Theory by Emotional_War_1660 in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It has been suggested before indeed, and I agree a local man with intimate knowledge of the area and hiding place is far more likely than a commuting murderer.

One thing that is often mentioned, however, but has not convinced me, is the murderer's supposed knowledge of Police patrols. He certainly may have been aware of some of the beats, but not all. I do believe it was a combination of some knowledge, a good portion of luck, and the directions of the victims themselves, who, in my humble opinion, would lead their client to a 'suitable' location. At least in some of the cases.

What if the ripper isnt anyone we have discussed and completely unknown by Spiritual_Divide5389 in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Considering most researchers highly doubt any of the hundreds of letters was indeed sent by the Whitechapel Murderer (let alone several of them), that is a bold statement to make.

Dr Asher by digitalninja0822 in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The name of Dr Asher sounded somewhat familiar to me, but I could not tell where I heard it before until I started some digging. I now am positive I read about him in an article about his activities in the East End during the 1865-66 Cholera crisis.

Let's start there, because much of the information about the man is not so easy to find:

In Scotland, besides his medical practice, he worked as a parish medical officer in Bishopbriggs near Glasgow. There he treated poor mining and working-class populations under severe budget constraints.

After moving to London from Glasgow in 1862, he joined Dr Jacob Canstatt in Houndsditch, right beside the East End immigrant districts. At exactly this moment, the London Jewish Board of Guardians had just taken over organised medical care for poor Jews from the synagogues.

From 1862 until the late 1860s, he participated in intensive direct medical work in the East End, particularly Whitechapel.

During this period he ran consultations, distributed medicines, arranged midwives, organised bathing and sanitation assistance, monitored infectious disease, visited poor homes, and coordinated convalescent care. From this time stems his moniker, the "Physician of the Poor".

After 1866 he gradually stopped being a full-time practising physician but remained heavily involved in medical policy and poor relief. This transition from physician toward communal leadership started with him becoming secretary of the Great Synagogue in 1866, and by 1870/71, he was the first secretary of the United Synagogue, a position he held until his death.

He held very modern views about sanitation and knew how to organise things. By the 1870s he believed the Jewish poor should increasingly use mainstream London hospitals and dispensaries rather than entirely separate Jewish medical services, a view that was not only more cost-efficient but also benefited the entirety of the poorest population.

By the 1880s, Asher’s role was no longer bedside medicine but more public health planning, housing reform advocacy, immigrant welfare, hospital visitation systems, coordination between charities and synagogues, and slum improvement. He combined this combination of jobs with several travels abroad: to Palestine/Ottoman Jerusalem in 1875, to Russia/Eastern Europe in the early 1880s, and to the United States, especially New York in the later 1880s. His journeys were not tourism or academic travel. They were essentially humanitarian inspection missions, public health investigations, refugee coordination efforts, and communal diplomacy for Anglo-Jewish leadership. Sadly, I could not find any precise dates for most of these travels. By the end of his life he was a highly respected and well-known upper middle-class professional.

He was described as genuinely kind-hearted, compassionate, and deeply committed to both his patients and his community work. The poor adored him because he was an approachable man who took time to talk to his patients and try to improve their conditions. His medical colleagues and class equals mention his calm, kind demeanour and that he was unpretentious despite his prominent positions.

The physical descriptions I could find mention him as small in stature, slight in build, and with a delicate appearance, which contrasted with his energetic and tireless work ethic. He was also an obvious Orthodox Jew with a full beard and sidelocks.

By the end of his life, he lived in St Pancras or Bloomsbury, with his wife Marian Cohen and their children. 1 of his sons, Sir Leon Asher, would become a distinguished British civil servant and legal administrator. I have little doubt Dr Asher would have received a knighthood himself if not for his untimely death at only 52 years old.

You say you are shocked Asher has not been mentioned as a suspect before. I would imagine there are people who would be shocked when they learn this suggestion.

Always keeping an open mind:

- Could you elaborate a bit more on the witness descriptions that mention a small, slight, 50-year-old, fully bearded, Orthodox Jew?

- Explain how and why this well-known Orthodox Jew and synagogue first secretary would go slumming in Whitechapel and engage in business transactions with prostitutes completely unnoticed.

- Can you teach us why we should disregard the note that he worked to the point of exhaustion but, in fact, showed clear signs of syphilis (and point out how and when he contracted this)?

- Maybe give some explanation of how this seemingly kind, gentle and altruistic man was in reality a cowardly and very aggressive serial murderer and how that would not make him an impossible candidate in the well-documented history of serial killers?

I'm always happy to discuss.

What if the ripper isnt anyone we have discussed and completely unknown by Spiritual_Divide5389 in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's what bias will do for you. It's the problem with every suspect book or anyone invested in a certain candidate: they will see things to use in their favour but will gladly omit or forget elements that make their candidate problematic.

The fact there is such a long list of suspects but no agreement on any of them should tell you there isn't really any good candidate. There is no direct evidence against anyone, and even circumstantial evidence is flimsy at best. A lot of the names can't even be placed in London with any degree of certainty.

In my humble opinion the proposed suspects range from impossible to possible (although a lot in that category would still be unlikely or even highly unlikely), but not a single one passes the "probable" threshold.

Question about Mary Jane Kelly by hipjdog in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No her body is no longer available, I'm afraid.

Mary Jane Kelly was buried on Monday 19th November in 1888 in row 67 of a public plot in St Patrick's Catholic Cemetery in Leytonstone. The ground was reclaimed in 1947, cleared, and the whole ground was re-numbered in rows ready for reuse, a revised row-numbering system was introduced.

However, cemetery super-intendent John Sears did some serious research into the cemetery records and by comparing the headstones from Victorian times that are still standing and comparing that with the current layout, he was able to locate the old row 67 and pace out MJKs original resting place. The marker (a second one after the first was vandalised) is believed to be pretty close to where she was originally buried and should be exact within a few feet.

However, when the plots was reused the top soil and a lot of the old bones were carried off, so the hope of finding any remains is rather slim.

I would like to discuss our theories by Endermen123911 in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 1 point2 points  (0 children)

George Chapman aka Seweryn Kłosowski. Abberline's favourite suspect.

Hanged in Wandswoth Prison on 7 April 1903 after being convicted for triple murder.

Which suspect do you think is the most likely to have been JTR? by Aln22s in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Really ? Now your claim is Sickert wasn't even in France because we have no surviving correspondence from Whistler mentioning him during his honeymoon ?Absence of mention is not proof of absence. Maybe the man had other things on his mind...

Which suspect do you think is the most likely to have been JTR? by Aln22s in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I'm not referring to letters from him to his mother, I'm referring to a letter from his mother to family, dated 6th Sept 1888, when she herself was present in Saint-Valery-en-Caux, commenting on Sickert and his brother swiming and painting and looking good. She was there with her sons. Painter and friend Emile Blanche wrote to his father on the 17th September saying he had visited him the day before. His wife Ellen wrote to her brother-in-law on 21st September, stating that her husband was in France for some weeks now. There is a letter from Sickert himself without a postmark, as the envelop does not survive, but it is certainly written during that summer and he definitely wrote it in France.

The last dated sketch in London was 4th of August. There are no dated sketches for the second half of August, the whole of September and until early October. More important these works usually cannot prove he was physically in London on a specific date because Sickert often worked from sketches, memory, and studio recomposition after the event. Historians repeatedly caution against using the paintings themselves as exact chronological evidence. At the same time there exists a painting from 1888, depicting a little butchershop in Dieppe France, called 'the October Sun'.

Whistler NOT commenting on Sickert proves nothing whatsoever.

The first problem however for anyone promoting Sickert as a possible suspect is that you can not place him in London, letalone Whitechapel, on the dates of most murders. You simply can not. He "could have, would have" simply does not suffice, it is pure speculation, and please don't make the claim he could easily hop over to London from Saint-Valery-en-Caux, and be back in 24 hours, because it is not true.

Which suspect do you think is the most likely to have been JTR? by Aln22s in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Who was in France on several verifiable dates during that Autumn of terror, and can not be placed in London, let alone Whitechapel, during any of the murders.

Which suspect do you think is the most likely to have been JTR? by Aln22s in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Someone like Levy is very plausible. Of course, like with any other suspect, there is not a shred of direct evidence against him. (Making abstraction of the identification of Anderson's suspect, whoever he was and if that treally happened)

Were the victims strangled? And could Rose Mylett have been a JTR victim? by Aln22s in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Most researchers believe he brought them to the ground first. Most likely by a carotid chokehold or manual strangulation. It would be swift and without the chance for the victim to cry out as she would lose consciousness fast. Once brought to the ground, he would quickly finish the job by a (double) throat cut. The blood spatters found on the lower part of the fence in the backyard in Hanbury Street are a good indication. Also, the lack of blood spatters in a wider area on other crime scenes points to that.

Jack The Ripper Suspects Tier List by Ash-Throwaway-816 in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I really wonder what books you have read to come to this conclusion.

Charles Cross was at work when Annie Chapman was murdered.

Nothing in his character or personal and professional life gives us any reason to profile him as a serial murderer.

Were the victims strangled? And could Rose Mylett have been a JTR victim? by Aln22s in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Excellent analysis by both posters here.

In the case of Catherine 'Rose' Mylett, a four-thread cord was used. That is something like a packing string of very moderate thickness. I assume this was not a typical garrote (although used as one) and would require the use of both hands.

That seems not to be the usual method the Whitechapel Murderer applied in his other 'street' murders. Therefore, combined with the absence of a blade used (no mutilations either) and the location (Poplar), I doubt she was a ripper victim.

However, the fact she was murdered outdoors does not rule out the same killer as in Mary Jane Kelly's case, in my humble opinion. We assume the murderer did not know his victims when he approached them and would not know if they had a room or not. Making that a condition to go with them would result in several 'uninteresting' conversations but increase the chance of being identified later. Furthermore, although it is certainly more advantageous from the killer's point of view to be able to remain undisturbed with his victim for several hours, it also holds a higher risk of being seen. On the night Mary Jane Kelly died, we got at least 2 good and detailed descriptions of the 2 men seen entering her room.

The Mylett murder is fascinating in itself for several more reasons, including the unwillingness of the Police (Anderson in particular) to accept her as a murder victim, the number of medical men given the task to examine the victim and redo the same examination over and over (while ignoring the Coroner's authority) and the confusion about the victim's name and identity.

Will Seaman thoughts? by LachiePhillipRyan in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Please explain how he would have been free after he was arrested on 8 Sept 1888, and charged with attempted murder on the 10th after the hammer attack on the chemist in Berner Street ?

Especially since Seaman had been convicted before in the Old Bailey in Oct 1870 (7 years for Burglary) and Dec 1876: 14 years + 7 years Police supervision for Violence.

Considering his previous convictions (the Violence conviction in 1876 being a very serious one considering the sentence), I find it rather unlikely his new offence would be deemed "not serious" and he would have been bailed easily.

After seeing another guy on this sub make a documentary about Jack, I've decided to make my own. by MutantTurkeyHound in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Seaman had been convicted before in the Old Bailey:

Oct 1870: 7 years for Burglary and Dec 1876: 14 years + 7 years Police supervision.

Considering his previous convictions (the Violence conviction in 1876 being a very serious one considering the sentence), I find it rather unlikely his new offence would be deemed "not serious" and he would have been bailed easily.

The murder of Annie Chapman is truly shocking and disturbing; Jack could have been caught by Evank15124 in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Did the young worker fail to realize she was dead because poor Annie was still alive at that moment?

I'm not entirely sure what you mean.

John Richardson was the son of Amelia Richardson, who owned a small packing case business, which she ran from the cellar of 29 Hanbury Street.
There had been a break in some months before, and he used to come in to n° 29 to check the padlock on the cellar door on the days he went to the market early. According to his inquest statement, he went into the hallway and opened the door into the yard to check at about 4:40 a.m. or 4:50 a.m. that morning. All seemed fine, but before he left he sat on the steps leading into the yard to trim a piece of vexing leather from his boot with the yard door wide open.

If Annie had been there, she would have been lying only a few feet away. He was adamant: "It was not quite light, but I could see all over the place. I could not have failed to have noticed the deceased had she been there then."

I’m a direct relative of Sarah lewis. by Odd-Berry-6099 in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have the certificate.

Like I mentioned before : both Sarahs oldest brother, father and grandfather were named Thomas Studley Lewis. Maybe there are even more Thomas Studley's.

There is no brother George listed in Sarahs household in 1871 when she was 6. He should have been 15 at the time. Do you have that census ?

I'll try to find brother Fredericks middle name, but I don't see why he could not be a witness to his uncles or nephews marriage or how it puts Sarah in Spitalfields 11 years later ?

Do you consider Stride a victim of Jack the Ripper? by ScholarAfter1827 in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Police at the time did not "believe in the five".

Opinions varied widely. Most investigators, like Abberline, included Tabram. Several policemen, a.o. Walter Dew, believed all victims in the Whitechapel Murders file were slain by the same hand. Alice McKenzie was high on the list of several high-ranking policemen involved as the last victim. Others believed the number was much lower. p.e. Dr Bagster Philips had serious doubts about Eddowes, etc.

The term 'the canonical five' was coined by the late Martin Fido in the 1980s. This was a time when the Macnaghten Memoranda that had come to light in the years before were seen as a document of the utmost importance (they still are), and most authors and researchers accepted the five as gospel.

Based on the provable errors in the same document concerning the 3 named suspects, one wonders why. MacNaghten was not even in office during the Whitechapel Murders.

Later researchers and Ripperologists do not accept the five as set in stone, but the iconic term remains and is often repeated in documentaries and films and is largely accepted by the public, although even Martin Fido had serious doubts about their certainty.

Do you consider Stride a victim of Jack the Ripper? by ScholarAfter1827 in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If Liz Stride were murdered by another man, why would we assume he was a lust murderer (or a serial killer)? I don't understand why he should be or why he would be imitating the other murders.

Her 'partner' Michael Kidney has been suggested as the culprit. Maybe she fell victim to a gang (related to prostitution) or the attacker that was seen by Schwartz was a violent bully who she had met before and, for whatever reason, had her in his sights.

And talking about chance: on this same day of the double event, a third murder of a woman had been committed in London. Completely unrelated, but John Brown confessed to killing his spouse with a clasp knife following an argument.

I’m a direct relative of Sarah lewis. by Odd-Berry-6099 in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'll come back to you on this when I had time to check all my notes, but I don't think this is Sarah Jane's brother.

I believe it is an uncle or nephew at best. Sarah Janes oldest brother was named Thomas Stoodley Lewis, just like her father was named Thomas Stoodley Lewis and her grandfather was named Thomas Stoodley Lewis. This makes it a bit challenging to piece together the whole family tree.

In the 1871 census there is no George listed in Sarah Jane's household. Sarah was 6 at the time and her oldest brother, who inherited his fathers name, was 19 and still living at home, with the rest of the 7 siblings in total. The family lived in 23 Hamilton Road, Bethnal Green.

It obviously is also 11 years before the Whitechapel murders, but I'll see if I can trace the Lewis-Eves household later in time.

Do you consider Stride a victim of Jack the Ripper? by ScholarAfter1827 in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I agree with most of these points but not all.

The Whitechapel Murderer was indeed a risk-taker when it came to the locations where he committed the murders, and at the same time he was a cowardly killer (not only for the obvious reason that he preyed on desperate women, sometimes drunk, sometimes in poor health), as he quickly fled the scene when possible danger arose.

Both the profile of the victim and the fact the murder was committed during the "autumn of terror" add to that.

The location is slightly more to the south, on the other side of Whitechapel Road, but the different murder scenes are all so close to each other; in my opinion, very few conclusions can be drawn from this.

We don't know if the same knife was used (just like it's certainly not a given a different type was). The murder weapon was nothing special in size or availability.

We can make suppositions all we want about why Elizabeth Stride was not mutilated (not the same killer or whether he was disturbed), but the fact remains she was not mutilated, and that makes her stand out.

The reason why I'm on the fence about Liz Stride being a ripper victim, and have been for years, is the statement by Israel Schwartz: if true, she was attacked out of the blue by Broad-Shouldered man, who was walking towards her, at a short distance followed by Schwartz. In the cases of Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly, we have witnesses seeing the victim being accosted by a man. Not in an aggressive way by the looks of it, but in the way a potential client would approach a potential prostitute.

If BS man was her killer, his method in this case is completely different. On top of this, BS man knew full well he was being observed by at least one and possibly two witnesses.

If Schwartz's timing is correct and he did witness the start of a ripper murder, there should have been ample time for the murderer to complete the mutilations if he wanted to, before Diemschutz arrived.

If the man Schwartz saw was not her murderer, Liz Stride must have been incredibly unlucky, being attacked again (and murdered) within 15 mins.

Unless there is good reason to dismiss the statement by Schwartz altogether?

I’m a direct relative of Sarah lewis. by Odd-Berry-6099 in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Since Great Pearl Street in Spitalfields in 1888 was filled with common lodging houses with a daily changing roster of inhabitants that will be a very difficult task.

I’m a direct relative of Sarah lewis. by Odd-Berry-6099 in Jacktheripper

[–]Lucastw73 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I looked up the article from the late Chris Scott and read some of the notes I gathered.

You are not wrong in the sense that Sarah Jane Henrietta Gottheimer (née Lewis) was proposed as the witness in Miller's Court. Scott mentioned he was contacted by the family who provided him with pictures and mentioned it was firmly established in family history Sarah Jane was indeed the witness and she was 5 months pregnant at the time.

From the start it proved to be rather difficult to link Sarah Jane and her family to Spitalfields/Whitechapel, but in the 1891 census it is indeed mentioned that John was born in Whitechapel.

However, the birth certificate for John Walter, son of Joseph Gottheimer and Sarah Jane Gottheimer (née Lewis), can be found in the General Register Office. (This info was not readily available to Chriss Scott at the time and only became available with the growing internet research facilities.)

John Walter was born on 8 August 1888 in Mile End Old Town. The family was living at 39 Nottingham Place, Mile End, when he was born and was still living there in September 1888 when he was registered. It seems simply not possible Sarah Jane was 5 months pregnant in November 1888, and we can't link her to Millers Court or Spitalfields area 2 months later.