The Bank Holiday Murders by Tom Wescott (2014)

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Curious, thanks. Yes, I talk in the book about Poll's cousin, Julia Sheen, nee McCarthy.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Barnaby]

Hi Barnaby. I'm intrigued by your thoughts but I'm not sure I fully understand what you're saying. You mean the murderer is someone exerting power over the landlords?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

I was thinking more along the lines of the murderer having some connections to people who would have this power. But I'm not a royal conspiracy theorist; I'm kind of thinking along the lines of organized crime protecting one of their own or even using the killer to advance their agenda, but this is just pure speculation of course.

[Stephen Thomas]

I'm taking a bit of a beating from the old-timers on the other site

Come off it, Tom.

Comments about your book on jtrforums are extremely complimentary.

Are you the man who won't take yes for an answer?

[Tom_Wescott]

I was thinking more along the lines of the murderer having some connections to people who would have this power. But I'm not a royal conspiracy theorist; I'm kind of thinking along the lines of organized crime protecting one of their own or even using the killer to advance their agenda, but this is just pure speculation of course.

Hi Barnaby, thanks. That's why I look at the landlords. They were the 'organized crime' of the East End at the time and had the power to pull this off. Thing is, I don't see how they benefitted from the murders, which is why I speculate they operated more in the cover-up capacity, i.e. Pearly Poll and Sgt. Thick. Who was in a position to pull the strings of Poll and Thick? Satchell, McCarthy, and Crossingham.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Come off it, Tom.

Comments about your book on jtrforums are extremely complimentary.

Are you the man who won't take yes for an answer?

Hi Stephen, yes most comments I've received have been extremely complimentary, including your own. However, at the time I wrote the post you quote I was indeed taking a beating, so it was quite a pleasure to read Barnaby's positive review. But even the negative comments are welcome if they're constructive as some of them have been.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[curious]

Hi Barnaby, thanks. That's why I look at the landlords. They were the 'organized crime' of the East End at the time and had the power to pull this off. Thing is, I don't see how they benefitted from the murders, which is why I speculate they operated more in the cover-up capacity, i.e. Pearly Poll and Sgt. Thick. Who was in a position to pull the strings of Poll and Thick? Satchell, McCarthy, and Crossingham.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Tom,
They could have benefited from the murders if:

1. They had instituted collecting something extra from the working girls. Those who refused were "taught a lesson" and those who knew too much and/or were a threat were removed.

2. If a "single girl" was not really earning anything -- such as a sick Pearly Poll -- but they could stay if they provided "assistance" when asked. Poll seems to have tried to draw the line at murder, ran off, but still was reeled in -- or that can be one interpretation.

That could explain why John Kelly and Catherine Eddowes would walk about or go elsewhere even though the deputy said since they were regulars, he would have let them stay anyway. If they thought that, they preferred not to for some reason. Maybe because "free" would cost too much in the long run????

I am wondering if the reclusive Martha Tabrum learned something she should not have known and since they didn't know whether they could trust her or whether she would keep her mouth shut she had to be eliminated.

Just musing.

curious

[Barnaby]

Hi Curious,

These are all benefits, no doubt, but there are also drawbacks (police, press attention) for repeatedly having your residents disemboweled. I agree with Tom and think they wouldn't have orchestrated the actual killings.

Tom: If your theory is correct, then I think you are arguing they might have participated in the cover-up. Which I will go along with but of course the obvious question is why? Without any knowledge of specific details, what makes intuitive sense to me is that it wasn't much of a choice. They were under someone's thumb, who I don't know, but if they were into dirty deeds done dirt cheap then there is always the potential for extortion, paybacks, etc. Or for that matter, concrete shoes, cyanide, TNT!

[curious]

Hi Curious,

These are all benefits, no doubt, but there are also drawbacks (police, press attention) for repeatedly having your residents disemboweled. I agree with Tom and think they wouldn't have orchestrated the actual killings.

Tom: If your theory is correct, then I think you are arguing they might have participated in the cover-up. Which I will go along with but of course the obvious question is why? Without any knowledge of specific details, what makes intuitive sense to me is that it wasn't much of a choice. They were under someone's thumb, who I don't know, but if they were into dirty deeds done dirt cheap then there is always the potential for extortion, paybacks, etc. Or for that matter, concrete shoes, cyanide, TNT!

Hi, Barnaby,
After sleeping on it, literally, I arrived at the same conclusion -- which is why I'm up at 4 a.m. -- well, nearly 5 now, after feeding animals, making coffee, etc.

Part of the reason it doesn't work is because of the necessity of them having to testify and being in the public eye. They would not be willing to do that.

The biggie for me is the extreme violence. If the landlords had an "enforcer" that violent, then he was beyond their control and they would have had to do something. Maybe they did and that's why the killings stopped after Mary Kelly. I wonder if the beatings stopped, too?

Remember that Tom pointed out that the walking stick pointed toward someone more affluent than most Whitechapel residents . . . so . . . what might that mean in relationship to the landlords assisting in the coverup?

Remember, IF Pearly Poll knew Martha Tabram was killed before she had even been identified -- what does that mean?

Unfortunately, Tom has started me thinking and it's always dangerous when I think. . . still musing.

be warned.

curious

[curious]

Hi, Tom,
Have you and Debs learned who Mary Ann Connelly's parents were?

Thx,

Velma

[Ginger]

Tom,
They could have benefited from the murders if:

1. They had instituted collecting something extra from the working girls. Those who refused were "taught a lesson" and those who knew too much and/or were a threat were removed.

If the "lesson" kills her, though, then you're not getting any more money at all from her. Mssrs. McCarthy and Crossingham might be willing to overlook Emma Smith as just the hired muscle getting carried away and doing more damage than he'd intended, but Tabram and subsequent victims were deliberately killed. The only way that can pay off for the cabal is if the other girls know what happened, and why. Victorian courts may have shown lenity in punishing men who beat women, but the Ripper murders were of an entirely different order of magnitude. I have to think someone would have talked.

Also, these two weren't choirboys. They had bouncers, they had cops on their payrolls, they did business with prize-fighters, and (if they ran true to form for that type) they probably had quite a few men who owed them money or favours. If they failed to take action against one man because they were afraid of him, then he must have been formidable indeed.

So, I'm left to wonder - is there some way that the murders could have made money for them? Did either man's finances show a sudden improvement after the killings?

[Barnaby]

Remember McCarthy allowed his door to be broken down to get to MJK. I don't know how much a door cost back then, but presumably this was not an insignificant cost. I just don't see how these murders would make the landlords money. I don't think they were jacking up the price of a bed during the Ripper scare.

Now, inciting the masses for some political gain, this I can envision something organized crime might attempt. But again, I have nothing specific, just vague ideas.

[curious]

If the "lesson" kills her, though, then you're not getting any more money at all from her. Mssrs. McCarthy and Crossingham might be willing to overlook Emma Smith as just the hired muscle getting carried away and doing more damage than he'd intended, but Tabram and subsequent victims were deliberately killed. The only way that can pay off for the cabal is if the other girls know what happened, and why. Victorian courts may have shown lenity in punishing men who beat women, but the Ripper murders were of an entirely different order of magnitude. I have to think someone would have talked.

Also, these two weren't choirboys. They had bouncers, they had cops on their payrolls, they did business with prize-fighters, and (if they ran true to form for that type) they probably had quite a few men who owed them money or favours. If they failed to take action against one man because they were afraid of him, then he must have been formidable indeed.

So, I'm left to wonder - is there some way that the murders could have made money for them? Did either man's finances show a sudden improvement after the killings?

I agree with you. I don't think Emma Smith was supposed to die. I think the deputy accompanying her to the hospital and doing the talking for her might be telling . . . It could also just be that they were friends.


I would guess that Emily Horsnell was not supposed to die. But for some reason, John Satchell was the only one who seemed to have talked to her. Why?

Tabram probably was not really a prostitute and maybe didn't plan to be. She had lived there only 3 weeks after leaving Turner. She could have been a "lesson" as someone who did not cooperate. Or she could have seen or overheard something she was not supposed to know and they did not know her well enough to know if she could be trusted to keep her month shut.

Polly Nichols seems to be in about the same category. Had just moved into the house . . . Of course, she was a prostitute, but maybe not willing to share her paltry earnings.

People would talk, of course, but amongst themselves. The landlords would have have had to claim responsibility for the rumors to have floated amongst the "girls." Even if the police did know, which ones could the "girls" have trusted?

My wheels are still turning, trying to figure this out. I can't help wondering if the landlords did have JtR taken care of and that's why he stopped. He was an uncontrollable "employee" who was removed. Not sure that makes sense.

Anyway, still musing. . .

curious

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi all,

I don't know anything more about Pearly Poll than what's in the book. Would like to though and I think more research could be done.

I don't see how the murders could have been lessons to anyone. These women were not prize prostitutes for anyone.

McCarthy had no choice but to axe his own door down because the alternative was to admit he had the only known key to a locked room inside which was a murdered woman.

Emma Smith's killers most likely left her for dead, though that's impossible to know for sure. As mentioned, Horsnell also survived her wounds for a time. Also, because no autopsy was performed on Horsnell, we do not know if she was violated as was Smith. It's a true injustice that the coroner's inquest was allowed to return an 'open' verdict because there was no doubt that her injuries - whatever they were - were intentionally inflicted and caused her death and therefore she was murdered. It's equally sad that the press did not care any more than did the police and coroner and only one newspaper carried any mention of the incident.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Wickerman]

Remember McCarthy allowed his door to be broken down to get to MJK. I don't know how much a door cost back then, but presumably this was not an insignificant cost.

Actually, I think quite the opposite.
Rather than have the police break their way in, no doubt requiring a new(er) door, McCarthy volunteered to force the lock himself with his own pick-axe.
He likely just used it as leverage to pop the lock causing as little damage to the door as possible.

Two questions remain:
1 - why did McCarthy not have a spare key?
2 - how come McCarthy did not know how to reach the lock through the window?

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Wick. McCarthy had a key. He just couldn't admit it for fear of implicating himself.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott