Did JTR live in a lodging house?

You're quite wrong here, Mike.

There wouldn't have been any significant blood staining on his person and garments, as the preponderance of medical evidence can attest, besides which the larger lodging house catered to 400+ residents of an average night. There wasn't the slightest chance of singling out of them for random scrutiny, especially if he was one of the hoards coming and going at all hours of the night, often with dodgy meat victuals to cook and consume in the kitchen. As bolt-holes went, you couldn't have found more ideal a haven than a common lodging house, which we know was popular with the criminal fraternity in the district. Remember that some lodging houses boasted private cabins.

A man like that does not get caught.

I think it's important to dispense with the idea of "abandonded buildings". Such was the extent of homelessness in the district that no building was likely to remain "abandoned" for very long.

Hope you had a good Christmas!

Best regards,
Ben

Hi Ben, had a great Christmas and I hope you did as well.

Heres my take on this particular issue...you dont s*** where you eat, and in this case, bringing the evidence in the form of any bloodstains or pocketed organs to a place that, as you say, has lots of tenants means that he is at greater risk of being caught by someone, mitigating the benifit of anonymity and being able to get lost in "the crowd".

Theres no reason not to suggest he had a place for his "dirty work" personna, and a few logical reasons why he might have.

The man becomes less capable and quite thick headed every assertion that has him doing something that might have got him caught....like carrying organs about in his pocket, or bringing organs to a bed inside a ward full of men, or writing taunting letters. When the opposite seems to be the case, not only based on the over-use of words like "cunning" and " cold" and "mysterious" and "slippery" and "phantom" by the very men who chased him, but also by the distinct lack of any evidence that he left of himself at crime scenes, or of his "night" activities wherever he lived.

I know you favour good luck in many of these instances, however I cant go along with that. I think the man considered the consequences of any mistakes, and as a result, acted in a manner that offered him the best opportunity to act out his macabre fantasies, but also to conceal his activities as best as possible.

Thats why he chose the weakest prey, and thats why I dont believe he "dared" fate to catch him by carrying on him evidence of murder while in the company of others. As far as the Lodger story goes, that man was thick enough to leave evidence about if he was Jack, and it remains one of the reasons the story is not more widely accepted.

All the best Ben.

[Ben]

Many thanks for that detail, Scott.

I think it would be wise for us to drop the notion that if blood stained and with organs in his pocket, he just went about his business as usual

You're quite wrong here, Mike.

There wouldn't have been any significant blood staining on his person and garments, as the preponderance of medical evidence can attest, besides which the larger lodging house catered to 400+ residents of an average night. There wasn't the slightest chance of singling out of them for random scrutiny, especially if he was one of the hoards coming and going at all hours of the night, often with dodgy meat victuals to cook and consume in the kitchen. As bolt-holes went, you couldn't have found more ideal a haven than a common lodging house, which we know was popular with the criminal fraternity in the district. Remember that some lodging houses boasted private cabins.

A man like that does not get caught.

I think it's important to dispense with the idea of "abandonded buildings". Such was the extent of homelessness in the district that no building was likely to remain "abandoned" for very long.

Hope you had a good Christmas!

Best regards,
Ben

Interesting Scott..,..that Working Mens Home keeps cropping up in these cases.

I think he was a lodger, but I dont agree with the notion he took his organs there at all. Pardon the pun phrasing,...it would be bloody stupid thing to do.

If he was a man who could pay for a bed, why not two, one used for his changes and deposits, one for a more visible profile. If the poorer sort, whats to prevent him from locating a spot in abandoned houses or buildings.

I think it would be wise for us to drop the notion that if blood stained and with organs in his pocket, he just went about his business as usual....a man like that gets caught. This one didnt...not only that, he left no traces of himself anywhere... that we can be sure of, anyway.

I think a wash, a change, and perhaps some ceramic jugs of wine for the takings would have made him that invisible. He pops into the bolt hole to become Jack, then pops back in to become...whomever...again.

