Aaron Kominski is one of the leading suspects accused of being Jack the Ripper, is there any truth to these allegations, was Aaron Kominski Jack the Ripper?
Unlike some of today's Jack the Ripper suspects, Aaron Kominski was one of the police suspects at the time of the Whitechapel Murders It wasn't until years after the Jack the Ripper murders stopped, that Aaron Kominski came to light as a ripper suspect - through police documentation found. One of the men accused thought to have been Jack the Ripper at the time, was a man named Aaron Kominski. Kominski is brought to our attention by Melville Mcnaghten, in his memoranda. The Mcnaghten Memoranda states three suspects, who Mcnaughten believes could have been Jack the Ripper. His three suspects are; Druitt, Ostrog and Kominski. Out of the three of Mcnaghtens suspects, Kominski seems to be the strongest candidate accused of being Jack the Ripper. In other words, Kominski seems to be the most favorable candidate to be Jack the Ripper out of the three men. Kominski resided in Whitechapel, many ripperologists agree that Jack the Ripper must have known the Whitechapel area very well, due to Jacks quick escapes - his undetected escapes and moves during the time of the murders. However, this indicates that Jack was calculated and new what he was doing. If this was true, that Jack was calculated about the ripper murders (which seem to be the case), then it indicates he wasn't insane. Due to the nature of the rippers murders, he seems to have been a cold, calculated and deliberate killer, not an insane man who wasn't aware of what he was doing. Perhaps this is an indication that Aaron Kominski was not Jack the Ripper - as Kominski was later sent to a lunatic asylum in March, 1889. Though, when we look at the date Kominski was incarcerated, it would explain why the ripper murders stopped. As he was sent to a lunatic asylum just four months after Jack the Rippers last victim, Mary Kelly was murdered. The fact that the ripper murders stopped just a few months before Kominski was incarcerated, isn't enough for us to be convinced that he was the ripper. However, there are other things which Mcnaughten says, which make Kominski looks like a promising Jack the Ripper. He says that Kominski had homicidal tendencies, he hated women, and he especially hated women who were prostitutes - these things would fit with Jack the Rippers personality. Even though Mcnaughten says that Kominski had a hatred of women, especially prostitutes and homicidal tendencies, it still isn't enough to say that he was Jack the Ripper. As there is no evidence to convince us that Aaron Kominski was Jack the Ripper. However, Aaron Kominski is a strong ripper suspect.
0 Comments
The secondJack the Ripper suspect that we will be looking at is, George Chapman. George Chapman is one of the leading suspects in the Jack the Ripper case.
Unlike many of the rippers suspects, George Chapman was a murderer, on the surface, this makes George Chapman a promising suspect. But, can we see him as a probable suspect in the Jack the Ripper case? Let's find out.
Just because George Chapman was a murderer, does not necessarily make him Jack the Ripper. Chapman was a womanizer and a serial adulterer . When he immigrated fromPoland to London he later married a woman called Lucie Badewski, in 1889. During his time living in the Whitechapel area, Chapman took at least four mistresses - all of whom he poisoned.
This is were the controversy surrounds Chapman, and his place in the ripper murders, his modus operandi was different from Jack the Rippers. Were Jack the Ripper killed his victims by using a knife, George Chapman killed his victims by using poison. Therefore, this has led many to believe that George Chapman couldn't have been the killer, because the method of his murder, was different to that of Jack the Rippers. Others disagree with this, and argue that George Chapman could have been Jack the Ripper because serial killers can and do change their modus operandi if they have to.
With this in mind, it seems that George Chapman can be considered one of the likelier people to have been Jack the Ripper. But, we need more than this. A lot more. There are other things which make George Chapman a credible suspect. One is being that he did have some anatomical knowledge; as he trained to be a junior surgeon while in Poland, in 1887. Shortly before the ripper murders happened. Many argue that Jack the Ripper must have had some knowledge of human anatomy. In this regards, it makes Chapman an even stronger suspect.
There does, however, seem to be something which gets in the way of George Chapman being a viable suspect, and that is to do in the difference in the way the men treated women. Of course, both Jack and George were both cold-hearted woman killers, however, there seems to be a difference in the way they kill. For George, he seems to want to prolong the deaths of the women he kills. It isn't about instant gratification, like it is with Jack the Ripper.
One last thing that we should think of in regards to Chapman is his knowledge, or lack of knowledge of the Whitechapel area. Many agree that Jack the Ripper must have known the area of Whitechapel extremely well. Both because of the timing he choose to murder these women (for example, it seems likely that he a good understanding of when the police where patrolling the streets), and, Jack new where to escape to - something which helped him avoid capture.
It seems unrealistic to believe that Chapman new the Whitechapel area that well. At most, he only lived in Whitechapel a few months before Jack the Ripper killed his first victim. If we are to believe that Jack the Ripper new the Whitechapel area well, which seems likely, then, this issue is a big deal. And not something to be tossed aside. With Chapman, we should take him as a more serious suspect. There is a lot to see reason why he can be seen as Jack the Ripper. However, this conflicts with things which suggest he was not Jack the Ripper. Chapman is a difficult suspect. A man with contradictions which could make him the ripper, or not make him the ripper. But, he his one of the most promising suspects.
Montague Druitt was one of the men suspected of being,Jack the Ripper. Many consider Montague Druitt to be thenumber one suspect, in the ripper case.
Perhaps one of the only reasons why Druitt is considered the number one suspect in the Jack the Ripper case is down to the timing of his death. Druitt committed suicide by jumping into theThames shortly after the murder of Mary Ann-Kelly, in December 1888. Mary Ann-Kelly is the last known victim of Jack the Ripper. Part of the ripper mystery is 'why' Jack the Ripper stopped killing. Certainly it is an important piece of the puzzle to solve. However, just because Montague Drutts death roughly coincidences with the end of the ripper murders, is not enough evidence to tell us that he was the ripper.
The only reason to suggest that Druitt was Jack the Ripper was the coincidental timing of his death, apart from that, there doesn't really seem to be any evidence which suggests that he was Jack the Ripper. Which is incredible, considering many see him as the prime suspect. Druitt was only considered to be a suspect almost a decade after the ripper murders stopped. The first time that Montague Druitt was considered a Jack the Ripper suspect was in February, 1894. By Sir Melville Macnaghten. He gives us three men who he suspects as being Jack the Ripper, in his The Macnaghten Memoranda.
Druitt is the first man he lists as being Jack the Ripper. Macnaghten doesn't provide any evidence as to he believes Druitt to be the ripper. Instead, Macnaghten seems to just be speculating. This is what he writes, and why he believes Druitt to be the killer: ''I may mention the cases of 3 men, any one of whom would have been more likely than Cutbush to have committed this series of murders: (1) A Mr M. J. Druitt, said to be a doctor & of good family -- who disappeared at the time of the Miller's Court murder, & whose body (which was said to have been upwards of a month in the water) was found in the Thames on 31st December -- or about 7 weeks after that murder. He was sexually insane and from private information I have little doubt but that his own family believed him to have been the murderer.''
The only interesting thing that Macnaughten mentions is that Druitts family thought he was the ripper, but everything else he writes about Druitt provides no evidence that he was the killer. His reason for concluding that Druitt was the killer was Druitts time of death, and that he was ''sexually insane''. He could have being saying that Druitt was sexually insane because he was either thought to have been gay, or abusive towards his students. Neither accusations stand up with any evidence. We also have no evidence that Druitts family thought of Druitt as Jack the Ripper, we only have Macnaughtens word for it.
It is also worth noting that he was not considered a suspect by police at the time. The head of the ripper case, Frederick Abberline dismissed Druitt as a suspect, believing that his time of death was just coincidence. Abberlines initial theory is probably correct about Montague Druitt. There are several reasons to believe this. The main reason to believe that Druitt was not Jack the Ripper is because of a lack of evidence. The timing of his suicide seems to be the prime motivation for Druitt being a ripper suspect, however, there was most likely many men who died in the same month Druitt did. Druitts death stands out because it is so public. From what we do know about Druitt, it is probably unlikely that he was Jack the Ripper. The problem that we have with Druitt, and with all of the suspects is that there is very little, to no evidence which suggests they are the killer. If there was, we still wouldn't be speculating about who Jack the Ripper was.
The Jack the Ripper case is not short of suspects. If anything, the Jack the Ripper case draws in some bizarre suspects and theories. To more probable, or even likely suspects. Like with all of history, evidence is key, sources are key - both primary sources and secondary sources. Both historical primary sources, and historical sources are important for different reasons. For example, primary sources give us first hand information from people who were there at the time. Whereas, secondary sources can offer us a more objective view of the historical event - we know people can view the world in different ways, biases will be present, therefore - these things can colour a primary source.
It is interesting to observe that when Ripperologists study the Jack the Ripper case, they can often refute secondary suspects. In other words, those suspected of being Jack the Ripper after the event. This can sometimes be years, or even decades after the Ripper Case was closed. This leads some to only take seriously the men suspected of being Jack the Ripper by the police at the time.
In the following articles we are going to look at the suspects accused of being Jack the Ripper. Not every single suspect will be covered, as there is literally hundreds of Jack the Ripper suspects. Sometimes it literally feels like every man around at the time of the Whitechapel Murders, has been accused of being the killer.
With coming articles we will dedicate an article to each suspect. The suspects focused on will be the most well known, the ones suspected by the police at the time, and the odd 'bizarre' theories about Jack the Ripper.
The From Hell, Jack the Ripper letter was postmarked on the 15th of October, 1888. The From Hell Jack the Ripper letter is thought to be authentic. However, the authenticity of the From Hell letter is debated to this day . Leaving some people to believe that the From Hell letter was a hoax, like many of the other Jack the Ripper letters sent to the police at the time. While others think that it is an authentic letter from the killer. Perhaps the only 'real' letter written and sent to the police, by Jack the Ripper.
There are a few reasons why we should consider the From Hell letter, 1888 to be authentic. One strong reason comes from the physician who examined the half a kidney which was delivered with the From Hell letter. Dr Thomas Openshaw was the physician who examined the kidney when he received it from George Lusk, on the 18th of October, 1888. The From Hell letter was originally send to George Lusk. Openshaw stated that the kidney was of human origin. That it was from a woman of 45 years old. And, that it had alcoholic spirits present within the kidney.
Mr Openshaw's description of the kidney matched Catherine Eddowes missing kidney. Catherine Eddowes was Jack the Ripper's fourth victim. She was one of the two women who were murdered by Jack the Ripper, on the 30th of September, 1888. In what is now known as 'The Double Event'. The other woman murdered by Jack the Ripper on the night of the Double Event was Elizabeth Stride. When Catherine Eddowes was murdered by Jack the Ripper atMitre Square , the ripper removed half of her kidney. She was also 46 and had an alcohol problem. This matches the information sent to George Lusk. However, there is no DNA evidence to suggest that the kidney was that of Eddowes, due to there being no DNA testing at the time. Therefore, the kidney could have been another woman's - but that is just speculation.
If the From Hell letter is authentic, then what can it tell us about Jack the Ripper? The first thing that stands out from the From Hell letter is, that it suggests that it could have been written by an uneducated person. The structure, language and grammar suggests that the writer was not educated. If the letter was a fabrication, in other words, written by a journalist, then that was probably deliberate. Another thing which stands out about the writing is that it is similar to the Saucy Jack postcard, but not identical. However, completely different from the Dear Boss letter - suggesting that all three were not written by the same hand.
Another way that we could look at the From Hell letter is that it was written by an educated hand. Why? Perhaps the letter was written by a man who's second language was English. It would explain the spelling mistakes and lack of grammar. However, it doesn't really explain the big messy writing of the letter. There is another reason why it could have been a letter from an educated hand; poor literacy rates at the time. The literacy rates between men and women during Victorian Britain were different, men were more literate, and woman less literate. By 1851, literacy rates for women were at 54%, while men's literacy rates were at 69%. This means that almost have of women were illiterate, and over a third of men were illiterate. Those were the poorest, seuch as most of the residents of Whitechapel, were the illiterate ones. It would have been the upper-class and middle-class, which were the educated class. But, with the rise in formal education during the latter half of the 19th century, the poor would have been increasingly educated. Increased education among the Victorian poor means an increase in literacy rates, however, the poor at the time largely depended on charity schools. And therefore, were not really educated. In that respect, the From Hell letter was most likely written by someone with an education behind them. That tells us that it was either someone with a good profession. If it was Jack the Ripper who wrote the From Hell letter, then it suggests that he could have had a good profession. Such as a doctor. Which would fit into the theory that he had medical knowledge. In conclusion, there is a strong possibility that the From Hell letter was from Jack the Ripper. It was probably the only letter written by Jack the Ripper. The From Hell letter seems less likely to have been a hoax. Along with the letter we not only have a human kidney, but a human kidney which matches the description of Catherine Eddowes. A hoax is one thing, but the From Hell letter takes it further than the suggestion that it is just a hoax. A human kidney sent with the letter. Which strongly indicates it wasn't a hoax. |
Archives
April 2023
Categories
All
← Resize me
|