Name your top 3 suspects with top 3 reasons why you think so...

[Rubyretro]

ok I'm going to bring the hounds of hell down on my head again now -or at least the hounds of Casebook

* deep breath*

I personally have only ever found one known suspect that I find totally convincing...and that is George Hutchinson, because :

1) He was unquestionably placed at the murder scene of Mary Kelly in the right time frame both by an independant witness, and his own admission.
That has to make him a major suspect in itself.

2) Although this was a highly publicised spate of murders, and everyone must have known about the inquest, he chose not to come forward to the police as a 'witness' until his accurate discrition had been given.

3) He gave a witness statement to the police as to a man he supposedly believed to be with Mary, whilst he was hanging about outside which is a) un confirmed by anyone else b) fantastic in itself given the location and hour and c) does have links to Hutchinson's own life (so is likely to have come out of his own imagination).

4) Although we know very little about this Hutchinson, we still know some things which are interesting to the case -for me the major one is the fact that he had been a groom who was now working in casual jobs as a labourer/
night watchman/ maybe in humping barrels in pubs.

I know little about the life of a groom at that time, but from documents that I've read (if you ask me then I will will give you the relevent links), then I know that :
a) Essex was a county that had the most amount of Stud Farms, due to it's proximity to Newmarket (just over the border) (as well as breeding horses for exportation for military uses in Europe -principally Germany and Belgium).
Hutchinson had family links to Essex -and it was an ideal place to find work as a groom. The horseshoe tiepin that Hutchinson describes on Astrakhan Man is a symbol of farriers in Essex (of course it could just be a good luck symbol).
b) George Topping Hutchinson, who identified himself to his son (and I can find no convincing reason to disbelieve him ) as the Hutchinson of the Kelly case, stated that he believed JtR to be " Lord Randolph Churchill...or someone very like him"; I do not believe for one second that Churchill was Jack ...but I do believe that he was ONE 'source' for the description of Astrakhan Man and that an Essex groom could easily have seen him, since he spent a great deal of time at Newmarket.
c) reading about victorian grooms I see that they are described as " not earning highly. skilled workmen, not members of the lower middle classes.." however " stud grooms needed basic literacy, because they needed to write to their masters and to customers" (so a groom could write/read graffiti or the papers).
b) part of the job description is that grooms sat up in stables to birth foals
"often carried out in poor light and at night"
c) grooms carried knives -mostly like a swiss knife with one long thin blade and one hooked blade (for curing hooves)
d) I used to farm sheep, so I know that animals die naturally and in accidents and need to

be 'put down' or their bodies disposed of. All farms have dogs -either as guard dogs or pets-and you don't buy pet food (could they ?) -you butcher dead animals to feed to your dogs if you can. Therefore a groom
(as I do) would have a rudimentary idea of anatomy of mammals and a practical experience of blood and guts. Infact animal farming would give a hardness to death which 'townies' don't have.
e) the murders of Stride and Eddowes might correspond to the 'Autumn Double" (Cambridgeshire and Cesarewitch races) at Newmarkt -a 'double event' held at the end of september/early October (they were killed on Sept 30th);
f) there's a sexual element to a groom's job in that they need to lead randy stallions to lots of mares.

I mean I am totally with Tom Westcott on the dangers of 'coincidences', and
if the women were all killed "near doors" etc ...but when the doors are all a shade of blue, and the locks are made by the same locksmith ? ( this is a metaphore). When do coincidences stop being coincidences ?

I am sure that we need to find out just where Hutchinson worked and in what circumstances he left his job, and why he left a "skilled" metier to be an
odd job man... (good grooms were sought after)

[Adam Went]

Lynn:

You're right about the possibility of her stopping off, but considering that she was heading to the Spitalfields market, there would no doubt have been coffee sellers amongst the dealers there and she just as easily could have done so upon her arrival there....

The thing that changing Mrs. Long's testimony to 5.15 does is it gels the testimony of all 3 witnesses (Richardson, Cadosch and Long) together, and surely has to be seen as the more likely hypothesis.

Thanks for the link!

Wolf:

Yes, she must have been a really slow walker. If she actually heard the clock chime 5:15 instead of 5:30, as Mrs. Long specifically said she’d heard (and was quite clear on the point), as you suggest, then it must have taken her 17 or 18 minutes to walk the short distance down Hanbury Street and arrive at the Market “a few minutes after half past five.”

Lynn has already answered this point well, but I'll just add that market day mornings were very, very busy, so no doubt her progress into the market would have been slowed by the traffic when she got there....we cannot expect these witnesses to be spot on correct to the exact minute, when they had no reason at the time to be doing so.

Tom:

I'm afraid nothing you've said 'damages' any case made by anyone, because it's pure conjecture. You're assuming they were standing at this point, and you're assuming they were in the yard and not in the passage of 29. You also seem to think Jack was a total dumbass who would stand in complete view of a man walking back and forth three feet from him. Had the Ripper been standing in view, I'm sure it would have caught Cadosch's attention. We have to assume no one was in view, because that's what the evidence suggests, but it has no bearing on the height of the killer, victim, or witness.

Well what else would they be doing when they were just talking than standing up? I can't imagine anybody wanting to be sitting down on a wet ground while holding a conversation? At best they might have been leaning against the fence or the wall or something, in which case that wouldn't have really lessened their height by any margin worth mentioning. Certainly not 6 inches. This is one of those moments where common sense needs to prevail, even it is technically "conjecture".

You seem to be forgetting the fence. JTR, if he was less than 5'6, was not standing in "complete view" of Cadosch. In any case he would only have been able to see the top of his head and was probably used to early morning activity in the backyard anyway.

As for them standing in the passageway....what? You are aware that there was a door there, right?

Cheers,
Adam.

[lynn cates]

tempus fugit

Hello Wolf. That's correct--provided she got THAT time right. In other words, she would have to have not conflated a few minutes after half past with a few minutes after a quarter past.

Of course, as the saying goes, "In for a penny, in for a pound."

Ah, but I think I am off the thread topic. Sorry, MD!

Cheers.
LC

[Tom_Wescott]

Surely the most likely explanation has to be that they were standing in the backyard talking, they were both less than 5'6 tall, and that's why Cadosch didn't see any heads poking over the top of the fence? But I know you'll disagree with that, because it damages the case against 6 foot Le Grand...

I'm afraid nothing you've said 'damages' any case made by anyone, because it's pure conjecture. You're assuming they were standing at this point, and you're assuming they were in the yard and not in the passage of 29. You also seem to think Jack was a total dumbass who would stand in complete view of a man walking back and forth three feet from him. Had the Ripper been standing in view, I'm sure it would have caught Cadosch's attention. We have to assume no one was in view, because that's what the evidence suggests, but it has no bearing on the height of the killer, victim, or witness.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Wolf Vanderlinden]

Lynn.

Hello Adam. That's a good idea. I think it likely that Long heard 5:15, NOT 5:30.

Recall that she left her home in Church-row at about 5:00 AM. Why would it take 30 minutes to reach Hanbury? She would be a really slow walker if so.

Yes, she must have been a really slow walker. If she actually heard the clock chime 5:15 instead of 5:30, as Mrs. Long specifically said she’d heard (and was quite clear on the point), as you suggest, then it must have taken her 17 or 18 minutes to walk the short distance down Hanbury Street and arrive at the Market “a few minutes after half past five.”

Wolf.

[Wolf Vanderlinden]

Hi Mike. Thanks for the compliments.

I have to agree with Hunter, though. Segments of the British press would not be easily muzzled especially when you consider left wing newspapers like the Star who were anti-police, to some extent, and certainly anti-establishment.

Hi Simon. I am very well thank you.

Yes, at this point, the 22nd – 23rd of November, the plan to send Andrews to Canada was already in full swing, as you know. Not accepting the handwriting would have probably made it into the North American papers.

Wolf.

[lynn cates]

time

Hello Adam. Thank you. Of course, in looking carefully at Mrs. Long's testimony, she does indicate "about 5" when she left home. Moreover, she could've stopped off for a cuppa or some chat along the way. But I think that unlikely. Given the purpose of an inquest and the pointed questions asked--all aimed at ascertaining the truth--I find it probable that she would have indicated any such stop over.

As it turns out, the Yost dissertation is on Casebook. I found it here:

http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/dst-yostlong.html

I had a go at it myself, and it seems that Mr. Yost is of the same opinion as you about the time. Actually, it seems such a simple inductive inference that I am taken aback that the coroner didn't notice the discrepancy at a moment's consideration.

I find your hypothesis, then, quite likely. The University where I work has a clock that chimes every quarter hour. On many occasions, when not properly attending, I can hear it strike but forget whether it is the quarter, half, or three-quarters hour.

