#Assistant Chief Constable Melville Macnaghten | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

spiritsanddemonspodcast · 3 years ago

Text

Jack the Ripper: The Suspects

(Again, all of my info comes from JackTheRipper.Org)

Hello and welcome again!! Last week we discussed the victims of the infamous Jack the Ripper, and today we are talking about possible suspects! So buckle up, buttercup, because there's a lot. Like I said last week, this is a 130 year old unsolved murder mystery. There's plenty of suspects.

Suspect #1: Montague John Druitt.

Chief Constable Sr Melville L. MacNaghten personally believed that Mr. Druitt was Jack the Ripper. Druitt was a lawyer (specifically a barrister) and worked as an assistant schoolmaster at a South East London boarding school. Several member's of his family were doctors, but Montague John Druitt was definitely NOT a doctor. He was, however, dismissed for unknown reasons form the boarding school in November of 1888.

MacNaghten stated Druitt's family suspected him as the ripper, but really there's no evidence of such claims. Druitt committed suicide between November and December of 1888, and his body was found in the Thames on Dec 31, 1888. It's most likely probable that he committed suicide due to being let go from the school.

It's worth noting that none of the other inspectors, police, or other involved in the investigation ever suspected Druitt.

Suspect #2: Michael Ostrog

Ostrog was MacNaghten's second favorite for the running of Jack the Ripper suspects. He was supposedly a Russian doctor and convict. However, he was actually just a "petty thief and con artist" (jack-the-ripper.org). He had a long criminal career but only had one known instance of violence (he pulled a gun on police at the station in 1873).

He was looked at because he had convinced the court that he was clinically insane when he was arrested again in 1887 and sent to an insane asylum. He was released on March 10, 1888. So when police started suspecting a "lunatic with medical knowledge", Ostrog fit the bill.

However - he was actually in France (and in prison again) during the Ripper Murders. So whatcha gonna do?

Suspect #3: Aaron Kosminski

First - I would like to say there was a 2019 DNA study done that places Aaron's DNA on the last bit of evidence that survives today - the shawl that was possibly found with Catherine Eddowes' body. But let's not forget that the shawl has no evidence of belonging to Catherine and this is over 130 year old shawl that's been passed around willy-nilly since 1888. Any and all DNA from that shawl should be looked at with a grain of salt. Catherine was supplementing her income with prostitution, ok?

Now - Why MacNaghten thought Kominski could have been the Ripper was because he was a Polish Jew who resided in Whitechapel. That's it. that's why he was suspected. Two other officers also suspected Kominski - Robert Anderson and Chief Inspector Swanson.

There's no real evidence of him being the killer.

Suspect #4: George Chapman

Chapman wasn't a suspect until he was arrested, tried, and convicted of murdering 5 women (lovers and wives) with poison in the 1903. While Chapman was definitely a murderer, his M.O. was poison, not throat slashing and disemboweling.

Fun fact: He was born Severin Klowoski and changed his name after meeting (get this) a woman named Annie Chapman in 1893.

Suspect #5: Thomas Cutbush

Cutbush was named as Jack The Ripper in The Sun newspaper (which was far more like a tabloid than a news paper and has *no* affiliation to the current Sun Newspaper) in Feb 1894. He was not a prime suspect during 1888 as the murders were taking place and MacNaghten took offence to the idea that Cutbush was the ripper.

Cutbush was definitely mentally ill, and definitely had some anger issues, but it's not very likely in my opinion that he had much to do with the murders, especially as he seemed to be in and out of mental asylums his whole life.

Suspect #6: Dr. Francis Tumblety

First off - Look at that mustache. That is one wicked mustache, omg.

Chief Inspector John Littlechild, who was head of the metropolitan police department (specifically the Irish Branch??) was written a letter by journalist George Sims asking if a "Dr. D." was a suspect (referring to Druitt), and Littlechild said "nope. But an American Quack named Tumblety comes to mind".

Tumblety was arrested for indecency and skipped to America where NYPD put him under surveillance only to conclude that he couldn't have done the murders.

