Suspects Poll

[auspirograph]

A new and updated Jack the Ripper suspects poll that is anonymous and multiple choice. Keep it fun, civil and of interest to fellow Casebookers

[Phil H]

I have voted "Kosminski".

My reasons:

A man of that name is specifically mentioned by Swanson and Melville Macnaghten, and aluded to by Anderson.

To me, he fits the general "type" that I now believe "Jack" to have been - poor, living at the heart of the area, probably mentally challenged.

But I make a number of provisos:

a) I don't know for sure that the Kosminski referred to by the police was AARON Kosminski (found by Martin Fido). It is difficult to see how that would fit with the knowledge we now have, but there it is.

b) I would have ticked other, except that that is too vague and shoulder-sloping.

c) I don't think "Kosminski" or "Jack" killed Tabram or MJK (and probably not Stride), but may have been responsible for McKenzie - even though that makes dates difficult.

There is something missing in our understanding of Kosminski -around why the police suspected him, the identification and his precise identity. If we had all the papers available to Swanson et al, everything would probably fall into place - at least better than it does now.

But I think Kosminski was the man the key cops at the time suspected, and I'll go with them.

Phil

[Abby Normal]

A new and updated Jack the Ripper suspects poll that is anonymous and multiple choice. Keep it fun, civil and of interest to fellow Casebookers

Thanks but this not nearly inclusive enough. No Bury, James Kelly, Hutch?

Perhaps do one with the suspects listed on Casebook suspects page?

[lynn cates]

grammatical point

Hello Auspirograph. Thanks for setting this up.

Does the last entry subsume the plural? If so, I'd be delighted to cast my vote--for what little it is worth.

Cheers.
LC

[Scott Nelson]

Where's Newland Francis Forrester Smith, James Gloster and Fountain Smith?

[Fleetwood Mac]

Of those mentioned, I think Kosminski is the best bet by virtue of poilce documents. Chapman is an interesting fella, too.

Hopefully, one day, a document will turn up shedding light on the supposed Kosminski ID. Wishful thinking, granted.

Mind you, Trevor has some interesting info from the ledgers that pours water on the Kosminski fire: would be interesting to see this info.

[auspirograph]

Does the last entry subsume the plural?

Hi Lynn,

Yes it does, and I think that is a good point.

Cheers
Spiro

p.s. A suspects poll will never please everyone of course, this is just a cross-section. The lost Scotland Yard suspects file would also be useful as would inclusion of known entries in the Special Branch index ledgers.

[Scott Nelson]

...and, of course, the probable Ripper, Henry DeFries.

[lynn cates]

thanks

Hello Spiro. Thanks!

Cheers.
LC

[Malcolm X]

either GEORGE CHAPMAN or GEORGE HUTCHINSON whoever this is!

.

[Tom_Wescott]

In a poll taken of the 16 (thus far) people who voted 'unknown/other', they revealed their preferred suspect is Robert Mann. I think if the rest of us were honest with ourselves, we'd admit the same.

MJ Trow, we salute you.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Jonathan H]

I voted for Montague Druit, but it is an entirely provisional, historical opinion; a theory based on fragmentary and contradictory sourcesand which could be upended by a new discovery.

Simply because my assessment of Sir Melville Macnaghten is that, while he played schoolboyish games with data -- and I think misled Anderson about 'Kosminski' -- for discretion/political reasons, nonetheless this hands-on chief's 1913 comments ('That remarkable man ...') and his 1914 memoir chapter, 'Laying the Ghost of Jack the Ripper', perfectly fits the 'West of England' MP bombshell article of 1891.

It was not the Ripper's identity which was unknown -- after 1891 -- it was that he was a poterntial tar baby; a Tory barrister who had confessed to a priest and then killed himself years before. Plus the Druitt family had to be protected along with the Yard's reputation (eg. the frantic 'friends') and both were protected by the wily Mac.

It is, arguably, not a mystery. Not since 1891 for Macnaghten, and not since 1898 for the public -- braodly speaking -- and not for us since 1965, as we have had access to the murderer's real name.

Historical methodology teaches that a source which goes against its expected bias is comeplling and [potentially] reliable; a discreet, gentleman charmer posthumously accuses a fellow gent of the same bourgeiosie class, the same race, and the same religion.

I realise this is not the opinion of more erudite and experienced writers on this subject whose works I revere, and who often do not even include one or either of the sources mentioned above in their books.

[lynn cates]

Monty

Hello Jonathan. Well, I must say that Monty Druitt is doing well for himself, at least according to the numbers at this point.

I hope only that you are correct, as he is MUCH more interesting than most of the lot. A fascinating and complex man.

