Tweet
I do not necessarily believe or disbelieve this theory. but I hope it warrants some discussion of this victim who has been, for the most part, completely ignored as a possible JtR victim.
I think it's important to examine the circumstances of the crime and how they relate to the known Ripper crimes. and a very important part of that is the progression.....
Polly Nichols
day and date: killed on a Friday, last day of the month
location: open street with surrounding housing where anyone who looked out their windows at the time would've seen the murder being committed.
murder/mutilation: throat cut, abdomen slashed open exposing intestines. no known "souvenirs" taken.
Annie Chapman
day and date: killed on a Saturday, 8th day of the month
location: again surrounded by residences, but in the back private yard, not on the open street where passers-by would've seen
murder/mutilation: throat cut, abdomen opened and disembowelled. uterus taken from the scene. also, rings probably taken by the killer.
Liz Stride
most believe the killer was interrupted so I'm not going to write much here other than location: dimly lit ally, beside a social club and across from a school. a few residences are nearby, but not close enough for the actual murder to be witnessed. and not on an open street.
Catherine Eddowes
day and date: killed on a Sunday, 8th day of the month
location: in a dimly lit square, not on an open road. a few surrounding residences, but all residents in bed?
murder/mutilation: throat cut, abdomen opened and disembowelled. face slashed. uterus and kidney taken from the scene.
Mary Kelly
day and date: killed on a Friday, 9th day of the month
location: in a private residence occupied by the victim
murder/mutilation: throat most likely cut, appeared that killer may have attempted unsuccessfully to remove the head. face slashed. abdomen opened and disembowelled. breasts removed, legs partially denuded. uterus and liver removed but not taken. heart taken from the scene.
so here's what we have on Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes, and Kelly....
*all killed on a weekend
*all killed on either the last day of the month or the 8th-9th day of month
*steady progression of severity of mutilations
*enough changes in the general locations of the murders to indicate that killer was aware that he could be caught in the act if he didn't choose more carefully. evidenced by the fact that the first murder occurs on an open street, last murder occurs in a private residence.
*killer shows interest in taking away body parts
*killer shows particular interest in the uterus, which was removed from 3 of the 4 victims and taken away completely in 2 cases.
*in the case of Kelly and I believe Chapman (?), there is indication that killer may have tried to remove the head.
so now, it's time to look at Elizabeth Jackson:
The first of Jackson's remains were found on a Tueday, June 4th. the examining doctor guessed that the remains had not been in the river for more than 24 hours. That would put the remains as having been put in the river on Sunday or Monday. So then, it would be very likely that Jackson died on Friday or Saturday. her family and friends stated they had not seen her since "the end of May". the last day of May was on Friday.
so here we have a victim who was very possibly killed on Friday, last day of the month.
location of the murder: completely unknown. but no one saw or heard anything so it was very obviously in a secluded place like a wooded area, private residence or business. in the canonical 5, the killer progressed from an open street to a private residence. This indicates to me that he was aware of the importance of his surroundings as far as witnesses and being caught in the act. and that, to me, would make Elizabeth Jackson's unknown murder site very important because wherever she was killed, there were no witnesses, passers-by, or any real chance of being caught in the act.
murder/mutilation: dismembered. abdomen cut open and disembowelled. organs removed. description of wounds sound very much like the wounds of Mary Kelly. Head never recovered. I believe there were a few other organs and possibly a limb that were not recovered. (I base this from the dissertation by the fine lady whose name escapes me, but I need to read it again for sure.)
now first and foremost, Elizabeth Jackson was NOT a "torso murder". "torso murders" refer to cases where the torso and very little else were recovered. with Elizabeth Jackson, almost the entire body was recovered bit by bit except the head, and (again, going from memory only) a limb and a few organs.
Elizabeth Jackson was pregnant and so most assume that she was the victim of a botched abortion. That's fair enough. But how many illegal abortion doctors who dismember/dispose of bodies keep the heads as souvenirs? because the river and surrounding areas were throughly searched, but the head was not found. unfound organs could've been washed away, eaten by fish, etc. but a head?
if she were a victim of a botched abortion, she was dismembered for disposal. and maybe the head was hidden to prevent identification? ok, fair enough. but the illegal abortion doctor didn't want to be linked, so why hide the head, which could be a very incriminating piece of evidence if found?
