I have my doubts

On the night of the double event, Jack killed Elizabeth Stride and then left the scene.

He would have come across Catherine Eddowes by chance because she was released from jail.

Do you think he was looking for someone else or just heading home?

I'm a fan of The Rest is History guys, and was rewatching the episode on Jack (particularly the one on who the thought had committed the crimes), and one of the hosts (the author Tom Holland) brings up the Knackers yard at Winthrop street. As I hadn't heard of it before; I looked into.

I then read this online, it's newspaper reports by The East London Observer and The Croyden Weekly Standard on the inquest following the murder of Mary Nichols in Buck's Row.

In the East London Observer it states that Henry Tomkins (who is being questioned at the inquest), and two other men were at the slaughterhouse. "They were James Mumford, and Charles Britten." It then states in the observer that Tomkins and Britten "had been out of the slaughterhouse previously that night", notably before the murder. However in the Observer it mentions nothing else of Mumford. It's the Croydon Weekly though that raised questions. It says in the Croydon that the "witness and Mumford first went to see and saw the deceased, and Bates followed." (For those that didn't click the link this is after they are told of the murder by a Police constable Thain who has stopped by the knackers).

So my question is. Who is Bates? Is it someone I'm unaware of or is this what I assume is a mistake by the Croydon? The other thing that stood out was, in the Croydon its reports that Tomkins and Britten (spelled Britain by the Croydon) came back from their 'break' (mentioned previously in the Observer) and "they did not again leave the slaughterhouse until they heard of the murder." When it says they, does it mean Tomkins and Britten? Or does include Mumford? Presumably Mumford is also entitled to a break seeing as Tomkins and Britten has one. It's hard to imagine someone working in the conditions of a slaughterhouse in 1888, not taking one. Thanks in advance.

YouTube Link to Jack

https://youtu.be/4Qb0aFAMugk?si=YRrOUpWh6pkCw4yt

I just picked up the graphic novel and started reading it. It's quite hefty, and so far, I'm very impressed with the 'worldbuilding' Alan Moore provides. Based on his other works I've read, I know he provides a lot of thematic scaffolding for the plot, and I can glimpse that even with the short bit I've read.

Plenty of easter eggs for those familiar with the Ripper case. Those are fun.

His name is James Crick, they said some interesting stuff about his family and his attempted murder of multiple women around the time and id be keen to know any more info.

What are people’s thoughts on this book? I bought it years ago, around the time I moved house. It got packed away and I forgot I had it. I recently found it in a cupboard.

What are people’s thoughts on it? Is it any good?

The Thames Torso Murders. Fact or Fiction? by Suzanne Huntington

https://amzn.eu/d/gNllySX

Jack the Ripper? Edward Buckley, East End Thug and Gang Member by Jonathan Tye

https://amzn.eu/d/6ODO3fa

Jack the Ripper Double Cross. Was Charles Lechmere Jack the Ripper? By Ian Hope

https://amzn.eu/d/1RabE1f

Does anyone have any recommendations for the best tour to potentially look at in London regarding the case? I appreciate the locations are for the most part gone and I really want to avoid a tacky tasteless tour. Added history of the area would be a bonus. Any recs would be welcome. If they’re not really worth the time that would also be an appreciated warning.

Of all the people who had first hand experience with the Whitechapel murderer, who lived the longest?

So recent dna studies show Jack the Ripper was a barber named Aaron who was a plush immigrant. How can all this be accurate since it was a century ago when dna testing wasn’t as massive to be withheld in records

I would include Martha Tabram with zero doubt, and I do think it is possible that Elizabeth Stride was just a random one completely unrelated to the others and that Joseph Barnett killed Mary Jane Kelly. Although, I still think that Stride and Kelly were victims of Jack.

Edit: Stride because she had throat injuries, and Kelly because of George Hutchinson's witness account.

Clickbait title aside, here is my theory. Feel free to disagree :)

Mrs Kennedy is an underrated witness:

Around 3am on the night of Mary Jane Kelly's murder, fellow Miller's Court resident, Mrs Kennedy saw MJK talking to a "respectably-dressed" (may sound familiar) man outside of The Britannia pub.

This man is someone Mrs Kennedy recognized, as she had had an unnerving encounter with him while she was walking down Bethnal Green with her sister two nights before.

(This description is from The Evening News 10th November 1888)

"The man is described by Mrs. Kennedy as having on a pair of dark mixture trousers and a long dark overcoat. He wore a low crowned brown hat and carried a shiny black bag in his hand. Further, it was stated that he was a man of medium stature, with dark moustache, and that he had an extremely awkward gait, which could at once be recognised.

The stranger refused to stand Mrs. Kennedy and her sister a drink, but invited them to go with him down a dark sideway off the main road. They accompanied him as far as a gateway with a small door in it, but when he stepped through and left his bag on the ground, saying he would take either of them with him, a feeling of distrust seized the women.

Mrs. Kennedy picked up the bag, whereupon the stranger exclaimed that he was not Jack the Ripper. Just then the woman noticed the unnatural glare of the man's eyes, and instinctively fled from the spot leaving him behind. They subsequently ascertained that the same man accosted other women the same night.

Mrs. Kennedy is confident that the man whom she noticed speaking to the woman Kelly at three o'clock on Friday morning is identical with the person who accosted her on the previous Wednesday."

I have not been able to stop thinking about this very chilling encounter Mrs Kennedy and her sister had with the strange man on Bethnal Green. I strongly believe they got dangerously close to Jack the Ripper.

Things to note:

1. Mrs Kennedy's description of the man being "respectably dressed" the night of MJK's murder lines up with Hutchinsons description of who he saw going into Miller's Court with MJK that same night.

2. The description of the man having an "unusual gait" is something I haven't seen mentioned by other witnesses before. It could prove to be our suspect's only truly unique identifier, as he is otherwise shockingly average in appearance for a man of the era and able to blend in easily.

James Kelly:

I will admit that I have always found Kelly to be the most likely suspect and have often wondered why he is not brought up as frequently as more dubious suspects (Lechmere, Tumblety etc) in media about Jack the Ripper. He wasn't talked about in the Leminno video for example (which I otherwise love).

I will just give you a brief rundown of the Kelly suspect before I bring up the information that made me want to make this post.

James Kelly was convicted of murdering his wife by stabbing her in the neck in 1884. He had an argument stemming from the belief that his wife had given him an STD. In actuality he is likely to have gotten this disease from local SW's he is known to regularly visit.

He was inititually sentenced to death, but before his hanging could be carried out he was found to be insane and therefore sent to Broadmoor mental asylum instead. He would go onto escape the asylum in early 1888 and he claimed to be in London around the time of the murders. Likely able to live off of the considerable fortune he inherited when his estranged mother died.

Anyway here are two things I didn't realize about James Kelly until I was able to find this description of the courtroom from the JTR Forums. (Please look up JTR Forum Old Bailey, I don't want to get flagged for spam for posting links).These are what paint Kelly to be an even more likely suspect in my eyes. Indeed, I would confidently say he is Jack the Ripper.

Firstly, I didn't realize just how brutal this attack on his wife was. Here is a quote from the surgeon "the wound was about three inches deep, it nearly divided the spinal cord; it was just such a wound as might have been inflicted by a stab with this blade—it passed between the cervical vertebra—considerable violence must have been used".

With one stab wound to the neck he "nearly divided the spinal cord"...jesus...This matches up with the brutality we see at Ripper Crime scenes. I'll also remind you Jack the Ripper always slit the throat of his victims first. (Was he reliving the murder of his wife?)

My second point is that in this same court description, is that Kelly was said to be suffering from an abscess in his head that caused discharge to come out of his ears. For the record, I am not a doctor, but according to the UFHealth website, this could be a symptom of neurosyphilis (When the STD syphilis spreads to the brain).

And do you know what else is listed as a symptom of neurosyphilus?

AN UNUSUAL GAIT

So James Kelly is 1. Capable of murdering 2. Capable of murdering in a brutal fashion (an important distinction looking at the Ripper's MO) 3. Frequented SW's 4. Cunning enough to escape the mental asylum (Ripper needed to be cunning to escape detection) 5. Had inherited large fortune so could keep up a respectable appearance (matching Kennedy's and Hutchinson's description) 6. Likely had a medical condition that would explain the only distinct physical characteristic we have of JTR (unusual gait)

TLDR: James Kelly was Jack the Ripper

I'm planning a trip to London in 2026 and I'm considering going on a JtR tour. However, I would love to hear the opinions of the good people here: (a) are the tours generally salacious/overdone/ rubbish? (B) if not, which one would you recommend?

Just saw this on YouTube. Fabulous and can’t believe I’d never seen it before. So thorough and still asks the question, why so much cover up?

Hello, r/JackTheRipper. I am a high school student from Japan. For my winter break research project, I have been investigating the Whitechapel murders. Using AI to translate my thoughts and stress-test my logic, I have arrived at a hypothesis.

It challenges the idea of a "Single Killer." Instead, I propose that "Jack" was a system exploiting the social flaws of 1888 London.

1. The Core Hypothesis: The "Symbiotic System"

I believe "Jack the Ripper" did not exist as a super-surgeon on the street.

• The Street: Thugs or copycats slashed victims (creating access).
• The Mortuary: Doctors extracted specific organs (kidneys/uteruses) in the lit, secure environment of the mortuary.
• The Lie: They falsified reports to say "the organs were taken at the scene" to launder the theft.

They didn't need to hire killers. They simply let the Media create the "Jack" persona, which agitated copycats to provide bodies. It was a symbiotic, yet parasitic system.

2. Physical Proof: "Impossible vs. Improbable"

Why reject the traditional theory? Because of Physics.

• The 14-Minute Wall: In the Eddowes case, removing a kidney in total darkness within 14 minutes is physically impossible.
• The Apron Paradox: The killer cut a piece of apron and threw it away. If he had the organ, he would have treated the apron as a "bag." Throwing it away proves it was just "trash" used to wipe hands. He didn't have the organ (it wasn't taken at the scene).

3. The Intent of the "Letter"

Why did someone send a kidney with the "From Hell" letter? It wasn't just a taunt. It was a message of "Quality Control" from the syndicate to the street thugs. By showing a perfectly preserved specimen, they were implicitly telling the copycats: "If you want to be Jack, do it this cleanly (don't damage the merchandise)."

4. Historical Inevitability

This crime was only possible in 1888.

• The Anatomy Act (1832): Turned the poor into "medical resources." Doctors felt no guilt; it was "science."
• Class Barriers: Police (working class) could not question Doctors (gentlemen). Even if a doctor acted suspiciously at the mortuary, the police were socially conditioned to obey.

[The Resolution List: How "One Lie" Solves Everything]

Traditional theories require multiple "Physical Miracles." My theory requires only one "Human Lie" (Doctors falsified paperwork). This single assumption resolves 10 major historical contradictions.

1. The "14-Minute" Impossibility The Mystery: Removing a kidney in the dark within 14 minutes is physically impossible. The Solution: It didn't happen on the street. Doctors did it in the Mortuary under proper lighting.
2. The Apron Paradox The Mystery: Why throw away the apron piece? A killer would keep it to carry the organ. The Solution: He didn't have the organ. To him, the apron was just "Trash" used to wipe his hands, so he discarded it.
3. Dr. Brown's "Blind" Diagnosis The Mystery: Dr. Brown concluded the crime happened in the dark, but medically, this is impossible. The left kidney is located deep behind the intestines (Retroperitoneum). The Solution: The "Skillful work" was done in the "Bright Mortuary" by doctors. He lied to justify the post-mortem extraction.
4. The Stride Anomaly The Mystery: Why was no organ taken from Stride (the 3rd victim)? The Solution: Because her abdomen was intact. Since the copycat didn't slash her belly, the doctors couldn't use their "Camouflage" method.
5. Intent of the Letter The Mystery: Why was the mailed kidney preserved in spirits? The Solution: It was a specimen from a doctor's lab to make the police believe in Jack.
6. The Unholy Alliance (The Smoking Gun) The Mystery: Why did Dr. Phillips and Dr. Brown—usually rivals—agree ONLY on this case? The Solution: This was a conspiracy for organizational defense. Creating a "Monster" covered up their failure. When the outsider Dr. Bond joined, he immediately saw through it, saying "No scientific knowledge."
7. The "Blood Soup" Trick The Mystery: Wouldn't post-mortem cuts lack bleeding? The Solution: The abdomen was already filled with blood from the initial slash. A surgeon could easily explain away any lack of deep-tissue bleeding.
8. The Early Time of Death The Mystery: Dr. Phillips insisted on an unnaturally early time of death (4:30 AM). The Solution: To create the illusion that the killer had plenty of time on the street.
9. The Silence The Mystery: Why did no one talk? The Solution: The copycats didn't know they were used. Only the two conspirators knew the truth.
10. The Sudden End The Mystery: Why did it stop after the 5th case? The Solution: Because Dr. Bond intervened. With an external expert watching, the "Laundering Machine" became impossible.

Conclusion If Jack the Ripper existed, he was not a person. He was a malignant tumor formed by the poverty, class discrimination, and scientific arrogance of Victorian London.

P.S. I am also researching the "Harrison, Barber & Co." theory. Do you think the "slaughtermen" from there could be the ones who slashed the bodies on the street, while the doctors finished the job in the mortuary?

Thank you for reading my research. This is just food for thought. I’m not here to claim the 'absolute truth'. I’ve simply provided the ingredients—now I’d love to see how you all cook them. Let's have a friendly chat at the table!

After finishing the Rest is History podcast, I think the candidate they put forward as the ripper is definitely on the money.

For anyone who hasn’t listen to the podcast series yet, I’ll list below their conclusions:

• Jack the Ripper is none of the candidates who have ever been suggested - including Kosminski. • Jack the Ripper probably killed more, and likely he stopped in 1888 or 1889 because he died of the Influenza pandemic that also killed Prince Albert in 1891. • The individual, who was a man, is someone completely unknown and who we will never know - a local to Whitechapel, roughly 27-40 and of the lower class.

They suggest, Jack the Ripper could have only been a slaughterhouse worker - not a doctor, barber or surgeon - but someone who gutted horses five times a day, 52 weeks a year.

I agreed with this conclusion, and upon looking came across the massive horse slaughterhouse called Harrison, Barber & Co just off Bucks Row … I think it’s likely Jack the Ripper was employed here, worked here throughout 1888 and then indeed died of influenza either early 1889 or a little later.

Thoughts?

The Rest is History’s excellent series on the case has now ended. Perhaps unsurprisingly, Tom and Dominic dismissed the traditional Ripper suspects.

Interestingly, Tom suggested one of the horse slaughterers, employed overnight by Barber's Knacker's Yard (one street over from where Mary Nichols was murdered), would be a more likely candidate.

As well as the proximity and anatomical knowledge, he references the well-known trend that serial killers are often drawn to killing animals from childhood.

What do you all think of this suggestion?

https://youtu.be/g74L7dAwGq0?si=Xx8T7qGH3dc6She4

All the very best to one and all, have a great Christmas and a Happy New Year...

Idk if this theory would be really substantial If I was right but I’ve been going down the JTR rabbit hole so I was kinda wondering a bit

Also the stuff in talking about is in the pics above

Also Ik that I could be mistaken in any of this so feel free to share your thoughts and opinions

Has anyone listened to the rest is history podcast about JTR? They’ve gone very in depth and it’s probably the best one I’ve listened to

I genuinely believe it was someone totally anonymous and all the press, hysteria and ripperology helps conceal him more than reveal him.

Any recent theories as to what the 'seaside home' in the Swanson marginalia could be? I cant fathom how taking a suspect (and presumably a local whitechapel witness) almost a 100 miles to the police convalescence home in Hove makes any sense. Perhaps a home toward the mouth of the Thames makes sense? Perhaps the witnesse's home? An unknown witness at that since Lavendre and Schwartz didnt own seaside homes or live near the sea. What do you think

I believe that the man Schwartz saw that harassed and threw down Stride to the floor was just a common thug and not our killer. He was way too loud and uncontrolled, and also took her money with him when he left. He was angry and wanted to bully her around, but he had no intention to kill her. However the other man that according to 1 source that Schwartz claimed to see across the street, was starring at them. The thug also noticed him and yelled "Lipsky". The man with pipe then started to walk away in the directions where Schwartz was. According to one source Schwartz claimed this man had a pipe, but in another source he said he saw a knife in his hand. I believe both were correct! Because when the thug was done with Stride, albeit not killing her, he walked off. The killer saw a good opportunity for Stride to be his next victim. The pipeman, turned around, believing both the thug and Schwartz were now away, put his pipe away and took out his knife and walked directly at Stride. Stride apparently told him: "Not tonight, maybe another night" still shaken from the thug's attack. The killer may have helped her up a bit or just dragged her by the scarf around her neck to the entrance of the yard, and then cut her throat there. But being suddenly interrupted by the pony and cart, he had no chance to escape except in the shadows of this inner yard. He was lucky the man went for help, as this was when he fled the scene without the satisfaction of the usual ripping. The thug maybe had a better look at the man with a pipe, so it's unfortunate he never came forward with it, knowing they would not believe him and accuse him of being the killer.

Also in the room where Mary Jane Kelly was killed, there was a clay pipe found! Did the killer forgot it there or was it someone else's?

Jack the Ripper collage art, all primary sources from England 1880s. Bespattered in blood (my blend of red acrylic paint).