The "Suspects": Current Opinion

[pinkmoon]

Hi Pinkmoon



One possible explanation we have put forward for this is the fact that Jacob was suffering from neurosyphilis. The last stage of this (tertiary syphilis) lasts about 5 years before death occurs. It is possible that at the onset of this stage (for us it would be around 1886 his first arrest) he was still functioning 'normally' but it would slowly rob him of his health mentally and physically until his death in 1891. So it isn't inconceivable to believe he had to stop killing due to the symptoms of the syphilis worsening.

Another factor could be that if you disclude Mary Kelly from the C5 (I don't like to) then it would be the case that Jtr never killed again after Joseph saw Jacob with Catherine Eddowes.



Again due to his health he may not have been able to kill again, then he was locked up in an asylum.





Hi Wicker



Who is to say he hasn't?



Yes but then you can argue that some Doctors stated he didn't have any so we are no further forward.



It is a middle man ground is it not, a butcher didn't have enough anatomical knowledge to be a Doctor. but he certainly would know enough to dissect and cut up bodies. It allows us an answer to the differences between opinions of the Doctor's of the time.



?? We have no reason to think he looked 'mad' he certainly would have had pock marked skin I would imagine, but then that wouldn't be that rare at the time.
His description into the asylums don't mention him looking abnormal so I would imagine he looked sane enough to interact with people without them fleeing, screaming into the night.




Yes we do.



I am not sure how you can say he isn't more likely than his next door neighbor! There is no way Hyman Sampson was Jtr!

Hi Observer




Not sure, Harris didn't see anything (apparently) and Lawende gave a description different to Joseph. We know Joseph Levy and Lawende remained friends through the years but we don't know to what extent they were friends.

Hey Fish



Yes but some of those suspects have been ruled out, so why can't others bu pushed in?



Fair enough, quite a plausible theory if you don't want to put Jtr in the mentally ill category.

Again though, just because they are delusional and hallucinate does not meant they can't comprehend the here and now. Look at the Richard Chase, he was delusional but knew enough to leave the scene before being caught.

Tracy

Hi Tracy,however was doing this wasn't so mad that that they didn't know when to put their knife or knives away and leg it.If levy was in final stages of syphillis wouldn't his manner or appearance be very of putting to a seasoned prostitute?

[pinkmoon]

Hello Fisherman,

Tell me what makes Levy a less viable suspect than any other name in the frame. If you can't answer that question sufficiently, then perhaps those methods aren't so questionable after all?

There is nothing wrong putting levy forward as a suspect however if it could be proved that he was spotted in the company of eddowes shortly before her demise then it could well be case closed would the three gentleman who observed eddowes with this man have kept their mouths shut for the rest of their life's?

[tji]

Hi Fish

Hey Tracy! Hope youīre well!

Not doing bad thanks, yourself?

Believe me, they can. And WILL! What I responded to was why we cannot perhaps rate Levy as the top contender as Harry suggested, and in this context, he canīt compete with people like, say, Kosminsky (who I think resembled Lecy much in many a respect).
Otherwise, I am convinced that the killer was not amongst the contemporary police suspects.

See, I do think he makes a strong suspect, especially from what we have to work with.

I don't understand how he can't compete with Kosminski, although I do agree that there are very similar in aspects, I accept Kosminski trumps Levy on certain points but Levy evens the field on others.

By which time he was done, right? I donīt think there is any example of him fleeing a scene when people happened upon it, but I havent read about Chase for a long time, so Iīm ready to stand corrected! As I remember things, he took his time and left when he was done, ignoring the fact that he left lots of trails behind him like footprints and such things. Not very Ripperish, is it?

No I believe you may be correct, but I am not trying to liken Jacob to Chase and the way he killed more the mind set, just show that even people in the throw of severe delusions/hallucinations can still have the sub-conscious (for want of a better word) ability to not be caught.

Tracy

[sepiae]

Where's this newby today...?

Hello everyone.

May I remark that this thread is actually quite a good read for a newcomer like me to learn about current opinions and hypotheses.

I already need to violate your basic rule of naming a single favourite suspect, as I'm currently perfectly divided into being interested in 2:

1. 'David Cohen'

- Timeline corresponds both with a so far not established alibi and end of the murders one can count [with some certainty] to the definite Ripper-committed.

- behaviour and state at arrest fit with aspects of what victims' states and circumstances can be read to exhibit [I know, this is subject to debate, I'd love to make my point there, but not today, as I've got to rush away in a few moments]

- has been of very strong interest by a number of those closely involved with the investigation

I should say that Martin Fido made a very good case, and I might be still under the influence, so to speak.

2. George Hutchinson

- still many questions for me about nature and contents of his testimony:
- reason/s for late statement
- reasons for not seeing/avoiding to mention Lewis
- issues with his description of 'Astracan'
- reasons for long wait [& subsequent end of wait] before Miller's Ct.

all of which could be answered with simple, trivial answers, but altogether he warrants some attention - being as elusive as he is; Hutchinson might be an alias, as it proves so hard to find out anything at all - which again might mean nothing, given that this was quite a common practise with many

Honorable mentions:
The Unknown Perp [it simply has to be taken into account that it was someone we've never heard about, even if he'd been talked to, as so much is lost]; Tumblety [with increasingly less conviction on my behalf ]; and I'm sorry, I can't decide on #3 :/


Have a good weekend, everyone

[Fisherman]

Hello everyone.

May I remark that this thread is actually quite a good read for a newcomer like me to learn about current opinions and hypotheses.

I already need to violate your basic rule of naming a single favourite suspect, as I'm currently perfectly divided into being interested in 2:

1. 'David Cohen'

- Timeline corresponds both with a so far not established alibi and end of the murders one can count [with some certainty] to the definite Ripper-committed.

- behaviour and state at arrest fit with aspects of what victims' states and circumstances can be read to exhibit [I know, this is subject to debate, I'd love to make my point there, but not today, as I've got to rush away in a few moments]

- has been of very strong interest by a number of those closely involved with the investigation

I should say that Martin Fido made a very good case, and I might be still under the influence, so to speak.

2. George Hutchinson

- still many questions for me about nature and contents of his testimony:
- reason/s for late statement
- reasons for not seeing/avoiding to mention Lewis
- issues with his description of 'Astracan'
- reasons for long wait [& subsequent end of wait] before Miller's Ct.

all of which could be answered with simple, trivial answers, but altogether he warrants some attention - being as elusive as he is; Hutchinson might be an alias, as it proves so hard to find out anything at all - which again might mean nothing, given that this was quite a common practise with many

Honorable mentions:
The Unknown Perp [it simply has to be taken into account that it was someone we've never heard about, even if he'd been talked to, as so much is lost]; Tumblety [with increasingly less conviction on my behalf ]; and I'm sorry, I can't decide on #3 :/


Have a good weekend, everyone

You cannot first say that you think Hutchinson may have done it, and then wish people a good weekend ...

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Tracy:

Hi Fish

Not doing bad thanks, yourself?

Doing eminently - never better!

See, I do think he makes a strong suspect, especially from what we have to work with.

Okay - thatīs fine by me, and I always welcome the effort people put into characters that I am not equally interested in myself. The outcome will be the best possible that way. If I was to decide, we would only look at one man ...

I don't understand how he can't compete with Kosminski, although I do agree that there are very similar in aspects, I accept Kosminski trumps Levy on certain points but Levy evens the field on others.

Donīt misunderstand me - he CAN compete with Kosminski, as far as Iīm concerned. But the traditional take on things is that the contemporary police suspects are the crown jewels of the Ripper saga. Like Ostrog, for example

No I believe you may be correct, but I am not trying to liken Jacob to Chase and the way he killed more the mind set, just show that even people in the throw of severe delusions/hallucinations can still have the sub-conscious (for want of a better word) ability to not be caught.

Hm - perhaps so. But I still say that people like Chase are sloppy killers, if you take my meaning; messy ones, leaving all sorts of gore and traces behind.

Take a look at the man who killed Chapman - he went into that back yard with her, and the door swung shut behind the couple (it always did, it was hinged that way).
Then the killer silently subdued and strangled Chapman, whereupon he slaughtered her and took her uterus out, without one person noticing or hearing anything, although some of them were awake and had their windows open.
Then he opened the door, bid his farewells, and left 29 Hanbury Street.
Reasonably, he must have dug his hands and lower arms deep into the blood and gore inside Chapman. But was there a single speck of blood on that door afterwards? Nope.

Does that sound as the work of a deranged man? Would a guy like Richard Trenton Chase have been able to do that? Or would he have left bloody footprints on the stairs and equally bloody palmprints on that door as he swung it open and walked off?

To me, we are dealing with a clever, cunning, cautious killer, a man very much in control of what he did. Not a mentally ill person.

All the best,
Fisherman

[tji]

Hi Wicker

Which sounds like another way of saying we pick the boxes to suit the suspect?

It all sounds semantics to me Wicker. The boxes have to be there to be ticked. After that it is down to individual interpretation.

Well, if I am allowed to paraphrase the words of Prosector - the original is available on Casebook.

1 - Where a section of colon was removed and the sigmoid flexure was invaginated into the rectum. .........

Are you telling me that we know that the sigmoid flexure was deliberately inserted into the rectum to stop the flow of faeces?
I am by no means a medical person but the sigmoid flexure just seems to be an extension of the sigmoid colon, which is already attached to the rectum. I am not disagreeing that surgeons may do this on purpose but it doesn't seem a stretch to think it could happen on it's own or accidently given the trauma to the area.

As to the rest of it, why would someone who had just suddenly attacked and killed a woman, disfiguring her face, cutting out her kidney, decide to suddenly change his approach with the sigmoid flexure, especially given the time constraints and available lighting.

Also I have to say reading up on slaughtering an animal seems to show quite a few similarities, even to the point of pulling the intestines out of the body.

[tji]

Hi Pinkmoon

Hi Tracy,however was doing this wasn't so mad that that they didn't know when to put their knife or knives away and leg it.If levy was in final stages of syphillis wouldn't his manner or appearance be very of putting to a seasoned prostitute?

Jacob still had 2 year before actually dying form the syphilis. I think he started to feel the effects from the start of the tertiary stage in 1886, this gets steadily worse (as does he) before dying 5 year later in 1891.
By 1888 I think he would be feeling the effects brought on with the illness and would probably be starting to have 'episodes.' However he would still be lucid at times also. Also don't forget on top of the effects of the syphilis we have to wonder how the things in his life had affected him.
His brother's suicide, in the same house as he was in, it is even possible he found the body.
How did he get the syphilis, we know his wife or children didn't have it so we have to wonder about prostitutes, and how did he feel about that.
His mother died May 1888 could this have been a stressor.
Did all of this on top of the delusions, hallucinations etc cause him to do something that he would never have contemplated when he was well.

Jacob lived in the area all his life, he would have been well known and up until his arrest in 1886 it seems he was an average person (his Old Bailey records stated Levy received a good character). He would not have been a drooling mad man approaching them and still probably when lucid carry on conversations.
His Doctor (Dr Henry James Sequeira) states that he knew Jacob for quite a few year and he used to be a shrewd businessman.

Tracy

[pinkmoon]

Hi Pinkmoon



Jacob still had 2 year before actually dying form the syphilis. I think he started to feel the effects from the start of the tertiary stage in 1886, this gets steadily worse (as does he) before dying 5 year later in 1891.
By 1888 I think he would be feeling the effects brought on with the illness and would probably be starting to have 'episodes.' However he would still be lucid at times also. Also don't forget on top of the effects of the syphilis we have to wonder how the things in his life had affected him.
His brother's suicide, in the same house as he was in, it is even possible he found the body.
How did he get the syphilis, we know his wife or children didn't have it so we have to wonder about prostitutes, and how did he feel about that.
His mother died May 1888 could this have been a stressor.
Did all of this on top of the delusions, hallucinations etc cause him to do something that he would never have contemplated when he was well.

