Uncle Jack


I've just finished reading this book, which is one of the latest books published about the infamous Whitechapel murderer of 1888.

Let me just establish something first.  My readers here will know something about the Ripper; i'm not going to explain everything cos we'd be here all day.  However, if you don't know much about him, feel free to read on but don't complain if you get lost.


John Williams is the author, Tony Williams's, great-great Uncle.  Tony was researching his family history and came across John Williams for his work at the National Library of Wales.  John was an obstetrician and gynaecologist.  Tony never imagined he would unearth something about him that no one would have imagined.  John Williams spent some years living and working in Whitechapel at the same time the Ripper reigned.  Tony also discovered that John had performed an abortion on the *official* first victim, Polly Nichols.  He also had contact with Annie Chapman and Kate Eddowes, as well as evidence connecting Williams to Mary Kelly - guessing she was his mistress.

The motives behind the killings were because John Williams could not conceive a child with his wife, and that the abdominal mutilation and subsequent organ removal of the victims - Kate Eddowes especially - was for his own scientific research.


Okay, let's set this right.  The Jack the Ripper murders were sex murders.  Let's not get diverted with satanic theories, freemason theories, the Russian sent to embarrass British authorities or even research theories.  Jack the Ripper was the seminal modern day serial sex murderer.  The act of killing and cutting his victims was the act of sex.  In fact the true definition of a serial killer is one who kills to fulifill his sexually sadistic fantasies.  Based on that John Williams's motives would have been all wrong.  There's no way he would murder with such ferocity just for the sake of research.  There's psychology behind the face slashing.  The Ripper hated himself so much that he slashed two victims' faces so they were uglier than he.  John Williams had a normal upbringing - in fact there was evidence that he enjoyed his childhood.  Already a problem there.

Tony Williams postulated that John was only after Mary Kelly - due to the amount of mutilation.  That's just not true.  The Ripper was indoors away from the streets and had all the time in the world to savage her.  The fact that she may have been Williams's mistress Tony Williams speculates that she could have suspected John and was blackmailing him, so he killed her, moreso than the others.  And because she was more attractive and younger meant more to him.  But the killings worsened as they went along.  Kelly was the final act of his atrocities before moving on to wherever.  No one can say that the other victims were flukes.

Tony Williams surmised that the reason the murders ceased was because John Williams could not solve the mystery of his wife's infertility so he gave up; or perhaps because the police were getting too close; or because he was overcome with guilt - hence his early retirement.  All are hopeless guesses.  Clearly Tony Williams is not tuned in to the mind of a serial killer - although based on his book Jack the Ripper is not actually the definition of a serial killer.  Lust murderers cannot just stop.  The only time they do is if they are caught or dead.  Just look at the victims.  Did the Ripper have any remorse?  John Williams had a normal upbringing; therefore, he would have had a conscience.  It's too far fetched.


John Williams knew four of the victims.  I stopped to think about this because he made some good points.  But there weren't many obstetricians and gynaecologists in those days, and Williams was one of the leading doctors.  It's very likely the victims would have come across him in his time at the infirmary but that doesn't prove anything.  John Williams was successful at what he did - again another glitch in the mind of a serial killer - in fact he was so successful that he made contact with the Royal Family.  He continued working for the National Library after retiring.  Doesn't happen.  Serial killers, although having above average intelligence, perform poorly at work.


Three main witnesses - not George Hutchinson - Joseph Lawende, Israel Schwartz and William Smith were the ones who probably saw the Ripper himself.  Tony Williams stated that Hutchinson was the main witness but he was unreliable with his account with whom Mary Kelly was speaking.  In the Liz Stride affair and even Kate Eddowes, Jack the Ripper had been spotted.  He was in his early twenties.  At the time of the Whitechapel murders John Williams was 48.


Another thing worth noting is that Jack the Ripper was probably a Jew, not because of the chalk message 'The Juwes(sic) are the men that will not be blamed for nothing' but when he was nearly caught after Liz Stride the Ripper called out the word lipski.  Not something John Williams is likely to do.


There's a lot to cover with Jack the Ripper.  Tony Williams has not focused on the facts but made a lot of conjectures based on circumstantial evidence.  There are two reasons which made me think John Williams might be Jack the Ripper:

1.  He was a doctor;

2.  The victims knew him.


That's not enough.  It's all to do with what happened after Mary Kelly.  John retired and worked on establishing the library.  He stopped because he felt remorse.  Well i'm sorry but anyone who believes that is just not switched on.


Please reply and tell me your thoughts.


The next book i want to read is Jack the Ripper: 21st Century Investigation by Trevor Marriot which explores the sailor theory in more detail.  And i haven't read about the physician yet.

 
   

 


 
 
sataf on
Re: Why John Williams is NOT Jack the Ripper
"Never turn your back on the Ripaaaaaaaaaaa!"

punkclown on
Re: Why John Williams is NOT Jack the Ripper
Whew! I read through all that...and at the end of a long day too. But I found it fascinating, thanks...someone came to our house one day to discuss the geneology of our surname...Dad was quite interested, the bloke had a huge book full of family trees and so forth...all that so-and-so begat whatshername who begat thingamejig...und so weiter...(bear with me, I'm getting there) The upshot was that we were (distantly) related to the royal male (forgive my ignoreance and tiredness but I can't remember who he was at the moment) who was also touted as one of the potential suspect "Jacks"
We were also (less distantly) related to Virginia Woolfe (who I am not afriad of...being related to Jack the Ripper...well...)
Your entry makes me want to read more about the whole thing however...if I could find the time. My last touching on the subject was when I saw "From Hell" with Johnny Depp...and I'm not at all sure about the veracity of any of the theories and conclusions drawn there.
Stay well, happy and inquisitive!

whitechapel on
Re: Why John Williams is NOT Jack the Ripper
Hey cool, thanks for the reply, Cam.  Must be quite fascinating knowing your family had ties with the Royal Family in the area and at the time.  From Hell is actually quite an accurate movie, especially with regard to the place and sequence of events.  Det. Abberline (Johnny Depp) was in fact the head detective for the real murders.  They explored the Freemason theory which most ripperologists rule out.  If you want to read a detailed account of the crimes then read the Complete History of Jack the Ripper by Philip Sugden.  It's a big read but i loved it.


Cheers

Starrish on
Re: Why John Williams is NOT Jack the Ripper
Dave when are you writing your own book about the Ripper? Where you crack the mystery for all of us?  I do believe that if anyone could do it you can!!! Hope you will, at least then I'd know which book I SHOULD read on the Ripper!  Very Interesting blog entry my friend, as always I've enjoyed reading it and learned so much from it   Thanks much!!!
whitechapel on
Re: Why John Williams is NOT Jack the Ripper
I've promised myself i'll go to the UK before i'm thirty.  While i'm there i'll spend a few days in London searching through the police museum, and i think there are other historical centres that have information.  Yeah...writing a book on Jack.  Kinda scary but i guess anything's possible.
Starrish on
Re: Why John Williams is NOT Jack the Ripper
Anything and everything is   You just have to try, and I know you can do it!  I'm a clairevoyant!
whitechapel on
Re: Why John Williams is NOT Jack the Ripper
Oh you are, are you?  Maybe you could guide me towards researching a suspect.
Starrish on
Re: Why John Williams is NOT Jack the Ripper
Yep!  Just take me with you to England plzzzzzzzzz!  Do you see the show Monk? We could be like that detective and his assistant! hehe Oh what fun that will be!
whitechapel on
Re: Why John Williams is NOT Jack the Ripper
Yeah i'm with ya.  But i don't watch the show.  In fact i don't think they play it anymore.  Must have received poor ratings here.
Starrish on
Re: Why John Williams is NOT Jack the Ripper
I don't watch TV at all lol, but I saw a couple of episodes of Monk here and there....but oh well you got my idea!

 
Login to replyToggle picture size
 

Latest Comment
Re: Life and paintballs... - Thanks for the advice Court. I'm gonna do a bit more soul searching, but it's on...

Read...


 
© 2005-2007 MindSay Interactive LLC
| Terms of Service
| Privacy Policy
My Account
Inbox
Account Settings
Lost Password?
Logout
Blog
Update Blog
Edit Old Entries
Pick a Theme
Customize Design
Modify Plugins
Community
Your Profile
Wiki Pages
MindSay Tags
Video & Photos
Geographic Directory
Inside MindSay
About MindSay
MindSay and RSS
Report Spam
Contact Us
Help