The case for him being Jack is that a man named Dunham claimed to have been a guest at Tumblety's house where the man proceeded to "fiercely denounce '...all women and especially fallen women'" and showed him several jars with the uteri of several women. However, Dunham was known to be a trickster. So... again, whatcha gonna do?

Suspect #7: James Maybrick

James Maybrick came to the public light more-or-less in 1992 when someone produced this "diary" of James. In it, he describes the 5 murders of the Jack the Ripper case and blames it on his wife being unfaithful (typical male). He was murdered in 1889 by said wife with arsenic.

So initially experts thought the diary might be legit, they agreed it was of the right time period at the very least, but more forensic investigation needed to be done. However!!! The guy who produced the diary confessed he forged it, but then withdrew his confession and stated that his wife's family had had the diary in their possession since at least WWII. So... who knows?

Around the same time, a pocket watch with the initials of the victims and J. Maybrick "I am Jack the Ripper" engraved into it was "discovered" as well. So if he *was* the killer, he was rather proud of himself. But if he wasn't, he was either a dick wanting to take credit for horrible murders, or someone was using him as a "get rich quick" scheme.

Suspect #8: Walter Sickert

Patricia Cornwell pointed Walter Sickert as Jack in her 2002 book "Portrait of a Killer: Jack the Ripper Case Closed". She sited impotency and hatred for women as the cause, but there isn't a lot of evidence to prove either. In fact, he probably had a few kids, even.

Suspect #9: Charles Cross

Charles Cross, or as he was born, Charles Lechmere, was one of the few (or possibly only) suspect to have actually been at the scene of the crime. He was the one who discovered Mary Nichols' body.

Cross told inspectors that he left his home around 3:30AM and noticed a large bundle lying in the gateway in Buck's Row. He stated he thought it might have been a tarpaulin and useful to his job as a meat transporter, he went to inspect. When he noticed it was a body of a woman, he heard Robert Paul (last episode I accidentally stated Cross and Paul were coworkers in last week's podcast - that was incorrect, they were both carters, but worked for different companies, neither man knew each other despite going the same rout to work every morning, but we'll get to that)walking towards him so he told Paul "Yo, come look at this dead chick" (direct quote LOL jk).

Cross told police he touched her face and reported he thought it was warm, and then her hands which he said were cold. He also stated Paul touched her chest and reported "I think she is breathing, but very little if she is". Cross also reported that Paul suggested sitting her up, but Cross wouldn't touch her again.

Both Paul and Cross left, telling PC Mizen about the woman, stating she was either drunk or dead, and went to work.

On the other hand, Robert Paul reported to the police that he passed Buck's row at 3:45 and saw Cross standing where Nichols was. He stated Cross came towards him, but Paul tried to keep a wide berth but Cross kept coming saying "Come look at this chick, dude!" (again, totes direct quote LOL). Paul states he felt her wrist and was sure she was dead, but couldn't see any blood due to how dark it was. He then left and told the first PC he saw that there was a dead woman in the street.

Cross is only placed at the first scene, so we can't say for sure if he was the Ripper (we can't say for sure ANYONE was the ripper, because it's been over 130 freaking years). But he is a good suspect.

The 10th and final suspect I will be talking about is, you guessed it: H.H. Holmes.

Who was actually born Herman Webster Mudgett. He was a con-artist in Chicago (and actually all over America, we'll do an episode about him), who build the infamous Murder Castle in Chicago during the World Fair of the 1890's. He came into the spotlight as a possible Jack the Ripper because his great-something-grand child thought it made sense. He went into a ton of detailed research and produced a documentary on it and everything.

The main reason is that the Ripper killings ended in November 1888, and shortly after that there is a ship log with a passenger "H. Holmes" from England to America, and Holmes' murder spree started in the end of 1888.

Personally, I don't buy this and if you listened to the podcast you know why.

But that's it. Those are *most* of the key suspects - there are others (gods are there others. Holy hell, there's so many...), but these are the top 10, if you will.

So who do you think did it??? Leave a comment below!

