Tweet
Is Thompson the Ripper in Three Questions.
Here’s a simple, testable way to cut through 137 years of fog. I’m inviting anyone—skeptics first—to run three neutral prompts with any mainstream AI and post the outputs (with sources) here. No theatrics, no priors. Just compare texts, timelines, and suspects.
The three questions:
1. Compare documented features of the 1888 Whitechapel murders with Francis Thompson’s poetry (choose a standard piece, The Hound of Heaven (1888), and a darker work).
2. Ignore his writings; compare the murders to Thompson’s life only (training, locations, associates, state of mind, and cessation).
3. Compare Thompson head-to-head with any popular suspect (Kosminski, Druitt, Chapman, Tumblety, etc.) and pick the stronger match to the crimes themselves.
Run it straight. Ask for overlaps and non-overlaps, for citations, and for a placement on a clear suspect-strength scale. Most AIs, when they actually verify facts and align them with the crime pattern, will rank Thompson as a top-tier—often prime—suspect. If yours doesn’t, press it to check sources and match claims to the record.
Replicate the steps, share the transcripts, and let the evidence speak.
——-
Notes.
Question One.
“Compare the Jack the Ripper murders to Francis Thompson’s poetry.”
This will work with most of the poems of Francis Thompson. I suggest any standard poem, his most well known poem and one of his darker poems.
——
Eg,
“An Arab Love-Song
The hunchèd camels of the night
Trouble the bright
And silver waters of the moon.
The Maiden of the Morn will soon
Through Heaven stray and sing,
Star gathering.
Now while the dark about our loves is strewn,
Light of my dark, blood of my heart, O come!
And night will catch her breath up, and be dumb.
Leave thy father, leave thy mother
And thy brother;
Leave the black tents of thy tribe apart!
Am I not thy father and thy brother,
And thy mother?
And thou—what needest with thy tribe's black tents
Who hast the red pavilion of my heart?”
——
This first poem is also a great one to test if your Ai is “Covering up” the murders by clinging to entrenched popular belief or if it critically examines a poem without bias. If your Ai answers that it sees “nothing” in An Arab Love Song that shows Francis Thompson is the Ripper, then it is refusing to follow instructions. Even a casual reader will spot basic comparisons. Eg, The murders happened in the dark, the victims were prevented from crying out. In this case, you will have to ‘nudge’ the Ai to look harder.
——
Question Two.
“Compare the Jack the Ripper murders to Francis Thompson’s life.”
Some people think that Francis Thompson is a Jack the Ripper suspect only by interpreting his poetry. Another way to phrase this question is.
“If we ignore everything that Francis Thompson has ever written, what about Francis Thompson’s life shows he was Jack the Ripper?
If the Ai answers“nothing” then it has not even looked the basic facts, eg, He studied as a surgeon for 6 years, and was living in London. You will have to tell it to take a closer look.
——
Question Three.
“Compare Francis Thompson to any other popular Jack the Ripper to suspect and choose which one is the strongest suspect.”
If the Ai answers that Aaron Kosminski is the strongest suspect then it is not verifying the facts. The first being that there was no mention of the name Kosminski in relation to the murders until after they occurred and even if his naming is in doubt. The name Kosminski was obtained from an 1894 memorandum written by Sir Melville Macnaghten, the Assistant Chief Constable of the London Metropolitan Police. Only the surname was written meaning this Kosminski could have been any one of thousands of people in London at the time.
If the Ai answers Montague John Druitt then, it is not verifying the facts and ask why it thinks a failed barrister who was in Dorset, playing cricket on the day of Annie Chapman’s murder could have been Jack the Ripper.
Dorsett is 180 kilometres from London.
In 1888, travel between Dorset and London by railway had a journey time of between 3.5 to 5 hours by train (non-express routes, mixed stops).
The Ai will says that Druitt suspect, it’s only because he drowned in the Thames and then the murders stopped. He was found in the Thames in early December. Mary Jane Kelly was murdered on 9 November. Francis Thompson was already taken off the streets in mid-November, and then confined.
——
Suggested Support Materials.
For Question One:
How about comparing a detail of the ripper murders and the themes of the investigation to Thompson’s most famous poem. His 1888 (year of Ripper murders) poem, the Hound of Heaven.
It is worth noting Burgho and Barnaby were two bloodhounds used in a failed attempt to track Jack the Ripper in 1888. The Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Sir Charles Warren, brought them in after a public suggestion, but the plan was abandoned due to doubts about their reliability in the crowded, confusing streets of Whitechapel and public skepticism. Despite performing well in controlled trials, the hounds' potential usefulness in a real-world urban chase was questioned, and the idea was dropped.
Here are the opening lines of Thompson’s 1888 Hound Of Heaven poem.
“I fled Him, down the nights and down the days;
I fled Him, down the arches of the years;
I fled Him, down the labyrinthine ways
Of my own mind; and in the mist of tears
I hid from Him, and under running laughter.
Up vistaed hopes I sped;
And shot, precipitated,
Adown Titanic glooms of chasmèd fears,
From those strong Feet that followed, followed after.
But with unhurrying chase,
And unperturbèd pace,
Deliberate speed, majestic instancy,
They beat—and a Voice beat
More instant than the Feet—
‘All things betray thee, who betrayest Me.’
I pleaded, outlaw-wise,
By many a hearted casement, curtained red,
Trellised with intertwining charities;
(For, though I knew His love Who followèd,
Yet was I sore adread
Lest having Him, I must have naught beside).
But, if one little casement parted wide,
The gust of His approach would clash it to.
Fear wist not to evade, as Love wist to pursue.
Across the margent of the world I fled,
And troubled the gold gateways of the stars,
Smiting for shelter on their clangèd bars;
Fretted to dulcet jars
And silvern chatter the pale ports o’ the moon.
I said to Dawn: Be sudden—to Eve: Be soon;”
Thompson’s, The Nightmare of the Witch Babies was “Finished before October 1886” 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!’
[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 finding, not just a single foetus, but two.
‘And its paunch was rent Like a brasten drum;
[stomach was ripped like a 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’. It has a plot which reads like the description of a slaughterhouse. To Thompson, his poems were records of real events in his life, clothed in rhyme and symbolism. In a letter written 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]
——
Francis Thompson (1859–1907) was uniquely positioned to commit the Ripper crimes. He spent six years studying medicine at Owens College, repeating anatomy and performing dissections—precisely the skill set implied by the swift throat cuts, targeted abdominal work, and organ removals described in 1888 autopsies. Unlike clerks or barristers later floated as suspects, Thompson plausibly handled scalpels daily and, by multiple biographical accounts, still carried a dissecting knife during his London homelessness.
Place and time align. From roughly 1885 to late 1888, Thompson lived rough in and around the East End—missions, night refuges, and doss houses within walking distance of the murder streets. He mixed with prostitutes, including a woman who reportedly “saved” him and then disappeared from his life shortly before the killings. This matters: the victims were street-working women; their killer needed both nocturnal access and a way to engage without drawing notice. Thompson, an anonymous, underfed wanderer, fit the street ecology perfectly.
Psychology and physiology are congruent. In 1888 he was not sedated by laudanum; he was likely in withdrawal: sleepless, agitated, hypersensitive, and intensely religious. This is closer to the focused, night-stalking compulsion suggested by the signature than to a chaotic psychosis. His spiritual obsessions—purity, blood, pursuit, and redemptive suffering—permeated his private world before and after 1888.
Cessation aligns. The murders stop in November 1888; in that same window Thompson is “rescued” by Catholic patrons Wilfrid and Alice Meynell, taken off the streets, and placed under care and structure. Many suspects require death or imprisonment to explain the stop; Thompson’s timeline offers a clean, nonfatal switch that fits the historical halt.
