Jack and the Thames Torso Murders: A New Ripper?

[Abby Normal]

Does anyone know if the author/s name a suspect?

[Elamarna]

Does anyone know if the author/s name a suspect?

At the conference last week, he gave nothing away at all.
The only comment was he was adding to the list. Which can be interpreted any number of ways.
Listening to his talk again, I am none the wiser Abby


Steve

[Abby Normal]

At the conference last week, he gave nothing away at all.
The only comment was he was adding to the list. Which can be interpreted any number of ways.
Listening to his talk again, I am none the wiser Abby


Steve

Ok thanks!

[Monty]

Does anyone know if the author/s name a suspect?

I do.

However I’ve been sworn to secrecy.

I shall state that Drew and Andy have provided some interesting background research on this suspect.

Monty

[Abby Normal]

I do.

However I’ve been sworn to secrecy.

I shall state that Drew and Andy have provided some interesting background research on this suspect.

Monty

ok thanks monty!

[Fisherman]

Does anyone know if the author/s name a suspect?

What has been gleaned is that Gray claims that the killer was murdering into the early nineties and that he died from disease thereafter.

[Fisherman]

I wonder if it is going to be said about Drew Gray that he is a nutter who tries to pin each and every murder committed in late 19:th century London on the same man...?

[John G]

I'm not a big fan of suspect based books, simply because at this juncture I don't think a credible case can be made about any supect. To be fair to Gray, he's been writing JtR articles for a number of years, albeit from a social historian perspective. See:

https://www.northampton.ac.uk/directories/people/drew-gray/

Personally, I'd like to see a book written by a renowned criminologist, like David Canter, or a forensic expert. But there you go...

[Fisherman]

I'm not a big fan of suspect based books, simply because at this juncture I don't think a credible case can be made about any supect. To be fair to Gray, he's been writing JtR articles for a number of years, albeit from a social historian perspective. See:

https://www.northampton.ac.uk/directories/people/drew-gray/

Personally, I'd like to see a book written by a renowned criminologist, like David Canter, or a forensic expert. But there you go...

I´d like to think that there is always the possibility of finding new material or solving the old equations in a new manner, thereby finding a worthy suspect. The idea that too long time has passed is something I do not invest in at all, many a case are solved many years after they occurred and there is no limit to the time span possible for such things.
I hope Gray makes the very good case that is available for a common originator of the two murder series, and I hope that if he does, he does not give people a chance to diminish the value of that effort by picking a bad suspect.
David Canter is a criminologist in whom I have never had full confidence myself. Others may disagree, and that is their prerogative.

[Batman]

Personally, I'd like to see a book written by a renowned criminologist, like David Canter, or a forensic expert. But there you go...

I would also because these are individuals who are actually published in forensic psychology/criminology journals.

Also, I tend to find the most trusted JtR books to make an appearance in the journals also as references.

I have seen Sugden, Begg, Rumbelow and Evans referenced this way in these journals for example.

I don't think I will find Alan Moore, Steven Knight or Cornwell being referenced.

So in a way, being referenced by those types of journals, does go a long way towards suggesting some authors are a cut above (no put intended) some others.

Now, that doesn't mean I won't read Moore, Knight or Cornwell. I like Moore (even though he is wrong) because he did a good graphic novel. I like Knight because he is a good laugh. Cornwell I haven't read to be honest but that's because Sickert just sounds like such a 'suspect' driven theory gone bananas.

Anyway, just food for thought.

[John G]

I´d like to think that there is always the possibility of finding new material or solving the old equations in a new manner, thereby finding a worthy suspect. The idea that too long time has passed is something I do not invest in at all, many a case are solved many years after they occurred and there is no limit to the time span possible for such things.
I hope Gray makes the very good case that is available for a common originator of the two murder series, and I hope that if he does, he does not give people a chance to diminish the value of that effort by picking a bad suspect.
David Canter is a criminologist in whom I have never had full confidence myself. Others may disagree, and that is their prerogative.

