Monday, 12 February 2018
Joseph Mackomacke
Joseph Mackomacke, Cora Crippen's biological father. Listed as a nail-smith in the 1875 Boston directory.
Thursday, 8 February 2018
Monday, 5 February 2018
Dr Crippen approaches the 'topping shed'.
'Topping shed', prisoner's nickname for Pentonville's execution room.
Saturday, 3 February 2018
39, Hilldrop Crescent.
Inspector Walter Dew discovered the mutilated body of Belle Elmore under the steps leading to 39, Hilldrop Crescent.
Thursday, 1 February 2018
Hundreds of 'Jack the Ripper' letters.
Hundreds of letters claiming to have been written by 'Jack the Ripper' were sent to the media and the London Police following the brutal Whitechapel murders of 1888. These letters have long been a mystery, with many suspecting they were faked by journalists to sell more newspapers. Now, a scientist has provided some new evidence that suggests the letters were, in fact, fakes. The study focused on the 'Dear Boss' letter, in which the name Jack the Ripper appears for the first time, and the 'Saucy Jacky' postcard. It found similar linguistic constructions in both letters, such as the phrasal verb 'to keep back', as well as similarities in the handwriting. They also used distinctive phrases, such as 'work' for killing and the use as 'ha ha'. Both letters also have a likeness to a third text long thought to be a hoax, known as the 'Moab and Midian' letter.
Two famous examples of letters supposedly written by Jack the Ripper were penned by the same person, new research has found. The use of the phrasal verb 'to keep back' to mean 'to withhold' appears in Ripper's 'Dear and 'Saucy Jack' letters Jack the Ripper is thought to have killed at least five young women in Whitechapel, east London, over the course of three months, but was never caught. The police started to publish letters allegedly from Jack the Ripper after receiving the first four, which encouraged hoaxers to send copycat letters claiming to be written by the killer. Dr Andrea Nini, from the University of Manchester, undertook a 'cluster analysis' of 209 letters linked to the Ripper, studying similarities in the documents' text. The 'Dear Boss' letter and 'Saucy Jacky' postcard stood out due to the striking similarities. Similarities between the two texts include the use of the phrasal verb 'to keep back' mean 'to withhold'. The Dear Boss letter, scrawled in red ink, was received by the Central News Agency in London on September 27, 1888, and forwarded to Scotland Yard. 'Saucy Jacky' was used as a reference to the killer in a postcard received by the Central News Agency on October 1, 1888.
The murderer is thought to have killed at least five young women in Whitechapel, east London , over the course of three months, but was never caught. Pictured is an 1889 artist's impression of a fictitious scene in which the Ripper is caught grasping the hair of one of his victims
A researcher has revealed that two of the most famous examples of the Ripper's letters were penned by the same person. One of the texts, the 'Dear Boss' letter (pictured), was the first to sign off with 'Jack the Ripper'
Jack the Ripper is thought to have killed at least five young women in Whitechapel, East London, in 1888 Using modern linguistic techniques to analyse the letters, Dr Nini uncovered certain shared distinctive linguistic constructions in the two early texts. 'My conclusion is that there is very strong linguistic evidence that these two texts were written by the same person,' he said. 'People in the past had already expressed this tentative conclusion, on the basis of similarity of handwriting, but this had not been established with certainty.' Dr Nini also found evidence that a link exists between these letters and another of the key texts in the case, the 'Moab and Midian' letter. Many people believe the text was a hoax created by the Central News Agency. Dr Nini said: 'In addition to the historical value of my findings, they could help forensic linguists to better understand the important issue of individuality in linguistic production. 'Since all the hoaxers tried to mimic the style of the original 'Jack the Ripper', we can use the database of the letters to understand how people fake writing style - and how successful they are at imitation. 'The results indicate that it is very difficult to do so.' This study doesn't identify the killer, or the author of the two letters, but it does seem to back up the journalist theory.
'There's historical evidence that points to the journalist theory for the earliest ones ('Dear Boss' and 'Saucy Jacky') and, since this 'Moab and Midian' letter might have been entirely fabricated at the Central News Agency—the original document was never found or sent to the police—if the linguistic evidence supports that this was the same author as the Dear Boss and Saucy Jacky then we could argue that the linguistic evidence does support to the journalist theory,' Nini told Gizmodo.
'However, this is a conclusion that should be reached by the historians, not the linguists.'
More than 200 letters were sent to media and officials during the spree, but the police started to publish them after the first four were received. This encouraged hoaxers to send copycat letters claiming to be written by the killer. Link to handwriting graph - Saucy Jack and Dear Boss.
Daily Mail
Two famous examples of letters supposedly written by Jack the Ripper were penned by the same person, new research has found. The use of the phrasal verb 'to keep back' to mean 'to withhold' appears in Ripper's 'Dear and 'Saucy Jack' letters Jack the Ripper is thought to have killed at least five young women in Whitechapel, east London, over the course of three months, but was never caught. The police started to publish letters allegedly from Jack the Ripper after receiving the first four, which encouraged hoaxers to send copycat letters claiming to be written by the killer. Dr Andrea Nini, from the University of Manchester, undertook a 'cluster analysis' of 209 letters linked to the Ripper, studying similarities in the documents' text. The 'Dear Boss' letter and 'Saucy Jacky' postcard stood out due to the striking similarities. Similarities between the two texts include the use of the phrasal verb 'to keep back' mean 'to withhold'. The Dear Boss letter, scrawled in red ink, was received by the Central News Agency in London on September 27, 1888, and forwarded to Scotland Yard. 'Saucy Jacky' was used as a reference to the killer in a postcard received by the Central News Agency on October 1, 1888.
The murderer is thought to have killed at least five young women in Whitechapel, east London , over the course of three months, but was never caught. Pictured is an 1889 artist's impression of a fictitious scene in which the Ripper is caught grasping the hair of one of his victims
A researcher has revealed that two of the most famous examples of the Ripper's letters were penned by the same person. One of the texts, the 'Dear Boss' letter (pictured), was the first to sign off with 'Jack the Ripper'
Jack the Ripper is thought to have killed at least five young women in Whitechapel, East London, in 1888 Using modern linguistic techniques to analyse the letters, Dr Nini uncovered certain shared distinctive linguistic constructions in the two early texts. 'My conclusion is that there is very strong linguistic evidence that these two texts were written by the same person,' he said. 'People in the past had already expressed this tentative conclusion, on the basis of similarity of handwriting, but this had not been established with certainty.' Dr Nini also found evidence that a link exists between these letters and another of the key texts in the case, the 'Moab and Midian' letter. Many people believe the text was a hoax created by the Central News Agency. Dr Nini said: 'In addition to the historical value of my findings, they could help forensic linguists to better understand the important issue of individuality in linguistic production. 'Since all the hoaxers tried to mimic the style of the original 'Jack the Ripper', we can use the database of the letters to understand how people fake writing style - and how successful they are at imitation. 'The results indicate that it is very difficult to do so.' This study doesn't identify the killer, or the author of the two letters, but it does seem to back up the journalist theory.
'There's historical evidence that points to the journalist theory for the earliest ones ('Dear Boss' and 'Saucy Jacky') and, since this 'Moab and Midian' letter might have been entirely fabricated at the Central News Agency—the original document was never found or sent to the police—if the linguistic evidence supports that this was the same author as the Dear Boss and Saucy Jacky then we could argue that the linguistic evidence does support to the journalist theory,' Nini told Gizmodo.
'However, this is a conclusion that should be reached by the historians, not the linguists.'
More than 200 letters were sent to media and officials during the spree, but the police started to publish them after the first four were received. This encouraged hoaxers to send copycat letters claiming to be written by the killer. Link to handwriting graph - Saucy Jack and Dear Boss.
Daily Mail
Saturday, 27 January 2018
Ethel Le Neve
By Ethel Le Neve:
Little more than three months ago, I was an obscure typist, earning my living like thousands of other girls in the city; all I wished was happiness, not notoriety.
My life bad been spent in modest surroundings, and gladly would I have avoided the searching light of publicity. About my early days there is very little to be said. Until I was seven I lived at Diss, in Norfolk, my native place. From Diss we moved to London, and here we settled. When I left school I soon had thoughts of earning my own living. One of our intimate friends happened to be a shorthand teacher, and it pleased him to give lessons both to my sister and to myself in stenography and typewriting.
When my sister was proficient as a shorthand typist she obtained an engagement at the Drouet Institute. Here I joined her. Very soon afterwards came Dr. Crippen, who was fated to influence my life so strangely. For some reason the doctor took kindly to us, and almost from the first we were good friends. But really he was very considerate to everybody. I quickly discovered that Dr Crippen was leading a somewhat isolated life. I did not know whether he was married or not. But one day a friend of his called at the office. My sister and I were taking tea with the doctor, which we ourselves had prepared.
“I wish I had someone to make tea for me,” said the friend. Whereupon the doctor, with his customary geniality, pressed him to stay, and during the chat over the tea cups mention was made of the doctor’s wife. When the friend had gone my sister asked the doctor whether he was really married.
“It would take the lawyers all their time to find out,” was the mysterious reply. That was all he said.
When her sister left to get married, Miss Le Neve took her sister’s place as Dr Crippen’s private secretary. I felt very lonely. Dr Crippen, too, was very lonely, and our friendship deepened almost inevitably. He used to come to see me at home. All this time the wife was shrouded in mystery But one day she turned up in the flesh for the first time. That was, I suppose, about six years ago, when I was still at the Drouet Institute. Her coming was of a somewhat stormy character. I was leaving the office for lunch when I saw a woman come out of the doctor’s room, and bang the door behind her. She was obviously very angry about something.
“Who is that?” I said in a whisper to Mr William Long.
“Don’t you klow?” he said. “That is Mrs. Crippen.”.
”Oh, is it?” I said, with some surprise.
After that I quickly realised Dr Crippen’s reluctance to speak about his wife. He was obviously not happy. Not long afterwards Mrs. Crippen paid another visit to the office which might have ended tragically. There were more angry words, and just before she left I saw the doctor suddenly fall off his chair. I ran to him as he lay on the floor. I believed that he had taken poison. He told me that he could bear the ill treatment of his wife no longer. However, I managed to pull him round with the aid of brandy, and we did our best to forget the painful incident. I think it was this, more than anything else, which served to draw us closer together.
On the question of Dr Crippen’s condition on the day following the Martinetti dinner and the supposed murder, Miss Le Neve proceeds: On 1st February – the day upon which, according to the case for the Crown, Belle Elmore died – Dr Crippen appeared at the usual hour at the office, which was at Albion House, New Oxford street, where he now carried on a dental practice – in partnership with Mr Rylance. If he had really just come from committing a dreadful crime, if he had administered, that poison called hyoscin to his wife, and if he had left her dead body alone at the house, it is certainly remarkable that outwardly, at any rate, he was his own calm self.
Surely we, who knew him so well, and every expression his face would have noticed at once if he had shown, the slightest agitation. Speaking on the flight to the Continent, Miss Le Neve mentions that it was she who suggested the pawning of the jewels. Having missed the train to Harwich, they went for bus ride to Hackney, after she had put on her boy’s clothes. Dr. Crippen had cut her hair in London. She had it cut again in Brussels, where they went to see all the sights together.
“In spite of being dressed as a boy,” she said, “I was just a girl, full of high spirits, and generally pleased at this exploration of a foreign city.” Our journey to Quebec was determined in a quite accidental way. Dr. Crippen had an idea of getting back to Hull, crossing over to Liverpool, and getting away to America from that port. But one day when we were wandering about we saw an advertisement of the Montrose steaming from Antwerp to Quebec. Dr. Crippen. said, “That is what we will do. Let us book berths on the Montrose, and go over to Canada.” We inquired at the shipping office on 17th July, and learnt that the Montrose would leave Antwerp on the 20th. We left Brussels, therefore, on the 19th, spent the night at Antwerp, and caught the boat in the morning. It was without the slightest sensation of nervousness that I stepped, on board the big steamer in my boy’s clothes.
If I had known of the frantic search that was being made for us. I should nave understood that we were very badly prepared for a secret voyage. Our lack of luggage was in itself calculated to betray us. We only had with us the one handbag which we had brought from Hilldrop Crescent. As for myself, I had nothing beyond in a boy s suit – not even an overcoat. The doctor was wearing his grey frock coat, and his soft white hat. I think it was as this time that he left off his glasses. The main features of the rest of this romantic affair are public property.
Little more than three months ago, I was an obscure typist, earning my living like thousands of other girls in the city; all I wished was happiness, not notoriety.
My life bad been spent in modest surroundings, and gladly would I have avoided the searching light of publicity. About my early days there is very little to be said. Until I was seven I lived at Diss, in Norfolk, my native place. From Diss we moved to London, and here we settled. When I left school I soon had thoughts of earning my own living. One of our intimate friends happened to be a shorthand teacher, and it pleased him to give lessons both to my sister and to myself in stenography and typewriting.
When my sister was proficient as a shorthand typist she obtained an engagement at the Drouet Institute. Here I joined her. Very soon afterwards came Dr. Crippen, who was fated to influence my life so strangely. For some reason the doctor took kindly to us, and almost from the first we were good friends. But really he was very considerate to everybody. I quickly discovered that Dr Crippen was leading a somewhat isolated life. I did not know whether he was married or not. But one day a friend of his called at the office. My sister and I were taking tea with the doctor, which we ourselves had prepared.
“I wish I had someone to make tea for me,” said the friend. Whereupon the doctor, with his customary geniality, pressed him to stay, and during the chat over the tea cups mention was made of the doctor’s wife. When the friend had gone my sister asked the doctor whether he was really married.
“It would take the lawyers all their time to find out,” was the mysterious reply. That was all he said.
When her sister left to get married, Miss Le Neve took her sister’s place as Dr Crippen’s private secretary. I felt very lonely. Dr Crippen, too, was very lonely, and our friendship deepened almost inevitably. He used to come to see me at home. All this time the wife was shrouded in mystery But one day she turned up in the flesh for the first time. That was, I suppose, about six years ago, when I was still at the Drouet Institute. Her coming was of a somewhat stormy character. I was leaving the office for lunch when I saw a woman come out of the doctor’s room, and bang the door behind her. She was obviously very angry about something.
“Who is that?” I said in a whisper to Mr William Long.
“Don’t you klow?” he said. “That is Mrs. Crippen.”.
”Oh, is it?” I said, with some surprise.
After that I quickly realised Dr Crippen’s reluctance to speak about his wife. He was obviously not happy. Not long afterwards Mrs. Crippen paid another visit to the office which might have ended tragically. There were more angry words, and just before she left I saw the doctor suddenly fall off his chair. I ran to him as he lay on the floor. I believed that he had taken poison. He told me that he could bear the ill treatment of his wife no longer. However, I managed to pull him round with the aid of brandy, and we did our best to forget the painful incident. I think it was this, more than anything else, which served to draw us closer together.
On the question of Dr Crippen’s condition on the day following the Martinetti dinner and the supposed murder, Miss Le Neve proceeds: On 1st February – the day upon which, according to the case for the Crown, Belle Elmore died – Dr Crippen appeared at the usual hour at the office, which was at Albion House, New Oxford street, where he now carried on a dental practice – in partnership with Mr Rylance. If he had really just come from committing a dreadful crime, if he had administered, that poison called hyoscin to his wife, and if he had left her dead body alone at the house, it is certainly remarkable that outwardly, at any rate, he was his own calm self.
Surely we, who knew him so well, and every expression his face would have noticed at once if he had shown, the slightest agitation. Speaking on the flight to the Continent, Miss Le Neve mentions that it was she who suggested the pawning of the jewels. Having missed the train to Harwich, they went for bus ride to Hackney, after she had put on her boy’s clothes. Dr. Crippen had cut her hair in London. She had it cut again in Brussels, where they went to see all the sights together.
“In spite of being dressed as a boy,” she said, “I was just a girl, full of high spirits, and generally pleased at this exploration of a foreign city.” Our journey to Quebec was determined in a quite accidental way. Dr. Crippen had an idea of getting back to Hull, crossing over to Liverpool, and getting away to America from that port. But one day when we were wandering about we saw an advertisement of the Montrose steaming from Antwerp to Quebec. Dr. Crippen. said, “That is what we will do. Let us book berths on the Montrose, and go over to Canada.” We inquired at the shipping office on 17th July, and learnt that the Montrose would leave Antwerp on the 20th. We left Brussels, therefore, on the 19th, spent the night at Antwerp, and caught the boat in the morning. It was without the slightest sensation of nervousness that I stepped, on board the big steamer in my boy’s clothes.
If I had known of the frantic search that was being made for us. I should nave understood that we were very badly prepared for a secret voyage. Our lack of luggage was in itself calculated to betray us. We only had with us the one handbag which we had brought from Hilldrop Crescent. As for myself, I had nothing beyond in a boy s suit – not even an overcoat. The doctor was wearing his grey frock coat, and his soft white hat. I think it was as this time that he left off his glasses. The main features of the rest of this romantic affair are public property.
Friday, 26 January 2018
James Munyon
of Munyon's cures, vouched for Dr Crippen.
Four times wed. he had a penchant for actresses. His third marriage was in 1908 when at the age of 60, he married Pauline
Neff Metzger, 24. In 1913 she filed for divorce and
returned to her career as an actress.
Saturday, 25 November 2017
Could Ethel Le Neve Lie?
Crippen on third edit – rechecking data and adding detail, I returned to the contemporary newspaper cuttings from an old scrapbook and noticed a peculiarity. Crippen declared his wife’s death when he sent a telegram, 24th March, from Victoria Station to Clara Martinetti. It simply stated:
Belle died yesterday at six o’clock. Please phone to Annie. Shall be away a week. Peter.
(Clara knew Dr Crippen by the name Peter Crippen.)
But Lydia Rose (Ethel’s friend) stated that Ethel wrote to her about her marriage in early March:
Dear Lydia,
You will be very surprised to hear your old chum was quietly married last Saturday.
The letter went on to explain that they could not honeymoon until the Easter holiday and then they were going to Dieppe.
Lydia could have confused the dates. But her memory of timing was confirmed by Ethel’s sister, Adina, who said, “I was not altogether surprised when one Monday morning, early in March, I received a letter from Ethel :
Darling,
Just a brief note to tell you that we have gone and done it as the advertisement says. Consequently, I am feeling very happy.
The letter was addressed from Hilldrop Crescent. A little time afterwards the doctor and my sister went to Dieppe for the honeymoon.”
Ethel said she married on Saturday, which would make the probable ‘wedding’ date March 5th, and less likely, March 14th. Ethel also mentioned an advertisement – presumably a classified advertisement – or possibly a merchandising slogan. Could Ethel lie to the two people closest to her – her best friend and her sister? Perhaps she was an accomplished liar, or she did undergo a wedding ceremony – using a false name – and thereby lying to the registrar and the English authorities . . .
If Ethel wasn’t complicit in the subterfuge then Dr Crippen must have told his ‘true love’ a lie – several lies. Either way, the two fugitives told different stories resulting in Ethel apparently marrying Dr Crippen before his wife’s death. Or perhaps they already knew Dr Crippen’s wife was dead and buried – in the cellar – since February 1st. At least they hadn’t committed bigamy.
It seems rather a complicated ruse (and unnecessary) that Ethel extended to include her dressmaker. “In February she came with a large box, and said, ‘I want you to do a lot of work for me, because in six weeks time I am going to be married.’ There was one dress and quite a number of dress lengths; vieux rose, which I made into a costume; a glace silk, which I made into a Princess robe; and a mole-coloured shade, with a stripe, which I made up for her. She told me afterwards that she was married in the vieux rose.”
Belle died yesterday at six o’clock. Please phone to Annie. Shall be away a week. Peter.