#jack the ripper #the whitechapel murders #true crime #podcast #true crime podcast #unsolved mysteries #unsolved murder

6 notes · View notes

victorianwhitechapel · 6 years ago

Text

Elizabeth “Lizzie” Jackson

Elizabeth Jackson (aka Lizzie)

Birth date: March 18, 1865 Killed and found (age): Ca. June 3rd 1889, June 5th 1889 (24)

Complexion: Fair Eyes colour: ? Hair colour: Sandy, light red or auburn Height: 5’5” (165 cm) Occupation: domestic servant

Clothes at the time of murder/discovery: Grey Ulster's coat, black dress button, brown linsey dress, burgundy skirt with red selvedge, blue-and-white waistband/drawers bearing the name of L. E. Fisher, ?

Resting place: ?

***

Early life

Elizabeth Jackson, also known as Lizzie, was born on 18 March 1865 in the neighbourhood of Chenie-place, Pimlico (City of Westminster). She was the daughter of John Jackson, a stonemason who was born in County Tipperary, Ireland, and his wife Catherine, who was also born in Ireland but hailed from County Cork. She was the youngest of three daughters, the others were Annie and May, and she also had a brother, James. When she was about twelve she had an accident with a vase leaving her a scar in her left forearm.

In 1881, when she was sixteen, she had gone out to work as a domestic servant in the neighbourhood of Chelsea. She had been described as “of excellent character” until, in November 1888, something happened which occasioned her leaving both her job and her home. Thereafter, she had been living in various common lodging houses in the vicinity of Chelsea. Her last known address was 14 Turk’s Row, which was near Chelsea Barracks. It was there when Lizzie and her sister Anne had a nasty row, as the latter accused the former of picking up men for immoral purposes.

Later months

In November 1888 she was well known to the local police, and she took up with a casually met Cambridgeshire man, a thirty-seven-year-old millstone grinder named John Fairclough (born March 1853), with whom she moved to Ipswich in January 1889. He said they met in a public house at the corner of Turk’s Row. She had told him she had been living with a man named Charlie but the relationship was over. She bought a pair of drawers bearing the name "L.E. Fisher" at a lodging-house at Ipswich, they had belonged originally to a domestic servant at Kirkley, near Lowestoft, and had been sold as old rags by her mother while staying near her daughter in November 1888. Elizabeth and John were in Colchester on March 30th 1889 and, unable to find work there, walked all the way back to London where they settled into lodgings in Manilla Street, Millwall, taking a room at four Schillings a week, with a Mrs. Kate Pane, who would afterwards testify that Fairclough was violent in his treatment of Elizabeth, knocking her about, irrespective of her being five months pregnant.

The pair parted on 28th April, Fairclough going off to Croydon in search of a job. Mary Minter, a family friend of Elizabeth’s, gave her an Ulster’s coat not long before she disappeared. On May 31st Catherine Jackson saw his daughter only one day or two before she was murdered in Queen's Road, Chelsea, and the two spent the time together. Lizzie was a 24 year-old homeless prostitute about eight months pregnant, and living in London's Soho Square at the time of her murder in early June 1889.

Discovery

On Tuesday 4th June 1889 in the morning, one package containing portions of a woman's body was found by two boys, as witnessed by waterside labourer John Regan at George's Stairs, Horselydown (just below London Bridge). At 10:00am, standing along the bank of the Thames, Regan noticed a couple of boys “throwing stones at an object in the water”. When one of the boys pulled the package out of the water, and realizing the contents of the package were that of human remains, contacted the Thames River police division. These remains were taken to Wapping police station by Alfred Freshwater of the Thames Police. Several experienced Scotland Yard detectives and Dr. Thomas Bond, the chief surgeon to the Metropolitan police, proceeded to Wapping (a district in East London in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets) to commence investigations. Among the first detectives and police at the scene was Melville Macnaghten, the newly appointed Assistant Chief Constable of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID).

The remains were the lower part of a female body; and she had evidently not been dead long as Dr. Bond noticed a slight ooze of blood from the ragged edges of the cut parts of flesh. Dr Bond was instantly of the opinion that the body part was that of a young woman and that an attempt had been made to carry out an illegal operation, which had been successful. None of the press reports described exactly what was found within this parcel to draw these conclusions from, but according to the medical jurisprudence book 'A system of legal medicine', which contains details from some of Dr. Bond's cases, there were flaps of abdominal skin and the uterus of the victim, complete with cord and placenta, "... The skin was fair, and the mons veneris was covered with light sandy hair..."

