Leaving Aside the "Name Issue"

[Richard Patterson]

Richard, this is fiction, that you're writing about me. Honestly, you're maddening at times.

I think your suspect is an ewcellent one, I've been saying that for how long? Certainly a better one than many, for compelling circumstantial evidence.

Last I was present here, you were bravely standing on the prow of the "Saints' Day" aspect of your theory, as it slowly sank toward Davy Jones. These other claims and their logical inferences (that Thompson may have peering out his window at Mary Kelly) would be critically important to your case, IF they weren't just join-the-very-sparse-dots suppositions.

I was hoping their condition had improved. Is all. No need to be snotty.

Hi Ausgirl. How are you? I hope you are well.Thank you for putting a smile on my face. I certainly wouldn't be wanting to tell stories so thanks for correcting me on the fiction. Because this thread is not about you know who and I wouldn't want to derail it, I am being careful to not bring up logic, inferences, or suppositions here. Saints be praised for books huh? I am welcome to argue finer points on a FT thread of course.

All the best.

Richard.

[Ausgirl]

Move a derailment to an existing thread?? Outrageous!

Of course, and I shall do, forthwith.

[harry]

Richard,
I believe there were many sensible investigators around in 1888,why do you think your candidate was overlooked?

[Richard Patterson]

Richard,
I believe there were many sensible investigators around in 1888,why do you think your candidate was overlooked?

Hi Harry,

A very sensible question about sensible investigators. It is the first question I would be asking about this suspect. It is an important and I spend the beginning of my book addressing it. If I can provide here briefly a three part answer.

1-In 1888 hardly anyone even knew that a then homeless Thompson was even alive. His fame did not reach its height until many years after his death.

2- Also there is some suggestions that he may have been questioned by the police. In 1967, a biographer of Thompson, the esteemed historian John Walsh, thought that Thompson might have been a suspect questioned by the City Police in Rupert Street, Haymarket. In the footnote on this in his biography, ‘Strange Harp Strange Symphony. The Life of Francis Thompson’ Walsh wrote.

‘During the very weeks he was searching for his prostitute friend, London was in an uproar over the ghastly deaths of five such women at the hands of Jack the Ripper… The police threw a wide net over the city, investigating thousands of drifters, and known consorts with the city’s lower elements, and it is not beyond possibility that Thompson himself may have been questioned. He was, after all, a drug addict, acquainted with prostitutes and, most alarming, a former medical student! A young man with a similar background and living only a block away from McMaster’s shop [a Panton Street Shoemakers that Thompson worked in for a time] was one who early came under suspicion,’

3- Why did no one think Thompson was Jack the Ripper? The drive to reform the image of Thompson, even in later 1888, was in full swing. Typical of the almost Christ like qualities that his editors bestowed on Thompson can be seen in this article that came out months after his death in 1907, from the ‘The Stylus’, 1 March 1908.

‘there died quietly in a London hospital a man of the rarest genius…The poet relates how the anatomy classes so sickened him that he never attended them after the first day. Instead of studying medicine, he spent his whole day in the public libraries…To have felt and loved Francis Thompson's poetry is one of those spiritual gains in our life which, come what may, can never be lost entirely. He was rather a soul, a breath, than a man. It is the mind of a woman in the character of a child, so that we feel for him less admiration than tenderness and gratitude. Francis Thompson has done the world an inestimable good, if the world will but recognize it, for he has succeeded in cloaking all things with the divine presence, and so vividly that we can almost see God in our midst. Truly a miracle was performed by this poet inspired of the Holy Ghost, "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.’

Anyone reading this might feel, even if they knew he lived within yards of one of the murders, carried a dissecting scalpel, had several years of training in surgery and was on the streets looking for a prostitute that dumped him, it could not possibly have been a poet. They might have thought he he only wrote about cutting into prostitutes with a knife and disembowelling them.

You can read more about the possible cover up in this recent news article about my book and theory that appeared in the Northern Echo.

http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/14423107.Was_Jack_the_Ripper_a_failed_priest_from_ Durham/

[Columbo]

The choice is yours Columbo: you don't have to read it.

Best regards.

Judging by hoe this thread got hijacked, I'm not the only one who followed your suggestion.

[Richard Patterson]

Sorry no more FT here. Promise. I would be happy to talk about Lechmere and escape routes from Buck's Row though or discrepancies in the documentary about him

[curious]

I think all have merit, if people don't start up with arrogant willy-swinging, with the wild and mostly baseless claims and the like.

Ausgirl

Thanks so much for the proper and historically accurate name for much of what is mucking up the threads.

I knew there was a correct name for it, just had not encountered it yet.

You've added to my vocabulary and I appreciate it.

:-) x 10

[Abby Normal]

Hi Harry,

A very sensible question about sensible investigators. It is the first question I would be asking about this suspect. It is an important and I spend the beginning of my book addressing it. If I can provide here briefly a three part answer.

1-In 1888 hardly anyone even knew that a then homeless Thompson was even alive. His fame did not reach its height until many years after his death.