Cheers.
LC

[mklhawley]

Hi all,

If I was forced to pick someone, my choice would be Francis Tumblety. Why? Not for just one reason, but for many. Here’s a couple:

1. My early plans were evaluate Tumblety and then discount him once I was convinced that the evidence against him demonstrated this and then go to the next suspects (Druitt and then Kosminski), but I then saw cracks in the evidence against him (too flamboyant, too tall, too gay, too chicken, too big of a mustache, too much of a publicity hound, etc. –all are misconceptions about Tumblety). At the time, I had no idea about the Parnell conspiracy argument, which would have been convincing. Another one is that Tumblety does not match witness descriptions, which in my opinion is wrong since multiple newspaper articles talk about Scotland Yard arresting tall/dark suspects (also, witness descriptions vary, especially since no one actually saw anyone killing and the witness description just might be an innocent punter).

2. The murders stopped once he jumped bail and made his way across the Atlantic. Scotland Yard could not extradite Tumblety from the US, so they lost their man. Why advertise this? Even with this, Scotland Yard NEVER denied Tumblety as a suspect.

3. He was Scotland Yard’s prime suspect at the peak of the murders as per Chief Inspector Littlechild (a man privy to more information that almost everyone), as per the actions of Anderson seeking information on him from the States at the exact time Tumblety was in jail in November, as per Canadian Deputy Minister Marine Smith, and as per the actions of Inspector Andrews traveling to Canada.

4. William Pinkerton’s comments about Tumblety (Nov 20, 1888) -a man he knew since the Civil War- having a SIGNIFICANT HATRED OF WOMEN was only a day after those in the US knew Tumblety was arrest for the Whitechapel murders (Nov 18 in San Francisco and Nov 19 in the rest of the US). Pinkerton was at Scotland Yard during the first of the murders (especially since Scotland Yard considered the April 1888 murder along with the early August murder coming from an unusual killer). Keep in mind, this Pinkerton interview occurred when the world still thought Scotland Yard was holding Tumblety. For me, this is powerful evidence to show that Pinkerton remembered Tumblety and remembered his unusual hatred of women.

5. Around 2005, the anti-Tumblety wave began thanks to convincing anti-Tumblety articles published around this time. Many of those reasons to reject Tumblety as a suspect are now suspect themselves thanks to further research, such as Roger Palmer’s material and others. For example, the Parnell conspiracy –an answer to explain why Inspector Andrews came to Canada other than for gaining information on Francis Tumblety-. The biggest problem I have with this is that the conspiracy requires Scotland Yard officials up and down the chain of command to knowingly violate British law. It would seem to me that someone by now would have spilled their guts on this blatant illegal conspiracy, yet it never happened. So for me, the only viable reason Andrews came over to the US during the peak of the murders was because a serious JTR suspect. Also, the argument that Andrews went to Toronto (and not NYC) for Tumblety but Tumblety was not in Toronto for decades. We have only now discovered (thanks to Palmer) that in fact, Tumblety was in Toronto multiple times in the 1880s and even in 1888.

6. US newspapers explained in unusual and informed detail that Scotland Yard suspected him of being involved in the Whitechapel murders but arrested him on gross indecency charges (to hold him), since officials had no significant JTR evidence (They had none on anyone, since no one saw the murders). Some claim those same newspapers were merely practicing sensationalist journalism, but they fail to take into account these newspapers were actually disregarding Tumblety being the murderer –a position quite counter to exciting sensationalist journalism. …keeping in mind Scotland Yard never denied Tumblety being a suspect.

7. Tumblety fits each and every element of a psychopath and narcissist, such as lack of remorse, pathological liar, vindictive, creation of a façade, lack of friends, inability to love, travels frequently, etc.

These are just a few of the reasons. Jonathan, someday I'll get to Druitt!

Sincerely,
Mike

[Ben]

Hi Mike,

Another one is that Tumblety does not match witness descriptions, which in my opinion is wrong since multiple newspaper articles talk about Scotland Yard arresting tall/dark suspects (also, witness descriptions vary, especially since no one actually saw anyone killing and the witness description just might be an innocent punter

The arrest of tall, dark suspects only means that the individuals in question came to the attention of the police for reasons that were unrelated to their physical appearance. If a tall, dark man is arrested for assaulting a woman (for example), he's hardly going to be released immediately owing to incompatibility with ripper-associated eyewitness descriptions. He would warrant serious investigation in spite of this incompatibility. This does not invalidate the observation that Tumblety is a very poor match for the witness descriptions.

I'm also not convinced that Tumblety conforms as closely as you suggest to a psychopathic personality. Do we really have any great insight into Tumblety's ability or otherwise "to love"?

Just I aside here, but I wonder how many of the 20 people who voted for "other/unknown" had the same specific "other" in mind?

All the best,
Ben