Cheers.
LC

[Adam Went]

Hi Lynn & Tom,

Lynn:

That's a good idea. I think it likely that Long heard 5:15, NOT 5:30.

Recall that she left her home in Church-row at about 5:00 AM. Why would it take 30 minutes to reach Hanbury? She would be a really slow walker if so.

Yes, that's a very good point too.....if anything you'd think she'd be hurrying along to try and keep warm! I mentioned elsewhere before that presumably she didn't actually see or look at the clock when she heard it strike, she just heard the sound and thought "Oh, must be 5.30...". Glad to see you support the hypothesis anyway....

Tom:

I was offering an explanation as to why Cadosch did not look towards his fence, because clearly he did not, or else he must have noticed whether or not someone was on the other side of the fence. He wasn't even certain the sounds came from 29.

Why must he have? My point all along has been that the fence was apparently 5'6 tall. Now we know Annie was much less than that, so that covers that, therefore, either JTR was less than 5'6 tall also, or else they were holding a conversation while bending, sitting, or whatever. And why would they be doing that on a cold, wet ground? It makes no sense.

Surely the most likely explanation has to be that they were standing in the backyard talking, they were both less than 5'6 tall, and that's why Cadosch didn't see any heads poking over the top of the fence? But I know you'll disagree with that, because it damages the case against 6 foot Le Grand...

Regarding Lynn's post and the idea that Mrs. Long heard the 5:15 chimes, I recommend reading Dave Yost's 'Long vs Cadosch', which originally appeared in Ripper Notes 8 or 9 years ago. It might be posted here in the Dissertations section or over at the forums.

Thanks for the tip. I have some old Ripper Notes issues so will see if it's in any of those when I get the chance as well.....

Cheers,
Adam.

[mklhawley]

You're right about that, Hunter. There is certainly a full story with the Pall Mall Gazette.

Mike

[Hunter]

I do believe Scotland Yard was so effective as to push their influence upon British papers to not focus upon Tumblety. Besides, if Tumblety was JTR, he was no longer a threat to the British public. If he was not, the British public would prefer threatening suspects still in Britain.

If they had that kind of influence on the British press, it must have been the first time in this series that it happened. Much of the press, and the Pall Mall Gazette in particular, didn't cut Scotland Yard much slack.

[The Grave Maurice]

I disagree with this, but man, can you write!

Yer roight. Don't he talk posh?

[mklhawley]

Hi Simon,

I believe your assessment is very accurate. My thought, though, is Scotland Yard met their match. Here's a guy who was skipping boarders between countries in order to elude conviction for decades. He was an expert at getting out of legal issues.

I do believe Scotland Yard was so effective as to push their influence upon British papers to not focus upon Tumblety. Besides, if Tumblety was JTR, he was no longer a threat to the British public. If he was not, the British public would prefer threatening suspects still in Britain.

Here's my take on the press after reviewing so many Tumblety articles. I purposely matched them up on a timeline, and I believe it has reveal something. My plan was to try an get a feel of how the public felt during these publications. Once one newspaper got ahold of a potential Jack the Ripper suspect on their way to the United States, it went viral (Novembr 23, 1888). Check the dates. When I read the first few articles and the sensational style of writing, I got excited. Just think of the Americans at that time. This was big news, but specifically American big news.

Just my thoughts.

Sincerely,

Mike

[Simon Wood]

Hi Mike,

By 1888 Britain could boast of the most efficient police/intelligence service in the world. Nulli secundus, in fact. With this in mind it's hard to believe that the high-profile Tumblety, even if remotely suspected of involvement in the WM, would have been bailed twice and afterwards managed to slip through a complex network of detectives and port-watchers with such consummate ease, and all without a whiff of interest from the UK press.

Tumblety tells us more about what Anderson et al were up to in America than he does about the WM.

Regards,

Simon

[mklhawley]

Oh, it has nothing to do with the validity of your argument specific to the available evidence. It's all quite logical. I also agree with you about him manipulating the press. I just see a higher level of interest in Tumblety than just hiding his true agenda.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Mike,

Thanks for the compliment. All the Captain Streeter stuff is in the Ripper Magimix, and I will serve it as soon as I've got rid of all the lumps.

Why do you disagree with my Tumblety-Crowley-Anderson jive?

Regards,

Simon