Face of Winifred May Davies
Latest topics
» Why Jesus Is Not God
Mon 17 Apr 2017 - 0:09 by Karen

» The Fourth Reich
Fri 14 Apr 2017 - 14:14 by Karen

» Allah, The Real Serpent of the Garden
Tue 7 Mar 2017 - 11:45 by Karen

Sat 4 Mar 2017 - 12:06 by Karen

» Hillary Clinton (Hillroy Was Here)
Fri 28 Oct 2016 - 17:38 by Karen

» Alien on the Moon
Thu 20 Oct 2016 - 21:57 by Karen

» Martian Nonsense Repeats Itself
Thu 20 Oct 2016 - 18:43 by Karen

» Enlil and Enki
Fri 7 Oct 2016 - 17:11 by Karen

» Israel Shoots Down Drone - Peter Kucznir's Threat
Wed 24 Aug 2016 - 22:55 by Karen

» Rome is Babylon
Sun 24 Jul 2016 - 21:27 by Karen



Details of Chapman's Murder and Inquest

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

Go down

Re: Details of Chapman's Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Sun 30 Oct 2011 - 9:14


The Press Association learns that a matter that is thought to have a bearing upon the Whitechapel murders is being investigated by the Metropolitan police. Early on Wednesday morning a man, apparently of about 33 years of age, accosted a woman in Whitechapel. At his request she accompanied him for a short distance, when he suddenly caught her by the throat, and knocked her down. The woman states that her screams alarmed the man, who then ran away. The description she gave of her assailant was as follows: - About 5ft. 6in. or 5ft. 8in. high, small dark moustache, dressed in light coat and dark trousers, black felt hat, and wore scarf round his neck.



The incident to which Mr. Wynne Baxter so emphatically referred in summing-up the evidence given at the inquest on the body of Annie Chapman, occurred some months since. So, at least, declares a morning contemporary. According to this authority, the person who made the singular application, as described by Mr. Baxter, at one of the great London hospitals, and which he repeated at a scientific institution, was for some time a student at the hospital in question, and it is stated he would have been able to procure what he required without incurring any risk. As a matter of fact, according to the experience of demonstrators of anatomy, there is no such value to be attached to what was mentioned by the Coroner, who was informed that 20 pounds would be given by the American in every case. In a pecuniary sense there would be no value attaching at all.


Inquiry at the London Hospital, Whitechapel-road, the nearest institution to the scene of the murder, elicited the fact that no applications of the kind indicated have recently been made to the warden or curator of the pathological museum. An opinion was expressed that an American pathologist would scarcely endeavour to obtain his specimens from London, when the less stringent laws prevailing on the Continent would render his task comparatively easy there. It was stated, however, that a considerable number of Americans, holding medical degrees of more or less value, were in the habit of studying at London pathological museums. On the other hand, if the real object was to add to the practical value of a technical publication in preparation, as alleged, the purposes in view could have been easily attained in America, without the necessity of committing murder.


It is the theory, however, of some among those who are well acquainted with the medical details of the recent mysterious deaths in Whitechapel, that the offer of 20 pounds must have become known to some one in the habit of frequenting dissecting rooms, and that, under temptation, this individual had yielded to the impulse of taking life. The circumstances that two murders had been perpetrated in the streets of Whitechapel within a short period without causing much comment would have led, it is supposed, the miscreant to assume that the police protection in the neighbourhood was so insufficient that he might commit a third murder with impunity. Upon the body of Mary Anne Nicholls, the Buck's-row victim, there were indications that the murderer had entertained, but not fully carried out his project, and had had to hurry away to evade discovery. In the case of Annie Chapman the opportunity was more favourable, and the object was attained. Although many hospital authorities do not attach very great importance to the story, the police have given due attention to the matter.


It is said that the man Fitzgerald, who confessed to the police at Wandsworth that he committed the last Whitechapel murder, is still in custody. The police have been instituting rigid inquiries as to his antecedents, but they are not now disposed to attach much importance to his statement. What could have induced him to make the assertion is not known. By some officers it is stated he had been drinking lately, and, through reading the details given at the inquest, had become more or less excited. While in this state, some suppose, he made his "confession," with the object of attracting attention. Though in some quarters the affair was yesterday regarded as of trivial importance, the police carried on their inquiries with redoubled energy. It is not yet known whether Fitzgerald will be put upon the charge sheet.


A case came before the Portsmouth Magistrates yesterday, which strikingly illustrates the excitement caused all through the country by the Whitechapel atrocities. A woman, named Eleanor Candy, charged Joseph Woods with indecently assaulting her. She alleged that he knocked her down, and declaring "that he was one of the Whitechapel men," committed the assault. On the other hand, it was contended for the defence that the woman told the defendant she carried a whistle since the Whitechapel murders, and the defendant replied that he carried a knife. Whereupon the complainant called the police, and the defendant was apprehended. He was acquitted of the charge of assault, but bound over in 10 pounds to keep the peace.


Fitzgerald is still in custody at Leman-street Police Station. He has, however, not yet been formally charged. The police authorities, it is understood, place but little credence in the statement made by Fitzgerald, and he will, in all probability, be discharged.



No arrest has yet been made in connection with the Birtley Fell murder. The whereabouts of Waddle, Jane Beetmoor's sweetheart, still remains a mystery. An important piece of evidence has been given to the police concerning the movements of Waddle and the deceased on the night of the murder. The deceased woman called at the cottage of a friend, situated a very short distance from where her dead body was afterwards discovered, and after waiting some time at the cottage, Waddle called also, and immediately the couple left together. It is supposed that they had met there by appointment. The time of their departure was close upon nine o'clock, and this was the last time she was seen alive.