2- Also there is some suggestions that he may have been questioned by the police. In 1967, a biographer of Thompson, the esteemed historian John Walsh, thought that Thompson might have been a suspect questioned by the City Police in Rupert Street, Haymarket. In the footnote on this in his biography, ‘Strange Harp Strange Symphony. The Life of Francis Thompson’ Walsh wrote.

‘During the very weeks he was searching for his prostitute friend, London was in an uproar over the ghastly deaths of five such women at the hands of Jack the Ripper… The police threw a wide net over the city, investigating thousands of drifters, and known consorts with the city’s lower elements, and it is not beyond possibility that Thompson himself may have been questioned. He was, after all, a drug addict, acquainted with prostitutes and, most alarming, a former medical student! A young man with a similar background and living only a block away from McMaster’s shop [a Panton Street Shoemakers that Thompson worked in for a time] was one who early came under suspicion,’

3- Why did no one think Thompson was Jack the Ripper? The drive to reform the image of Thompson, even in later 1888, was in full swing. Typical of the almost Christ like qualities that his editors bestowed on Thompson can be seen in this article that came out months after his death in 1907, from the ‘The Stylus’, 1 March 1908.

‘there died quietly in a London hospital a man of the rarest genius…The poet relates how the anatomy classes so sickened him that he never attended them after the first day. Instead of studying medicine, he spent his whole day in the public libraries…To have felt and loved Francis Thompson's poetry is one of those spiritual gains in our life which, come what may, can never be lost entirely. He was rather a soul, a breath, than a man. It is the mind of a woman in the character of a child, so that we feel for him less admiration than tenderness and gratitude. Francis Thompson has done the world an inestimable good, if the world will but recognize it, for he has succeeded in cloaking all things with the divine presence, and so vividly that we can almost see God in our midst. Truly a miracle was performed by this poet inspired of the Holy Ghost, "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.’

Anyone reading this might feel, even if they knew he lived within yards of one of the murders, carried a dissecting scalpel, had several years of training in surgery and was on the streets looking for a prostitute that dumped him, it could not possibly have been a poet. They might have thought he he only wrote about cutting into prostitutes with a knife and disembowelling them.

You can read more about the possible cover up in this recent news article about my book and theory that appeared in the Northern Echo.

http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/14423107.Was_Jack_the_Ripper_a_failed_priest_from_ Durham/

Hi Richard
Ive always been intrigued by FT. Is there anything in the case files(or even the papers) that even mention him and/or is there anything other than he lived in the area that definitively ties him at all to the case?

Also, When did he write about cutting up prostitutes? Before the ripper killings, during or after? If before that's more interesting because it shows he might have had the fantasy first. if after, perhaps he was just "inspired" by them?

[Patrick S]

Could it be simply that Mizen, in his own mind, took the term "you're wanted in Buck's Row" to mean a "policeman wanted him"?

At the inquest, Mizen claims that the carman (Cross) told him that he was wanted by a policeman in Buck's Row. Further, Cross is asked (by a juryman) if told Mizen that he was wanted in Buck's Row by a policeman. Cross said that he didn't, as he saw no policeman in Buck's Row. So, I think it's clear that Mizen claimed that he was told that a policeman wanted him in Buck's Row.

And at the time he heard "dead and drunk", would not necessarily be a reason to immediately drop everything and run there.....

I completely agree. I think that's Mizen's point. If he's told ONLY that the woman is lying in Buck's Row then it's understandable that he did not rush to the scene, or even act with any urgency whatsoever. Paul's statement, which appeared the day prior to Mizen's testimony, made issue of Mizen's rather laconic attitude. That attitude is understandable if he had only been told that a woman was lying in the street (maybe drunk, but not dead), AND that another policeman was on scene. This tells Mizen that the situation is being addressed (by the other PC) and that it's not very serious (not having been told the woman is likely dead).

You know, "a woman dead with her throat cut" would have been different.

Both Cross and Paul stated they didn't see wounds or blood due to the darkness. However, both said that they told Mizen they thought she was dead. Mizen disagrees.

Remember both Paul and Cross "thought" she may be dead as a result of an "outrage", not a vicious murder. And where did the "drunk" come from anyway? Did they smell drink on her?

They may have smelled drink. We know that Nichols has been drinking. Emily Holland stated that she was drunk just over an hour before her body was found. As well, I think it was likely a reasonable assumption (that she was drunk and had passed out). It is likely also the reason Mizen didn't rush to the scene. Drunk men and woman lying unconscious on the street in that part of town was - in all likelihood - far more common than dead bodies lying about.

So I think maybe Mizen quoted what he "thought" he heard, and as both Paul and Cross confirmed they didn't say that, it was merely him being human.

Absolutely possible. I to not wish to ascribe any malevolence to Mizen. I doubt there was sinister intent. Just a human reaction to soften the view some may take of his actions (and the Met as a whole), which were inappropriate only when the true nature of the situation was revealed. Had Nichols been lying there drunk, his actions would never have been questioned.

