The kill ladder

[The Rookie Detective]

So...it's been a few days, so I thought...


Time for another new thread!


Let's build the "Kill Ladder"

5 rungs...


Top rung...



How many of the known Ripper suspects and persons of interest were also murderers?


Bury -
No link to any of the Ripper murders, but capable of being the Ripper at a canter.

Chapman -
Direct links to the area and one of the only "Old Skool" suspects with a pedigree for killing. Very different MO to Bury and very unlike the Ripper's MO.


Who else goes onto this known killer rung?


I think it's important to know how many suspects and persons of interest had the proven credentials to kill...




Now, if we move to the next rung down, we also have several Persons of interest with a known history of violence...

Rung 2...


Le Grand
(Prone to extreme violence against women in particular - sentenced to a whopping 20 years before being deported, although he didn't serve the entire sentence as it was reduced. However, it's intriguing that the Home Office intervened directly to delay his early release. He was eventually deported)

Morganstern/Morganstone
(Prone to extreme violence and once took his shirt off before he cut, stabbed and beat several women, before vaulting over a high wall and escaping - had a former direct connection to MJK and therefore can be linked to one of the Ripper victims)

Edward Buckley
(a petty career criminal who began small, but the progressed to cutting and stabbing his paramour on multiple separate occasions...but then went back to being a petty criminal and ended in a whimper with some odd public behavior. He also once lived at the coffee house at 14 Hanbury Street, to which he fled after cutting his paramour. 14 Hanbury Street subsequently burnt down and was rebuilt in early 1888)


Daniel Sullivan
(a career criminal who worked for Crossingham and prone to violence. He was directly involved in the attempted covering up of the murder of Mary Ann Austin in 1901, that occurred at 35 Dorset Street/Crossinghams)


There are others of course that can be added to rung 2.




Moving down the next rung...


Rung 3...

We then have some individuals that were known to endorse the use of violence...

Bachert
(As Alfred Charrington, Head of the notorious Skeleton army in Whitechapel)

McCarthy
(involved in the world of pugilist fighting, but he was given a seal of approval by a certain Officer Thicke)

Crossingham (as above)

Dr Barnardo
(once assaulted a young woman on the street, who tried to defend her father from being attacked by a group of "Barnardos Boys")

Again, there are many others to add to this rung 3.


Let's go down to rung 4, those individuals who had no history of violence, and have remained somewhat of a mystery over time.



Rung 4...


Hutchinson
(A self confessed friend of MJK's despite nobody else knowing who he was. Gave an overly detailed description of a suspect that required a photographic memory to remember and recall in such vivid detail. Only exists in the context of the MJK murder, outside of which he remains an unknown)

Schwartz
(Saw and heard a key event shortly before the murder of Stride, and yet nobody saw him, saw or heard anything he claimed to have witnessed, and he only exists in the context of the Stride murder, outside of which he remains an unknown)



We then have the bottom rung, which includes those individuals with NO KNOWN evidence of a history of violence or the capabilities to kill AND was well documented through time both before and after the murders...


Rung 5 -


Lechmere
(We know more about him than we need to know. Being found a few yards away from Nichols being his only link to anything remotely dodgy. He has NO attributing factors regarding the Ripper killings)

Maybrick
(No history of violence and no known connection to any of the victims. Only considered because of a suspect watch and even more suspect diary. The jury is out)



This bottom rung has a long list also.




So, there we have it, a kind of suspect league table based on a ladder system; the higher the rung, the more likely the individual can be possibly attributed to some of the Ripper methods and application


It is now your turn to add to that ladder and see where each suspect and person of interest best fits.


1 - convicted and/or proven murderers, capable and willing to kill
2 - strong history of violence and capable of being the Ripper given the right circumstances
3 - known for endorsing/promoting/supporting violence and/or minor offenses.
4 -No known history of violence, but remain unknown entities.
5 - No known history of violence and well-documented lives before and after the Ripper series


You may have noticed that some individuals could be placed on multiple rungs; Le Grand for example could be considered on rung B or A depending on perspective and timing.

And yes, I am aware the ladder is technically upside down, what with all the different rung terminology, but it's metaphoric so please just go with it.




The main aim of this thread is to get those "kill Ladder" rungs filled up with as many suspects and persons of interest as possible...


Could be fun



RD

[Losmandris]

Interesting. We have scant few names now but at the time this ladder would have been made up of hundreds if not thousands of potential persons of interest.

[c.d.]

But then we also have a logical problem -- These known murderers and individuals with a history of violence, prior to their first murder or act of violence had never murdered or acted violently, correct?

c.d.

[Herlock Sholmes]

So...it's been a few days, so I thought...


Time for another new thread!


Let's build the "Kill Ladder"

5 rungs...


Top rung...



How many of the known Ripper suspects and persons of interest were also murderers?


Bury -
No link to any of the Ripper murders, but capable of being the Ripper at a canter.

Chapman -
Direct links to the area and one of the only "Old Skool" suspects with a pedigree for killing. Very different MO to Bury and very unlike the Ripper's MO.


Who else goes onto this known killer rung?


I think it's important to know how many suspects and persons of interest had the proven credentials to kill...




Now, if we move to the next rung down, we also have several Persons of interest with a known history of violence...

Rung 2...


Le Grand
(Prone to extreme violence against women in particular - sentenced to a whopping 20 years before being deported, although he didn't serve the entire sentence as it was reduced. However, it's intriguing that the Home Office intervened directly to delay his early release. He was eventually deported)

Morganstern/Morganstone
(Prone to extreme violence and once took his shirt off before he cut, stabbed and beat several women, before vaulting over a high wall and escaping - had a former direct connection to MJK and therefore can be linked to one of the Ripper victims)

Edward Buckley
(a petty career criminal who began small, but the progressed to cutting and stabbing his paramour on multiple separate occasions...but then went back to being a petty criminal and ended in a whimper with some odd public behavior. He also once lived at the coffee house at 14 Hanbury Street, to which he fled after cutting his paramour. 14 Hanbury Street subsequently burnt down and was rebuilt in early 1888)


Daniel Sullivan
(a career criminal who worked for Crossingham and prone to violence. He was directly involved in the attempted covering up of the murder of Mary Ann Austin in 1901, that occurred at 35 Dorset Street/Crossinghams)


There are others of course that can be added to rung 2.




Moving down the next rung...


Rung 3...

We then have some individuals that were known to endorse the use of violence...

Bachert
(As Alfred Charrington, Head of the notorious Skeleton army in Whitechapel)

McCarthy
(involved in the world of pugilist fighting, but he was given a seal of approval by a certain Officer Thicke)

Crossingham (as above)

Dr Barnardo
(once assaulted a young woman on the street, who tried to defend her father from being attacked by a group of "Barnardos Boys")

Again, there are many others to add to this rung 3.


Let's go down to rung 4, those individuals who had no history of violence, and have remained somewhat of a mystery over time.



Rung 4...


Hutchinson
(A self confessed friend of MJK's despite nobody else knowing who he was. Gave an overly detailed description of a suspect that required a photographic memory to remember and recall in such vivid detail. Only exists in the context of the MJK murder, outside of which he remains an unknown)

Schwartz
(Saw and heard a key event shortly before the murder of Stride, and yet nobody saw him, saw or heard anything he claimed to have witnessed, and he only exists in the context of the Stride murder, outside of which he remains an unknown)



We then have the bottom rung, which includes those individuals with NO KNOWN evidence of a history of violence or the capabilities to kill AND was well documented through time both before and after the murders...


Rung 5 -


Lechmere
(We know more about him than we need to know. Being found a few yards away from Nichols being his only link to anything remotely dodgy. He has NO attributing factors regarding the Ripper killings)

Maybrick
(No history of violence and no known connection to any of the victims. Only considered because of a suspect watch and even more suspect diary. The jury is out)



This bottom rung has a long list also.




So, there we have it, a kind of suspect league table based on a ladder system; the higher the rung, the more likely the individual can be possibly attributed to some of the Ripper methods and application


It is now your turn to add to that ladder and see where each suspect and person of interest best fits.


1 - convicted and/or proven murderers, capable and willing to kill
2 - strong history of violence and capable of being the Ripper given the right circumstances
3 - known for endorsing/promoting/supporting violence and/or minor offenses.
4 -No known history of violence, but remain unknown entities.
5 - No known history of violence and well-documented lives before and after the Ripper series


You may have noticed that some individuals could be placed on multiple rungs; Le Grand for example could be considered on rung B or A depending on perspective and timing.

And yes, I am aware the ladder is technically upside down, what with all the different rung terminology, but it's metaphoric so please just go with it.




The main aim of this thread is to get those "kill Ladder" rungs filled up with as many suspects and persons of interest as possible...


Could be fun



RD

For me…

Rung A - Bury, Kosminski and Druitt.

Rung B - no one but a yawning chasm.

Rung C - Cutbush, Levy, Hyams, Tumblety (not sure about his place)

Rung D - no one.

Rung E - no one.

Rung Z - Cross, Hutchinson, Gull, Lewis Carroll.

[Geddy2112]

A few ladders, how many snakes?

[Lewis C]

James Kelly, Frederick Deeming, H. H. Holmes, and Carl Feigenbaum are known murderers, and so they'd go in the top rung, though I think the last two are extremely weak suspects.

Thomas Cutbush, William Grainger, David Cohen, and Hyam Hyams all were violent, so they can go on Rung 2.

I think Aaron Kosminski probably goes on Rung 3. He threatened someone's sister with a knife, but didn't attack. He was in a lunatic asylum for 25 years and had one one reported incident of violence, when he attacked someone with a chair.