Well he's certainly got his work cut out trying to convince me that a "common originator" argument works! As you succinctly put it, "two murder series."

Hopefully, this isn't going to ve a book involving rounding up as many possible victims as you can find, and then attributing the murders to one implausible newly discovered super killer.

Personally, I think an academic historian should be focussing on the hard facts of the case. But I guess sensationalism sells, whereas hard facts doesn't. And even newspapers in 1888 had worked that one out.

[John G]

I would also because these are individuals who are actually published in forensic psychology/criminology journals.

Also, I tend to find the most trusted JtR books to make an appearance in the journals also as references.

I have seen Sugden, Begg, Rumbelow and Evans referenced this way in these journals for example.

I don't think I will find Alan Moore, Steven Knight or Cornwell being referenced.

So in a way, being referenced by those types of journals, does go a long way towards suggesting some authors are a cut above (no put intended) some others.

Now, that doesn't mean I won't read Moore, Knight or Cornwell. I like Moore (even though he is wrong) because he did a good graphic novel. I like Knight because he is a good laugh. Cornwell I haven't read to be honest but that's because Sickert just sounds like such a 'suspect' driven theory gone bananas.

Anyway, just food for thought.

Yeah, I would tend to agree with you. What I like about Sugden, Begg and Evans is that they focus dispassionately on the reasearch and hard facts, rather than crazy theories and even crazier suspects.

The only two suspect-driven JtR books I've read are Shirley Harrison's, which I didn't particularly enjoy, and Ewan McPherson book about William Bury, which I did enjoy, particularly as it was well researched.

However, ultimately McPherson failed to convince me, especially as Bury doesn't really fit the geo profile, whereas, say, Lechmere, fits it much better.

[Elamarna]

I wonder if it is going to be said about Drew Gray that he is a nutter who tries to pin each and every murder committed in late 19:th century London on the same man...?

I believe the response will be based on the evidence he presents and the murders he includes in his proposal.

Steve

[Boggles]

Hi John G Sorry to interrupt but regarding your point:

especially as Bury doesn't really fit the geo profile

Can I ask why not? Because he had the means to be at any of the crime scenes from his residence in Spanby Road in under 30 minutes. (Probably needed an hour if you include horse/cart preparation time, tacking up etc, in fact it was probably quicker to walk it in 40 minutes)

Anyway certainly less time than it took many of the known serial killers to get to their respective murder sites (Sutcliffe for example)

Though I cannot dispute he has as stronger link to the crime scene as Lechmere, who was actually at a crime scene, we do at least have testimony from a witness at his trial that he did once beat up his wife in a Whitechapel pub, which at least shows that he went there.

Regarding these Torso killings, I don’t know anything about them, but I will look into it. Im was quite surprised about them actually.

[Abby Normal]

Hi John G Sorry to interrupt but regarding your point:


Can I ask why not? Because he had the means to be at any of the crime scenes from his residence in Spanby Road in under 30 minutes. (Probably needed an hour if you include horse/cart preparation time, tacking up etc, in fact it was probably quicker to walk it in 40 minutes)

Anyway certainly less time than it took many of the known serial killers to get to their respective murder sites (Sutcliffe for example)

Though I cannot dispute he has as stronger link to the crime scene as Lechmere, who was actually at a crime scene, we do at least have testimony from a witness at his trial that he did once beat up his wife in a Whitechapel pub, which at least shows that he went there.

Regarding these Torso killings, I don’t know anything about them, but I will look into it. Im was quite surprised about them actually.

Hi Boggles
Bury is one of the least weak suspects IMHO.
He was known killer
He displayed similar sig-post mortem mutilation and abdoman gashed
He was a person of interest at the time
known to frequest pubs and prostitutes

geographically I think he is somewhat weak compared to other suspects-he lived far away comparitively and little evidence he was in WC.

His leaving for Dundee coincides with the end of the C5 murders, but as I think McKenzie was a ripper victim-this is a wash for me.

still one of the least weak suspects for me.