Had The Ripper A Beard ?!

[The Baron]

I am impressed with your collection of photographs, except this one which is a photograph of an Australian politician. I'd be even more impressed if you could come up with the genuine photo that has been reported to exist of Grainger, which supposedly bears a striking resemblance to Druitt.

I took that photo from this site bellow, at the bottom of the picture you will see the place of it, Grenville, he was a member of Victorian Parliament between 1900 and 1902.

https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/members/james-sadler/

For the other James Thomas Sadler from London, the suspect in Coles murder, there is a sketch of him:





With a beard too


As for Grainger I was looking for a picture of him but didn't find yet.



The Baron

[Jon Guy]

John Pizer




Eliminated.


The Baron

Hi Baron

I believe this is an illustration of William Piggot, and not John Pizer. Both were been held at the same time at Commercial Police Station. Pizer did not wear a beard. The newspaper reports say Pizer had a drooping dark moustache and side whiskers.

[Jon Guy]

I took that photo from this site bellow, at the bottom of the picture you will see the place of it, Grenville, he was a member of Victorian Parliament between 1900 and 1902.

https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/members/james-sadler/

For the other James Thomas Sadler from London, the suspect in Coles murder, there is a sketch of him:





With a beard too


As for Grainger I was looking for a picture of him but didn't find yet.



The Baron

Hi Baron

Sadler`s wife told the newspapers that James Sadler did not have a beard in 1888. In fact, she went further to say he only had a fair moustache at the time.

[The Baron]

Hi Baron

Sadler`s wife told the newspapers that James Sadler did not have a beard in 1888. In fact, she went further to say he only had a fair moustache at the time.

Hi Jon,


Yes, the sketch of him with a beard is after the Coles murder in 1891.



The Baron

[The Baron]

Hi Baron

I believe this is an illustration of William Piggot, and not John Pizer. Both were been held at the same time at Commercial Police Station. Pizer did not wear a beard. The newspaper reports say Pizer had a drooping dark moustache and side whiskers.

That is Pizer sketch in Wikipedia

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Pizer

There is another one for him with a beard too but I don't know its source





This man looks very rippery to me


The Baron

[Jon Guy]

That is Pizer sketch in Wikipedia

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Pizer

There is another one for him with a beard too but I don't know its source





This man looks very rippery to me


The Baron

Yes, I think it was The Star 11/9/88 have printed a sketch of William Piggott under the name of Pizer. Correction Piggott was held at Commercial Police Station, and Pizer was at Leman Street. If you look at the description of Piggott, you can see it`s the man in the sketch.

The Times- 11/8/88 - Piggott wore no vest and had a battered felt hat"
The Star - 10/8/88 - Piggott stands barely 5ft. high. He has a long dark beard, and he wears dark clothes.

[The Baron]

Yes, I think it was The Star 11/9/88 have printed a sketch of William Piggott under the name of Pizer. Correction Piggott was held at Commercial Police Station, and Pizer was at Leman Street. If you look at the description of Piggott, you can see it`s the man in the sketch.

The Times- 11/8/88 - Piggott wore no vest and had a battered felt hat"
The Star - 10/8/88 - Piggott stands barely 5ft. high. He has a long dark beard, and he wears dark clothes.

Hi Jon,

I have a question please, did the Times also mentioned if Piggott had a beard?!


The Baron

[Jon Guy]

Hi Jon,

I have a question please, did the Times also mentioned if Piggott had a beard?!


The Baron

I can`t see any other description, Baron.

[The Baron]

Thanks Jon

Good, so when a given description didn't mention a beard, that doesn't necessarily mean the person hadn't a beard.

A good example is above.

A picture is worth a thousand words.


The Baron

[Jon Guy]

Good, so when a given description didn't mention a beard, that doesn't necessarily mean the person hadn't a beard.

Well, it depends on how detailed the description is. For example, if it is detailed description (height clothes scars /tatoos) that makes no mention of a beard, that could mean no beard. But The Times description is quite vague.

[The Baron]

An interesting exchange Jon thanks.


The Baron

[The Baron]

if you could come up with the genuine photo that has been reported to exist of Grainger, which supposedly bears a striking resemblance to Druitt.

On second thought, if the man looks anything like Druitt, then I don't even want to see him.



The Baron

[The Baron]

Francis Thompson in 1890


Very handsome: Eliminated









The Baron

[Herlock Sholmes]

If a person had a beard in 1890 then he must have had a beard in 1888? I have a beard in 2024 but I didn’t have one in 2004. There’s nothing wrong with suggesting that none of the likeliest witnesses mentioned a potential ripper having a beard but surely we need to be more certain that they provably had a beard at the time of the murders?

[The Baron]

Even if we proved that a suspect had a beard in 1888, the naysayers will still not approve, they will ask for the exact month, then the exact week, then the exact day, then they will say he hid his beard then will say non of the eyewitnesses saw the ripper...

Every one has his reasoning, I personally will eliminate any suspect that is known to have a beard close to the time of the murders, and the chances are very high that he was not the ripper


The Baron