Jack the Ripper At Last? by Helena Wojtczak

[Amanda Sumner]

Yes, thinking about it, certainly Annie was led into the yard at Hanbury street so we can assume that the man seen with her was Jack because she was killed, it seems, not long after she was last seen. It is very unlikely, but not impossible, that after 'biff boffing', as Sam calls it, with a client she is then killed minutes later by someone else. Shame that he was only seen from behind.
As for language, I don't think a foreigner would find the words 'Will you?' difficult to say and it's possible that they may have been the only words he needed to say. How much small talk did one need unless they knew each other?
Obviously, not all the men seen by witness's were the killer. Most were just clients, and no, I think it very unlikely that they would have come forward.

[Observer]

You seem to be saying that, whoever the Ripper was, he MUST have been one of the blokes that one of the eyewitnesses saw, and, ergo, that if a suspect does not fit ANY of their descriptions, he cannot have been the Ripper.

My take on this is that the Ripper could have been, and almost certainly was, someone that none of the witnesses saw.

Who did Lawende see?

[Observer]

Evening observer,I'm not talking about a fleeting glimpse I'm saying maybe someone saw our killer at his grisly work or actually disturbed him in the act.

Hi Pinkmoon

With regard to obtaining a good description of the murderer, what difference would that make? If the killer was disturbed in the act of murder do you think he would have remained at the scene? If he was busy at his mutilation, then the witness would not get a clear view of him anyway.

I'm quite sure it did not occur.

Regards

Observer

[Observer]

Well, I think I would find it fascinating, certainly interesting but I would not be horrified, I don't think.
As a family member of one of Chapman's victims I feel sorry and have empathy for what the poor girl went through but I accept that is what happened and is part of my family history. If it was ever proved that I was related to JtR I think I would react in the same way, as far as I would not feel responsible for crimes that I had not committed but would accept that that was a very interesting part of my family tree.
At least, that's how I think I would react. How would you?

Hi Amanda

I certainly wouldn't have a fascination, or find it interesting should I discover that I was related to JTR. Certainly disturbed, I wouldn't want to publicise the fact.

Regards

Observer

[pinkmoon]

Abby, do you really think anyone saw the ripper?

I've often wondered if the men that the witness's saw may have been just potential clients interested in the ladies...Could our Jack have been hiding and attacked the women from behind? It is possible, is it not, that the Ripper was never seen?
Just a thought....

Someone must have seen something however would a witness who was up to no good themselves go to the police.

[Patrick S]

Abby, do you really think anyone saw the ripper?

I've often wondered if the men that the witness's saw may have been just potential clients interested in the ladies...Could our Jack have been hiding and attacked the women from behind? It is possible, is it not, that the Ripper was never seen?
Just a thought....

My two cents. I don't think all of the witnesses saw the Ripper, but one of them probably did. My guess is that it was the guy in Hanbury Street.

[Sam Flynn]

I'm sure the chap was not discussing those things with either Annie or Catherine but I'm sure that any lack of the English language did not prevent a foreigner to convey what he did want with these women, so that puts an end to the argument, really, that Chapman, or anyone else, can be dismissed on the grounds of his age or lack of communication skills.

I don't think it does, Amanda. Fleeting though the glimpses afforded to the witnesses were, there's a distinct impression of a more-than-basic exchange of words between the Ripper and his victim. Take (Annie) Chapman, for example: what preceded the Ripper's "Will you?" and her reply. I bet it was something more involved than "Me... you... biff-boff in yard, yes?"

[HelenaWojtczak]

Hi Helena
Again, congrats on your book.

Many thanks Abby. Have you ordered one yet?

I have always thought Chapman a viable suspect, but have difficulty getting around the fact that none of the witnesses describe a suspect with an accent.... Whats your take on this? Are there any other explanations to the language/accent barrier?

You seem to be saying that, whoever the Ripper was, he MUST have been one of the blokes that one of the eyewitnesses saw, and, ergo, that if a suspect does not fit ANY of their descriptions, he cannot have been the Ripper.

My take on this is that the Ripper could have been, and almost certainly was, someone that none of the witnesses saw.

Helena

http://s1130.photobucket.com/user/helena1958/slideshow/

[Amanda Sumner]

Therefor either none of these witnesses saw the ripper (which i highly doubt), or Chapman was not the ripper.

Whats your take on this? Are there any other explanations to the language/accent barrier?

Abby, do you really think anyone saw the ripper?

I've often wondered if the men that the witness's saw may have been just potential clients interested in the ladies...Could our Jack have been hiding and attacked the women from behind? It is possible, is it not, that the Ripper was never seen?
Just a thought....

[Abby Normal]

I know :-)

Levisohn was a Polish Jew who came to England in 1862, when he was a young teenager. He was for many years a hawker of hairdresser's supplies in east London.

Chapman came to England 1887 or 1888 and would not have learned any English before coming here (unless he engaged a private tutor whilst in Poland, which I think highly unlikely).

Polish children in his part of Poland were fluent in Russian and Polish, and knew differing levels of Yiddish, depending on how much contact they had with the large Jewish population. Chapman was apprenticed to a Jew, so if he didn't know a lot of Yiddish at age 14 he would have done by age 19.

Helena

Hi Helena
Again, congrats on your book.

I have always thought Chapman a viable suspect, but have difficulty getting around the fact that none of the witnesses describe a suspect with an accent. Long, marshall, schwartz, Lawende, hutchinson all heard the suspect speak so obviously the suspect knew English and an accent must have stuck out, yet none mention it. Not even any of the peripheral witnesses like Best and Gardner, Mrs Fiddymont etc.

Therefor either none of these witnesses saw the ripper (which i highly doubt), or Chapman was not the ripper.

Whats your take on this? Are there any other explanations to the language/accent barrier?

[Amanda Sumner]

Just wanted to pick up on what Amanda wrote (above).

When my book "Jack the Ripper at Last" was getting close to being finished, about 4 months ago, I received an email out of the blue from a woman who had only just found out that she was George Chapman's great grand-daughter.

It had come as an enormous shock to her, and her niece, who also contacted me. They had absolutely no idea. Chapman's two grandsons had changed their family surname back in the 1950s and 1960s, swapping Polish for English names.

The way they found out was, someone offered to do their family tree, and using the usual official records on Ancestry found her way to Seweryn Klosowski... and someone on another tree had named him as AKA George Chapman.

What a way to find out! The two family members then did internet searches, and found out the horrible truth about Chapman's murders. One of the sites they found was mine, and they emailed me.

Both have just bought copies of my book. Of course when writing I had no idea if any of his descendants would read the book, and it's making me feel a little weird too, knowing they will be reading not only about the three murders but about the speculation about his libido and his performing illegal abortions. If this had been MY g-grand-dad, I am not sure I would WANT to know all this stuff.

Helena

Both have bought copies of your book Helena, so they must be interested in reading about their ancestor, and I'm sure that they are already aware that it will not be all comfortable reading, knowing already that he was a murderer. They also got in touch with you, wanting to know more so, even as they were initially shocked, they do find the subject intriguing.
As I do. Even if the story is sad or shocking, reading about members of your family is interesting and brings to life people on your tree that would otherwise just be faceless names on paper.

[Amanda Sumner]

Actually he was 22 during the Ripper murders. His birthday was in December.

Helena

Of course he was. Maths has never been a strong point of mine!

Looking forward to reading your book, Helena!

Kind Regards,

Amanda

[HelenaWojtczak]

George Chapman was only 23 years old in 1888.

Actually he was 22 during the Ripper murders. His birthday was in December.

Helena

[HelenaWojtczak]

The photo on Helena Wojtczak's book cover was taken, I believe, at his arrest when he was, what, about 38 years old? .

He was 36, Amanda, nearly 37.

His birthday is coming up soon, in fact - 14th Dec 1865....

Helena

[HelenaWojtczak]

Hi Sam,

But do we know whether Wolff himself could speak English at that time? Certainly he could later when in court but if he also only spoke Yiddish and Polish in 1889ish then he would only have conversed in those languages.
regards,

I know :-)

Levisohn was a Polish Jew who came to England in 1862, when he was a young teenager. He was for many years a hawker of hairdresser's supplies in east London.

Chapman came to England 1887 or 1888 and would not have learned any English before coming here (unless he engaged a private tutor whilst in Poland, which I think highly unlikely).

Polish children in his part of Poland were fluent in Russian and Polish, and knew differing levels of Yiddish, depending on how much contact they had with the large Jewish population. Chapman was apprenticed to a Jew, so if he didn't know a lot of Yiddish at age 14 he would have done by age 19.

Helena