Favoured Suspect...

[FrankO]

Allo, Frank. I do see what you mean, and I guess he could have ripped them up if he wanted to, but it'd put him into a corner, imo, if his lovers started to turn up as Ripper victims.

That is why I think he, in an absolute sense, isn't a great suspect, Mike. But that's just how I see it. I think Chapman was wired fairly different than the Ripper, although - again - I don't completely rule him out.

I'm not confident at all that Chapman was the man, but I do feel that for a named suspect he's actually pretty good, and anyone backing him could be totally forgiven.

I agree with you on this, especially the last part.

Cheers,
Frank

[FrankO]

The only way I could accept different killers for Chapman, Eddows and Kelly would be if they were all still connected.
It it were modern day south America and they were cartel executions, I'd have no problem believing that they were committed by different people, but in Victorian Whitechapel, I can't see how they'd be either unconnected or by different hands.

These kinds of murders were pretty rare enough as it was. I know there's the torsos and Johnny Gill, etc, and I'm not saying that they're all connected, but Eddows, Chapman and Kelly seem to be very much by one person. I'm not entirely opposed to the idea of multiple killers, but it's far a more likely solution that it was one person. If it was more than one, then the string of murders weren't a coincidence and were part of one series.

Any minor differences in the killings themselves aren't evidence of them being unrelated, imo. Killers aren't robots.

Good post, Mike.

[FrankO]

Allo, Frank. I do see what you mean, and I guess he could have ripped them up if he wanted to, but it'd put him into a corner, imo, if his lovers started to turn up as Ripper victims.

That is why I think he, in an absolute sense, isn't a great suspect, Mike. But that's just how I see it. I think Chapman was wired fairly different than the Ripper, although - again - I don't completely rule him out.

I'm not confident at all that Chapman was the man, but I do feel that for a named suspect he's actually pretty good, and anyone backing him could be totally forgiven.

I agree with you on this, especially the last part.

Cheers,
Frank

[FISHY1118]

5 Murders 1 killer.

[Mike J. G.]

The only way I could accept different killers for Chapman, Eddows and Kelly would be if they were all still connected.
It it were modern day south America and they were cartel executions, I'd have no problem believing that they were committed by different people, but in Victorian Whitechapel, I can't see how they'd be either unconnected or by different hands.

These kinds of murders were pretty rare enough as it was. I know there's the torsos and Johnny Gill, etc, and I'm not saying that they're all connected, but Eddows, Chapman and Kelly seem to be very much by one person. I'm not entirely opposed to the idea of multiple killers, but it's far a more likely solution that it was one person. If it was more than one, then the string of murders weren't a coincidence and were part of one series.

Any minor differences in the killings themselves aren't evidence of them being unrelated, imo. Killers aren't robots.

[FISHY1118]

Hi Frank,

WADR, I cannot agree. My daughter is a medical professional who has zero interest in JtR. When I asked her to look at the autopsies she responded that Chapman and Eddowes were by different hands (unknowingly agreeing with Baxter). I am not convinced that Kelly was a victim of JtR. I am of the opinion that we are all endeavouring to fit the murders into an artificial construct whereby, if the perpetrator of one murder is found then the JtR case is solved. I am not persuaded that this is the case. YMMV.

Best regards, George

I'm a bit confused here George, are you saying that your daughter believes two different perpetrators for chapman and Eddowes murders ?.

Kelly not a victim of JtR ??? So 3 killers during the Autumn of Terror?

[GBinOz]

Hi George,

I think we can rather safely assume that Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes & Kelly were victims of Jack the Ripper. I don't doubt that any modern day police investigation would include all of them - regardless of the opinions of any of the men you mentioned above. So, your point/opinion only goes so far, the way I see it.

Cheers,
Frank

Hi Frank,

WADR, I cannot agree. My daughter is a medical professional who has zero interest in JtR. When I asked her to look at the autopsies she responded that Chapman and Eddowes were by different hands (unknowingly agreeing with Baxter). I am not convinced that Kelly was a victim of JtR. I am of the opinion that we are all endeavouring to fit the murders into an artificial construct whereby, if the perpetrator of one murder is found then the JtR case is solved. I am not persuaded that this is the case. YMMV.

Best regards, George

[Lewis C]

Hi George,

I think we can rather safely assume that Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes & Kelly were victims of Jack the Ripper. I don't doubt that any modern day police investigation would include all of them - regardless of the opinions of any of the men you mentioned above. So, your point/opinion only goes so far, the way I see it.

Cheers,
Frank

Hi Frank-O,

I agree with this, except that I think there's an outside chance that Kelly wasn't a Ripper victim. Still, if someone has an iron-clad alibi for Kelly's murder, I would consider such a person an extremely weak Ripper suspect.

[Mike J. G.]

Hi there Mike,

Thanks for your response. The only thing I wouldn't agree with is "If he was the Ripper, he couldn't rip them up." I think that, if he really wanted to, he could have. He just couldn't cut them up at his home.

So, if Chapman was the Ripper, then he had 2 morbid desires, either all along or developed at different stages of his life. Even though I don't see this as very likely, it's still possible and that's why I keep the door just ajar to the possiblity that Chapman was JtR. That's how I see it, anyway.

Cheers,
Frank

Allo, Frank. I do see what you mean, and I guess he could have ripped them up if he wanted to, but it'd put him into a corner, imo, if his lovers started to turn up as Ripper victims.

I do feel that, if he was the Ripper, poisoning was a means to an end for the women he no longer wanted around, whereas the Ripper victims were his actual pleasure.

I'm not confident at all that Chapman was the man, but I do feel that for a named suspect he's actually pretty good, and anyone backing him could be totally forgiven.

I often wonder if any of the named suspects knew the killer, not necessarily that they were aware of them being the killer, but if they simply knew the person behind the killings, assuming it was one person.

[FrankO]

The C5 was an artificial construct of McNaughton, a tea planter promoted after the events to a position (IMO) beyond his competence. Baxter, at Stride's inquest, suggested that the Eddowes murder was a crude copycat of the Chapman murder. Swanson, who was probably more capable in his assessments than McNaughton or Anderson, designated nine Whitechapel murders, from Emma Smith to Frances Coles, plus two additional names being Farmer and Mylett.

So there are differences of opinion as to whether Stride was a victim....of Who? We don't know how many killers were involved let alone which were responsible for which. Neither did the police at the time. Even if Anderson's witness was Schwartz, and Schwartz identified Kosminski, and Kosminski killed Stride, it does not follow that Kosminski killed anyone else.

IMO, proof of guilt or innocence for any one of the Whitechapel victims does not establish guilt or innocence for any of the other victims.

JMO.

Cheers, George

Hi George,

I think we can rather safely assume that Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes & Kelly were victims of Jack the Ripper. I don't doubt that any modern day police investigation would include all of them - regardless of the opinions of any of the men you mentioned above. So, your point/opinion only goes so far, the way I see it.

Cheers,
Frank

[FrankO]

re the chalked messages..to me i dont place much emphasis on them, but i read somewhere once there were questions about who wrote them and it came up that they were written by the locals. the messages predate ellens murder. did the locals know something about bury? was there gossip he was the ripper? why?

Hi Abby,

Even though we can only speculate, I do think the chalked messages are interesting, as they might give us some answers (depending on who we suppose wrote them & when), however indefinite. They'd only become less interesting or even uninteresting if they were written after the murder became known, which doesn't seem to be the case.

and i would be remiss if i didnt compliment you for your open mind and rational responses, much appreciated.

Thanks for the compliment!

Cheers,
Frank

[FrankO]

Hiya, Frank. If we're supposing that Chapman was the Ripper, then him poisoning his wives or lovers was merely a relatively quiet way in which to dispatch them, as opposed to him getting his kicks doing what he enjoyed doing to unknowns, which was mutilation after death. So getting a thrill from watching them die slowly may not have been the actual goal, but merely a "bonus," if you will.

Whether Chapman got any kicks from poisoning his lovers or not, who knows, he probably did, but it may have been a happy accident, as opposed to his intention, as his real intention seems to have been to simply rid himself of them quietly. If he was the Ripper, he couldn't rip them up.

Abberline seems to be going for Chapman solely because he was murdering women in the same area, but he did seem fully aware of the differences in each series, and he stated as much, pointing out that it was the similarities which drew his suspicion, and adding that Chapman had reportedly threatened a previous lover with a blade, so he wasn't blind to the difference between the two killers.

My main purpose for backing up Abberline here is purely because another poster (Mortis?) was boldly claiming that Abberline was a terrible inspector simply because he thought it might be Chapman, which is a bit unfair, IMO, and a bit naive.

Like I've said, though, I'm not particularly one for promoting Chapman, but I do feel that him, Bury and Kelly are good suspects, not that that really means a lot!

Cheers

Hi there Mike,

Thanks for your response. The only thing I wouldn't agree with is "If he was the Ripper, he couldn't rip them up." I think that, if he really wanted to, he could have. He just couldn't cut them up at his home.

So, if Chapman was the Ripper, then he had 2 morbid desires, either all along or developed at different stages of his life. Even though I don't see this as very likely, it's still possible and that's why I keep the door just ajar to the possiblity that Chapman was JtR. That's how I see it, anyway.

Cheers,
Frank

[GBinOz]

If Bury ( or any suspect for that matter) was eliminated due to the fact they had a cast iron fully checked at the time alibi say for the Stride murder hence elimination as a suspect.
However there is major doubts that Stride was a victim.

The C5 was an artificial construct of McNaughton, a tea planter promoted after the events to a position (IMO) beyond his competence. Baxter, at Stride's inquest, suggested that the Eddowes murder was a crude copycat of the Chapman murder. Swanson, who was probably more capable in his assessments than McNaughton or Anderson, designated nine Whitechapel murders, from Emma Smith to Frances Coles, plus two additional names being Farmer and Mylett.

So there are differences of opinion as to whether Stride was a victim....of Who? We don't know how many killers were involved let alone which were responsible for which. Neither did the police at the time. Even if Anderson's witness was Schwartz, and Schwartz identified Kosminski, and Kosminski killed Stride, it does not follow that Kosminski killed anyone else.

IMO, proof of guilt or innocence for any one of the Whitechapel victims does not establish guilt or innocence for any of the other victims.

JMO.

Cheers, George

[paul g]

If Bury ( or any suspect for that matter) was eliminated due to the fact they had a cast iron fully checked at the time alibi say for the Stride murder hence elimination as a suspect.
However there is major doubts that Stride was a victim.

[Mike J. G.]

As far as favoured suspects go, of the list that we have, it's hard to really find any who are better than the ones who we know without a doubt were capable of murder.

I don't see how anyone can confidently pick anyone else from the list and feel without a doubt that they were more likely to be the killer than the ones who were actually proven murderers. Lech, Hutchinson, etc etc, are hard to logically put ahead of known murderers in the area. Deeming should be high on the list, but behind the known murderers proven to have been in or around the area.

That's not to say that the list we have is worth more than a twopenny fart, because it probably isn't, but when it comes to likely suspects on the list, I'd go with the actual killers before the others.