Topic: Jack the Ripper - Identity to be Revealed ©

[Ultimate Bromance]

Amazing that no one's ever proposed that theory before WOOLTONIAN, very very interesting.

[Sarah Deane]

So why did he stop killing? Especially if he was still alive and, as has been proved, serial killers continue in an ever-increasing frenzy until caught!

I just don't get it.  Especially as he was still living in the area.  Has his name cropped up as a suspect before?

He didn't stop killing. The "official" accounts of his activities only include those 1888 murders. There were several before this date, and many more after this date, that "could" have been linked to him but were never officially attributed. Serial killers often have signature MOs, but they also deviate when they become bored or their needs escalate. Changes in MO are too often interpreted as being a difference in killer, not the same killer changing method.

Records show that John Ripper of Mile End Town died in 1917, aged 79/80. Ann Ripper died in Whitechapel in 1922 aged 71/2. Assuming these were the same ones listed by Karl above, it's a good base to start from, tracking their daily lives seeing if dates match. Their ancestors? Family stories/secrets? I wish I had a credit card to subscribe to the various archive sites for a week, as it wouldn't take long to trace where the family is right now.

[Finn Solomon]

Can I ask why you think he signed it Jack THE Ripper? I don't understand why you'd put the in front of your name? And if it's a trade name wouldn't 'ripper' maybe just be related to his occupation (fish gutting or something similar?) and his first name is just Jack or John?

To disguise from the police! Why the heck would he literally sign his name as Jack Ripper, it would put them on the right track to arresting him.

Like JMc said just by putting 'the' between his real names he fooled everyone for years while taunting them by putting his name in plain sight.

[Enemy]

IMO, it was a way to fool the police into searching for a mythical figure who was indeed real.

The 'the' between the first and surname has sent people searching for the true identity for years. By simply inserting 'the' between the names, it's both simple yet genius in the way that it hid his identity in plain view of the world.

It seems a bit too close to the bone really, if I wrote to the police I certainly wouldn't put both of my names in there and put something else just incase they had code breakers or the like who could possibly find it. There's taunting the authorities and then there's kind of blatent and stupid, if they did cotton on and this was who he was then he would end up looking completely stupid.

It's compelling but I'm not overly convinced of the motive, the why he stopped or that Jack Ripper would be a very probable suspect.

[Finn Solomon]

Fascinating reading.

Should defintely be published somewere though, some one is bound to steal all this info, and make a killing (pardon the pun)

No worries there, this thread is proof that Wooltonian had the idea first.

[lachesis]

Was JTR used by the media before the letter was sent?

[Enemy]

To disguise from the police! Why the heck would he literally sign his name as Jack Ripper, it would put them on the right track to arresting him.

Like JMc said just by putting 'the' between his real names he fooled everyone for years while taunting them by putting his name in plain sight.

It could be a completely dumb disguise if his last name wasn't Ripper. If I put Jones it would be fairly obvious, as it is Ripper isn't a definite second name and can be taken to mean other things. Honestly I don't see how someone who fooled the police for ages would use the word 'the' to disguise his actual name, although a John Ripper being in the approximate area is a bit fishy. Maybe it was actually a friend of this Ripper guy and wanted him to take the fall for it. *shrug*

[Sarah Deane]

It seems a bit too close to the bone really, if I wrote to the police I certainly wouldn't put both of my names in there and put something else just incase they had code breakers or the like who could possibly find it. There's taunting the authorities and then there's kind of blatent and stupid, if they did cotton on and this was who he was then he would end up looking completely stupid.

You're thinking from a very 21st century mindset, though. They didn't have CSI: Whitechapel in 1888.

[J-Mc-]

It seems a bit too close to the bone really, if I wrote to the police I certainly wouldn't put both of my names in there and put something else just incase they had code breakers or the like who could possibly find it. There's taunting the authorities and then there's kind of blatent and stupid, if they did cotton on and this was who he was then he would end up looking completely stupid.

It's compelling but I'm not overly convinced of the motive, the why he stopped or that Jack Ripper would be a very probable suspect.

Given that the census wasn't available at the time of the murders and the dates of them happening, it's safe to assume that the police weren't as clued up then as they are now, with most information probably being obtained through the public and sources which may have proven false.

The lack of forensics then would have certainly not helped either and if his name was indeed John Ripper, the police may have been searching for a 'Jack' that simply did not exist without making the obvious connection to a John Ripper.

Sometimes when searching for something, we overlook the obvious, it's very probable that the police techniques of the time had done the same.

It could be a completely dumb disguise if his last name wasn't Ripper. If I put Jones it would be fairly obvious, as it is Ripper isn't a definite second name and can be taken to mean other things. Honestly I don't see how someone who fooled the police for ages would use the word 'the' to disguise his actual name, although a John Ripper being in the approximate area is a bit fishy. Maybe it was actually a friend of this Ripper guy and wanted him to take the fall for it. *shrug*

I was thinking about that before actually, if his surname was something other than Ripper then his identity would needed to have been hidden in a different way, yet with it being Ripper, it allowed him to hide his identity in plain sight, which is the last place anyone would think to look.

WOOLTONIAN has put a lot of effort into this, and if this theory is ever proved correct then he'd deserve all the credit coming his way.

[Finn Solomon]

Didn't Woolly say that the census with Jack Ripper's name on it wasn't available to the police at the time?

[Enemy]

You're thinking from a very 21st century mindset, though. They didn't have CSI: Whitechapel in 1888.

But they did have brains. Codes aren't anything new, nor are code breakers.

[Enemy]

Given that the census wasn't available at the time of the murders and the dates of them happening, it's safe to assume that the police weren't as clued up then as they are now, with most information probably being obtained through the public and sources which may have proven false.

The lack of forensics then would have certainly not helped either and if his name was indeed John Ripper, the police may have been searching for a 'Jack' that simply did not exist without making the obvious connection to a John Ripper.

Sometimes when searching for something, we overlook the obvious, it's very probable that the police techniques of the time had done the same.

Quite probable. It's definitely a good theory, but I guess we'll never really know. I suppose the question for me is whether being seperated from your wife is a good enough motive to go round hacking up prostitutes or not? And whether you'd just stop it all after a while because your wife comes back.

[Enemy]

I do applaud your originality though Wool, amazing that you can come up with something completely fresh and compelling after all these years. Quite the achievement!

[lostpet.]

depends if the separation was the cause, or whether his wife knew, or was even involved in some...

would be interesting to look at violent crime in the area post 1800's till his date of death to see any that might show and escalation/change of MO

[J-Mc-]

Quite probable. It's definitely a good theory, but I guess we'll never really know. I suppose the question for me is whether being seperated from your wife is a good enough motive to go round hacking up prostitutes or not? And whether you'd just stop it all after a while because your wife comes back.

You see it with people now though, they've split from their partner and gone suicidal/mad because of the connection they felt with that person.

It's safe to assume that JTR could have either been:

A) A man who was easy to temper and when reminded of his wife through the name Annie, he's flipped and commited murder
B) A man who without his wife would not allow anyone to have a woman of the same name
C) A schizophrenic who was able to live a double life in which he was a loving family man and a killer at the same time, a Jekyll and Hyde figure.

[Enemy]

depends if the separation was the cause, or whether his wife knew, or was even involved in some...

would be interesting to look at violent crime in the area post 1800's till his date of death to see any that might show and escalation/change of MO

Or even if he went away to other places for a while and there were violent attacks or murders. That would add loads of weight to the theory.

[Enemy]

You see it with people now though, they've split from their partner and gone suicidal/mad because of the connection they felt with that person.

It's safe to assume that JTR could have either been:

A) A man who was easy to temper and when reminded of his wife through the name Annie, he's flipped and commited murder
B) A man who without his wife would not allow anyone to have a woman of the same name
C) A schizophrenic who was able to live a double life in which he was a loving family man and a killer at the same time, a Jekyll and Hyde figure.

Very true. I suppose I was just thinking that you'd be more likely to do that if your wife died (like Ed Gein with his mother or something) rather than just seperated. Hmmmm.

[Mark Walters]

Was JTR used by the media before the letter was sent?

It must've been if he signed it as his "trade name".

But another question: is Jack a shortened, slang or alternative nickname for someone called John?

[Red Squiggle]

I don't see how someone who fooled the police for ages would use the word 'the' to disguise his actual name, although a John Ripper being in the approximate area is a bit fishy.

Nominative determinism in full effect if it does transpire that John/Jack Ripper is the bloke responsible!! I think establishing a motive for him to participate in such brutal murders is as interesting as discovering who the perpetrator was. Given the social context of these crimes, and the abject poverty in the East End; the "den of inequity" mentioned previously, with women turning to prostitution to earn the money to keep their families, could the motive be that of a religious zealot trying to purge the streets he lives on of prostitutes in a way that would intimidate others from following their lead? Obviously there'd be massive hypocrisy in his actions from a moral perspective, but as with right wing nutters in the US shooting abortion doctors nowadays this tends to be ignored or forgotten.

Either way an absolutely brilliant and thought provoking thread, many thanks Karl!

[Mark Walters]

He didn't stop killing. The "official" accounts of his activities only include those 1888 murders. There were several before this date, and many more after this date, that "could" have been linked to him but were never officially attributed.

