James Davis of #29 was the Ripper!

[Debra A]

From the Workman's Times Aug 21 1891.



Although the article gives the location of the yard where the murder occured as #20, it's obviously refering to #29.
John Davis who was a resident of #29 when he discovered Annie chapman's body, it is also mentioned that in 1888 he had at least two sons living with him.

In the 1891 census for 29 Hanbury St. John Davis is still living there and also listed is a son named James.

[lynn cates]

1/3

Hello Debs. Nice research!

I wonder about the one-third figure? Polly, Annie and Kate?

Cheers.
LC

[Bridewell]

Convenient

From the Workman's Times Aug 21 1891.

[ATTACH]14158[/ATTACH]

Although the article gives the location of the yard where the murder occured as #20, it's obviously refering to #29.
John Davis who was a resident of #29 when he discovered Annie chapman's body, it is also mentioned that in 1888 he had at least two sons living with him.

Hi Debs,

Mr Goodchild seems to have been very conveniently placed to come to his wife's rescue, don't you think? Was this some sort of dare on his part, I wonder?

Regards, Bridewell.

[Monty]

Great work Debs,

Monty

[Lechmere]

The three are clearly tabram, Nichols and chapman

[Tom_Wescott]

Another neat find, Debs. Poor James got socked in the jaw just for standing in his own yard.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Archaic]

Hi Debs, nice find.

I think it's interesting that they went "too see" the Ripper murder spot at night. It seems unlikely that the backyard would have had any source of light. Of course, they might have gone in the evening before it was dark, but it seems to me that Victorian newspapers usually used the word "evening" where appropriate.

I understand that they were curious, but why didn't they just ask their neighbors if they could have a look?

Maybe the residents at #29 were tired of being reminded of the horror... or maybe the trio wanted to experience the scary vibes of the Ripper murder site in the dark?

Best regards,
Archaic

[DGB]

Great find!

Davis could have responded when they asked who was there. But maybe, as you say, the residents were sick of sightseers, so Davis - finding himself in the yard when they let themselves in - decided to play a little joke.

And got a punch on the nose for his troubles!

[curious]

From the Workman's Times Aug 21 1891.

[ATTACH]14158[/ATTACH]

Although the article gives the location of the yard where the murder occured as #20, it's obviously refering to #29.
John Davis who was a resident of #29 when he discovered Annie chapman's body, it is also mentioned that in 1888 he had at least two sons living with him.

In the 1891 census for 29 Hanbury St. John Davis is still living there and also listed is a son named James.

[ATTACH]14159[/ATTACH]

Hi, Debs,
Great find. It certainly shows some light on how people around the murders reacted, which was much as they once did around here following a tragic, well-publicized car accident. People would drive in droves to look at the site, and find out which garage had the car to go view the car. Just human nature, I suppose.

I like Bridewell's point about the closeness of the husband . . .

interesting.

And perhaps Mr. Davis did not intend to scare them. They "called" to him, so perhaps instead of yelling across the yard he moved closer to speak and the women spooked.

Life for the survivors was likely very interesting for a long time afterward.

curious

[Debra A]

Hi all,
Many thanks for the feedback.
I'm with you two Bridewell and Curious,there's something very odd about Mr Goodchild being able to come to his wife's aid so quickly isn't there?!
I haven't been able to find any other mentions of the story yet but I'll keep looking.
James was either acting very mischievously or very strangely...I can't decide which.

[Bridewell]

The three are clearly tabram, Nichols and chapman

I think so too.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Livia]

Hi all,
Many thanks for the feedback.
I'm with you two Bridewell and Curious,there's something very odd about Mr Goodchild being able to come to his wife's aid so quickly isn't there?!
I haven't been able to find any other mentions of the story yet but I'll keep looking.
James was either acting very mischievously or very strangely...I can't decide which.

Excellent work, Debs.

Was there a privy in the yard? Maybe Davis was
minding his business, doing his business, when these
two lookyloos interrupted him.

Maybe Goodchild escorted them to #29, but had no
interest in what was by that time just an ordinary
back yard.

Liv

[Debra A]

Excellent work, Debs.

Was there a privy in the yard? Maybe Davis was
minding his business, doing his business, when these
two lookyloos interrupted him.

Maybe Goodchild escorted them to #29, but had no
interest in what was by that time just an ordinary
back yard.

Liv

Hi Liv. Thanks.
I think there must have been a privy, yes and I can't think of many other reasons he would have been in the back yard at night.
You're probably right but I still find it an odd story somehow.
As long as we're sure James wasn't re-living something from his past!

[RavenDarkendale]

If sight-seers weren't so morbidly interested in crime scenes, especially where murder is involved, the "Jack the Ripper Tour" wouldn't be so popular!

[Phil H]

Well, one could make a case for "Jack" being familiar with the backyard of No29 - a site not visible from the street - and with the movements (metaphorically and literally - given the location of the privy) of residents.

phil H