A Correspondent in Newcastle writes that a statement was freely circulated yesterday morning that Waddle's capture was only a matter of a few hours, as his whereabouts was known, but there is reason to believe that this is not so. He is not likely, however, to get far, as it has been ascertained that he had only 1s. 6d. in his pocket, and when once he shows himself he will be readily identified. The police are indignant at the publication of the private advice concerning the man, as it is feared that he will now part with his knife and other articles by which he would be known.

Source: The Echo, Friday September 28, 1888, Page 3

Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"

Posts : 4907

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Chapman's Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Sun 30 Oct 2011 - 12:15


Another murder, of a most brutal nature, was committed in the Whitechapel district of the Metropolis, and at a spot only a few hundred yards from where the mangled body of the poor woman Nicholls was found just a week before. About six o'clock on Saturday morning the body of another woman, mutilated and horribly disfigured, was found lying in the back yard of 29, Hanbury-street, Spitalfields, a house occupied by Mr. Richardson, a packing-case maker, and it is not five minutes' walk from the scene of the previous tragedy. This crime was of even a more revolting character than that recently committed at Buck's-row, where Mary Ann Nicholls was killed in a barbarous manner, for the poor victim's throat was cut from ear to ear and the stomach ripped completely up, and the contents torn out. The poor creature was found by John Davis, a man employed in Spitalfields Market. He is a married man, and lodges with his wife in a room at the top of the house. He went down at six o'clock to go to his work, when he saw the deceased lying prostrate and lifeless in the yard. From the front door is a passage leading to a small paved yard at the back, and it was in this yard that the body of this woman was discovered. Deceased was subsequently identified as Annie Chapman, the widow of a veterinary surgeon who lived at Windsor. She had long been separated from her husband, who appears to have allowed her ten shillings a week while he lived, and she has been known for the past six years among the lodging-houses of the neighbourhood in which she met her death. She appears to have maintained herself to some extent by making antimacassars or selling articles in the street, but there is little room for doubt that her earnings in this way were eked out by less creditable sources. She cohabited, it is said, for a time with a sieve maker, commonly known as Jack Sivvy, and hence she has been generally known of late as Annie Sivvy, and the name appearing in the summonses for the inquest is "Annie Siffey." Those who know her best spoke of her as a quiet, inoffensive creature, not given to drink, and earning her living respectably in so far as she could. Judging by the appearance of the woman as she lay in the mortuary on Saturday she must have been somewhere about five and forty years of age. For some months past she has been in the habit of frequenting a lodging-house in Dorset-street, Spitalfields, an extremely low and turbulent spot, just in front of Spitalfields Church, on the opposite side of Commercial-street. She reappeared there about half-past eleven on Friday night, and said she had been in the infirmary. She again went out into the street till just before two o'clock on the fatal Saturday morning, when she returned eating baked potatoes. She passed downstairs into the kitchen, and a demand was made for payment for the bed. "I haven't got enough," she replied, and turned to go out again into the street. "Keep my bed for me," said the poor creature, "I shan't be long; I won't be long, Brummy," she added to the watchman, as she passed out; "See that Jim keeps my doss for me." That was just before two o'clock last Saturday morning. A woman named Amelia Farmer, who was a fellow-lodger with the deceased, has made a statement of what she knew of the history of the murdered woman. Annie Chapman had for a long time been separated from her husband by mutual agreement, and had been allowed 10s. a week by him for her maintenance. The money had always come regularly till about 18 months ago, when the instalments suddenly ceased, and, upon inquiry being made, it was found that the husband had died. Annie Chapman had two children, but where they were she could not say. Farmer is certain that on Friday night the murdered woman had worn three rings, which were not genuine, but were imitations. Great weight is attached to the statement as to the rings which were on the murdered woman's hand before the murder was committed, but which had been wrenched off by the wretch before he made good his escape.
The evidence shows that the murder was committed shortly after five o'clock in the morning. At five o'clock, or a trifle earlier, the murdered woman was seen drinking with a man in a public-house called the Bell, in Brick-lane. This was the last that was seen of her until she was found by Davies when he was leaving for his work. In this house no fewer than six separate families reside. Some people who live on the ground floor, and are credited with being light sleepers, stated emphatically that during the night and morning they heard no sound of a suspicious nature. When the police arrived they found that the woman had been murdered in a terribly brutal fashion. It was obvious, both from the marks upon the body and the splashes upon the palings which separate the dwellings one from the other, that the woman while lying down, had her throat first cut, and was then ripped open and disembowelled. Dr. Phillips, the Divisional Surgeon of Police, was at once apprised of the case. On arriving Dr. Phillips found that the woman's throat had been cut nearly to the vertebrae, that she was completely disembowelled. To show the barbarity with which the crime was committed, the poor creatures intestines were lying near her.

Source: The Courier, September 15, 1888, Page 6

Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"

Posts : 4907

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Chapman's Murder and Inquest

Post by Mr Hyde on Sat 10 Mar 2012 - 10:15

Anyone know when Mrs Elizabeth Cooney first gained a financial interest in the Weavers Arms Public House at 17 Hanbury Street?
What is a boy from Violet Street doing living with "Military" Hutchinson a few years afters the Murders?

Mr Hyde

Posts : 174

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Chapman's Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Sat 16 Mar 2013 - 16:10


Another murder of a character even more diabolical than that recently perpetrated in Buck's-row, Whitechapel, was discovered on the 8th inst. in the same neighbourhood. At about six o'clock in the morning a woman was found lying in a back yard at the foot of a passage leading to a lodging-house
in Old Brown's-lane, Spitalfields. The house is occupied by a Mrs. Emilia Richardson, who lets it out to various lodgers and it seems that the door which admits into this passage, at the foot of which lies the yard where the body was found, is always open for the convenience of the lodgers. A Mr. and
Mrs. Davis occupy the upper storey (the house consisting of three storeys). As Mr. Davis was going down to work at the time mentioned he found a woman lying on her back close to the flight of steps leading into the yard. Her throat was cut open in a fearful manner. So deep, in fact was the gash, that the murderer, evidently
thinking he had severed the head from the body, had tied a handkerchief round it. Upon further examination it was found that the woman's body had been completely ripped open and the heart and other organs placed on the pavement at her side. The fiendish work had been completed by the murderer tying portions of the entrails round the victim's neck.
The ground round where the woman lay was covered with clots of thick blood, and the spectacle presented was altogether a sickening one. By those who know the place well it is believed that the woman was murdered in the street and afterwards carried into the passage. This view is, to a certain extent, borne out by traces of blood, which reach to the street.
There is, moreover, nothing in the appearance of the ground to indicate a struggle. Davis, the man who found the body, at once communicated with the police at Commercial-street Station, and Inspector Chandler and several constables arrived on the scene shortly afterwards, when they found the woman in the condition described. Even at this early hour the news spread quickly, and great excitement prevailed among the occupants
of the adjacent houses. An excited crowd gathered in front of Mrs. Richardson's house, and also around the mortuary in Old Montague-street, whither the body was quickly conveyed. As the corpse was lying in the rough coffin in which it was placed in the mortuary - the same coffin in which the unfortunate Mrs. Nicholls was first placed - it presented a fearful sight. The body was that of a woman evidently of about 45 years of age. The height was exactly five feet.
The complexion was fair, with wavy dark brown hair; the eyes were blue, and two lower teeth had been knocked out. The nose was rather large and prominent. The third finger of the left hand bore signs of rings having been wrenched off it, and the hands and arms were considerably bruised. The deceased had on laced-up boots and striped stockings. She had on two cotton petticoats, and was otherwise respectably dressed. Nothing was found in her pockets but a handkerchief and two small combs.
It is believed in the neighbourhood to be almost beyond doubt that this murder is but one of a series of fiendish atrocities on women which have been going on within the past few months, and apparently have been committed by the same hand. Looking at the corpse no one could think otherwise than that the murder had been committed by a maniac or wretch of the lowest type of humanity; indeed, one would have to go to the wilds of Hungary or search the records of French lower peasant life before a more sickening
and revolting tragedy could be told.


The Whitechapel mortuary in Old Montague-street presented a scene of agitated curiosity, and people flocked around either to see anything that could be seen, or to hear any fresh items of intelligence on the great subject of the moment. The body occupied the same position as that of the recent victim in Buck's-row. Strict orders had come down from headquarters that no one was to be allowed in the yard under any circumstances whatever. The woman had been identified as Annie Sievey, or Siffey, a woman of loose character, and there was an end of the matter.
The order was strictly adhered to, except in the case of Dr. Phillips, of Spital-square, the divisional doctor, who was called in to see and examine the body. He is of opinion that, as in the previous murder, the first wound inflicted was that in the throat, which was of so deadly a character that it would cause instant death. The other mutilations were caused subsequently, and apparently immediately afterwards. There was the same fiendish ripping open of the abdomen up to the breast-bone, with further gashes on the breast which had enabled the murderer to remove the heart.


Mrs. Richardson, who lives at the house in Hanbury-street, states that the appearance of the body when found was simply revolting. She was lying on her back with her legs outstretched. Her throat was cut from ear to ear. Her clothes were pushed up above her waist and her legs were bare. The abdomen was exposed, the woman having been ripped up from groin to breast-bone. In addition to this brutal treatment, the viscera had been pulled out and scattered in all directions, the heart and liver being placed behind her head, and the remainder along her side. No more horrible sight ever met a human eye, for she was covered with blood and lying in a pool of it,
which hours afterwards had not soaked into the ground. It was evident at a glance that the murder had been done where the body lay. The enormous quantity of blood and the splash on the fence, coupled with the total absence of stains elsewhere, made this clear. It was also clear that the man had decoyed the poor woman into the yard, and murdered her as she lay where she was found. The passage through the house by which the yard was reached is 25ft. long and 3ft. wide. Its floor is bare, and nobody can pass along it without making some noise. The murderer and his victim failed to awaken anybody, however, though people were sleeping only a few feet away. Both front and back door are open all night,
and there was no difficulty in reaching the yard. There was a story that a bloody knife had been found in the yard, but this was not true. Not a sound seems to have been made by the woman when attacked. Mrs. Bell, an old lady who lives next door, sleeps by an open window not 20ft. from the spot, and it is certain that no noise was made, as she sleeps very lightly. The probability is that the woman by five o'clock was stupidly drunk, as she was well on when Donovan, the deputy, last saw her. In this state she could have been easily kept silent until she was unable from loss of blood to speak.


The Scotland-yard authorities have come to a definite conclusion as to the description of the murderer of two, at least, of the hapless women found dead in East London, and the following is the official telegram despatched to every station throughout the metropolis and suburbs: "Description of a man wanted, who entered a passage of the house at which the murder was committed with a prostitute, at two a.m., the 8th. Aged 37, height 5ft. 7in., rather dark, beard and moustache; dress, short dark jacket, dark vest and trousers, black scarf and black felt hat; spoke with a foreign accent."


