#catherine eddowes

[thepastisalreadywritten]

By Parissa DJangi

August 18, 2023

Some say he was a surgeon. Others, a deranged madman — or perhaps a butcher, prince, artist, or specter.

The murderer known to history as Jack the Ripper terrorized London 135 years ago this fall.

In the subsequent century, he has been everything to everyone, a dark shadow on which we pin our fears and attitudes.

But to five women, Jack the Ripper was not a legendary phantom or a character from a detective novel — he was the person who horrifically ended their lives.

“Jack the Ripper was a real person who killed real people,” reiterates historian Hallie Rubenhold, whose book, The Five, chronicles the lives of his victims. “He wasn’t a legend.”

Who were these women? They had names: Mary Ann “Polly” Nichols, Annie Chapman, Elizabeth Stride, Catherine Eddowes, and Mary Jane Kelly.

They also had hopes, loved ones, friends, and, in some cases, children.

Their lives, each one unique, tell the story of 19th-century London, a city that pushed them to its margins and paid more attention to them dead than alive.

Terror in Whitechapel

Their stories did not all begin in London, but they ended there, in and around the crowded corner of the metropolis known as Whitechapel, a district in London’s East End.

“Probably there is no such spectacle in the whole world as that of this immense, neglected, forgotten great city of East London,” Walter Bessant wrote in his novel All Sorts and Conditions of Men in 1882.

“It is even neglected by its own citizens, who had never yet perceived their abandoned condition.”

The “abandoned” citizens of Whitechapel included some of the city’s poorest residents.

Immigrants, transient laborers, families, single women, thieves — they all crushed together in overflowing tenements, slums, and workhouses.

According to historian Judith Walkowitz:

“By the 1880s, Whitechapel had come to epitomize the social ills of ‘Outcast London,’ a place where sin and poverty comingled in the Victorian imagination, shocking the middle classes."

Whitechapel transformed into a scene of horror when the lifeless, mutilated body of Polly Nichols was discovered on a dark street in the early morning hours of August 31, 1888.

She became the first of Jack the Ripper’s five canonical victims, the core group of women whose murders appeared to be related and occurred over a short span of time.

Over the next month, three more murdered women would be found on the streets of the East End.

They had been killed in a similar way: their throats slashed, and, in most cases, their abdomens disemboweled.

Some victims’ organs had been removed. The fifth murder occurred on November 9, when the Ripper butchered Mary Jane Kelly with such barbarity that she was nearly unrecognizable.

This so-called “Autumn of Terror” pushed Whitechapel and the entire city into a panic, and the serial killer’s mysterious identity only heightened the drama.

The press sensationalized the astonishingly grisly murders — and the lives of the murdered women.

Polly, Annie, Elizabeth, Catherine, and Mary Jane

Though forever linked by the manner of their death, the five women murdered by Jack the Ripper shared something else in common:

They were among London’s most vulnerable residents, living on the margins of Victorian society.

They eked out a life in the East End, drifting in and out of workhouses, piecing together casual jobs, and pawning their few possessions to afford a bed for a night in a lodging house.

If they could not scrape together the coins, they simply slept on the street.

“Nobody cared about who these women were at all,” Rubenhold says. “Their lives were incredibly precarious.”

Polly Nichols knew precarity well. Born in 1845, she fulfilled the Victorian ideal of proper womanhood when she became a wife at the age of 18.

But after bearing five children, she ultimately left her husband under suspicions of his infidelity.

Alcohol became both a crutch and curse for her in the final years of her life.

Alcohol also hastened Annie Chapman’s estrangement from what was considered a respectable life.

Annie Chapman was born in 1840 and spent most of her life in London and Berkshire.

With her marriage to John Chapman, a coachman, in 1869, Annie positioned herself in the top tier of the working class.

But her taste for alcohol and the loss of her children unraveled her family life, and Annie ended up in the East End.

Swedish-born Elizabeth Stride was an immigrant, like thousands of others who lived in the East End.

Born in 1843, she came to England when she was 22. In London, Stride reinvented herself time and time again, becoming a wife and coffeehouse owner.

Catherine Eddowes­­, who was born in Wolverhampton in 1842 and moved to London as a child, lost both of her parents by the time she was 15.

She spent most of her adulthood with one man, who fathered her children. Before her murder, she had just returned to London after picking hops in Kent, a popular summer ritual for working-class Londoners.

At 25, Mary Jane Kelly was the youngest, and most mysterious, of the Ripper’s victims.

Kelly reportedly claimed she came from Ireland and Wales before settling in London.

She had a small luxury that the others did not: She rented a room with a bed. It would become the scene of her murder.

Yet the longstanding belief that all of these women were sex workers is a myth, as Rubenhold demonstrates in The Five.

Only two of the women — Stride and Kelly — were known to have engaged in sex work during their lives.

The fact that all of them have been labeled sex workers highlights how Victorians saw poor, unhoused women.

“They have been systematically ‘othered’ from society,” Rubenhold says,"even though this is how the majority lived.”

These women were human beings with a strong sense of personhood. According to biographer Robert Hume, their friends and neighbors described them as “industrious,” “jolly,” and “very clean.”

They lived, they loved, they existed — until, very suddenly on a dark night in 1888, they did not.

A long shadow

The discovery of Annie Chapman’s body on September 8 heightened panic in London, since her wounds echoed the shocking brutality of Polly Nichols’ murder days earlier.

Investigators realized that the same killer had likely committed both crimes — and he was still on the loose. Who would he strike next?

In late September, London’s Central News Office received a red-inked letter that claimed to be from the murderer. It was signed “Jack the Ripper.”

Papers across the city took the name and ran with it. Press coverage of the Whitechapel Murders crescendoed to a fever pitch.

Newspapers danced the line between fact and fiction, breathlessly recounting every gruesome detail of the crimes and speculating with wild abandon about the killer’s identity.

Today, that impulse endures, and armchair detectives and professional investigators alike have proposed an endless parade of suspects, including artist Walter Sickert, writer Lewis Carroll, sailor Carl Feigenbaum, and Aaron Kosminski, an East End barber.

"The continued fascination with unmasking the murderer perpetuates this idea that Jack the Ripper is a game,” Rubenhold says.

She sees parallels between the gamification of the Whitechapel Murders and the modern-day obsession with true crime.

“When we approach true crime, most of the time we approach as if it was legend, as if it wasn’t real, as if it didn’t happen to real people.”

“These crimes still happen today, and we are still not interested in the victims,” Rubenhold laments.

The Whitechapel Murders remain unsolved after 135 years, and Rubenhold believes that will never change:

“We’re not going to find anything that categorically tells us who Jack the Ripper is.”

Instead, the murders tell us about the values of the 19th century — and the 21st.

[sittingupwiththedead]

Hey guys this is your occasional reminder that using song lyrics as evidence in a criminal trial is kinda bullshit. K thanx

[killerblogs-stuff]

CATHERINE EDDOWES

Catherine Eddowes, 46 years old. Her body was found on September 30 in Miter Square in a pool of blood and in a supine position, like all the other victims. The woman had been subjected to a real martyrdom by the assassin, who, having failed to inflict violence on the previous victim, would have sought a second victim to attack. The face was completely disfigured and unrecognizable except for the color of the eyes. The face was disfigured with a "V" cut. Not very far from the crime scene, more precisely in Goulston street around 2:55 in the morning, a bloody section of Eddowes' apron was found and a graffiti directly above the apron piece which read: "Jews are those that they will not be accused of anything". The message seemed to imply that a Jew or several Jews in general were responsible for the series of murders.

[blamed-for-nothing]

[littlequeenies]

*Check out our blogspot for victorian Whitechapel here*

World Television Day

On the 21st of November is World Television Day. Obviously, on Victorian times the TV didn't exist yet, but there are some TV films, series and mini-series that portrayed the Whitechapel Murder Victims. As a way of tributing these women, we decided to celebrate World Television Day by posting TV shows that featured them.

Jack The Ripper (1988 mini series):

In this TV mini-series starring Michael Caine, Annie Chapman is played by Deirdre Costello:

Angela Crow plays Liz Stride:

Susan George plays Catherine Eddowes:

And Lysette Anthony plays the role of Mary Kelly:

The Ripper (1997 TV film):

In this TV movie, Josephine Keen plays the role of Elizabeth Stride:

Catherine Eddowes is played by an unknown actress (please, contact me if you can identify her!):

And Mary Kelly is played by Karen Davitt:

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s The Lost World (2001 TV Series):

In this fantasy TV series, there is an episode about the Whitechapel murders, the 5th episode of the 3rd season called "The Knife".

In it, Jennifer O'Dell plays Catherine Eddowes:

And Rachel Blakely plays the role of Mary Kelly:

--

PS: As Tumblr only allows to post 10 photos in one post, I cannot post the shows posters.

[lizbethborden]

Wot on erf... Started reading Theodora: Actress Empress Saint and there's like... just copy editing stuff within the first few pages... Saying Theodora "had born [sic] a daughter"? It's "borne," sir... Describing an image depicting kids cheering at chariot races, saying "the images of children cheering her [sic] may show us one of Theodora's own activities"? Um... And it's written by this person?

David Stone Potter (born 1957) is the Francis W. Kelsey Collegiate Professor of Greek and Roman History and the Arthur F. Thurnau Professor, Professor of Greek and Latin in Ancient History at The University of Michigan. Potter is a graduate of Harvard (A.B. 1979) and Oxford (D.Phil 1984) universities and specializes in Greek and Roman Asia Minor, Greek, and Latin historiography and epigraphy, Roman public entertainment, and the study of ancient warfare.[1]

You can graduate Harvard and Oxford and not know this stuff? This is like when I was reading Femina by Janina Ramirez and she didn't know the difference between "grisly" and "grizzly." She studied at Oxford too

[intriguingpeoplebyangelafloyd]

WHO WAS JACK THE RIPPER? The shawl that allegedly belonged to Catherine Eddowes In 2014, the shawl that allegedly belonged to Jack the Ripper victim, Catherine Eddowes was tested for DNA, as well as those related to Jack the Ripper suspect Aaron Kosminski and victim, Catherine Eddowes. Catherine Eddowes was murdered by Jack the Ripper on 30 September 1888 and was his fourth known victim. Eddowes was murdered in the early hours in the city of London. She was the second woman killed within an hour that night, after the murder of Elizabeth Stride, known as the ‘double event’. Aaron Kosminski was one of the alleged suspects, he was a Polish Jewish barber and hairdresser in Whitechapel, where the crimes took place. In 1891, he was locked up after he had threatened his sister with a knife. However, there has been a mix up between the names ‘Kosminski’ and ‘Aaron Kosminski’ – which possibly could be two different people. Author Russell Edwards wrote a book Naming Jack the Ripper as Aaron Kosminski. He had bought a shawl which allegedly belonged to Eddowes which was discovered at the crime scene. The shawl was tested for DNA and Edwards claimed that it matched the suspect as Kosminski. Scientists disagreed, they criticised the findings due to several mistakes and assumptions made by Edwards.

[dean-boese-universe]

In this episode of the Family Plot Podcast we talk Jack the Ripper! His most likely victims, the area of Whitechapel in 1888, suspects and so much more. Krysta talks her love interest Bunny and about life on a high school debate team in her Catching Up with Krysta segment in our final spooky season episode of the Family Plot Podcast!

[chaifootsteps]

i don't think i like the implication of that pentious was able to redeem himself by doing something that stopped six people from dying forever in hell as a bandaid to failing to stop six women from being murdered in life. like their lives are interchangeable just because the numbers add up even. are those six women in heaven? is he ever going to actually come face to face with them and apologize for not speaking up for them? that seems like it would be more healing and redeeming for him than what was in the clip imo

Can you imagine how much more impactful it would have been if the Speaker had said that it wasn't up to her, then asked, "What do you think, ladies?" And then Mary Ann Nichols, Annie Chapman, Elizabeth Stride, Catherine Eddowes, and Mary Jane Kelly all step forward?

At that point, if you don't want the hornet's nest of potentially mischaracterizing five brutally murdered women, you reveal that Pentious was allowed to stay but leave their actual words on the subject to the imagination.

[miwhotep]

THE JACK THE RIPPER CASE IN YUUMORI AND IN REALITY

One of my favourite arcs is the Phantom of Whitechapel because it adapted the real Jack the Ripper case quite well and the story was full of elements what actually happened. I wanted to write a little about the similarities as recently was the anniversary of the first murder.

The Jack the Ripper murders or Whitechapel murders took place in 1888 in the East End of London, the infamously poor Whitechapel district where the underclass people lived. Lot of women here earned their money for the living from selling their bodies and a serial killer, Jack the Ripper started to target them. The number of the victims is unsure, the police accepted five murders to be surely connected to Jack the Ripper, they are often referred to as the canonical five. The women got murdered by their throats being cut away and some of their inestines were also removed from their bodies.

The first victim was called Mary Ann Nichols whose body was discovered at 3:40 a.m. on 31th August. She was last seen alive by a woman she lived with in a lodging house. These all are very similar to how Moriarty the Patriot described the murder details, except that there, the victim's name was Melanie Nichols and she was seen with a blond man.

The second victim was Annie Chapman, her body was found at 6 a.m on 8th September and she was last seen half an hour ago in a company of a dark-haired man. The details shown in Yuumori are again similar, just the victim was called Adeline Bergman.

(Interesting addition to here - just like you see, the fan translation uses the victims' real names while the official gave them fake ones. In the original Japanese, also the fake ones are what are used.)

When it comes to the later murders, Yuumori's story deviates from the historical events, since here, the last three victims of the canonical five was just a stage-play by William who tried to catch the killer(s) with setting up a fake Jack the Ripper. In reality, two of the victims, Elizabeth Stride and Catherine Eddowes were found on the same morning of 30th September - the Morigang placing two of the dead bodies at the same place so they get discovered at the same time must be a reference to that. The last victim, Mary Jane Kelly was discovered in the room where she lived on 9th November - her murder was the most gruesome out of the five, what I think Yuumori also referenced with Jack's show who pretended to kill a woman brutally on the roof.

Several letters signed by Jack the Ripper were sent to the newspapers. The media, especially the Central News Agency where some of the letters arrived, also overexaggerated about the details when they wrote about the murders, spreading a lot of misinformation just to sell more papers. In Yuumori, the group of people responsible for the murders who committed them to cause fear in the public and make a revolution by the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee and the police forces collide, hired Milverton to create the Jack the Ripper agenda with the help of his media power and he also manipulated the public opinion. The quotes shown from the letter sent to the Central News in the Moriarty the Patriot manga are from the first letter (called as Dear Boss letter) signed as Jack the Ripper what was also sent to Central News in reality. The real letter was longer and Jack the Ripper threatened to send the lady's ears to the police instead of her organs (however, with one of his later letters, Jack truly sent one of his victims kidney to the police), otherwise they are the same.

The Scotland Yard, just like in Yuumori wasn't really on the top when it came to solve the murders what resulted in riots and conflicts with the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee in reality too. And just like Chief Inspector Arterton was removed from his position in Scotland Yard - tho, for a slightly different reason - for not solving the Jack the Ripper case one of the police chiefs of London back then was also fired. In Moriarty the Patriot, a doctor was wrongly arrested and sent to prison in order to silence the raging public and in real life, lot of doctors were suspected to commit the murders.

In Yuumori, the identity of Jack the Ripper was solved by both Sherlock Holmes and the Morigang - who killed them - but it stayed unsolved for the public. In reality, the identity of Jack the Ripper either remained unsolved or not - few years ago, there was a DNA test what was said to determine the killer's identity, but lot of researchers believe that the test was incorrect and don't accept the answer.

I adore this arc for how well the series merged reality with fiction and it was especially exciting to read knowing the details of the real Jack the Ripper case.

[whencyclopedia]

The Five: The Untold Lives of the Women Killed by Jack the Ripper

"The Five" by Hallie Rubenhold offers a fresh perspective on the victims of Jack the Ripper, focusing on their lives rather than their deaths. Rubenhold's meticulous research brings these women to life, challenging misconceptions and shedding light on the socio-economic struggles of Victorian London. Unlike typical true crime narratives, this book emphasizes the humanity of its subjects. It's a must-read for history enthusiasts of all levels.

The Five: The Untold Lives of the Women Killed by Jack the Ripper takes a refreshing approach by focusing on the lives of the women believed to be victims of the notorious killer rather than simply on their deaths. Unlike typical ripperology literature, this book barely mentions Jack the Ripper himself. Instead, it successfully brings the so-called canonical five victims to life, shedding light on who they were beyond their tragic ends. It offers a new perspective that challenges preconceived notions about these women and their places in history.

Hallie Rubenhold, author of The Covent Garden Ladies (2012) and The Harlot's Handbook (2007), showcases her mastery in The Five. She diverges from traditional Jack the Ripper narratives and focuses instead on the lives of the overlooked women. Through meticulous research, Rubenhold breathes life into their stories, exploring their relationships, livelihoods, and tragedies. This book isn't just for ripperologists; it appeals to anyone interested in British history. Offering a captivating glimpse into Victorian London's socio-economic landscape, it is a must-read for history enthusiasts and the curious alike.

Rubenhold's dedication to the five victims of Jack the Ripper is fitting, as she brings their stories to life with respect and dignity. Mary Ann Nichols, facing marital struggles, finds herself among the many homeless in Trafalgar Square. Elizabeth Stride, a Swedish immigrant, escapes a troubled past only to end up on the streets of London. Catherine Eddowes undergoes an abusive relationship. Mary Jane Kelly, once employed in a Paris brothel, seeks refuge in London. Rubenhold's portrayal of these women goes beyond their tragic ends, shedding light on the challenges they faced in life.

The Five challenges common misconceptions about the victims of Jack the Ripper, revealing a stark contrast to the sensationalized narratives often depicted in popular culture. Contrary to popular belief, only two of the five women—Elizabeth Stride and Mary Jane Kelly—were confirmed sex workers. Moreover, the ages of these women varied significantly: Mary Ann Nichols was 43, Annie Chapman 47, Elizabeth Stride between 44 and 45, Catherine Eddowes 46, and the youngest, Mary Jane Kelly, 25. Rubenhold's narrative offers a profound reexamination of these women's lives, moving beyond their tragic demise to illuminate the complexities of their individual stories. Placing each woman within the socio-economic backdrop of Victorian London, The Five provides a compelling exploration of the era's pervasive poverty and the harsh realities of daily life. Delving into the intricacies of workhouses, the narrative offers insights into the grim existence endured by those who found themselves within their confines. Additionally, it vividly depicts contrasting experiences, from the newly established Peabody Estate to the squalid brothels of the East End. Moreover, the book delves into the widespread perils of addiction, a prevalent issue among the urban poor, and the profound challenges of homelessness and familial disconnection. Through poignant storytelling, readers are transported into the harsh and unforgiving world faced by these five women.

This book is a remarkable literary work that transcends the confines of true crime literature, appealing to history enthusiasts of all levels of familiarity with the Whitechapel murders. Suitable for the teenage audience and beyond, this book offers a captivating journey into the hardships of Victorian London, making it a must-read for anyone interested in this era. What sets this book apart is its unparalleled depth of research and unique narrative approach. It stands as a singular masterpiece, offering a profound exploration of societal struggles and individual resilience. With no rivals in its genre, this book is an indispensable addition to any reader's collection. In its pages, this book unveils the forgotten snapshots of lives, preventing historical figures from being relegated to mere footnotes. Through poignant storytelling, it celebrates the endurance and resilience of its subjects, leaving an indelible impression on its readers.

Continue reading...

[petermorwood]

Funny what you hear...

A couple of days ago I found a TV series on YouTube that I haven't seen since 1973: "Jack The Ripper - Barlow & Watt Investigate".

It's an intriguing show, using two of the currently most popular TV policemen: they'd appeared in about three linked-but-separate crossover series, "Z Cars", "Softly Softly" and "Softly Softly Task Force".

However in this instance the crimes they're investigating, and the theories they're examining, are the notorious non-fictional Whitechapel murders.

*****

After about 50 years, watching this Is like seeing it for the very first time, and the very first episode contained the following exchange, which made me laugh a bit.

("Jack" is slang for a policeman, like "Bobby", "Peeler" or "cop", though I think Jack is more regionally North of England, where the Barlow and Watt characters originate.)

Barlow: "They had eight inspectors on the case." Watt: "And two Lancashire Jacks are worth how many from the south?" Barlow: "Well, at least we are Jacks. Starting with the evidence, and testing some theories. Not starting with the theory and selecting the evidence…"

*****

Why did I laugh?

It's because Barlow's final observation sums up Patricia Cornwell's infamous approach to her "Portrait of a Killer: Jack the Ripper: Case Closed".

Like any detective-story writer, she started with her chosen perpetrator (artist Walter Sickert) then arranged the rest of the book to "prove" it was 'im wot dunnit.

It's a book crammed full of circumstantial evidence and leap-of-logic speculations such as "...while there is no evidence Sickert was in London on that date, there is no evidence that he wasn't".

Well, duh.

Cornwell goes after her target with such obsession that one reviewer - a lawyer - pointed out that if Sickert had been still alive, the book would have been Exhibit A in a case of malicious libel. (Another comment, however, suggested he would have revelled in such notoriety...)

*****

As for closing the Ripper case or providing solid proof of who he / she / they was or were, it won't happen; the speculation industry is worth too much money and new books, new names and new theories - or old stuff recycled - keep coming out, with the most recent in July of this year (2023).

The only names that really matter are Mary Ann "Polly" Nichols, Anne "Annie" Chapman, Elizabeth "Long Liz" Stride, Catherine "Kate" Eddowes and Mary Jane Kelly.

They were people, not just names to tick off a check-list.

[inposterumcumgaudio]

Uncle Jack & Foggy Jack

So if you're asking about both of them, I'm assuming that's because you're into the idea that they are one and the same.

I don't dislike the concept, but I like it much more for that the game seems to push that notion while simultaneously giving you nothing to substantiate it and, at times, even giving you details that seem to contradict it than the idea for its own sake. Good shit!

It's another one of those things you'll never have a canon answer for!

And frankly, I've never really found the question of whether Uncle Jack is Foggy Jack that interesting. It's a little contrived, a little obvious, a very basic bitch story. The most famous man in town has a mental breakdown and becomes a serial killer? And he somehow does this despite being instantly recognizable by everyone? And also he's doing this while he's still filming his show every day and looking all normal and shit?

Too, the whole Foggy Jack thing intrudes on the natural predisposition of fledging fanartists to make serial killer OC's.

Foggy Jack also exists as an urban legend in the town in a way I think predates even the toxic fog (and I was given a separate ask about this as well so I'll save my thots about that for then!)

But suffice to say, because I do not find the whole Uncle vs Foggy Jack thing compelling and I'd never really devoted much thought to it, I struggled to think of something interesting to say about it. The only chapter I ever wrote about the subject was actually about why Ollie's surface-level investigation of the crime scene in "A Pomaceous Puzzle" did not arrive at the correct conclusion. It simply doesn't fit the MO.

However... in reviewing what we know concretely about Foggy Jack from the main game, I actually did arrive at a fascinating new theory.

Because we think of this as a duality, do we not? Uncle Jack is one side of the coin, Foggy Jack the other. That's why you asked about both.

Let us go over what we know for sure about Foggy Jack, that was reported in the game, to separate out the unreliable information given in "Lightbearer". There are only two sources of "solid" information about Foggy Jack in the main game:

In "The "O" COURANT - Article 3", we learn that five Wellie women - Annie Chapman, Elizabeth Stride, Catherine Eddowes, Mary Jane Kelly, and Mary Anne Nichols - have been found hacked to pieces in the streets. All of these women are named for real-life victims of Jack the Ripper.

Stated in the above and reiterated in "Interrogation Report", these murders seem to take place on particularly foggy nights. "Interrogation Report" also states that the witness, Daniel Dunglass, reported that the apparent murderer's face looked "oddly familiar" to him.

One further piece of information that we learn in Ollie's act is that Foggy Jack apparently kept a hideout in the Gardner House, at least until plague wastrels overtook it. We know this from the suitcase which contains a cleaver and the "Mystery Note" with the only the phrase "I'm afraid you've come to the end of your time" on it.

And here we learn that Foggy Jack has some interest in Margaret. And that makes sense if he's actually Uncle Jack.

But... what it's it's not a duality.

What if it's a triptych?

What if it's not Uncle Jack, but someone who would have us come to that conclusion? Someone who would want us to think Uncle Jack is avenging his murdered daughter, but is in fact trying to frame him for it?

Why, who would have motive to do that?

Who indeed.

But DJ, you say, that's crazy. You play through Ollie's entire act and not once do they ever imply that he could be Foggy Jack.

Yeah, well, there's a lot of stuff they don't imply through his act, ain't there?

And just like with Uncle Jack, the details don't say anything conclusive but consider.

Ollie is said multiple times over his act to have periods of lapsed memory, both due to the Oblivion he took and excessive drinking. Margaret mentions specifically in both "The Camp of Thine Enemies" and "Cache as Cache Can" that Ollie has trouble remembering things due to his drinking. And it's an interesting coincidence that Ollie also "vaguely remembers" leaving himself a cache of supplies in that quest and its the same sort of vague notion that leads him into Gardner House where he finds Foggy Jack's suitcase.

He's also in deep denial about the limits of his morality and how far he'll go to see traitors get theirs. Still, killing innocent women just to make Uncle Jack look bad? Surely not! Maybe Ollie ratted out a little girl and got her chased down and murdered, but he's not a serial killer!

Then again, if there's one thing Ollie hates, it's a collaborator. Deutschland Über Alles special and all. And you know who about the first people to start collaboratin' with an occupying force are?

Prostitutes.

All of Foggy Jack's not-hallucination victims are named for the "Canonical Five" of Jack the Ripper's victims, all known prostitutes. Which, sure, maybe that's just the reference, but we actually meet Elizabeth Stride before her apparent death. As Ollie. At the Jack O Bean Club, where she works as a cook serving a bunch of collaborationist traitor lovers. She has no love for them, calling them toffs and wankers as she does, but she does also muse aloud to herself about it: "Take the job, she says. You'll never have to suck another cock, she says." Which sounds an awful lot like a thing a (former?) prostitute would say, making it two separate issues to Ollie, really. And why else would a fine upstanding Wellette be out on the streets at night anyway? That's how Foggy Jack gets you!

And for my most tenuous point: remember that guy from the Interrogation Report? Daniel Dunglass. I looked his ass up and

Reminiscent!

Dunglass (the character, not the actual guy) also says that the murderer's face is "oddly familiar" to him. Uncle Jack is familiar, but not oddly so. Ollie isn't exactly a nobody in town, but he's definitely odd looking in a world that conformist.

And as long as we're drawing specious connections, Daniel Dunglass (the real guy, not the character) was a Scottish medium famous for levitation and speaking with the dead. You know who else does a lot of that?

But... even if Ollie is Foggy Jack, I don't think he killed the constables at the apple tree. Which means there's copycat killer pretending to be the guy who's pretending to be Uncle Jack pretending be urban legend Foggy Jack.

[dailydemonspotlight]

Day 12 - Jack [the] Ripper

Race: Foul

Alignment: Dark-Chaos

April 4th, 2024

On the fog-covered streets of London in the 1880's, a scream is heard, and blood drips slowly into a gutter, carried by the misty rain. Jack the Ripper had claimed another victim. One of the most famous unsolved murderers of the distant past, Jack the Ripper was a man known by name and location only, a man who knew police routes and could dispatch his victims- almost always women of the nightlife- effortlessly. This infamous serial killer was never truly caught, even hundreds of years past his death, leaving the question: Just who was the Jack behind the Rippings?

Unfortunately, I can't answer that! I'm a 16 year old autistic trans girl, not a historian. Jack the Ripper was active throughout the late 1880's, leaving a bloodstained legacy behind him as each year passed by. He kept out of the eyes of the public, murdering a disputed amount of victims that hovers around the 5-10 range, though it's mostly agreed upon that he has 5 absolute victims, known as the Canonical Five: Mary Ann Nichols, Annie Chapman, Elizabeth Stride, Catherine Eddowes, and Mary Jane Kelly.

The heedlessly brutal bloodshed came to a close around approximately 1888, though a source for it was never found- the police of London spent years upon years searching for the source of the anonymous slaughter, but they turned up squat in the end. Even now, Jack's true identity is hotly disputed, though a widely accepted theory is that of him being a police officer himself, as many of the killings he committed were done almost surgically, and every body was found outside of the police routes, showing a clear understanding as to the routes in question.

Jack the Ripper marks a first for this series- a demon not based on folklore or myth, but rather a true historical account. His appearance is almost skeletal, wielding a scalpel knife, likely an allusion to his clear understanding of the body, and his long black coat with white gloves are very reminiscent of the average clothes a man would wear in 19th century England. Why is he a Jack? Because he's Jack! He doesn't have much in common with the rest of the frost lineage, but he sure gets a title as an honorary jack bro.

[conradscrime]

The Canonical Five: Catherine Eddowes

March 31, 2023 

Catherine Eddowes was born on April 14, 1842, in Graiseley Green, Wolverhampton. She was the 6th of 12 children born to George and Catherine Eddowes. 

In 1843, the Eddowes family moved to London, where the family moved around a lot in the city. Catherine’s mother died of tuberculosis on November 17, 1855 at the age of 42. 

By 1857, both of Catherine’s parents had died, and as a 15 year old Catherine was admitted to a Bermondsey workhouse as an orphan. During this time, Catherine and a few of her siblings attended a local industrial school where they would be taught a trade. Catherine, with the help of her sister Emma, and her aunt got employment as a tinplate stamper in Wolverhampton. She then moved there and resided with her aunt, while continuing her education. 

Within a few months, Catherine was fired from this job, with claims that she had been caught stealing. Losing this job was said to cause tension between her and her aunt, and she relocated, living with an uncle Thomas Eddowes in Birmingham. 

Catherine moved around over the next year, between Wolverhampton and Birmingham. She was only 5 feet tall, slim, with dark wavy auburn hair and hazel eyes. She was described as a “very jolly woman, always singing, intelligent, and scholarly but possessed of a fierce temper.” 

When in Birmingham, Eddowes began seeing a former soldier named Thomas Conway and had two children with him, a daughter in 1863 and a son in 1867. There is no evidence that the two actually got married, though Thomas often called Catherine “Kate Conway.” She later got Thomas’ initials tattooed in blue ink on her left forearm. 

In 1868, Catherine and Thomas moved to London, living in Westminster. The couple had a third son, born in 1873. During this time in London, Catherine began drinking, causing arguments between her family. According to Catherine’s daughter, Catherine and Thomas began living on “bad terms” throughout the 1870′s, mostly due to the drinking. 

In the late 1870′s, the relationship turned more violent physically, as Catherine was often seen with black eyes and bruising on her face. It was said that Thomas found Catherine’s drinking “intolerable.” 

Catherine left Thomas and their children in 1880, and in 1881 she had moved in with a new partner, a man named John Kelly. The two had met at Cooney’s common lodging house located at 55 Flower and Dean Street, Spitalfields, a known spot for criminal activity. After this, she became known as “Kate Kelly.” 

The deputy of the lodging house stated that Catherine’s drinking wasn’t to excess, however there is a record that she was brought before the court on a charge of being drunk and disorderly in September 1881. She was discharged without being fined. 

Catherine made money by cleaning and sewing around Spitalfields, however it is believed she engaged in sex work from time to time to pay her daily rent. 

In September 1888, it was said that Catherine had told a superintendent that she was going to claim the reward money for the arrest of the Whitechapel murderer (Jack the Ripper) saying “I think I know him.” 

In the early afternoon of September 29, Catherine told John she was going to travel to Bermondsey to borrow money from her daughter. She told John she would return by 4pm. 

At 8:30pm, a police officer named Louis Frederick Robinson saw a group of people outside 29 Aldgate High Street. When he approached he found Catherine laying drunk on the pavement. Catherine was then taken to the Bishopsgate Police Station to be detained while she sobered up. When Catherine arrived she said her name was “Nothing” and had fallen asleep in her cell. 

After 12:30 am on September 30, 1888, Catherine asked the police if she could be released. At 1am, Catherine was released. Instead of turning right to take the shortest route back to Flower and Dean street, Catherine turned left. 

She was last seen in a narrow walkway named Church Passage at 1:35 am. Three witnesses saw her there: Joseph Lawende, Joseph Hyam Levy and Harry Harris. 

Joseph Lawende would later say that Catherine was standing and talking with a man of medium build, with a fair moustache. Catherine was facing the man and had one hand on his chest, although it did not appear to Joseph that she was resisting the man. 

The man was described as around 30 years old, about 5′7″, and wearing loose fitting pepper and salt coloured jacket, a grey peaked cloth cap and a “reddish” neckerchief. Joseph said the man resembled a sailor. 

At 1:44am, Catherine’s body, which had been mutilated and disembowelled was found in the south-west corner of Mitre Square by policeman Edward Watkins. Catherine was found lying on her back with her head resting on a coal hole and turned towards the left shoulder.

Edward Watkins had previously walked by the area 14 minutes earlier, at 1:30am, and did not see anything. Watkins had gotten assistance from a watchman at the Kearley and Tonge warehouse, George James Morris who had been an ex-policeman. Morris claimed he had been sweeping the landings inside the warehouse with the door opened but had not heard anything. 

Other police officers who were around the area also reported that they heard nothing. Around 2:55am, a blood stained piece of Catherine’s apron was discovered at the bottom of a stairway on Goulston Street, Whitechapel. A police officer claimed to have not seen the garment at 2:20am when he passed through. 

Scrawled on the wall above where the apron was found in chalk was written, “The Juwes are the men that Will not be Blamed for nothing.” It is unclear whether this was written by the killer or had already been there. 

During the autopsy it was determined that Catherine’s throat had been cut, and her intestines had been removed from her body and placed over her right shoulder. Her body was warm, and no stiffening at taken place. It appears she had been dead within half an hour. There were no superficial bruises and no blood on the abdomen. Catherine’s face had been mutilated. 

Catherine’s cause of death was haemorrhage from the left common carotid artery. The mutilations had been inflicted after death, as her death was immediate, thus there would not be much blood on the murderer. Catherine’s left kidney had been taken out and removed carefully. 

The murderer was believed to be someone who knew knowledge of cutting up bodies, such as animals. It was said during the autopsy that the person responsible would not possess enough anatomical knowledge to be a surgeon, but perhaps enough that they could be a butcher or a slaughter man. 

However, a police physician named Thomas Bond disagreed with this, saying he believed the person did not have any anatomical knowledge. George Sequeira, the first doctor on the scene, and the city medical officer, William Sedgwick Saunders also agreed the killer probably did not have any anatomical skill. 

The official inquest began on October 4, 1888. John Kelly testified saying he had last seen Catherine at 2pm on September 29. John also claimed that Catherine did not work as a sex worker, didn’t drink much and made her earning by hawking goods. 

The testimony from others also deemed that Catherine must of died around 2:20am, and the mutilations on her body had been from a knife at least 6 inches in length after death. The murderer most likely kneeled on the right side of Catherine’s body while doing them. 

Police went door to door to search for the perpetrator but found nothing suspicious. It is believed that Catherine was a victim of Jack the Ripper, as the murder took place close to the boundary of Whitechapel and the mutilation of her body, specifically the removal of her left kidney and part of her womb was similar to Jack the Ripper killings. 

