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: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Wickerman 1 hour and 9 minutes ago.
General Discussion: Do you think it will be solved? - by Mayerling 2 hours ago.
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - by Wickerman 2 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Varqm 3 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Wickerman 3 hours ago.
Non-Fiction: the victims werent prostitutes - by Varqm 3 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (29 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: JtR was Law Enforcement Hypothesis - (6 posts)
Non-Fiction: the victims werent prostitutes - (5 posts)
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - (5 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (3 posts)
Non-Fiction: The Whitechapel Murders of 1888: Another Dead End? - (3 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 > Victims > Annie Chapman

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 05-16-2012, 07:41 PM
Wyatt Earp Wyatt Earp is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Tombstone
Posts: 358
Default

curious4 and lynn, I am currently reading William Beadle's Jack the Ripper: Anatomy of a Myth, and this is mentioned on page 18: "An item which Dr Llewellyn did not mention, he probably thought it of no consequence, was that one of Polly's fingers bore the impression of a ring." He doesn't have it footnoted, so maybe someone else here can chime in on the source for that.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-16-2012, 07:44 PM
curious4 curious4 is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,748
Default annie's rings

Thanks Wyatt - I'll look it up.

Cheers,
C4
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-16-2012, 07:47 PM
curious4 curious4 is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,748
Default

Hello Lynn,

Ah yes, another one of the hordes of people running round Whitechapel at the time, strangling and mutilating as they went lol. Sorry, not with you there!

Cheers,
C4
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-16-2012, 07:51 PM
Wyatt Earp Wyatt Earp is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Tombstone
Posts: 358
Default

As a general point I think it's worth mentioning that while we know what the Ripper didn't take from his victims -- whatever was left with their bodies -- we can't really know what trinkets he might have taken from them.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-16-2012, 08:02 PM
Cogidubnus Cogidubnus is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: West Sussex UK
Posts: 3,145
Default

Quote:
Ah yes, another one of the hordes of people running round Whitechapel at the time, strangling and mutilating as they went lol. Sorry, not with you there!
Well even if you accept "Jack" at face value (ie the Canonical 5), then you've got Martha Tabram's killer, Jack himelf, the Torso killer (Elizabeth Jackson???), then at least one other for Clay Pipe Alice and Frances Coles ... so yes there were possibly a few floating round by the look of things!

Dave
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-16-2012, 08:40 PM
Mr Lucky Mr Lucky is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 646
Default

Hi, here you go-

From the press reports of Nichols inquest.

Helston - ‘No marks of any ring being torn off her fingers’ - The Morning Post 4th Sept

‘The Coroner: Do you know if she wore rings?
Dr Llewellyn: There were marks of rings on the fingers, but I do not think she had wore any for five or six weeks’ - The Western Daily Press, Bristol, 18th Sept. 1888
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-16-2012, 10:32 PM
Wyatt Earp Wyatt Earp is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Tombstone
Posts: 358
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Lucky View Post
Hi, here you go-

From the press reports of Nichols inquest.

Helston - ‘No marks of any ring being torn off her fingers’ - The Morning Post 4th Sept

‘The Coroner: Do you know if she wore rings?
Dr Llewellyn: There were marks of rings on the fingers, but I do not think she had wore any for five or six weeks’ - The Western Daily Press, Bristol, 18th Sept. 1888
I just found this reference in The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Companion (2009, p. 29): "There is the impression of a ring having been worn on one of Deceased's fingers, but there is nothing to show that it had been wrenched from her in a struggle." The source is a newspaper cutting from 8/31/88 (which actually preceded the inquest) and it is in HO 144/220/A49301B, f 179 (the name of the newspaper is not given). If the ring was simply looser-fitting than the rings Chapman wore, this could explain why the Ripper had not needed to "wrench" it from her if in fact he took possession of it.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-16-2012, 11:43 PM
Mr Lucky Mr Lucky is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 646
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wyatt Earp View Post
I just found this reference in The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Companion (2009, p. 29): "There is the impression of a ring having been worn on one of Deceased's fingers, but there is nothing to show that it had been wrenched from her in a struggle." The source is a newspaper cutting from 8/31/88 (which actually preceded the inquest) and it is in HO 144/220/A49301B, f 179 (the name of the newspaper is not given). If the ring was simply looser-fitting than the rings Chapman wore, this could explain why the Ripper had not needed to "wrench" it from her if in fact he took possession of it.
What are your thoughts about Dr Llewellyns 'five to six weeks' quote (from prev post), as a loose fitting ring wouldn't leave those kind of marks?

I've just had a look for that newspaper quote, it's from the Pall Mall Gazette, the previous sentence in the article is worth considering as well.

‘The hands are bruised, and bear evidence of having been engaged in a severe struggle. There is the impression of a ring having been worn on one of the deceased’s fingers, but there is nothing to suggest that it has been wrenched from her in a struggle’ - Pall Mall Gazette 31st August 1888
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-17-2012, 10:36 AM
Wyatt Earp Wyatt Earp is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Tombstone
Posts: 358
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Lucky View Post
What are your thoughts about Dr Llewellyns 'five to six weeks' quote (from prev post), as a loose fitting ring wouldn't leave those kind of marks?

I've just had a look for that newspaper quote, it's from the Pall Mall Gazette, the previous sentence in the article is worth considering as well.

‘The hands are bruised, and bear evidence of having been engaged in a severe struggle. There is the impression of a ring having been worn on one of the deceased’s fingers, but there is nothing to suggest that it has been wrenched from her in a struggle’ - Pall Mall Gazette 31st August 1888
If I had to pick between the sources, I would favor the Western Daily Press article you mentioned, since it is based on the inquest testimony. It is odd, however, that it mentions impressions from more than one ring while the Pall Mall Gazette article, published the same day of the murder, only mentions the one distinct impression. Perhaps there was one "more noteworthy" impression among several...who knows.

If the Ripper was a souvenir-taking killer, I presume he would have waited until the victim was finished off before taking something, so I think the absence of marks indicating removal during a struggle might not be relevant.

Loose-fitting rings do not leave as strong of an impression on the skin as tighter-fitting ones. If Llewellyn observed light impressions, I'm wondering if he might have mistakenly taken them to be older impressions. I don't know if this is a reasonable possibility or not. I also have no idea how long the skin impressions from rings might stay with a corpse and whether or not that might also be a factor.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-17-2012, 12:35 PM
Bridewell Bridewell is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Bottesford, Leicestershire
Posts: 3,726
Default

Polly Nichols was married for about 16 years, and so probably wore a wedding ring throughout that time and perhaps for a while afterwards. Might there be a residual impression from that, especially if she had gained weight as she grew older? I don't know the answer - just wondering.

Regards, Bridewell.
__________________
Regards, Bridewell.
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 08:06 PM.


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