The Jack the Ripper Mystery is Finally Solved — Scientifically

[Mike J. G.]

Fair points I just don't see Chapman changing from what Jack did with mutilation etc to be a calculating poisoner. I think Bury a much stronger suspect than Chapman. For various reasons not least the fact he performed post mortem mutilation on his wife.

Yeah I don't really disagree too much, tbh. I doubt Chapman was the man. I think it was a lot easier before the boom in behavioural science research to accept that a poisoner could well be a mutilator as well, and I definitely don't think Abberline was naive in thinking it could have been Chapman, he was wrong for the right reasons, IMO, if that makes sense.

[John Wheat]

Yeah I don't really disagree too much, tbh. I doubt Chapman was the man. I think it was a lot easier before the boom in behavioural science research to accept that a poisoner could well be a mutilator as well, and I definitely don't think Abberline was naive in thinking it could have been Chapman, he was wrong for the right reasons, IMO, if that makes sense.

I'd agree with that Mike. I don't think Chapman was the Ripper but I wouldn't go as far as to say he definitely wasn't. I make no secret in my belief that Bury was the Ripper. However if it was proved he wasn't I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.

[Paddy Goose]

I know the person who posted this on a Facebook group has written a book on Francis Thompson and I'm not sure if he frequents here...

Yes that person posted here before. And he started several threads. About his suspect.

This thread has become instead a gathering place on the top line of Casebook Forums for each poster to mention their favorite suspect. And I think we know who the "usual suspects" who do that sort of posting are.

It's like Pavlov's Dogs.

[Doctored Whatsit]

I am having major problems taking this thread seriously, sorry!

I realise that research into Thompson's life produces slightly different information, and slightly different dates according to the source, but this is the information I had, and why I totally rejected him as a potentially serious suspect -

As to the alleged medical expertise frequently quoted here, my version is that he enrolled at St Bartholomew's Hospital, but was there only a few months, attended a handful of lectures, and never progressed beyond the introductory phase, and left because of poor health and opium addiction.

He found one or two low paid clerical jobs, and wrote some of his early poetry, but his poor health and addiction resulted in him becoming a vagrant for about three years. His ability as a poet was recognised by Wilfred Meynell, who "rescued" him and chose to rehabilitate him. Thompson was said to be so weak after three years of vagrancy, ill health and his addiction, that it was thought that he might die, but a few weeks in hospital organised by Meynell saved him, although his poor health remained until he died aged only 48. With regard to him allegedly living right on the doorstep of the murders, Meynell found him a simple flat in St Giles-in-the-Wood, Oxfordshire, where he lived, close to Meynell himself. His health was said to be so poor that he needed regular medical attention which Meynell arranged. The Times reported him as still being at St Giles in early 1889.

Therefore, I don't think that he had any medical expertise, I don't believe he was in London during the Autumn of 1888, and I don't believe he was anywhere near fit enough to be JtR.

I don't doubt that someone will claim that there is a more reliable source that said that his medical training was very advanced, that his health was really good, and that he was living in the East End in the Autumn of 1888, but I don't believe it.