There is also a compelling fit to a contemporary police description. In 1910 Major Henry Smith recalled a Rupert Street/Haymarket suspect with five rare traits: ex-medical student, asylum history, consorted with prostitutes, passed polished farthings (coin fraud), and lived in the Haymarket district. Thompson checks each: six years of medicine; treatment in a Catholic asylum; prostitute association; reported polished-farthings fraud; residence on nearby Panton Street (and continuing ties via Charing Cross). The conjunction of those uncommon markers in one man is extraordinarily unlikely; even conservative probability models render alternative matches vanishingly rare.
His poetry isn’t proof, but it exposes mindset. Before the murders, “The Nightmare of the Witch-Babies” revels in nocturnal pursuit and visceral disembowelment; in 1888 “The Hound of Heaven” frames relentless, righteous pursuit through “labyrinthine ways.” “An Arab Love-Song” entwines darkness, silencing, possession, and blood. These texts don’t convict; they show a longstanding inner fusion of eros, dominance, blood, and sanctity that mirrors the crimes’ psychological grammar.
Compared head-to-head with popular suspects: Kosminski offers locality but lacks surgical control; Druitt offers cessation by suicide but fails on anatomy and presence; Chapman is homicidal but his later poisonings diverge in motive and method; Tumblety was a misogynist showman, not a surgeon. Thompson is the only figure who simultaneously satisfies skill, access, psychology, and cessation without special pleading. Taken together—training, geography, state of mind, Rupert Street profile fit, and cessation—the convergence makes Thompson, on present evidence, the prime or best-possible explanation for the Whitechapel murders.
——
Here is a Suspect Strength Scale that can be used to describe the strength of a Jack the Ripper suspect.
Peripheral Mention – A name recorded in Ripper folklore or press rumor but lacking any substantive link. Present in the story, not in the evidence.
Possible Suspect – Shares broad circumstance such as time, gender, or geography. Could have done it in theory, but no mechanism or motive connects them.
Plausible Suspect – Displays several overlapping factors (location, opportunity, disposition). Worth inclusion in analysis, though still speculative.
Probable Actor – Their background and behavior fit the pattern consistently enough to narrow the field. Others start to fall away when compared.
High-Tier Suspect – Strong circumstantial or psychological alignment; only minor contradictions or gaps remain. A top-list candidate.
Prime Suspect – Multiple lines of evidence converge with little internal conflict. The case coheres around this individual better than any rival.
Principal Perpetrator (Working Hypothesis) – Treated as the offender for reconstruction or modelling until new evidence disproves it. A temporary stand-in for “guilty.”
Best-Possible Explanation – The person whose life, skills, and psychology most fully explain the crimes. Their story makes the pattern intelligible.
Beyond Any Reasonable Alternative – No competing theory fits the known facts more economically. As close to proof as the surviving record allows.
Historical Identification – The point of final acceptance: verifiable physical or documentary proof establishes guilt beyond rational doubt.
——
Francis Thompson is most likely to be the Rupert Street suspect described by Major Henry Smith, Acting Commissioner of the City of London Police during the Ripper investigation. Smith, in his 1910 memoirs From Constable to Commissioner, listed five specific characteristics of the man they tracked nightly through Rupert Street: he was an ex-medical student, had been in an asylum, consorted with prostitutes, passed polished farthings as sovereigns (a rare form of coin fraud), and lived in the Haymarket district. Thompson matches each of these with uncanny precision.
