Who *are* Jack the Ripper(s) ?

[DaveR]

Hello Ripperites!

I'm a scholar/researcher/historian of the Lizzie Borden case and a Ripper enthusiast/crime buff who's done a little work with police as a frelance detective, mostly in the capacity of information-gathering. Lizzie Borden is to the Americans what Jack the Ripper is to you Brits, the most fascinating Victorian true crime murder mystery. Anyway, I'm not sure how familair you are with the Borden double murders, but I don't wanna take this thread off-topic. I have a question which I'd love one of my fellow Ripper enthusiasts or one of the experts to take a crack at answering...

...We all know the 5 cannonical murders, but altogether there are 8 or 9 murders which are more or less often referred to as Ripper killings but sometimes dismissed because there was no mutilation, or it happened too long after the Mary Kelly murder, or etc. But if we take all 8 killings into account, it would appear to me based on the various circumstantial evidence, that there was not just ONE "Jack the Ripper" but several, perhaps 2 or 3 altogether, probably however working independently of each other. But still. The 4 or 5 cannonical murders were probably by the same hand, but the others were likely all each done by a different guy in each case. That's at least how I see it based on what we know. What do you good peope think? Thank you for your time, and I look forward to reading any responses.

David Rehak
author of "Did Lizzie Borden Axe For It?"

[Ally]

I was planning a very nice on-topic response to this post until I got to the signature. You actually titled your book Did Lizzie Borden Axe For It? I mean....my god. Leaving aside the fact it was a hatchet and not an axe, ....

... here, words fail me.

[Monty]

Oh Ally, how Ive missed you.

[Graham]

Lizzie Borden is to Americans what Jack the Ripper is to the British?????

What planet are you on, mate?

Whoo-hooo!

Graham

[Ally]

Graham,

He did qualify the bit with Victorian-era murders and so in that sense, I'd have to agree. I can't think of another American murder in that time frame that is known to the vast majority of Americans as a subject of interest, speculation or that is prone to avid students dissecting and debating the elements of the case.

[Sam Flynn]

Lizzie Borden is to Americans what Jack the Ripper is to the British?????

H H Holmes, perhaps?

[Ally]

HH Holmes lacks the mystery, there is no debate, there is no question. With Lizzie there is, like Jack, still a mystery, also they have both had nursery rhymes/poems that made it into the general mindset and I guarantee if you asked the average person who HH Holmes was, they'd have no clue where as at least half the population has heard of Lizzie Borden.

[Sam Flynn]

HH Holmes lacks the mystery, there is no debate, there is no question.

I was thinking in terms of HHH being a contemporary Victorian serial killer who attracted a huge amount of sensational press coverage, Ally, rather than the "mystery" element. Even there, I'd respectfully suggest that the mystery around Jack the Ripper is a degree different than that surrounding Borden - at least when debating the latter, you've already "caught your rabbit", so to speak, whether you believe she did it or not.

Of course, you make a good point when you say that relatively few now know about HHH compared to Borden - quite why that should be the case, I really can't fathom. It's almost like the Ratcliff Highway murders of 1811 being better-known than the later Ripper series, to draw a British parallel, which would seem a bit "back-to-front" to me. Perhaps Borden's having a catchy rhyme written about her helped.

[sdreid]

Yes, I think Lizzie would be ours for that era but she isn't half JtR. The other later big ones for us would be Black Dahlia and Zodiac although I can think of several I might put ahead of the latter.

[Celesta]

Hello DaveR,

Welcome to the Casebook. Lizzie is intriguing, in that some people question her guilt, but she doesn't pack the wallop that Jack does, despite the gruesomeness of her (?) crimes. At least not for this US American.

There are bucket loads of debates here on who was and wasn't a Ripper victim, so you should have plenty of room to maneuver. Enjoy your time here.

Best,

Celesta

[Celesta]

I was thinking in terms of HHH being a contemporary Victorian serial killer who attracted a huge amount of sensational press coverage, Ally, rather than the "mystery" element. Even there, I'd respectfully suggest that the mystery around Jack the Ripper is a degree different than that surrounding Borden - at least when debating the latter, you've already "caught your rabbit", so to speak, whether you believe she did it or not.

Of course, you make a good point when you say that relatively few now know about HHH compared to Borden - quite why that should be the case, I really can't fathom. It's almost like the Ratcliff Highway murders of 1811 being better-known than the later Ripper series, to draw a British parallel, which would seem a bit "back-to-front" to me. Perhaps Borden's having a catchy rhyme written about her helped.

Hi Sam, Also the fact that it was her father and stepmother adds to the notoriety. If we didn't know Holmes identity, his fame would be much greater. As you say, we "caught the rabbit."

Best,

Cel

[DaveR]

2Ally: you're absolutely right about Lizzie. HH Holmes is now familiar to much of the reading public because of a recently published bestseller on the case but I suspect it was a largely forgotten case until recently when the book came out. However, widespread interest in and knowledge of Lizzie Borden has never wavered in the States since 1892. Most Americans today know at least something about Lizzie and have heard the rhyme. She's been deep-seated in the American psyche in the same way as the Ripper has been in England. The reason for this appears to be the high mystery element. With Holmes, we know he did it, and how. What we crave is the who-dunnit factor. That seems to be what keeps Lizzie and the Ripper alive.



Anyway, please feel free anyone to take a crack at my question about multiple Rippers.

Thanks Celesta, I enjoy reading the various threads.

[Graham]

Whether she was guilty or not - and I can't really say that I'm all that bothered either way - Lizzie Borden was 'another' domestic case. Jack the Ripper, the Whitechapel Murderer - call him or they what you will - was not.
In fact, they were as far removed from domestic murder as you are ever likely to get. As Celesta rightly says, Lizzie Borden didn't have the wallop of the Ripper Murders. Neither did Lizzie Borden have much in the way of social impact, as did the Ripper Murders. Neither - oh, I could go on and on.

Cheers,

Graham

PS: to be honest, I think that the 19th century equivalent of the Ripper Murders in terms of their social impact can be matched in America only by the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. There - that should keep the posts coming in.

[DaveR]

p.s. And just to answer that thing about the title of my Lizzie Borden book, it's a play on words: axe/ask. Make of it what you will. There are several valid interprettations.

2Graham: you're very much mistaken if you think Lizzie didn't have the same national and indeed international coverage and impact as the Ripper murders.

[Graham]

p.s. And just to answer that thing about the title of my Lizzie Borden book, it's a play on words: axe/ask. Make of it what you will. There are several valid interprettations.

2Graham: you're very much mistaken if you think Lizzie didn't have the same national and indeed international coverage and impact as the Ripper murders.

Coverage and impact are two different things.

Graham