Best regards all.

[Scott Nelson]

While trying to find Jospeh Fleming/James Evans in the April 1891 census, I came across James Sadler residing at Victoria Home no. 1 (of 2) on Commercial Street.

James T. Sadler, lodger, married, 53, Marine Fireman, employed, b. London Stepney.

This was one month after his early March acquittal of the Coles murder.

source: RG12/281/f 94/p. 17

[DVV]

If I was the killer, I would have carried a flask of whisky or gin to wash my hands with. Nothing more simple.

Amitiés,
David

[Ben]

The smell of feces though during the Eddowes murder might have stayed.

Unless he had a damn good wipe of the hands on that apron beforehand, Varqm!

[Varqm]

Hello Varmq!
A bloody heart in his pocket, to begin with.
j.r-ahde

Hi,
Well I do not think they would notice a heart or a kidney in his pocket especially under the coat. And I think it would not smell noticibly.
The smell of feces though during the Eddowes murder might have stayed.
This point could be used against the killer just going to a lodging house as a dosser after the murder.

[Jon Guy]

Hello Ben and Sam

Thanks for the info on the Victoria Home, Ben. I now remember that Sadler paid for a few days in advance.

Further to my now moot point, perhaps our boy was in exactly the same position as Annie and Polly, where they were asked to leave the L.H. as they had no money to pay for their bed. Similarly,their decision to spend what money they had on booze instead of a bed. Which may tie in with the murders been on weekends and bank holidays, drinking nights.

[Ben]

Thanks for that useful extract from the inquest, Jon.

With regard to the closure of the lodging houses, not all of them closed at 3.00am. The Victoria Home, for example, was open all night for any lodger who had purchased a daily or weekly pass.

Best regards,
Ben

[Sam Flynn]

Another point regarding jtr using Lodging Houses are the murder times of Nichols, Chapman and Kelly.The L. H.`s shut their doors at 03.00 am.

...but by then, he might as well have stayed up until morning and clocked in the next time the lodging-houses opened, Jon. It strikes me that the police may have made a bad mistake if, as it might appear, all they asked of lodging-house deputies was whether any stranger had come in on the same night as a murder.

[Jon Guy]

Another point regarding jtr using Lodging Houses are the murder times of Nichols, Chapman and Kelly.The L. H.`s shut their doors at 03.00 am.

[Ben]

Good points, Gareth.

Hi Barry,

If he was in a lodging house for the entire series of murders then i think,not only would he be noticed with the blood etc but also his mood and personality POSSIBLY would be changing .

Blood wouldn't have been a problem at all. He wouldn't have been bloodstained owing to the manner in which he tilted the victims' heads in the opposite direction to that of himself and his garments, a point on which most medical commentators agree. Besides which, doss houses such as these were home to any number of butchers and slaughterers coming home from work at varying hours.

I can't envisage mood and personality being a problem either. The majority of serial killers evade capture because they don't look like serial killers. They're your average man on the street, the blend-into-the crowd local nobody for the most part. I don't expect our killer to have been any different, and therefore consider it unlikely that he'd exhibit any external manifestations of "mania".

[Sam Flynn]

Of course, the "beauty" of lodging-houses was (a) there were loads of them all over town; (b) you needn't have returned to the same one every night; and (c) you needn't have returned to one at all if you didn't have the money/inclination to do so. Not a bad setup for one wishing to remain anonymous.

[j.r-ahde]

Hello Halomanuk!

Though the next question sounds like Agatha Christie, I have to ask it anyway:

How about "A murder in a lodging house"?

Meaning, someone could have begun to know too much within this scenario...

All the best
Jukka

[halomanuk]

If he was in a lodging house for the entire series of murders then i think,not only would he be noticed with the blood etc but also his mood and personality POSSIBLY would be changing .

There are a lot of people coming and going in these places so yes he could mingle with them,but,he also stood a very good chance of people seeing something suspicious...