now, we go back to JtR who seemed to make some level of attempt at beheading, but was unsuccessful. did he want to remove the heads for an even more ghastly display, or did he want the heads as souvenirs? with the proper amount of time, JtR would've probably been successful in the removal of the heads. whoever killed Elizabeth Jackson DID have the proper amount of time and did indeed remove (and likely keep) the head, as well as dismembering the limbs.
in JtR, we have a man who is interested in the wombs of prostitutes.
in Elizabeth Jackson, we have a prostitute who has a baby in her womb. do you not think JtR would have found this fascinating?
could've been a botched abortion, sure. but also could've been a killer who had a fascination with the wombs of prostitutes and happened upon a pregnant prostitue...like an added bonus.
again, I don't believe or disbelieve. I just think we've got a case here that has not been given it's due consideration.
look at it this way.....if there had been no "torso murders", then Elizabeth Jackson would have been absolutely positively without any doubt, considered a Ripper victim.
but you have the police, who want the Ripper panic to go away and not come back. and Elizabeth Jackson was conveniently pregnant. so they say, "it was a botched abortion, not a Ripper victim, nothing to see here."
I think it is VERY important that we consider this case more closely and get some discussion going.
for one, if Jackson is a true Ripper victim, then one major suspect (Druitt) is completely removed from the picture.
secondly, if Jackson was a Ripper victim, you can probably look for someone who was in some way removed from the streets from mid-November 1888 through May 1889.
and now here's the biggie, and my closing.....WHERE IS THE SKULL OF ELIZABETH JACKSON NOW????? just the other day, I saw a story from awhile back in Britain, a murder victim who was beheaded but her head was never found. the skull was discovered buried in the backyard of a famous man. the yard was in some way associated with the girl who killed the woman. someone will come forward with the details of that. but WHY it's important....if Elizabeth Jackson's skull were located- buried, hidden, etc- our fine researchers would be able to probably discover who lived or worked in that immediate area in 1888-1889.
ELIZABETH JACKSON'S SKULL IS THE CLUE THAT COULD POSSIBLY SOLVE THE RIPPER CASE. find her skull, find who was living/working in the area of the skull in 1889, find their whereabouts in the autumn of 1888. and then, you may well have solved the unsolveable case.
Damn, I've written the outline for a very interesting Ripper-related book. maybe I should've kept it to myself, eh? alas, you can tell from my ramblings that I'm not much of a writer.
but please, discuss. It may just be a dumb theory. but I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.
I think it's important to examine the circumstances of the crime and how they relate to the known Ripper crimes. and a very important part of that is the progression.....
Polly Nichols
day and date: killed on a Friday, last day of the month
location: open street with surrounding housing where anyone who looked out their windows at the time would've seen the murder being committed.
murder/mutilation: throat cut, abdomen slashed open exposing intestines. no known "souvenirs" taken.
Annie Chapman
day and date: killed on a Saturday, 8th day of the month
location: again surrounded by residences, but in the back private yard, not on the open street where passers-by would've seen
murder/mutilation: throat cut, abdomen opened and disembowelled. uterus taken from the scene. also, rings probably taken by the killer.
Liz Stride
most believe the killer was interrupted so I'm not going to write much here other than location: dimly lit ally, beside a social club and across from a school. a few residences are nearby, but not close enough for the actual murder to be witnessed. and not on an open street.
Catherine Eddowes
day and date: killed on a Sunday, 8th day of the month
location: in a dimly lit square, not on an open road. a few surrounding residences, but all residents in bed?
murder/mutilation: throat cut, abdomen opened and disembowelled. face slashed. uterus and kidney taken from the scene.
Mary Kelly
day and date: killed on a Friday, 9th day of the month
location: in a private residence occupied by the victim
murder/mutilation: throat most likely cut, appeared that killer may have attempted unsuccessfully to remove the head. face slashed. abdomen opened and disembowelled. breasts removed, legs partially denuded. uterus and liver removed but not taken. heart taken from the scene.
so here's what we have on Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes, and Kelly....
*all killed on a weekend
*all killed on either the last day of the month or the 8th-9th day of month
*steady progression of severity of mutilations
*enough changes in the general locations of the murders to indicate that killer was aware that he could be caught in the act if he didn't choose more carefully. evidenced by the fact that the first murder occurs on an open street, last murder occurs in a private residence.
*killer shows interest in taking away body parts
*killer shows particular interest in the uterus, which was removed from 3 of the 4 victims and taken away completely in 2 cases.
*in the case of Kelly and I believe Chapman (?), there is indication that killer may have tried to remove the head.
so now, it's time to look at Elizabeth Jackson:
The first of Jackson's remains were found on a Tueday, June 4th. the examining doctor guessed that the remains had not been in the river for more than 24 hours. That would put the remains as having been put in the river on Sunday or Monday. So then, it would be very likely that Jackson died on Friday or Saturday. her family and friends stated they had not seen her since "the end of May". the last day of May was on Friday.
so here we have a victim who was very possibly killed on Friday, last day of the month.
location of the murder: completely unknown. but no one saw or heard anything so it was very obviously in a secluded place like a wooded area, private residence or business. in the canonical 5, the killer progressed from an open street to a private residence. This indicates to me that he was aware of the importance of his surroundings as far as witnesses and being caught in the act. and that, to me, would make Elizabeth Jackson's unknown murder site very important because wherever she was killed, there were no witnesses, passers-by, or any real chance of being caught in the act.
murder/mutilation: dismembered. abdomen cut open and disembowelled. organs removed. description of wounds sound very much like the wounds of Mary Kelly. Head never recovered. I believe there were a few other organs and possibly a limb that were not recovered. (I base this from the dissertation by the fine lady whose name escapes me, but I need to read it again for sure.)
now first and foremost, Elizabeth Jackson was NOT a "torso murder". "torso murders" refer to cases where the torso and very little else were recovered. with Elizabeth Jackson, almost the entire body was recovered bit by bit except the head, and (again, going from memory only) a limb and a few organs.
Elizabeth Jackson was pregnant and so most assume that she was the victim of a botched abortion. That's fair enough. But how many illegal abortion doctors who dismember/dispose of bodies keep the heads as souvenirs? because the river and surrounding areas were throughly searched, but the head was not found. unfound organs could've been washed away, eaten by fish, etc. but a head?
if she were a victim of a botched abortion, she was dismembered for disposal. and maybe the head was hidden to prevent identification? ok, fair enough. but the illegal abortion doctor didn't want to be linked, so why hide the head, which could be a very incriminating piece of evidence if found?
now, we go back to JtR who seemed to make some level of attempt at beheading, but was unsuccessful. did he want to remove the heads for an even more ghastly display, or did he want the heads as souvenirs? with the proper amount of time, JtR would've probably been successful in the removal of the heads. whoever killed Elizabeth Jackson DID have the proper amount of time and did indeed remove (and likely keep) the head, as well as dismembering the limbs.
in JtR, we have a man who is interested in the wombs of prostitutes.
in Elizabeth Jackson, we have a prostitute who has a baby in her womb. do you not think JtR would have found this fascinating?
could've been a botched abortion, sure. but also could've been a killer who had a fascination with the wombs of prostitutes and happened upon a pregnant prostitue...like an added bonus.
again, I don't believe or disbelieve. I just think we've got a case here that has not been given it's due consideration.
look at it this way.....if there had been no "torso murders", then Elizabeth Jackson would have been absolutely positively without any doubt, considered a Ripper victim.
but you have the police, who want the Ripper panic to go away and not come back. and Elizabeth Jackson was conveniently pregnant. so they say, "it was a botched abortion, not a Ripper victim, nothing to see here."
I think it is VERY important that we consider this case more closely and get some discussion going.
for one, if Jackson is a true Ripper victim, then one major suspect (Druitt) is completely removed from the picture.
secondly, if Jackson was a Ripper victim, you can probably look for someone who was in some way removed from the streets from mid-November 1888 through May 1889.
and now here's the biggie, and my closing.....WHERE IS THE SKULL OF ELIZABETH JACKSON NOW????? just the other day, I saw a story from awhile back in Britain, a murder victim who was beheaded but her head was never found. the skull was discovered buried in the backyard of a famous man. the yard was in some way associated with the girl who killed the woman. someone will come forward with the details of that. but WHY it's important....if Elizabeth Jackson's skull were located- buried, hidden, etc- our fine researchers would be able to probably discover who lived or worked in that immediate area in 1888-1889.
ELIZABETH JACKSON'S SKULL IS THE CLUE THAT COULD POSSIBLY SOLVE THE RIPPER CASE. find her skull, find who was living/working in the area of the skull in 1889, find their whereabouts in the autumn of 1888. and then, you may well have solved the unsolveable case.
Damn, I've written the outline for a very interesting Ripper-related book. maybe I should've kept it to myself, eh? alas, you can tell from my ramblings that I'm not much of a writer.
but please, discuss. It may just be a dumb theory. but I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.
Comment