Montague Druitt can be added to Rung 5. I think Joseph Barnett can be too.

Someone died as a result of taking one of Francis Tumblety's quack medicines. I don't know if that fits into this classification.

[The Rookie Detective]

A few ladders, how many snakes?

Only one...

The Ripper himself



RD

[The Rookie Detective]

For me…

Rung A - Bury, Kosminski and Druitt.

Rung B - no one but a yawning chasm.

Rung C - Cutbush, Levy, Hyams, Tumblety (not sure about his place)

Rung D - no one.

Rung E - no one.

Rung Z - Cross, Hutchinson, Gull, Lewis Carroll.

I never realised Druitt was a known/convicted murderer?


Interesting


RD

[The Rookie Detective]

But then we also have a logical problem -- These known murderers and individuals with a history of violence, prior to their first murder or act of violence had never murdered or acted violently, correct?

c.d.

So you're saying before he murdered women, he had never murdered women?

Ths Ripper couldn't have been a murderer before he murdered women.

Well..maybe because his first kill...was his first kill

His first act of violence...was his first act of violence


You also can't breathe before you're conceived, but that doesn't mean you cant be born.




It does sound a little like non-sensical gibberish designed to disrupt a perfectly good thread; but I get it.


I would expect no less from some folk



RD

[Kattrup]

Sadler is rung 2 or 3. He was known to have a viole temper and was involved in two violent incidents on the night of Coles’ murder.
I cannot recall if he is known to have assaulted anyone, so probably rung 3.

[Kattrup]

William Grant Grainger is rung 2. He stabbed a prostitute in the throat (or genitals, not sure EDIT I checked and it was the genitals). She survived, so he’s not quite rung 1. But close.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I never realised Druitt was a known/convicted murderer?


Interesting


RD

Fair point RD. You have known murderers automatically at Rung 1. I was simply going on who I thought the likeliest?

[The Rookie Detective]

William Grant Grainger is rung 2. He stabbed a prostitute in the throat (or genitals, not sure EDIT I checked and it was the genitals). She survived, so he’s not quite rung 1. But close.

That's a great entry onto the Kill Ladder.

Grainger certainly had the intent.

For me, he is on rung 2; but tried to climb to rung 1 for sure.

Certainly borderline.


RD

[The Rookie Detective]

Fair point RD. You have known murderers automatically at Rung 1. I was simply going on who I thought the likeliest?

That's also a fair point from you Herlock.

I tried to avoid adding my personal preferences to the ladder; because some individuals I favour more than others...but I wanted to try and make the concept more objective by aiming to differentiate between...

...those who had killed/murdered, those who were known to be violent, those involved in criminality/endorsing violence, those who had no known violent attributes but relatively unknown entities, and then those whom we have a life history that contains zero evidence of violence, criminality or murder.

Druitt is a very difficult one to include because he has been on the radar, had mental ill health and his behaviour was peculiar and potentially suspicious in context with the case.

Unlike Lechmere and Maybrick, he did have particular issues that would mean he doesn't fit right on the bottom rung. That said, he wasn't a murderer and so doesn't fit on rung 1 either.

IMO he doesn't fit onto any of the rungs based on the framework I have initiated.

But that's a good thing because it shows that my idea of a Kill Ladder is flawed.

That's why I like your post, because Druitt must be included somewhere, but he doesn't quite fit anywhere.


One thing that the ladder isn't, is a league table of suspects.

I wanted to avoid my previous attempt a while back when I made up that Suspect League Table.

It soon descended into chaos because it became very much saturated by somewhat disingenuous comments that made a mockery of what I was trying to achieve.


This time around, the Kill ladder was more about known data regarding convictions, violence and murders etc... and is therefore more about the known data, rather than the opinion of the data so to speak.



It's also important to mention that just because Bury is placed on rung 1, and then Maybrick and Lechmere on Rung 5; that has no impact on who I believe the Ripper may have been, but based solely on the objective data that comes from fact.

In other words, I am not suggesting that I believe that Maybrick and Lechmere are not the Ripper and Bury was; I am just aiming to differentiate between those individuals who were known to have murdered, to those who have no known history of violence.


We know that the Ripper had a violent streak.

We know that all humans are capable of being violent


But it's the actions that speak louder than words.


The kill ladder separates those individuals who were proven to have taken another life, from those who may or may not have written a diary claiming to have done so.


I don't believe that anyone from rung 1 or 5 was the Ripper


And that's why I think that despite it's flaws, it also kind of works objectively.



Now...where to put Druitt?



RD

[John Wheat]

I like the idea of a Kill ladder. It plus the comments shows Bury as the clear front runner as the best suspect. And also has the frankly ridiculous suspect Lechmere on Rung 5.

Cheers John