The clue of the coins

[Donpayasos]

Does anyone out there have ready access to The Times' contemporaneous coverage of the murders? If so, there's something they might like to check.

Quite some years ago, I read through the Times coverage as part of my research into a Ripper-related project. I found something that seemed to be unremarked-on elsewhere. Forgive me if I have this wrong and send someone on a wild goose chase, but to the best of my recollection this is genuine fresh information not dealt with elsewhere. By all means prove me wrong.

I was startled to read mention of coins being found arranged neatly at Polly Nichols' crime scene, something I had not read of elsewhere. The Annie Chapman site was, to the best of my knowledge, the first place where the victim's pocket change had been arrayed in view.

My first thought was that the paper had simply made a mistake (the press reporting was full of errors, as anyone who studies the case knows), but the report appeared BEFORE the Annie Chapman murder, so it wasn't possible that the reporter had transferred a detail from the later crime scene.

If someone can check the Times coverage after Nicholls' death and before Chapman's, they can see if I'm right. Apologies again if I'm wrong.

It doesn't really prove anything about the killer except that the coins thing happened more often than though. It doesn't even prove that the same guy killed both women, since Chapman's killer could have taken the MO from the Times. But I think that would be unlikely.

Can anybody confirm this memory of mine?

[pinkmoon]

Does anyone out there have ready access to The Times' contemporaneous coverage of the murders? If so, there's something they might like to check.

Quite some years ago, I read through the Times coverage as part of my research into a Ripper-related project. I found something that seemed to be unremarked-on elsewhere. Forgive me if I have this wrong and send someone on a wild goose chase, but to the best of my recollection this is genuine fresh information not dealt with elsewhere. By all means prove me wrong.

I was startled to read mention of coins being found arranged neatly at Polly Nichols' crime scene, something I had not read of elsewhere. The Annie Chapman site was, to the best of my knowledge, the first place where the victim's pocket change had been arrayed in view.

My first thought was that the paper had simply made a mistake (the press reporting was full of errors, as anyone who studies the case knows), but the report appeared BEFORE the Annie Chapman murder, so it wasn't possible that the reporter had transferred a detail from the later crime scene.

If someone can check the Times coverage after Nicholls' death and before Chapman's, they can see if I'm right. Apologies again if I'm wrong.

It doesn't really prove anything about the killer except that the coins thing happened more often than though. It doesn't even prove that the same guy killed both women, since Chapman's killer could have taken the MO from the Times. But I think that would be unlikely.

Can anybody confirm this memory of mine?

He took poor Annie's organs and rings but left her money could this mean that our killer was not a pauper.

[Donpayasos]

Yeah, he evidently didn't need the pennies. So he couldn't have been completely desperate for cash. Or he may have regarded the money as tainted by prostitution. Sheer speculation, of course.

[pinkmoon]

Surely to God if he was a poor local he would take the time and remove the coins

[Donpayasos]

Depends how poor. It's not like his victims had the price of a night's lodging on them.

And if the crimes were related to a distaste for prostitution, then taking the money might have been abhorrent to him. We're not dealing with a wholly rational person here.

I would say that it's pretty likely that the killer was local, and that he was probably from a social class just above that of his victims. This tends to be the case, though there could certainly be an exception. He had probably had dealings with prostitutes, which suggests he some money to spare.

The coins left by the victims seem to form some kind of statement: if the victims were murdered because they were prostitutes, the killer is presumably saying: Look, these are the ill-gotten gains, and this is what happens to you when you earn money this way. A crime scene deliberately arranged like this is making some kind of statement, though it's often an incoherent one.

[Mr Lucky]

Hi donpayasos

Personally, I have never come across any press statements that money was found on or near Nichols.

If you have managed to find a press article that did mention this, particularly pre- Chapman murder, then that would be a very significant find, as far as an attempt to understand the contemporary narrative goes.

[Donpayasos]

That's what *I* thought. Now we just need someone to check the online Times database - -preferably someone who has already paid for access!

It shouldn't take too long tocheck Ripper-related articles between the times of the 1st and 2nd murders. I wish I'd kept a proper note of the exact date of the article.

[lynn cates]

evidence

Hello Don. Welcome to the boards.

All the evidential reports agree that no money was found on the victims.

Cheers.
LC

[Donpayasos]

That's interesting -- are you saying that the stories about coins being found beside Annie Chapman were untrue? If so, an oft-reported canard (I find it in my old JTR A-Z stated as "almost certainly") At any rate, a small heap of the contents of her pockets, yes?

I suppose it's possible that items lying BESIDE the body wouldn't be listed as being found on the victims, but you'd expect them to be recorded alright.

I'd still like someone to check The Times.

[Jon Guy]

I'd still like someone to check The Times.

Here you go. Let us know if you find it.

http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/times/

[lynn cates]

ultimately debunked

Hello Don. Thanks.

Yes, those stories are not true. I think the rumour had them as two farthings?

Stewart Evans debunked that nonsense in "The Ultimate."

Cheers.
LC

[MayBea]

Donp., could it be that:
1. you're thinking of the reported incident, on Hanbury St. the same morning as the Chapman murder, involving a rough client and two shiny coins made to look like sovereigns? (There was another similar report for the Thursday night prior to the double event.)
or
2. you're mistaking Nichols and nickels?!
or
3. you're thinking of the Times article about the MacKenzie Inquest where Inspector Reid 'recollects' two coins at the Chapman scene?

[Donpayasos]

Donp., could it be that:
1. you're thinking of the reported incident, on Hanbury St. the same morning as the Chapman murder, involving a rough client and two shiny coins made to look like sovereigns? (There was another similar report for the Thursday night prior to the double event.)
or
2. you're mistaking Nichols and nickels?!
or
3. you're thinking of the Times article about the MacKenzie Inquest where Inspector Reid 'recollects' two coins at the Chapman scene?

1) The whole point of this is that the reference to coins appeared BEFORE the Chapman murder, so could not have been influenced by reports of coins at that crime scene (which I now understand were false).

2) Haha

3) Again, this was aNichols murder, appearing before the Chapman murder.

Might not have been coins, might have been rings or other belongings.

I don't see it in the Times pieces collected here, but I would rather be looking at scans of the original papers rather than edited bits. It's possible someone missed something.

[Mr Lucky]

Hi Donpayasos

I feel you may need a bit of a better explanation, basically the Times is the paper that has been used most as a press source for these murders, I would even say that some accounts only seem to use the Times as a source - so of all of the papers connected to the murders this would be the one most often studied.

So your claims about the coins at the Nichols murder, a very startling claim in ripper terms, is something that is so shocking that someone would have likely noted this before (or so we all think)

This leads me to ask
Are you sure that it was the Times?
Are you sure that it was between the Nichols/Chapman murders?

[Mr Lucky]

Might not have been coins, might have been rings or other belongings.

Nichols possessions

general reports - comb and a broken mirror
some other reports (Neil's testimony) - pocket handkerchief
Echo - soap

There were also some early reports that had claimed that she had been robbed of her rings, these were latter denied.