Francis Spurzheim Craig

[Lord-z]

While what a DNA profile could be pretty interesting, perhaps that could at least shed some light on her ancestry, or maybe even a facial reconstruction, while she is up, this is a pretty blatant act of "I got a bookdeal, and I need media-exposure". In a few months, if this goes through, we will probably hear "We could not conclusively prove that I am related to her" (read, "not at all").

Anyway, I, like the rest of you, have absolutely no idea what it is supposed to prove. If Mary Kelly is his great-aunt, she was killed by her former husband who also murdered 4 or so other women over several months to cover his tracks? It is like a Ripper MadLibs. Shockingly many Ripper books that claim to solve the case are.

[Sally]

Like you Sally I've read the sample pages on Google books and there are some astonishing leaps of faith made and some sloppy research. However, the divorce petition documents all stand up to scrutiny as does the Weston-Davies family tree. I'm intrigued and would wholly support the exhumation and DNA testing as long as it wasn't a wasted opportunity like the forensic work done on The Shawl!

Hi Silverpaw

I agree - as I say, I think the identity of MJK and that of the killer are two separate issues. There appears to be a substantial amount in the verifiable story of EWD in London which could match information from MJK herself and that we have since learned through research.

EWD was clearly a high-end prostitute in the West End by 1884, appears to have had close connections with a wealthy woman in the acting trade [so often euphemistic for other pursuits] whose family had strong connections with France and who was born in France herself; and had a brother called John who was demonstrably living in London in the 1890's and who may well have been there earlier.

Compare those facts with what MJK told Barnett and others - The West End job, the trip to France, the French lady in Knightsbridge and the brother called 'Johnto' - it's certainly intriguing, isn't it?

I don't know about the identification of Francis Craig as the Ripper though.

[Pcdunn]

It's interesting, at least, and should refresh the discussion threads. I think it is a bit far-fetched, but am willing to wait and see how things develop.

[Silverpaw]

Hmm... to sell books?

In all seriousness though, don't you think there's probably a desire to 'solve' the case for most who write a book on the subject [and for many who don't get that far...] - it's an enduring mystery after all.

If it was my aunty - or yours - would we also have that desire to pin down the person who'd killed our relative in such a gruesome fashion?

I might - I don't know about you.

But, you know, maybe one day somebody really will be able to join up the dots to make a picture we can all agree on - and if that were to happen, it'd probably be due to 'inside' information, perhaps a family connection just such as this.

I have my reservations on this occasion because I can already see under-researched elements in the sample chapters of Dr. Davies' book which may, I feel, not bode well.

I'll wait and see though - it's only fair.

Will you be buying the book?

Like you Sally I've read the sample pages on Google books and there are some astonishing leaps of faith made and some sloppy research. However, the divorce petition documents all stand up to scrutiny as does the Weston-Davies family tree. I'm intrigued and would wholly support the exhumation and DNA testing as long as it wasn't a wasted opportunity like the forensic work done on The Shawl!

[Bridewell]

For years it's been said that MJK's real identity might one day be revealed by a descendant who realised that a relative had disappeared around the material time and never turned up. This is the scenario claimed by this author so I'll be interested to read what he has to say. After the "Uncle Jack" experience of a few years ago though, I'm not over-optimistic.

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
I have not bought a book on this subject for years, having been interested in it since 1965, and been a member of this site since before the millennium, no book has really caught my attention..
But in this case , I must admit , it has all the ingredients of being a darn good read, so who knows.?
Regards Richard

[Sally]

Yes identifying her will be significant.

But why oh why do these authors so often want o over egg the pudding and yell SOLVED.

Hmm... to sell books?

In all seriousness though, don't you think there's probably a desire to 'solve' the case for most who write a book on the subject [and for many who don't get that far...] - it's an enduring mystery after all.

If it was my aunty - or yours - would we also have that desire to pin down the person who'd killed our relative in such a gruesome fashion?

I might - I don't know about you.

But, you know, maybe one day somebody really will be able to join up the dots to make a picture we can all agree on - and if that were to happen, it'd probably be due to 'inside' information, perhaps a family connection just such as this.

I have my reservations on this occasion because I can already see under-researched elements in the sample chapters of Dr. Davies' book which may, I feel, not bode well.

I'll wait and see though - it's only fair.

Will you be buying the book?

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
Anyone who had the madness to commit at least five murders, in such a gruesome fashion, would in my opinion be raving mad, and hardly like to live many years without suspicion that madness was present..
If the body was exhumed , and did prove that the authors relative was the victim known as Mary Kelly, it would be a tremendous breakthrough in the case, we would finally have a name that could be linked, and at the very least a new suspect could be identified that was plausible.
Regards Richard.

[DJA]

And what was the excuse for the suggestion that the killer removed the organs from Eddowes and Chapman?[/B]

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Obviously moonlighted as a mortuary attendant

[GUT]

Well,

If Dr. Davies' aunty does turn out to have been MJK, that's what it'll prove - nothing more or less than that.

Demonstrating MJK's identity is a separate issue from establishing the identity of the Ripper and is interesting in itself - isn't it?? From the documents pertaining to Craig's divorce petition, I don't think the identification of EWD with MJK is implausible per se - but we'll see.

It probably isn't significant to his proposed candidacy as the Ripper that Francis Craig took his own life as he did though - it was a pretty common method at the time.

Yes identifying her will be significant.

But why oh why do these authors so often want o over egg the pudding and yell SOLVED.

[Sally]

Well,

If Dr. Davies' aunty does turn out to have been MJK, that's what it'll prove - nothing more or less than that.

Demonstrating MJK's identity is a separate issue from establishing the identity of the Ripper and is interesting in itself - isn't it?? From the documents pertaining to Craig's divorce petition, I don't think the identification of EWD with MJK is implausible per se - but we'll see.

It probably isn't significant to his proposed candidacy as the Ripper that Francis Craig took his own life as he did though - it was a pretty common method at the time.

[GUT]

So let me ask this.

If his aunty was MJK and

If she was married to Craig and

If Craig killed himself by cutting his own throat.

What does that prove?

My answer, not a thing.

There is as good of a hypothesis that Craig cut his own throat because of his grief over MJK'S death as any other. Or even simply that it was a. Common form of self harm.

[pinkmoon]

I refuse to waste my time on this tripe even if after digging some bodies up (which in my honest opinion I do not think would be allowed) it could be proved that Mr Davies is related to Mary Kelly so what it isn't case closed as is been claimed.What will happen after the first edition of the book is published at 14 quid a pop we will have the revised edition six months later at 14 quid a pop going over the problems of the first one .If I was to comment on this in depth I think I would be banned from this truly brilliant site I don't want that to happen so I will just leave it alone .

[dixon9]

is there any real evidence that he was an ex of MJK?

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi,
There are so many flaws in this theory, as Trevor suggests.
Number one, the murdering of four women to hide the fact that Mary Kelly was his real intention..
What if he had been caught attempting this? how would he then have despatched his ex?.
As Trevor suggests, how would he know that Kelly had not told people in her life, about her elderly husband, and his attitudes. disfiguring her would then not be relevant.
Its a good story, and the authors statement , that if the book achieved success, then he would go ahead with exhumation. seems to me a good way of achieving sales.
It would, despite all my reservations, not at all surprise me, if it actually proved all of us wrong, because one day some bombshell will happen..
Regards Richard.

Yes but in the mean time we are left with yet another Ripper exclusive for the press to jump on, again misleading the public at large. No doubt a documentary will follow.

Its about time the press and documentary makers stopped trying to tell the public who the killer was and produced a story and a documentary on who it wasnt !!!

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk