View Full Version : Ripperologist 82 August 2007
09-03-2007, 06:48 AM
Having just read Donald Souden's well thought out article on the basis of the November pardon offered by the Crown....it reminded me of a brief discussion we had here about what we thought the basis for the Crown deciding ( at long last ) to offer a reward stemmed from.
I believe the subject of whether or not the authorities were concerned that perhaps with the onset of Winter approaching...that the authorities were fearful that the Ripper might begin working indoors....and/or whether or not that in the case of the Kelly murder,the wording of Dr.Thomas Bond's summation,given to Sir Robert Anderson,inferred that it was possible two people were involved and that the authorities hoped that one of the two would give evidence against the other.
In any event, Don's article makes a lot of sense to me ( at least ) and I was wondering what anyone else felt about his article.
Thank you....and nice job Don !
09-03-2007, 07:01 AM
The editorial by Chris George....The Ripper and Gang Violence...draws attention to the escalation of gang violence currently ripping cities like Liverpool apart in the UK ( Here in Philadelphia,death totals in the 400's yearly since the late 1980's are considered standard operating procedure ) and quite possibly being the source for all that trouble back in the fall of 1888.
Chris's article mentions Polly Nichols' murder ( August 31st ) and how the London Echo mentions that a "High Rip" gang was suspected in this early Whitechapel Murder.
It also made me think about the thread set up here on the site as to whether or not at least 4 of the Canonical Five murders were "blitz" killings and not the inevitable result of a prospective "John" taking a victim off to a dark corner or backyard to unleash his or her mayhem.
I'm sure there are arguments to the contrary such as why would a "gang" eviscerate a woman in the open street or leave an eviscerated body in the open street for one and all to see.
However,4 1/2 years ago in Philadelphia...more than one person had to have eviscerated a man and placed his body in a trash heap in the notorious Badlands of North Philadelphia. Unless the man who performed these awful mutilations and murder was incredibly strong...it required some effort to deposit the torso where it was found....which means an accomplice.
Nothing's etched in stone in this Case....so if you have opinions on Chris's editorial...please share them.
09-03-2007, 08:12 AM
When you think about it part of my reasoning for concluding, at the end of the editorial, that gang activity was probably not involved in the canonical murders, is linked to the theme of the excellent article by Don Souden on the matter of rewards and a pardon for any accomplices of the murderer. Gangs are criminal organizations, and despite the fact that they have codes and oaths, and are likely to attack, maim or kill anyone who "squeals" or "grasses", one would think it would be very hard to keep the truth behind the killings secret without someone revealing it.
As you mentioned, I did quote a newspaper article after the Polly Nichols murder that spoke about the possibility of a "High Rip" gang being responsible for her slaying, but they also said that meanwhile detectives thought a lone "maniac" most probably was the killer. The newspapers alluded to other women in the area being killed by gangs and left in the gutter, perhaps referring to the murders of Emma Smith and Martha Tabram -- the latter though of course the Tabram murder took place on the landing of a tenement and Emma Smith died not in the street but in hospital, not having recovered from her wounds. However, the silence in which the Tabram murder took place in George Yard, makes one wonder if it was a lone murderer, be it maniac or serial killer.
All the best
09-03-2007, 11:08 AM
Thank you sir, the words were most appreciated. As I hoped to point out in the article, starting in September there was considerable correspondence within the Home Office about not only offering a reward but also offering a pardon and much of that discussion had to do with the political fallout that might accrue from such an action.
As the number of Whitechapel murders increased those outrages became the focal point of criticism by the radical press of Lord Salisbury's Conservative government. Even some newspapers generally friendly to the government became critical of the police's inability to find the perpetrator.
Such that while for the police it remained a criminal matter, for the Salisbury government it was increasingly a political problem. Thus my argument that the pardon offer was a decision based on politics and not police information.
09-10-2007, 03:52 PM
With the humble apologies of this poster, who hasn't kept up with the clockwork-like publishing schedule of the magazine, here at last are the contents of Ripperologist 82.
Christopher T. George kicks things off his Editorial, 'The Ripper and Gang Violence', in which he discusses the recent sad killing of 11-year-old Rhys Jones, suggested to be related to gang activity. Chris goes on to compare modern gang culture with that of the Victorian period.
In 'Pardon Me: Spin Control at the Home Office?', Don Souden examines the 'certain circumstances' in the pardon offer, and Stewart Evans offers a few thoughts on the newly-found interview with Dr. Tumblety in 'A Slouch-Hatted Yank'.
Andy Aliffe gives us a look at Rock Bands as you’ve never seen them
before in 'The Original Stones', while Richard Patterson completes this collection of features with 'The Hound of Heaven', a look at Francis Thompson and Wilfrid Blunt.
With all the usual news, views and reviews, this issue of the Rip is as jam-packed as ever.
And wait til you see the back cover.
56 pages for just £2! Subscribe now and receive 6 issues for just £12.
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.