William Grant/Grainger

[Defective Detective]

What do we know about this guy? I find him as compelling a person of interest as other named suspects like Kelly and Bury, given that we know he wasn't averse to putting a knife to women, even if the events we know of didn't end in murder. I find it strange nobody's put out a suspect book featuring this character, for instance.

[Harry D]

Yes, I'm also interested in William Grant Grainger as a JTR suspect. I would put him second after William Bury in my 'best of a bad bunch' category. If he could be placed in London at the time that would definitely take his legitimacy up a couple of notches.

I'm at a loss as to how Lawende "unhesitatingly identified" a man who, in his own words, he probably wouldn't recognise again, let alone some seven years after the fact. Although this is only coming from a newspaper article, and we don't know for certain the witness was Lawende.

There exists a photo of the guy but apparently you need to be in the right clique to get a hold of it.

[Rob Clack]

There exists a photo of the guy but apparently you need to be in the right clique to get a hold of it.

Idiot, people just have to ask nicely. I have shown it to quite a few people, some of those i have only had the contact with just the once.

There's more than likely other photos of him out there if you were bothered to look. I suppose you are one of those who sits on there arse and expects everyone else to post there research for free on the boards. Or perhaps from reading your posts you are just a **** stirrer.

[Jonathan H]

I would just like to thank Rob Clack for promptly sending me the only known photo of William Grant aka Grainger taken in 1910.

Rob generously did this on request, so long as I agreed did not to disseminate or publish it and I will honour that request. I also want to make it clear that Rob in no way supports my revisionist theory.

On the one hand, it is somewhat frustrating for me because, as I had long suspected, Lawende [probably] affirmed to a man in 1895, Grant, who must have been a dead ringer for Druitt, e.g. the man I think he actually saw chatting amiably with Eddowes in 1888.

Allowing for the size of the photo and the passage of years the resemblance between Druitt and Grant is nothing short of uncanny.

According to my researcher, on the other hand, the publication restriction is a small mercy because those who have seen the photo, at my end, are unanimous that there is no resemblance at all.

And they call me blind ...?

[Rob Clack]

Thank you Jonathan, I will reserve final judgement on your theory when your book comes out. The problem I have is that your theory is all over the boards in different threads and it's not an easy theory to understand and that's why I am glad you are publishing a book as I can get a better grip of it if it was all in one place.

If it is not to late you are welcome to publish the photo in your book if it will help.

Regards

Rob

[Jonathan H]

Dear Rob

That is extremely generous of you!

It is too late, but my researcher would have vetoed it as ludicrous (Ludicrous? ludicrous?? Grant and Druitt could be twins!).

[Rob Clack]

No worries Jonathan, good luck with the book.

Rob

[Harry D]

Idiot, people just have to ask nicely. I have shown it to quite a few people, some of those i have only had the contact with just the once.

Is that so? Because that's not what you said on JTRForums:

The situation however is that I am fed up of people putting photos on public message boards for people to make copies and use in there own publications without so much as a thank you. So I will only share stuff with close friends.

[Rob Clack]

Debs had already told you I had shown it to some people. Jonathan then made a very polite request to see the photo and I saw no reason not to honour that request. If instead of being a knob sent me a p.m. asking politely to see it I would probably had said yes. But now? Don't even bother.

[Harry D]

Debs had already told you I had shown it to some people.

Yes, she said you shared it with "people [you] knew and trusted".

So you might want to think in future before insulting people, because my original point stands. If you only want to share it with certain people, fine, that's your prerogative, but don't pretend otherwise.

If instead of being a knob sent me a p.m. asking politely to see it I would probably had said yes.

Why would I make a request when you made it quite clear you'd only "share stuff with close friends", and you don't know me from Adam?

But now? Don't even bother.

Don't flatter yourself.

[Rob Clack]

You started the ball rolling by saying "better no one sees it" try changing your attitude and keep your snide comments to yourself.

[Jonathan H]

To Rob

Thanks for your support.

Unlike recent efforts which have been undeniably fun and sensational, like this new Midsomer Murders-type scenario of the killer covering his tracks with four earlier homicides -- wow two on the same night, that will fool 'em! -- and then, in about a month, the Robinson book accusing the brother of the guy who never wrote a diary, I'm not sure that my tome will get any oxygen with a fairly un-sexy claim that, you know, its not a mystery, it was solved at the time, and the solution was broadly shared with the public.

Very spookily to see Grant (I'm looking at him now) because, for me, it is to see Druitt as if he had reached middle-age.

[Rob Clack]

Hi Jonathan,

Whether I agree with your theory or not I admire the amount of time and effort you have put into. And I hope it is well received an does well enough for you to make all that effort worthwhile

Regards

Rob

[Debra A]

Yes, she said you shared it with "people [you] knew and trusted".

Yes. In response to you saying "Much better that none of us see it, then." when I explained Rob didn't want to post it because of past problems with people copying and using photographs that others have found. I was the one that told people on JTRforums that Rob had a picture, not Rob. He wasn't gloating about it like you are trying to make it sound. Rob also explained to you that although it was a newspaper photograph, it was from what is probably one of the few, if not only surviving copies of that newspaper and he had paid a lot of money for the privilege of owning it.
Your comments are just spiteful.

[Craig H]

What do we know about this guy? I find him as compelling a person of interest as other named suspects like Kelly and Bury, given that we know he wasn't averse to putting a knife to women, even if the events we know of didn't end in murder. I find it strange nobody's put out a suspect book featuring this character, for instance.

Hi “Defective Detective”

Great to see William Grant Grainger has resurfaced. I remember reading a number of posts here a while ago (http://forum.casebook.org/archive/index.php/t-770.html ) about him.

In summary ….

There was a great article in Pall Mall Gazette just after he was sentenced to 10 years jail for the attack on Alice Graham in March 1895. Some saw the attack as having similarities to previous Ripper attacks:
• William Grainger who went by name of William Grant
• 37 y.o. (so born around 1858), 5 ft. 10 in. in height, slim-built, with grey eyes, pale complexion, no beard, and a black moustache.
• Scars on cheek and throat, and dancing women, crowns, anchors tattoos on arms and hands
• Born at Cork, and left home at the age of fifteen to go to sea. In December, 1883, he enlisted in the Cork City Artillery, and attended the trainings annually from 1884 to 1889 inclusively. In 1889 he was discharged on bad character
• Described himself as a ships fireman
• Had a history of arrests for drunken behaviour, and frequent times in Cork and London workhouses

More information from George Kebbell (Grant’s lawyer from 1895 attack) wrote a letter to Pall Mall Gazette in April 1910 and claimed Grant was the Ripper. He also said Grant was from a respectable family in Cork, Ireland.

After being released from jail, Grant appealed to courts (through his lawyer Forbes Winslow) about Kebbell’s incorrect and damaging allegations.allegations.

Others on previous posts believe William Grainger was born in 1860 in Cork City to parents William Grainger and Mary (nee Busteed). Not sure about the respectable, “high places” comment as his father was a labourer and his mother’s family were farmers.

I thought I read somewhere that both Kebbell and Winslow said that Grant was previously a medical student at St Bartholomews Hospital in London.

Has anyone found out anything to prove this ? It would seem out of character with the picture of him from the above ?

Craig