Francis Thompson. The Perfect Suspect.

[Richard Patterson]

Richard,

Post 54 doesn't show any such thing, it suggests it. In order for you to be sure of your facts you would have to know the exact whereabouts of Thompson for the whole of his vagrant period.

You put Walsh forward as a reliable source, but he says Thompson was in hospital from October to December, 1888.

And as I mentioned previously, although it was run by the Sisters of a Mercy, the refuge was non-sectarian, so Thompson's Catholicism would not have given him any advantage.

MrB

Why should I need to know his whereabouts throughout his whole vagrancy period to be know where he was in November 1888. He certainly could not have been in Providence Row before that November. Of course his Catholicism would have given him an advantage. non-sectarian or not. Their own websites starts with these words,

‘Our history as a Catholic charity We were founded in 1860 as a Catholic charity by a priest, Father Daniel Gilbert, who was moved by the poverty he saw around him. He enlisted the help of an order of nuns, the Sisters of Mercy, and together they raised funds and found premises in East London which opened on to a narrow lane called Providence Row. Over the last 150 years we have changed in many ways but we continue to value our Catholic roots and links with the church'

Do you seriously think that they would not have been predisposed to help Thompson a one time Catholic seminary student and altar boy, whose father was a Catholic lay healer, whose sister was a nun, whose family friends were all Catholic priests, whose editor was the publisher of Catholic magazine?

http://www.providencerow.org.uk/our-history-catholic-charity

[MrBarnett]

John Evangelist Walsh wrote in 1967 biography on Thompson, “Strange Harp, Strange Symphony the Life of Francis Thompson,” that Thompson was staying in Providence Row. Walsh is one of the foremost experts on Thompson with access to personal notes, archives, unpublished letters, and private notebooks. Walsh’s sources were copious and trusted. Most of the Preface to his book is devoted to thanking the people and organizations that gave him access to personal papers and related documents. He also interviewed people who knew Thompson. The circumstances of Thompson’s homelessness and the events surrounding it would hardly have been treated lightly. Providence Row was run expressively for Catholics with limited beds. It is more than likely that Thompson sought refuge with people of his faith. Such things as him being a newly published poet and writer in a respectable Catholic magazine, him being an ex-seminary student, and connections he had to priests in London, who were friends of the family, would have guaranteed entry to Providence Row. A place where Thompson would have felt protected. I myself have been to Boston College to the Burns library that holds many of Thompson’s notes and letters. It was there that I attained information that he would walk nights on Mile End Road in the East End. The Providence Row information from Walsh comes from Thompson’s manuscript, “Catholics in Darkest England”. This was an essay, using the Salvation Army’s shelters as an example foe why Catholics should follow suit, providing more shelters for Catholic vagrants.

As post #54 shows the facts point to Thompson being in Providence Row in the first half of November 1888. This puts him as living less than 100 meters from Kelly when she was murdered. Thompson has been established a suspect for decades. Now this 2015 deduction placing him in the radius of the murders adds more weight to the bulk of circumstantial evidence that seem to show he was the Ripper.

Richard,

Post 54 doesn't show any such thing, it suggests it. In order for you to be sure of your facts you would have to know the exact whereabouts of Thompson for the whole of his vagrant period.

You put Walsh forward as a reliable source, but he says Thompson was in hospital from October to December, 1888.

And as I mentioned previously, although it was run by the Sisters of a Mercy, the refuge was non-sectarian, so Thompson's Catholicism would not have given him any advantage.

MrB

[Richard Patterson]

Hello Richard,

Thanks for this, very interesting. I don't know if you've raised this before, but the fact that he was a poet, and may have appeared to be well-dressed, also seems to me to be of some significance. The evidence seems to suggest that the victims were enticed to go with their killer to pre-planned locations. Moreover, when they were attacked they seem to have been completely taken by surprise: Kelly may well have been asleep, suggesting that the killer was able to put them at their ease.

It seems to be that a well-dressed poet would have come accross as reassuringly disarming and unthreatening, even charming; the very antithesis of a stereotypical knife-wielding maniac.

I like your insight. I have brought this up before. On another thread I wrote in part, '...What if the listener was a fearful Whitechapel woman, who had been taught to fear a brutish butcher or strong tattooed foreign sailor for the murders in the East End? I pictured a poor, scared prostitute walking fearfully and desperately through the night. I pictured her jump momentarily when she is tapped on the shoulder only to be greeted by the voice of poet who smiling asks if she would like to hear a poem...' You make an astute observation which I can also see.

[Richard Patterson]

Richard,

From what I have read, it would appear that the Providence Row Refuge was non-sectarian, and operated each year between November and May.

