Who was the first clothes-puller?

[lynn cates]

solvey poo

Hello Jon. Actually, I agree with you. Of course, I would say, "No one will find Jack the Ripper."

Do think the case will be solved, though.

Cheers.
LC

[curious]

That's about it

Would a poor man trying to work and feed all those children come to hate female genitalia that pops out a new baby a year?

[curious]

Sally
I suspect that a family of a husband, wife and seven kids living in a couple of rooms would be pretty stressful and could easily have a detrimental impact on an already unbalanced mind.
Also choosing Cross as an alternative name would be quite cunning as if found out he could claim some sort of reason for using it, while at the sasme time preserving his anonymity.

Lynn
There is no reason why a serial killer cannot start killing in his late thrities.
For Cross my presumption would be that prior to June 1888 he was living close to and under the psychogical dominance of his mother and this inhibited him.
When he moved a mile or so away he was liberated from her immediate presence and his long standing inner resentments burst out in a series of attacks that were only sated when his step father died - together with his youngest child at roughly the same time.
At least these are potential and credible triggers for the initiation and cessation of the attacks.

Lechmere,
I have long suspected that JtR had a problem with his mother. I wonder if Lechmere's problem was not with his wife.

He was from landed gentry. She was illiterate and saddling him with all these children to try to feed.

If Cross/Lechmere was the killer, it makes more sense (to me) that it was because of his hatred of his wife.

[Lechmere]

Curious
You might be right. However I tend to think that he saw his wife as a breeding machine and saw women's role in society in that way. She was from very much more humble background than himself. From an illiterate family. This may have given him a distaste for prostitutes.
However I tend against the view that prostitites tend to be attacked because they are prostitutes per se. They tend to be attacked because they are vulnerable women out alone late at night and who take men to secluded spots.
My feeling is that he had a warm relationship with his wife, up to a certain level anyway. In that he respected her up to her limit.
Furthermore I think he may have been under the influence of the whore-Madonna complex with respect to his mother - worshipping her as the woman who provided for him and his sister when they were abandoned by their true father, yet nurturing a grudge against the men who she engaged with and against her for neglecting him when she was with her new man. And having all sorts of regrets at not knowing his father while being aware of his more upper crust and respectable background - which he undoubtedly was.

[curious]

My feeling is that he had a warm relationship with his wife, up to a certain level anyway. In that he respected her up to her limit.

Well they were friendly enough to have more children than he could easily support -- perhaps a love/hate relationship?

Why do you think they had a warm relationship and where do you see respect?

If they had to marry because she was pregnant -- and we don't know that, but the 3 year gap from marriage to first living child seems too long as fertile as they were.

I'm not convinced Cross is the killer, but I can see how a man who married beneath him and was kept down and poor by too many children might, just might, break in a very stressful time.

[Sally]

Standards

I think we're in danger of applying latterday standards retrospectively here. Yes, Cross had lots of children. But most people had lots of children. In an age before effective birth control (amongst other considerations) that was how it was.

And yes, his family shared a house - I don't know how many rooms they occupied - maybe Lechmere does - but they were well off compared to a great many people and may have well recognised that.

So, he lost his father at an early age - so did countless other people. Countless others saw their parents remarry. So what?

It would take more than these mundane circumstances to send a man over the edge, I'd suggest; unless he was mentally fragile, for which there is no evidence, nor suggestion, whatever.

As has been pointed out already, by Lechmere, Cross was one of the successful working class - and not only that, everything that we know points to him having had a very stable life; domestic and working.

All of Lechmere's guesses - that he had a Madonna-Wore complex; resented is wife for a common illiterate person; resented his stepfathers for their relationship with his mother - all are absolutely pure speculation.

I think there comes a point at which it is wise to take a step back and look at one's theory from a distance - in this case not least because this man has living relatives who might not enjoy seeing their ancestor tarred with the Ripper brush so absolutely. A measure of caution wouldn't go amiss.

[Fisherman]

Sally:

" I don't know how many rooms they occupied "

Five, Sally.

Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Sally:

"All of Lechmere's guesses - that he had a Madonna-Wore complex; resented is wife for a common illiterate person; resented his stepfathers for their relationship with his mother - all are absolutely pure speculation."

... and so is the suggestion that Cross/Lechmere did not kill Polly Nichols.

The best,
Fisherman

[harry]

And so is the suggestion that Cross/Lechmere did.It's nice to see we have now come to the conclusion that it is suggestion and not evidence that is being shown.

[Fisherman]

Harry:

"And so is the suggestion that Cross/Lechmere did.It's nice to see we have now come to the conclusion that it is suggestion and not evidence that is being shown."

I think you need to be a little more perceptive about the differences involved here. What we have is two "suggestions" - one with Cross as an innocent witness, and one with the same man as the killer. Both pictures are suggestions when it comes to the overall scenarios, but both pictures also have evidence to support them.