Terrible as is the story, told above, of the murder of Annie Chapman, it is made all the more painfully significant when considered (remarks the Daily Telegraph) in the light of recent records of capital crimes committed in the same locality. Within less than twelve months four women have been done to death, in streets adjacent to Whitechapel-road, in a manner which has left no room to doubt that resort has been had to foul play of the worst kind. It is a regrettable fact, worthy of the serious attention of residents in this vast metropolis, that vigilant as are the members of the police force, their numbers are not nearly sufficient to enable them, however wisely distributed, to afford a reasonably
adequate "safe conduct" to that indefinite and indefinable factor, the "public." The increase of police establishment has been often advocated by responsible advisers, but the advice has been in the past, as it still is, regarded with indifference by the statesmen in charge of the exchequer. Notice has already been given that attention will again be called to the matter in the next session of Parliament, and it cannot be doubted that the shocking events which are now engrossing the minds of the people of London will lend a melancholy zest to any discussion that may be raised on the subject in the House of Commons. It is obvious, however, that no augmentation of the police force could supply absolute immunity
from crimes of the astounding character recently perpetrated. Prevention is said to be better than cure, and what London seems to want is better means of guarding against crime and of bringing offenders, after detection, home to justice. The first of the series of murders was committed so far back as last Christmas, when the body of a woman was discovered with a stick or iron instrument thrust into her body as if she had been interred under the law until recently applicable to suicides, which required a person found guilty of felo de se to be buried at the four cross-roads with a stake driven through the chest. In this case the woman was never identified, and no particular sensation was caused, the death being generally
assumed to be the result of a drunken freak on the part of the nameless ruffians who swarm about Whitechapel. The second noticeable tragedy occurred on August 7 last, when a woman named Martha Turner, aged thirty-five, a hawker, was discovered lying dead on the first floor landing of some model dwellings known as George-yard-buildings, Commercial-street, Spitalfields. The body when found presented a shocking appearance, being covered with stab-wounds to the number of 39, some of which appeared to have been caused by a bayonet. At the inquest reference was made to the similarity of this murder to that which had been perpetrated in the same locality at Christmas, and a verdict was returned of "Wilful murder against some person
or persons unknown." Scarcely had the emotion caused by this affair had time to abate when another discovery was made which, for the brutality exercised on the victim, was even more shocking. As Constable John Neil was walking down Buck's-row, Thomas-street, Whitechapel, about 3:45 a.m., on Aug. 31, he discovered a woman, apparently between 35 and 40 years of age, lying at the side of the street with her throat cut right open from ear to ear, the instrument with which the deed had been committed having apparently traversed the throat from left to right. The wound was an inch wide, and blood was flowing profusely. She was immediately conveyed to the Whitechapel mortuary, where it was found that besides the wound in the throat the lower part of the abdomen
was completely ripped open, the bowels protruding. The wound extended nearly to the breast, and had evidently been effected with a large knife. Buck's-row, where the deceased was discovered, is described as a narrow passage, running out of Thomas-street, containing a dozen houses, said to be of a very low class. An inquest was opened last week, when the body was identified as that of a Mrs. Nicholls, who had been separated from her husband for a period of eight years, and who had of late been leading a disreputable life. The inquiry stands adjourned, and its future course will depend upon the statements which the police authorities may then be able to make. Meanwhile there is a general impression that all the outrages described, including the latest fiendish atrocity,
have been conceived and executed by one man, and he in all probability a maniac.


From inquiries which have been made in Windsor, it seems that the deceased was the widow of a coach-man in service at Clewer, and not of a veterinary surgeon, as stated by Amelia Palmer in her evidence at the inquest. While deceased lived at Clewer she was known to the police for her drinking habits, and had been in the custody of Superintendent Hayes for the offence, but had not been charged before the magistrates. Her husband was obliged to separate from her owing to her dissolute habits; but, as the witness Palmer stated, he sent her a post-office order, payable at Commercial-road, each week for 10s. There were two children of the marriage, a boy and a girl. The former lay ill for some time in a London hospital, while the latter lived at Windsor, but the police now have no knowledge
of their whereabouts. The husband of the deceased woman was obliged to resign his situation owing to ill-health, and he died in Grove-road, Windsor, about Christmas, 1886. These particulars have been forwarded by Superintendent Hayes, at Windsor, to Superintendent Shore, of the Scotland-yard police, in response to telegraphic inquiries, and one of the constables at Windsor was sent to London to identify the remains.


