Francis Thompson and the Jack the Ripper Pattern Murder.

[Dane_F]

Just because people are not posting in those threads does not mean they aren't getting read. Thompson was not on my radar as recent as a few days ago. Since then I've spent numerous hours reading over those threads looking at the points for and against him. I personally feel he is a viable option. I don't post in those threads because I have nothing I can possibly add to them. Instead I read and think.

A thread like this does more harm than help your point with him I can promise you. People can find things in all types of stuff if they look hard enough, stetch reasonableness just enough, and wiggle truths just enough.

There was a man that years ago claimed there were hidden messages in the bible. Many people who challenged him said you can find messages in any book. So he issued them a challenge. Find the message of the birth of Jesus in Moby Dick. They found not only the message for the Birth of Jesus, but also foretelling Adolfo Hitler, and JFKs assassination.

Taking a sensational angle with your otherwise solid suspect does nothing but harm him. You might as well add Free Masons, the Prince, and the supernatural once you start going down this path.

You can't expect people to all agree on your suspect because you have no smoking gun. You have laid out a great case for how he fits the profile if only the canonical 5 were victims of JTR. But without being able to even tie him to Whitechapel the best he can be is a solid suspect. Hoping to have a "case closed" off of the evidence is just ridiculous. That's why people are continuing to discuss this case. There is no definitive proof for it being closed.

The worst crime is assuming your suspect is not being considered and that your information is not being read. It is. It's not being discussed because what more can be said until new evidence is found?

[Richard Patterson]

Richard,

What evidence is there that Thompson was in Whitechapel in the Autumn of '88?

I've only read Walsh and his take on it is that Thompson's spell in lodging houses was from late '87 to early '88. He was rescued from that life by his prostitute friend who took him to her flat in Chelsea for a few months, but then abandoned him once he had made contact with the Meynells. The suggestion is that it was a sacrifice on the girl's part, she did not want to get in the way of his literary career. Thompson does not seem to have borne her any ill will for leaving him.

Walsh has him searching for the girl in August and September, presumably in the West End and Chelsea, and finally giving up all hope of finding her in early October.

Has Walsh got his dates wrong? If not, I don't see Thompson as someone 'down on whores' and in Whitechapel between August and November '88.

Gary

First I am using terms carefully here so I used the words ‘most likely living in Whitechapel’. Walsh does not have his dates wrong. I have written a chronology of Thompson in 1888, and I’m happy to share it if you ask for it. To be brief, Canon John Carroll alerted Thompson to the publication of his first poem, in April 1888. This Catholic priest was a friend of the family, but until April 1888, did not keep in touch with Thompson. In June 1888, Thompson’s prostitute abandoned him and vanished. That same month Meynell paid Thompson for his poems and essay and offered to find him lodging, however Thompson refuse and insisted he stay on the streets. It is said he had given up hope of finding her in October, though he did not leave the streets until, at the least, the middle of November. It is true that Thompson was probably actively seeking his prostitute in the West End, but what points to Thompson staying at the Providence Row Shelter was that unlike other shelters, Providence Row, was a Catholic friendly shelter that restricted its clientele. If I may quote here the Casebook dissertation on this refuge,

‘The rules provided that "no vagrants, tramps or professional beggars should be admitted even for one night… All persons seeking accommodation were supposed to give the names of referees to whom inquiries could be made, and if the replies were unsatisfactory the applicant was told to leave.’

This only allowed for people who had some form of income. Providence Row was non-denominational, but the charity that ran it was the Catholic Sister’s of Mercy. His friend Canon Carroll, or fellow Catholic Wilfrid Meynell, who had worked as a volunteer himself at refuges, could have provided Thompson, an ex seminary student with a reference stating he was now employed as writer. In this case he would have been made most welcome at Providence Row. Thompson himself spoke highly of Providence Row in his essay on the life of St. Ignatius. To sum up, Thompson favored this refuge and it is likely he stayed there, at the time of the Whitechapel murders.

[MrBarnett]

Richard,

What evidence is there that Thompson was in Whitechapel in the Autumn of '88?

I've only read Walsh and his take on it is that Thompson's spell in lodging houses was from late '87 to early '88. He was rescued from that life by his prostitute friend who took him to her flat in Chelsea for a few months, but then abandoned him once he had made contact with the Meynells. The suggestion is that it was a sacrifice on the girl's part, she did not want to get in the way of his literary career. Thompson does not seem to have borne her any ill will for leaving him.

Walsh has him searching for the girl in August and September, presumably in the West End and Chelsea, and finally giving up all hope of finding her in early October.

Has Walsh got his dates wrong? If not, I don't see Thompson as someone 'down on whores' and in Whitechapel between August and November '88.

Gary

[Richard Patterson]

In this Jack the Ripper murder pattern thread. I have shown clearly and simply that by following the cardinal compass points from one murder to the next draws a figure 8, which in its most simple, two dimensional form would be displayed as two triangles meeting at their apex. I have also shown that this piece of symmetry is represented as the central motif for my suspect. For those who struggle with comprehension, I have included easy to follow diagrams and simple images. I have also demonstrated that my suspect proscribed to the compass directions as part of a theological evolution in religious worship. It would not matter if the pattern I were discussing was the Vesica Pisces, an hourglass, a wine glass, or the southern cross, or an arrow. If the shape could be found to match the ideals of a known Ripper suspect it should be investigated. Of course people can make many shapes by connecting the dots, but the point is the shape I have depicted has to do with my suspect. This alone does not prove he is the Ripper. He could have committed no crimes and at the most been inspired by a shape that can be represented in the crimes or it could be simply a coincidence. But to dismiss it readily without looking more closely at other aspects of this man is at the best the ‘silly angle’ rather than the scope of this thread

Dane_F wrote on post #30
‘Bring facts and evidence and I can promise you, people will take it far more seriously than this.’

No. I’m sorry, but I don’t believe on this site that facts and evidence are taken seriously. I think they are ignored. This is shown by my receiving no response for post #42 on the thread ‘Francis Thompson. The Perfect Suspect’. Post #42 details his medical training and the Virchow method of pathology in relation to the murders. Although showing the strongest connection of any suspect yet to the crimes nobody on Casebook has any real interest. I could write more on the things that mattered, such as how Thompson was most likely living in Whitechapel. Or that was carrying a knife. I could detail his strong motive by being rejected by a prostitute who he had a yearlong affair with. I could give more evidence to show how his appearance and dress matches witness descriptions.

But, and I think it is pathetic in its sadness, the people on Casebook will instead, for the most part, write response to this Vesica Pisces murder pattern thread. The posts that I put up that discuss the more outlandish if true propositions are the ones that attract attention. In my opinion I can see why. They provide the best place where those people who get a perverse thrill in deriding others can run riot and under the guise of the educated, poor scorn on any new idea. This is why I know people will continue posting on this thread. Rather than ones that bring ‘facts’ and ‘evidence’

Such a state of affairs is not any one person’s fault and it not due to any conscious decision. It’s simply the inevitable outcome. With each passing year, as the weight of information and contribution continues to grow so does the disease of negativity and doubt also take hold. Why? Because to members and outsiders it becomes more and more evident that members would rather luxuriate in the case than solve it. If not, then as each year passes and the wealth of information this site compiles continues to grow, the more elusive the Ripper seems. Or is it the more incompetent its members appear to be? An elusive suspect would not explain the vitriol and feigned expertise presented by most responses to those who dare to give the Ripper a name, so it can only be that its members instead resort to sarcasm having nothing else meaningful to contribute.

[Pcdunn]

It's an hourglass, not an 8

I'm sorry. But the "figure 8" you've drawn that apparently depicts JtR's path (assuming he did indeed kill Stride) looks **nothing** like a vesica piscis. It's not even close.

And were the points you've includrd that other shape equidistant?

I agree with the above. Your diagram depicts an hourglass made with triangles, not two intertwined circles or an figure eight.
You need to lay off the "Da Vinci Code" stuff, Richard. Great fiction, not so great for murder theories.

[Dane_F]

Perhaps he did. With Catherine Eddowes there was on each side of cheek a cut which peeled up the skin, forming a triangular flap about an inch and a half.

Then that weakens his case as being the ripper and strengthens it for only Eddows. If he is going to put these symbols on one he would do it on all his kills.

My point is not that he isn't a viable suspect. It's that this is a silly angle to take to add strength to him as a suspect. Bring facts and evidence and I can promise you, people will take it far more seriously than this.

[Richard Patterson]

I saw some toast once that had the Virgin Mary burnt into it. I see here an arrow, a number 6, or upside down 9. (Ooo mysterious) I'm sorry but if he was trying to leave symbols then I don't see why he wouldn't have carved it or left clear symbols with each of his victims. Then he would have had mini figure 8s inside of the larger figure 8. Infinity inside Infinity.

Perhaps he did. With Catherine Eddowes there was on each side of cheek a cut which peeled up the skin, forming a triangular flap about an inch and a half.

[Dane_F]

I saw some toast once that had the Virgin Mary burnt into it. I see here an arrow, a number 6, or upside down 9. (Ooo mysterious) I'm sorry but if he was trying to leave symbols then I don't see why he wouldn't have carved it or left clear symbols with each of his victims. Then he would have had mini figure 8s inside of the larger figure 8. Infinity inside Infinity.

[Richard Patterson]

Or the dagaz rune.

Or a route taken due to police beats.

Or a random path that is easily, if "subtly" able to be shoehorned into a theory.

Maybey but all still Vesica Pisces, a symbol that was a central motif for Thompson by forming compass direction headings, in the manner espoused as by him.

[Ausgirl]

Given when a perfectly proportioned figure 8 figure is achieved when all the points are equidistant and true. In the case of the murders even a disproportionate figure 8 is still a Vesica Pisces. One needs only to draw originating from one precise murder location to another. The transecting lines would still form a Vesica Pisces.

Or the dagaz rune.

Or a route taken due to police beats.

Or a random path that is easily, if "subtly" able to be shoehorned into a theory.

[Richard Patterson]

But it says "given that they are true and equidistant" in really big letters on your diagram?

Is that not correct? Is it not then "given"?

Martha Tabram was also thought to be a Ripper victim in 1888. Was she not one? Does her present popular absence from the canon prove she was not? or does she just not fit the pattern, for some obscure handy reason, like Mary Kelly?

Given when a perfectly proportioned figure 8 figure is achieved when all the points are equidistant and true. In the case of the murders even a disproportionate figure 8 is still a Vesica Pisces. One needs only to draw originating from one precise murder location to another. The transecting lines would still form a Vesica Pisces.

[Ausgirl]

But it says "given that they are true and equidistant" in really big letters on your diagram?

Is that not correct? Is it not then "given"?

Martha Tabram was also thought to be a Ripper victim in 1888. Was she not one? Does her present popular absence from the canon prove she was not? or does she just not fit the pattern, for some obscure handy reason, like Mary Kelly?

[Richard Patterson]

"given that they are true and equidistant" -- well are they? really? and why is this claim to 'given' equidistance suddenly unimportant?

'given that they are true and equidistant.' I never said that they need be true or equidistant to make a Vesica Pisces, only in the symmetrical Figure 8 shape I demonstrate. A general compass point and any distance will still make the Vesica shape with the intersecting directional lines as they cross from one point to the next.

[Ausgirl]

Proof that it was Deeming perhaps.

[Ausgirl]

To me the distance between each murder were not as important as the directions that Ripper headed.

"given that they are true and equidistant" -- well are they? really? and why is this claim to 'given' equidistance suddenly unimportant?

And how do we get to him being "the most likely suspect" when he can't be placed in the area at the time of the murders? Simply not knowing where he was won't do. Because it proves nothing. Showing that he was in the area a year or a month before or after won't do either, to make such a definitive claim. Saying it's "possible" he was a suspect is about as good as gets, and in the realm of possibility there's a lot of great points for Thompson being one.

But the "most likely"? Not yet. And some of these supportive arguments are circular tripe.

It's also very convenient to nudge Mary Kelly out of the 'pattern' so the other four fit.