Step 1: Probability Thompson Was the Rupert Street Suspect
Each of these traits is rare. Based on historical estimates: • Medical student = 0.0005 (1 in 2,000) • Asylum history = 0.001 (1 in 1,000) • Consorted with prostitutes = 0.01 (1 in 100) • Coin fraud = 0.0001 (1 in 10,000) • Haymarket resident = 0.0001 (1 in 10,000)
Now multiply:
0.0005 × 0.001 × 0.01 × 0.0001 × 0.0001 = 0.00000000000000005
That’s: 0.00000000000000005 = 1 in 20,000,000,000,000,000 (20 quadrillion, 16 zeros)
⸻
Step 2: Add Traits That Match Jack the Ripper
Now consider these 5 additional traits Thompson also had: 6. Anatomical knowledge (medical training) = 0.0005 (1 in 2,000) 7. Opium addiction = 0.002 (1 in 500) 8. Violent or sacrificial poetry = 0.0005 (1 in 2,000) 9. Disappeared after final Ripper murder = 0.001 (1 in 1,000) 10. Lived in East London at time of murders = 0.001 (1 in 1,000)
Multiply these:
0.0005 × 0.002 × 0.0005 × 0.001 × 0.001 = 0.0000000000000005
Which equals:
0.0000000000000005 = 1 in 2,000,000,000,000,000 (2 quadrillion, 15 zeros)
Final Breakdown: • Probability that any man in London was the Rupert Street suspect: 1 in 20,000,000,000,000,000 (20 quadrillion, 16 zeros) • Probability that any man also matches Ripper traits: 1 in 2,000,000,000,000,000 (2 quadrillion, 15 zeros)
To increase the probability that the anyone other than Francis Thompson could be the ripper multiply the probability that he is the Rupert Street suspect to the fact that Thompson is already a known Rupert suspect for completely different reasons. for example.
Sources Consulted
• Population & demographic data: 1881 and 1891 UK Census records
• Medical student data: Royal College of Surgeons & Physicians, 1880s registers
• Asylum committal rates: Reports from the Lunacy Commission (1885–1890)
• Coin fraud anecdotes: Jack the Ripper case files; Major Smith’s memoir “From Constable to Commissioner”
• Biography cross-referencing: John Walsh’s Strange Harp, Strange Symphony (1967) and 1913 Francis Thompson by Everard Meynell
• Map analysis: Ordnance Survey maps of 1888 London, tracing Panton in Street, Rupert Street, and Charing Cross.
Statistical estimates derive from contemporary public records — notably the 1881 and 1891 UK censuses, Royal College of Surgeons and Physicians registers (1880s), Lunacy Commission reports (1885–1890), case references in Major Henry Smith’s From Constable to Commissioner (1910), Strange Harp, Strange Symphony (John Walsh, 1967), Everard Meynell’s Francis Thompson (1913), and Ordnance Survey maps of 1888 London tracing Thompson’s movements between Panton Street, Rupert Street, and Charing Cross.
——
Francis Thompson (1859–1907) was uniquely positioned to commit the Ripper crimes. He spent six years studying medicine at Owens College, repeating anatomy and performing dissections—precisely the skill set implied by the swift throat cuts, targeted abdominal work, and organ removals described in 1888 autopsies. Unlike clerks or barristers later floated as suspects, Thompson plausibly handled scalpels daily and, by multiple biographical accounts, still carried a dissecting knife during his London homelessness.
Place and time align. From roughly 1885 to late 1888, Thompson lived rough in and around the East End—missions, night refuges, and doss houses within walking distance of the murder streets. He mixed with prostitutes, including a woman who reportedly “saved” him and then disappeared from his life shortly before the killings. This matters: the victims were street-working women; their killer needed both nocturnal access and a way to engage without drawing notice. Thompson, an anonymous, underfed wanderer, fit the street ecology perfectly.
Psychology and physiology are congruent. In 1888 he was not sedated by laudanum; he was likely in withdrawal: sleepless, agitated, hypersensitive, and intensely religious. This is closer to the focused, night-stalking compulsion suggested by the signature than to a chaotic psychosis. His spiritual obsessions—purity, blood, pursuit, and redemptive suffering—permeated his private world before and after 1888.
Cessation aligns. The murders stop in November 1888; in that same window Thompson is “rescued” by Catholic patrons Wilfrid and Alice Meynell, taken off the streets, and placed under care and structure. Many suspects require death or imprisonment to explain the stop; Thompson’s timeline offers a clean, nonfatal switch that fits the historical halt.
