Jack the Ripper At Last? by Helena Wojtczak

[HelenaWojtczak]

Hi, Helena,
Congratulations on your new book. When I asked, I suspected that might be the case. Sure can't blame you for taking care of your readers.
Velma

Thank you Velma!

Helena

[curious]

Yes that is exactly what I think happens, Velma.

My new suspects are named in my book, which has only just been published and most people on here haven't received their copy yet... don't want to spoil it for them!

Helena

Hi, Helena,
Congratulations on your new book. When I asked, I suspected that might be the case.

Sure can't blame you for taking care of your readers.

Velma

[HelenaWojtczak]

I understand. We get so wrapped up in what little information we do have we try to make choices based only upon surviving information and we forget that much has been lost over the years. Or perhaps was never presented to the authorities in the first place.

Are you willing to share your other "new" suspects? or is that perhaps another book?

Velma

Yes that is exactly what I think happens, Velma.

My new suspects are named in my book, which has only just been published and most people on here haven't received their copy yet... don't want to spoil it for them!

Helena

[curious]

Well I DO suggest two more Ripper suspects that nobody seems to have suggested before, but not in a zealous way.

But what I really meant was, sometimes on this board people seem to be assuming that the Ripper MUST have been someone who was described by an eyewitness. They seem to forget that the Ripper may well not have been seen by anyone who gave a description to the police.

Helena

I understand. We get so wrapped up in what little information we do have we try to make choices based only upon surviving information and we forget that much has been lost over the years. Or perhaps was never presented to the authorities in the first place.

Are you willing to share your other "new" suspects? or is that perhaps another book?

Velma

[HelenaWojtczak]

Thanks, Helena,

Because I knew of your research, I had hoped it might be something tangible I would like to know about. I (and probably lots of folks) have lots of the other "insights", "feelings" or beliefs that are cumulative from everything.

curious

Well I DO suggest two more Ripper suspects that nobody seems to have suggested before, but not in a zealous way.

But what I really meant was, sometimes on this board people seem to be assuming that the Ripper MUST have been someone who was described by an eyewitness. They seem to forget that the Ripper may well not have been seen by anyone who gave a description to the police.

Helena

[curious]

No great academic insight, Curious, I'm just sayin'....

Thanks, Helena,

Because I knew of your research, I had hoped it might be something tangible I would like to know about. I (and probably lots of folks) have lots of the other "insights", "feelings" or beliefs that are cumulative from everything.

curious

[HelenaWojtczak]

Hi, Helena,
There are times that I suspect the same thing. I would love to hear how you arrived at that conclusion – if you don't mind sharing.

curious

No great academic insight, Curious, I'm just sayin'....

[Amanda Sumner]

Hi Amanda,

Actually I would probably be appalled by such a connection, but have to accept it. More than likely (this is my opinion) the Ripper probably never married, as he would have worried what if his wife and in-laws discovered his secret. But he might have had collateral relatives through siblings or cousins - much like the actor Joseph Cotten in Hitchcock's "Shadow of a Doubt", who is known as "good old Uncle Charlie" to his sister's family when he visits them, but is actually a serial killer of wealthy women. And notice that when his niece (Theresa Wright) finds out, he plans to cause her "accidental" death.

I had ancestors who were British, from Birmingham, but my mother's grandfather left England in 1885-87 and settled in New York City. He and his wife married during the Blizzard of 1888 here, so I don't think he was the Ripper.

On the other hand I might be related to an earlier killer who I have noticed had a similar last name to my father's family name, and who (in some pictures of him) looks a bit like me. If so, he was not someone to be proud of. I will leave it at that.

Jeff

I agree that there is less likely to be direct descendants related to the Ripper running around although it's not impossible that he had a wife and family.
Your comment about you possibly being related to an earlier killer is interesting and that is where you and I are different because I would have to find out, if, indeed there was any suggestion like that in my family.
I've done my family tree, by no means complete, but some of it goes back to 1762. I've disabused the notion that we were ever related to THE Stephenson family, which was a rumour passed down the generations, or a connection to the Royal family, which was another one. I did find out our connection to unfortunate Maud and a connection to a convict that was sent to Australia. I have yet to find out what his crime was. I've also come across some colourful characters, like my x2 grandmother who managed to have 5 illegitimate children and then finally married later on in her life.
Do we have to be proud of our ancestors? I am already appalled by JtR's crimes, as I am of Chapman's, both were evil in their own ways, one driven by power and the other, possibly by madness or hatred but neither of those traits change how future descendants have led their lives since. It's a myth, IMO, and illogical to believe that bad blood is passed down.