Jacob lived in the area all his life, he would have been well known and up until his arrest in 1886 it seems he was an average person (his Old Bailey records stated Levy received a good character). He would not have been a drooling mad man approaching them and still probably when lucid carry on conversations.
His Doctor (Dr Henry James Sequeira) states that he knew Jacob for quite a few year and he used to be a shrewd businessman.

Tracy

Very interesting my dear thank you.

[Wickerman]

2. George Hutchinson

- still many questions for me about nature and contents of his testimony:
- reason/s for late statement
- reasons for not seeing/avoiding to mention Lewis
- issues with his description of 'Astracan'
- reasons for long wait [& subsequent end of wait] before Miller's Ct.

all of which could be answered with simple, trivial answers, but altogether he warrants some attention - being as elusive as he is; Hutchinson might be an alias, as it proves so hard to find out anything at all - which again might mean nothing, given that this was quite a common practise with many

How refreshing it is to finally meet someone who is still asking questions
There are no end of Hutchinson threads to keep you enthralled in your pursuit.

Just to lightly touch upon your pointers:

- reason/s for late statement

This is something you can enlighten yourself with. If you look through the Press Reports, here on Casebook, you will see that the press over that weekend following the murder (Sat. 10th Nov.) really had no clue as to when the murder took place. Therefore, if Hutchinson was even reading the papers he would be no wiser than the press.

The St. James Gazette for example published the cry of "murder" between 3:30 - 3:45 Friday morning. Yet the Times reports that Kelly was still alive at 10:00 am Friday morning. Other press opinions only repeated the confusion by offering a variety of times inbetween.
What we today do not realize is that no-one over that weekend knew what time the murder took place.

Hutchinson saw Mary between 2:00 and 2:30 am, if she was still alive at 10 o'clock Friday morning, then what value would his statement have been?
To put this in context, Eddowes was murdered about 1:30-40 am, do you see the urgency of someone coming forward who saw Eddowes at 6:00 pm the night before?
What could a sighting at 6:00 pm on Saturday night possibly have to do with her murder at 1:30 am Sunday morning?


- reasons for not seeing/avoiding to mention Lewis

The 19th century was a period when women were always in the background.
If a witness says there was no-one in the street, we cannot know if he means no-one at all, or no men in the street.
Women were always passing up and down for one reason or another, as women were rarely the object of suspicion their presence was not of significance.


- issues with his description of 'Astracan'

The description is not unique, indeed Stewart Evans (Ret. PC) has told us he has taken hundreds of statements and Hutchinson's was nothing special.
Add the fact that Peter Sutcliffe wrote 34 pages of detailed confession, all from memory, and Hutchinson's half-page statement pales into insignificance.

What might have contributed to the detailed depth of Astrachan's description is Sgt. Badham's experience with the Suspect Description Form.
This form takes the witness from head to toe in a very detailed step by step procedure; hair; eyes; beard; moustache; etc.
A experienced officer can get you to answer something on every line, the result will be a very detailed description. How much of it was accurate, guesswork?, we cannot know.

- reasons for long wait [& subsequent end of wait] before Miller's Ct.

Agreed, Hutchinson may have had intentions that night which he did not admit to the police.
Also the fact he appears to have told Mary he had no money, yet when the lodging house opened in the morning, he managed to gain entrance, presumably by paying the usual fee.
I suspect he was not willing to give his last few pennies to Mary, he had given her money before and possibly, never got it back.

[Observer]

Hi Observer

Not sure, Harris didn't see anything (apparently) and Lawende gave a description different to Joseph. We know Joseph Levy and Lawende remained friends through the years but we don't know to what extent they were friends.

Jacob lived in the area all his life, he would have been well known and up until his arrest in 1886 it seems he was an average person (his Old Bailey records stated Levy received a good character). He would not have been a drooling mad man approaching them and still probably when lucid carry on conversations.
His Doctor (Dr Henry James Sequeira) states that he knew Jacob for quite a few year and he used to be a shrewd businessman.
Tracy

Hi tji

Precisely. As you imply Jacob Levy was well known in the area, and Lawende and Harris, being friendly with Joe Levy, in all probability, knew Jacob Levy; and yet, Lawende gave a decent enough description of the man talking to Eddowes on the night of her murder, but stated he would not know him again. Harris didn't see anything, as you imply. We are led to believe by Harry that Joe Levy recognised Jacob Levy, but decided not to implicate him. If Lawende knew Jacob Levy, was he also in on the ruse not to implicate him as the man seen talking to Eddowes? Likewise Harris? The alternative of course was that Jacob Levy was unknown to both Lawende and Harris.

Regards

Observer

Observer

[Ben]

If you look through the Press Reports, here on Casebook, you will see that the press over that weekend following the murder (Sat. 10th Nov.) really had no clue as to when the murder took place.

Still wrong, I'm afraid.

The time of death most frequently reported for Kelly was in the early hours of the morning, in common with every other ripper-attributed victim to date. If Hutchinson was innocent, and learned about the murder in the way that the vast majority of the press-reading public did, he would have read these reports and concluded that his evidence was relevant, and that the Astrakhan man - if a genuine entity - might have played a role in that early morning murder. Under those circumstances, one has to wonder why a supposedly innocent, honest-to-buggery Hutchinson "waited" three crucial days before coming forward; ultimately doing so just after the inquest, where Lewis' sighting of a loitering man in a wideawake was aired.

A minority of papers covered the rumours of a later morning time of death, but there was absolutely no possibility of Hutchinson being exposed to these only, whilst mysteriously missing the more extensively covered early morning accounts. Hutchinson may well have encountered both - in which case, it would have been perverse of him to withhold his evidence on the irrational assumption that the minority reports were correct.

You mention the Times, which reported:

"During the early hours of yesterday morning another murder of a most revolting and fiendish character took place in Spitalfields." - The Times, 10th November.

The description is not unique, indeed Stewart Evans (Ret. PC) has told us he has taken hundreds of statements and Hutchinson's was nothing special.

Magistrate Bob Hinton observed: “I have spoken to many serving and ex-police officers, and without exception they all dismiss Hutchinson’s description as pure fantasy. The general consensus of opinion being that witnesses generally get the sex and the height about right, but after that it’s pot luck”.

I'd love to see the evidence for Sutcliffe's confession being any more detailed than Hutchinson's description. It isn't just "memory" that's the problem; he was very unlikely to have noticed many of the things he claimed to have then memorized. You capitalize "Suspect Description Form", but do we have any evidence of these being in use in 1888?

A experienced officer can get you to answer something on every line

Oh, every line. So, presumably, there was a little box Hutchinson had to fill in for "eyelash colour" and "tie-pin style"? Badham's incompetence in failing to record the type of horse the "shoe" was meant for is what shocks me most. Was it a Windsor Grey or a Byelorussian harness horse? A groom should know, eh?

Also the fact he appears to have told Mary he had no money, yet when the lodging house opened in the morning, he managed to gain entrance, presumably by paying the usual fee.

Why on earth would he have to wait for "the" lodging house to open "in the morning" when there were plenty of lodging houses open throughout the night to anyone with enough money to pay for a bed?

Regards,
Ben

[tji]

Hi pinkmoon

Very interesting my dear thank you.

No problem.

[tji]

Hi Fish

Doing eminently - never better!

Always good to hear

Okay - thatīs fine by me, and I always welcome the effort people put into characters that I am not equally interested in myself. The outcome will be the best possible that way. If I was to decide, we would only look at one man ...

Ah I see - sort of give them enough rope to hang themselves? ;0)

Donīt misunderstand me - he CAN compete with Kosminski, as far as Iīm concerned. But the traditional take on things is that the contemporary police suspects are the crown jewels of the Ripper saga. Like Ostrog, for example

Yes how can we argue with Ostrog lol.

Hm - perhaps so. But I still say that people like Chase are sloppy killers, if you take my meaning; messy ones, leaving all sorts of gore and traces behind.

What like intestines flung over the shoulder?

Take a look at the man who killed Chapman - he went into that back yard with her, and the door swung shut behind the couple (it always did, it was hinged that way).
Then the killer silently subdued and strangled Chapman, whereupon he slaughtered her and took her uterus out, without one person noticing or hearing anything, although some of them were awake and had their windows open.
Then he opened the door, bid his farewells, and left 29 Hanbury Street.
Reasonably, he must have dug his hands and lower arms deep into the blood and gore inside Chapman. But was there a single speck of blood on that door afterwards? Nope.

??? I know I have been away from the boards for a while Fish but this is the first time I have heard this scenario. How do we know he did all this?

Does that sound as the work of a deranged man? Would a guy like Richard Trenton Chase have been able to do that? Or would he have left bloody footprints on the stairs and equally bloody palmprints on that door as he swung it open and walked off?

I couldn't say Christer, but I am not trying to liken Jtr to Chase, I am just pointing out that a man who suffers hallucinations etc can still function 'normally' st some level at times.

To me, we are dealing with a clever, cunning, cautious killer, a man very much in control of what he did. Not a mentally ill person.

I guess we just agree to disagree here.


Tracy

[Wickerman]

Still wrong, I'm afraid.

The time of death most frequently reported for Kelly was in the early hours of the morning,

Still struggling with right & wrong are we Ben?

Daily News 10 Nov.
There are conflicting statements as to when the woman was last seen alive,.....although a tailor named Lewis says he saw Kelly come out about 8 o'clock, and go back. Another statement is to the effect that Kelly was seen in a public house about ten o'clock yesterday morning,

Daily Telegraph, 10 Nov.
The hour at which the deed was done can only be conjectured, as the last evidence of the woman being alive was at one o'clock in the morning, when she was heard singing.

Morning Advertiser, 10 Nov.
JANE KELLY, it is believed, was killed between eight and half-past ten o'clock yesterday morning. There is some conflict of testimony on this head, but it would appear that in this interval the woman was seen alive,...
Mrs. Caroline Maxwell
"I have known the murdered woman well for the past six months. This morning as near as possible 8.30, I saw Mary Jane (the murdered woman) standing outside the court....

St. James Gazette, 10 Nov.
A woman named Kennedy was on the night of the murder staying with her parents at a house.....and between half-past three and a quarter to four she heard a cry of murder.

Times, 10 Nov.
A tailor named Lewis says he saw Kelly come out about 8 o'clock yesterday morning and go back. Another statement is to the effect that Kelly was seen in a public-house known as the Ringers at the corner of Dorset-street and Commercial-street, about 10 o'clock yesterday morning...

Star, 10 Nov.
A tailor named Lewis says he saw Kelly come out about eight o'clock yesterday morning and go back. Another statement is to the effect that Kelly was seen in a public-house known as the "Ringers," at the corner of Dorset-street and Commercial-street, about ten o'clock yesterday morning,...
A woman named Kennedy was on the night of the murder staying with her parents at a house.....and between half-past three and a quarter to four she heard a cry of murder.

No-one had a clue.
Your position would be better served if you actually checked the papers before you commented.

Magistrate Bob Hinton observed: [I]“I have spoken to many serving and ex-police officers,

And Bob's personal theory about Hutchinson was?
I prefer an impartial opinion.

Why on earth would he have to wait for "the" lodging house to open "in the morning" when there were plenty of lodging houses open throughout the night to anyone with enough money to pay for a bed?

Well, "we" know different Ben.
But, if you can find "plenty" that stayed open, contrary to regulations, you won't have any problem naming them, so go ahead, make a list...
.
.
.