While I don't think that Joe Barnett killed Mary Kelly, I do believe that JtL's background and outward appearance bore a fair resemblance to JB...an ordinary non-"foreign" workingman familiar with the area and its denizens, unlikely to draw more than a passing glance and imparting a false sense of relative security to his victims.
@baraxor That is a very good summing up - and we clearly agree on just about everything. Masonic plots about the royal family may make good TV but it is highly unlikely in the real world.
I'd like to know ,how far apart from one another were the bodies found? That could give you a clue. My understanding is that murderers seek out their victums close to home. That way they can get away quickly.
@alanheath Thank you and thanks for this video. Based on your comment , I think the Ripper must've lived in that area. He probably became scared with the growing presence of police and fled.
The Barnett thery is not compelling. That would be a passion gone to far. If he was that into her he wouldn't have left her. He would have stayed around to the (very bitter) end. Plus you didn't need a key to get into her room. It's well documented that you could get in there via a broken window next to the door. Nice film though. :-)
@brandyvanl JTR would not have been the first person to murder his ex - it still happens! As for the key, it may have been deadlocked. I accept that the police did not know about the trick opening the window when they entered the room on 9 November 1888.
I am just assuming and the biggest fault with my theory is probably giving Barnett too much knowledge about the media - given my profession then that my be understood.
Nice theory but the ripper absolutely hated women.catherine eddowes and mary kelly were mutilated beyond belief.Jack was an insane madman that fled to america shortly after he was questioned.To say joseph barnett was the ripper is abit out of order.Hel be turning in his grave.Tumblety is the ripper in my opinion.
@pdjbuzz51 Tumblety is in no way responsible for these crimes. He did not know the area and the modus operandi is not his. The form of mutilations suggest something personal.
@alanheath How do you know he did not know the area?You make it sound as if ripping a woman to shreds is easy.These kind of murders are never about the victim.You dont rip your ex roommate to shreds just because she sells her body.I also would like to know more about druitt.His family were convinced that he was the ripper and id like to know what made them think that.Did he go out late at night?Did he come home covered in blood?Not alot of info on net as to why they thought it was him.
i took a quiz it said i was jack the ripper and the 1st sentence was true the knife is your best freind i actuly think i saw him once i was soo freaked i threw a rock at whatever it was and ran BUT IT FOLLOWED ME all i saw when i walked outside and a knife on my door step and i saw a figure walk away and never saw it agian
Absolutely no evidence that Joe Barnett had anything to do with this. Psychologically he is way off the profile, and was released after producing cast iron alibis for the killings. Also, the killings were very obviously NOT premeditated to cause "maximum press coverage" and the ripper letters were obvious hoaxes.
The killings show all the characteristics of sexual frenzy, and not calm, premeditation. Joe Barnett was not the Ripper.
@alanheath3 Hey mate, thanks for the reply. With Joe Barnett we know of no reason to suspect him on any count. We know he was interrogated thoroughly, and we know he provided an alibi which was accepted by the police at the time. We also know he was on good terms with Mary Kelly at the time of her murder, even going so far as to give her money. He was not a contemporary suspect and does not fit the pattern of opportunistic, and clearly frenzied impulsive killer.
@Macque77 I think we must agree to disagree. However I can be persuaded that I am wrong - although so far you have not done so. The best thing would have been for you and me to do the video together!
@Macque77 That is good to hear. I have been posting some stuff from Newcastle although there is a pile more to put up when I get round to it. Having said that, I no longer live daaaan saaaaaf but in Poland so it might have to wait. But definitely worth doing....
This is a theory I have heard before but seems to me very unlikely. You may as well look to the mortuary assistant Robert Mann as a suitable ripper- that's another non-starter as far as theories go but a little more likely than the exonerated Barnett. Nice try though.
I heard somewhere that Martha Tabram could have been the first, Jack got a taste for killing and wanted to test out his weapon. After stabbing her 35 times I think, he must have felt sure about his weapon and his area, Whitechapel. That's what I think.
Not sure if Jack was the guy Barnett, I read and also heard from you, that he was a porter but Jack was skilled in human anatomy. He knew what organs to go after, fish are different from people.
@alanheath I've heard a few, some did say that he knew about it as he removed organs and not ripped them not. And the knife he used was that of a Doctors, a Liston knife. I have pictures of the cases for those knives, you get a saw to cut through bone. It would have been a lot, something a Doctor might be able to get.
I think he was a Doctor but someone we never knew was alive, maybe new to the East End. We could have all been wrong about who Jack was.
@alanheath Oh i believe Barnett killed Mary Jane Kelly, but i don't think he was responsible for the other murders. What is interesting is the police at the time had 3 likely suspects, they were Druitt, Kosminski & Ostrog. They stopped resources for investigation 6 weeks after Kelly's killing, they also had a 24 hour around the clock watch on possibly Kosminski, but it was a polish jew they were watching. An Aaron Kosmninski was incarcerated in an asylum. Try Casebook for JTR information.
Don't necessarily disagree with your hypothesis, but there are lots of little inaccuracies in this video that suggest research is lacking. Site of MJK killing was not near the doorway you suggest -the actual site is pretty much known. You also state five victims, but this is open to discussion. If MJK is NOT the last one, then your theory may fall apart.
@claypole47 It does rather wind me up when blind statements such as 'lots of inaccuracies' whilst failing to say what those inaccuracies where.
When Dorset Street was rebuilt it did not quite follow the same line as today (compare maps). The warehouse today is further back that the street was then.
Elizabeth Stride may not have been a victim.
If more victims are found then the theory falls to pieces. But I don't think that that is likely near 122 years later.
Sorry, being slightly petty but the murder sight is slightly up the road from where you suggest-round about where the open shutter is. I'm aware that the path of Dorset Street has changed, I've been there many times. Inaccuracies, or perhaps points of debate:
-Martha Tabram wasn't mutilated, she was a multiple stab victim.
-She may have been a real victim, which lessens the argument.
-You keep stating 5 victims. Might have been 4,5,6 or 9 or more.
-If MJK is not the last then the argument falls apart.
-There is a calculation that the MJK injuries could have been inflicted in a lot less time than you suggest.
-There is a suggestion that the key had been missing for a while beforehand.
-Young and indoors suggests nothing for a potentially opportunistic killer - he met her and she invited him in. She is the only one with a fixed abode.
-There is some evidence that it is her friendship witht the other prostitute that causes friction with JB.
@claypole47 No problem with being slightly petty - dont worry about it.
The point of putting up comments is to allow debate and ideas. Please also remember that I am speaking off the top of my head. My friend GuildfordGhost whom you can find on you tube knows far more than I do!
Martha Tabram was a stab victim yes.
I think Goulston Street is irrelevant - coincidence. Druitt is only a suspect because he died in December 1888 - other than that nothing.
@alanheath Thanks for that. I agree about Druitt certainly. Interesting your view on Goulston Street. If it was nothing to do with the case it's got lots of people barking up a potentially wrong tree! Could you explain again your view that the missing key is significant please? I do find JB appealing as Jack, but I wonder if he could have actually done it, and there is also the problem of some of the post-MJK victims, particularly MacKenzie.
@claypole47 I think there was probably quite a lot of anti Semitic writing - as you would unfortunately get today against other minorities. Around one third of the population were Jewish - mainly Yiddish speaking.
The killer closed the door. Either he had the key or he knew how to close the door. I accept this is not sufficient to condemn Barnett but he knew - although someone could have seen or Mary may have explained it.
Someone wrote earlier that the lock could be used without the key.
@alanheath I don't think the police at the time thought any more of the victims were from the Ripper.
Obviously I don't know and I don't know anything about pathology, so my view is not worth all that much!
Another contributor here points out that JB was arrested first over MJK and the police were happy then that he was innocent, so there is no reason for him to be suspected today. I don't share this argument.
-ES may not have been a victim, but some suggest the MJK wasn't either.
-For the killings to stop JtR does not have to have died. He may have been away. There are similar cases in other areas/countries that fill the gap, assuming that MJK is not the last.
In JB favour, he fits the profiles but it all depends. Do you include the Goulston Street graffitti? If MJK is the last, then why not Druitt? Questions questions...
What about James Kelly? Kelly escaped from Broadmoor asylum prior to the murders where he had been incarcerated for cutting his wife's throat in 1883. He was clearly a psychotic man with a sufficient hatred of women and wouldn't have been easily recognizable though he would have had knowledge of the area.
For the reason you state that he had no knowledge of the area plus there is no evidence he was ever in London in 1888 - indeed he was possibly in France at the time!
do you think barnet would have killed the others?
the attacks where suly aimed at cutting away the womans vergina suggested I thought that he was attacking what made them women suggesting he might have been afrid of women.
but still very good suggestion. it must have taken lots of reserch
This film was made on 26 July 2007. I have today learned of the works of Dr. Frederick Walker which can be found on the internet on the Jack the Ripper Casebook site. Whereas I do not agree with everything he writes, the general message as to who the killer could have been is exactly the same!
Just because the owner of the diary finally proclaimed the dairy a hoax doesnt mean it actually was..his marriage counldnt stand the pressure and nor could he ..maybrick was probably a distant relative of his..
And there are still experts who believe the diary..however people dont want to end the mystery.
i would subscribe to chapman or tumblety. chapman fits the description almost exactly on appearance. And tumblety looks younger than he actually is. Also i believe him to be the batty st. lodger. Tumblety was also not a homo since he was once married to a prostitute,maybe bi? both are foreigners which also fits.
Tumblety is certainly a strong possibility, to my way of thinking. He was an abortionist, and it's said that Mary Kelly was pregnant at the time of her murder. If she were having the pregnancy terminated, it would certainly explain the clothing folded neatly in the chair beside her bed. The only problem I have with him is that he was about 6'1. Much too tall to be the man seen with the others before they were killed.
Tumblety is the strongest suspect. He killed in America before he came to england and had attempted to obtain wombs before the killings to add to his large collection of preserved female genitalia. He fled to New York then the killings stopped. Littlejohn and his department thought it was tumblety, I think that's why they stopped their patrol after he left. There were also copycat killings in new york after tumblety became lost in the crowd. Drunk eyewitnesses at night are spotty at best.
Thanks for posting this. I don't know that I'd say Barnett did it, but he's definitely in my top five. I also think that William H. Bury is a very likely suspect. And as to why Kosminski was considered in the first place, I think it was simply because he was a) a paranoid schizophrenic and b) a Polish Jew. Given the strong anti-Semitic sentiments of the time, he was an easy answer for the residents of the east end to swallow.
Some beleive their was a connection between the 5 murders and some torso murder that happened soon afterward, also I beleive there was a campden murder with a prostitute that was kiiled similarly maybe 5 years later. Copycat or the same?
The horrible thing was how much enjoyment the killer must have had. The first newspaper to sell 1 million copies was because of it. I beleive the chief of police was fired or resigned from public outcry. That must have given the ripper unending pleasure. Not to mention how deep the story was sensationalized, with the royal conspiracy, the amount of suspects.
I think the royal conspiracy theory came later and is largely confined to literature! Mind you I also accept that my theory relies on a bit of hindsight and that the killer would realise how to get publicity which is perhaps presuming too much!
the only problem with Kosminski is that he was homeless and insane when the murders were taking place. The killer had to have a basic sophistication and charm, and an escape route. He was unassuming enough to be under the radar of the cops and women. they knew there was a madman in the area but the killer still established enough trust with the women. I like Barnett, but I don't buy that the killer just stopped or lost interest in killing. Great post Alanhealth.
Kudos Alan, I would love to see this area myself but will never be able to. However I disagree with your conclusions. The man who I believe did it was Kosminski. For one he fit the profile to a T. 2. He was committed and the murders stopped, 3. The cops stopped their aid patrols very shortly after he was incarcerated. I believe that they did in fact know who the killer was and that the killer was Kosminski. Whoever is right tho, very very well done and thank you.
I dont agree with you but thank you very much for your comments. The third point is very valid of course - why did they stop their patrols so quickly?
The only reason that I can think of, is that they already knew who the person was and they also knew he was in no position to cause further harm. Otherwise I can't imagine why they would stop the patrols.
good point. this is the only reason I can't rule out a deeper conspiracy, maybe not the prince, but possibly someone/people masonic with a purpose tied to hierarchy or law. "the juwes" reference might have been a giveaway, and why was it removed? For fear of retaliation? I doubt it, they were living in hell anyway. Maybe the investigators gave up too quickly, were "hoping" that it was over and got lucky.
I can see why the Juwes reference was deleted, given the ethnic make up of the area at the time and the desire not to see revenge killings. I completely dismiss the masonic connections as the killer clearly knew the area very well - a royal or mason would not. (Or have I misunderstood who joins the masons?)
no, you're right. masons are usually higher ranking members of the business world. I know the killer could have misspelled, but the Juwes also has the masonic reference. the head investigator who was so insistent about removing the writing was a known high ranking member of the freemasons. Even if the killer didn't know the area, if it was premeditated with a getaway there is a chance. this would probably only be relevant if you beleive in some prostitute blackmail theory.
Frances Tumblety was too old, he did not fit the physical description given by witnesses, absolutely no evidence ties him to any of the murders, and most importantly, he was a homosexual. Serial killers almost always murder the sex they are sexually attracted to, and the Whitechapel murders were clearly sexual in nature. Aaron Kosminski, on the other hand....
tumblety looks much younger than he actually was. his actual pic can attest to that. and he was not a homo. he was once married to a prostitute so he isnt gay. maybe bi.
Whoever made this video needs to re-examine the facts of the case. The door to Mary Kelly's room was a spring lock, and the killer did not need a key. And the police cleared Joseph Barnett almost immediately after interviewing him, which suggests he had a solid alibi the night of the murder. Barnett was not the killer.
Of course Joseph Barnett was arrested by police after Mary Kelly's murder. Even 100 years ago, law enforcement officials knew then--like we know now--that statistically, family members and lovers are always the #1 culprits in homicides...unless they can be ruled out after examining the facts of the investigation, in which Mr. Barnett was ruled out almost immediately after his interrogation. The spring-latch was in Det. Thomas Arnold's report on the scene, and was later reported in the media.
well done good documentry it is amazing though how many suspects there are and you can make anyone of them fit in thats what makes the whole thing so interesting but think about what those women went through and how evil you have to be to murder
well done alan..a very interesting and thought provoking film..im still convinced it was maybrick..if it was barnet..why did he stop killing after kelly..? he must of been a real sick man to do what he did..he would of kept on killing..
Thanks for the doc Alan, I commented on part 1 as well. I previously worked as a criminal analyst here in the states, what you stated about Barnett I just read in the Ripper Companion. The ripper did what he wanted to do, london suffered, no one would have come forward in those days, just like now
Thanks a lot - I am happy to hear you liked it. I have not read the Ripper Companion. Of course there are holes in this theory too but this is the best one I know of that actually names someone. It is also the most logical.
Another viewer suggested that Barnett's brother may have been involved also in shielding him - an interesting and logical hypothesis.
Brilliant and cool documentry Alan, THANKS A LOT. I´m a big fan of London, so this kind of docus is worth gold for me. Jack the Ripper, the Kray twins and 10 Rillington Place e.t.c are all good stories.
okay if this was jack the ripper then why did the murders stop what happand to this man to make him stop and if he is jtr this man was relly skewd in the head
then i must have miss it some how u say he died in the 1920s but where was he after the muders stop had he been locked up thats the part i missed i dont remerber u saying why he stoped killing and u say he killed all these women because of one women thats a littla heard to belive
The killings stopped as he was detained in an institution! I will always sway towards this psychotic loner. I can see no reason as to why the cerial killer would simply stop murdering...unless of course he'd reached his peak with the extreme mutilation of Mary Jane Kelly!
It sounds OK but he was too much of a wierdo to be able to approach women. JTR was clearly someone who could put the women at ease. Kosminski was not. That is not to say it was not someone else who was put in an institution!
I don't think so he would necessarily have to put them at ease, alan. These women were quite desperate and the fact that they continued to walk the streets after the first murders attests to that. The murders could simply have been his outlet for letting out his rage at being an outcast. I agree that it was most likely Kosminski.
I accept that the women were pretty desperate and no doubt alcohol had largely degenerated their minds. However Kosminski is just too extreme. Furthermore he was well known. He clearly would not have had the money to pay them the couple of pennies that such services cost. Not only that he stood out in a crowd and witnesses would have seen him. It had to be a local, that knew his way round the streets and yet could remain cool.
It is irrelevant. Some racist wrote in their earlier. There is no evidence that it had anything to do with the murderer - on the contrary he was in a hurry to get away and did not have time for any grafitti.
It was not at the murder scene but was where he discarded a piece of her clothing.
Fair enough. I just find it a little too hard to believe that he coincidentally dropped a bloody piece of clothing from a victim right underneath such an obviously (in my opinion) malicious statement. I see it more of a declaration of vengeance for being persecuted instead of something anti-semitic.
There is no way if they had of caught him they would of institutionalised him, he would of hanged. I'm surprised they didn't just hang someone they didn't like after the murders stopped as said yeah it was him. I'd say the most likely suspect would of been involved in the case and able to send his colleagues on a wild goose chase, and could act with utmost confidence because of his position. Right in front of everyone's eyes the whole time, possibly handsome and a gentlemen.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
what is very interesting is that historically in england and london specifically the name joe is often exchanged with jack in the same way as robert with bob. And the literal meaning of ripper from french and latin roots means to gut and fillet fish! joe the fishporter is jack the ripper! he named himself very well!
I have to go back and read some things.. but wasn't the attack on Stride made some time before her murder? I seem to remember that she had been seen with several different types of men that night.. buying grapes and what not.
The psychological portrait of the Ripper is one of a man who HATED women and therefore ripped out what made them female. Would such a man be in love then with a woman.. a prostitute, ie. Kelly?
Stride was accosted before her murder but not attacked. (The grapes plus "Lipski" incidents.) Maybe two things you (or I) are confusing. She may not have been a Ripper victim even.
I am not into psychological profiling so I can only repeat what I have read. My understanding is that the FBI profiling around 1990 pointed to Barnett - of course a guess 100 years after the event. I think his obsession with Kelly caused him to kill. But of course it is just a guess... I don't know.
I've never read a profile that pointed to Barnett. I have heard of the man suspect being Druitt.. before the memoirs naming Kosminski came out. Supposedly, Lawende identified Kosminski as the man he saw at the entrance to Mitre Square wih Eddowes. But he did not wish to formerly charge him because his indentification would send Kosminski to the gallows. And he did not want that on his concence. Kosminski was kept under lock and key ever after.
The Druitt theory is nonsense so we can forget that.
The man who found Stride (temporarily forgotten his name) thought he saw Kosminski but it is alleged that he did not want to send a fellow Jew to the gallows. Kosminski was locked up and rightfully so. But I do not believe he was the Ripper for the reasons stated earlier.
What I've read is the whitness who identified Kosminski was at Mitre Square with Eddowes. It's in his notes as such.
Also, someone dismissed the Koskinski theory as Jewish racism of the day. If this were true, the officials who supposedly conducted the ID of him would have shouted it to the roof tops, named him publically and sat back to enjoy the backlash. But they didn't. They sat on the ID of Kosminski and said naming publicly him would serve no public good.
I can't remember this + I am in Poland now so cannot check it. But I find it hard to believe that Kosminski was at Mitre Square. I am not saying it did not happen.
The next time I am in London I will film Mitre Square and some of the other sites!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
kosminski wasnt witnessed at all at any of the killings. Mcnaughten named kosminski together with druitt as suspects only in his memoirs years later. the witness at mitre square at the time in 1888 said he wouldnt be able to recognise the man again and then 2 years later when there was an id parade - he picked kosminski out immediately! - and his description in 88 was nothing like Kosminski! utter nonsense - a police bluff to say they knew who he was all along to hide their embarressment!
Yes, he was. I don't know why you want to disbelieve the officials of the day. There's no reason to have lack of confidence in the people who were there at the time.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
there is every reason not to believe them - the top brass of both police forces involved in the killings weren't even on speaking terms - these were arrogant and vain men who were interested in their own status only. bottom line is they FAILED and so lo and behold a few years later those pompous old duffers anderson and mcnaughton started to claim they knew all along to try and enhance their poor professional reputations. And where do they point their fingers? - at the jews!
Why do you have such a negative opinion of them? Where's the evidence that they were arrogant and vaint who were interested in their own status?
I don't think they were anti semite at all. And proof of this is right in their naming of Kosminski. They refused to do so publicly. Saying it would do no public good. If they were anti semites.. and wanting to blame the Jews.. and wanting to look like they were competent and solved the case, they'd have yelled Kosminski's name from the rooftop.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
they couldnt because they knew he didnt do it! why have you got such a positive opinion of them? wheres your evidence that they were just and fair? there are numerous accounts of corruption in the police esp in the top ranks during that period. many ended their careers in disgrace.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
the schwartz witnessing of stride being attacked was 30 minutes before she was found dead when the ripper was interrrupted by the owner of the jewish club. fbi profiling suggests a killer who knew how to make the victims feel safe and who was most probably in a "normal' relationship. there have been other cases of serial killers who have killed other women as a result of the stormy relationship with their own wife - and all had gone on to kill the wife.
So much is made of the door to Kelly's room being locked. The window next to the door had been broken. I've read one could reach through the broken window and bolt and unbolt the door. Therefore, no key was required to lock or unlock the door. No smoking gun.
Maybe you are right. But in an area like Dorset Street you would not want everyone knowing how to get into your room.. My feeling is that few people would have known about it. It is also possible that the killer found the key - assuming it was not Mr Barnett of course.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
very few people locked their doors - there was nothing to steal anyway in such a desperately poor area. And as you say if the killer found the key he must of been someone who knew who lived at 13 millers court or even knew its inhabitant - the coincidence otherwise would be startling. the whole ripper cases hinges on kellys murder - he knew where how to get in. One of her previous clients in the week before her murder could have found it but barnett said the key was lost when he was there!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The door was LOCKED when the body was found - someone could easily have reached through the window to release the door but only someone with the key - and that was missing - could have locked it behind them. Barnett at the inquest said that the key was lost and he and kelly used to reach through. It was only 7 days before that the window was broken and in a violent row between kelly & barnett! some researchers say in that case the ripper could only be either barnett or mcarthy the landlord!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
so what im saying is folks that mary kellys killer was in possession of the key! this shines the light of suspicion firmly on joseph barnet. the door was locked after the murder! barnet is the only man to be in possession of a key if we discount mcarthy! and all evidence of the modus operandi of JTR concludes that the killer of kelly was the same as the other 4 and possibly tabram. joseph barnett is the most likely candidate for the ripper. joe the ripper.
Thank you very much for your extremely well informed comment - even if you do agree with me!!! One earlier correspondent wrote that he believed Mr Barnett could have been 'working' with his brother which would explain some of the weaknesses of 'our' theory.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
you dont understand - it was the actual lock that was locked - not the bolt. the door could be bolted and unbolted from reaching through but the lock mechanism is separate to that and was LOCKED after the murder. Remember the police had to break the door down to gain entrance? they could unhook the bolt but not open the actual lock.
I agree with bunterx in almost everything he states. I would like to add that the enjoyment Jack probably gathered from the terror he created must of doubled when woman could no longer sleep safely in their beds, ie, the indoor Kelly murder. Before that murder I'm sure woman thought they were safe indoors.
Every time I look into this case---Joey always seems to fit the most. There's a word count to what I can write here, but, damn.....
Why aren't people looking into him more? For some reason their preocupied by Sickert (who is a very interesting fellow without being Jack) Maybrick, or Aaron K.
Joe also had a huge hatred for Prostitutes *blamed them for Marry's downfall*, and his pipe was found near the body. o_O
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
the most important factor in the jack the ripper case is that it was the first time a killer could see and experience the effect of his crimes via the media. this was new and has proved to be a key factor in most subsequent serial killers. barnet used to read kelly the newspaper reports of the murders! part of the thrill is the uproar the crimes cause.
Obviously you largely agree with me on this one but you have added the additional rather convincing detail of the support of his brother (and for the first time I have seen a good argument for two people being involved).
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Ive always felt that because of the logistics of the murders that jack was being helped. The knight theory of 2 or 3 men working together has always rung true but the royal/freemason aspect is nonsense. I agree the kelly murder is the key- the fact that she was murdered in her own home suggests that it was targeted and not opportunist. it was the culmination of the previous 4 killings. After kelly his mission was complete - he could no longer frighten her so therefore the killings stopped.
The fact Kelly was murdered in her room is due to the fact she was the only one of the victims who had one. There's no indication there that she was a target any more then any of the others.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
barnett used the murders and the acssociated media hysteria to frighten kelly into rejecting prostitution. on the night of her murder she was still taking clients back to her room. thats why barnett had had enough and decided to kill her too. various witnesses report seeing a man watching the entrance to millers court. i believe that to be barnet's look out - his brother.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
it might be an idea to cross reference all of the sightings of barnett with his brother. what intrigues me is that a pair of men seems to be a common factor across the murders and that barnett himself crops up in relation to all of the events time and time again.
All speculation. Barnett was interrogated and all his clothes searched by the officials of the day. He was found by them to be innocent.
We need to trust a little more in the people who were alive and there at the time then armchair theorists looking back with absolutely zero evidence beyond speculation.
Don't get me wrong, I don't know who the Ripper was nor pretend to. But I put more credence into the official opinions of the day. Barnett may have been the Ripper. But the officials looked him over and found nothing. Kosminski however, was suspected and fits the FBI profile. He also lived at the center of the killings. He may or may not have been the Ripper, no one can know now. But the majority of the hard evidence points to him.
First I am glad you are writing and anyone with anything intelligent to say is welcome. You do not have to agree with me and may change my mind.
Kosminski is unacceptable because he would not have been able to approach the victims. He was a well know dangerous nut case. The Ripper clearly could convince his victims he was respectable.
The FBI profiling of Kosminski dates from the mid 1990s - later than that of Barnett. Kosminski was suspect but was not arrested.
Well, thank you for taking these films. It's fascinating to me to see these places.
As I understand it, it was a man named John Pizer who was the known lunatic.. aka Leather Apron, who would wave a knife at women and yell, "I'll rip you up!"
Kosminski was an anonymous man living with this sister and her husband in the respectable district of Sion Square. He would have had access to his brother-in-law's clothing, etc.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
but kosminski DOESNT fit the fbi profiling or any of the witness statements - in 1888 he was 22 years old dark, jewish looking. the profile states the JTR is 30 5ft 7" and a white male! Are you trying to shoehorn kosminski into every piece of evidence circumstantial or otherwise connected to the killings? the officials of the day were useless. the police top brass couldn't even communicate with each other because of petty personal vanity and abberline & swanson missed vital clues.
Jews are white. Certainly not Black or Asian. Did you see the television show where FBI agents John Hazelwood and another guy named Douglas, listed the profile and both claimed Kosminski as the suspect? You don't know Kosminsky was, "Dark, jewish looking." That is trying to stereotype him. And his age did fit the profile.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
rubbish! the witness at mitre square saw a non jew - a gentile. the tension between the jewish immigrants and the irish cockneys was very serious. Everyone back then knew who a 'yid' was - hence the epithet "lipski" which was used as an insult. dont forget that witnesses heard him speak on more than one occasion - kosminski apparantly couldnt speak a word of english. you are barking completely up the wrong tree.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
thats nonsense! the witness at the chapman killing only saw the mans back and didnt see his face! Please get your facts right. The witness did HEAR him speak " will you?" and that was in clear english! this has been the problem with this case for years - people add their own interpretation to the witness accounts.
Alan under no circumstances become a prosocuting lawer againt me, ....or Im done for,good summing up.
24327355 4 months ago
While I don't think that Joe Barnett killed Mary Kelly, I do believe that JtL's background and outward appearance bore a fair resemblance to JB...an ordinary non-"foreign" workingman familiar with the area and its denizens, unlikely to draw more than a passing glance and imparting a false sense of relative security to his victims.
baraxor 4 months ago
@baraxor That is a very good summing up - and we clearly agree on just about everything. Masonic plots about the royal family may make good TV but it is highly unlikely in the real world.
alanheath 4 months ago
niezle ;d
BuryT88 7 months ago
@BuryT88 Staram!!
alanheath 7 months ago
I'd like to know ,how far apart from one another were the bodies found? That could give you a clue. My understanding is that murderers seek out their victums close to home. That way they can get away quickly.
HellFireKane 7 months ago
@HellFireKane I would say the sites are roughly ten minutes away from each other (very approximately).
alanheath 7 months ago
@alanheath Thank you and thanks for this video. Based on your comment , I think the Ripper must've lived in that area. He probably became scared with the growing presence of police and fled.
HellFireKane 7 months ago
The Barnett thery is not compelling. That would be a passion gone to far. If he was that into her he wouldn't have left her. He would have stayed around to the (very bitter) end. Plus you didn't need a key to get into her room. It's well documented that you could get in there via a broken window next to the door. Nice film though. :-)
brandyvanl 8 months ago
@brandyvanl JTR would not have been the first person to murder his ex - it still happens! As for the key, it may have been deadlocked. I accept that the police did not know about the trick opening the window when they entered the room on 9 November 1888.
I am just assuming and the biggest fault with my theory is probably giving Barnett too much knowledge about the media - given my profession then that my be understood.
alanheath 8 months ago
Nice theory but the ripper absolutely hated women.catherine eddowes and mary kelly were mutilated beyond belief.Jack was an insane madman that fled to america shortly after he was questioned.To say joseph barnett was the ripper is abit out of order.Hel be turning in his grave.Tumblety is the ripper in my opinion.
pdjbuzz51 10 months ago
@pdjbuzz51 Tumblety is in no way responsible for these crimes. He did not know the area and the modus operandi is not his. The form of mutilations suggest something personal.
alanheath 10 months ago
@alanheath How do you know he did not know the area?You make it sound as if ripping a woman to shreds is easy.These kind of murders are never about the victim.You dont rip your ex roommate to shreds just because she sells her body.I also would like to know more about druitt.His family were convinced that he was the ripper and id like to know what made them think that.Did he go out late at night?Did he come home covered in blood?Not alot of info on net as to why they thought it was him.
pdjbuzz51 10 months ago
i took a quiz it said i was jack the ripper and the 1st sentence was true the knife is your best freind i actuly think i saw him once i was soo freaked i threw a rock at whatever it was and ran BUT IT FOLLOWED ME all i saw when i walked outside and a knife on my door step and i saw a figure walk away and never saw it agian
funkyjeffyg 11 months ago
Absolutely no evidence that Joe Barnett had anything to do with this. Psychologically he is way off the profile, and was released after producing cast iron alibis for the killings. Also, the killings were very obviously NOT premeditated to cause "maximum press coverage" and the ripper letters were obvious hoaxes.
The killings show all the characteristics of sexual frenzy, and not calm, premeditation. Joe Barnett was not the Ripper.
Macque77 1 year ago
@Macque77 A suggestion or report coming from the FBI around 1990 says he is psychologically on profile + I don't think his alibis were cast iron.
I think the letters were hoaxes + perhaps the press coverage bit is adding too much from a modern perspective.
As for the frenzy, I know too little on criminality to make a comment - but thanks for yours!!
alanheath3 1 year ago
@alanheath3 Hey mate, thanks for the reply. With Joe Barnett we know of no reason to suspect him on any count. We know he was interrogated thoroughly, and we know he provided an alibi which was accepted by the police at the time. We also know he was on good terms with Mary Kelly at the time of her murder, even going so far as to give her money. He was not a contemporary suspect and does not fit the pattern of opportunistic, and clearly frenzied impulsive killer.
Macque77 1 year ago
@Macque77 I think we must agree to disagree. However I can be persuaded that I am wrong - although so far you have not done so. The best thing would have been for you and me to do the video together!
alanheath3 1 year ago
@alanheath3 Good idea! I'm also from the North East living daaaaan saaaaaf so our accent will match :)
Macque77 1 year ago
@Macque77 That is good to hear. I have been posting some stuff from Newcastle although there is a pile more to put up when I get round to it. Having said that, I no longer live daaaan saaaaaf but in Poland so it might have to wait. But definitely worth doing....
alanheath 1 year ago
This is a theory I have heard before but seems to me very unlikely. You may as well look to the mortuary assistant Robert Mann as a suitable ripper- that's another non-starter as far as theories go but a little more likely than the exonerated Barnett. Nice try though.
WJBLeonard 1 year ago
@WJBLeonard I think the theory goes back around thirty years or so. I still think it the most logical answer but I appreciate that it is flawed.
alanheath3 1 year ago
I heard somewhere that Martha Tabram could have been the first, Jack got a taste for killing and wanted to test out his weapon. After stabbing her 35 times I think, he must have felt sure about his weapon and his area, Whitechapel. That's what I think.
Not sure if Jack was the guy Barnett, I read and also heard from you, that he was a porter but Jack was skilled in human anatomy. He knew what organs to go after, fish are different from people.
That's what I think.
StormTrooperGeneral 1 year ago
@StormTrooperGeneral There are some who argue that Tabran was the first victim but the wounds were different.
Jack was not skilled in human anatomy - this is the stuff of legend. He knew some basics but not more. (See doctors reports after killings.)
alanheath 1 year ago
@alanheath I've heard a few, some did say that he knew about it as he removed organs and not ripped them not. And the knife he used was that of a Doctors, a Liston knife. I have pictures of the cases for those knives, you get a saw to cut through bone. It would have been a lot, something a Doctor might be able to get.
I think he was a Doctor but someone we never knew was alive, maybe new to the East End. We could have all been wrong about who Jack was.
StormTrooperGeneral 1 year ago 3
@StormTrooperGeneral That is a very good summary!
alanheath 1 year ago
@alanheath Oh. Thank you. =D
StormTrooperGeneral 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@alanheath Oh. Thank you! =D
StormTrooperGeneral 1 year ago
@alanheath Oh i believe Barnett killed Mary Jane Kelly, but i don't think he was responsible for the other murders. What is interesting is the police at the time had 3 likely suspects, they were Druitt, Kosminski & Ostrog. They stopped resources for investigation 6 weeks after Kelly's killing, they also had a 24 hour around the clock watch on possibly Kosminski, but it was a polish jew they were watching. An Aaron Kosmninski was incarcerated in an asylum. Try Casebook for JTR information.
66Shellz 1 year ago
@StormTrooperGeneral interesting comments, why not look up ' Francis Thompson ' as a possible ripper suspect.
66Shellz 1 year ago
Don't necessarily disagree with your hypothesis, but there are lots of little inaccuracies in this video that suggest research is lacking. Site of MJK killing was not near the doorway you suggest -the actual site is pretty much known. You also state five victims, but this is open to discussion. If MJK is NOT the last one, then your theory may fall apart.
claypole47 1 year ago
@claypole47 It does rather wind me up when blind statements such as 'lots of inaccuracies' whilst failing to say what those inaccuracies where.
When Dorset Street was rebuilt it did not quite follow the same line as today (compare maps). The warehouse today is further back that the street was then.
Elizabeth Stride may not have been a victim.
If more victims are found then the theory falls to pieces. But I don't think that that is likely near 122 years later.
alanheath 1 year ago
Sorry, being slightly petty but the murder sight is slightly up the road from where you suggest-round about where the open shutter is. I'm aware that the path of Dorset Street has changed, I've been there many times. Inaccuracies, or perhaps points of debate:
-Martha Tabram wasn't mutilated, she was a multiple stab victim.
-She may have been a real victim, which lessens the argument.
-You keep stating 5 victims. Might have been 4,5,6 or 9 or more.
claypole47 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
-If MJK is not the last then the argument falls apart.
-There is a calculation that the MJK injuries could have been inflicted in a lot less time than you suggest.
-There is a suggestion that the key had been missing for a while beforehand.
-Young and indoors suggests nothing for a potentially opportunistic killer - he met her and she invited him in. She is the only one with a fixed abode.
-There is some evidence that it is her friendship witht the other prostitute that causes friction with JB.
claypole47 1 year ago
Comment removed
claypole47 1 year ago
@claypole47 No problem with being slightly petty - dont worry about it.
The point of putting up comments is to allow debate and ideas. Please also remember that I am speaking off the top of my head. My friend GuildfordGhost whom you can find on you tube knows far more than I do!
Martha Tabram was a stab victim yes.
I think Goulston Street is irrelevant - coincidence. Druitt is only a suspect because he died in December 1888 - other than that nothing.
Missing key is highly relevant I think!
alanheath 1 year ago
@alanheath Thanks for that. I agree about Druitt certainly. Interesting your view on Goulston Street. If it was nothing to do with the case it's got lots of people barking up a potentially wrong tree! Could you explain again your view that the missing key is significant please? I do find JB appealing as Jack, but I wonder if he could have actually done it, and there is also the problem of some of the post-MJK victims, particularly MacKenzie.
claypole47 1 year ago
@claypole47 I think there was probably quite a lot of anti Semitic writing - as you would unfortunately get today against other minorities. Around one third of the population were Jewish - mainly Yiddish speaking.
The killer closed the door. Either he had the key or he knew how to close the door. I accept this is not sufficient to condemn Barnett but he knew - although someone could have seen or Mary may have explained it.
Someone wrote earlier that the lock could be used without the key.
alanheath 1 year ago
@alanheath I don't think the police at the time thought any more of the victims were from the Ripper.
Obviously I don't know and I don't know anything about pathology, so my view is not worth all that much!
Another contributor here points out that JB was arrested first over MJK and the police were happy then that he was innocent, so there is no reason for him to be suspected today. I don't share this argument.
alanheath 1 year ago
Comment removed
claypole47 1 year ago
-ES may not have been a victim, but some suggest the MJK wasn't either.
-For the killings to stop JtR does not have to have died. He may have been away. There are similar cases in other areas/countries that fill the gap, assuming that MJK is not the last.
In JB favour, he fits the profiles but it all depends. Do you include the Goulston Street graffitti? If MJK is the last, then why not Druitt? Questions questions...
claypole47 1 year ago
stupid question, but were any of the killings committed near Royal london hospital?
his299 1 year ago
@his299 That is not a stupid question!! The hospital is very close - the same one in the film about the Elephant Man!
alanheath 1 year ago
What about James Kelly? Kelly escaped from Broadmoor asylum prior to the murders where he had been incarcerated for cutting his wife's throat in 1883. He was clearly a psychotic man with a sufficient hatred of women and wouldn't have been easily recognizable though he would have had knowledge of the area.
Number7smokesForEver 2 years ago 2
For the reason you state that he had no knowledge of the area plus there is no evidence he was ever in London in 1888 - indeed he was possibly in France at the time!
alanheath 2 years ago
I take that back - he lived near Spitalfields so he would have had some local knowledge.
I dont believe it was him though!
alanheath 2 years ago
@alanheath
Probably right. Kelly just seems to match the profile but he is just one of many. We'll probably never know for certain.
Number7smokesForEver 2 years ago
do you think barnet would have killed the others?
the attacks where suly aimed at cutting away the womans vergina suggested I thought that he was attacking what made them women suggesting he might have been afrid of women.
but still very good suggestion. it must have taken lots of reserch
conrad4ever 2 years ago 5
I think he possibly killed the other four - maybe not Elizabeth Stride.
He fits a psychological profile done by the FBI in 1988 - 100 years too late!
alanheath 2 years ago 2
This film was made on 26 July 2007. I have today learned of the works of Dr. Frederick Walker which can be found on the internet on the Jack the Ripper Casebook site. Whereas I do not agree with everything he writes, the general message as to who the killer could have been is exactly the same!
alanheath 2 years ago 2
Just because the owner of the diary finally proclaimed the dairy a hoax doesnt mean it actually was..his marriage counldnt stand the pressure and nor could he ..maybrick was probably a distant relative of his..
And there are still experts who believe the diary..however people dont want to end the mystery.
TheSleathable 2 years ago
I have just read an interesting theory that the Maybrick diary is a hoax - written by Jack the Ripper.
The suspect I name here wrote the diary after 1908 trying to incriminate Maybrick.
It is a very fanciful and far fetched idea but entertaining.
alanheath 2 years ago
it was James Maybrick.
TheSleathable 2 years ago
No it was not, but there is an excellent film on the hoax diaries here on you tube.
alanheath 2 years ago
kosminsky is the killer
harmonyliberty 2 years ago
Impossible.
alanheath 2 years ago
fourty three is very old? really...
aeronuk1 2 years ago
If you are living that life as they did in those days it certainly was not young.
alanheath 2 years ago
i wanted to vist that ,, thanks to you i cant anyway you ruin it lol,, jack the ripper off my list
mothr7 2 years ago 3
i would subscribe to chapman or tumblety. chapman fits the description almost exactly on appearance. And tumblety looks younger than he actually is. Also i believe him to be the batty st. lodger. Tumblety was also not a homo since he was once married to a prostitute,maybe bi? both are foreigners which also fits.
danny101682 2 years ago 4
Tumblety is certainly a strong possibility, to my way of thinking. He was an abortionist, and it's said that Mary Kelly was pregnant at the time of her murder. If she were having the pregnancy terminated, it would certainly explain the clothing folded neatly in the chair beside her bed. The only problem I have with him is that he was about 6'1. Much too tall to be the man seen with the others before they were killed.
doug1119 2 years ago 4
Tumblety is the strongest suspect. He killed in America before he came to england and had attempted to obtain wombs before the killings to add to his large collection of preserved female genitalia. He fled to New York then the killings stopped. Littlejohn and his department thought it was tumblety, I think that's why they stopped their patrol after he left. There were also copycat killings in new york after tumblety became lost in the crowd. Drunk eyewitnesses at night are spotty at best.
djlDP 2 years ago
seems like alot to go through just to keep one girl.also the key was missing up to a week before she died,could have lost it anywhere.
danny101682 2 years ago 3
It is a lot - but it has to be seen form his psychological point of view.
Of course it is just an idea and not proven fact!
alanheath 2 years ago
Thanks for posting this. I don't know that I'd say Barnett did it, but he's definitely in my top five. I also think that William H. Bury is a very likely suspect. And as to why Kosminski was considered in the first place, I think it was simply because he was a) a paranoid schizophrenic and b) a Polish Jew. Given the strong anti-Semitic sentiments of the time, he was an easy answer for the residents of the east end to swallow.
doug1119 2 years ago 2
Some beleive their was a connection between the 5 murders and some torso murder that happened soon afterward, also I beleive there was a campden murder with a prostitute that was kiiled similarly maybe 5 years later. Copycat or the same?
djlDP 2 years ago
There were a lot of similar murders. There are those that have claimed as many as 11 victims of JTR. I think that it is either four or five!
alanheath 2 years ago
The horrible thing was how much enjoyment the killer must have had. The first newspaper to sell 1 million copies was because of it. I beleive the chief of police was fired or resigned from public outcry. That must have given the ripper unending pleasure. Not to mention how deep the story was sensationalized, with the royal conspiracy, the amount of suspects.
djlDP 2 years ago
I think the royal conspiracy theory came later and is largely confined to literature! Mind you I also accept that my theory relies on a bit of hindsight and that the killer would realise how to get publicity which is perhaps presuming too much!
alanheath 2 years ago
the only problem with Kosminski is that he was homeless and insane when the murders were taking place. The killer had to have a basic sophistication and charm, and an escape route. He was unassuming enough to be under the radar of the cops and women. they knew there was a madman in the area but the killer still established enough trust with the women. I like Barnett, but I don't buy that the killer just stopped or lost interest in killing. Great post Alanhealth.
djlDP 2 years ago 2
Thank you for your valid comments. On Kosminski I agree absolutely, I cant figure how anyone can suggest he could be the killer.
alanheath 2 years ago
Kudos Alan, I would love to see this area myself but will never be able to. However I disagree with your conclusions. The man who I believe did it was Kosminski. For one he fit the profile to a T. 2. He was committed and the murders stopped, 3. The cops stopped their aid patrols very shortly after he was incarcerated. I believe that they did in fact know who the killer was and that the killer was Kosminski. Whoever is right tho, very very well done and thank you.
jardail 2 years ago
I dont agree with you but thank you very much for your comments. The third point is very valid of course - why did they stop their patrols so quickly?
alanheath 2 years ago
The only reason that I can think of, is that they already knew who the person was and they also knew he was in no position to cause further harm. Otherwise I can't imagine why they would stop the patrols.
jardail 2 years ago
good point. this is the only reason I can't rule out a deeper conspiracy, maybe not the prince, but possibly someone/people masonic with a purpose tied to hierarchy or law. "the juwes" reference might have been a giveaway, and why was it removed? For fear of retaliation? I doubt it, they were living in hell anyway. Maybe the investigators gave up too quickly, were "hoping" that it was over and got lucky.
djlDP 2 years ago
I can see why the Juwes reference was deleted, given the ethnic make up of the area at the time and the desire not to see revenge killings. I completely dismiss the masonic connections as the killer clearly knew the area very well - a royal or mason would not. (Or have I misunderstood who joins the masons?)
alanheath 2 years ago
no, you're right. masons are usually higher ranking members of the business world. I know the killer could have misspelled, but the Juwes also has the masonic reference. the head investigator who was so insistent about removing the writing was a known high ranking member of the freemasons. Even if the killer didn't know the area, if it was premeditated with a getaway there is a chance. this would probably only be relevant if you beleive in some prostitute blackmail theory.
djlDP 2 years ago 2
Frances Tumblety was too old, he did not fit the physical description given by witnesses, absolutely no evidence ties him to any of the murders, and most importantly, he was a homosexual. Serial killers almost always murder the sex they are sexually attracted to, and the Whitechapel murders were clearly sexual in nature. Aaron Kosminski, on the other hand....
p9byrd 2 years ago
tumblety looks much younger than he actually was. his actual pic can attest to that. and he was not a homo. he was once married to a prostitute so he isnt gay. maybe bi.
danny101682 2 years ago 4
i beleave it was francis tumblety or kosminski
dooko1 2 years ago
Have you read From Hell?
Muskadash 2 years ago
I have not no. I saw a film with Johnny Depp which had a similar name - not impressed at all!
alanheath 2 years ago
Whoever made this video needs to re-examine the facts of the case. The door to Mary Kelly's room was a spring lock, and the killer did not need a key. And the police cleared Joseph Barnett almost immediately after interviewing him, which suggests he had a solid alibi the night of the murder. Barnett was not the killer.
p9byrd 2 years ago
Are you sure it was a spring lock? What is your source?
Of course the killer may have just pushed the lock open from outside, he may have seen the occupants do this or may have been a client of Mary Kelly.
Joseph Barnett was the first person to be arrested for the Kelly murder and he was released. His alibi does not sound too convincing.
alanheath 2 years ago
Of course Joseph Barnett was arrested by police after Mary Kelly's murder. Even 100 years ago, law enforcement officials knew then--like we know now--that statistically, family members and lovers are always the #1 culprits in homicides...unless they can be ruled out after examining the facts of the investigation, in which Mr. Barnett was ruled out almost immediately after his interrogation. The spring-latch was in Det. Thomas Arnold's report on the scene, and was later reported in the media.
p9byrd 2 years ago
well done good documentry it is amazing though how many suspects there are and you can make anyone of them fit in thats what makes the whole thing so interesting but think about what those women went through and how evil you have to be to murder
reaperfreaker 2 years ago
well done alan..a very interesting and thought provoking film..im still convinced it was maybrick..if it was barnet..why did he stop killing after kelly..? he must of been a real sick man to do what he did..he would of kept on killing..
dibbleman 2 years ago 2
Thanks for the doc Alan, I commented on part 1 as well. I previously worked as a criminal analyst here in the states, what you stated about Barnett I just read in the Ripper Companion. The ripper did what he wanted to do, london suffered, no one would have come forward in those days, just like now
MrBigoutlaw 2 years ago 3
Thanks a lot - I am happy to hear you liked it. I have not read the Ripper Companion. Of course there are holes in this theory too but this is the best one I know of that actually names someone. It is also the most logical.
Another viewer suggested that Barnett's brother may have been involved also in shielding him - an interesting and logical hypothesis.
alanheath 2 years ago
Brilliant and cool documentry Alan, THANKS A LOT. I´m a big fan of London, so this kind of docus is worth gold for me. Jack the Ripper, the Kray twins and 10 Rillington Place e.t.c are all good stories.
TheSra69 2 years ago 4
Thanks for your nice comment! I see you have been watching some films (is there one on the Kray twins or am I mistaken?)
alanheath 2 years ago
Indeed some of the buildings in this film are pre Georgian and even to the seventeenth century.
I also hope it can be preserved!!
alanheath 2 years ago
And the description fits Joseph Barnett (age and height) and he used to be a fishporter also nicknamed as rippers.
zeeannemoon61 2 years ago 4
Although the word 'Ripper' was actually penned by the press who very probably sent the hoax letter thus giving the name!
alanheath 2 years ago
okay if this was jack the ripper then why did the murders stop what happand to this man to make him stop and if he is jtr this man was relly skewd in the head
trixie29788 2 years ago
I think I have explained that in the film.
alanheath 2 years ago
then i must have miss it some how u say he died in the 1920s but where was he after the muders stop had he been locked up thats the part i missed i dont remerber u saying why he stoped killing and u say he killed all these women because of one women thats a littla heard to belive
trixie29788 2 years ago
Why should he have continued killing if my theory is correct?
alanheath 2 years ago
cus i belive that jtr was a serial killer thay dont stop killing until thay are made to stop
trixie29788 2 years ago
If I am correct - and this is only a theory - then he was made to stop because he had no reason to go on killing.
alanheath 2 years ago
i dont belive was killing these women becous of one women i think jtr was a sick psychopath what proof do you have to back ur story up
trixie29788 2 years ago
Listen to the video for the suggestions I am making.
alanheath 2 years ago
if only Sherlock Holmes was real...
Tylmarande14 2 years ago 3
Yes, it was the right time historically speaking....!!
alanheath 2 years ago
thanks for sharing this film with us, i belive it was a member of royalty who was the ripper,
rosenewton57 2 years ago
Oh no, that certainly was not the case!
alanheath 2 years ago
Another passing interest in JTR...
in my opinion it's all about Kosminski!
The killings stopped as he was detained in an institution! I will always sway towards this psychotic loner. I can see no reason as to why the cerial killer would simply stop murdering...unless of course he'd reached his peak with the extreme mutilation of Mary Jane Kelly!
So many unanswered questions!...i love it!
rathers90 2 years ago 3
It sounds OK but he was too much of a wierdo to be able to approach women. JTR was clearly someone who could put the women at ease. Kosminski was not. That is not to say it was not someone else who was put in an institution!
alanheath 2 years ago
I don't think so he would necessarily have to put them at ease, alan. These women were quite desperate and the fact that they continued to walk the streets after the first murders attests to that. The murders could simply have been his outlet for letting out his rage at being an outcast. I agree that it was most likely Kosminski.
TheSkunker 2 years ago
I accept that the women were pretty desperate and no doubt alcohol had largely degenerated their minds. However Kosminski is just too extreme. Furthermore he was well known. He clearly would not have had the money to pay them the couple of pennies that such services cost. Not only that he stood out in a crowd and witnesses would have seen him. It had to be a local, that knew his way round the streets and yet could remain cool.
However, thanks for your comment!!
alanheath 2 years ago
But how does the scribbled phrase that was found at the Eddowes crime scene play into your theory?
TheSkunker 2 years ago
It is irrelevant. Some racist wrote in their earlier. There is no evidence that it had anything to do with the murderer - on the contrary he was in a hurry to get away and did not have time for any grafitti.
It was not at the murder scene but was where he discarded a piece of her clothing.
alanheath 2 years ago
Fair enough. I just find it a little too hard to believe that he coincidentally dropped a bloody piece of clothing from a victim right underneath such an obviously (in my opinion) malicious statement. I see it more of a declaration of vengeance for being persecuted instead of something anti-semitic.
TheSkunker 2 years ago
There is no way if they had of caught him they would of institutionalised him, he would of hanged. I'm surprised they didn't just hang someone they didn't like after the murders stopped as said yeah it was him. I'd say the most likely suspect would of been involved in the case and able to send his colleagues on a wild goose chase, and could act with utmost confidence because of his position. Right in front of everyone's eyes the whole time, possibly handsome and a gentlemen.
HalfEatenDimSim 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
what is very interesting is that historically in england and london specifically the name joe is often exchanged with jack in the same way as robert with bob. And the literal meaning of ripper from french and latin roots means to gut and fillet fish! joe the fishporter is jack the ripper! he named himself very well!
bunterx 2 years ago
That is a nice theory but the name Jack the Ripper was probably coined by a journalist (who wrote the probably faked letter thus signed..)
But it is an interesting thought..... keep it up!!
alanheath 2 years ago
I have to go back and read some things.. but wasn't the attack on Stride made some time before her murder? I seem to remember that she had been seen with several different types of men that night.. buying grapes and what not.
The psychological portrait of the Ripper is one of a man who HATED women and therefore ripped out what made them female. Would such a man be in love then with a woman.. a prostitute, ie. Kelly?
saxm 2 years ago 2
Stride was accosted before her murder but not attacked. (The grapes plus "Lipski" incidents.) Maybe two things you (or I) are confusing. She may not have been a Ripper victim even.
I am not into psychological profiling so I can only repeat what I have read. My understanding is that the FBI profiling around 1990 pointed to Barnett - of course a guess 100 years after the event. I think his obsession with Kelly caused him to kill. But of course it is just a guess... I don't know.
alanheath 2 years ago
I've never read a profile that pointed to Barnett. I have heard of the man suspect being Druitt.. before the memoirs naming Kosminski came out. Supposedly, Lawende identified Kosminski as the man he saw at the entrance to Mitre Square wih Eddowes. But he did not wish to formerly charge him because his indentification would send Kosminski to the gallows. And he did not want that on his concence. Kosminski was kept under lock and key ever after.
saxm 2 years ago 3
The Druitt theory is nonsense so we can forget that.
The man who found Stride (temporarily forgotten his name) thought he saw Kosminski but it is alleged that he did not want to send a fellow Jew to the gallows. Kosminski was locked up and rightfully so. But I do not believe he was the Ripper for the reasons stated earlier.
alanheath 2 years ago
What I've read is the whitness who identified Kosminski was at Mitre Square with Eddowes. It's in his notes as such.
Also, someone dismissed the Koskinski theory as Jewish racism of the day. If this were true, the officials who supposedly conducted the ID of him would have shouted it to the roof tops, named him publically and sat back to enjoy the backlash. But they didn't. They sat on the ID of Kosminski and said naming publicly him would serve no public good.
saxm 2 years ago 2
I can't remember this + I am in Poland now so cannot check it. But I find it hard to believe that Kosminski was at Mitre Square. I am not saying it did not happen.
The next time I am in London I will film Mitre Square and some of the other sites!
alanheath 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
kosminski wasnt witnessed at all at any of the killings. Mcnaughten named kosminski together with druitt as suspects only in his memoirs years later. the witness at mitre square at the time in 1888 said he wouldnt be able to recognise the man again and then 2 years later when there was an id parade - he picked kosminski out immediately! - and his description in 88 was nothing like Kosminski! utter nonsense - a police bluff to say they knew who he was all along to hide their embarressment!
bunterx 2 years ago
Yes, he was. I don't know why you want to disbelieve the officials of the day. There's no reason to have lack of confidence in the people who were there at the time.
saxm 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
there is every reason not to believe them - the top brass of both police forces involved in the killings weren't even on speaking terms - these were arrogant and vain men who were interested in their own status only. bottom line is they FAILED and so lo and behold a few years later those pompous old duffers anderson and mcnaughton started to claim they knew all along to try and enhance their poor professional reputations. And where do they point their fingers? - at the jews!
bunterx 2 years ago
Why do you have such a negative opinion of them? Where's the evidence that they were arrogant and vaint who were interested in their own status?
I don't think they were anti semite at all. And proof of this is right in their naming of Kosminski. They refused to do so publicly. Saying it would do no public good. If they were anti semites.. and wanting to blame the Jews.. and wanting to look like they were competent and solved the case, they'd have yelled Kosminski's name from the rooftop.
saxm 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
they couldnt because they knew he didnt do it! why have you got such a positive opinion of them? wheres your evidence that they were just and fair? there are numerous accounts of corruption in the police esp in the top ranks during that period. many ended their careers in disgrace.
bunterx 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the schwartz witnessing of stride being attacked was 30 minutes before she was found dead when the ripper was interrrupted by the owner of the jewish club. fbi profiling suggests a killer who knew how to make the victims feel safe and who was most probably in a "normal' relationship. there have been other cases of serial killers who have killed other women as a result of the stormy relationship with their own wife - and all had gone on to kill the wife.
bunterx 2 years ago
So much is made of the door to Kelly's room being locked. The window next to the door had been broken. I've read one could reach through the broken window and bolt and unbolt the door. Therefore, no key was required to lock or unlock the door. No smoking gun.
saxm 2 years ago
Maybe you are right. But in an area like Dorset Street you would not want everyone knowing how to get into your room.. My feeling is that few people would have known about it. It is also possible that the killer found the key - assuming it was not Mr Barnett of course.
alanheath 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
very few people locked their doors - there was nothing to steal anyway in such a desperately poor area. And as you say if the killer found the key he must of been someone who knew who lived at 13 millers court or even knew its inhabitant - the coincidence otherwise would be startling. the whole ripper cases hinges on kellys murder - he knew where how to get in. One of her previous clients in the week before her murder could have found it but barnett said the key was lost when he was there!
bunterx 2 years ago
It is of course possible that a previous client saw how to open the door and then returned.
alanheath 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The door was LOCKED when the body was found - someone could easily have reached through the window to release the door but only someone with the key - and that was missing - could have locked it behind them. Barnett at the inquest said that the key was lost and he and kelly used to reach through. It was only 7 days before that the window was broken and in a violent row between kelly & barnett! some researchers say in that case the ripper could only be either barnett or mcarthy the landlord!
bunterx 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
so what im saying is folks that mary kellys killer was in possession of the key! this shines the light of suspicion firmly on joseph barnet. the door was locked after the murder! barnet is the only man to be in possession of a key if we discount mcarthy! and all evidence of the modus operandi of JTR concludes that the killer of kelly was the same as the other 4 and possibly tabram. joseph barnett is the most likely candidate for the ripper. joe the ripper.
bunterx 2 years ago
Thank you very much for your extremely well informed comment - even if you do agree with me!!! One earlier correspondent wrote that he believed Mr Barnett could have been 'working' with his brother which would explain some of the weaknesses of 'our' theory.
alanheath 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
yes that was me!
bunterx 2 years ago
No.. If you can shoot the bolt by reaching through the window, you can lock and unlock it. No key was needed. No smoking gun.
saxm 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
you dont understand - it was the actual lock that was locked - not the bolt. the door could be bolted and unbolted from reaching through but the lock mechanism is separate to that and was LOCKED after the murder. Remember the police had to break the door down to gain entrance? they could unhook the bolt but not open the actual lock.
bunterx 2 years ago
I agree with bunterx in almost everything he states. I would like to add that the enjoyment Jack probably gathered from the terror he created must of doubled when woman could no longer sleep safely in their beds, ie, the indoor Kelly murder. Before that murder I'm sure woman thought they were safe indoors.
footballgeorgiebest 2 years ago
Every time I look into this case---Joey always seems to fit the most. There's a word count to what I can write here, but, damn.....
Why aren't people looking into him more? For some reason their preocupied by Sickert (who is a very interesting fellow without being Jack) Maybrick, or Aaron K.
Joe also had a huge hatred for Prostitutes *blamed them for Marry's downfall*, and his pipe was found near the body. o_O
Zoisitetta 2 years ago 2
It may not have been Mary Kelly... that is why the body was so cut up. to Hide that it was not her.
richieb3374 3 years ago
Was that in a film or a novel?
alanheath 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the most important factor in the jack the ripper case is that it was the first time a killer could see and experience the effect of his crimes via the media. this was new and has proved to be a key factor in most subsequent serial killers. barnet used to read kelly the newspaper reports of the murders! part of the thrill is the uproar the crimes cause.
bunterx 3 years ago
Obviously you largely agree with me on this one but you have added the additional rather convincing detail of the support of his brother (and for the first time I have seen a good argument for two people being involved).
alanheath 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Ive always felt that because of the logistics of the murders that jack was being helped. The knight theory of 2 or 3 men working together has always rung true but the royal/freemason aspect is nonsense. I agree the kelly murder is the key- the fact that she was murdered in her own home suggests that it was targeted and not opportunist. it was the culmination of the previous 4 killings. After kelly his mission was complete - he could no longer frighten her so therefore the killings stopped.
bunterx 3 years ago
The fact Kelly was murdered in her room is due to the fact she was the only one of the victims who had one. There's no indication there that she was a target any more then any of the others.
saxm 2 years ago
Where did you read that Barnet read to Kelly from the news papers?
saxm 2 years ago
His testimony.
alanheath 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
thats in his statement at he inquest of the kelly murder
bunterx 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
barnett used the murders and the acssociated media hysteria to frighten kelly into rejecting prostitution. on the night of her murder she was still taking clients back to her room. thats why barnett had had enough and decided to kill her too. various witnesses report seeing a man watching the entrance to millers court. i believe that to be barnet's look out - his brother.
bunterx 3 years ago
Good ideas - off the top of my head I seem to remember (maybe incorrectly) that his brother's whereabouts were known that night.
alanheath 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
it might be an idea to cross reference all of the sightings of barnett with his brother. what intrigues me is that a pair of men seems to be a common factor across the murders and that barnett himself crops up in relation to all of the events time and time again.
bunterx 3 years ago
All speculation. Barnett was interrogated and all his clothes searched by the officials of the day. He was found by them to be innocent.
We need to trust a little more in the people who were alive and there at the time then armchair theorists looking back with absolutely zero evidence beyond speculation.
saxm 2 years ago
Yes, you are right it is all speculation. He was the first to be arrested after the Mary Kelly killing and released.
alanheath 2 years ago
Don't get me wrong, I don't know who the Ripper was nor pretend to. But I put more credence into the official opinions of the day. Barnett may have been the Ripper. But the officials looked him over and found nothing. Kosminski however, was suspected and fits the FBI profile. He also lived at the center of the killings. He may or may not have been the Ripper, no one can know now. But the majority of the hard evidence points to him.
saxm 2 years ago 2
First I am glad you are writing and anyone with anything intelligent to say is welcome. You do not have to agree with me and may change my mind.
Kosminski is unacceptable because he would not have been able to approach the victims. He was a well know dangerous nut case. The Ripper clearly could convince his victims he was respectable.
The FBI profiling of Kosminski dates from the mid 1990s - later than that of Barnett. Kosminski was suspect but was not arrested.
alanheath 2 years ago
Well, thank you for taking these films. It's fascinating to me to see these places.
As I understand it, it was a man named John Pizer who was the known lunatic.. aka Leather Apron, who would wave a knife at women and yell, "I'll rip you up!"
Kosminski was an anonymous man living with this sister and her husband in the respectable district of Sion Square. He would have had access to his brother-in-law's clothing, etc.
saxm 2 years ago 3
I think Leather Apron was a hard working man, wrongfully accused in the climate of the time. He had a cast iron alibi.
alanheath 2 years ago
Yes, absolutely. But he was a nut.. LOL
saxm 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
but kosminski DOESNT fit the fbi profiling or any of the witness statements - in 1888 he was 22 years old dark, jewish looking. the profile states the JTR is 30 5ft 7" and a white male! Are you trying to shoehorn kosminski into every piece of evidence circumstantial or otherwise connected to the killings? the officials of the day were useless. the police top brass couldn't even communicate with each other because of petty personal vanity and abberline & swanson missed vital clues.
bunterx 2 years ago
Jews are white. Certainly not Black or Asian. Did you see the television show where FBI agents John Hazelwood and another guy named Douglas, listed the profile and both claimed Kosminski as the suspect? You don't know Kosminsky was, "Dark, jewish looking." That is trying to stereotype him. And his age did fit the profile.
saxm 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
rubbish! the witness at mitre square saw a non jew - a gentile. the tension between the jewish immigrants and the irish cockneys was very serious. Everyone back then knew who a 'yid' was - hence the epithet "lipski" which was used as an insult. dont forget that witnesses heard him speak on more than one occasion - kosminski apparantly couldnt speak a word of english. you are barking completely up the wrong tree.
bunterx 2 years ago
Why do you clain he saw a non Jew?
The woman who saw Annie Chapman with the ripper at the entrance to Hanbury St, said he looked like a foreigner. A Euphemism at the time for a Jew.
saxm 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
thats nonsense! the witness at the chapman killing only saw the mans back and didnt see his face! Please get your facts right. The witness did HEAR him speak " will you?" and that was in clear english! this has been the problem with this case for years - people add their own interpretation to the witness accounts.
bunterx 2 years ago