There is also a compelling fit to a contemporary police description. In 1910 Major Henry Smith recalled a Rupert Street/Haymarket suspect with five rare traits: ex-medical student, asylum history, consorted with prostitutes, passed polished farthings (coin fraud), and lived in the Haymarket district. Thompson checks each: six years of medicine; treatment in a Catholic asylum; prostitute association; reported polished-farthings fraud; residence on nearby Panton Street (and continuing ties via Charing Cross). The conjunction of those uncommon markers in one man is extraordinarily unlikely; even conservative probability models render alternative matches vanishingly rare.
His poetry isn’t proof, but it exposes mindset. Before the murders, “The Nightmare of the Witch-Babies” revels in nocturnal pursuit and visceral disembowelment; in 1888 “The Hound of Heaven” frames relentless, righteous pursuit through “labyrinthine ways.” “An Arab Love-Song” entwines darkness, silencing, possession, and blood. These texts don’t convict; they show a longstanding inner fusion of eros, dominance, blood, and sanctity that mirrors the crimes’ psychological grammar.
Compared head-to-head with popular suspects: Kosminski offers locality but lacks surgical control; Druitt offers cessation by suicide but fails on anatomy and presence; Chapman is homicidal but his later poisonings diverge in motive and method; Tumblety was a misogynist showman, not a surgeon. Thompson is the only figure who simultaneously satisfies skill, access, psychology, and cessation without special pleading. Taken together—training, geography, state of mind, Rupert Street profile fit, and cessation—the convergence makes Thompson, on present evidence, the prime or best-possible explanation for the Whitechapel murders.
——
Timeline and Modus Operandi
• 1885–1888: Thompson is homeless in Whitechapel, carrying a dissecting scalpel, supported by a prostitute who vanishes before the murders.
• Aug–Nov 1888: The canonical five murders occur, each displaying anatomical skill.
• Nov 1888: Thompson enters hospital. The murders cease.
• 1889: In a letter, Thompson requests a razor, noting he had shaved previously with his scalpel.
The alignment of presence, opportunity, and cessation is exact.
——
Prior Research and Why the Thompson-Ripper Theory Was Buried.
John Walsh was a literary scholar and biographer who, in 1967, authored Strange Harp, Strange Symphony, the first major modern biography of the English poet Francis Thompson. Walsh gained exclusive access to Thompson’s original manuscripts, notebooks, lettrs, and personal papers, which allowed him to provide detailed insight into Thompson’s life, addiction, literary struggles, and periods of homelessness in London’s East End.
Walsh was meticulous and scholarly, situating Thompson within his historical context and exploring his poetic genius alongside his tragic personal challenges. His biography remains an important source for understanding Thompson’s complex character.
Within this authoritative biography, Walsh included a brief but highly significant footnote describing an eerie overlap: during the weeks of August–September 1888—coinciding exactly with the Jack the Ripper murders—Thompson was desperately searching for a prostitute friend in London’s East End. Walsh wrote:
“At this time (August-September, 1888) occurred the most bizarre coincidence in Thompson’s life. During the very weeks he was searching for his prostitute friend, London was in 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!”
Walsh deliberately did not highlight this coincidence as a central thesis of his biography, instead tucking it away in a footnote. The reasons appear to be:
• Social and political sensitivities of the 1960s, a time when accusing a beloved poet of possible serial murder—even indirectly—would have been controversial and career-jeopardizing.
• The emotional complexity of Thompson’s story, blending tragic genius, addiction, and urban despair, which Walsh treated with sympathy.
• A lack of conclusive evidence at the time to support the theory strongly enough for headline claims.
Thus, Walsh’s role was that of a careful scholar who recognized a critical clue but was constrained by the era’s social and academic taboos, relegating the “coincidence” to a subtle hint rather than a bold accusation.
The reason lay in the politics, emotions, and cultural sentiments surrounding Thompson’s legacy at the time. Thompson was revered as a tragic poetic genius, a Catholic figure whose reputation the literary world was eager to preserve. Associating him openly with one of the most horrific serial murderers in history would have been scandalous and controversial, threatening to overshadow his literary contributions and alienate sympathizers.
Thus, Walsh’s cautious handling reflected the sensitivities of the late 1960s literary and academic community, which was not yet ready to entertain the possibility that such a celebrated poet might also have been capable of violent crime. The combination of Thompson’s revered status, the stigma of addiction, and the notorious infamy of the Ripper murders made the suggestion deeply uncomfortable. This context explains why Walsh quietly tucked away this “remarkable coincidence” rather than making it a central thesis.
⸻
Joseph C. Rupp, M.D., Ph.D.: Forensic Pathologist and the First Public Proponent
Credentials and Expertise
Joseph C. Rupp is a distinguished American forensic pathologist with over fifty years of experience, having performed approximately 9,000 autopsies during his career. He holds both medical (M.D.) and doctoral (Ph.D.) degrees, grounding him in both clinical and research expertise.
His deep familiarity with anatomy, medical procedures, and crime scene analysis uniquely qualified him to assess the plausibility of suspects in historical murder cases.
How Rupp Became Involved with the Thompson Case
• In the 1960s, Rupp was drawn to the Ripper case out of professional and personal interest.
• Around the time of the Jack the Ripper centennial in 1988, he read Walsh’s biography of Thompson and the book by Tom Cullen, When London Walked in Terror, which connected elements of Thompson’s life with the murders.
• Noticing the striking overlap of medical knowledge, familiarity with London’s East End, mental instability, and drug addiction, Rupp independently concluded that Thompson fit the profile of the murderer better than many traditional suspects.
Rupp’s Analysis and Public Presentation
In 1988, Rupp published an article titled Was Francis Thompson Jack the Ripper? in The Criminologist, a respected UK journal devoted to criminology. Key points included:
• Thompson’s six years of medical schooling, possibly repeating the anatomy course thrice, meant he was highly skilled with surgical knives—knowledge necessary for the precise eviscerations of Ripper victims.
• The murderer performed eviscerations quickly, with dexterity, under poor light and stressful conditions, something Rupp deemed nearly impossible without medical training.
• Thompson’s drug addiction and mental instability provided motive and temperament.
• His hatred of prostitutes, chaotic personal life, and familiarity with the East End’s backstreets made him an ideal suspect.
• Rupp lamented that despite the strength of these connections, the article was met with silence, no letters, and little attention.
⸻
Other factors in why Thompson has been ignored as a suspect.
• Social stigma and literary reverence for Thompson made public speculation about his guilt controversial.
• The theory challenged established suspects and threatened comfortable academic narratives.
• Media and scholarly circles in the late 20th century tended to focus on more sensational or aristocratic suspects (e.g., Prince Albert Victor).
• Rupp’s article, despite its forensic authority, was published in a niche journal with limited circulation.
• The “wall of silence” from the Ripper research community and media meant that neither Walsh nor Rupp could bring the theory to mainstream attention.
⸻
The Cover-Up
Why has this not been recognized? Because Thompson was “rescued” by Catholic patrons Wilfrid and Alice Meynell, who promoted him as a saintly poet. They edited his biographies across five editions, removing references to prostitution, coin fraud, and mental instability. By canonizing him in literature, they buried the police profile that exposed him.
——
The Fallout to this Conclusion.
If the world were ever to settle on one definitive name for Jack the Ripper, we should almost hope it is not Francis Thompson.
Any other suspect—Kosminski, Druitt, or even a royal—would change little beyond the margins of crime history. It would tidy a mystery, affect book sales, museum tours, and film scripts, and life would move on.
But naming Thompson would rewrite more than the case. It would ripple through literature, religion, and even modern politics, because his words have already shaped the moral language of the modern world.
