Rating The Suspects.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Version 18

(A) Age/physical health > 2 = no issue/1 = issues creating doubt.

(B) Access to murder sites > 2 = no issues/ 1 = within reasonable travel (train for e.g./ 0 = presence unproven/doubt

(C) Violence > 4 = murder of a woman with a knife/ 3 = murder of a woman (including the use of a knife) or murder with another weapon/ 2 = wounding a woman with a knife/ 1 = threatening a woman with a knife or physical violence using a weapon/ 0 = no violence (with knife or otherwise)

(D) Mental health issues > 2 = serious/violent/sexual/1 = other/0 = none known.

(E) Police interest > 2 = at the time (without exoneration)/1 = later (within 10 yrs and without exoneration)/0 = none known, not serious or exonerated.

(F) Hatred/dislike of women/prostitutes > 2 = yes/1 = link to prostitutes/0 = none known.

(G) Medical/anatomical knowledge (inc. animals) > 1 = yes/0 = none known

(H) Alcohol/drug issue > 1 = yes/0 = none known.



--- (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H) ---

13 = 2 - 2 - 3 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 : Kelly, James
11 = 2 - 2 - 3 - 0 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 : Bury, William Henry
11 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 0 : Puckridge, Oswald
10 = 2 - 0 - 4 - 1 - 1 - 2 - 0 - 0 : Deeming, Frederick Bailey
10 = 2 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 : Grainger, William Grant
09 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 : Cutbush, Thomas Hayne
09 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 : Hyams, Hyam
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Kosminski, Aaron (Aron Mordke Kozminski)
08 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 : Lechmere, George Capel Scudamore
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 : Barnado, Thomas John
08 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Pizer, John (Leather Apron)
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 : Cohen, David
07 = 1 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 : Tumblety, Francis
07 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 2 - 0 - 0 : Smith, G. Wentworth Bell
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 : Kidney, Michael
07 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 1 : Thompson, Francis
06 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 : Chapman, George (Severin Antonowicz Kłosowski)
06 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 : Levy, Jacob
06 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Druitt, Montague John
06 = 2 - 0 - 4 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Carl Feigenbaum
06 = 2 - 0 - 3 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Hendrik De Jong
05 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 : Barnett, Joseph
05 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 1 : Stephenson, Robert Donston (or Roslyn D'Onston)
05 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 : Sutton, Henry Gawen
05 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Buchan, Edward
05 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 : Williams, Dr. John
05 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Craig, Francis Spurzheim
05 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 : Maybrick, James
04 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Stephen, James Kenneth
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Bachert, Albert
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Cross, Charles (Charles Allen Lechmere)
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Hardiman, James
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Hutchinson, George
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Mann, Robert
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Le Grand, Charles
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Maybrick, Michael
04 = 1 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 : Gull, Sir William Withey
03 = 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 : Sickert, Walter Richard



Changes Made


Altered criteria’s (B) and (C)

Made amendments in line with the 2 new criteria (B) and (C)

New suspects added - Carl Feigenbaum and Hendrik De Jong

I just realised that I forgot to make the alteration to Puckridge on criteria (E) as suggested by Fiver. It will be changed for next time.

[Lewis C]

Hi Lewis,

I’ve got Millington’s book on the table next to me. I’ve also got Gary Linnell’s more recent book on Deeming. I’ve been wondering whether to re-read Millington it or just have a skim through. Morley’s suspect book certainly favours that he was likely in England.

Fair enough, Herlock. I would think that for the purpose of this thread, it would be enough to just re-read the parts of the book that discuss where he was at the time of the Ripper murders. Unless you want to re-read the whole book just out of interest.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Herlock, is Roger Millington's book one of your Deeming books? It was thought at one time that Deeming wasn't in England or was in jail at the time of the murders, but Millington's book places Deeming in England at the time. On page 91 of Ripperologist 142, Paul Begg reviewed this book and endorsed both the book and the idea that Deeming was in England at the time.

Hi Lewis,

I’ve got Millington’s book on the table next to me. I’ve also got Gary Linnell’s more recent book on Deeming. I’ve been wondering whether to re-read Millington it or just have a skim through. Morley’s suspect book certainly favours that he was likely in England.

[Lewis C]

I’ll have a look into the Deeming question later today Lewis. I do have one or maybe two books on Deeming as a suspect as well as Morley’s book.

Herlock, is Roger Millington's book one of your Deeming books? It was thought at one time that Deeming wasn't in England or was in jail at the time of the murders, but Millington's book places Deeming in England at the time. On page 91 of Ripperologist 142, Paul Begg reviewed this book and endorsed both the book and the idea that Deeming was in England at the time.

[The Rookie Detective]

I have always found it interesting as to why the police at New Scotland Yard chose to use the death mask of Deeming in reference to his being the face of Jack the Ripper.

His face was used for many years for visitors to the Black Museum, that in 1892 (when Deeming was hanged) was housed in the same basement; and only a few yards away from where the Whitehall Torso was found just 4 years earlier; on the same weekend as the "double event."

Eerie to say the least.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I believe that Deeming can be proven to have been in England at the time, he just can't be proven to have been in the London area. But though I disagree with your example, I agree with your point. Sickert almost certainly wasn't in England at the time of some of the murders, so if Sickert can be included, Feigenbaum can be too. If anything, I'd say it's more likely that Feigenbaum was there than that Sickert was there for all of them.

I’ll have a look into the Deeming question later today Lewis. I do have one or maybe two books on Deeming as a suspect as well as Morley’s book.

[Fiver]

I get annoyed at myself for errors like this one but they have to be put right so thanks for pointing it out Fiver. I’ll change it for the next version,

I only caught it because the discussion of Henry Smith's suspect showed that was probably Puckridge, which means he had an alibi. There are so many suspects that no one knows everything about all of them and that's before we get to errors made by available sources or speculation that was presented as fact.

[Lewis C]

I would include him personally, because otherwise Deeming should be omitted too.

It still can't be definitively confirmed that Deeming was in England at the time of the Ripper murders.

If Feugenbaum is excluded, than Deeming must be disregarded also, based on the same parameters.

The fact that Feigenbaum was also a convicted killer, means that he should be included IMO.

I believe that Deeming can be proven to have been in England at the time, he just can't be proven to have been in the London area. But though I disagree with your example, I agree with your point. Sickert almost certainly wasn't in England at the time of some of the murders, so if Sickert can be included, Feigenbaum can be too. If anything, I'd say it's more likely that Feigenbaum was there than that Sickert was there for all of them.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Version 18

(A) Age/physical health > 2 = no issue/1 = issues creating doubt.

(B) Access to murder sites > 2 = no issues/ 1 = within reasonable travel (train for e.g./ 0 = presence unproven/doubt

(C) Violence > 4 = murder of a woman with a knife/ 3 = murder of a woman (including the use of a knife) or murder with another weapon/ 2 = wounding a woman with a knife/ 1 = threatening a woman with a knife or physical violence using a weapon/ 0 = no violence (with knife or otherwise)

(D) Mental health issues > 2 = serious/violent/sexual/1 = other/0 = none known.

(E) Police interest > 2 = at the time (without exoneration)/1 = later (within 10 yrs and without exoneration)/0 = none known, not serious or exonerated.

(F) Hatred/dislike of women/prostitutes > 2 = yes/1 = link to prostitutes/0 = none known.

(G) Medical/anatomical knowledge (inc. animals) > 1 = yes/0 = none known

(H) Alcohol/drug issue > 1 = yes/0 = none known.



--- (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H) ---

13 = 2 - 2 - 3 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 : Kelly, James
11 = 2 - 2 - 3 - 0 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 : Bury, William Henry
11 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 0 : Puckridge, Oswald
10 = 2 - 0 - 4 - 1 - 1 - 2 - 0 - 0 : Deeming, Frederick Bailey
10 = 2 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 : Grainger, William Grant
09 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 : Cutbush, Thomas Hayne
09 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 : Hyams, Hyam
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Kosminski, Aaron (Aron Mordke Kozminski)
08 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 : Lechmere, George Capel Scudamore
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 : Barnado, Thomas John
08 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Pizer, John (Leather Apron)
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 : Cohen, David
07 = 1 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 : Tumblety, Francis
07 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 2 - 0 - 0 : Smith, G. Wentworth Bell
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 : Kidney, Michael
07 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 1 : Thompson, Francis
06 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 : Chapman, George (Severin Antonowicz Kłosowski)
06 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 : Levy, Jacob
06 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Druitt, Montague John
06 = 2 - 0 - 4 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Carl Feigenbaum
06 = 2 - 0 - 3 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Hendrik De Jong
05 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 : Barnett, Joseph
05 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 1 : Stephenson, Robert Donston (or Roslyn D'Onston)
05 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 : Sutton, Henry Gawen
05 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Buchan, Edward
05 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 : Williams, Dr. John
05 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Craig, Francis Spurzheim
05 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 : Maybrick, James
04 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Stephen, James Kenneth
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Bachert, Albert
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Cross, Charles (Charles Allen Lechmere)
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Hardiman, James
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Hutchinson, George
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Mann, Robert
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Le Grand, Charles
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 : Maybrick, Michael
04 = 1 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 : Gull, Sir William Withey
03 = 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 : Sickert, Walter Richard



Changes Made


Altered criteria’s (B) and (C)

Made amendments in line with the 2 new criteria (B) and (C)

New suspects added - Carl Feigenbaum and Hendrik De Jong

[Herlock Sholmes]

Another suggestion is to change the current:

(B) Location/access to murder sites > 2 = no issues/1 = reasonable travel/0 = serious doubt.

To:

(B) Access to murder sites > 3 = no issues/ 2 = within reasonable travel (train for e.g./ 1 = presence unproven/doubt

or even,

(B) Access to murder sites > 2 = no issues/ 1 = within reasonable travel (train for e.g./ 0 = presence unproven/doubt


I tend to favour the last one.

[Trevor Marriott]

It’s nothing personal Trevor but I can’t put him in unless we can show that he was definitely in the country. I realise that this might be frustrating for you a on the nights you rate him highly as a suspect. I know that you searched the passenger lists but couldn’t find evidence that he was here at the right time. If evidence was found to show that he was here he’d be on the list.

Well, he apparenty admitted to his lawyer that he was here on all the dates of the murders and he can be shown as being here on the night of Alice Mckenzie murder and I think that it is right to draw an inference that he was here on all the dates bearing in mind ships from the same line were here on all the dates of the murders.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock,

As you know the ultimate result in cricket is defined as a draw. I'm not sure that I would accept that as an outcome with as traditional foe as the old blighty, but the thrill is in the chase. I seem to recall that you started a thread on this subject, so you may care to revive that thread to avoid us commandeering this thread in an off topic takeover.

Cheer, George

Good point George.

[GBinOz]

Hi George,

For a while I’ve been fearing a trouncing for England (and it still might happen) but England are playing well and with some confidence. So maybe we can make it a close series? I think that we need a good start though. Sadly, I never fancy England to come from behind and especially not a side as ruthless as the Aussies. Let’s hope at least that it’s an interesting series (and when I say ‘interesting’ I don’t mean a series where England beat all of the ‘low scoring’ records)

Hi Herlock,

As you know the ultimate result in cricket is defined as a draw. I'm not sure that I would accept that as an outcome with as traditional foe as the old blighty, but the thrill is in the chase. I seem to recall that you started a thread on this subject, so you may care to revive that thread to avoid us commandeering this thread in an off topic takeover.

Cheer, George

[The Rookie Detective]

I would include him personally, because otherwise Deeming should be omitted too.

It still can't be definitively confirmed that Deeming was in England at the time of the Ripper murders.

If Feugenbaum is excluded, than Deeming must be disregarded also, based on the same parameters.

The fact that Feigenbaum was also a convicted killer, means that he should be included IMO.

[Herlock Sholmes]

This is Trevor’s post..

. I notice from your list you have not mentioned who I believe is a prime suspect Carl Feigenbaum, aka Anton Zahn a German Merchant seaman who at the time of the murders was employed as a German Merchant seaman for the Nordeutscher German Shipping line, which had merchant ships in London on the dates of all the murders. He can formally be identified through crew lists as being In London as late as 1891 the date of the Coles murder.

Following him leaving the sea he emigrated to New York when in 1896 he murdered a woman by cutting her throat. He was arrested fleeing the scene and executed in 1896. He told his lawyer prior to execution that he was in London at the time of the murders and his lawyer believed him to have been JTR.

I’ll put it out for the everyone’s opinion. No disrespect meant to Trevor but I’d would be uncomfortable about putting in a suspect that we can’t prove was in England at the time of the murders. That said, as Trevor points out, he was a merchant seaman at the time, so it’s certainly not impossible that he could have come to London.

I’ll go with the majority.

ps…no, that doesn’t mean that I’ll consider putting Van Gogh on the list.