Ripper Confidential by Tom Wescott (2017)

[Tom_Wescott]

There are absolutely exceptions. Some of most out of the box thinking I have read lately has come from people long in the Ripper Community. Mr. Simon Wood comes to mind. Agreeing or disagreeing is irrelevant. He is tossing a lot of interesting ideas out there that cause you to think deeper on Ripper murders.

I love Simon and his writing but his work is night and day from mine. I don't consider what I do to be 'alternative' or even 'out of the box'. Some of my ideas are 'new' but they're not alternative. Read what I say about the grapes and what he says and you'll see the difference.

You do hit on a very key point however: "And most Ripper books are written for and by that crowd. Some are damn good and I use them. But it does get stale, so I think it's time for next level stuff."

This has been my overwhelming feeling for years now. I was introduced to JTR in the early 2000s when I was a teen. I have less experience and knowledge on the case than almost anyone who passionately posts about it here. Yet even I feel the case can be so stale with the same re-telling of the story over and over just slightly modified to fit the authors favorite suspect into the picture.

This has been a lot of people's feelings for years, or so I keep hearing. Particularly since Stewart Evans stopped publishing.

What the authors did 20 years ago was amazing and gives us such a wonderful foundation of research to build off of. But that work has been done. It's time for a new type of suspect book. Not one based around trying to twist the known facts to fit the person's favorite suspect but instead a book that uses new information and new research to give us a new perspective. No easy task for sure, but just what we need.

Would you like to see the greatest Ripper suspect book ever written?

Also, if I can be greedy, I really would like Debra to do a book on the Torso murders. I have been blown away by 3 things I've read in the last 3 years. Pearly Poll, Margret Millous, and Deb's posts on Elizabeth Jackson and the types of mutilations she had.

Have you read the stuff she's published with Rob Clack? Some of the best stuff I've read. Rob Clack also published on the torso solo-style a couple years ago. Great stuff, but mere teases compared to what they could do in a book. But it's easier to write a book when you're in the midst of the excitement of discovery. It's harder later on when you've become burnt out on a subject. I'm speaking from my own experience, not from anything Debs has said, but I speculate (that's all I do, according to some) that such burn out plays a part in why the (relatively overwhelming) task of writing a book hasn't yet been appealing.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Totally agree with you on debs and the Jackson/torso thing. I've been asking her for a while to write a book on the torsos case and or any connection to the ripper.

While you've been asking Debs to write a Thames Torso book I've been begging and pleading her. It hasn't worked. I'm going to learn hypnosis and try that next.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Abby Normal]

There are absolutely exceptions. Some of most out of the box thinking I have read lately has come from people long in the Ripper Community. Mr. Simon Wood comes to mind. Agreeing or disagreeing is irrelevant. He is tossing a lot of interesting ideas out there that cause you to think deeper on Ripper murders.


You do hit on a very key point however: "And most Ripper books are written for and by that crowd. Some are damn good and I use them. But it does get stale, so I think it's time for next level stuff."

This has been my overwhelming feeling for years now. I was introduced to JTR in the early 2000s when I was a teen. I have less experience and knowledge on the case than almost anyone who passionately posts about it here. Yet even I feel the case can be so stale with the same re-telling of the story over and over just slightly modified to fit the authors favorite suspect into the picture.

What the authors did 20 years ago was amazing and gives us such a wonderful foundation of research to build off of. But that work has been done. It's time for a new type of suspect book. Not one based around trying to twist the known facts to fit the person's favorite suspect but instead a book that uses new information and new research to give us a new perspective. No easy task for sure, but just what we need.

Also, if I can be greedy, I really would like Debra to do a book on the Torso murders. I have been blown away by 3 things I've read in the last 3 years. Pearly Poll, Margret Millous, and Deb's posts on Elizabeth Jackson and the types of mutilations she had.

Totally agree with you on debs and the Jackson/torso thing. I've been asking her for a while to write a book on the torsos case and or any connection to the ripper. Same thing to fish and or ed stow also, and throw lech into it by all means I say.

[Dane_F]

I don't like to generalize people, so I won't, because there are wonderful exceptions. But yes, a lot of the more old school Ripperologists seem to be rather stuck in the mid-90s as regards their thinking of the case. They'll gleefully accept new details about people, places and things, but would prefer their overall understanding of the case not be significantly modified. It was settled within the first handful of books that they read and won't change. I'm not sure if that's 'unfortunate' as you say or if it's just human nature, but it is what it is. And most Ripper books are written for and by that crowd. Some are damn good and I use them. But it does get stale, so I think it's time for next level stuff.

Ripperology isn't going away. That's a fact. Some day my books won't be considered 'new' and young people will view them as almost contemporaneous to Begg, Sugden, et al and will consider them in tandem with them, instead of 20 years later. That's when I expect the work will be taken more seriously. It's extremely gratifying to see so many 'get it' in the here and now.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

There are absolutely exceptions. Some of most out of the box thinking I have read lately has come from people long in the Ripper Community. Mr. Simon Wood comes to mind. Agreeing or disagreeing is irrelevant. He is tossing a lot of interesting ideas out there that cause you to think deeper on Ripper murders.


You do hit on a very key point however: "And most Ripper books are written for and by that crowd. Some are damn good and I use them. But it does get stale, so I think it's time for next level stuff."

This has been my overwhelming feeling for years now. I was introduced to JTR in the early 2000s when I was a teen. I have less experience and knowledge on the case than almost anyone who passionately posts about it here. Yet even I feel the case can be so stale with the same re-telling of the story over and over just slightly modified to fit the authors favorite suspect into the picture.

What the authors did 20 years ago was amazing and gives us such a wonderful foundation of research to build off of. But that work has been done. It's time for a new type of suspect book. Not one based around trying to twist the known facts to fit the person's favorite suspect but instead a book that uses new information and new research to give us a new perspective. No easy task for sure, but just what we need.

Also, if I can be greedy, I really would like Debra to do a book on the Torso murders. I have been blown away by 3 things I've read in the last 3 years. Pearly Poll, Margret Millous, and Deb's posts on Elizabeth Jackson and the types of mutilations she had.

[Tom_Wescott]

As far as writing an article on the similarities between the two murders series, that is a very good idea. Maybe something I will look into. I'm glad you are finding the case as interesting as I have.

It's always more real when it's close to home, isn't it? If you choose to write something feel free to hit me up.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Dane_F]

Dane, I'm reading this article you provided. It seems it might be more a case of drug murders, but that many women in such a small area, so connected, is terribly curious. Needless to say, I thought of both Polly Nichols an Catherine Eddowes when I read this: 'Guillory also had her four kids placed with relatives. A task force witness supports the claim that in her final days she “was scared of someone,” but she would not say who, and that she “knew who killed the girls.”'

If you feel up to the task, you might consider writing a piece about the Jeff Davis 8, comparing and contrasting it to the early Whitechapel murders (beginning, as I do, with Horsnell). You could submit it to Ripperologist magazine or some other journal or blog you're familiar with. I think it would be a great piece. It's unfortunate that something so tragic as the Jeff Davis 8 is not more widely known. I suspect if the victims were soccer moms it would be.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Drugs were involved for sure Tom. But keep reading. What becomes apparent is the murders weren't all about drugs. If anything the main suspect is rumored to have killed them to cover up the original murder, which was about drugs. At least the author seems to think that was the reason for the subsequent murders.

Yet another interesting correlation to JTR murders as some people have theorized that at least one or more of the murders were done to "silence" people who were rumored to know who the killer was.

The rumors of police corruption/incompetence is equally as intriguing of a link to JTR. You've got it all in the Jeff Davis 8. Police officer(s?) sleeping with eventual victims. Bad handling of crime scenes or evidence. Police making money on the side. Victims rumored as police informants! No one caring because the victims were "unfortunates" until multiple murders in. And these are just the tip of the iceberg of similarities from the top of my head.

It really is amazing that not more has been published and researched on the Jeff Davis 8. The only reason I am familiar with it is because I live about 1 hour away and at the time of the series I was actually working in the town that it happened in. I remember when the first murder happened and no one cared because it was "just some drugged out prostitute". Even when it was realized it was a serial killer most people seemed apathetic because of the type of people he was killing. Isn't it amazing even 100+ years later some of the same issues that plagued the JTR series still plagued another serial murder case?


