Author of New Book Claims Francis Thompson Was the Ripper

[c.d.]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/jack-the-ripper-was-renowned-poet-francis-thompson-teacher/ar-CC2qww?li=AAa0dzB

c.d.

[Karl]

Well, I see nothing objectionable in helping to plug a book by a fellow researcher/friend/acquaintance. But I admit to raising an eyebrow when this follows very shortly after you said the following, in direct address to same author:

There is a major inherent problem in all of this. And I mean major. No matter what pattern you come up with that corresponds to the dates of the murders you have no way of knowing if that is the pattern that Jack was adhering to. Since there would seem to be an almost limitless number of patterns you could never be actually sure that you had stumbled upon the correct one. And since Jack is dead no one can confirm that the pattern you decided upon is the correct one.

Also, the dates could correspond to something very mundane like days that fell into a week where he had worked overtime and therefore had a little more money to take to the pubs and spread around. It could also be dates when he was alone and the other people that he lived with had gone out.

So it would seem that specific patterns are limitless and mundane explanations could be many.

It might be time to grab a beer and call it a day on this one. No disrespect meant.

c.d.

I'm not criticizing, mind you. I just found it interesting, somehow.

And I would still like to know what this rare surgical procedure was.
("he was taught a rare surgical procedure that was found in the mutilations of more than one of the Ripper victims")

[c.d.]

Hello Karl,

I was not aware that the author of this new book and the individual that was posting on these boards were one and the same. As for trying to establish a pattern, any pattern, I stand by what I wrote.

As for the book, I have not read it and so have no opinion. I simply thought that other posters would be interested that a new book had come out.

c.d.

[Karl]

Oh, I did not mean to imply that you did not stand by what you wrote. I see no conflict in promoting authors one disagrees with, in the spirit of being a gentleman. I just thought the timing was a bit curious, that's all.

[Shaggyrand]

Hasn't Patterson written a suspect book about Thompson before? Back in the late 90s, maybe?

[Karl]

Hasn't Patterson written a suspect book about Thompson before? Back in the late 90s, maybe?

I don't think Patterson has written on it before. Amazon certainly only has the one booklisting on him, "Francis Thompson & the Ripper Paradox", published November 2014. However, on his website, he mentions a 1988 article in the Criminologist by a Dr. Joseph C. Rupp.

[Shaggyrand]

"Thompson, an English poet, was suggested as the Ripper by author Richard Patterson in the 1999 book Paradox."

^From Casebook's Thompson page. My memory still works! (Sometimes!)
Looks like he has written at least one other, The Story of Jack the Ripper- A Paradox. I'm not sure if the third title is the same as the original book or a different one with a similar title, PARADOX: UPON JACK THE RIPPER POETRY AND FRANCIS JOSEPH THOMPSON. I assume its a different book. Found an archived page on Ripper books about when I searched.

[Karl]

"Thompson, an English poet, was suggested as the Ripper by author Richard Patterson in the 1999 book Paradox."

^From Casebook's Thompson page. My memory still works! (Sometimes!)
Looks like he has written at least one other, The Story of Jack the Ripper- A Paradox. I'm not sure if the third title is the same as the original book or a different one with a similar title, PARADOX: UPON JACK THE RIPPER POETRY AND FRANCIS JOSEPH THOMPSON. I assume its a different book. Found an archived page on Ripper books about when I searched.

I'm impressed. Based on this information, I found out that this book was privately printed, with a very limited distribution (and apparently, unless it's a typo, only 20 pages long). Which would explain why there was no Amazon listing.

[Shaggyrand]

I'm impressed. Based on this information, I found out that this book was privately printed, with a very limited distribution (and apparently, unless it's a typo, only 20 pages long). Which would explain why there was no Amazon listing.

Groovy. The page I found had some links but they were all dead so I just had the titles.

[Whitechapel]

This is my debut post, so hello everybody. I will enjoy reading the book and seeing what evidence he has. Of course you could put arguments out for half of London or more to be the Ripper and they can all be knocked down. What you are looking for is the best fit for the evidence, but without a suspect being caught red handed, dna evidence or an informant, it all boils down to what suspect you prefer as your guess is as good as mine. However, it does move the debate forward and keeps the subject alive.

[Rosella]

Hi Whitechapel and welcome to the forum. Of course you are correct, the Whitechapel murders will almost certainly never be solved. However, debating the how's, whys and wherefores is definitely part of the fun and interest of it.

[Richard Patterson]

My books have gone through different incarnations since 1997. You wil find some versions free to read if you trawl through the net. Last year I wrote a horror novel on the theory that Thompson was the Ripper. (Francis Thompson and the Ripper Paradox) This currently sells on Amazon and although in reading it, you will learn heaps about Thompson, most might find it too expensive. My new book (Francis Thompson - A Ripper Suspect) is only at Manuscript stage and will be available as a book when I secure a publisher and have it looked at by a good editor. While the 2014 novel is chiefly concerned in providing a strong narrative and biography of Thompson, the new book will be non-fiction and be aimed at sharing all that 20 years of research can do to show what makes him a strong candidate for the Ripper.