Almost simultaneous to the discovery by the two boys, was the finding of another parcel by fifteen-year-old Isaac Brett, of 7 Lawrence Street in Chelsea, who earned his living as a wood cutter. When taking a walk near the Albert Bridge, Battersea (South West London, within the London Borough of Wandsworth, about 5 miles from the spot of the first discovery), Brett decided to take a bath. Upon submerging he noticed a strange object being nudged by the tide against the muddy foreshore and tied with a bootlace. He took it ashore but didn’t open it. Upon the advice of a passing stranger, he took it straight to the Battersea Police Station, where sergeant William Briggs of V division opened it. The assistant divisional surgeon for Battersea, Dr. Felix Charles Kempster, was called in. He declared it to be a portion of a human thigh from hip to knee; his opinion was that the limb had not been in the water above 24 hours. The white cloth was the right leg of a pair of drawers, on the waistband (an item of ladies underclothing) of which had the name L.E. Fisher written in black ink along it. Fastened to another portion of the material was a piece of tweed seemingly torn from the right breast area of a lady's long Ulster coat.

The local police immediately alerted Scotland Yard and Inspector John Bennett Tonbridge or Tunbridge of the criminal investigation department alerted Dr. Bond, who concluded that the two body parts corresponded and there were no doubts that they belonged to the same body, further proof that backed this up came from the fact the parcel found at Horselydown was wrapped in a portion of underwear identical to the portion found with the thigh section at the Albert bridge and also contained another portion of the bottom left hand side of a woman's Ulster coat. The whole parcel had been tied up with mohair boot laces and was slightly stained with blood. Further examinations of the thigh, by Dr. Kempster and Mr. Athelstan Braxton Hicks found it to be the left one, and most likely that of a young woman within the 20 to 30 age range. Bruises made by finger marks were also found upon the thigh, and these were concluded to have been made before death.

On Wednesday 5th June 1889, the coroner of East Middlesex Wynne Edwin Baxter, who had presided over the inquests of Mary Ann Nichols, Annie Chapman and Elizabeth Stride, opened an inquest at the Vestry hall, Wapping, into the remains found at Horselydown. He expressed doubts as to whether it was a proper case for an inquiry as it was difficult to draw the line as to what part of a body was sufficient enough to warrant an inquest. However, he had decided that an inquiry should be held and he summoned a jury. John Regan and Alfred Freshwater gave evidence at the inquest and repeated their stories. The inquest was then adjourned until the 3rd of July.

On Thursday 6th June, in the afternoon, Joseph Davis, a gardener at Battersea Park, was at work near some greenery rhododendron shrubbery when he noticed a parcel laying on the ground in an area that was closed to the public. The shrubbery was situated about 200 yards from the shore of the Thames and was a place not frequented usually by the public or employed staff at the park. On nearing the bundle, that was rides with white Venetian blind cord, he noticed an unpleasant smell emanating from it. Upon open it, Davis threw the thing in shock, horrified to recognise parcelled therein bits and pieces from a human body wrapped in a burgundy-coloured skirt. Off he shot in a desperate dash in search of one of the patrolling park policemen. He found police constable Walter Augier of V division, and conveyed the parcel to Battersea police station by means of a garden basket. Dr Kempster, whose surgery was only a few yards from the police station, was alerted to the find by Sergeants Viney and Briggs, Viney being in charge of local inquires into the case. Telegrams were despatched to police headquarters describing the remains found as thus: the upper part of a woman's trunk, probably a portion of other human remains found in the Thames. The chest cavity was empty but among the remains were the spleen, both kidneys, a portion of the intestines and a portion of the stomach. There was also a portion of midriff and both breasts present. The chest had been cut through the centre, thought to have possibly been done by a saw. Kempster was of the opinion that due to the state of decomposure, they were probably looking at another portion of the same remains previously found in the Thames, and that the murder might have taken place as early as June 2nd.