Sorry if I missed it in Wool's account here but which ones? And what were the dates?  Did they continue up to 1891 when the census indicates that he was back with his wife?

[Finn Solomon]

Sure, John F. Kennedy was always called Jack. There must be a lot of other examples.

[scatman]

ah, this is fucking excellent Karl, absolutely fucking brilliant , now for you to move onto conquering other old myths

[Aristotle]

It must've been if he signed it as his "trade name".

But another question: is Jack a shortened, slang or alternative nickname for someone called John?

I would assume so. JFK was called 'Jack' by his friends and family although in public he was always John F. Kennedy.

*edit:

Sure, John F. Kennedy was always called Jack. There must be a lot of other examples.

Fuck you!

[lostpet.]

True,

if he's you guy WOOL, then you have to follow his life and see if anything interesting pops up, keep us posted

[El_Pistolero]

This is a brilliant read. Will be keeping an eye here, well done WOOL.

[Sarah Deane]

But they did have brains. Codes aren't anything new, nor are code breakers.

Of course, but I'm talking about the way they would have approached the case. Today, we think a lot more outside the box, precisely for things like you're describing. At the time of the Ripper murders, there was mass hysteria and enormous pressure on the police to solve them quickly. One thing that was very similar to today, was that the press ruled the world, and there sensationalising of the case was what created the "facts" of the case that people of the time bought into. From a police detection point of view, they simply weren't trained or equipped for a case of this magnitude. The fact that the victims were prostitutes, as well, meant that it wasn't taken as seriously in the early stages, as it perhaps should have been. Prostitute murders were not uncommon, happening at a rate of about 4 a week across the London area, so it took a while for the police to get going, by which time many clues and evidence had been lost.

Yes, there were codebreakers and the like around at the time, but they wouldn't have been called in to a case like this. Everyone except Abberline thought they were dealing with a deranged lunatic, pure and simple. In Victorian England, insanity equals lack of brain, whereas today, we know only too well that insanity often equals superior intelligence. Abberline was the only one who recognised that they were dealing with someone with more nous than the guy was given credit for (hence his scorn in the authenticated letters) but, sadly, Abberline didn't pull the strings, his superiors did, and those superiors repeatedly ignored Abberline's various pleas to attack the case in a different way. All the 'top brass' were interested in, was playing down the seriousness of what was happening, and pushing it under the carpet. There were so many flaws in the investigation, probably a case of "too many cooks", with no single person leading the investigation, that it's little wonder the guy got away with it.

[Sarah Deane]

But another question: is Jack a shortened, slang or alternative nickname for someone called John?

Yes, Jack has always been slang for "John". It's only in the last 50 years or so that "Jack" has begun to exist on its own, thanks to a trend in baby-naming...

[richiedouglas]

Wow.

I know you've not done this for money but you deserve the limelight from this. It's an almost certainty that if someone associated with a publisher twigs this they can get a book out in a reasonable time. It's time to delete this thread, get the men in black to erase our memory and bide our time till Wooltonian releases a bestseller.

[Sarah Deane]

You see it with people now though, they've split from their partner and gone suicidal/mad because of the connection they felt with that person.

It's safe to assume that JTR could have either been:

A) A man who was easy to temper and when reminded of his wife through the name Annie, he's flipped and commited murder
B) A man who without his wife would not allow anyone to have a woman of the same name
C) A schizophrenic who was able to live a double life in which he was a loving family man and a killer at the same time, a Jekyll and Hyde figure.

You could any any number of reasons to that list. And he wouldn't necessarily have to been separated from his wife. He could have discovered she was working the streets herself, found her with another fella and went out ripping girls who looked like her, pent-up sexual frustration - killers who inflict such savagery on women, especially disembowellment, are often impotent, which would explain why J&A Ripper don't appear to have had any children (according to the census). Ad infinitum, really...

[Welshred]

Yes, Jack has always been slang for "John". It's only in the last 50 years or so that "Jack" has begun to exist on its own, thanks to a trend in baby-naming...

I know a lad who's name is John and everyone calls him Jack too

[Mark Walters]

Of course, but I'm talking about the way they would have approached the case. Today, we think a lot more outside the box, precisely for things like you're describing. At the time of the Ripper murders, there was mass hysteria and enormous pressure on the police to solve them quickly. One thing that was very similar to today, was that the press ruled the world, and there sensationalising of the case was what created the "facts" of the case that people of the time bought into. From a police detection point of view, they simply weren't trained or equipped for a case of this magnitude. The fact that the victims were prostitutes, as well, meant that it wasn't taken as seriously in the early stages, as it perhaps should have been. Prostitute murders were not uncommon, happening at a rate of about 4 a week across the London area, so it took a while for the police to get going, by which time many clues and evidence had been lost.

Yes, there were codebreakers and the like around at the time, but they wouldn't have been called in to a case like this. Everyone except Abberline thought they were dealing with a deranged lunatic, pure and simple. In Victorian England, insanity equals lack of brain, whereas today, we know only too well that insanity often equals superior intelligence. Abberline was the only one who recognised that they were dealing with someone with more nous than the guy was given credit for (hence his scorn in the authenticated letters) but, sadly, Abberline didn't pull the strings, his superiors did, and those superiors repeatedly ignored Abberline's various pleas to attack the case in a different way. All the 'top brass' were interested in, was playing down the seriousness of what was happening, and pushing it under the carpet. There were so many flaws in the investigation, probably a case of "too many cooks", with no single person leading the investigation, that it's little wonder the guy got away with it.

You make an interesting point here.  The letter does seem to be well written or at least better than you'd attribute to a baker of today.  Having said that I don't know what the general standard of education would have been for a baker at that time.  Or a baker who was born and brought up in Germany. 

But was he brought up in Germany?  When did he come to England?  Where did he live when he arrived?  Was there a general hatred of Jews in the late 19th century?  I thought that only started in the 1930s (but then I'm kind of ignorant when it comes to all that).

[WOOLTONIAN]

Was JTR used by the media before the letter was sent?

NEVER ! The DEAR BOSS letter was the first time the name was raised.

 Assuming these were the same ones listed by Karl above,

It is the same John/Jack Ripper
Deaths Jun 1917 Ripper John 80 Mile End Death Certificate No.1c 366
This excerpt is taken from the BMD archives

[Mark Walters]

Thanks for confirming for me that John = Jack everyone

[Rox]

A 'circumstantial' thought... a baker would certainly find the Leather Apron thing a joke, as he would wear an apron during his work, but not a leather one.

Would be fascinating if you could find reference to the name of his Baker's shop.

There have been a number of Ripper books based upon even flimsier evidence than this (as pointed out, Patricia Cornwell being a prime example).

[MichaelA]

Is this how they collared Carlos Jackal?

[Sarah Deane]

Sorry if I missed it in Wool's account here but which ones? And what were the dates?  Did they continue up to 1891 when the census indicates that he was back with his wife?

It wasn't in Karl's post, it's public info in the many books and casefiles.

"Fairy Fay", Whitechapel, December 1887 (no records, just rumour)
Annie Millwood, Whitechapel, February 1888 (attack, death came later, in March)
Ada Wilson, Whitechapel, March 1888
Headless torso, Pimlico, October 1888
Annie Farmer, Whitechapel, November 1888 (attack, not murder)
Rose Mylett, Poplar, December 1888
Elizabeth Jackson, River Thames, June 1889
Alice McKenzie, Whitechapel, July 1889
"The Pinchin Street Torso", Whitechapel, September 1889
Frances Coles, Whitechapel, February 1891

All unsolved, though worth pointing out that there was another serial killer at large in London at the same time, the so-called "Torso Killer", who could be responsible for some of the above.


And no-one's saying he split from his wife? That's a theory, nothing more.

[Ycuzz]

/case closed then

So, Karl. Atlantis. Whats up with that?

[Mark Walters]

NEVER ! The DEAR BOSS letter was the first time the name was raised.

Really?  Then he's either very brave or very stupid!  But again, this points to someone who was giving away vital clues and wanted to get caught.

[Sarah Deane]

You make an interesting point here.  The letter does seem to be well written or at least better than you'd attribute to a baker of today.  Having said that I don't know what the general standard of education would have been for a baker at that time.  Or a baker who was born and brought up in Germany. 

But was he brought up in Germany?  When did he come to England?  Where did he live when he arrived?  Was there a general hatred of Jews in the late 19th century?  I thought that only started in the 1930s (but then I'm kind of ignorant when it comes to all that).

Excellent questions re.Herr Ripper, same ones I've asked Karl.

Re. Anti-semitism, it's been around in the UK (and the world!) since the dawn of time.
Massacre at Clifford's Tower, York in (I think) the 14th century, mass persecutions in the Middle Ages. People think Jews having to wear stars was "invented" by the Germans in WWII. Jews had to put signs on their doors all over England in the Middle Ages, and were consistently targeted by the Crown. It's not a recent thing, unfortunately.

[Sarah Deane]

Really?  Then he's either very brave or very stupid!  But again, this points to someone who was giving away vital clues and wanted to get caught.

Yep, and most serial killers DO want to be caught, or at least see their name in lights. I guess this was the 19th century equivalent. He certainly kept a close eye on the newspapers and hated it when they got facts wrong, or didn't give the killings sufficient coverage. Typical inflated ego of a narcissistic psychopath.