I believe he knew her under a assumed name, and initially had no idea where he could find her, he killed the others , because he had hated prostitutes , ever since that betrayal by Kelly.
It was after Eddowes , who I believe informed him that the woman he was looking for might be living with a man named Kelly in Dorset street, that he began to track her down, but Kelly was Barnett , and he would not have known that.
I would bet a £ to a penny, that this was the man, that made inquiries to McCarthy, for information about one of his residents,and he was sent packing.
Was this Mary Kelly's killer, was he the man dressed to the nines, that accosted her , seen by Hutchinson, was he the one who said''You will be alright, for what I have told you''.
And is this McCarthy's suspect handed down generations,?
Regards Richard.

[Dane_F]

Years upon years ago when I was a teen and first discovered casebook I came to the conclusion that I liked Barnett as a suspect. Oh how I was young and thought I had it figured out.

Since then I've moved on to the point that I have no favorites. I probably fall into the camp that we haven't heard his name as a suspect yet or if it's come up it's been passed over because of lack of evidence.

I now look at the case much more as trying to figure out individual pieces: like the GSG, Dear Boss, the victims, links with possible other murders outside of C5, etc.

[DJA]

Wouldn't you need to remove "the"????

Is that a legal conundrum,or have just had too much coffee today