Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Francis Spurzheim Craig

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Well you know, Richard, EWD had a brother who was demonstrably in London by 1891, living in the very same district that EWD had been working in early 1885 - and he may well have been there earlier still - perhaps Prosector might know more about that?

    From what we can currently see of EWD's story; it's evident that there are a number of details which appear to match the stories told by MJK - and some of those are quite specific. I think that either we're looking at a series of random coincidences that we will come to view as remarkable; or EWD and MJK were one and the same.

    Perhaps we should remember that we used to consider the whole of MJK's back story as potential invention - and it was only through the efforts of researchers of the case that we eventually learned that individuals from MJK's story such as Mrs. Buki, Elizabeth Phoenix and Morganstone were real people.

    I don't see, in theory, why other elements of MJK's accounts of herself shouldn't also be essentially true.

    Comment


    • #92
      Hi Sally.
      And the elusive Joe Fleming...the fact is with any theory, you can jingle with facts, and fit them in.
      My old 39 theory was , I could juggle numbers to fit a distinct pattern..
      I agree I do not believe that a Mary Kelly existed in the form of the Millers court victim, but I am sure that the authorities knew her real identity, and I would be surprised if that was EWD.
      Regards Richard.

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by Sally View Post
        Well you know, Richard, EWD had a brother who was demonstrably in London by 1891, living in the very same district that EWD had been working in early 1885 - and he may well have been there earlier still - perhaps Prosector might know more about that?

        From what we can currently see of EWD's story; it's evident that there are a number of details which appear to match the stories told by MJK - and some of those are quite specific. I think that either we're looking at a series of random coincidences that we will come to view as remarkable; or EWD and MJK were one and the same.

        Perhaps we should remember that we used to consider the whole of MJK's back story as potential invention - and it was only through the efforts of researchers of the case that we eventually learned that individuals from MJK's story such as Mrs. Buki, Elizabeth Phoenix and Morganstone were real people.

        I don't see, in theory, why other elements of MJK's accounts of herself shouldn't also be essentially true.
        Agreed Sally. This is why I was enquiring on another thread about the chances of Fiona Kendall-Lane being amenable to discussing her family stories in connection with WWD's theory; particularly her recollection of what happened to MJK's belongings and how her ancestors were certain that Mary Jane Kelly was her true identity. It would be a fascinating debate were it ever to take place!

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by Prosector View Post
          Elizabeth was born on 24th July 1856. I have her birth certificate. She was married to Craig on 24th December 1884 when she gave her age as 26 (should have been 28) and her name as Elizabeth Weston Jones, Widow. There's absolutely no doubt that they are the same person as is made clear in Craig's Divorce Petition two years later.

          As far as cover serial killings are concerned the classic case is that of Ronald O'Bryan, the 'Trick or Treat' killer who attempted to murder a group of children to conceal the fact that the intended victim was his 8 year old son but there are also other examples. Clearly you have to be a psychopath to do it but I have tried to show evidence that Craig was just that.

          Wynne
          Hi prosector
          Fascinating stuff. Even if your theory as to the killer isn't right, at the very least we may finally found out who Mary Kelly is (once the DNA is conducted) correct?
          "Is all that we see or seem
          but a dream within a dream?"

          -Edgar Allan Poe


          "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
          quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

          -Frederick G. Abberline

          Comment


          • #95
            I'm more interested in whether Craig can be linked to the Kelly murder scene more than anything. This theory about Craig is all supposition up until MJK's remains are exhumed and even then slight caution is advised.

            Although I have to admit I'm glad to see a theory emerge that could have some interesting outcomes.

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by dixon9 View Post
              if Craig was her ex husband,that was also some age gap.Was that the norm in those times?
              Actually 20 years was not uncommon.

              I have it a few times in my Family Tree. my Great Great Grandmotger was born in 88 and in 1902 married a man 17 or 18 years her senior. There are others I will have to look up.
              G U T

              There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Sally View Post
                MJK's age aside, I wonder how Francis Craig fits with the various witness sightings of men with the victims shortly before their death etc. that were reported at the time?

                At 51, Craig is somewhat older than any estimates given in witness sightings. Will his age be a sticking point when considering the possibility that he was the Ripper?
                I agree but both Francis and his father were fitness fanatics. Pictures of E T (his father) look at least 20 years younger than his actual age. If I am correct and the Pictorial News picture is of him he looks in his mid thirties rather than 51 (but I admit this is something of a long shot).

                Wynne

                Comment


                • #98
                  Hi Proscetor,

                  I welcome your research and you sharing that with us. I also welcome that you are prepared to discuss it with us on these boards. It is very good of you.

                  I dont think you have to worry too much about the witnesses who said that they saw someone with the victims shortly before they were killed.

                  After that they never amounted to anything.

                  I am not too sure (until I read your book) that your suspect killed all of the victims. But if it cam be proved who Mary Kelly really was that will certainly be a giant leap, and also it could be that your suspect killed Kelly, but didnt kill the others.

                  Best wishes.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    thanks GUT for reply

                    Comment


                    • I'm actually surprised that Kelly's remains haven't already been exhumed for a reality show/documentary, etc. It would make for great TV.

                      I have a question about DNA. Suppose the body could clearly be identified as the Miller's Court victim and DNA from her could be extracted. Nothing else is known to identify her. Could scientists sample people from the population until they got similar profiles and work backward from there to figure out her family and thus ID her?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by dixon9 View Post
                        thanks GUT for reply
                        No worries.

                        Just had a quick gander, for those born between about 1840 and 1900 the average age gap at time of marriage was between 9 and 10 years with the range being between her being 14 years older than him and him being 21 years older than her. [Now that's just in my tree others may be different].
                        G U T

                        There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Barnaby View Post
                          I'm actually surprised that Kelly's remains haven't already been exhumed for a reality show/documentary, etc. It would make for great TV.

                          I have a question about DNA. Suppose the body could clearly be identified as the Miller's Court victim and DNA from her could be extracted. Nothing else is known to identify her. Could scientists sample people from the population until they got similar profiles and work backward from there to figure out her family and thus ID her?
                          There's services offered by certain commercial genealogy companies that compare a sample of submitted DNA with a database of other samples that have been submitted for that purpose. If a sample was submitted, familial relationships could be traced. Only people with a familial match would be informed of the match, as far as I know, so the community would have to rely on them coming forward with the information.

                          So, let's say I've submitted some of my DNA for testing by Ancestors-R-Us. I could end turn up a distant relationship to the author's candidate due to my Weston ancestry. However, even if there's a relationship, there's still no proof that it's on the Weston line, unless other ancestors show up with the same connection, and could be excluded from other lines. The closer the link (eg. sibling vs. cousin vs. 2nd cousin) the easier it would be determine the connection.

                          Hopefully, in this case the close familial relationship would simplify the situation for the author.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Prosector View Post
                            I agree but both Francis and his father were fitness fanatics. Pictures of E T (his father) look at least 20 years younger than his actual age. If I am correct and the Pictorial News picture is of him he looks in his mid thirties rather than 51 (but I admit this is something of a long shot).

                            Wynne
                            Thank you, Wynne, for that interesting information - I look forward to reading your book in due course.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Prosector View Post
                              I agree but both Francis and his father were fitness fanatics. Pictures of E T (his father) look at least 20 years younger than his actual age. If I am correct and the Pictorial News picture is of him he looks in his mid thirties rather than 51 (but I admit this is something of a long shot).

                              Wynne
                              So what makes you think that drawing is of him? Do you have another photo of him to compare it to? Did you just pick a random person at the inquest and are saying it could be him? If that is your method of reasoning your book is going to be pretty worthless

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by RockySullivan View Post
                                your book is going to be pretty worthless
                                You're not wrong Rocky.

                                Cheers John

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X