Favoured Suspect...

[Mortis]

I imagine I'm not alone in thinking this, but I have every confidence that had you been in Abberline's shoes in 1888, you'd have most definitely cracked the case, random guy on internet.

Hindsight is a wonderful tool, but it has no real use in this murder case for Abberline. Abberline was there, and so was Chapman, and what information he had on Chapman was obviously of interest to him, as it has been to countless researchers since.

We now have the benefit of being able to assess M.O. and signature, which Abberline didn't have. We have over a century of analysis to pluck from at the touch of a button, something Abberline could only hope to dream of.

Had any of us actually been living and breathing in 1888, who knows who we'd think the killer was. Frankly, Chapman isn't a bad suspect out of the ones we've got. Discounting him because of M.O. is naive at best, as killers such as Ramirez and Kurten had murders that the police were hesitant to link at first because they didn't immediately seem like they were by the same hand. People are obsessed with M.O.

As for language, the man obviously had enough ability to communicate to run a business and serve customers.

No offense, mate, but your argument is strange.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it was Chapman, but that anyone thinking it could be, certainly back in 1888, could be forgiven. There are still people who believe that Chapman could have been the killer. Chapman, Kelly, Bury, those guys aren't bad suspects. I don't feel like he's been named, personally, but there you go.

Not really relevant. If I was put in Abberline shoes in 1888 I'd be an entirely different person. Unless my conscience, as it is now, was transported with me.

And I said I agreed absolutely that Abberline didn't have all the tools, but even plain investigative work was lacking. You might argue about M.O and such, but I think MO is nothing but a logical conclusion of what someone would do. It's a stretch to suggest that a killer poisoning women is going to be the one ripping open bellies and the like. It's not like JTR was the first killer in existence. You mentioned Ramirez and Kurten as examples of them having used a different MO, but I beg to differ - the MO wasn't different at all, it was just escalation. Same as Jack. Just because what he did to Nichols pales in comparison to what he did to Kelly doesn't mean the pattern of the killing and the post butchery was any different other than the superficial difference in location and the extremity of it.

There is nothing in Abberline's career that we know of that suggests he was a great detective, let alone an infallible one that we all must listen to like gospel because he was the one investigating JTR which is the only thing I took issue with. Promotions are not an indication of competency and quite often than not they are. After all, we're not talking about a highly organized killer like DeAngelo here who seldom left any evidence at all and constantly misdirected the police, we're talking about a killer who struck nonchalantly in very populated areas and who wasn't that particularly careful with his safety.

[Lewis C]

Not really relevant. If I was put in Abberline shoes in 1888 I'd be an entirely different person. Unless my conscience, as it is now, was transported with me.

And I said I agreed absolutely that Abberline didn't have all the tools, but even plain investigative work was lacking. You might argue about M.O and such, but I think MO is nothing but a logical conclusion of what someone would do. It's a stretch to suggest that a killer poisoning women is going to be the one ripping open bellies and the like. It's not like JTR was the first killer in existence. You mentioned Ramirez and Kurten as examples of them having used a different MO, but I beg to differ - the MO wasn't different at all, it was just escalation. Same as Jack. Just because what he did to Nichols pales in comparison to what he did to Kelly doesn't mean the pattern of the killing and the post butchery was any different other than the superficial difference in location and the extremity of it.

There is nothing in Abberline's career that we know of that suggests he was a great detective, let alone an infallible one that we all must listen to like gospel because he was the one investigating JTR which is the only thing I took issue with. Promotions are not an indication of competency and quite often than not they are. After all, we're not talking about a highly organized killer like DeAngelo here who seldom left any evidence at all and constantly misdirected the police, we're talking about a killer who struck nonchalantly in very populated areas and who wasn't that particularly careful with his safety.

I don't know how you figure that Ramirez and Kurten didn't change their MO at all, especially Ramirez. With Ramirez, a victim might be strangled, stabbed, shot, bludgeoned, electrocuted, or stomped to death.

[Fiver]

There is nothing in Abberline's career that we know of that suggests he was a great detective, let alone an infallible one that we all must listen to like gospel because he was the one investigating JTR which is the only thing I took issue with.

Nobody is saying that Abberline's conclusions should be taken as gospel or that he was infallible. But as an investigator, he was above average. He was repeatedly and rapidly promoted in spite of having no connections to help him. He was specifically brought in for the Ripper and the Cleveland Street cases. During his career he received 84 commendations and awards.

"Inspector Abberline was portly and gentle speaking. The type of police officer - and there have been many - who might easily have been mistaken for the manager of a bank or a solicitor. He also was a man who had proved himself in many previous big cases. His strong suit was his knowledge of crime and criminals in the East End, for he had been for many years the detective-inspector of the Whitechapel Division, or as it was called then the "Local Inspector". Inspector Abberline was my chief when I first went to Whitechapel. He left only on promotion to the Yard, to the great regret of myself and others who had served under him. No question at all of Inspector Abberline's abilities as a criminal hunter." Walter Dew, 1938

Abberline had a favored suspect, Chapman. While I believe Abberline's theory was incorrect, his theory had more basis than most suspects put forward - he believed Chapman and the Ripper had medical knowledge, the attacks stopped roughly when Chapman left the area, Chapman had threatened his wife with a knife, and Chapman fit some witness descriptions. Unlike most suspectologists, Abberline acknowledged weaknesses in his theory - Chapman's age did not match witness descriptions.

After all, we're not talking about a highly organized killer like DeAngelo here who seldom left any evidence at all and constantly misdirected the police, we're talking about a killer who struck nonchalantly in very populated areas and who wasn't that particularly careful with his safety.

DeAngelo left lots of evidence and was nearly caught multiple times. He took precautions like wearing gloves, but I have seen no evidence that DeAngelo attempted to misdirect the police, let alone that he succeeded.

[Filby]

Being very much an amateur, my library consists of only about a dozen JtR studies - all from serious researchers. At first, I considered Kozminski as 80-90% the most likely. For me, the marginalia cannot be ignored even with the glaring error on date of death. Rob House also put forth a very compelling book as well, imo. It's my view that Koz likely fits the most important characteristics for me which are : his mental profile, his home environment and ability to conceal his crimes, and the geographic profile of his family businesses being a very reasonable route to/from the murder sites.

However I must admit that he has diminished a bit with all the reading of the posts by others. Sometimes I'm convinced it was Druitt, and at other times, Cutbush. Still, though, when I envision JtR somehow I envision Koz.