Francis Spurzheim Craig

[sdreid]

Killing others to create a false trail is very rare but it has happened in some product tampering cases and, according to one theory, in the Duff/Sidney Case.

[Robert]

I take it that this is the Park St in question?

TIMES APRIL 29 1887

[Prosector]

Yes, That seems to be the one.

Wynne

[Prosector]

Prosector, thank you for answering questions on here.

Have you considered the possibility that Craig was only responsible for the murder of your relative, if she was the woman known as "Mary Kelly"?

I think your book sounds interesting, and plan to get it.

That's possible but the fact that the murders stopped after her death and that he left the area soon afterwards are somewhat against that.

Wynne

[Prosector]

Killing others to create a false trail is very rare but it has happened in some product tampering cases and, according to one theory, in the Duff/Sidney Case.

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

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
By my maths that made the victim of Millers court a 32 year old, surely that goes against all that we know..24-25 is the age we have always perceived,
Seven-eight years is a huge differential, albeit McCarthy did state she looked about 30, most likely because of deprivation.
It does not rule it out, but ought to be brought up.
Regards Richard.

[dixon9]

if Craig was her ex husband,that was also some age gap.Was that the norm in those times?

[Robert]

Richard, it has been known - on the odd occasion - for women to knock a few years off their age.

[sdreid]

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

Thanks Wynne. Yes in 1871, Christiana Edmunds poisoned a bunch of random people, including at least one who died, to cover the fact that she was poisoing her lover's wife. And in 1980s, Stella Nichol killed a random woman with cyanide to cover the fact she had murdered her husband with the same substance. My sorta pet theory regarding the Tynenol Poisonings is also along this line. Cases like Jack Gilbert Graham are also somewhat similar although not exact.

[Sally]

Hi,
By my maths that made the victim of Millers court a 32 year old, surely that goes against all that we know..24-25 is the age we have always perceived,
Seven-eight years is a huge differential, albeit McCarthy did state she looked about 30, most likely because of deprivation.
It does not rule it out, but ought to be brought up.
Regards Richard.

Hi Richard

If MJK was EWD, we should remember that she hadn't had a life of deprivation - at least not up to the last few years of her life. A well-nourished 31 year old may well pass for younger - particularly, I dare say, in a general environment of extreme poverty such as was prevalent in the slums of Whitechapel at the time.

[Sally]

Age before Notoriety?

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?

[richardnunweek]

Hi Sally..
Mrs Longs sighting.Yes
Cleric type in Berner street,Yes
Mrs Maxwell's sighting at 845.am.Yes
But the most crucial alleged sighting, witnessed at church passage...NO
Young respectable man seen with Kelly on the eve of her death..NO,
Hutchinson's man. NO.
Blotchy face..NO.
It is possible, but a man of 51 in 1888, was considered elderly,,My grandmother born 1880, used to say, a woman of 40 in her day, was considered past it..
Regards Richard.

[Chris2307uk]

I'm interested in this work have pre-ordered the book hoping to find answers to some questions that I have such as how exhuming the body (if it can be found) can show that this guy is JTR.....

I'm always interested in new theories and look forwardto reading this book

All the best

Chris

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
If we stick to what we know[ if it is accurate]..we have the son of John McCarthy, telling his family that his mother parcelled up belongings of the dead woman, and sent them to her army brother, who allegedly was reluctant to involve himself , because of prospects in his career,
We then have to ask ourselves...How did Mrs McCarthy . or the authorities, know who to send the clothes to?.
If they knew the real name of the victim, then Francis Craig's attempt to conceal did not work..
If they sent them to a soldier called Kelly, then surely some conformation , and certainty, would have been obtained prior.
These points have to be discussed, its no good going all out on a new theory , without addressing relevant points...
Regards Richard.

[RockySullivan]

Wheres the strong circumstantial evidence you boast of? A reporter went to talk To a brothel owner? Huh? Now that RE has brought the DNA angle to the mainstream it's going to be a rush of any and every different kind of theory that involves DNA. I dont believe for a second your going to get MK exhumed but if you are...why in the hell are they not exhuming her to looked by the most brilliant high tech scientists in the world? Instead there exhuming her so this guy can prove he's full of ****?

Trevor

I think you need to read the whole book to fully find answers to all those questions. In brief: I accept that identifying MJK does not in itself prove the identity of the killer. However there is very strong circumstantial evidence to suggest that it was her husband. There's not time or space to set it all out here but, for instance, he moved into the East End soon after she did and out again a few months after the last killing, he suddenly went to the High Court in the middle of the Martha Tabram inquest to seek leave to strike out a paragraph in his divorce petition which had lain dormant for two years as he couldn't serve it on her. The paragraph was the one that identified Ellen Macleod and gave the addresses of some of her brothels so I think he did it in order to get her to disclose the whereabouts of Elizabeth. The murders started 10 days later.
I believe that Francis Craig devised the idea of a series of prostitute killings very carefully engineered to appear to be the work of one man in order to disguise his real victim. He went to considerable lengths to make sure she couldn't be identified which he didn't do with the others.
There is no doubt whatever that he was obsessed with his wife. He stalked her from the moment she left him and got other people including friends and private detectives to help him. He didn't return to it years later, it was a constant occupation from the moment she left him. It was the breakthrough when he struck a deal with Ellen Macleod that finally gave him the opportunity (I don't for a moment think that she knew he intended to kill her - only to divorce her).
Finally, yes, if (and it's a big if) the body is exhumed and it turned out not to be my relative then you're right, the theory would collapse completely. The reason that there is doubt about the exhumation is that there is no certainty as to the precise location of the grave. I have Ministry of Justice permission subject to certain conditions but if it proves impossible to pinpoint the grave it would be an impossible undertaking.
But, as I say, there's a lot more evidence in the book than it was possible to put in the articles so the only real answer would be for you to read it in its entirety.

Wynne