So itīs not a question of unevidenced scenarios in either case. Moreover, it has never been suggested that there was enough evidence to be certain that Cross was the killer. The interesting thing, though, is that there is a commonly accepted scenario that has just as little - or less - evidence to go with it, as has the suggestion of Cross as the killer.

So, Harry, this is how it works.

Fisherman

[Lechmere]

Sally
I don’t think caution is required as he is long dead and in any case the hangman’s noose has long been discarded. And the relatives are quite relaxed about it. There is no reason for anyone to be anxious or feel implicated by the behaviour – however abominable – of their great great grandfather.
We are in the realms of Ripper ‘suspectology’. I believe you yourself pointed out all we can do is look at the facts and see if a potential culprit fits them, or if the facts as known lend themselves towards a credible theory with no ‘killer’ holes’ in the theory such as – for example – Robert Mann being an inmate in a Workhouse and as such pretty much under lock and key at night time.
As such, a potential psychopathic serial killer will often come from an unstable family background and be brought up by someone other than his natural father, who perhaps might be an authority figure. This does not mean that everyone who is brought up in such a manner becomes a serial killer of course. But born psychopaths (which is what they are) tend to use such a background as an excuse or mental self-justification for their actions.

Curious
One aspect in Cross’s marriage that should perhaps be considered is that he died in 1920 and she died in 1940. Very close couples often die within a couple of years of each other. Not always I know, but it is a common phenomena.

[Jon Guy]

And so is the suggestion that Cross/Lechmere did.It's nice to see we have now come to the conclusion that it is suggestion and not evidence that is being shown.

And that, Harry, as you know, is how suspect ripperology works.

[curious]

So, he lost his father at an early age - so did countless other people. Countless others saw their parents remarry. So what?

It would take more than these mundane circumstances to send a man over the edge, I'd suggest; unless he was mentally fragile, for which there is no evidence, nor suggestion, whatever.

As has been pointed out already, by Lechmere, Cross was one of the successful working class - and not only that, everything that we know points to him having had a very stable life; domestic and working.

I think there comes a point at which it is wise to take a step back and look at one's theory from a distance - in this case not least because this man has living relatives who might not enjoy seeing their ancestor tarred with the Ripper brush so absolutely. A measure of caution wouldn't go amiss.

Hi, Sally,
I agree with you about being considerate of the descendants. However, it appears that his descendants have the same question.

It is not as though some victim has been picked on (I get upset with the suggestion of Barnett, because I believe him to be a victim in all this) but a
person alone with a body, who used a second name, and wore work clothes to an inquest when it was customary to dress for these occasions.

Cross was one of the successful working class, but he was still far below his family's standards.

Stepparents have horrible reputations -- some deserved. Policemen have been known to be on the force because they like the authority the position allows them. Those policemen often inflict horrible home lives on their families. Do we have any way of knowing if Cross the policeman was of that type or not?

Spending a boyhood with a man like that might change a child.

I don't get the impression that Cross/Lechmere was mentally fragile. He appears mentally tough to me. IF, and note that is a very big IF, C/L is responsible for the killings he was extremely bright, daring, and capable.

The picture I get from C/L is that IF he were the killer, the killings would have been committed in anger -- perhaps a fight with the wife, which could explain why he left home early the morning Polly Nichols was killed. Why else would anyone be out of bed earlier than necessary? (Of course, I'm up early this morning because I fell asleep in my recliner too early last night.)

It is possible he went through a period in his life (40-ish is mid-life crisis for men, isn't it?) that he felt trapped and hopeless, stuck in a dead-in job with so many little mouths to feed. And he could not fully vent that frustration on them.

Some known serial killers have appeared to have stable lives. It is possible that other undiscovered ones have maintained the facade successfully to the end of their lives.

Lechmere, did the Cross family have a child born in 1888 or early 1889?

Was the wife pregnant in that year?

And Sally, I am far from convinced. However, I do feel there is enough about this man to raise serious questions. The fact that his descendants wonder makes me wonder what the family stories are.

For instance, no one liked one of my grandfathers. Some of the older cousins can tell me stories. Not of this nature, I hasten to add. But he was an unpleasant man who was not good to my grandmother. Cross/Lechmere must have left family stories that make his descendants wonder.

Wondering is all I'm doing, trying to look at it from all angles.

For instance, the GSG and the apron ---- from the character we are beginning to see, how would that work? Can anyone make that work with C/L?

[Fisherman]

Curious:

"Lechmere, did the Cross family have a child born in 1888 or early 1889?"

Iīm not Lechmere, but I can inform you that they had a daughter in 1888, who died in 1890. I donīt remember the exact dates, but I feel pretty certain that the child was born before the Whitechapel murders began.

May I command you on your good thinking relating to Thomas Cross? Policemen are often authoritative figures, just like you say.

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Found it! There is apparently a birth certificate dated 2 March 1888,and a death certificate dated 8 October 1890 for this daughter.

The best,
Fisherman