Jack the Ripper

[Zahir]

For those of you who don't know, novelist and wouldbe criminologist Patricia Cornwell is getting to re-issue her book about the Whitechapel murders: Portrait of a Killer In it she claims Walter Sickert, a fairly well-known artist of the period, was Jack the Ripper and that she can prove it.

I've seen her evidence and I'm not convinced. Having read extensively about the Ripper case, I've yet to be convinced there's even been a viable suspect put forth. Montague Druitt looked good, but it turns out it was all-but-impossible for him to have committed one of the murders (he was playing cricket at the time). Frances Tumbley looks pretty convincing, but the evidence is pretty clear the man was gay. Gay serial killers kill their own gender as a rule. Usually.

Anyway, I was wondering if anyone else had some ideas? Or are we all gonna go with the notion that a seventy-year-old man with the use of only one arm did the killings on behalf of a secret society everyone knows about in order to silence five witnesses no one would believe to a marriage the gay Duke of Clarence supposadely entered into with a young Catholic girl (for which there is no evidence)?

Mind you, it was a pretty fun movie.

[Avatar]

I read the Cornwall book, (apparently the rerelease is meant to bolster it with new info). Now I've never really studied the issue, nor did I try and verify anything she said independantly, but I remember thinking it was fairly convincing. (My GF BTW, disagrees.)

Why did you find it unconvincing if I may ask?

--A

[Zahir]

Well, first of all she presumed that Jack the Ripper wrote letters to the police and/or press. That is by no means established. Certainly something like two hundred such letters and cards were received, but without a doubt the vast majority were hoaxes. Only two or perhaps three of these are considered at all likely to have been written by the actual killer, and there's no real evidence any of them were.

Second, she tested two letters, neither of which anyone has ever seriously considered as legitimate letters from the Ripper before now. Nor does she offer any credible evidence or logic to accept them as such.

Third, although she found matching midochondrial DNA, the problem is that such DNA is passed intact through the mother. All she proved was that someone matrilinearly related were in contact with the letters and Sickert. It cannot be narrowed down even to Walter Sickert himself.

Fourth, Sickert's paintings dealth with crime, yes, but so do many artists. There's little doubt he was fascinated by the Ripper murders so why should that fascination not find its way into his art?

Fifth, Sickert did have some odd days where he claimed to be Jack the Ripper. Of course, he also had some days where he claimed to Napoleon. He was an odd man.

Sixth, what evidence does exist pretty strongly suggests Sickert was in France during the Ripper murders.

The end result is that at most she's made the theory that Walter Sickert--an eccentric artist known to have been fascinated by the murders--may have written one or two of the hundreds of hoax letters purporting to be from Jack the Ripper a tad more viable.

[Avatar]

Some good points Zahir.

I seem to remember her countering the Sickert in France one, but as I don't have easy access to the book, I can't verify that.

I'll certainly agree that the "evidence" she presented was inferential at best though.

That said, (and bearing in mind that, as I said, I've never paid much attention to the whole thing), I haven't seen or heard of anything more convincing.

It seems that your major disagreement is with lack of evidence, which I'd guess would be a problem with any "investigtion" now.

Your conclusion is certainly valid though, but we could argue that identifying, (tentatively admittedly) the authorship of two of the letters is a better link to a potential culprit than any I've seen or heard of so far, in my, again admittedly limited, knowledge of the whole thing.

Except for the possibility that he wasn't in the country at the time of some of the murders, (didn't she suggest he'd simply lied about his whereabouts?) there seems no reason why it couldn't be him either.

Interested to see what others have to say about this. I'll certainly agree with you that her investigation didn't prove anything. But it's as realistic a possibility, (perhaps more so) than your poll options. (Except for the "some nutter" one anyway. )

--Avatar

[Zahir]

Well, there is the problem also of--why did the murders stop? Apart from the fact Walter Sickert doesn't seem to fit any profile of a serial killer, there's also the fact the murders did indeed stop after five. Any theory about Jack the Ripper has to come up with some idea to account for that. Sickert lived a good long time. If he was a serial killer, why did he stop? Or if he didn't, who were his other victims?

[The Laughing Man]

good question, Z!
I only vaguely remember reading "something" about JTR 20+ yrs ago, so I can't add much, but what struck me is his expert surgical skills, and the removal of specific body parts. Any evidence of these "parts" having a common similarity, or totality of purpose? What did it "appear" he wanted from these women?

[Avatar]

Valid point Zahir. (Didn't she suggest that other, very similar murders, in other parts of the country and in Europe as well were connected?)


Esmer, IIRC, from the book that Zahir and I are discussing, (and whose "reliability" we are not exactly agreed on) the "suregeries" were not exactly "expert". Usually the uterus was removed, wasn't it Zahir?

(A while since I've read it, and as I said, the only thing I've really ever read about it, in terms of detail at least.)

--A

[Zahir]

The examinations at the time--which were not as detailed as those today--were done by two different doctors and had slightly different comments. On the one hand, the killer showed very precise anotomical knowledge--removing the kidney very precisely for example (not an easy thing to do). On the other hand, one of the examining doctors said the cutting itself was amateurish, as if the person was unused to cutting into flesh.

All of the Ripper's victims were cut deeply twice in the throat--two of them almost to the point of decapitation. All had mutilations in the general area of the pelvis. The least of these was a simple slash. The worst--and last--involved both breasts being removed, along with the uterus and heart, portions of the leg and face being skinned, etc. This was the one murder to take place indoors, where the Ripper had privacy and time.

There was no hint of masturbation or sexual assault in any of the cases. Some people dispute just how many victims there were, but five is generally accepted. The tell-tale sign, to me, is the coupling of mutilation with those two deep cuts into and across the throat.

I've seen no detailed reports of any other murders that matched these. There are incomplete reports that could match, but lack enough details to be sure. None I know of were in Great Britain.

As I recall, there are existing letters from people who visited Walter Sickert in France during Autumn, 1888. To counter this, Ms. Cornwell has proven someone with the same midochondrial DNA (which is common to everyone related via their mothers at all) handled one or two of the Ripper letters( that are regarded by everyone else as fakes) and had some intimate contact with the paintings of Walter Sickert. In other words, Walter Sickert was almost certainly related to someone who has handled those letters--letters that have literally been handled thousands of times, often by the same people.

She also mentions the 'pose' from one painting as matching that of the autopsy photograph. Exactly why that is evidence of Sickert's guilt I do not know, since those photos were available for anyone who went looking. But we already know Sickert was fascinated by Jack the Ripper.

Dr. Francis Tumbley, on the other hand, is known to have collected some of the very body parts the Ripper took--witnesses reported he kept them preserved in jars. He was evidently bisexual, who preferred men but seemed to have a kind of passionate interest/disdain of women (he married a prostitute).

I'll have to check, but I believe there were also reports of prostitutes murdered with a knife in some of the areas where he lived. But details are not available. Certainly, he was considered a suspect by Scotland Yard, but he left the country not long after the fifth and final Ripper murder.

[The Laughing Man]

Very informative Z! That "indoor" photo is the one I seem to remember best, very gory indeed. Sounds like this Dr. Tumbley guy is quite conspicuous, to say the least!

[Usivius]

I've only done a little reading on this, so am in no way 'informed'. An interesting movie dealing with this in a fictional manner is "Murder By Decree". Ever seen it?

[Zahir]

Yep. Sherlock Holmes and the (absurd) Royal Masonic Conspiracy.

[Fist and Faith]

There was a Raver-like being that fed on fear. It possessed bodies and committed serial murders in order to generate the fear it needed. It killed:
-17 women in London in 1888-1891 (known as the Jack the Ripper/Red Jack/Redjac murders)
-7 women in Shanghai in 1932
-5 women in Kiev in 1974
-8 women in the Martian colonies in 2105
-10 women on Alpha Eridani II in 2156
-an unknown number of women on Rigel IV in 2266 (known as the Beratis murders)
-3 women on Argelius II in 2267 (during which the being possessed an earthman named Montgomery Scott and a Rigelian named Hengist)
-an unknown number of women on Deneb II (date unknown) (known as the Kesla murders)

During the investigation of the Argelius murders, this being was destroyed by James T. Kirk, then captain of the United Star Ship Enterprise.

'k?

[Zahir]

No, NOT K!

Jack the Ripper was a sadist and would-be social reformer named Sebastian. He was abducted soon after the last of the Ripper murders by a race of ancient aliens who showed him the error of his ways, then gave him a job to do while they preserved him in between the times needed. Finally, in the 23rd century, his task as an Inquisitor was done when he found the Ones his alien abductors were looking for. It is believed (hoped) he was then allowed to die.

K?

[Fist and Faith]

No, it's the possessing spirit thingy. It is known.

[Dragonlily]

Psychologically, it looks to me like Jack the Ripper killed women because he was so afraid of how much they drew him sexually. He had to kill them in order to regain the controlling position. He must have been raised by a horrendous woman. (Add that last bit to your JtR profile.)

If, in a later incarnation, he became promiscuous, that would be several karmic steps up because 1) he would be accepting his own sexuality, and 2) he would be loving women instead of hating them for their impact on him.

No, I have nothing to add about his specific identity. Call this women's intuition.

[TRC]

The Ripper Contained
He was a real man. Highly intelligent, left handed, Loved women more than he could express. The murders were a necessity that he never revealed reason for.