The inquest on the body of Annie Chapman, alias Sivvy, was opened at ten o'clock on the morning of the 10th inst. by the district coroner, Mr. Wynne Baxter. The inquiry was held in the Alexandra Room, at the Working Lads' Institute.
Inspector Helson, J Division, represented the police authorities.
There was a large attendance of the general public in court and in the precincts of the Institute, and the approaches thereto were guarded by a large number of constables. The latest newspaper accounts of the murder were eagerly scanned by those in waiting, and thus passed the interval of time between the opening of the court and the Coroner's arrival. There were everywhere visible signs of the profound impression made by the crime.
Mr. Collier, Deputy-Coroner, was now accompanied by Mr. Wynne Baxter. The jury, having been formally sworn in, went to view the body at the mortuary.
On their return, John Davis deposed: I live at 29, Hanbury-street, Spitalfields. I am a carman. I occupy one front room, which is shared by my wife and three sons. I went to bed on Friday night at eight o'clock, and my sons came in at different times - the last one at about a quarter to eleven. I was awake from three o'clock until five, but fell off to sleep for about half an hour. I got up at a quarter to six on Saturday morning, and went across the yard. The house faces Hanbury-street. On the ground floor there is a front door leading into a passage, which runs right through to the back yard. There is a back door to this passage. Sometimes both doors are open during the night, and I have never known either of them to be locked. Anyone who knows where the latch of the front door is can open it and pass along into the yard.
I cannot say whether the back door was latched on Saturday morning when I got down, but the front street-door was wide open and thrown back against the wall. I was not surprised at that. Witness was here asked to describe the general appearance of the yard, but was not very clear in his statements. Some time having been occupied in attempting to elicit answers, the Coroner said that in country inquests the police were always ready to assist him by preparing a plan of any locality which was the subject of investigation. Certainly this was a case of sufficient importance for such a plan, and he hoped that any future time a plan would be laid before him. Inspector Chandler said a plan should be drawn up. The Coroner reported that it might be then too late to be of any service. Davis, resuming, said: When I opened the back door of the yard
I found a woman lying on her back. I called two men who are in the employ of Mr. Bayley, packing-case maker in Hanbury-street. They were standing outside their place of work, which is three doors from 29, Hanbury-street, on the same side of the road. They came and looked at the sight. I do not know them personally. The Coroner asked if these men were known to the police. Inspector Chandler said they were not. The Coroner expressed his surprise at this. Witness: I had to go to my work myself. The Coroner (emphatically): Your work is of no importance compared with this inquiry. To Inspector Chandler: We must find these men out, either with the assistance of the police, or with the assistance of my officer. Witness: The men did not wish to be seen in the job. The Coroner: If they have not been seen and identified yet they must be. Davis (continuing):
I informed the inspector at Commercial-street what I had seen in the yard. I have never seen any women in the passage. I heard no noises on Saturday morning.
Amelia Palmer said: I live at 30, Dorset-street, which is a common lodging-house. I am the wife of a labourer, who is a pensioner from the army. I have known the deceased well for the past five years. I have seen a body at the mortuary, and am quite sure it is that of Annie Chapman. She was a widow. Her husband was formerly a veterinary surgeon at Windsor, and was well known there.
He died about eighteen months ago. Deceased had lived apart from him for four years. Since the separation deceased had lived principally, though not altogether, in common lodging-houses in the neighbourhood of Spitalfields. She lived two years ago at 30, Dorset-street, with a man called "Sievy." At that time she was receiving 10s. a week from her husband. The money was always sent by P.O.O., payable at Commercial-road.
The remittances stopped 18 months ago, and the deceased found that her husband was dead. The fact was acertained from a brother or sister of her husband living in Oxford-street, Whitechapel. Mrs. Chapman was calleld Mrs. Sievey, because the man she lived with was a sieve maker. He left her some time ago. I saw the deceased two or three times during last week. I saw her on Monday, Sept. 3, standing in the road opposite
a lodging-house, 35, Dorset-street. She had been staying there, and complained of feeling unwell. Deceased had a bruise on one of her temples; I think the right temple. I asked how she got it. Deceased asked me to look at her chest, which was also bruised, and said, "You know the woman," mentioning some name, which I do not remember; but it was a woman who carried out books for sale. That woman and deceased were acquainted with a man
called "Harry the Hawker." Deceased told me that on Saturday, September 1, she (deceased) was with a man called Ted Stanley - a very respectable man. She was in a beershop with him - 87, Commercial-street, which is at the corner of Dorset-street. "Harry the Hawker was also there, and was under the influence of drink. "Harry the Hawker" put down 2s. for beer; the book-selling woman picked it up, and put down a penny. There was an ill-feeling in consequence, and the same evening
the book-selling woman met the deceased and struck her in the face and chest. I saw the deceased again on Tuesday, September 4. I met her as she was walking at the side of Spitalfields Church. The deceased said she felt no better, and should go into the casual ward for a day or two. The deceased told me she had not had even a cup of tea that day. I said, "Here is twopence. Get a cup of tea; but don't have any rum." The deceased was partial to rum, and I have seen her many times the worse for drink.
She used to do crochet work, make anti-macassars, and sell flowers. I am afraid she was not particular how she earned her living, and I know that she was out late at times. She has told me so. On Fridays the deceased used to go to Stratford, East, to sell anything she had. I did not see her from Tuesday afternoon until Friday afternoon. On that day I met her in Dorset-street, about five o'clock. She then appeared perfectly sober. I said, "Aren't you going to Stratford today?" She said, "I feel too ill to do anything."
I saw her again about ten minutes afterwards on the same spot. She said, "It's no use my giving way. I must pull myself together and go and get some money, or I shall have no lodgings." That is the last I saw of her. Deceased told me she had been in the casual ward. Deceased was very industrious when sober, and was a very clever little woman. I have seen her the worse for drink, but I don't think she could take much without it making her drunk. She had been living a very irregular life for five years, more especially since her husband's death.
She has a sister and brother in London, but I don't think they were on friendly terms. The deceased had two children at Windsor, and after her husband's death they were put in a school. The coroner said it appeared to be doubtful whether the husband of the deceased was a veterinary surgeon.
Timothy Donovan, 35, Dorset-street, Spitalfields, deputy of the common lodging-house, said: I identify the body at the mortuary as that of a woman who has lodged at my place. She had lived there for four months, but was not at No. 35 last week, until the Friday. Afterwards, at about two or three o'clock, she asked me to allow her to go into the kitchen. I consented, and did not see her until about 1:45 on Saturday morning. At that time I was sitting in the office, and I saw deceased go into the kitchen. Deceased afterwards came upstairs, saying she had not sufficient money for a bed,
and adding, "Don't let it; I shan't be long before I am in." The bed she spoke of was the one she usually occupied. The deceased left the house, and I did not see which way she turned, but I believe the watchman did. She had had enough to drink when I last saw her, but she could walk straight. She was generally the worse for drink on Saturdays, but not on other days. When she left the lodging-house on Saturday morning, I said to her, "You can find money for beer, but not for your bed." She replied that she had only been to the top of the street, to the Ringers' public-house. I saw deceased
with no man that night. I could not say whether deceased walked the streets. She used to come and stay at the lodging-house on Saturdays with a man of soldierly appearance, and who is said to be a pensioner. She has come at other times with other men, and I have refused to allow her to have a bed. The Coroner: A woman has only one husband at your place? Donovan: The pensioner told me not to let her have a bed with any other man. She did not come to my place with any man on Friday night. As a rule she occupied No. 29 bed by herself. The pensioner and the deceased were together at the lodging-house
on Sunday, September 2. The Coroner: Is anything known of this pensioner? Inspector Chandler: No, sir. Donovan (resuming): On the 25th of August the woman told me she was going out to see if the pensioner had drawn his pension. She usually saw him in the street. She was on good terms with all the lodgers, and I never had any trouble with her. About Tuesday, August 28, deceased and another woman had a row in the kitchen before I was up. I afterwards saw them both outside the house, but I did not notice any injury on deceased. Subsequently deceased called my attention to her eye, which was bruised, but she did
not tell me how the injury was done.
John Evans deposed: I am night watchman at 35, Dorset-street. Deceased used to live there. On Saturday morning I saw her go out of the lodging-house. She went in the direction of Spitalfields Church. That was after she had asked us to keep the bed until she got some lodging money. She never returned. Deceased was the worse for drink, but not badly so. She came into the kitchen soon after 12 o'clock. I heard her say she had been to her sister's, at Vauxhall. I have known that the deceased was out at nights, but I have known only one man with whom she was associated. He used to come with her on Saturdays. That particular man
called on Saturday last, the 8th instant, at about half-past two o'clock in the afternoon to make inquiries about the woman. He had heard of her death. I do not know either his name or address. After I had told him what had occurred, he went out without saying a word. I have never heard any man threaten the deceased at any time. I have never heard her express fear of any one. The Coroner: Have you heard any woman at your house say that she had been asked for money by any man? Witness: No. This concluded the witness's evidence, and the coroner adjourned the inquiry.


Mr. S. Montagu, M.P., has offered 100 pounds as a reward for the capture of the Whitechapel murderer, and has asked Superintendent Arnold to issue notices to that effect.

Source: Cardigan Observer, and General Advertiser For the Counties of Cardigan, Carmarthen and Pembroke, 15 September 1888, Page 2

Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"

Posts : 4907

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Chapman's Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Tue 20 Aug 2013 - 18:03

Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"

Posts : 4907

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Chapman's Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Sat 7 Sep 2013 - 18:12

Whitechapel Mysteries.

London is once more cast under the spell of a supreme horror. In the early hours of Saturday morning a murder was committed in Whitechapel excelling in the utter fiendishness of its hideous details any crime that has heretofore startled and terrified a great community or stained the annals of modern history. Ghastly as was the East-end outrage which we reported scarcely a week ago, the crime which was discovered in the grey dawn of Saturday outdoes even that in the maniacal ferocity with which it was accomplished, and in the sickening and loathsome mutilation by which it was accompanied. Probably not even the diseased imagination which conceived the details of the "Murders in the Rue Morgue" could have reached such a climax of brutality and callousness as characterised the ghoul-like atrocity which has now struck a new terror into the hearts of the people of East London. To all appearance it has been committed by the same hand as the three (if not four) terrible murders which have preceded it during the past few months, and if this is so, there can be no doubt that the murderer is a maniac animated by hideous malice, deadly cunning, and an insatiable thirst for human blood. Like its revolting predecessors, the tragedy of Saturday last seems to be so entirely motiveless, and, like those also, it is enshrouded in mystery. In each case a woman of the lowest class has been mutilated and murdered in the dead of night; in each case something especially revolting has characterised the crime; in each case there seems to have been no reason for the deed except a madman's thirst for blood; and in each case the murderer has baffled the watchfulness and ingenuity of the police, and disappeared from the ken of man only to make his presence known afresh by some new atrocity. The first of this terrible series of crimes occurred some months ago; the others quite recently. The second case was that in which the body of an "unfortunate" was found in a lodging-house at George Yard Buildings, Whitechapel, covered with wounds inflicted with a knife. Then came the brutal murder and mutilation of a Mrs. Nichols, in Buck's-row, Whitechapel; and now there is the fourth case, which, although as stated in the report below, perpetrated in Spitalfields, is nevertheless within a few hundred yards of Buck's-row, Whitechapel. This neighbourhood is in a state of wild excitement, bordering on panic, for the other cases are fresh in everybody's memory, and nobody has been brought to justice for any one of the crimes. Only on Thursday last it was through Hanbury-street that Mary Ann Nicholls' terribly mutilated body was carried on the way to its place of burial. The fourth victim is, like the other three, a poor defenceless walker of the streets. A companion identified her soon after she had been taken to the mortuary as "Dark Annie," and as she came from the mortuary gate bitterly crying said between her tears, "I knowed her; I kissed her poor cold face." The scene of the murder is the house, 29, Hanbury-street - a packing-case maker's. The body was actually found in the back yard, just behind the back door, mutilated in an even more ghastly manner than the woman Nicholls. As in her case, the throat was cut, and the body ripped open, but the horror was intensified by the fact that