That same Thursday afternoon, around 4pm, Charles Marlow, a man working on a barge at Covington's Wharf adjacent to the London, Brighton and South Coast railway at Battersea and coincidentally, almost immediately opposite the spot where an arm belonging to the 'Whitehall torso' was found in the previous year, noticed a parcel floating up the river, he fished the bundle, wrapped in portions of a woman's dark coloured skirt and tied with ordinary string, out with a broom. Once again a passing Thames police boat was flagged down and Inspector William Law of the Thames division took possession of it at Waterloo Pier, and was conveyed to Battersea police station to await the scrutiny of Dr. Kempster. This latest find was the upper part of a woman's trunk, the arms had been taken off cleanly at the shoulder joints and the head separated from the body close to the shoulders. The chest had been cut down the centre in a similar fashion to the other portion of the trunk. A portion of the windpipe remained within the trunk but the lungs were missing. An earlier supposition that the victim had light red or auburn hair was substantiated on the finding on this portion of the body.

The doctors and police were now gradually building up a physical description of the woman, based on measurements of the various body parts already found and this description was widely circulated. The police regarded the name of L.E. Fisher, stencilled into the underwear found wrapping parts of the body, as an important clue that may lead to her identification. Several people reported missing female relatives that fitted the description.

By Friday 7th June several other missing portions of the body began to be discovered. A section of the lower right leg and foot were picked up by gyspy Solomon Hearne on the foreshore near Wandsworth Bridge in Fulham (an area of the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham in South West London), wrapped in the same tweed Ulster coat fragments as the previous finds. The left leg and foot were found near Limehouse (district in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets in East London) by lighterman Edward Stanton, this piece was wrapped in the sleeve of the same Ulster. A liver and other portions of supposed abdominal flesh, were also found around this time in the Thames by nitric acid maker David Goodman and the Inspector Hodson of the Thames Division dully passed it on to Dr. Kempster to be analysed and assessed as to whether they came from the same body or not. The police and large numbers of volunteers, including the Royal Humane society, were engaged in searches and dredging along the river in the Battersea area. A portion of lung was discovered at Palace Wharf, Vauxhall (Surrey, Central London) and brought to Dr Kempster at Battersea, all the found pieces were preserved in spirits and doctors were of the opinion that there was no doubt they all belonged to the same body. Portions of the clothing that accompanied the finds were taken along to the Bridge Road police station at Battersea in order that they could be inspected by anyone who may have been missing a female friend or relative fitting the description. An inquest was also held at Pimlico (City of Westminster) concerning the body of a newborn female child found bundled in ragged, filthy clothing and bedding and dumped in an underground station near Edbury Bridge. There was some suspicion that this may have connection with the case under investigation, based on some press reports that the victim found in the Thames had been delivered of a child recently. The cause of death of this child could not be ascertained however.

On Friday 8th June the left arm and hand turned up in the river Thames off Bankside. Dr Kempster described the hands as pale delicate and genteel and evidently that of a person who was in a superior position in life, although the nails had been bitten down to the quick. There were marks from a ring being removed later discovered on the left hand, indicating the deceased had probably been married. Vaccination marks were also found upon the arm. This time the limb was wrapped in brown paper and tied up with string.

On the Saturday afternoon the buttocks and the bony pelvis, with all the organs missing, were picked up near Battersea steam boat pier. These parts were all found to correspond with other parts found among the first discoveries at Horselydown a few days earlier. The bladder was said to have been cut through in the pubic arch. According to the Lloyd's Weekly Newspaper of Sunday 9th June, a strange discovery was made on examining the buttocks closer. A fine piece of linen, approximately 9.5in. by 8in., possibly a handkerchief, was found rolled up and pushed into the back passage: "The third portion of the trunk consisted of the pelvis from below the third lumbar vertebra. The thighs had been taken off opposite The hip joints by long, sweeping incisions through the skin, muscles and tissues down to the joint, the heads of the bones neatly disarticulated... The pelvis contained the lower part of the vagina and the lower part of the rectum, the front part of the bladder including the urethra..."

The right thigh was also found the same day in the garden of the poet Sir Percy Byshee Shelley's Chelsea house, which was being rented out to another occupier at the time. It was very much decomposed and wrapped in some more portions of the now familiar Ulster coat as well as what appeared to be the coarse fabric pocket of an apron, similar to those used by meat or fish salesman or costermongers.

On the 10th June the right arm and hand were found floating in the Thames off Newton's Wharf near Blackfriars Bridge. The only portions of the body still missing were the heart, lungs, head and neck and the intestines. By Tuesday the 11th June no further human remains had been discovered and it was doubted whether any further portions would turn up, although on the 12th June the remains of a male foetus, of approximately 5 or 6 months gestation, was found floating in the river near Whitehall, in a jar similar to the ones used for pickles, the doctors were undecided if this had any connection to the case in hand.

Drs Bond, Charles A. Hebbert and Kempster then made their final examination of all the remains at the Battersea mortuary in preparation for making their final report to the Commissioners of Police. It was conclusively established that the remains were that of a woman under the age range of twenty five, and approximately 5ft. 5 in. tall with bright reddish-golden hair. It was believed from the condition of the hands, showing no signs of hard labour or manual work, that the murdered woman had occupied a better position in life than was indicated by the clothing found with the body.

‘The Times' of 13th June reported that the body was accompanied by “an old brown linsey dress, red selvedge, two flounces round the bottom, waistband made of small blue-and-white check material like duster clothe, a piece of canvas roughly sewn on the end of the band, a large brass pin in the skirt and a black dress button, about the size of a threepenny piece, with lines across in the pocket.” The torn pieces of Ulster’s coat was get with a black cross-hatching pattern forming a check design. The material was of good quality but old.

Inquest

On Saturday the 15th June, the inquest on the circumstances surrounding the death of the woman whose mutilated remains were found over a 12 day period in June, in and around the Thames, was opened at The Star and Garter Battersea by Mr A. Braxton Hicks, coroner for Mid Surrey. No less than 23 witnesses were in attendance that day. Dr Thomas Bond handed the coroner a lengthy report on the medical findings and the description of the woman was again repeated including the fact that she was pregnant by about seven to eight months and undelivered at the time of her death, the unborn child having been removed, by an incision into the uterus after the mother's death. Dr Bond went on to state that as part of the stomach was missing there was no way of knowing if the victim had been administered drugs of any kind, but he had seen no trace of instruments having been used for an unlawful purpose. The cause of death could not be determined as the head, throat, lungs and heart had never been recovered, although attempts had been made to recover the head using the dog, Smoker, who had been successful at discovering missing parts in the Whitehall case. He also stated that the medical men had concluded that "the division of the parts showed skill and design: not, however, the anatomical skill of a surgeon, but the practical knowledge of a butcher or a knacker. There was a great similarity between the condition, as regarded cutting up, of the remains and that of those found at Rainham, and at the new police building on the Thames Embankment."

Various witness testimonies were then heard, describing the finding of the various portions of the body, including the testimony of Joseph Churcher, sub inspector of the Thames police, who had found the buttocks and pelvis. He repeated the fact, that this portion of the body had a piece of linen placed inside it. The full details as reported in the earlier Lloyd's article were not however mentioned in the inquest press reports. At this point it was stated that the identification of the victim was still a mystery and very few people had been to view the remains or clothing by that time. The inquest was then adjourned for two weeks.

On June the 26th, via the central news agency and coinciding with fresh reports that the victim had now been possibly identified as an unfortunate named Elizabeth Jackson, came news of previously undisclosed information that 'various circumstances connected with the fate of this victim had led to a belief that she was really a victim of the Whitechapel fiend, Jack the Ripper.' It was reported that this information involved "a nameless indignity inflicted upon the corpse, which it was then considered advisable to suppress in the published reports. That indignity was of a character instinctively to suggest the handiwork of the most brutal of murderers".

In the 11 days since the last inquest, the Metropolitan police, acting on information received, had been investigating the possibility that the victim was a missing homeless unfortunate named Elizabeth Jackson. She had not been seen by most family or friends since the end of May and her father had expressed concern in a letter to another of his daughters, that the Thames victim may have been his missing daughter Elizabeth.