My website for the book is designed as an online book proposal.

http://www.francisjthompson.com/

It also has a detailed breakdown of the contents of the planned book and a history of the theory in newspaper reports, reviews and articles I have written for the Whitechapel Journal and the Ripperologists. BTW I have written to casebook a few times asking if I could update my very early summary on Thompson in their suspects section, but nobody has ever responded. Here is the summary, much like what i would suggest.

-----

The theory began in 1988, on the centenary of the murders, when the article titled, 'Was Francis Thompson Jack the Ripper?’ came out in the Criminologist. The writer was, forensic pathologist, Dr Joseph C Rupp, M.D., Ph.D. He was the Medical Examiner for Nueces County, Texas.

Further research shows Thompson, whose fame grew soon after the murders, lived in Whitechapel. He was there when all the prostitutes were murders. It is true too that on the night that the 5th victim, Mary Kelly was killed, he could look from the room that had his bed, to the covered passage, that led to the room that had her bed. Supposedly, Mary Kelly and Thompson stayed at the same address. A friend of his is believed to have said Thompson and Mary were friends.

Thompson was ex-medical school student, who kept a dissecting knife under his coat. He was also taught a rare surgical procedure that was found in the mutilations of the victim. Before the murders and after the murders he was writing about killing prostitutes with knives. His alibi for being in Whitechapel was that he was seeking out a prostitute who had jilted him.

Prior 1888, he had showed signs of religious mania, pyromania and the urge to mutilate females. He had a nervous breakdown, being in trouble with the police, had became a drug addict, been rejected by the priesthood, failed six years of medical school, kicked out of the, army, and fired from his jobs at a medical instruments factory and shoemaker.

The editor, who rescued Thompson from homelessness in Mid-November 1888, had a keen interested in the Ripper murders. He tightly controlled Thompson’s finances and the poet, who was hardly known in his lifetime, lived the life of a hermit. After Thompson died, his editor altered and destroyed much of Thompson’s personal papers.

[Karl]

Thompson was ex-medical school student, who kept a dissecting knife under his coat. He was also taught a rare surgical procedure that was found in the mutilations of the victim.

Hi, Richard;

Could you elaborate on these, please?
1. What sort of dissecting knife
2. What surgical procedure
3. On which victims

And as a follow-up questions: if all these were known at that time, why did no one think to associate Francis Thompson with the murders?

[Richard Patterson]

Hi, Richard;

Could you elaborate on these, please?
1. What sort of dissecting knife
2. What surgical procedure
3. On which victims

And as a follow-up questions: if all these were known at that time, why did no one think to associate Francis Thompson with the murders?

Hi Karl;

1- A dissecting scalpel.
2- Detailed partly already Casebook. Virchow.
3- Kelly (Also partly detailed on Casebook) and others too but you will have to wait for my book.

Followup: Nobody knew Thompson at the time, most probably thought he had died a vagrant. His editor had gotten to know him only recently and then had learned only a little bit about him.

Thanks for the interest Karl

[Karl]

Hi Karl;

1- A dissecting scalpel.
2- Detailed partly already Casebook. Virchow.
3- Kelly (Also partly detailed on Casebook) and others too but you will have to wait for my book.

Followup: Nobody knew Thompson at the time, most probably thought he had died a vagrant. His editor had gotten to know him only recently and then had learned only a little bit about him.

Thanks for the interest Karl

Thank you for taking the time to answer. However:

1) The knife used on the victims was larger than a scalpel. A scalpel would certainly be big enough to kill, but not effectively. And we know the knife or knives used were bigger.
2) The best I could find was removal of organs by cutting through membrane... pretty vague. There is nothing to suggest that the killer followed or imitated a surgical procedure when doing this. If I wished to remove someone's heart, I'd cut through the pericardium as well. Looking at pictures of the pericardial sac, it strikes me as obvious that I'd want what's inside the sac, and not the sac itself:

http://bio.sunyorange.edu/updated2/comparative_anatomy/anat.html1/Pericardium_files/21o.jpg

http://www.fmv.ulisboa.pt/atlas/cardiovascular/imagens/Pericardite%20supurada%20suino%20fig_058.JPG

In fact, to cut out the heart with the pericardium looks like it would entail more work, and more precise cutting.
3) I am unfamiliar with Virchow's technique, but I get the impression that it concerns mainly the removal of the heart - and MJK was the only victim whose heart was removed. And even here, I see no indication that a surgical procedure was used to do so.

And also, if no one knew Thompson at the time, how do we know he carried a knife with him? Someone knew, or we wouldn't.