(Clara knew Dr Crippen by the name Peter Crippen.)
But Lydia Rose (Ethel’s friend) stated that Ethel wrote to her about her marriage in early March:
Dear Lydia,
You will be very surprised to hear your old chum was quietly married last Saturday.
The letter went on to explain that they could not honeymoon until the Easter holiday and then they were going to Dieppe.
Lydia could have confused the dates. But her memory of timing was confirmed by Ethel’s sister, Adina, who said, “I was not altogether surprised when one Monday morning, early in March, I received a letter from Ethel :
Darling,
Just a brief note to tell you that we have gone and done it as the advertisement says. Consequently, I am feeling very happy.
The letter was addressed from Hilldrop Crescent. A little time afterwards the doctor and my sister went to Dieppe for the honeymoon.”
Ethel said she married on Saturday, which would make the probable ‘wedding’ date March 5th, and less likely, March 14th. Ethel also mentioned an advertisement – presumably a classified advertisement – or possibly a merchandising slogan. Could Ethel lie to the two people closest to her – her best friend and her sister? Perhaps she was an accomplished liar, or she did undergo a wedding ceremony – using a false name – and thereby lying to the registrar and the English authorities . . .
If Ethel wasn’t complicit in the subterfuge then Dr Crippen must have told his ‘true love’ a lie – several lies. Either way, the two fugitives told different stories resulting in Ethel apparently marrying Dr Crippen before his wife’s death. Or perhaps they already knew Dr Crippen’s wife was dead and buried – in the cellar – since February 1st. At least they hadn’t committed bigamy.
It seems rather a complicated ruse (and unnecessary) that Ethel extended to include her dressmaker. “In February she came with a large box, and said, ‘I want you to do a lot of work for me, because in six weeks time I am going to be married.’ There was one dress and quite a number of dress lengths; vieux rose, which I made into a costume; a glace silk, which I made into a Princess robe; and a mole-coloured shade, with a stripe, which I made up for her. She told me afterwards that she was married in the vieux rose.”
Friday, 10 November 2017
Ethel Le Neve and her strange invitations.
Ethel Le Neve sent her dressmaker, Miss Hargreaves, a letter enclosing a £1 postal order and asked her to call on Friday July 8th to deliver a coat her dressmaker was finishing.
. . . We are going to Bournemouth or Eastbourne for a holiday.
Signed ‘Ethel Crippen’.
The dressmaker couldn’t keep the Friday appointment and arrived on Saturday. Of course, Ethel wasn’t at home. Nothing peculiar about that in isolation. On Friday, July 8th, Ethel requested Lydia Rose, her friend, visit her on Sunday 10th July but Lydia received a letter postmarked July 9th.
Dear Lydia Rose
Do not come up tomorrow.
Am not feeling well.
Am going away for a few days
Loving wishes,
Ethel.
Ethel Le Neve sent a postcard to her brother Sidney on the morning she disappeared with Dr Crippen
The card read:
Dear Sid
Please come up to night and stay over Sunday or come up early tomorrow morning to dinner.
Love to all,
Ethel.
Sid arrived at Hilldrop Crescent on Saturday July 8th as requested and the French maid, Valentine Le Coq, handed him a note:
. . . I am very sorry, but I have been called away.
Love to all,
Ethel.
Ethel is purposely inviting people to call at ‘that’ weekend. Was this some plea for help, or perhaps a cynical demonstration of her innocence? If it were the latter then it means Ethel Le Neve was aware of some ‘peculiarity’ either in Crippen’s character or of the events of January 31st – March 1st.
Anyway, the upshot of these missives were that Walter Neave, Ethel’s father, visited 39, Hilldrop Crescent on Sunday, 10th July accompanied by William Long, Dr Crippen’s long-standing employee, and prior to Inspector’s revisit to 39, Hilldrop Crescent on July 11th. Walter claimed to be looking for two pictures he owned and with William Long searched, or at least, visited each room.
Monday, 6 November 2017
Thursday, 2 November 2017
Wednesday, 1 November 2017
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)