Given that, according to Walsh, Thompson was living in Chelsea in March, April and May of 1888 and was in hospital during November, 1888, I can't see how the time he may have spent at the refuge has any direct relevance to the Whitechapel Murders.

MrB

As post #54 shows the facts point to Thompson being in Providence Row in the first half of November 1888. This puts him as living less than 100 meters from Kelly when she was murdered. Thompson has been established a suspect for decades. Now this 2015 deduction placing him in the radius of the murders adds more weight to the bulk of circumstantial evidence that seem to show he was the Ripper.

[MrBarnett]

John Evangelist Walsh wrote in 1967 biography on Thompson, “Strange Harp, Strange Symphony the Life of Francis Thompson,” that Thompson was staying in Providence Row. Walsh is one of the foremost experts on Thompson with access to personal notes, archives, unpublished letters, and private notebooks. Walsh’s sources were copious and trusted. Most of the Preface to his book is devoted to thanking the people and organizations that gave him access to personal papers and related documents. He also interviewed people who knew Thompson. The circumstances of Thompson’s homelessness and the events surrounding it would hardly have been treated lightly. Providence Row was run expressively for Catholics with limited beds. It is more than likely that Thompson sought refuge with people of his faith. Such things as him being a newly published poet and writer in a respectable Catholic magazine, him being an ex-seminary student, and connections he had to priests in London, who were friends of the family, would have guaranteed entry to Providence Row. A place where Thompson would have felt protected. I myself have been to Boston College to the Burns library that holds many of Thompson’s notes and letters. It was there that I attained information that he would walk nights on Mile End Road in the East End. The Providence Row information from Walsh comes from Thompson’s manuscript, “Catholics in Darkest England”. This was an essay, using the Salvation Army’s shelters as an example foe why Catholics should follow suit, providing more shelters for Catholic vagrants.

Richard,

From what I have read, it would appear that the Providence Row Refuge was non-sectarian, and operated each year between November and May.

Given that, according to Walsh, Thompson was living in Chelsea in March, April and May of 1888 and was in hospital during November, 1888, I can't see how the time he may have spent at the refuge has any direct relevance to the Whitechapel Murders.

MrB

[John G]

When Francis Thompson was a child, he complained the right to own a doll. Of one doll in particular he would write, 'With another doll of much personal attraction, I was on the terms of intimate affection, till a murderous impulse of scientific curiosity incited me to open her head, that I might investigate what her brains were like. The shock which I then sustained has been a fruitful warning to me, I have never since looked for a beautiful girl's brains. The United States serial killer Edmund Kemper III killed ten people and he told of how he justified his vile acts, 'it is more or less making a doll out of a human being...Taking life away from them.’' The theme of childhood acts of mutilation against dolls is echoed in Kemper. During one Christmas, when Kemper III was a child, his grandparents gave his sister a doll. It vanished only to be found by the sister decapitated and handless.

I believe you already know of Thompson’s history of fire-starting, but for those who don’t I will restate it: Thompson had a habit of setting fire to buildings. The occasions he did so is recorded in many biographies on Thompson. One 1988 biography, ‘Between Heaven and Charing Cross’ by Bridget M Boardman will tell you on page 20 that Thompson twice set a church on fire. The first time, as an altar boy, he did so by stealing the candle lighters job and starting a blaze at the church altar. Yet again, because of an argument on what robes he wanted to wear, he spun the incense-burning thurible over his head, round and round with such force that he again set the church alight. He got into the local newspaper for that arson attack describing how he sent the crowd into a ‘general panic’ Again he would start a fire by kicking over a lamp in a room he was lodging in. He fled the burning house leaving his landlady sleeping inside. When asked why he did not awake her and left her to burn to death his response was, ‘A house on fire is no place for tarrying.’ He would also start a fire in his editor’s house by leaving his smoking pipe lit in the pocket of his coat which he had left hanging on a hook.

Hello Richard,

Thanks for this, very interesting. I don't know if you've raised this before, but the fact that he was a poet, and may have appeared to be well-dressed, also seems to me to be of some significance. The evidence seems to suggest that the victims were enticed to go with their killer to pre-planned locations. Moreover, when they were attacked they seem to have been completely taken by surprise: Kelly may well have been asleep, suggesting that the killer was able to put them at their ease.

It seems to be that a well-dressed poet would have come accross as reassuringly disarming and unthreatening, even charming; the very antithesis of a stereotypical knife-wielding maniac.

[Richard Patterson]

Hello Richard,

As I've noted before, I find it extremely relevant that Thompson started fires as child: 56% of serial killers have a history of setting fires as children: see https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...0fires&f=false

Did you also say that he had a history of committing mutilations?

When Francis Thompson was a child, he complained the right to own a doll. Of one doll in particular he would write, 'With another doll of much personal attraction, I was on the terms of intimate affection, till a murderous impulse of scientific curiosity incited me to open her head, that I might investigate what her brains were like. The shock which I then sustained has been a fruitful warning to me, I have never since looked for a beautiful girl's brains. The United States serial killer Edmund Kemper III killed ten people and he told of how he justified his vile acts, 'it is more or less making a doll out of a human being...Taking life away from them.’' The theme of childhood acts of mutilation against dolls is echoed in Kemper. During one Christmas, when Kemper III was a child, his grandparents gave his sister a doll. It vanished only to be found by the sister decapitated and handless.

I believe you already know of Thompson’s history of fire-starting, but for those who don’t I will restate it: Thompson had a habit of setting fire to buildings. The occasions he did so is recorded in many biographies on Thompson. One 1988 biography, ‘Between Heaven and Charing Cross’ by Bridget M Boardman will tell you on page 20 that Thompson twice set a church on fire. The first time, as an altar boy, he did so by stealing the candle lighters job and starting a blaze at the church altar. Yet again, because of an argument on what robes he wanted to wear, he spun the incense-burning thurible over his head, round and round with such force that he again set the church alight. He got into the local newspaper for that arson attack describing how he sent the crowd into a ‘general panic’ Again he would start a fire by kicking over a lamp in a room he was lodging in. He fled the burning house leaving his landlady sleeping inside. When asked why he did not awake her and left her to burn to death his response was, ‘A house on fire is no place for tarrying.’ He would also start a fire in his editor’s house by leaving his smoking pipe lit in the pocket of his coat which he had left hanging on a hook.

[John G]

Hello Richard,

As I've noted before, I find it extremely relevant that Thompson started fires as child: 56% of serial killers have a history of setting fires as children: see https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...0fires&f=false

Did you also say that he had a history of committing mutilations?

[Richard Patterson]

29 Hanbury Street & Thompson.

In 1896 Thompson’s stepmother, Ann Richardson would not let Thompson into the house in the days leading to the funeral of his father. Thompson had to seek shelter in a nearby monastery instead. She had convinced his late father, to cut him out of the will. It was because Thompson had discovered his father Charles was going to marry Richardson that a fight occurred, on the night of November 9 1885. It led to Thompson fleeing to London. Charles Thompson accused his son of being a drunk, even though his strange behavior and flushed face was because of laudanum. His son Francis Thompson expressed hostility to the idea of his father remarrying replacing their mother with Richardson. Thompson stormed off and that night wrote a note telling he was leaving, and crept out of the house. He walked to Manchester where he asked his father to wire money for a train fare to London. During the next three, years when he was homeless, he returned home once, only to find out that his father and Richardson had set a date to be married. She saw him as a good-for-nothing freeloader. He was not invited to the wedding because of Ann Richardson's loathing of him.

The 2nd Ripper victim’s name was Ann and she was killed the back of a house whose front sign read, 'Mrs A. Richardson.’

[Richard Patterson]

Was Francis Thompson almost arrested for the Ripper Murders?

There are some similarities that show that Thompson may have been Major Henry Smith’s Haymarket suspect, During the Ripper murders the papers suggested that the criminal was using coins to confuse his victims. The ‘Telegraph’, a daily paper, made reported that next to Chapman's body, in Hanbury Street,
'There were also found two farthings brightly polished and according to some, these coins had been passed off as half-sovereigns upon the deceased by her murderer.'
The “Daily Telegraph” would add that the coins, two polished farthings, were found placed neatly near to the head, side by side. There were also two brass rings (owned by Chapman) similarly placed side by side. These and other ritualistic features of the crimes, such as the positioning of the bodies have left researchers perplexed. These details were not reported on in the inquest into Chapman’s murder. Either they did not happen and the papers were making things up, or the police did not divulge it.
The paper’s account of the murderer supposedly confusing his victims with polished coins of changing value is interesting in that Thompson near the time of the murders also had his own experience with coins whose value changed. For Thompson’s the nights and days of torment in hunger and addiction appeared endless and then a minor miracle occurred. He was walking, more to keep warm than in any particular direction, along a crowded street when heard a clinking sound and saw a coin rolling in the gutter. He watched as it weaved itself about the feet of the passing pedestrians and revolved to a stop. Thompson picked it up and because no one approached him to claim it, he kept it. Believing that the coin was a newly minted halfpenny, Thompson put it in his waistcoat pocket and walked on. Then he decided to turn back the way that he had come. When Thompson reached the same spot where he had found the first coin, he saw another coin glittering on the road. Thompson, thinking that it was another halfpenny, picked it up as well. He looked at the coin in his hand and saw a golden sovereign. Francis took the first coin from his pocket and when he held both coins together, he saw that they were both gold. Everard Meynell recorded, in his "Life of Francis Thompson", the homeless poet's reaction to the finding of the equivalent of two pounds, which was equivalent to a fortnight’s working wage,
'"That was a sovereign too, Evi; I looked and saw that it was a sovereign too!" he ended with a rising voice and tremulous laughter.'
Biographer of Thompson J.C Reid expressed Thompson’s love of ritual. 'Certainly he was always fascinated by ritual…’ritual is poetry addressed to the eye….he found in ceremonial an end in itself rather than a means, that the rite was at least as important, as perhaps more important than, the creed.’ FBI Criminal profiler told of the Ripper’s obsession with ritual, ‘However, the personal desires and the needs of the subject are expressed in the ritual aspect of the crime. The ritual is something that he must do because it is the acting out of the fantasy.'
In the 1888, the Acting Police Commissioner for the City was Major Henry Smith. In his 1910 memoir, ‘From Constable to Commissioner,’ Smith wrote, ‘There is no man living who knows as much about the murders as I do.’ Written 22 years after the crimes, Ripperologists chide Smith’s boast because his memoirs show mistakes in how he described some events. Smith’s memoir told that he had learnt through his informants of an ex-medical student living in Haymarket who was passing off coins to Prostitutes. Smith had also read further reports on this. Smith’s informants tracked down a suspect for the crimes, who was living in London’s Haymarket district. Major Smith felt this man certainly had the qualifications. He had been a medical student, he had been in a lunatic asylum; he had spent all his time with women of loose character, whom he tricked by giving them polished pennies, like those reportedly found with Chapman's body, but the man explained his circumstances and his innocence and Smith’s men let him go. Smith officers had questioned the man when they found him in Rupert Street, Haymarket. Less than a hundred meters was Panton Street. This was where Francis Thompson resided from August 1886 to January 1887. He had been found wandering the streets and hired by a shoemaker and churchwarden who offered him a job and accommodation. The shoemaker had checked Thompson’s criminal history with the police before hiring him. Both Haymarket people, Smith’s suspect and Thompson, were ex-medical students, had mental breakdowns, and their own stories about mysteriously changing coins. Perhaps Smith’s man was Thompson, but his alibi of working for a churchwarden and being an ex-priest and a doctor’s son convinced the Major of his good character. Perhaps it was Smith’s letting him go that Thompson was referring to in his notebooks, written while on the streets, ‘Policeman who aided me’ That Thompson may have questioned for the Ripper murders is supported by his biographer John Walsh, who wrote that the police might have interviewed him over the crimes but let go. FBI profiler Douglas also stated that he thought the Ripper would have been questioned but he would have talked his way out of it.

[Amanda]

You know. I grew up in Benalla which is the town 10 kilometers from Glenrowan where Ned Kelly was captured. I used to go mushroom picking with my mum on the old Kelly homestead. I should have been researching him, not the Ripper on the other side of the world.

Now that's much more rational thinking Richard

[Richard Patterson]

You know. I grew up in Benalla which is the town 10 kilometers from Glenrowan where Ned Kelly was captured. I used to go mushroom picking with my mum on the old Kelly homestead. I should have been researching him, not the Ripper on the other side of the world.

[Amanda]

Visiting Oz

Now Ned you will get as many opinions as there are people.

But if you are gonna write a book on him you have to come down under as any excuse is a good excuse to visit.

Hi Gut,

I was over there about five years ago & thoroughly enjoyed my trip, stayed at a lovely place called Palm Cove near Cairns.

I'll definitely be back, but in the meantime I'm busy doing boring old legwork researching my next literary offering.
Amanda

[GUT]

Good Morning Pinkmoon,

I trust it IS morning with you as I checked your location!

Based on the significant lack of legwork required to write a JtR book I'm now thinking of embarking on a work about Ned Kelly.
However, I will neither travel to Australia nor pick up the phone to call people who might be able to assist my research....

Amanda

Now Ned you will get as many opinions as there are people.

But if you are gonna write a book on him you have to come down under as any excuse is a good excuse to visit.

[Amanda]

Morning

Good Morning Pinkmoon,

I trust it IS morning with you as I checked your location!

Based on the significant lack of legwork required to write a JtR book I'm now thinking of embarking on a work about Ned Kelly.
However, I will neither travel to Australia nor pick up the phone to call people who might be able to assist my research....

Amanda