Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Hutchinson, George: Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson? - by DJA 4 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson? - by Batman 6 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson? - by Wickerman 6 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson? - by Simon Wood 6 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson? - by Batman 7 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Time after Time: Did JtR have a watch? - by Wickerman 8 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Time after Time: Did JtR have a watch? - (8 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson? - (7 posts)
General Discussion: My profile of the ripper - (6 posts)
Scene of the Crimes: distances between kills.odd - (5 posts)
Torso Killings: JtR failed amputation. Torso killer was successful. - (4 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Witnesses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-06-2012, 08:39 AM
richardnunweek richardnunweek is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,310
Default How strange is this

Hi,
As this has not been brought up on Casebook, let me start the ball rolling.
A letter was published on the 2ND November 1888[1 week before Kelly's death] in the Ipswich Journal, which was a obvious hoax, however it stated that 'Lets hope the police here, can do better then the London police'
The content is not so important as the address, from which it was sent.14 Dorset street.Spitalfields.
How strange is that, it mentions an address just a few doors away from Millers court.
Even stranger it was the address of Caroline Maxwell ,one of the most discussed witnesses in the Ripper case, the woman who claimed to have done the impossible... seeing and talking, to someone after their death....
We know that 14, Dorset street, was a dwelling comprising of 39 inhabitants [ my favourite number ha] in 1881, and was still a lodging house in 1891.
I just find it strange that just over 7 days before Mary Kelly's death, someone addressed a letter to the Norfolk police , allegedly sent from 14 Dorset street, and what's more, that was the home of Mrs Maxwell.
I should add that all of this is currently to be found on Forums, but needs to be viewed here on Casebook , as it could be important.
It should be mentioned that by the 2ND November , Dorset street had been mentioned in the press, as Chapman had resided there, and Kate rumoured to have lived in the shed, nevertheless it is a very strange coincidence, that a letter sent to the police mentioning that on the Thursday [ 7days prior to the eve of Kelly's death] the killer would strike[ hoax] and the killer claimed to live just a few doors away from Millers court..the home of the witness who stated the impossible.
It was once suggested that Maxwell was giving the killer an alibi, by suggesting that Kelly was alive at a later time, it was even suggested that maybe she was protecting her husband.?
Lets face it,,she went to extreme lengths just for five minutes of fame,informing the police, and swearing on oath.
food for thought , and something different to discuss.
Regards Richard.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-06-2012, 11:35 AM
Sally Sally is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Badgers Drift
Posts: 2,095
Default Intriguing..

Hi Richard - intriguing

So, we know that the letter was posted on or before the preceding Monday, and that it was posted in London. It is odd, considering that Kelly was killed exactly a week after a report of this letter appeared in the press.

My questions would be: - was there any mention of this letter in the London Press? Assuming the letter writer was not 'Jack', could the real killer have read the letter in the press?

- if written and posted by 'Jack' why use his own address? A bit risky to put his actual address on a letter. For all we know the police in London were informed of the letter (even if believed to be a probable hoax) and visited the address just to make sure. Perhaps the letter-writer was trying to implicate somebody.

- Why Yarmouth? Its probably not a random choice. Was the letter writer a person who lived there, was visiting London, and decided to cause a stir for whatever reason?





-
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-06-2012, 11:43 AM
lynn cates lynn cates is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 13,841
Default content

Hello Richard. Excellent find.

What was the exact content of the letter?

Cheers.
LC
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-06-2012, 11:49 AM
Sally Sally is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Badgers Drift
Posts: 2,095
Default

Its under discussion on the other site, Lynn - there are citations from the letter, but the exact content is not revealed. It was signed 'Jack The Ripper' - so obviously a hoax
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-06-2012, 11:51 AM
lynn cates lynn cates is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 13,841
Default thanks

Hello Sally. Thanks. I'll see what I can find.

Cheers.
LC
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-06-2012, 12:02 PM
richardnunweek richardnunweek is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,310
Default

Hi Sally, Lynn,
It really is amazing what turns up frequently, the letter appears to be a obvious hoax, but why 14 Dorset street, published one week exactly, to a murder just a few doors away.? and especially a house that Maxwell lived in.
It surely indicates at the very least the killer was very aware of this property, or was it just a lucky guess?
There is a vast amount of streets in Whitechapel, and a vast amount of houses,yet the writer of this hoax[ apparent] chooses not only the street of the next murder, but the residence of the witness,that has been discussed ever since with reservations.
Not that is strange...
Regards Richard.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-06-2012, 12:15 PM
lynn cates lynn cates is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 13,841
Default Yarmouth

Hello Richard, Sally. Thanks. I found the thread over at JTRForums.

I notice that Debs Arif posted a listing of occupants. The last one caught my eye:

113 SMITH, Helen Single F 24 1867
Yarmouth, Norfolk

Bell going off yet?

Cheers.
LC
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-06-2012, 12:42 PM
richardnunweek richardnunweek is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,310
Default

Hi Lynn.
Well spotted.
So we have someone from Yarmouth living at 14 Dorset street in 1891, born 1867, aged 21 when the murder happened.
If I was the speculative type.... I would say the alarm clock has gone off.
Naturally we would have to trace this person back to 1888, and her residence then, and see if anything emerges.
But we have yet another coincidence, someone ''possibly'' staying at that house in 1888,originally from the very place the letter was sent to..
I think I will have to have a lie down..
Regards Richard.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-06-2012, 12:46 PM
lynn cates lynn cates is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 13,841
Default detctive work

Hello Richard. Thanks. You are right that we must establish that she was there in 1888.

That would make her 21. It sounds as though this lassie were a trifle bored. Reminds me of the other lassie who wrote a "Jack" letter as "a lark."

Enjoy the lie down.

Cheers.
LC
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-06-2012, 01:07 PM
lynn cates lynn cates is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 13,841
Default our gal?

Hello Richard. Is this our gal in 1881?

Cheers.
LC
Attached Images
 
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.