Myths tested against the record

1. Prince Albert Victor was the Ripper

   Verdict: Contradicted by the record

   ● Well supported Retrieved MYTH TESTED: Prince Albert Victor was the Ripper. Origin: first in print in 1962, then developed by Stowell (1970) and Knight (1976). Record: according to the Court Circular, family journals, letters and newspapers, as summarised by Wikipedia, he "could not have been near any of the murders"; on 30 September 1888 he was at Balmoral. Stowell himself wrote to The Times (published 9 November 1970) that he had never associated the Duke of Clarence with the murderer. Status of the myth: contradicted.

   Not settled here: The Court Circular itself was not retrieved; the alibi is as summarised by Wikipedia.

   Supports the claim (3)

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   Rumours that Albert Victor may have committed, or been responsible for, the Jack the Ripper murders were first mentioned in print in 1962. It was later alleged, among others by Stephen Knight in Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution, that Albert Victor had fathered a child with a woman in Whitechapel and that he, or several high-ranking men, committed the murders to conceal the indiscretion. Although such claims have been frequently repeated, scholars have dismissed them as fantasies and point to indisputable evidence of Albert Victor's innocence. For example, on 30 September 1888, when Elizabeth Stride and Catherine Eddowes were murdered in London, Albert Victor was at Balmoral in Scotland. According to the official Court Circular, family journals and letters, newspaper reports, and other sources, he could not have been near any of the murders.

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   However, Stowell denied in the first place he was implicating the Duke of Clarence, for on 5 November 1970 Stowell wrote to The Times newspaper, "I have at no time associated His Royal Highness, the late Duke of Clarence, with the Whitechapel murderer." The letter was published on 9 November, the day after Stowell's own death on 8 November.

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   Subsequently, conspiracy theorists, such as Stephen Knight in Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution, have elaborated on the supposed involvement of Prince Albert Victor in the murders. Rather than implicate Albert Victor directly, they claim that he secretly married and had a daughter with a Catholic shop assistant, and that Queen Victoria, British Prime Minister Lord Salisbury, his Freemason friends, and the Metropolitan Police conspired to murder anyone aware of Albert Victor's supposed child. Many facts contradict this theory and its originator, Joseph Gorman (also known as Joseph Sickert), later retracted the story and admitted to the press that it was a hoax.

2. A royal/Masonic conspiracy, with Sir William Gull as the killer

   Verdict: No supporting evidence

   ● Well supported Retrieved MYTH TESTED: the royal/Masonic conspiracy with Gull as killer (Knight, The Final Solution, 1976). Origin: Joseph Gorman ('Joseph Sickert'), who "later retracted the story and admitted to the press that it was a hoax". Record: Gull "was 71 years old and in ill health". Historians do not accept the theory. An earlier, separate 'prominent London physician' story appeared in US newspapers in 1895-97. Status of the myth: no supporting evidence; its source retracted it.

   Supports the claim (3)

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   Subsequently, conspiracy theorists, such as Stephen Knight in Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution, have elaborated on the supposed involvement of Prince Albert Victor in the murders. Rather than implicate Albert Victor directly, they claim that he secretly married and had a daughter with a Catholic shop assistant, and that Queen Victoria, British Prime Minister Lord Salisbury, his Freemason friends, and the Metropolitan Police conspired to murder anyone aware of Albert Victor's supposed child. Many facts contradict this theory and its originator, Joseph Gorman (also known as Joseph Sickert), later retracted the story and admitted to the press that it was a hoax.

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   A masonic/royal conspiracy theory created in the 1970s alleged that Gull knew the identity of Jack the Ripper, or even that he was the murderer. Scholars have dismissed the idea, since Gull was 71 years old and in ill health when the murders were committed.

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   His book Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution (1976) suggested that the Ripper murders were part of a conspiracy between Freemasons and the British royal family, a claim which is not accepted by historians.

   Qualifies the claim (1)

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   The earliest known allegation that links the Whitechapel murders with a prominent London physician (not necessarily Gull) was in two articles published by a number of US newspapers between 1895 and 1897.

3. Walter Sickert was the Ripper

   Verdict: Evidence weak

   ○ Weakly supported Retrieved MYTH TESTED: Walter Sickert was the Ripper (Patricia Cornwell, Portrait of a Killer, 2002). Record: there was "no mention" of Sickert as a suspect for over 80 years. Evidence places him "probably in France on the nights of four of the five" murders. The letters Cornwell relies on are mostly thought hoaxes, so even if Sickert wrote one, "that does not prove that he was the Ripper". The mtDNA result did not exclude a large share of the population. Status of the myth: unsupported, and contradicted for most dates.

   Not settled here: The alibi is 'probably in France' for four of the five murders; the mtDNA result does not exclude him but excludes very few people.

   Supports the claim (4)

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   Critics point out that most, if not all, of the Ripper letters are considered hoaxes by other authorities and that if they really are hoaxes, then Sickert may have been one of the hoaxers. Thus, even if he did write one or more of these letters, that does not prove that he was the Ripper. [...] In fact, evidence shows that he was probably in France on the nights of four of the five Ripper murders.

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   Although for over 80 years there was no mention of Sickert's being a suspect in the Ripper crimes, some authors have explored the idea that Sickert was Jack the Ripper or his accomplice. Sickert is not considered a serious suspect by most who study the case, and strong evidence shows he spent most of 1888 outside the UK and was in France at the time of most of the Ripper murders.

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   On September 6th, Sickert's mother wrote from St. Valéry-en-Caux, describing how Walter and his brother Bernhard were having such a "happy time" swimming and painting there. [...] A letter sent by a French painter, Jacques-Emile Blanche, to his father described a visit with Sickert on September 16th. [...] Walter's wife Ellen wrote to her brother-in-law on September 21st, stating that her husband was in France for some weeks now.

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   (Other DNA experts, when asked to comment on this analysis, state that the actual percentage could range anywhere between 10% and 0.1% of the contemporary population)

4. The Maybrick diary and watch

   Verdict: Disputed

   ◐ Disputed Retrieved MYTH TESTED: the Maybrick diary and watch (1992-93) show James Maybrick was the Ripper. Record: Michael Barrett swore in January 1995 that he wrote the diary, then the affidavit was repudiated and the repudiation withdrawn. Ink tests gave "contradictory findings". Rendell judged the handwriting 20th-century. The watch engravings were judged by Dr Wild likely "at least several tens of years" old, which does not date them to 1888. Nothing independent of the two objects links Maybrick to the murders. Status: authenticity disputed; Ripper identification unsupported.

   Not settled here: Ink tests contradict each other; the record is disputed rather than settled.

   Supports the claim (3)

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   In 1992, Maybrick was accused of being the notorious serial killer Jack the Ripper, based on the discovery of a diary which contained an account allegedly written by Maybrick himself. Critics countered that the diary and confession were a hoax, but forensic tests were inconclusive. Michael Barrett, who claimed discovery of the diary, signed a sworn statement saying the diary was a forgery, but the Ripper hypothesis retains defenders.

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   In January 1995, Michael Barrett swore in two separate affidavits that he was "the author of the Manuscript written by my wife Anne Barrett at my dictation which is known as The Jack the Ripper Diary." Adding to the confusion, however, was Barrett's solicitor's subsequent repudiation of his affidavit, then Barrett's withdrawal of the repudiation.

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   Tests carried out on the ink used in the diary produced contradictory findings.

   Qualifies the claim (1)

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   In 1994, the watch was taken to the Interface Analysis Centre at Bristol University and studied by Dr Robert Wild using an electron microscope and Auger electron spectroscopy. Dr Wild found that: [...] "Provided the watch has remained in a normal environment, it would seem likely that the engravings were at least several tens of years age...in my opinion it is unlikely that anyone would have sufficient expertise to implant aged, brass particles into the base of the engravings".

5. Francis Tumblety, the 'American quack'

   Verdict: Disputed

   ◐ Disputed Retrieved MYTH TESTED: Tumblety, the 'American quack', was the Ripper. Origin: Littlechild's 1913 letter, revived by Evans and Gainey (1996). Record: he was arrested on 7 November 1888 for gross indecency. His arrest record has him bailed on 16 November, which would place him in custody when Kelly was killed on 9 November (Barratt argues he may have been released earlier). His age, height of 5ft 10in or more and large moustache match no witness description. Status: unproven; possibly excluded for Kelly.

   Not settled here: Whether he was in custody on the night of the Kelly murder is argued both ways.

   Supports the claim (2)

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   He was an American quack named Tumblety and was at one time a frequent visitor to London and on these occasions constantly brought under the notice of police, there being a large dossier concerning him at Scotland Yard. Although a 'Sycopathia Sexualis' subject he was not known as a 'Sadist' (which the murderer unquestionably was) but his feelings toward women were remarkable and bitter in the extreme, a fact on record. Tumblety was arrested at the time of the murders in connection with unnatural offences and charged at Marlborough Street, remanded on bail, jumped his bail, and got away to Boulogne.

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   The Metropolitan Police arrested Tumblety on 7 November 1888 on unrelated charges of gross indecency, apparently for having been caught engaging in a homosexual encounter, which was illegal at the time. Two days later on 9 November, Mary Jane Kelly was murdered. Though according to Tumblety's arrest record he was not bailed until 16 November, David Barratt has advanced a case that he might have been released beforehand.

   Qualifies the claim (1)

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   Other Ripperologists have dismissed Tumblety as a plausible Ripper suspect, citing the fact that his appearance and age did not match the description of any of the men that were seen with the murder victims, and that his relatively tall height of at least 5 feet 10 inches (1.78 m) and enormous moustache would have made him particularly conspicuous.

6. The Ripper was a doctor

   Verdict: Disputed

   ◐ Disputed Retrieved MYTH TESTED: 'the Ripper was a doctor'. Origin: the 1888 inquests themselves. Phillips (Chapman) saw "anatomical knowledge" and Brown (Eddowes) "a good deal of knowledge", but Sequeira (Eddowes) said the killer "was not possessed of any great anatomical skill". Officials split later: Abberline (1903) spoke of "an expert surgeon", while Reid denied any surgical skill. Macnaghten's memo wrongly called Druitt "said to be a doctor". Status: disputed; the medical evidence conflicts and does not establish training.

   Not settled here: Medical opinion in 1888 itself was split.

   Supports the claim (3)

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   [Coroner] Was there any anatomical knowledge displayed? - I think there was. There were indications of it. My own impression is that that anatomical knowledge was only less displayed or indicated in consequence of haste. The person evidently was hindered from making a more complete dissection in consequence of the haste.

   [Coroner] Was the whole of the body there? - No; the absent portions being from the abdomen.

   [Coroner] Are those portions such as would require anatomical knowledge to extract? - I think the mode in which they were extracted did show some anatomical knowledge.

   [Coroner] You do not think they could have been lost accidentally in the transit of the body to the mortuary? - I was not present at the transit. I carefully closed up the clothes of the woman. Some portions had been excised.

   Content notice: medical evidence

   This testimony contains clinical descriptions of injuries and post-mortem findings.

   Show medical evidence

   Your choice applies to this kind of material for the rest of this browser session.

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   The fact that he studied medicine and surgery in Russia before he came here is well established, and it is curious to note that the first series of murders was the work of an expert surgeon, while the recent poisoning cases were proved to be done by a man with more than an elementary knowledge of medicine.

   Contradicts the claim (2)

   Content notice: medical evidence

   This testimony contains clinical descriptions of injuries and post-mortem findings.

   Show medical evidence

   Your choice applies to this kind of material for the rest of this browser session.

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   In 1903 he wrote two letters to The Morning Advertiser in which he stated that the Ripper was responsible for nine murders, that of Frances Coles being the last. He further stated that he did not believe that the Ripper was possessed of any surgical skill, holding the view that the wounds to the victims' bodies were merely slashes, inflicted even after the killer knew that the women were dead. He wrongly believed that 'at no time was any part of the body missing', and he also believed there was evidence that the Ripper's knife was blunt.

   Qualifies the claim (1)

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   (1) A Mr M. J. Druitt, said to be a doctor & of good family -- who disappeared at the time of the Miller's Court murder, & whose body (which was said to have been upwards of a month in the water) was found in the Thames on 31st December -- or about 7 weeks after that murder. He was sexually insane and from private information I have little doubt but that his own family believed him to have been the murderer.

7. 'Jill the Ripper', a woman

   Verdict: No supporting evidence

   ○ Weakly supported Inference MYTH TESTED: 'Jill the Ripper', a female killer posing as a midwife. Origin: attributed by Wikipedia to Arthur Conan Doyle; candidates include Mary Pearcey and Constance Kent. Record: every witness who described a person with a victim shortly before death described a man (e.g. Elizabeth Long, PC William Smith, Joseph Lawende, George Hutchinson). No retrieved contemporary police or inquest text suggests a woman. Status: no supporting evidence.

   Not settled here: The Conan Doyle attribution rests on a secondary source only.

   Supports the claim (4)

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   Sir Arthur Conan Doyle advanced theories involving a female murderer dubbed "Jill the Ripper". Supporters of this theory believe that the murderer worked, or at least posed, as a midwife, who could be seen with bloody clothes without attracting suspicion and would be more easily trusted by the victims than a man. Women proposed as the Ripper include the convicted murderers Mary Pearcey and Constance Kent, and even Theosophist Helena Blavatsky.

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   Elizabeth Long, 198, Church-row, Whitechapel, stated that she was the wife of James Long, a park-keeper. On Saturday morning the 8th inst., she was passing down Hanbury-street from home and going to Spitalfields Market. It was about 5:30. She was certain of the time, as the brewers' clock had just struck that time when she passed 29, Hanbury-street. Witness was on the right-hand side of the street - the same side as No. 29. She saw a man and woman on the pavement talking. The man's back was turned towards Brick-lane, while the woman's was towards the Spitalfields Market. They were talking together, and were close against the shutters of No. 29. Witness saw the woman's face. She had since seen the deceased in the mortuary, and was sure it was the face of the same person she saw in Hanbury-street. She did not see the man's face, except to notice that he was dark. He wore a brown deer stalker hat, and she thought he had on a dark coat, but was not quite certain of that. She could not say what the age of the man was, but he looked to be over 40, and appeared to be a little taller than deceased. He appeared to be a foreigner, and had a shabby genteel appearance. Witness could hear them talking loudly, and she overheard him say to deceased, "Will you?" She replied, "Yes." They still stood there as witness passed, and she went on to her work without looking back. By the CORONER. - She saw nothing to indicate they were not sober. It was not an unusual thing to see men and women talking together at that hour in that locality. The Foreman remarked that the time stated by the witness was not consistent with that stated by the doctor. The CORONER observed that Dr. Phillips had since qualified his statement.

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   William Smith, 452 H Division: On Saturday last I went on duty at ten p.m. My beat was past Berner- street, and would take me twenty-five minutes or half an hour to go round. I was in Berner-street about half-past twelve or twenty-five minutes to one o'clock, and having gone round my beat, was at the Commercial-road corner of Berner-street again at one o'clock. I was not called. I saw a crowd outside the gates of No. 40, Berner-street. I heard no cries of "Police." When I came to the spot two constables had already arrived. The gates at the side of the club were not then closed. I do not remember that I passed any person on my way down. I saw that the woman was dead, and I went to the police-station for the ambulance, leaving the other constables in charge of the body. Dr. Blackwell's assistant arrived just as I was going away.

   The Coroner: Had you noticed any man or woman in Berner-street when you were there before? - Yes, talking together.

   [Coroner] Was the woman anything like the deceased? - Yes. I saw her face, and I think the body at the mortuary is that of the same woman.

   [Coroner] Are you certain? - I feel certain. She stood on the pavement a few yards from where the body was found, but on the opposite side of the street.

   [Coroner] Did you look at the man at all? - Yes.

   [Coroner] What did you notice about him? - He had a parcel wrapped in a newspaper in his hand. The parcel was about 18in. long and 6in. to 8in. broad.

   [Coroner] Did you notice his height? - He was about 5ft. 7in.

   [Coroner] His hat? - He wore a dark felt deerstalker's hat.

   [Coroner] Clothes? - His clothes were dark. The coat was a cutaway coat.

   [Coroner] Did you overhear any conversation? - No.

   [Coroner] Did they seem to be sober? - Yes, both.

   [Coroner] Did you see the man's face? - He had no whiskers, but I did not notice him much. I should say he was twenty-eight years of age. He was of respectable appearance, but I could not state what he was. The woman had a flower in her breast. It rained very little after eleven o'clock. There were but few about in the bye streets. When I saw the body at the mortuary I recognised it at once.

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   About 2 am 9th I was coming by Thrawl Street, Commercial Street, and saw just before I got to Flower and Dean Street I saw the murdered woman Kelly. And she said to me Hutchinson will you lend me sixpence. I said I cant I have spent all my money going down to Romford. She said Good morning I must go and find some money. She went away toward Thrawl Street. A man coming in the opposite direction to Kelly tapped her on the shoulder and said something to her. They both burst out laughing. I heard her say alright to him. And the man said you will be alright for what I have told you. He then placed his right hand around her shoulders. He also had a kind of a small parcel in his left hand with a kind of strap round it. I stood against the lamp of the Queen’s Head Public House and watched him. They both then came past me and the man hid down his head with his hat over his eyes. I stooped down and looked him in the face. He looked at me stern. They both went into Dorset Street I followed them. They both stood at the corner of the Court for about 3 minutes. He said something to her. She said alright my dear come along you will be comfortable He then placed his arm on her shoulder and gave her a kiss. She said she had lost her handkercheif he then pulled his handkercheif a red one out and gave it to her. They both then went up the court together. I then went to the Court to see if I could see them, but could not. I stood there for about three quarters of an hour to see if they came out they did not so I went away.

   Description age about 34 or 35. height 5ft6 complexion pale, dark eyes and eye lashes slight moustache, curled up each end, and hair dark, very surley looking dress long dark coat, collar and cuffs trimmed astracan. And a dark jacket under. Light waistcoat dark trousers dark felt hat turned down in the middle. Button boots and gaiters with white buttons. Wore a very thick gold chain white linen collar. Black tie with horse shoe pin. Respectable appearance walked very sharp. Jewish appearance. Can be identified.

   [...]

   [Abberline:] I have interrogated him this evening and I am of opinion his statement is true. He informed me that he had occasionally given the deceased a few shillings, and that he had known her about 3 years. Also that he was surprised to see a man so well dressed in her company which caused him to watch them.

8. Lewis Carroll was the Ripper

   Verdict: No supporting evidence

   ○ Weakly supported Retrieved MYTH TESTED: Lewis Carroll was the Ripper (Richard Wallace, Jack the Ripper, Light-Hearted Friend). Origin: anagrams Wallace made from Carroll's texts, plus a claim that Carroll switched from purple to black ink in his diary on the murder days. Record: "This claim is not taken seriously by scholars". Critics made an anagram from Wallace's own text 'confessing' to another crime. Status: no evidence; the method can prove anything.

   Not settled here: The purple-ink diary claim was not checked.

   Supports the claim (1)

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   He was named as a suspect based upon anagrams which author Richard Wallace devised for his book Jack the Ripper, Light-Hearted Friend. Wallace argues that Carroll had a psychotic breakdown after being assaulted by a man when he was 12. Moreover, according to Wallace, Carroll wrote a diary every day in purple ink, but on the days of the Whitechapel killings, he switched to black. This claim is not taken seriously by scholars.

9. He wore a top hat and cape

   Verdict: Not supported by the sources

   ● Well supported Retrieved MYTH TESTED: the Ripper in top hat and cape. Origin: film costume. Wikipedia says the 1959 film Jack the Ripper gave him "a top hat and cape" borrowed from Hammer horror, and that by the 1960s he was "more often portrayed in a top hat dressed as a gentleman". Record: the 1888 witnesses described a "deer stalker hat" (Long), a "dark felt deerstalker's hat" (PC Smith), and a "dark felt hat" on Hutchinson's well-dressed man. A Kelly-inquest juror's question about a "tall silk hat" shows the idea was already in circulation, but no witness gave one. Status: not supported by the record.

   Supports the claim (5)

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   Jack the Ripper (1959), produced by Monty Berman and Robert S. Baker and written by Jimmy Sangster, is loosely based on Leonard Matters' theory that the Ripper was an avenging doctor. It borrowed icons from previously successful horror films, such as Dracula (1958) and The Curse of Frankenstein (1957), by giving the Ripper a costume of a top hat and cape.

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   In the 1920s and 1930s, he was depicted in film dressed in everyday clothes as a man with a hidden secret, preying on his unsuspecting victims; atmosphere and evil were suggested through lighting effects and shadowplay. By the 1960s, the Ripper had become "the symbol of a predatory aristocracy", and was more often portrayed in a top hat dressed as a gentleman.

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   Elizabeth Long, 198, Church-row, Whitechapel, stated that she was the wife of James Long, a park-keeper. On Saturday morning the 8th inst., she was passing down Hanbury-street from home and going to Spitalfields Market. It was about 5:30. She was certain of the time, as the brewers' clock had just struck that time when she passed 29, Hanbury-street. Witness was on the right-hand side of the street - the same side as No. 29. She saw a man and woman on the pavement talking. The man's back was turned towards Brick-lane, while the woman's was towards the Spitalfields Market. They were talking together, and were close against the shutters of No. 29. Witness saw the woman's face. She had since seen the deceased in the mortuary, and was sure it was the face of the same person she saw in Hanbury-street. She did not see the man's face, except to notice that he was dark. He wore a brown deer stalker hat, and she thought he had on a dark coat, but was not quite certain of that. She could not say what the age of the man was, but he looked to be over 40, and appeared to be a little taller than deceased. He appeared to be a foreigner, and had a shabby genteel appearance. Witness could hear them talking loudly, and she overheard him say to deceased, "Will you?" She replied, "Yes." They still stood there as witness passed, and she went on to her work without looking back. By the CORONER. - She saw nothing to indicate they were not sober. It was not an unusual thing to see men and women talking together at that hour in that locality. The Foreman remarked that the time stated by the witness was not consistent with that stated by the doctor. The CORONER observed that Dr. Phillips had since qualified his statement.

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   William Smith, 452 H Division: On Saturday last I went on duty at ten p.m. My beat was past Berner- street, and would take me twenty-five minutes or half an hour to go round. I was in Berner-street about half-past twelve or twenty-five minutes to one o'clock, and having gone round my beat, was at the Commercial-road corner of Berner-street again at one o'clock. I was not called. I saw a crowd outside the gates of No. 40, Berner-street. I heard no cries of "Police." When I came to the spot two constables had already arrived. The gates at the side of the club were not then closed. I do not remember that I passed any person on my way down. I saw that the woman was dead, and I went to the police-station for the ambulance, leaving the other constables in charge of the body. Dr. Blackwell's assistant arrived just as I was going away.

   The Coroner: Had you noticed any man or woman in Berner-street when you were there before? - Yes, talking together.

   [Coroner] Was the woman anything like the deceased? - Yes. I saw her face, and I think the body at the mortuary is that of the same woman.

   [Coroner] Are you certain? - I feel certain. She stood on the pavement a few yards from where the body was found, but on the opposite side of the street.

   [Coroner] Did you look at the man at all? - Yes.

   [Coroner] What did you notice about him? - He had a parcel wrapped in a newspaper in his hand. The parcel was about 18in. long and 6in. to 8in. broad.

   [Coroner] Did you notice his height? - He was about 5ft. 7in.

   [Coroner] His hat? - He wore a dark felt deerstalker's hat.

   [Coroner] Clothes? - His clothes were dark. The coat was a cutaway coat.

   [Coroner] Did you overhear any conversation? - No.

   [Coroner] Did they seem to be sober? - Yes, both.

   [Coroner] Did you see the man's face? - He had no whiskers, but I did not notice him much. I should say he was twenty-eight years of age. He was of respectable appearance, but I could not state what he was. The woman had a flower in her breast. It rained very little after eleven o'clock. There were but few about in the bye streets. When I saw the body at the mortuary I recognised it at once.

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   About 2 am 9th I was coming by Thrawl Street, Commercial Street, and saw just before I got to Flower and Dean Street I saw the murdered woman Kelly. And she said to me Hutchinson will you lend me sixpence. I said I cant I have spent all my money going down to Romford. She said Good morning I must go and find some money. She went away toward Thrawl Street. A man coming in the opposite direction to Kelly tapped her on the shoulder and said something to her. They both burst out laughing. I heard her say alright to him. And the man said you will be alright for what I have told you. He then placed his right hand around her shoulders. He also had a kind of a small parcel in his left hand with a kind of strap round it. I stood against the lamp of the Queen’s Head Public House and watched him. They both then came past me and the man hid down his head with his hat over his eyes. I stooped down and looked him in the face. He looked at me stern. They both went into Dorset Street I followed them. They both stood at the corner of the Court for about 3 minutes. He said something to her. She said alright my dear come along you will be comfortable He then placed his arm on her shoulder and gave her a kiss. She said she had lost her handkercheif he then pulled his handkercheif a red one out and gave it to her. They both then went up the court together. I then went to the Court to see if I could see them, but could not. I stood there for about three quarters of an hour to see if they came out they did not so I went away.

   Description age about 34 or 35. height 5ft6 complexion pale, dark eyes and eye lashes slight moustache, curled up each end, and hair dark, very surley looking dress long dark coat, collar and cuffs trimmed astracan. And a dark jacket under. Light waistcoat dark trousers dark felt hat turned down in the middle. Button boots and gaiters with white buttons. Wore a very thick gold chain white linen collar. Black tie with horse shoe pin. Respectable appearance walked very sharp. Jewish appearance. Can be identified.

   [...]

   [Abberline:] I have interrogated him this evening and I am of opinion his statement is true. He informed me that he had occasionally given the deceased a few shillings, and that he had known her about 3 years. Also that he was surprised to see a man so well dressed in her company which caused him to watch them.

   Qualifies the claim (1)

   Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

   Historical text, verbatim:

   Caroline Maxewell, 14, Dorset-street, said: My husband is a lodging-house deputy. I knew the deceased for about four months. I believe she was an unfortunate. On two occasions I spoke to her.

   The Coroner: You must be very careful about your evidence, because it is different to other people's. You say you saw her standing at the corner of the entry to the court ? - Yes, on Friday morning, from eight to half-past eight. I fix the time by my husband's finishing work. When I came out of the lodging-house she was opposite.

   [Coroner] Did you speak to her ? - Yes; it was an unusual thing to see her up. She was a young woman who never associated with any one. I spoke across the street, "What, Mary, brings you up so early ?" She said, "Oh, Carrie, I do feel so bad."

   [Coroner] And yet you say you had only spoken to her twice previously; you knew her name and she knew yours ? - Oh, yes; by being about in the lodging-house.

   [Coroner] What did she say ? - She said, "I've had a glass of beer, and I've brought it up again"; and it was in the road. I imagined she had been in the Britannia beer-shop at the corner of the street. I left her, saying that I could pity her feelings. I went to Bishopsgate-street to get my husband's breakfast. Returning I saw her outside the Britannia public-house, talking to a man.

   [Coroner] This would be about what time ? - Between eight and nine o'clock. I was absent about half-an-hour. It was about a quarter to nine.

   [Coroner] What description can you give of this man ? - I could not give you any, as they were at some distance.

   Inspector Abberline: The distance is about sixteen yards.

   Witness: I am sure it was the deceased. I am willing to swear it.

   The Coroner: You are sworn now. Was he a tall man ? - No; he was a little taller than me and stout.

   Inspector Abberline: On consideration I should say the distance was twenty-five yards.

   The Coroner; What clothes had the man ? - Witness: Dark clothes; he seemed to have a plaid coat on. I could not say what sort of hat he had.

   [Coroner] What sort of dress had the deceased ? - A dark skirt, a velvet body, a maroon shawl, and no hat. [Coroner] Have you ever seen her the worse for drink ? - I have seen her in drink, but she was not a notorious character.

   By the Jury: I should have noticed if the man had had a tall silk hat, but we are accustomed to see men of all sorts with women. I should not like to pledge myself to the kind of hat.

10. Fog on the murder nights

    Verdict: Not supported by the sources

    ○ Weakly supported Inference MYTH TESTED: fog on the murder nights. Record: no retrieved 1888 inquest or press text mentions fog on any canonical murder night. The weather the witnesses do mention is rain on the Eddowes night (Lawende: "It was raining") and the Kelly night (Cox: "as it was raining"), and no rain at around midnight before Stride's death (Marshall). The fog image fits fiction, e.g. Hitchcock's The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog (1927). Status: unsupported (absence in a large sample; Met Office records not checked).

    Not settled here: Met Office or newspaper weather tables were not checked; this rests on the absence of 'fog' in the project's passages.

    Supports the claim (3)

    Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

    Historical text, verbatim:

    Joseph Lawende: I reside at No. 45, Norfolk-road, Dalston, and am a commercial traveller. On the night of Sept. 29, I was at the Imperial Club, Duke-street, together with Mr. Joseph Levy and Mr. Harry Harris. It was raining, and we sat in the club till half-past one o'clock, when we left. I observed a man and woman together at the corner of Church-passage, Duke-street, leading to Mitre-square.

    The Coroner: Were they talking? - The woman was standing with her face towards the man, and I only saw her back. She had one hand on his breast. He was the taller. She had on a black jacket and bonnet. I have seen the articles at the police-station, and believe them to be those the deceased was wearing.

    [Coroner] What sort of man was this? - He had on a cloth cap with a peak of the same.

    Mr. Crawford: Unless the jury wish it, I do not think further particulars should be given as to the appearance of this man.

    The Foreman: The jury do not desire it.

    Mr. Crawford (to witness): You have given a description of the man to the police? - Yes.

    [Coroner] Would you know him again? - I doubt it. The man and woman were about nine or ten feet away from me. I have no doubt it was half-past one o'clock when we rose to leave the club, so that it would be twenty-five minutes to two o'clock when we passed the man and woman.

    [Coroner] Did you overhear anything that either said? - No.

    [Coroner] Did either appear in an angry mood? - No.

    [Coroner] Did anything about their movements attract your attention? - No. The man looked rather rough and shabby.

    [Coroner] When the woman placed her hand on the man's breast, did she do it as if to push him away? - No; it was done very quietly.

    [Coroner] You were not curious enough to look back and see where they went. - No.

    Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

    Historical text, verbatim:

    Mary Ann Cox stated: I live at No. 5 Room, Miller's-court. It is the last house on the left-hand side of the court. I am a widow, and get my living on the streets. I have known the deceased for eight or nine months as the occupant of No. 13 Room. She was called Mary Jane. I last saw her alive on Thursday night, at a quarter to twelve, very much intoxicated.

    [Coroner] Where was this ? - In Dorset-street. She went up the court, a few steps in front of me.

    [Coroner] Was anybody with her ? - A short, stout man, shabbily dressed. He had on a longish coat, very shabby, and carried a pot of ale in his hand.

    [Coroner] What was the colour of the coat ? - A dark coat.

    [Coroner] What hat had he ? - A round hard billycock.

    [Coroner] Long or short hair ? - I did not notice. He had a blotchy face, and full carrotty moustache.

    [Coroner] The chin was shaven ? - Yes. A lamp faced the door.

    [Coroner] Did you see them go into her room ? - Yes; I said "Good night, Mary," and she turned round and banged the door.

    [Coroner] Had he anything in his hands but the can ? - No.

    [Coroner] Did she say anything ? - She said "Good night, I am going to have a song." As I went in she sang "A violet I plucked from my mother's grave when a boy." I remained a quarter of an hour in my room and went out. Deceased was still singing at one o'clock when I returned. I remained in the room for a minute to warm my hands as it was raining, and went out again. She was singing still, and I returned to my room at three o'clock. The light was then out and there was no noise.

    [Coroner] Did you go to sleep ? - No; I was upset. I did not undress at all. I did not sleep at all. I must have heard what went on in the court. I heard no noise or cry of "Murder," but men went out to work in the market.

    [Coroner] How many men live in the court who work in Spitalfields Market ? - One. At a quarter- past six I heard a man go down the court. That was too late for the market.

    [Coroner] From what house did he go ? - I don't know.

    [Coroner] Did you hear the door bang after him ? - No.

    [Coroner] Then he must have walked up the court and back again? - Yes.

    [Coroner] It might have been a policeman ? - It might have been.

    [Coroner] What would you take the stout man's age to be ? - Six-and-thirty.

    [Coroner] Did you notice the colour of his trousers ? - All his clothes were dark.

    [Coroner] Did his boots sound as if the heels were heavy ? - There was no sound as he went up the court.

    [Coroner] Then you think that his boots were down at heels ? - He made no noise.

    [Coroner] What clothes had Mary Jane on ? - She had no hat; a red pelerine and a shabby skirt.

    [Coroner] You say she was drunk ? - I did not notice she was drunk until she said good night. The man closed the door. By the Jury: There was a light in the window, but I saw nothing, as the blinds were down. I should know the man again, if I saw him.

    By the Coroner: I feel certain if there had been the cry of "Murder" in the place I should have heard it; there was not the least noise. I have often seen the woman the worse for drink.

    Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

    Historical text, verbatim:

    William Marshall, examined by the Coroner, said: I reside at No. 64, Berner-street, and am a labourer at an indigo warehouse. I have seen the body at the mortuary. I saw the deceased on Saturday night last.

    [Coroner] Where? - In our street, three doors from my house, about a quarter to twelve o'clock. She was on the pavement, opposite No. 58, between Fairclough-street and Boyd-street.

    [Coroner] What was she doing? - She was standing talking to a man.

    [Coroner] How do you know this was the same woman? - I recognise her both by her face and dress. She did not then have a flower in her breast.

    [Coroner] Were the man and woman whom you saw talking quietly? - They were talking together.

    [Coroner] Can you describe the man at all? - There was no gas-lamp near. The nearest was at the corner, about twenty feet off. I did not see the face of the man distinctly.

    [Coroner] Did you notice how he was dressed? - In a black cut-away coat and dark trousers.

    [Coroner] Was he young or old? - Middle-aged he seemed to be.

    [Coroner] Was he wearing a hat? - No, a cap.

    [Coroner] What sort of a cap? - A round cap, with a small peak. It was something like what a sailor would wear.

    [Coroner] What height was he? - About 5ft. 6in.

    [Coroner] Was he thin or stout? - Rather stout.

    [Coroner] Did he look well dressed? - Decently dressed.

    [Coroner] What class of man did he appear to be? - I should say he was in business, and did nothing like hard work.

    [Coroner] Not like a dock labourer? - No.

    [Coroner] Nor a sailor? - No.

    [Coroner] Nor a butcher? - No.

    [Coroner] A clerk? - He had more the appearance of a clerk.

    [Coroner] Is that the best suggestion you can make? - It is.

    [Coroner] You did not see his face. Had he any whiskers? - I cannot say. I do not think he had.

    [Coroner] Was he wearing gloves? - No.

    [Coroner] Was he carrying a stick or umbrella in his hands? - He had nothing in his hands that I am aware of.

    [Coroner] You are quite sure that the deceased is the woman you saw? - Quite. I did not take much notice whether she was carrying anything in her hands.

    [Coroner] What first attracted your attention to the couple? - By their standing there for some time, and he was kissing her.

    [Coroner] Did you overhear anything they said? - I heard him say, "You would say anything but your prayers."

    [Coroner] Different people talk in a different tone and in a different way. Did his voice give you the idea of a clerk? - Yes, he was mild speaking.

    [Coroner] Did he speak like an educated man? - I thought so. I did not hear them say anything more. They went away after that. I did not hear the woman say anything, but after the man made that observation she laughed. They went away down the street, towards Ellen-street. They would not then pass No. 40 (the club).

    [Coroner] How was the woman dressed? - In a black jacket and skirt.

    [Coroner] Was either the worse for drink? - No, I thought not.

    [Coroner] When did you go indoors? - About twelve o'clock.

    [Coroner] Did you hear anything more that night? - Not till I heard that the murder had taken place, just after one o'clock. While I was standing at my door, from half-past eleven to twelve, there was no rain at all. The deceased had on a small black bonnet. The couple were standing between my house and the club for about ten minutes.

    Detective-Inspector Reid: Then they passed you? - Yes.

    A Juror: Did you not see the man's face as he passed? - No; he was looking towards the woman, and had his arm round her neck. There is a gas lamp at the corner of Boyd-street. It was not closing time when they passed me.

    Qualifies the claim (1)

    Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

    Historical text, verbatim:

    In 1927, "The Lodger" was the subject of an Alfred Hitchcock-directed film: The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog

11. Thomas Neill Cream: 'I am Jack the…' on the gallows

    Verdict: Not supported by the sources

    ○ Weakly supported Retrieved MYTH TESTED: Thomas Neill Cream's gallows words "I am Jack the...". Record: "police officials who attended the execution made no mention" of it. Cream was in Joliet prison, Illinois, from November 1881 to 31 July 1891, which covers the whole of 1888. Status: the quotation is unattested and the suspect impossible.

    Supports the claim (1)

    Historical text · verbatimchecked against retrieved page

    Historical text, verbatim:

    He was imprisoned in the Illinois State Penitentiary in Joliet, Illinois, from November 1881 until his release on good behaviour on 31 July 1891. He moved to London, where he resumed killing and was soon arrested. He was hanged on 15 November 1892 at Newgate Prison. According to some sources, his last words were reported as being "I am Jack the...", interpreted to mean Jack the Ripper. However, police officials who attended the execution made no mention of this alleged interrupted confession.

Police memoirs · Compare suspects