It seems that the crime was committed soon after five. At that hour the woman and a man, who in all probability was her murderer, were seen drinking together in The Bells, Brick-lane. But though the murder was committed at this late hour, the murderer - acting, as in the other cases, silently and stealthily - managed to make his escape. The first discovery of the body was made by John Davies, living on the top floor of 29, Hanbury-street, in the yard of which the body was found. Mr. Davies was crossing the yard at a quarter to six, when he saw a horrible-looking mass lying in the corner, partly concealed by the steps. He instantly made for the station, and notified the police without touching the body. Meanwhile Mrs. Richardson, an old lady sleeping on the first floor front, was aroused by her grandson, Charles Cooksley, who looked out of one of the back windows and screamed that there was


Mrs. Richardson's description of the sight makes this murder even more horrible than any of its predecessors. She was lying on her back with her legs outstretched. Her throat was cut from ear to ear. Her clothes were pushed up above her waist and her legs bare. The abdomen was exposed, the woman having been ripped up from groin to breast-bone as before. Not only this, but the viscera had been pulled out and scattered in all directions, the heart and liver being placed behind her head, and the remainder along her side.


ever met a human eye, for she was covered with blood, and lying in a pool of it, which hours afterwards had not soaked into the ground. The yard is a small one, square in shape, with a 4ft. fence on either side. The fence is old and rotten. There is a woodshed at the back. The yard is roughly and irregularly paved with stones of all sizes and shapes rammed into the ground. The back door of the house which leads into the yard is a plain board frame, with no lock on it. Two stone steps are just outside, and in the narrow space between these steps and the fence the body lay. The murdered woman, who appears to have been respectably connected, was known in the neighbourhood by women of the unfortunate class as Annie Sivvy, but her real name was Annie Chapman. She is described by those who knew her best as


about 5ft. 2in. or 5ft. 3in. high, with fair brown wavy hair, blue eyes, large flat nose; and, strange to say, she had two of her front teeth missing, as had Mary Ann Nicholls, who was murdered in Buck's-row. When her body was found it was respectably clad. She wore no head covering, but simply a skirt and bodice and two light petticoats. A search being made in her pockets, nothing was found but an envelope stamped "The Sussex Regiment." It was evident at a glance that the murder had been done where the body lay. The enormous quantity of blood and the splash on the fence, coupled with the total absence of stains elsewhere made this clear. It was also clear that the man had


into the yard, and murdered her as she lay where she was found. The passage through the house by which the yard was reached is 25ft. long and 3ft. wide. Its floor is bare, and nobody can pass along it without making some noise. The murderer and his victim failed to awaken anybody, however, though people were sleeping only a few feet away. Both front and back door are open all night, and there was no difficulty in reaching the yard. There was a story that a bloody knife had been found in the yard, but this is not true. The only unusual thing about the yard excepting the dead woman was the fact that the rusty padlock on the door of the shed had been broken. Not a sound seems to have been made by the woman when attacked, and quite evidently she was


Mrs. Bell, and old lady who lives next door, sleeps by an open window, not 20ft. from the spot, and is certain that no noise was made, as she sleeps very lightly. The probability is that the woman by five o'clock was stupidly drunk, as she was verging upon that state when Donovan, the "deputy" at the lodging-house where she had been living, last saw her. In this state she could have been easily kept silent until she was unable from loss of blood to speak. The people, and even the police, were so excited that all sorts of rumours were flying about. The woman living next door declared that in the morning there was written on the door of No. 29, "This is the fourth;


and then give myself up." There was no basis for this story, however, there being no chalk mark on the door except "29." As soon as the murder was known there came a rush of people from the market and the houses, and in charge of an inspector the body was removed to the mortuary. Mystery of the deepest kind envelops the whole circumstances. She was murdered where she was found, because she could not have been carried into the yard except by the passage-way from the street, which is open all night, but the street at that time was filled with market people. There is no blood except in the yard corner, and a huge splash on the fence, like the spurt from an artery. When the police arrived they found that the woman had been murdered in a terribly brutal fashion, and that the


To be continued...........................

Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"

Posts : 4907

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Chapman's Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Sun 8 Sep 2013 - 15:04

It was obvious both from the marks upon the body and the splashes of blood upon the palings which separate the dwellings one from the other that the woman while lying down had her throat cut, and then was ripped open and disembowelled. There is on every hand the one opinion prevailing that the Whitechapel murders have been all enacted by the same person. The body now lies in the mortuary, guarded by several officers of the police. The body is already in a shell, and the autopsy having been made by Dr. Phillips and assistants, the portions of flesh and entrails removed by the fiendish hands of the murderer have been so far as possible replaced in their natural positions, and there is little else observable beyond the usual post-mortem indications. The body is that of a fairly-nourished woman, but bears traces of rough usage.


Albert Cadosch, who lodges next door, went into the adjoining yard at the back at 5:25 on the fatal morning, and states that he heard a conversation on the other side of the palings, as if between two people. He caught the word "No," and fancied he subsequently heard a slight scuffle, with the noise of a falling against the palings, but thinking that his neighbours might probably be out in the yard he took no further notice, and went to his work. Nothing further can be traced of the dreadful tragedy, until shortly before six o'clock, when the man Davies, passing into the yard at the back of 29, Hanbury-street, observed a mutilated mass which caused him to go


into the street. In the house the back premises of which happened to become the scene of this hideous crime no fewer than six separate families reside. Some people who live on the ground floor, and are credited with being "light sleepers," stated emphatically that during the night and morning they heard no sound of a suspicious nature.