The identification came about by means of the clothing of the victim, her description, pregnant condition at the time of her disappearance and also the fact that Elizabeth had a scar on her wrist as a result of a childhood accident. This was investigated by the doctors and by lifting away a small amount of skin from the slightly decomposed arm of the victim they were able to locate traces of similar scar on the wrist.

The police traced Elizabeth's movements up until the time of her disappearance. She had been a frequenter of common lodging houses in the Chelsea area and was last known to have lived at a house in Turk's Row, close to the Chelsea Barracks. Police discovered she had not been seen in any of her usual haunts or been an inmate of any casual wards, workhouses or hospitals in London since her disappearance. Given that she was destitute, the only option if she had left the London area would have been for her to tramp on foot, but because of her physical condition, police thought this would have been difficult for her and most unlikely. The lodging houses that Elizabeth had lodged from time to time and the areas she promenaded at night were all within a short distance of Battersea Bridge, the area where it was believed that the lighter parts of the body were disposed of from.

Elizabeth had boasted to friends, in particular a close friend nicknamed 'Ginger Nell,' that she had been in the habit of remaining in Battersea Park, the area where the upper portion of her trunk had been discovered, after the park gates had been closed to the public. The park was also known to be one of the areas the unfortunate 'promenaded.' This information gave rise in some newspapers to the theory that Elizabeth had been accosted, murdered and dismembered in the park itself, and that there were serious grounds for connecting the murder of Elizabeth Jackson with the Whitechapel atrocities.

Other reports suggested the idea that there were two main theories connected with this case. One being the abortion theory, the other one being the fact that Elizabeth had been in the habit of sleeping outdoors on the Chelsea Embankment and on disclosure of this fact had been warned, again by her friend 'Ginger Nell,' that she should be wary of the rough character of the waterside labourers and their treatment of homeless unfortunates. It was believed she may have fallen victim to one of these rough characters that frequented the areas around the Thames and may have been murdered outdoors alongside the Thames or else met her death on board a vessel there.

On Monday July 1st the inquest into the death was resumed before Mr. Braxton Hicks. Elizabeth Jackson's mother, sisters and various friends and acquaintances of Elizabeth's were present and gave witness testimony to the effect that they were convinced beyond doubt of the identification of the body found in the Thames as that of Elizabeth Jackson, only Elizabeth's brother expressed any doubts as to the identification, on account of the description of the 'genteel' hands. Mention was also made of John Faircloth, who up until that point had remained untraced. Police expressed their eagerness to interview him, whose photograph was in the process of being circulated around various parts of the country, with a view to locating him. Faircloth, a former soldier and punished deserter from the 3rd battalion Grenadier Guards, was said to have been the father of Elizabeth's child and she had passed herself off as his wife, even wearing a cheap brass ring to carry this off. Police also made it known that the deceased had been seen alive and in the company of a man a little over twenty four hours previous to the first discoveries in the Thames. The inquiry was then adjourned again until Faircloth, and the man seen with Elizabeth on the alleged night of her death could be located by police, descriptions were given of both men. The inquest ended with the coroner making an order for the remains to be buried in the name of Elizabeth Jackson.

By July 8th came news from Scotland Yard that a man named John Faircloth, fitting the description of the paramour of Elizabeth Jackson had been located in Tipton St John, Devon. Sergeant Pope of the Devonshire constabulary communicated with Scotland Yard and Inspector Tunbridge of the Criminal Investigation Department was sent to Tipton to find Faircloth and bring him back to London. Faircloth was found and proved to be the man wanted to help with inquiries into Elizabeth's death. He proceeded willingly and voluntarily back to London, stating that he had heard no news whatsoever of Elizabeth's death, and being an illiterate man, had been unable to read anything of the matter. He was however, willing to answer any questions he could to help in the inquiry and would give a full account of his life with Elizabeth and their subsequent split.

