Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jack the local.

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

  • San Fran
    replied
    I'm sorry. I thought this was the deerstalker/hunter thread. It's the "local" thread.

    I don't think we can say a deerstalker is so ubiquitous that a local wearing one would be inconspicuous. I don't think it works as a disguise so people won't recognize him either, like me walking around Whitechapel wearing a crown, trying to throw my neighbors off, or wearing glasses like Superman.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gary Barnett
    replied
    Click image for larger version  Name:	4AAEEF76-8F4F-48BF-B6FD-1706388580C0.jpeg Views:	0 Size:	269.6 KB ID:	576750

    October, 1889.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gary Barnett
    replied
    November, 1878:

    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • Gary Barnett
    replied
    Perhaps we should collect a few.

    American Fenians:

    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • Gary Barnett
    replied
    As I mentioned previously, the Bank of England issued a ‘memo’ to their staff about inappropriate dress, including the wearing of deerstalkers. Soldiers, clerks, labourers, factory workers, dockers wore them. One mention was of the son of a publican.




    Leave a comment:


  • San Fran
    replied
    Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
    We’ve already established that the deerstalker was ubiquitous, worn by all classes of society. You might just as well say that a suspect was wearing shoes and Dukes of the realm wore shoes so we’re looking for a Duke.
    Is the deerstalker ubiquitous to all members of the upper classes? Did regular London businessmen sport them?

    If you accept JtR as a "respectable" person, based on the half dozen or so corroborating and credible witnesses (even leaving Packer out), at least as a premise, can you therefore look for a hunter or gameskeeper, or a rural gentleman, or could it equally be a citified gent?


    Leave a comment:


  • Gary Barnett
    replied
    Originally posted by San Fran View Post
    Packer's description is actually at variance with the other witnesses. I have him down as saying a wideawake hat, which could be deduced as a Rembrandt hat. You'd have to deduce he mixed up the flaps with the upturned sides of a wideawake. I don't think it greatly helps the Rural/Huntsman Outsider With A Deer Stalker hat theory.

    Isn't a wideawake more in keeping with a working class person than part of a Victorian gentleman's "country ensemble" like a deerstalker?

    https://www.countrylife.co.uk/countr...bout-you-78581
    We’ve already established that the deerstalker was ubiquitous, worn by all classes of society. You might just as well say that a suspect was wearing shoes and Dukes of the realm wore shoes so we’re looking for a Duke.


    Leave a comment:


  • Adam Went
    replied
    Hi San Fran,

    More so it's that Packer's known to have been fabricating his story, so I don't think we need pay any attention at all to his version of the type of headware Jack was sporting.

    Cheers,
    Adam.

    Leave a comment:


  • San Fran
    replied
    Originally posted by Adam Went View Post
    Why Packer's description is even mentioned is an oddity to me, as he has been completely discredited.

    Cheers,
    Adam.
    Packer's description is actually at variance with the other witnesses. I have him down as saying a wideawake hat, which could be deduced as a Rembrandt hat. You'd have to deduce he mixed up the flaps with the upturned sides of a wideawake. I don't think it greatly helps the Rural/Huntsman Outsider With A Deer Stalker hat theory.

    Isn't a wideawake more in keeping with a working class person than part of a Victorian gentleman's "country ensemble" like a deerstalker?

    https://www.countrylife.co.uk/countr...bout-you-78581

    Leave a comment:


  • Adam Went
    replied
    Hi Trevor and San Fran,.

    One thing I do agree with Trevor on is that we shouldn't get too caught on witness descriptions because one, they are notoriously variable (see all the differences) and unreliable, and two, we can't actually say with absolutely certainty that the man they saw was in fact the killer. Why Packer's description is even mentioned is an oddity to me, as he has been completely discredited.

    Cheers,
    Adam.

    Leave a comment:


  • San Fran
    replied
    Billycocks are felt hats with narrow brims. It makes sense that two local laborers would call a deerstalker a billycock.

    THE BILLY-COCK HAT

    By joemasonspage on December 7, 2011


    This was a popular nickname for the Bowler hat in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The name, and indeed the hat, originated in England at Holkham in Norfolk. It was intended as a practical version of the top hat for use by gamekeepers on the estate.

    https://joemasonspage.wordpress.com/...illy-cock-hat/

    Leave a comment:


  • San Fran
    replied
    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.




    Leave a comment:


  • Trevor Marriott
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • San Fran
    replied
    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?

    Leave a comment:


  • Chris Phillips
    replied
    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:	73
Size:	88.5 KB
ID:	576185

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X