On a general note not directed at anyone, I don't think we should expect all the witnesses to remember exactly what they said or did. There has to be some leeway given to human error and weaknesses. We don't all have a photographic memory, and the same with what we have said in the past. Some people can remember exactly word for word, others won't. So I have come to the realisation that trying to forensically dissect everything said probably leads no-where.

See comments above bold.

[wigngown]

Curious and Ausgirl,

'arrogant willy-swinging' - is probably the funniest thing I've ever read on here. Lol.

Best regards.

[curious]

Ain't it just?

From now on, whenever I wander across one of those endless, page-after-page examples of aws, I can just say, "more aws" and move right along with a smile.

[Richard Patterson]

Hi Richard
Ive always been intrigued by FT. Is there anything in the case files(or even the papers) that even mention him and/or is there anything other than he lived in the area that definitively ties him at all to the case?

Also, When did he write about cutting up prostitutes? Before the ripper killings, during or after? If before that's more interesting because it shows he might have had the fantasy first. if after, perhaps he was just "inspired" by them?

Hi Abby.
No, I have found nothing in any newspaper or case file that mention him in connection to the case. Although there are suggestions that he may have been questioned and was a suspect, these are made by biographers after his death in 1907. My book does detail these. It also details that his editor, the one who rescued him from the streets on about November 15th 1888, and placed in hospital and then the monastery, held an intense fascination of the Whitchapel murder investigation. The editor, Wilfrid Meynell, followed the press reports and updated his colleagues on the latest news and constructed his own theories to who might be the murderer.
Francis Thompson wrote about killing prostitutes before the murders. Here is an extract from my book that discusses this.
____
In his 1988 book, Francis Thompson, Strange Harp Strange Symphony, Chapter 3, The Gutters of Humanity, John Walsh wrote:

‘The most painful of these poems was The Nightmare of the Witch Babies, never revived in a fair copy. But in the last of the notebook drafts, he added a reminder, rare for him, of the date of its completion: “Finished before October 1886” – that is within a year of his departure from home.'

____
You can also read a detailed overview of the theory in the following article which appeared in the Ripperologist. It discusses his poem.

http://www.francisjthompson.com/arti...t-october.html

This is another extract from my book about his poem. The fact that it was written before the murders is very interesting indeed.
____
There is probably no poem that came out of the 19th century to contend with its unbound revelry for carnage and bloodshed. It provides an awful glimpse into Thompson’s mind and shows that finally the years of solitude, the riot faced by his family, the seeming wickedness of his stepmother, the cruel loss of his mother, all had unhinged him. With the ‘Witch Babies’ his full depravity and abandonment of morality is revealed. It shows his rage against women who abandon and betray him. The poem begins with the protagonist; a ‘lusty knight’ on a hunt, but he hunts in London, after dark and his game is women.

A lusty knight,
Ha! Ha!
On a swart [black] steed,
Ho! Ho!
Rode upon the land
Where the silence feels alone,
Rode upon the Land
Rode upon the Strand
Of the Dead Men's Groan,
Where the Evil goes to and fro
Two witch babies, Ho! Ho! Ho!
A rotten mist,
Ha! Ha!
Like a dead man's flesh,
Ho! Ho!
Was abhorrent in the air,

As he rides through a desolate landscape of the metropolis, the knight catches sight of a suitable prey.

‘What is it sees he?
Ha! Ha!
There in the frightfulness?
Ho! Ho!
There he saw a maiden
Fairest fair:
Sad were her dusk eyes,
Long was her hair;
Sad were her dreaming eyes,
Misty her hair,
And strange was her garments’

Soon he begins to stalk her.

‘Swiftly he followed her
Ha! Ha!

Eagerly he followed her.
Ho! Ho!;’

But then she disappoints him. He discovers she is unclean.

‘Lo, she corrupted!
Ho! Ho!

The knight captures her and decides to kill her. He slices her open and drags out the contents of her stomach. He guts her like an animal in order to find and kill any unborn offspring she may have. The poem ends with a macabre twist and his rapture at not finding not just a single foetus but two.

‘And its paunch was rent
Like a brasten [bursting] drum;
And the blubbered fat
From its belly doth come
It was a stream ran bloodily under the wall.
O Stream, you cannot run too red!
Under the wall.
With a sickening ooze –
Hell made it so!
Two witch-babies,
ho! ho! ho!’

The entire poem, contains phrases like ‘the bloody-rusted stone’, ‘blood, blood, blood’, ‘No one life there, Ha! Ha!’ and ‘Red bubbles oozed and stood, wet like blood’, has a plot which reads like the description of a slaughterhouse. Anyone who know poets always ever rely solely on imagination does not know Thompson. To him, his poetry were records of real events in his life, clothed in rhyme and symbolism. In a letter, years later, to his editor, this is how Thompson explained that his poetry was always more fact than fiction, ‘The poems were, in fact, a kind of poetic diary; or rather a poetic substitute for letters.’{Poems.p436]

_____
Thank you for your interest,
Richard.