Catherine’s injuries were very similar to Annie Chapman, one of Jack the Ripper’s previous victims. 

It is believed that the murderer had left Mitre Square northwards towards St James’ Place, towards Goulston Street, where he had dropped a piece of Catherine’s apron. 

Goulston Street was a 15 minute walk from Mitre Square, directly on route to Flower and Dean Street, where Catherine lodged. It is believed her murderer also lodged around the same area and was perhaps on his way home after the killing. 

On October 1, 1888, the day after Catherine’s murder, a postcard from signed by Jack the Ripper, known as the “Saucy Jacky” postcard was received by the Central News Agency. The writer claimed he had killed both Elizabeth Stride and Catherine Eddowes as a “double event.” 

It’s been reported that the postcard had been mailed before the murders had gone public, making It less likely that a random person would be playing a prank. However, this later was postmarked more than 24 hours after the killings took place, which was long after the details had already been known to journalists and the public. 

It was later claimed by public officials that the author of this postcard was a London based journalist, and they dismissed this as a hoax. Most Ripper historians believe this to be a hoax as well, as many believe all of the correspondence from Jack the Ripper was not from the true killer. 

On October 16, 1888, a parcel was delivered and received to the Chairman of the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee, George Lusk. Inside the parcel was a human kidney, and the infamous “From Hell” letter, as the writer had written the address as from where the letter came from. 

The writer said they had fried and ate the missing kidney half, and the writing was similar to that of the Saucy Jacky postcard. 

The kidney was taken to a nearby London hospital where it was determined that it was most likely a human kidney, from the left side, and the organ had been preserved. It was believed the kidney came from a woman who was 45. 

However, the next day it was reported that it was near impossible to be able to tell the age or gender of who the kidney belonged too. It was also not determined how long the organ had been preserved before being sent. 

It was believed by some that the kidney was that of Catherine Eddowes, as it matched the length of the renal artery that was missing from her. The kidney also showed Bright’s disease, which Catherine had. 

Police surgeon Brown said the kidney had been trimmed up, and that the renal artery was absent, meaning it cannot be confirmed to be Catherine’s and that it could’ve been anybodies. 

Catherine was buried on October 8, 1888. She was laid in an unmarked grave at #49336, square 318 in the City of London Cemetery. Her coffin had a plate inscribed which read, “Catherine Eddowes, died Sept. 30, 1888, aged 43 years.” Catherine now lies beside the Garden Way in front of Memorial Bed #1849. In 1996 cemetery authorities gave Catherine’s grave a plaque to formally mark it. 

In 2014, DNA matching one of Catherine’s descendants was extracted from an 8 foot section of a shawl that was supposedly from the scene of her murder. The source of stains on the shawl could not be actually classified as blood, but are hypothesized to be from blood spatter and possibly semen. 

The DNA on this shawl is believed to be matched from a descendant of Jack the Ripper, a suspect named Aaron Kosminski. 

The shawl was supposedly taken by a policeman investigating Catherine’s murder scene and had been passed down to family generations. The shawl ended up at Scotland Yard’s Crime Museum in 1991, but unsure of how authentic it is it has never been publicly displayed in the museum. 

[littlequeenies]

Catherine “Kate” Eddowes

[Previous post]

Last days & murder

Catherine was five feet tall, with dark auburn hair, hazel eyes. Friends described her as “intelligent and scholarly, but possessed of a fierce temper” and “a very jolly woman, always singing.”

On Saturday September 29th 1888, at 8:00am, Catherine met her common-law husband John Kelly at Cooney’s lodging house where he spent the night, saying there had been some trouble at the Mile End Casual Ward where she spent the night and was turned out early. Between 10:00 and 11:00am, Frederick Wilkinson, deputy at Cooney’s, saw Catherine and John eating breakfast in the kitchen of Cooney’s. Wilkinson noted that Catherine had on an apron. It was agreed that Catherine would pawn a pair of Kelly’s boots at a broker, Smith or Jones, in Church Street. Catherine got 2/6d (12 1/2p), and the ticket was in the name of Jane Kelly. With the money, they bought tea, coffee, sugar, and food. In the early afternoon she told him she would go to Bermondsey (London Borough of Southwark) to try to get some money from her daughter Annie, whom she believed was living there. She said she would have returned by 4:00pm and she and John separated in good terms. With money from pawning his boots, a bare-footed Kelly took a bed at the lodging-house just after 8:00 p.m., and according to the deputy keeper remained there all night.

At 8.30 p.m. Catherine Eddowes was found lying drunk in the road on Aldgate High Street by PC Louis Robinson. She was taken into custody and then to Bishopsgate police station, where she was detained, giving the name “Nothing”, until she was sober enough to leave at 1 a.m. on the morning of 30 September. On her release, she gave her name and address as “Mary Ann Kelly of 6 Fashion Street”. When leaving the station, instead of turning right to take the shortest route to her home in Flower and Dean Street, she turned left towards Aldgate. Around the same time, Louis Diemschutz found Elizabeth Stride’s body in gateway of Dutfield’s Yard.

Catherine Eddowes was last seen alive at 1.35 a.m. by three witnesses, Joseph Lawende, Joseph Hyam Levy and Harry Harris, who had just left a club on Duke Street. She was standing talking with a man at the entrance to Church Passage, which led south-west from Duke Street to Mitre Square along the south wall of the Great Synagogue of London. Only Lawende could furnish a description of the man, whom he described as a fair-moustached man wearing a navy jacket, peaked cloth cap, and red scarf. Chief Inspector Donald Swanson intimated in his report that Lawende’s identification of the woman as Eddowes was doubtful. He wrote that Lawende had said that some clothing of the deceased’s that he was shown resembled that of the woman he saw—“which was black … that was the extent of his identity [sic]”. A patrolling policeman, PC James Harvey, walked down Church Passage from Duke Street very shortly afterwards but his beat took him back down Church Passage to Duke Street, without entering the square.

Discovery

Catherine was murdered and mutilated in the square between 1:35 and 1:44 a.m. At 1:45 a.m., a mutilated body of then an unidentified woman was found in the south-west corner of Mitre Square by the square’s beat policeman PC Edward Watkins, who said that he entered the square at 1:44 a.m, having previously been there at 1:30 a.m. He called for assistance at the Kearly and Tonge’s tea warehouse in the square, where night watchman George James Morris, who was an ex-policeman, had noticed nothing unusual. Neither had another watchman George Clapp at 5 Mitre Square or an off-duty policeman Richard Pearse at 3 Mitre Square. ”For God’s sake, mate, come to assist me,“ said PC Watkins. ”What’s the matter?“ asked Morris. ”Oh dear, there’s another woman cut to pieces.“ replied PC Watkins. Morris returned with PC Watkins to view the body. At the same time, Inspector Edmund Reid arrived at Dutfield’s Yard. Superintendent Thomas Arnold arrived shortly after. Around 3 minutes later, at 1:47am, PC Watkins stayed with the body while Morris blew his whistle, running down Mitre St and into Aldgate. One minute later, PC Harvey heard whistle, saw Morris running, and went over to him. Morris Told PC Harvey about the body. Morris saw Police Constable Holland and called him over. One minute later, PC Harvey, PC Holland, and Morris went to Mitre Square. After viewing the body, PC Holland went to fetch Doctor George William Sequeira from his surgery at 34 Jewry Street. At 1:55am Inspector Edward Collard notified at Bishopsgate Police Station about the body and sent a PC to notify Doctor Frederick Gordon Brown, City Police Surgeon, 17 Finsbury Circus. Dr Sequeira was notified about the body. At 1:58am Detective Constable Daniel Halse, Detective Constable Edward Marriott, and Detective Sergeant Robert Outram, at bottom of Houndsditch near St Boloph’s Church, responded to Morris’s whistle and went to Mitre Square.

At 2:00am PC Holland returned with Dr Sequeira, who pronounced Catherine dead. DC Halse, DC Marriott, and DS Outram arrived at scene. Three minutes later, Insp. Collard arrived and immediately organized a search of the district. At the same time, Dr Sequeira was informed of Dr Brown’s impending arrival and waited before conducting the exam further. At 2:05am, DC Halse went into Middlesex Street and then on into Wentworth Street. Police surgeon Dr. Brown, who arrived at 2:18 a.m., said of the scene: “The body was on its back, the head turned to left shoulder. The arms by the side of the body as if they had fallen there. Both palms upwards, the fingers slightly bent. A thimble was lying off the finger on the right side. The clothes drawn up above the abdomen. The thighs were naked. Left leg extended in a line with the body. The abdomen was exposed. Right leg bent at the thigh and knee. The bonnet was at the back of the head—great disfigurement of the face. The throat cut. Across below the throat was a neckerchief. … The intestines were drawn out to a large extent and placed over the right shoulder…. The lobe and auricle of the right ear were cut obliquely through… Body was quite warm. No death stiffening had taken place. She must have been dead most likely within the half hour. We looked for superficial bruises and saw none… Several buttons were found in the clotted blood after the body was removed. There was no blood on the front of the clothes…”

Investigation

At 2:20am, Detective Superintendent Alfred Lawrence Foster and Superintendent James McWilliam arrived at the scene. DC Halse was in Goulston St returning to Mitre Square, and PC Alfred Long was on patrol in Goulston Street - saw nothing suspicious there. It was also at this time that PC Pearse first heard about the murder. At 2:35am DC Halse back in Mitre Square as a part of his beating. The body was placed into ambulance and taken to Golden Lane Mortuary. Sergeant Jones found three buttons, a thimble, and a mustard tin containing 2 pawn tickets issued to Emily Birrell and Anne Kelly beside the body. These eventually led to her identification by John Kelly as his common-law wife, after he read about the tickets in the newspapers. His identification was confirmed by Catherine Eddowes’ sister, Eliza Gold. No money was found on her. Sergeant Phelps, Inspector Izzard, and Sergeant Dudman went at the scene to preserve the public order. DC Halse and Insp Collard went to mortuary, where the body was stripped and a piece of ear dropped from the clothing. Inspector Collard itemized Catherine’s possessions and DC Halse noticed a piece of her apron was missing.

Dr Brown, Dr Sequeira and Doctor William Sedgwick Saunders, Medical Officer of Health and Public Analyst, City of London, conducted a post-mortem that afternoon attended by Dr Phillips. Dr Brown noted: “After washing the left hand carefully, a bruise the size of a sixpence, recent and red, was discovered on the back … between the thumb and first finger… The hands and arms were bronzed… The cause of death was haemorrhage from the left common carotid artery. The death was immediate and the mutilations were inflicted after death … There would not be much blood on the murderer. The cut was made by someone on the right side of the body, kneeling below the middle of the body. … the left kidney carefully taken out and removed. … I believe the perpetrator of the act must have had considerable knowledge of the position of the organs in the abdominal cavity and the way of removing them. The parts removed would be of no use for any professional purpose. It required a great deal of knowledge to have removed the kidney and to know where it was placed. Such a knowledge might be possessed by one in the habit of cutting up animals. I think the perpetrator of this act had sufficient time … It would take at least five minutes. … I believe it was the act of one person.”

Police physician Thomas Bond, disagreed with Brown’s assessment of the killer’s skill level. Bond’s report to police stated: ”In each case the mutilation was inflicted by a person who had no scientific nor anatomical knowledge. In my opinion he does not even possess the technical knowledge of a butcher or horse slaughterer or any person accustomed to cut up dead animals.“ Local surgeon Dr Sequeira, who was the first doctor at the scene, and City medical officer Saunders, who was also present at the autopsy, also thought that the killer lacked anatomical skill and did not seek particular organs. In addition to the abdominal wounds, the murderer had cut Eddowes’ face: across the bridge of the nose, on both cheeks, and through the eyelids of both eyes. The tip of her nose and part of one ear had been cut off. 

Due to the location of Mitre Square, the City of London Police under Detective Inspector James McWilliam joined the murder enquiry alongside the Metropolitan Police who had been engaged in the previous murders. Though the murder occurred within the City of London, it was close to the boundary of Whitechapel where the previous Whitechapel murders had occurred. The mutilation of Eddowes’s body and the abstraction of her left kidney and part of her womb by her murderer bore the signature of Jack the Ripper and was very similar in nature to that of earlier victim Annie Chapman.

Goulston Street Graffiti

At about 3 a.m. on the same day as Eddowes was murdered, PC Long found a blood-stained fragment of Catherine’s apron lying in the passage of the doorway leading to Flats 108 and 119, Model Dwellings, Goulston Street, Whitechapel. Above it on the wall was a graffito in chalk. There are at least 4 different versions of what was written in the graffiti:

PC Long told at an inquest that it read ”The Juwes are the men that Will not be Blamed for nothing“. Superintendent Arnold wrote a report which agrees with his account.

DC Halse arrived short time later, and took down a different version: “The Juws are not the men who will be blamed for nothing”.

City Surveyor Frederick Foster recorded a third version: “The Juws are not the men To be blamed for nothing”.

A summary report on the writing by Chief Inspector Swanson rendered it as “The Jewes are not the men to be blamed for nothing”. However, it is uncertain if Swanson ever saw the writing.

A copy according with Long’s version of the message was attached to a report from Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Charles Warren to the Home Office. PC Long searched staircases and surrounding area. The writing may or may not have been related to the murder, but either way, and despite the protests of PC Halse, it was washed away before dawn on the orders of Metropolitan Police Commissioner Warren, who feared that it would spark anti-Jewish riots. Mitre Square had three connecting streets: Church Passage to the north-east, Mitre Street to the south-west, and St James’s Place to the north-west. As PC Harvey saw no-one from Church Passage, and PC Watkins saw no-one from Mitre Street, the murderer must have left the square northwards through St James’s Place towards Goulston Street. Goulston Street was within a quarter of an hour’s walk from Mitre Square.

To this day, there is no consensus on whether or not the graffito is relevant to the murders. Some modern researchers believe that the apron fragment’s proximity to the graffito was coincidental and it was randomly discarded rather than being placed near it. If, as some writers contend, the apron fragment was cut away by the murderer(s) to use to wipe his hands, he could have discarded it near the body immediately after it had served that purpose, or he could have wiped his hands on it without needing to remove it. Author and former homicide detective Trevor Marriott raised another possibility: the piece of apron may not necessarily have been dropped by the murderer on his way back to the East End from Mitre Square. The victim herself might have used it as a sanitary towel, and dropped it on her way from the East End to Mitre Square.

On 30th September, John Kelly read in paper about victim having pawn ticket with Birrell’s name on it. He presented himself to the police and identified the body. Until then, he had no idea that Catherine was the victim.

Inquest

The Eddowes inquest was opened on 4 October by Samuel F. Langham, coroner for the City of London. A house-to-house search was conducted but nothing suspicious was discovered. Brown stated his belief that Eddowes was killed by a slash to the throat as she lay on the ground, and then mutilated.

October 11th, 1888 was the last day of her inquest. Verdict: “wiliful murder by person or persons unknown.”

Funeral 

Catherine Eddowes was buried on Monday, 8 October 1888 in an elm coffin in the City of London Cemetery, in an unmarked (public) grave 49336, square 318. John Kelly and one of Catherine Eddowes’s sister attended. 

After Catherine’s burial, her former husband Thomas Conway was located. The October 16th, 1888 issue of Echo, said: “Conway was at once taken to see Mrs. Annie Phillips, Eddowes’s daughter, who recognised him as her father. … He knew that [Catherine] had since been living with Kelly, and had once or twice seen her in the streets but has, as far as possible, kept out of her way, as he did not wish to have any further communication with her. Conway had followed the occupation of a hawker. The police describe him as evidently of very exemplary character. He alluded to his wife’s misconduct before their separation with evident pain”.

Today, square 318 has been re-used for part of the Memorial Gardens for cremated remains. Eddowes lies beside the Garden Way in front of Memorial Bed 1849. 

In late 1996, the cemetery authorities decided to mark her grave with a plaque. The plaques used to have “victim of ‘Jack the Ripper” on them, but since 2003 have been replaced with ‘Heritage Trail’ markings instead. The grave can be found either side of the path in ‘Gardens Way’, to the east of the cemetery.

Aftermath

The Royal London Hospital on Whitechapel Road preserves some crime scene drawings and plans of the Mitre Square murder by the City Surveyor Frederick William Foster; they were first brought to public attention in 1966 by Francis Camps, Professor of Forensic Medicine at London University. Based on his analysis of the surviving documents, Camps concluded that “the cuts shown on the body could not have been done by an expert.”

In 2014, mitochondrial DNA that matched that of one of Eddowes’ descendants was extracted from a shawl said to have come from the scene of her murder. The DNA match was based on one of seven small segments taken from the hypervariable regions. The segment contained a sequence variation described as 314.1C, and claimed to be uncommon, with a frequency of only 1 in 290,000 worldwide. However, Professor Sir Alec Jeffreys and others pointed out this was in fact an error in nomenclature for the common sequence variation 315.1C, which is present in more than 99% of the sequences in the EMPOP database. Other DNA on the shawl matched DNA from a relation of Aaron Kosminski, one of the suspects. This match was also based on a segment of mitochondrial DNA, but no information was given that would enable the commonness of the sequence to be estimated. The owner of the shawl, British author Russell Edwards, claimed the matches proved Kosminski was Jack the Ripper. Others disagree. Donald Rumbelow criticized the claim, saying that no shawl is listed among Eddowes’ effects by the police, and mitochondrial DNA expert Peter Gill said the shawl “is of dubious origin and has been handled by several people who could have shared that mitochondrial DNA profile.” Two of Eddowes’ descendants are known to have been in the same room as the shawl for 3 days in 2007, and, in the words of one critic, “The shawl has been openly handled by loads of people and been touched, breathed on, spat upon.”

On July 2, 2015 Russell Edwards unveiled a blue plaque to Catherine Eddowes at Wolverhampton Civic & Historical Society. The plaque features an image of Catherine Eddowes and is inscribed, “Catherine Eddowes. Born nearby, at 20 Merridale Street, Graisley Green on 14-4-1842 and murdered on 30-9-1888 in Whitechapel, London. An innocent victim of ‘Jack The Ripper’.”

Photos from: Escrito en Sangre blogspot & Pinterest.

***

To know more:

Wikipedia

Casebook website - Wiki Casebook - Casebook Message boards - Casebook Timeline - Casebook Last Movements - Casebook Forums

Dissertation: Catherine Eddowes and Gallows Literature in the Black Country

Dissertation: Catherine Eddowes: Wolverhampton and Birmingham

Catherine Eddowes wordpress

JTR Forums

Find a Grave

Jack The Ripper Experience

Jack The Ripper.org - Jack The Ripper.org Catherine-s last night

Whitechapel Jack

Ripper Vision

Jack The Ripper Tour Mitre Square - Jack the Ripper Tour Double Event

Jack Ripper

Jack The Ripper Time

Jack The Ripper Map

BEGG, Paul (2003): Jack the Ripper: The Definitive History.

BEGG, Paul (2013): Jack The Ripper. The Facts.

COOK, Andrew (2009): Jack the Ripper.

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

EDWARDS, Russell (2014): Naming Jack the Ripper.

EVANS, Stewart P. & RUMBELOW, Donald (2006): Jack the Ripper: Scotland Yard Investigates.

EVANS, Stewart P. & SKINNER, Keith (2000): The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Sourcebook: An Illustrated Encyclopedia.

EVANS, Stewart P. & SKINNER, Keith (2001): Jack the Ripper: Letters from Hell.

FIDO, Martin (1987): The Crimes, Death and Detection of Jack the Ripper.

FROST, Rebecca (2018): The Ripper’s Victims in Print. The Rethoric Portrayals Since 1929.

HUME, Robert (2019): The hidden lives of Jack the Ripper’s victims.

KENDELL, Colin (2010): Jack the Ripper - The Theories and The Facts.

MARRIOT, Trevor (2005): Jack the Ripper: The 21st Century Investigation.

PRIESTLEY, Mick P. (2018): One Autumn in Whitechapel.

RANDALL, Anthony J. (2013): Jack the Ripper. Blood lines.

RUBENHOLD, Hallie (2019): The Five: The Untold Lives of the Women killed by Jack the Ripper / The Five: The Lives of Jack the Ripper’s Women.

RUMBELOW, Donald (2004): The Complete Jack the Ripper: Fully Revised and Updated.

SHELDEN, Neal E. (2013): Mary Jane Kelly and the Victims of Jack the Ripper: The 125th Anniversary.

SHELDEN STUBBINGS, Neal (2007): The Victims of Jack the Ripper.

SUDGEN, Philip (2002): The Complete History of Jack the Ripper.

TROW, M. J. (2009): Jack The Ripper: Quest for a Killer.

WHITE, Jerry (2007): London in the Nineteenth Century.

WHITEHEAD, Mark; RIVETT, Miriam (2006): Jack the Ripper.

WILSON, Colin; ODELL, Robin (1987): Jack the Ripper: Summing Up and Verdict.

WOOD, Simon Daryl (2015): Deconstructing Jack: The Secret History of the Whitechapel Murders.

WOODS, Paul; & BADDELEY, Gavin (2009): Saucy Jack: The Elusive Ripper.