As a result of Faircloth's return to London, the previously adjourned inquest was resumed earlier than had been scheduled. On Monday 8th July Faircloth was the main witness at the inquest. His life with Elizabeth and his whereabouts at the time of her death, and since, were discussed in great detail. The inquest was then adjourned again until the 25th July so as to allow the police to thoroughly check out Faircloth's story and continue with their investigations.

On July the 17th, between these two inquests, came the reports of the murder of Alice Mckenzie in Castle Alley, Whitechapel. These reports again included comment from The Central News Agency that it was thought by not a few people, that the Thames mystery was also the work of the wretch, believed to have left off after the Mary Jane Kelly murder of 9th November 1888. This was owed principally to the fact that the various portions of the body found, seemed to show that the murderer had taken a fiendish delight in performing mutilations upon it.

On the 25th July, Mr. Braxton Hicks opened his very last enquiry into the circumstances surrounding the death of Elizabeth Jackson. Inspector Tunbridge stated that after exhaustive and thorough efforts by police, the exact whereabouts of the man Faircloth, at the time of the murder of Elizabeth Jackson had been confirmed without a doubt. He was found to have been nowhere in the vicinity of London or within travelling distance for a period of time before the murder. Faircloth had a solid and witnessed alibi for the days leading up to the murder of Elizabeth. The Coroner then stated that was all the evidence. He remarked that this case was somewhat different to the cases that had unfortunately occurred in Whitechapel. This was a case in which a woman had died under circumstances that in themselves were excessively suspicious. He went on to say that everything on the body pointed to the conclusion that the body was that of Elizabeth Jackson and suggested to the jury that a verdict of wilful murder, by some person or persons unknown should be returned. A verdict in accordance with the coroner's direction was reached and the jury complemented the police engaged on the case on their vigilance and the ability they had shown in bringing the matter to an issue.

Aftermath

The previous press claims that the murder of Elizabeth Jackson could be linked to the Whitechapel fiend; Jack the Ripper soon lost their momentum. By the time of the discovery of the Pinchin Street torso in Whitechapel in September 1889, the press were linking the murder of Elizabeth Jackson to this more recent murder. The two murders were also linked by the press to the previous Rainham and Whitehall mysteries. Inspector Tunbridge, who had been in charge of the Jackson murder investigation, was brought in to view the Pinchin Street torso, along with detectives who had been involved in the other similar cases. It was reported that the general opinion of these detectives was that the mode of dismemberment in all these cases was strikingly similar and there was also an opinion expressed that these murders were of a 'different origin' to the Whitechapel atrocities.

***

TO KNOW MORE:

Casebook Website – Casebook Message Boards – Debra Arif report on Casebook – Casebook Forums - Dr. Hebberd's reports on Elizabeth Jackson and the Whitehall Mystery – Casebook Forums - Elizabeth's location in Battersea Park – Casebook Forums - was Elizabeth's murder related to abortion? – Casebook Message Boards - L. E. Fisher

JTR Forums - Elizabeth Jackson – JTR Forums - Elizabeth Jackson's press reports – JTR Forums - Elizabeth Jackson's as Whitechapel Murders' victim

Jack The Ripper Tour

Thomas Bond page

Wiki Visually

Red Jack Blogspot (in Italian)

Jack The Ripper German Forum (in German)

BEGG, Paul & BENNETT, John (2014): The forgotten victims.

BEGG, Paul; FIDO, Martin & SKINNER, Keith (1996): The Jack The Ripper A – Z.

BROWNING, Corey (2010): The Darker Side of Evolution, in The Casebook Examiner, NUM. 5, December.

EDDLESTON, John J. (2001): Jack the Ripper: An Encyclopedia.

GORDON, R. Michael (2015): The Thames Torso Murders of Victorian London.

HAMILTON, Allan McLane & GODKIN, Edwin Lawrence (1894): A System of Legal Medicine.

MACNAGHTEN, Sir Melville L. (1914): Days of My Years.

TROW, Meirion James (2011): The Thames Torso Murders.

WHITTINGTON-EGAN, Richard (2015): Mr Atherstone Leaves the Stage. The Battersea Murder Mystery: A Twisting and Tragic Tale of Love, Jealousy and Violence in the age of Vaudeville.

42 notes · View notes