Jack the Ripper Black Magic Rituals--Satanism, the Occult, Murder...The Sinister Truth of the Doctor who was Jack the Ripper

by Ivor Edwards

  More damning is the fact that Dr Phillips stated: ‘Neither in the hands nor about the body of the deceased did I find any grapes, or connection with them. I am convinced that the deceased had not swallowed either the skin or seed of a grape within many hours of her death.’

  Packer stated that the suspect with Stride bought black grapes. Yet no witness, including PC Smith, saw Stride, or the suspect, holding or eating grapes. More to the point, Packer made several conflicting reports to the police and the press after Stride was murdered.

  One story involved a man who called at his premises to buy rabbits. Packer alleged that the customer told him he suspected the killer to be his cousin. The police concluded that the original statement made by Packer would be worthless in a court of law. Thus, he was never called to the inquest.

  His reasons for injecting himself into the case may well have been to claim any reward placed on offer for information leading to the apprehension of the killer. The thought of being involved as the man who conversed with and sold grapes to the killer may well have boosted his ego.

  It is interesting to note that the changes in Packer’s statements appear to have been made in keeping with other witness statements as they were reported. When one views all the available evidence concerning Packer with the case, it appears that he was nothing more than a publicity seeker.

  I remember the case of a police officer in recent years who was on patrol in Farnborough, Hampshire. He stated that an IRA gunman had shot at him from a car which police were looking for. One can imagine the set of events which then took place. It transpired that the car in question had never left Ireland. The policeman had been bored and he wanted some limelight. He invented the entire story to satisfy his own self-gratification.

  Press print showing armed Whitechapel prostitutes

  The corner of Berner Street and Fairclough Street looking towards Commercial Road as it appears today. The man in the doorway (site marked ‘D’) was undercover from the rain. More to the point he stood at a perfect lookout position which gave him unobstructed views in all directions

  Stride could have been soliciting in Berner Street (although she was heard to say ‘No’ to a man in Fairclough Street who may have been a potential client) or met the killer by arrangement on site. Stride was seen to be attacked only a yard or so from where her body was later found. Two men, apart from Schwartz, were on the scene. Only one of these men was the killer. Schwartz felt so threatened by events he fled the scene.

  Was the man in the doorway Jack the Ripper? If not, then why didn’t he come forward as a witness as Schwartz had done? Until this man is eliminated from the enquiries he must be considered as a suspect. Schwartz was scared and concerned for his well being, but in spite of this he came forward as a witness.

  We are informed that the knife that killed Stride was not the same weapon that was used on the other victims. It was stated that the knife used by the Ripper was of the type used in post-mortem examinations (which was pointed at the end).

  In the Star report it stated: ‘A second man came out of the doorway of a public house a few doors off, and shouting out some sort of warning to the man who was with the woman, rushed forward as if to attack the intruder.’ It does not specify who the intruder is.

  Schwartz could be interpreted as intruding on the scene. Victim four, Eddowes, was found to be in possession of a domestic knife. Many people who lived in doss houses carried with them what little they owned, cutlery included. This was a safeguard against theft by others.

  The Ripper scare was responsible for encouraging women to carry weapons for protection. So it is plausible that Stride carried her own protection in the form of a knife. Was she disarmed by guile, by the man in the doorway, who then used her own knife to cut her throat?

  The attack on Stride witnessed by Schwartz was far from the realms of Jack’s MO. The man who was seen to attack Stride did not kill her, neither was he the same man who killed Eddowes. Some writers have listed several details (some incorrect) differentiating Stride’s murder from the other four Whitechapel victims:

  1. A different type of knife was used to kill Stride.

  2. The position of the body indicated that it fell on its left side, rather than on its back as in the other cases.

  Incorrect: The evidence shows that it was placed on its side. Victims one, two, four and five did not fall on to their backs; they were placed in that position by the killer. They could hardly be mutilated if they were face down or on their sides. Victim three was not to be mutilated.

  3. No extravasation of blood in the neck and head region, which would indicate asphyxiation before throat-cutting.

  Incorrect: Medical evidence, clenched hands, a swollen, protruding tongue and a lack of blood on the scene did indicate asphyxiation.

  4. No abdominal mutilations.

  There is more than enough evidence to show why Stride can be termed a Ripper victim. The killer’s MO shows up in many instances. Jack laid his victims down. Dr Phillips stated that Stride had been placed on the ground. PC Lamb who was the first police officer on the scene stated, ‘She looked as if she had been laid quietly down.’ The victim was murdered facing due west. We now have three victims killed at the three points of the compass.

  Stride had been asphyxiated as in other Ripper cases. Her throat was cut from left to right after being laid down on her side. Like the other four victims she was a prostitute. She was murdered after 12.30am and before 6.00am. The body was placed close to a wall. The victim was found on her left side facing a wall, the position the killer placed the other victims in before cutting their throats and before laying them on to their backs prior to mutilating them.

  Stride was not laid on her back because the killer had no intention of mutilating her. More to the point her murder scene had been located and pinpointed by her killer on a map in advance and was exactly the same distance from Victim five and Victim four, 950 yards! Nichols was found due east. Chapman was found due north. Stride was found due south. So our next victim should be found due west to complete the pattern.

  There is a pressure point by the right shoulder near the collarbone, which can be manipulated to control violent individuals. If the killer had medical experience then he would have known about such pressure points, which can immobilise.

  As an experiment I reconstructed the killer’s MO with the help of a male prison nurse from HMP Wandsworth, who had previous experience in dealing with violent patients. He approached me from behind and placed his left hand over my nose and mouth. With his right hand he applied pressure to the point mentioned near the collarbone. I was completely and utterly immobilised. It had a paralysing and constricting effect on me and I could not move. This was probably the method used by the killer. This would explain why Stride still held cachous in her hand. Bruising was in evidence by Stride’s right shoulder.

  Dr Phillips attended Leman Street Police Station at 1.20am, on 30 September 1888. On arrival he was directed to attend the crime scene at Berner Street, arriving at approximately 2.00am. He attended Stride’s inquest on 3 October, where he reported:

  The body was lying on the near side, with the face turned toward the wall, the head up the yard and the feet toward the street. The left arm was extended and there was a packet of cachous in the left hand … The right arm was over the belly. The back of the hand and wrist had on it clotted blood. The legs were drawn up with the feet close to the wall. The body and face were warm and the hand cold. The legs were quite warm. Deceased had a silk handkerchief round her neck, and it appeared to be slightly torn. I have since ascertained it was cut. This corresponded with the right angle of the jaw. The throat was deeply gashed, and there was an abrasion of the skin about 1½ inches in diameter, apparently stained with blood, under her right brow. At 3pm on Monday at St George’s Mortuary … Dr Blackwell and I made a post-mortem examination … Rigor mortis was still thoroughly marked. There was mud on the left side of the face and it was matted in the head … The body was fairly nou
rished. Over both shoulders, especially the right, and under the collarbone and in front of the chest there was a bluish discoloration, which I have watched and have seen on two occasions since. There was a clean-cut incision on the neck. It was 6 inches in length and commenced 21½ inches in a straight line below the angle of the jaw, ½ inches over an undivided muscle, and then becoming deeper, dividing the sheath. The cut was very clean and deviated a little downwards. The artery and other vessels contained in the sheath were all cut through.

  The cut through the tissues on the right side was more superficial, and tailed off to about 2 inches below the right angle of the jaw. The deep vessels on that side were uninjured.

  From this it was evident that the haemorrhage was caused through the partial severance of the left carotid artery. Decomposition had commenced in the skin. Dark brown spots were on the anterior surface of the left chin. There was a deformity in the bones of the right leg, which was not straight, but bowed forwards. There was no recent external injury save to the neck. The body being washed more thoroughly I could see some healing sores. The lobe of the left ear was torn as if from the removal or wearing through of an earring, but it was thoroughly healed. On removing the scalp there was no sign of bruising or extravasation of blood … The heart was small, the left ventricle firmly contracted, and the right slightly so. There was no clot in the pulmonary artery, but the right ventricle was full of dark clot. The left was firmly contracted so as to be absolutely empty. The stomach was large, and the mucous membrane only congested. It contained partly digested food, apparently consisting of cheese, potato and farinaceous powder. All the teeth on the left lower jaw were absent … Examining her jacket, I found that while there was a small amount on the right side, the left was well plastered with mud …

  It was Dr Phillips’s opinion that the cause of death was undoubtedly from the loss of blood from the left carotid artery and the division of the windpipe. The inquest was resumed on 5 October when Dr Phillips stated that Stride had not swallowed the skin or inside of a grape within many hours of her death. He had examined the handkerchiefs found with the body and had drawn the conclusion that the stains on the larger handkerchief were from fruit.

  He was of the opinion that the deceased was seized by the shoulders, pressed to the ground and that the perpetrator of the deed was on her left side when he inflicted the wound. The fatal cut was made from left to right. He went on to add that the knife was not sharp pointed, but round, and an inch across. There was nothing in the cut to show an incision of the point of any weapon. The injury was accomplished possibly in two seconds.

  He believed that Stride was lying on the ground when the wound was inflicted [on her left side]. Therefore, the killer would have been behind her in a kneeling or crouched position. This indicates that Jack was right handed when he made his cut left to right.

  Elizabeth Stride was interred in a pauper’s grave in East London Cemetery. From the medical evidence accumulated it can be said with certainty that the killer possessed medical knowledge. How much medical knowledge did he possess? He knew enough to win the day and confuse the experts in the bargain. Jack fell back on his past experiences to achieve his goal just as I fell back on my past experiences to achieve mine. He wasn’t a medical orderly; he wasn’t a slaughterman; he wasn’t a butcher; he wasn’t a barber; he was Jack of all trades, surgery being but one.

  The Swanson Marginalia are pencil notes in Supt (deceased) Swanson’s hand, written in his personal copy of Sir Robert Anderson’s memoirs (The Lighter Side of My Official Life, 1910). Assistant Commissioner to the Metropolitan Police CID Anderson stated in writing that the identity of Jack the Ripper was known. He said it would serve no purpose if he made this knowledge public! Anderson stated: ‘… the only person who ever had a good view of the murderer unhesitatingly identified the suspect the instant he was confronted with him, but he refused to give evidence against him.’ Swanson then elaborated:

  Because the suspect was also a Jew and also because his evidence would convict the suspect, and witness would be the means of murderer being hanged, which he did not wish to be left on his mind. And after this identification which suspect knew, no other murder of this kind took place in London.

  (Which is hardly surprising – the murders stopped 18 months before this identification took place!)

  Swanson also noted:

  After the suspect had been identified at the Seaside Home where he had been sent by us with difficulty, in order to subject him to identification, and he knew he was identified. On suspect’s return to his brother’s house in Whitechapel he was watched by police by day and night. In a very short time the suspect with his hands tied behind his back he was sent to Stepney Workhouse and then to Colney Hatch and died shortly afterwards – Kosminski was the suspect.

  Kosminski was in fact insane. In 1888 an insane person would not have been executed for murder, therefore the identification of the witness would not have meant Kosminski would hang, if indeed Kosminski was the suspect. The police would have gone to great lengths to tell the witness the suspect would not hang. This story has more holes in it than a Swiss cheese.

  Other errors occur in this story. Kosminski lived until 1919 and was still alive when Swanson made these notes. There is no record of Kosminski being sent to Stepney Workhouse. The Kosminski story can only refer to Schwartz on Site 3 or Lawende on Site 4. Lawende doubted that he would know the man again. Taking all the evidence into account Site 3 is the most plausible site of the two.

  Because of the conflict in the testimony of Schwartz to the police and the press, and taking into consideration the story mentioned in the Swanson Marginalia, I have sought to clarify the situation and propose the following scenario at Berner Street. Stride was standing at the entrance to Dutfield’s Yard.

  Kosminski was walking down the road towards Stride from Commercial Road. He may have known Stride and for some unknown reason he may well have held a grievance against her. He may simply have been ninety pence short of a pound and tipsy. For whatever reason, on drawing level with Stride he stated something to her and then physically assaulted her. He may not have been aware that Schwartz was walking behind him.

  After Stride was thrown to the ground Schwartz passed across to the other side of the road, not wanting to get involved. However, the situation worsened and he turned to view the row. Kosminski then noticed that Schwartz was taking an interest in events.

  The man in the doorway (waiting for the all clear to kill Stride) shouted a warning at the attacker. Schwartz then saw a man rushing towards him from the direction of the doorway of Nelson’s Beer Shop on the corner and fled the scene.

  This suspect then turned his attention on the attacker after scaring away the witness. Faced with the threat of a man with a knife rushing towards him, Kosminski decided it prudent to withdraw in a hurry.

  Even a so-called lunatic can think logically when his own welfare is at stake. One must expect the unexpected when crime is involved. At this moment in time someone was attacking the victim that Jack intended to murder. After scaring off her attacker the killer may have consoled Stride and, thinking that this man had come to her rescue, she would quite naturally have dropped her defences and would have been more than grateful for his intervention.

  Having no time left before Schwartz could return with help, Jack killed Stride. Maybe with her own knife, if she carried one, which he took from her by guile after scaring off her attacker. He then left the scene, knowing full well that the witness, Schwartz, would identify the attacker as the killer.

  Diemschutz then arrived at Dutfield’s Yard at about 12.53am and discovered the body. Club members upstairs were alerted at 12.55am. The man in the doorway was in a safe position; he was seen by Schwartz but was not seen as the attacker. If the man in the doorway was ever traced all he had to say was that he had left the scene as Schwartz had done.

  All he had to do was to point the finger at poor backward Kosminski stating, ‘There is the man who killed Stride.�
�� Schwartz’s story backed him up. Just as Reginald Christie pointed the finger at Timothy Evans when he stood in the dock. The man who was seen to attack Stride can’t say, ‘Yes, I did attack her but I didn’t kill her. The man in the doorway did it.’ No one would believe him and he would end up being found guilty.

  It would be akin to the case of Timothy Evans (who was rather backward) stating in court that he didn’t kill his wife or child. No one believed poor innocent Evans and he was hanged. Christie was to get his come-uppance later but that was no help to Evans. It is ironic that the witness at the Seaside Home (the Seaside Home was a police convalescent home in west Brighton the first of which was located at 51, Clarendon Villas in March 1890) who identified Kosminski as the attacker could well have saved an innocent man from prison by not identifying him.

  Three men were at the murder scene; only one can be accounted for. Out of the two men left on the scene only one wore an overcoat, the man in the doorway. Dr Bond (police surgeon) stated that he believed the killer wore an overcoat to hide any bloodstains. Many poor Jews could not afford such a luxury as an overcoat. Reversible coats (waterproof or otherwise) were on the market in 1888. Such a coat could transform the appearance of any individual.

  A change of headgear would also be advantageous to the killer, and would cause confusion in witness statements. It is possible that Schwartz was the man who identified the attacker at the Seaside Home, if in fact the Seaside Home saga is correct. It was dark and overcast when Stride was murdered, so how could the witness identify the suspect unhesitatingly under such conditions and after a period of 18 months? Try that one out on a Crown Court today – it would be laughed out of court.