Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jack the local.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Cogidubnus View Post
    Hi Tristran

    As Tom Wescott once, (rather pungently if I recall!), reminded me, the club's toilets were across the yard, and guess what happens on a busy night when drinks are being served?

    Cheers
    Dave
    Good point!

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Cogidubnus View Post
      Hi Tristran

      As Tom Wescott once, (rather pungently if I recall!), reminded me, the club's toilets were across the yard, and guess what happens on a busy night when drinks are being served?
      Drink and food, no doubt. If the toilets were all occupied, the next man in line might well have endured a "double event" of his own
      Kind regards, Sam Flynn

      "Suche Nullen"
      (F. Nietzsche)

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post

        Given the size of London at the time, the overwhelming likelihood is that an outsider would have come from another part of the city or its sprawling suburbs.

        Then, what, the home counties and the major conurbations of the Midlands?

        Of course, we shouldnt lose sight of Londons attractive to foreign immigrants.


        Do the origins of the victims bear this out? I believe they do:

        Nichols: born in the City and lived largely in London south of the Thames before finally making it to the East End in the few weeks before her death.

        Chapman: connections to west London and Windsor.

        Stride: Foreign immigrant.

        Eddowes: born in the west Midlands, brought up in London south of the Thames. As an adult spent time in the Midlands and west London.

        Kelly: a mystery woman, but allegedly an Irish immigrant who grew up in Wales and arrived in the East End after a stint in Knightsbridge.

        And I cant leave Alice out: born in Peterborough, lived in Leicester and spent time in south London before ending up in the East End.
        That’s a good overview and assessment, Gary.

        I thought Birmingham was the next largest city. But it wasn’t.

        This theory can apply to commuter killers and those that have settled here like the victims themselves.

        Comment


        • #34
          I do think of Jack as almost certainly being a 'local' by 1888, though that's not to say he didn't originally come from somewhere else as mentioned with the victims. We've all heard lots about the foreign immigrant suspects, but it's an interesting angle that he may have come from another area of England, to London for work or something. If similar crimes had previously been committed in other parts of the county, the two may not necessarily have been linked yet.

          Cheers,
          Adam.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Adam Went View Post
            I do think of Jack as almost certainly being a 'local' by 1888, though that's not to say he didn't originally come from somewhere else as mentioned with the victims. We've all heard lots about the foreign immigrant suspects, but it's an interesting angle that he may have come from another area of England, to London for work or something. If similar crimes had previously been committed in other parts of the county, the two may not necessarily have been linked yet.

            Cheers,
            Adam.
            Those who subscribe to the local theory should also consider the fact that he was not a local, and that he simply came into Whitechapel to find a victim and then after killing left the area. It should be noted that the crime scenes were in close proximity to main thorougfares.

            There is nothing written in stone when it comes to investigating these murders, many of the old accepted theories do not now stand up to close scrutiny.

            www.trevormarriott.co.uk

            Comment


            • #36
              I agree with you, Trevor. That old idea of someone being so nondescript that he "blends" into the background never jelled with me. We're not talking about someone blending into a crowd in the daytime. In any dangerous area or time of day, people with be aware of their surroundings and who's around and watching.

              Comment


              • #37
                Trevor, but would that not then imply in itself that he was at least somebody familiar with the area? Perhaps had lived or worked there even if he didn't in 1888? Commuting wasn't so easy then. Evidently he knew his areas, particularly if you consider the sequence of events on the night of the Double Event and in Mitre Square particularly.

                I still think the fact that all of the murders were committed on a weekend / holiday is rather telling.

                Cheers,
                Adam.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Adam Went View Post
                  Trevor, but would that not then imply in itself that he was at least somebody familiar with the area? Perhaps had lived or worked there even if he didn't in 1888? Commuting wasn't so easy then. Evidently he knew his areas, particularly if you consider the sequence of events on the night of the Double Event and in Mitre Square particularly.

                  I still think the fact that all of the murders were committed on a weekend / holiday is rather telling.

                  Cheers,
                  Adam.
                  There is a difference between somebody being familiar with the area and someone living locally.

                  You cannot rule out the fact that the killer simply came to Whitechapel looking to find a victim and then quickly left the area

                  And I agree that the days of the killings are significant, as are the dates between the murders which might indicate a working traveler

                  Was the same killer responsible for the double event-I very much doubt that

                  www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    The killer also was spotted and/or interrupted every time. It seemed he didn't fear being recognized. He didn't really have to act like a phantom and hide in the shadows beforehand. He could have hidden his face or disguised himself but he didn't have to.

                    That comes with anonymity and with anonymity that is respected and protected, due to the nature of the area. It was more than a slum because of it's proximity to the docks, etc.

                    The fact that he didn't hide his face suggests that he knew he wasn't going to leave any possibility of his victim surviving the attack. He either planned the kill meticulously or he was a natural killer with a knife. Strangulation beforehand suggest careful planning instead of relying on slaughtering instinct. Careful planning would suggest the sensible idea of picking a distant location for the crimes, i.e. a big buffer zone to his residence.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                      There is a difference between somebody being familiar with the area and someone living locally.

                      You cannot rule out the fact that the killer simply came to Whitechapel looking to find a victim and then quickly left the area

                      And I agree that the days of the killings are significant, as are the dates between the murders which might indicate a working traveler

                      Was the same killer responsible for the double event-I very much doubt that

                      www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                      Indeed, somebody familiar with the area might know the streets and how to get from A to B. But a local would better know the nuances of the area - what time and where the police patrols went, where the best places to seek out potential victims would be, etc etc. The Ripper clearly knew the latter in order to slip the net despite several close calls. I'm not sure an occasional visitor to the area would be able to do the same.

                      Many Victorians by necessity worked long, hard hours. It may be as simple as that the only time the killer had an opportunity away from that was at the weekend. In any case, surely it's safe to say that he was somebody who had either spent a lot of time in the area for whatever reason, or was an out and out local.

                      As for the Double Event, that's a whole other discussion, but I would think it's very unlikely that Stride and Eddowes weren't killed by the same hand.

                      San Fran:

                      I think one of the common mistakes that people make is this assumption that Jack must've taken the back alleys home after committing his crimes, and how could anyone have missed this psychopath walking around with a knife, covered in blood? But actually I think it could well have been the opposite - that he made a point of staying close to thoroughfares where he could blend in with other people and traffic, and thereby go unnoticed amongst the chaos.


                      Cheers,
                      Adam.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Apparently Adam, he was running around in the night of the Double Event wearing a deerstalker. (Some people may have only seen the front brim so described it as a sailors hat.) It’s not something that would help you to be nondescript, or go unnoticed in a place where you could be recognized if you were a local.

                        I wonder when deerstalkers were introduced in Sherlock Holmes.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by San Fran View Post
                          Apparently Adam, he was running around in the night of the Double Event wearing a deerstalker. )Some people may have only seen the front brim so described it as a sailors hat.) It’s not something that would help you to be nondescript, or go unnoticed in a place where you could be recognized if you were a local.

                          I wonder when deerstalkers were introduced in Sherlock Holmes.
                          Not by the time of the murders, I think. The only story published by then was "A Study in Scarlet", and the illustrations by the author's father don't show Holmes in a deerstalker:
                          Click image for larger version

Name:	C_A_Doyle_Study.jpg
Views:	67
Size:	88.5 KB
ID:	576185

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Yes, Chris, the Holmes-in-deerstalker image didn't come in until the 1890s. So without deerstalkers being a sleuth accessory and fashionable, and maybe not even recognizable for what it is to the average local witness, then doesn't this infer that the killer could be a hunter?

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by San Fran View Post
                              Yes, Chris, the Holmes-in-deerstalker image didn't come in until the 1890s. So without deerstalkers being a sleuth accessory and fashionable, and maybe not even recognizable for what it is to the average local witness, then doesn't this infer that the killer could be a hunter?
                              The problem is that no one actually saw anyone with any of the victims immediately before their deaths, so there is no accurate description of any potential suspect to work with.

                              www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                                The problem is that no one actually saw anyone with any of the victims immediately before their deaths, so there is no accurate description of any potential suspect to work with.
                                I have five witnesses who saw him on a date with Liz Stride, including a police officer (I discount the sighting by James Brown, and Schwartz). I have three witnesses who saw him with Catherine Eddowes.

                                The hat is described as:

                                Best and Gardner: billycock
                                Marshall: sailor's hat
                                Packer: wideawake hat
                                PC Smith: deerstalker

                                Lawende: peaked cloth cap

                                Obviously, no one in Whitechapel except PC Smith knew what a deerstalker hat was. Packer said wideawake but that could be because of the side flaps which could make it look like a widawake. A sailor's hat, I believe, has brim on the front like a deerstalker. "Peaked cloth cap" is the perfect description of a deerstalker by someone who doesn't know the term deerstalker. I haven't looked at billycocks.




                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X