Thompson is not an obscure figure. His poetry—especially The Hound of Heaven—has influenced a century of thinkers and artists. In 1955, the U.S. Supreme Court quoted its phrase “with all deliberate speed” in the Brown v. Board of Education decision, the ruling that declared racial segregation in schools unconstitutional. The choice of those words—majestic but vague—allowed Southern states to delay desegregation for nearly a decade, prolonging suffering and resistance. Many historians now see that hesitation as a fracture that still runs through America’s racial psyche. If the author behind that phrase were proved to be Jack the Ripper, it would mean that one of the most sacred judgments in U.S. history was, in part, inspired by a murderer.
The consequences would reach further still. Thompson’s work helped to shape the moral imagination of giants: G.K. Chesterton, W.B. Yeats, T.S. Eliot, Ezra Pound, Robert Frost, Aleister Crowley, Coventry Patmore, and J.R.R. Tolkien. Tolkien admired him openly, saying he was “in perfect harmony with the poet.” Thompson’s coinage “Luthany” inspired Tolkien’s Lúthien; his use of “Southron” in At Lords reappears in The Lord of the Rings. Mahatma Gandhi kept The Hound of Heaven with him in prison, reading it during a 21-day fast against British rule. He later wrote to a friend: “Read The Hound of Heaven. Think over it and understand its meaning.” Martin Luther King Jr. quoted it in sermons between 1945 and 1950, using it to illustrate God’s pursuit of humanity. Thompson’s spiritual lexicon became woven into the rhetoric of global liberation and moral struggle.
Even D.H. Lawrence, hosted by Thompson’s editor Wilfrid Meynell at the poet’s former home, saw himself as inheriting that same prophetic fire: “We will be Sons of God who walk here on earth,” he wrote there. Thompson’s circle touched popes, prime ministers, philosophers, and mystics.
If Thompson was Jack the Ripper, the stain spreads backward through all that lineage. Every writer who quoted him, every teacher who made children memorize his verses, every movement that drew comfort from his imagery of divine pursuit—all of it becomes morally charged with the horror of five women butchered in Whitechapel.
It would not merely close a case. It would force the world to confront how easily civilization canonizes genius without seeing the blood beneath the words.
Solving the Ripper case is more than trivia. It reshapes criminology, proving that genius can coexist with psychopathy. It reshapes literature, forcing universities and churches to confront their idolization of Thompson. It transforms London tourism — a $50 million market in waiting. Most importantly, it honors the five women: Mary Ann Nichols, Annie Chapman, Elizabeth Stride, Catherine Eddowes, and Mary Jane Kelly. To leave this truth buried is to dishonor them. To speak it is to restore justice.
⸻
7. Comparison with Major Suspects
• Druitt: Educated but lacked anatomy or proximity; suicide fits timing only.
• Kosminski: Local but incoherent, incapable of methodical surgery.
• Chapman (Kłosowski): Medical assistant and killer, but murders for gain years later, different signature.
• Tumblety: Loud misogynist, no surgical precision, fled the city early.
• Thompson: Medical skill ✔ Location ✔ Anonymity ✔ Psychological motive ✔ Cessation ✔.
On circumstantial structure alone—without poetry or confession—Thompson matches more operational criteria than any of them.
Among the “canonical” suspects, none fit the killings as completely, across means, opportunity, and psychology, as Francis Thompson does. But let’s walk it cleanly.
Aaron Kosminski
• Profile: Polish-Jewish barber, local to Whitechapel, paranoid schizophrenic.
• Pro: Lived in the right area, deep misogyny reported by family, possible knife-handling.
• Con: Psychotic but disorganized; Ripper murders were methodical and controlled. No evidence he had anatomical knowledge or could vanish unseen after each attack. The later DNA claim on a shawl is unverified and statistically meaningless.
→ Likely incapable of the precision and restraint shown.
Montague John Druitt
• Profile: Educated barrister, died soon after last murder.
• Pro: Suicide timing fits cessation.
• Con: Nowhere near the scenes, no surgical skill, no evidence of sadistic or ritual impulses.
→ Chronology fits; psychology and geography don’t.
Michael Ostrog
• Profile: Russian conman, thief, fraudster.
• Pro: Violent tendencies, used aliases.
• Con: In prison during some murders; zero surgical background.
→ No credible linkage.
George Chapman (Szewram Klosowski)
• Profile: Polish barber-surgeon who poisoned his later wives.
• Pro: Knew anatomy; demonstrably homicidal; present in East End.
• Con: His killings were slow, domestic, profit-driven. The Ripper’s were sudden, compulsive, theatrical.
→ Technically capable, temperamentally different.
James Maybrick
• Profile: Liverpool cotton merchant; “diary” claims of guilt.
• Pro: Confession-style diary (of dubious authenticity).
• Con: Forensic and handwriting evidence collapse under scrutiny.
→ A literary hoax, not a suspect.
Dr. Thomas Neillen (Tumblety)
• Profile: American quack doctor, misogynist, arrested for indecency.
• Pro: Medical pretensions, hatred of women, was in London 1888.
• Con: A braggart, not a surgeon; fled arrest for unrelated offences.
→ Superficial resemblance to Ripper myth, not reality.
⸻
“But he was too high on drugs!” The Main Objection on Thompson’s Guilt.
Francis Thompson was a laudanum addict for years, but by the time of the Ripper murders he had stopped using. His editor and rescuer, Wilfrid Meynell, made him quit in mid-1888 — the same summer the murders began. So he wasn’t staggering around in an opium haze; he was in withdrawal, which is a completely different beast.
Opiate withdrawal doesn’t sedate you. It produces the opposite: insomnia, agitation, restlessness, hypersensitivity, nightmares, and even hallucinations. Victorian medical texts called this hyperaesthesia — the nerves set on fire. Thompson himself described heightened vision and sound and an almost unbearable nervous tension. It’s the kind of physiological state that can drive obsessive or even violent behaviour.
At the same time, his life was falling apart. He’d just lost his prostitute lover, was living rough around Spitalfields, and had abandoned medical school after being trained in dissection. He was sleep-deprived, religiously manic, and in constant torment. This was a man walking miles every day between Limehouse and Kensington to visit the Meynells, still writing essays and poetry that were later published. Clearly he was functional and mobile—but also volatile and sleepless.
So the image of a drowsy opium dreamer doesn’t apply to Thompson in 1888. He was more like a man electrically overcharged: lucid at times, but haunted, hyper-aroused, and possibly delusional. That mix of medical skill, religious mania, heartbreak, and physical torment is what makes him, in my view, one of the most viable psychological matches for whoever committed those killings.
———
Conclusions.
Five women died, and yet the man who may have killed them is still celebrated. It’s unjust that Francis Thompson—if he was Jack the Ripper—receives reverence instead of reckoning. His victims were poor, forgotten women who did nothing to him, while his name is printed in schoolbooks, wrapped in sanctity. Millions of children across the world are taught to admire his words, to read The Hound of Heaven as an act of spiritual beauty, unaware that those same hands might have torn living flesh in Whitechapel’s darkness.
Teachers tell their students to follow his life as a model of redemption—a fallen soul redeemed by faith and genius. They repeat this myth because his editors, the Meynells, crafted it. They purified him in print, deleting the sordid parts: the prostitution, the addiction, the madness. They sculpted a saint from a man who, if the evidence holds, should instead be remembered beside the women whose lives he ended.
It is not fair that the killer became a poet of grace while the women he slaughtered remain footnotes known only by how they died. It is not fair that his “divine pursuit” is taught as love, when perhaps it was obsession, bloodlust, and control disguised as theology. It is not fair that the world celebrates a man who may have hunted human beings and calls it holiness.
If Thompson truly was the Ripper, then every verse taught in his honor becomes a quiet erasure of those women’s screams. Every classroom that praises him repeats the same blindness that allowed him to walk free: worship of intellect over empathy, beauty over truth. Justice would mean seeing his poetry in full light—not as sacred revelation, but as the confession of a mind at war with itself, whose art was fed by horror. Until that reckoning comes, the balance between the killer and the killed will remain grotesquely reversed.
Comment