[Mayerling]

You seem to lead an interesting life, Mayerling, and have met lots of interesting people over the years.
Certainly these connections to famous, or infamous, people will crop up at times, I suppose. Earlier in this thread we were discussing the possible reactions of one who finds out that they are related to JtR, if the case should ever be solved.
How do you think you would feel?

Hi Amanda,

Actually I would probably be appalled by such a connection, but have to accept it. More than likely (this is my opinion) the Ripper probably never married, as he would have worried what if his wife and in-laws discovered his secret. But he might have had collateral relatives through siblings or cousins - much like the actor Joseph Cotten in Hitchcock's "Shadow of a Doubt", who is known as "good old Uncle Charlie" to his sister's family when he visits them, but is actually a serial killer of wealthy women. And notice that when his niece (Theresa Wright) finds out, he plans to cause her "accidental" death.

I had ancestors who were British, from Birmingham, but my mother's grandfather left England in 1885-87 and settled in New York City. He and his wife married during the Blizzard of 1888 here, so I don't think he was the Ripper.

On the other hand I might be related to an earlier killer who I have noticed had a similar last name to my father's family name, and who (in some pictures of him) looks a bit like me. If so, he was not someone to be proud of. I will leave it at that.

Jeff

[Amanda Sumner]

You seem to lead an interesting life, Mayerling, and have met lots of interesting people over the years.
Certainly these connections to famous, or infamous, people will crop up at times, I suppose. Earlier in this thread we were discussing the possible reactions of one who finds out that they are related to JtR, if the case should ever be solved.
How do you think you would feel?

[curious]

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

Helena

Hi, Helena,
There are times that I suspect the same thing. I would love to hear how you arrived at that conclusion – if you don't mind sharing.

curious

[Mayerling]

I initially started this thread to discuss Chapman and his crimes and also the newly published book on that very subject by Helena Wojtczak. We deviated from the initial topic and covered a variety of subjects, which was great, but what has come across, quite forcefully, is that any discussion of Chapman invariably leads to an in-depth discussion of Jack the Ripper and his crimes. I know, that if it was not for the fact that Abberline thought he had finally found his man, Chapman may well have disappeared into obscurity after a few years. However I feel that Chapman's story is an interesting one in its own right, whether he is a strong suspect or not. When I first discovered that my grandmother's cousin was a poison victim of Chapman's, I searched to find out more about it all and have only been able to read about his crimes in his relation to being a Ripper suspect. ...

I have been fascinated by historical continuities and family connections for decades, and occasionally on this website I have commented on possible odd connections. As I was reading Amanda's comments about Maud and her connection to her, I was thinking of how in recent years some of the descendants of the Ripper's victims (Annie Chapman's for instance) have reappeared. And not only the victims. Recently a book has been published by a descendant of "H.H.Holmes" as well.

It is inevitable that such contacts happen to exist. When I was at college I met a young woman who was descended from one of the Salem "witches". A close personal friend of mine had an ancestor killed in Pennsylvania in the 1820s. And in public school ("sixth grade" in the U.S.) I knew the grandson of President Venustiano Carranza of Mexico, who was assassinated in 1920.

You have to keep in mind that everyone who ever lived (that we are aware of) lived on this planet. So such contacts are inevitable.

Recently I attended a reading of a screenplay regarding the massacres and murders of Jews in the Ukraine in 1918-1920 when that country was trying to gain and keep it's independence from the Soviet Union. I mentioned to the author of the play (who was an old high school friend of mine) that my cousin's grandfather was murdered in the Ukraine in 1919, apparently robbed by some unknowns who might have been Cossacks, or soldiers (of which side?), or just thieves. But it happened in that very area that his screenplay was dealing iwith.

Jeff

[HelenaWojtczak]

[HelenaWojtczak]

That's great Abby, and I really hope you'll write a review on Amazon.

Cheers

Helena

[Abby Normal]

Many thanks Abby. Have you ordered one yet?



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/

Hi Helena
Thank you for the respone and your explanation.

I have not ordered yet but most certainly will, probably when the paperback is available and after the holidays. Very much looking forward to it.