As far as writing an article on the similarities between the two murders series, that is a very good idea. Maybe something I will look into. I'm glad you are finding the case as interesting as I have.

[Fisherman]

Fish, my last post to you was more of a general rant and not intended for you to take personally. But you don't take yourself just a wee bit seriously. And I do not make fun of Ripperology. Satirize it and myself occasionally, but I never disrespect it.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Who´s to take me seriously if I don´t do it, Tom?

It´s good to hear that you don´t intentionally make fun of ripperology, anyways.

[Tom_Wescott]

Tom,

The Jeff Davis 8 really is an interesting case. If I might suggest a starting point that really lays out the details of the case it would be this one: https://medium.com/matter/who-killed...8-d1b813e13581

Dane, I'm reading this article you provided. It seems it might be more a case of drug murders, but that many women in such a small area, so connected, is terribly curious. Needless to say, I thought of both Polly Nichols an Catherine Eddowes when I read this: 'Guillory also had her four kids placed with relatives. A task force witness supports the claim that in her final days she “was scared of someone,” but she would not say who, and that she “knew who killed the girls.”'

If you feel up to the task, you might consider writing a piece about the Jeff Davis 8, comparing and contrasting it to the early Whitechapel murders (beginning, as I do, with Horsnell). You could submit it to Ripperologist magazine or some other journal or blog you're familiar with. I think it would be a great piece. It's unfortunate that something so tragic as the Jeff Davis 8 is not more widely known. I suspect if the victims were soccer moms it would be.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Hello Tom
I guess I'm one of the 10% who does accept that possibility, and Millous is certainly a very interesting find.

Color me shocked but genuinely pleased to read this!

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Publically talking **** about people when you think they cannot hear it is not my idea of fun, I´m afraid.
If you think I am obsessed with you having to be wrong, you may need to read my post again - what I said was that you stand on your own two feet in Ripperology regardless if you are right or wrong. That does not amount to much of an obsession, does it?
I´m all for having fun with my ripperology, as it happens - but having fun with ripperology is not the same as making fun of it.

Fish, my last post to you was more of a general rant and not intended for you to take personally. But you don't take yourself just a wee bit seriously. And I do not make fun of Ripperology. Satirize it and myself occasionally, but I never disrespect it.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Tom,

The Jeff Davis 8 really is an interesting case. If I might suggest a starting point that really lays out the details of the case it would be this one: https://medium.com/matter/who-killed...8-d1b813e13581

There are some similarities that I can see between this and JTR that might also scratch the same itch for you and give you a chance to stretch the same muscles but get a break from constant JTR research.


The Police informant point I completely agree with. There's no way of knowing if it's true nor can we really determine what the implications would be, if any, even if they were true. It is something that makes you go, "That's interesting to think about".

. . .Which is really what makes Margret Millous such a huge and wonderful revelation of research. Here you have actual evidence that points to the potential of a failed attack, not just randomly on some night in some area, but on the same night and in the same area as someone that WAS murdered by JTR.

The implications of what this means, the thought that the first double event might actually involve Nichols and an until now unknown victim, I mean wow. This is good stuff and yet it's a shame because so many will dismiss it off hand without giving it the proper attention it deserves.

Your talk of a next generation of Ripper researchers is both heartening and saddening as well. The vast amount of knowledge that the "old timers" possess would be so helpful in new research, yet I feel most of the most knowledgeable people are also the most stuck in their way and unwilling to budge. Still, a new generation might be exactly what is needed to breathe life back into this case.

Count yourself among them Tom. Or maybe, even more importantly you will serve as a bridge between the two.

I don't like to generalize people, so I won't, because there are wonderful exceptions. But yes, a lot of the more old school Ripperologists seem to be rather stuck in the mid-90s as regards their thinking of the case. They'll gleefully accept new details about people, places and things, but would prefer their overall understanding of the case not be significantly modified. It was settled within the first handful of books that they read and won't change. I'm not sure if that's 'unfortunate' as you say or if it's just human nature, but it is what it is. And most Ripper books are written for and by that crowd. Some are damn good and I use them. But it does get stale, so I think it's time for next level stuff.

