Was the Artist Henri de Toulouse Lautrec Implicated in the Killings?

[Henry Flower]

Cog - it really could be Homer Simpson having a root canal.

But more likely, it's definitive proof of somebody's guilt in the Jack the Ripper murder case. As usual.

[Henry Flower]

Hello there,

The point of a ritual is that it's carried out the same way every time. That's what makes it a ritual. Every single Ripper victim was killed differently. Did they each have intestines thrown over shoulders? No. They didn't. Therefore, in answer to your question: yes, just a coincidence. Why not list the other third degree penalties in Masonry, so we can see whether an attempt has been made to kill by Masonic precept. That would show more rigour and integrity than cherry-picking, would it not?

No meaningless injuries? Nonsense. Absolute nonsense. Look at the face of Eddowes or the body of Kelly. Look at the hacks at Nichols' abdomen. You've cherry-picked one medical opinion, and ignored others that later contradicted it.

If we're going Masonic, please list all the punishments prescribed by Masonic ritual and tell us how many have been carried out on all five victims. And further, what advice did Masonic law have for doctors avenging the contraction of disease by their clients? While you're at it, see if you can drag Oscar Wilde into the story - he's famous too!

This is old stuff.

[Cogidubnus]

A visit to the dentist perhaps?

[galexander]

Speaking as a painter, what the hell did we ever do to earn these constant accusations of serial murder?

I know I know - you're not suggesting that HTL had anything to do with it himself. But please, can I ask you - what percentage of serial murders turn out to have anything at all to do with:

- The Royal Family / President of the USA / Doge of Venice
- A world-famous artist / poet / novelist / movie-star
- A shadowy secret organisation / the Rotary Club / Basildon Women's Institute
- A doctor so shocked by the existence of disease that he has to butcher a handful of those who might have carried it?

Please, look at the photos of Eddowes and Kelly: there is no rational explanation for this act. This isn't the work of a doctor protecting a patient. This is the work of a seriously sexually disordered sicko. Can we stop this syphilitic revenge nonsense? And especially, can we stop this syphilitic revenge on someone else's behalf nonsense? It has nothing to do with this type of killing.

Besides, it's surely a slight breach of the hippocratic oath?

Good luck finding a publisher - I'm sure I'd actually enjoy your book; fascinating people living through an interesting epoch

If a lone serial killer was involved then why did the killings stop after just a little more than two months?

Serial killers kill over years and there are usually many months between each victim.

The 'Jack the Ripper' murders are exceptional.

And look at the wounding inflicted on the victims. Were they ritualistic? In French Grand Orient Freemasonry the penalty in the third degree includes having one's entrails thrown over the shoulder. Just a coincidence?

Coronor Wynne Baxter was of the following opinion as the the injuries:

"The body had not been dissected, but the injuries had been made by someone who had considerable anatomical skill and knowledge. There were no meaningless cuts. The organ had been taken by one who knew where to find it, what difficulties he would have to contend against, and how he should use his knife so as to abstract the organ without injury to it....The conclusion that the desire was to possess the missing abdominal organ seemed overwhelming."

And what brought Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec to paint the following image?

[Bridewell]

The Title

How many times do I have to tell you?

I have already made it clear that I don't think Lautrec carried out the killings in person or even knew for certain that they had happened.

Now will you listen?

What about his doctor Henri Bourges? See Lautrec's own painting of him:

The title of the thread is:

Was the Artist Henri de Toulouse Lautrec Implicated in the Killings?

Your comment is: I don't think Lautrec carried out the killings in person or even knew for certain that they had happened.

I don't see how Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec (or anyone else for that matter) can be implicated in killings he doesn't know about.

In my opinion, then: No, he wasn't (directly or indirectly).

[Robert]

Perhaps now is the time for me to mention that I have a genuine Victorian painting of a man disembowelling a woman. There is a bubble issuing from the woman's mouth, containing the words "You rotten swine, I've just had my hair done." The painting is signed "Toulon Lautrec" (Toulon Lautrec was the famous sailor-artist).

[Simon Wood]

Hi Caz,

I love a good wind-up.

Laissez les bons temps rouler.

Regards,

Simon

[caz]

Fake rot or genuine rot?

I must say, I applaud all these new theorists who have succeeded not only in producing worse piles of 'rot' than the 'rot' we have apparently been talking for the last 123 years about a lone serial predator, but in winding up otherwise intelligent posters into responding to their 'rot'.

Oops - forget I responded.

Love,

Caz
X

[Henry Flower]

Speaking as a painter, what the hell did we ever do to earn these constant accusations of serial murder?

I know I know - you're not suggesting that HTL had anything to do with it himself. But please, can I ask you - what percentage of serial murders turn out to have anything at all to do with:

- The Royal Family / President of the USA / Doge of Venice
- A world-famous artist / poet / novelist / movie-star
- A shadowy secret organisation / the Rotary Club / Basildon Women's Institute
- A doctor so shocked by the existence of disease that he has to butcher a handful of those who might have carried it?

Please, look at the photos of Eddowes and Kelly: there is no rational explanation for this act. This isn't the work of a doctor protecting a patient. This is the work of a seriously sexually disordered sicko. Can we stop this syphilitic revenge nonsense? And especially, can we stop this syphilitic revenge on someone else's behalf nonsense? It has nothing to do with this type of killing.

Besides, it's surely a slight breach of the hippocratic oath?

Good luck finding a publisher - I'm sure I'd actually enjoy your book; fascinating people living through an interesting epoch

[Limehouse]

But the big difference here is that Lautrec was descended from Toulouse nobility, hence his name.

Also Lautrec's family had both influence and money. They were also perhaps a little over protective towards their son whose handicap had resulted from inbreeding. Lautrec's mother and father were cousins.

Hello again,

So what if his family had money? Does that mean a doctor should have been willing to kill for them? How did killing five women in the most horrible way add up to protection AFTER he had been infected? Surely, as an adult, he consulted with those women knowing the risks?

In any case, what evidence is there that MJK had syphillis?

[Phil Carter]

Gaudin was still living after 1888. Look it up.. I'm sure you will find it

[sleekviper]

The good doctor would be killing at the wrong end of the spectrum. If anyone is to blame for the conditions that Henri, and others in that class for ages, were to suffer, it was those led by greed. The Charles II of Spain type were born from the greed of keeping money in the family; incest is the problem, and thus the enemy someone would want to kill. A guy born with numerous health problems, drinking heavy because of those problems and constant ridicule of his physical handicaps, and the doctor would blame whom? I would expect rich males with titles coming to unexplained ends than poor females just trying to live another day. If he is killing over an injustice, the root begins with relatives bearing children with one another for the sake of money and titles, but that is just my take on it.

[galexander]

Hello Galexander, welcome to the site.

Don't you think this doctor was going beyond his duty to his client - ie going out and slaying the women/woman he felt was responsible for his client's illness. i mean, did he do this for all of his syphillitic patients? seems a bit implausible to me.

Also, with respect, I am getting a little tired of the theory that the women were slayed for spreading syphillis. It seems an often repeated motive and some theorists even seem to imply it was a justifiable motive. I don't have any sympathy with it. For a start, I am sure their clients knew the risk they were taking when they went with the women and were therefore at least partly responsible for getting infected, and secondly, why don't we have any examples of prostitutes going out and slaying the men responsible for infecting them in the first place?

But the big difference here is that Lautrec was descended from Toulouse nobility, hence his name.

Also Lautrec's family had both influence and money. They were also perhaps a little over protective towards their son whose handicap had resulted from inbreeding. Lautrec's mother and father were cousins.

[Sally]

Looks like Astroman to me. I'm sold.

[galexander]

Hi Galexander.

I'm being rather less than charitable. Welcome to the Boards. You will, inevitably I think, encounter a great deal of scepticism in advancing Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec as a JtR suspect.

You'll need to show that he was in London at the material time, that he had at least a passing familiarity with the East End, that he (or at least someone answering his description) was seen there. You'll also need to establish a motive and to show that, despite his limitations, he was physically capable of a series of brutal murders. I think you're up against it, frankly, but please prove me wrong on this.

Regards, Bridewell

How many times do I have to tell you?

I have already made it clear that I don't think Lautrec carried out the killings in person or even knew for certain that they had happened.

Now will you listen?

What about his doctor Henri Bourges? See Lautrec's own painting of him: