Ripper Confidential by Tom Wescott (2017)

[Debra A]

Maybe so - but the admission records still have her as arriving at the hospital on September 1:st, and so it seems she was not a prequel to the Nichols murder. Otherwise, it appears to add up nicely if the Daily Telegraph got it wrong. There could reasonably not have been all that many women who fended off neck-cutting offenders with their forearms, could there...?

Well yeah, obviously forgetting an attack before Nichols as proposed by Tom, as both Abby and I said.

[Fisherman]

Well yeah, obviously forgetting an attack before Nichols as proposed by Tom, as both Abby and I said.

Mmm. So what we are left with is actually not half bad - all women who were subjected to sharp violence at this remove in time are of course interesting per se. However, given how the Ripper time and again displays his ability to silently overpower and do away with his victims, my money is on Millows falling prey to another man.
It also should be said that serial killings are normally regarded as a string of murders, broken off by cooling off periods, meaning that it would be unexpected (although not impossible) for the killer to strike on two consecutive days. If there was a frustration on part of the Ripper for not having had the time to procure any organs from Nichols, that may change the picture.

[Tom_Wescott]

Surely you know the answer to that, you've commented on his Facebook page where he lists them.

Ed looked through 1888 generally and checked 4 patients specifically:

Emma Smith
Malvina Haynes
Georgina Green
Mary Ann Austin

I rarely actually read his posts. They're terribly long. I just post my book info so his followers will know how to purchase my books.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[MrBarnett]

And yet you're able to respond to their content. Spooky. There's obviously some kind of ESP thing going on here, which might explain how you knew the LH records were 'full' of suicide attempts without seeing them.

[Tom_Wescott]

And yet you're able to respond to their content. Spooky. There's obviously some kind of ESP thing going on here, which might explain how you knew the LH records were 'full' of suicide attempts without seeing them.

Well, of course I always read the first paragraph. How else would I know what the post is about? But if it will make you feel better, I'll make some time to read them through. Ed is actually a good researcher and a man's man, so what he has to say might be worth considering.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[MrBarnett]

Well, of course I always read the first paragraph. How else would I know what the post is about? But if it will make you feel better, I'll make some time to read them through. Ed is actually a good researcher and a man's man, so what he has to say might be worth considering.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

You may have to wade through dozens of posts from other old, jealous, drunk, unmanly men who seem not to be your biggest pals.

[Tom_Wescott]

You may have to wade through dozens of posts from other old, jealous, drunk, unmanly men who seem not to be your biggest pals.

Oh, I'm used to that. I'm not sure they'll ever get used to me, though. And anyone who is not my pal is not a Ripperologist. Because I love all Ripperologists.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Abby Normal]

That's more or less what I've been asking on JTR forums, Abby. I listed three other women in the Whitechapel Infirmary with arm wounds too that were admitted late Aug, early Sept. Forgetting the Brady Street attack for a moment; If Tom was correct about the Daily Telegraph article of Oct 4th being possibly wrong on the date when describing an attack on a woman between 8th and 24th Sept., by a man with a knife. The victim was said to have used her arm to defend herself against an attempt at cutting her throat and received a severe arm wound that required treatment at the London Hospital. Maybe Millows was that woman?

Interesting and as usual thanks Debs!!!

[Dane_F]

Having listened to the explanation by Tom and everyone's take on the matter it's clear that while no definitively answer can be obtained there is nothing that outright invalidates Tom's suggestion of what happened with Margret Millous. The fact that the entries were added at a later time and in the wrong order gives plenty of leeway for the suggestion of the possibility that she actually came in on the 31st.

Let's also not forget that while people have been arguing over Margret Millous and the date she came into the hospital no one seems to have argued the rest of Tom's points about that evening or his explanation of there actually being a bloodstain (possibly a hand). These are very critical points in my eyes.

[GUT]

Haven't got to this one yet but a big fan of Tom's last book and can't wait to get to this one.

[David Orsam]

Having listened to the explanation by Tom and everyone's take on the matter it's clear that while no definitively answer can be obtained there is nothing that outright invalidates Tom's suggestion of what happened with Margret Millous. The fact that the entries were added at a later time and in the wrong order gives plenty of leeway for the suggestion of the possibility that she actually came in on the 31st.

No, Dane, you can't have been following properly for there is no leeway whatsoever for "the suggestion of the possibility that she actually came in on the 31st". Certainly no more so than the possibility that any other woman in Whitechapel (or indeed the rest of London) came into the London Hospital for treatment on 31st August without that fact being recorded. It's perfectly clear that 'Margaret Millous' was admitted to the London Hospital on 1st September. That is what the hospital register says.

And if you think the debate that has been going on in this thread over the post few days has been about whether it is 'possible' that MM could have been attacked in Brady Street then you have entirely missed the point of it.

[David Orsam]

Let's also not forget that while people have been arguing over Margret Millous and the date she came into the hospital no one seems to have argued the rest of Tom's points about that evening or his explanation of there actually being a bloodstain (possibly a hand). These are very critical points in my eyes.

Well I've discussed it with him in this thread (having discussed it at great length with him and others in another thread two years ago) so I'm not sure that 'no one' is strictly accurate.

[Tom_Wescott]

Commissioner Orsam! Please, be nice.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[David Orsam]

Commissioner Orsam! Please, be nice.

I am being nice Tom. I haven't smeared anyone or questioned their motives for posting or accused anyone of being jealous or been generally rude or insulting. I have confined myself at all times to addressing the contents of the posts and directly meeting the points under discussion. If only everyone else would do the same, what a wonderful world it would be.

[Dane_F]

No, Dane, you can't have been following properly for there is no leeway whatsoever for "the suggestion of the possibility that she actually came in on the 31st".

In your opinion.