Ripperology isn't going away. That's a fact. Some day my books won't be considered 'new' and young people will view them as almost contemporaneous to Begg, Sugden, et al and will consider them in tandem with them, instead of 20 years later. That's when I expect the work will be taken more seriously. It's extremely gratifying to see so many 'get it' in the here and now.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Sam Flynn]

Hello Tom

Thanks for that. 90% of the people currently in the Ripper scene will not be able to adjust their thinking in order to accept Millous might have been a Ripper victim.

I guess I'm one of the 10% who does accept that possibility, and Millous is certainly a very interesting find.

[Fisherman]

No, I just didn't know you read this thread, so I was talking some s**t about you. Let it go. People like to say a certain researcher does all my work for me. You think that bothers me? It's cute! And what's this 'right or wrong' business? What's this obsession everyone has with me having to be wrong? Is it the end of the world or something if you're wrong? Is that why everyone plays it so damn safe? If I could say one thing to Ripperology it's stop taking yourself so seriously and have fun with it. When it's not boring it IS fun you know.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Publically talking **** about people when you think they cannot hear it is not my idea of fun, I´m afraid.
If you think I am obsessed with you having to be wrong, you may need to read my post again - what I said was that you stand on your own two feet in Ripperology regardless if you are right or wrong. That does not amount to much of an obsession, does it?
I´m all for having fun with my ripperology, as it happens - but having fun with ripperology is not the same as making fun of it.

[Dane_F]

Tom,

The Jeff Davis 8 really is an interesting case. If I might suggest a starting point that really lays out the details of the case it would be this one: https://medium.com/matter/who-killed...8-d1b813e13581

There are some similarities that I can see between this and JTR that might also scratch the same itch for you and give you a chance to stretch the same muscles but get a break from constant JTR research.


The Police informant point I completely agree with. There's no way of knowing if it's true nor can we really determine what the implications would be, if any, even if they were true. It is something that makes you go, "That's interesting to think about".

. . .Which is really what makes Margret Millous such a huge and wonderful revelation of research. Here you have actual evidence that points to the potential of a failed attack, not just randomly on some night in some area, but on the same night and in the same area as someone that WAS murdered by JTR.

The implications of what this means, the thought that the first double event might actually involve Nichols and an until now unknown victim, I mean wow. This is good stuff and yet it's a shame because so many will dismiss it off hand without giving it the proper attention it deserves.

Your talk of a next generation of Ripper researchers is both heartening and saddening as well. The vast amount of knowledge that the "old timers" possess would be so helpful in new research, yet I feel most of the most knowledgeable people are also the most stuck in their way and unwilling to budge. Still, a new generation might be exactly what is needed to breathe life back into this case.

Count yourself among them Tom. Or maybe, even more importantly you will serve as a bridge between the two.

[Tom_Wescott]

Yes indeed.

The introduction of Margret Millous is the most captivating piece of JTR research I've read since Tom did it in his previous book with Pearly Poll. The implications of what it would mean, if what Tom suggests is true, are astounding.

Thanks for that. 90% of the people currently in the Ripper scene will not be able to adjust their thinking in order to accept Millous might have been a Ripper victim. I knew that when I was writing it. But it's for the next generation to take on board and follow up. Maybe the one after that. I may be way off base in my thinking and if so I hope someone will find that out. But it seems extremely logical to me.

In the hours just before the murder of Polly Nichols we have a screaming woman running through Brady Street, the screams were said to have began from about the place a bloody handprint was found. Around the same time Margaret Millous checks into London Hospital for a serious cut to her arm. So serious she remains in hospital for 2 weeks. Reports then start appearing in papers of a potential Ripper victim who survived. All the pieces fit perfectly and present the start of a picture, but since not all the pieces are there it's not a complete picture an I might be seeing a dinosaur where in fact there's only a frog.

As I mention in my book, there is a LOT of material in existence that has not been collected in a digital database yet but one day will be. So, I think it's good that all this stuff get out there into the conscious of people who are or one day will be researching the case so that when they come across items they'll be able to recognize the significance of this. I've no doubt we've not heard the last of Margaret Millous.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott