Robert Mann - A 'New' Suspect

[PVAD8]

Noboby wants his true Identity revealed

Hello

I'm new to the forum but have been fascinated by the Whitechapel Murders for quite some time. My question is do we really want Jack The Rippers true identity revealed? I watched the "Robert Mann" programme the other night and some parts were quite plausible but then again so was the CI programme where they truely believed it be Walter Sickert, further more who can ever forget the Michael Winner documentary where I for one was convinced Maybrick was the killer. We all know that the Ripper industry is like a cash machine so surely we dont ever want him caught ....or do we ?

One or two other good points were raised in the programme, ... the finding of the old mortuary once used by Mann.

Its location has been known for quite some time!

[ATTACH]6799[/ATTACH]
Site of Whitechapel Union Infirmary Mortuary, Eagle Place, Old Montague Street, Hamlet of Mile End New Town (Click to View in flickr)
Underlying Aerial Imagery: Copyright Google Earth, 2007
Overlying Plots, Labels and Color-Shadings: Copyright Colin C. Roberts, 2009

[ATTACH]6800[/ATTACH]
Site of Whitechapel Union Infirmary Mortuary, Eagle Place, Old Montague Street, Hamlet of Mile End New Town (Click to View in flickr)

.........

Let it go, Stewart! Just let it go!

Take that perception of 'Jack the Ripper' having been the top-hat wearing / Gladstone toting / caped 'Toff', that we have all had for so many years, and just let it go!

Mr. Trow has introduced us all to the possibility that 'Jack the Ripper' might have actually been a local man, of little stature; and for that, we should all be thankful.

I'm sorry I don't understand what you mean. Many, many suspects have been put forward who were local people of little stature ( whatever that means - I assume you don't mean dwarves). Kosminski, Hutchinson, Chapman, Kidney, Cutbush to name just a few.

Wherever do you get the idea that Trow is the first person to do this?

I should print a copy of this!

[Bob Hinton]

Let it go, Stewart! Just let it go!

Take that perception of 'Jack the Ripper' having been the top-hat wearing / Gladstone toting / caped 'Toff', that we have all had for so many years, and just let it go!

Mr. Trow has introduced us all to the possibility that 'Jack the Ripper' might have actually been a local man, of little stature; and for that, we should all be thankful.

I'm sorry I don't understand what you mean. Many, many suspects have been put forward who were local people of little stature ( whatever that means - I assume you don't mean dwarves). Kosminski, Hutchinson, Chapman, Kidney, Cutbush to name just a few.

Wherever do you get the idea that Trow is the first person to do this?

[Jem.R.Salmon]

Hi Jem R. Salmon,

Well, for that matter, all of the ripper suspects are devoid of factual evidence except of course and this is a joke: The Maybrick case where it practically says: " Look its me " If you like I will even tatoo it on my forehead, " I did it " " I'm Jack the ripper "

I do welcome new information on the case, including new suspects. The ripper case is dynamic and new theories should be brought forward.

However, i do have to stress, while i am very receptive to new ideas based on historical and factual evidence (and i do understand that a certain amount of supposition will always prevail around ripper suspects) the basic credence of a suspect cannot be made up by marginalised guesswork.

Trow, has in my opinion, brought forward a ''person of interest'' at this moment in time. I am not dismissing Mann as a suspect (I would be foolish to do so!) however i do struggle with some of the points that Trow raised concerning this suspect and the matter of fact way he delivered these. The tabram incident, the motive, the fact Trow claimed Mann was a sexual sadist based on him stripping the body of Nicholls in the morgue, the fact he named seven victims.(I mean why stop at Mackenzie? If you are going to include her why not francis coles in 1891 also?)

These and some other points raised are why i tread carefully when it comes to this ripper suspect. All to often authors do not look at the facts from an objective viewpoint and make the facts fit their tale.This, unfortunately, was very previlent in Trows programme.

On saying all this, I do recognise he has brought forward a new name (not easy to do in this day and age) and should get some recognition for that.

One or two other good points were raised in the programme, most noticeably the supposition that Eddowes was picked up in or around Whitechapel road and led the killer herself to Mitre square and the finding of the old mortuary once used by Mann.

[dixon9]

The searching of houses in the area(13th oct-18th oct) are well documented.
Phillip Sugden's book The Complete History is one which highlights it(page 290)

Dixon9
still learning

[scarletpimpernel]

The suggestion that Mann was the ripper was based totally without Factual evidence, and at best is wild, wild conjecture.

To suggest he did it based on working in a mortuary,stipping the body against the wishes of the police,living in the area, his father dying when he was seven and having basic anatomical knowledge is almost so laughable its untrue.

Where is the factual evidence??? If Trow went to court with this today he would be laughed out. And dont even get me started on finding the dead body of Tabram and deciding to mutilate it there and then.......

Something tells me he is trying to sell a book!!

Hi Jem R. Salmon,

Well, for that matter, all of the ripper suspects are devoid of factual evidence except of course and this is a joke: The Maybrick case where it practically says: " Look its me " If you like I will even tatoo it on my forehead, " I did it " " I'm Jack the ripper "

[scarletpimpernel]

Hi TJ

If you watched the programme then you would have seen that Mr. Trow's proposal was that the last victim wasn't Mary Kelly but Alice Mackenzie and that this last victim also ends up in his slab as well.

Supe,
By the looks of it, you have not watched the programme either. It is all too easy to shoot down a new suspect if you haven't even seen the programme and it seems to me, that it is you who is getting all confused with the different ill informed comments like TJ's.

[Supe]

Trev,

Where is this documented ?

Sugden, Evans & Rumbelow and, I'm sure, Begg as well. Evans & Skinner has the correspondence between Henry Matthews and Charles Warren on the subject and "Solved in Minutes" (an analysis of police effrorts in 1888) in Ripperologist 97 (November 2008) has a neat map of the search area,

Don.

[The Grave Maurice]

Of course I haven't seen the programme, but I think we're all taking this way too seriously. Is there any compelling evidence that Mann was JtR? No. Is there any compelling evidence that any of the other named suspects was JtR? No. I just like the fact that people are still out there trying to come up with new ideas. Were it not for guys like Trow, we'd have very little to talk about.

[Jem.R.Salmon]

Jem R.

Something tells me Mr. Trow is trying his best to find a more credible suspect, based on an earlier FBI observation by experienced geographical profilers when they mentioned that the likely suspect could be someone like a butcher or maybe a mortuary assistant and it from there that Mr. Trow was paying attention when he remembered in the back of his head that somewhere he remembered reading that there was indeed, a mortuary assistant who had been named and who had been called in to give evidence in one of the cases and the more and more Mr. Trow proved on this possible suspect, the more and more interesting coincidences he found, like the fact that all the murdered women ended up in his slab; in the patch of territory where the killing field took place.

It is all too easy, to assume that the killer is not in our mist, it easier to say, it was the Jews who did it, or the Swedes, or an errant sailor, or an itinerant American actor, or a doctor who would not have lived and known the area too well, or better still... Royalty. Nope. The thought of the murderer being a local, never ever entered the minds of the people then, like it doesn't enter the minds of the people now, this is why no one then, nor now cared to look at this other grey and insignificant person, a mere mortuary assistant in the eyes of those who have studied this case for so long. Their ideas are already fixed and are inmutable like the universal laws that cannot be changed. It is only the bold who dare to part from the established thoughts and put forward new ideas that others didn't care to even look at. I think more respect should be shown to this new suspect.

I am all for putting forward new suspects and the proverbial thinking outside the box in relation to the ripper case, however, this must be backed up with factual evidence.

It could not have escaped your attention, after watching last night's programme that Trow was basing the vast majority of his ''Mann ideology'' on wild guesswork and conjecture.

While he may be a ''person of interest'' to ripperologists for trow to make outlandish claims such as Mann finding tabram already dead and deciding to mutilate her and also the TB attack in the Mackenzie murder, Not to mention claiming Mann WAS the ripper was very fancyful to say the least.

I am also all in favour of giving respect to new suspects however my respect must be earnt with hard, factual evidence.This, i am afraid to say was in very short supply.....

[Burgho]

Hi everyone,

I had a bit of time to kill this afternoon so I visited You tube (as you do) and I re-visited a documentary which I remember seeing on Channel 5 a couple or three years back. It seems to me that all the “costume dramatics” used in this show were “cut and pasted” into the “Jack the Ripper - Killer Revealed” programme shown on Discovery on Sunday night . In fact, in many ways the older one seems like practically the same documentary (only a bit better in my opinion). Dr Dean features in this one too. However, Mann is not named as a suspect!

For anyone with the time or inclination the link to the first part is below :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4KjQ...eature=related

Best wishes
Burgho

[Trevor Marriott]

Well thank you for pointing those facts out me. Is there any reasons why they picked those streets especially so long after the last murder. It would seem to be to little to late. Where is this documented ?

Is there any reasons documented then as to why the same wasnt done following Mary Kellys murder

[Supe]

Trev,

It would seem they were never implemented probabaly because all the initial enquiries drew a blank.

What are you talking about? Are you unaware of the intensive searches by plainclothes detectives from 13 October to 18 October in an area bounded by "Lamb Street, Commercial Street, the Great Eastern Railway and Buxton Street on the north; Whitechapel Road on the South; by the City boundary on the west, and by Albert Street, Dunk Street, Chicksand Street and Great Garden Street on the east"? The detectives went from house to house and from apartment to apartment within those houses. Not armed with warrants, they asked the permission of the occupants (which seems to have been granted in almost all cases, such was the fear of Jack) and, if allowed to enter, asked questions of the occupants, looked into closets or chests, under beds and anywhere else accessible.

Whether they found anything that may have pointed to a future named suspect (e.g. Kominski) is moot, but the great effort involved belies Pimpernel's confused comments about contemporary suspicions a local may have been Jack.

Don.

[Trevor Marriott]

I think those proposals were intended to give the police powers to enter and search the homes of persons who had perhaps been flagged up as a direct result of either initial house to house enquiries or evidence from witnesses.

It would seem they were never implemented probabaly because all the initial enquiries drew a blank.

[tji]

Hi all

After watching the show I tend to agree with the consesus on this thread.

To me mann is like 60 - 70% of the 'local men' in the area at the time. You could have them carrying knives working in slaughter houses, round blood etc, rough upbringing - do I need to go on?

I think that maybe Mr trow has made a link with Mann and the court transcripts and tried to fit the rest of the 'evidence' around this.

The fact that he went until 1896 before dying is in itself not very likely - and we have to assume he had a reoccurence of t.b. to cease the killings, what if he didn't, why then did he stop after Kelly?

Also why does he need to kill the women when he has his fill of bodies coming to him daily? To me the facts that were put forward are contradictary.

I a mere ripper nipper was shaking my head at the mistakes/misinformation put forward I can understand why the ripperologists were gnashing there teeth in consternation.

This info would have sufficed as 'interesting info' chapter in a ripper book not drawn out to the extent it was.

Thanks for your time
Tj