Mrs. Richardson, the landlady at 29, Hanbury-street, the house where the body of deceased was found, said: "I have lived at this house fifteen years, and my lodgers are poor, but hard-working people. They mostly work at the fish market or the Spitalfields Market. Some of the carmen in the fish market go out to work as early as 1 a.m., while others go out at four and five, so that the place is open all night, and any one can get in. It is certain that the deceased came voluntarily into the yard, as if there had been any struggle it must have been heard. Several lodgers sleep at the back of the house, and some had their windows open, but no noise was heard from the yard. One of my lodgers, a carman, named Thompson, employed at Goodson's, in Brick-lane, went out at four o'clock in the morning. He did not go into the yard, but he did not notice anything particular in the passage as he went out. My son John came in at ten minutes to five, and he gave a look round before he went to market. He went through to the yard, but


and everything was right. Just before six o'clock, when Mr. Davis, another of my lodgers, came down, he found the deceased lying in the corner of the yard, close to the house, and by the side of the step. There was not the slightest sign of a struggle, and the pool of blood which flowed from the throat after is was cut was close to the step where she lay. She does not appear to have moved an inch after the fiend struck her with the knife. She must have died instantly. The murderer must have gone away from the spot covered with blood.


that I can think of is that Mr. Thompson's wife met a man about a month ago lying on the stairs. This was about four o'clock in the morning. He looked like a Jew, and spoke with a foreign accent. When asked what he was doing there, he replied he was waiting to do a "doss" before the market opened. He slept on the stairs that night, and I believe he has slept on the stairs on other nights. Mrs. Thompson is certain she could recognise the man again both by his personal appearance and his peculiar voice." The police have taken a full description of this man.


at 30, Dorset-street stated that Annie Chapman used to lodge there about two years ago with a man called Jack "Sivvy," a sieve maker; hence her nickname Annie Sivvy. She appeared to be a quiet woman, and not given to drinking. He was surprised to hear that she had been seen drinking the night before her murder. The woman had two children.
Timothy Donovan, the deputy at the lodging-house, 35 Dorset-street, where the deceased frequently stayed, stated that the deceased stayed there on Sunday night last. She had been in the habit of coming there for the past four months. She was a quiet woman, and gave no trouble. He had heard her say she wished she was as well off as her relations, but she never told him who her friends were or where they lived. A pensioner or soldier usually came to the lodging-house with her on Saturday nights, and generally he stayed until the Monday morning. He would be able to


if he saw him. This man stayed at the house from Saturday to Monday last, and when he went the deceased went with him. She was not seen at the house again until Friday night about half-past eleven o'clock, when she passed the doorway, and Donovan, calling out, asked her where she had been since Monday, and why she had not slept there, and she replied, "I have been in the infirmary." Then she went on her way in the direction of Bishopsgate-street. About 1:40 on Saturday morning she came again to the lodging-house, and asked for a bed. The message was brought upstairs to him, and he sent downstairs to ask for the money. The woman replied, "I haven't enough now, but


I shan't be long." Then as she was going away she said to John Evans, the watchman, "Brummy, I won't be long. See that Jim keeps my bed for me." She was the worse for drink at the time, and was eating some baked potatoes. He saw nothing of her again until he was called to the mortuary, when he identified the deceased by her features and her wavy hair, which was turning grey. On being asked whether he knew the man called "Leather Apron," Donovan said he knew him well. He came to the lodging-house about twelve months ago, a woman being his companion. In the early hours of the morning the woman commenced screaming murder, and it seems that


and torn her hair and clothes. "Leather Apron" said the woman was trying to rob him, but he (Donovan) did not believe him, and turned him out of the house. The man had come there several times since for a lodging, but they would not admit him.


John Davis, who was the first to make the shocking discovery, says: - Having had a cup of tea this morning at about six o'clock, I went down stairs. When I got to the end of the passage I saw a woman lying down, her clothing up to her knees, and her face covered with blood. What was lying beside her I cannot describe - it was part of her body. I had heard no noise, nor had my missus. I saw Mr. Bailey's men waiting at the back of the Black Swan ready to go into their work - making packing cases. I said to them, "Here's a sight; a woman must have been murdered." I then ran to the police-station in Commercial-road, and I told them there what I had seen, and some constables came back with me. I did not examine the woman when I saw her - I was too frightened. Our front door at 29, Hanbury-street, is never bolted, and anyone has only to push it open and walk through to the gate at the back yard. Immoral women have at times gone there.
Mrs. Davis said: We never heard any screams, either in the night or this morning. I went down myself shortly after my husband did, and nearly fainted away at what I saw. The poor woman's throat was cut, and the inside of her body was lying beside her. Someone beside me then remarked that the murder was just like the one committed in Buck's-row. The other one could not have been such a dreadful sight as this, for the poor woman found this morning was quite ripped open. She was lying in a corner of the yard, on her back, with her legs drawn up. It was just in such a spot that no one could see from the outside, and thus the dead creature might have been lying there for some time.
Two young men named Simpson and Stevens, living in Dorset-street, who knew the deceased as residing at that address, state that her name is Annie Chapman. She returned thither about twelve o'clock, stating that she had been to see some friends at Vauxhall. It is also stated that the murdered woman has two children - one of them, a girl aged 14, is at present performing in a circus travelling in France. The other is a boy between four and five years of age. He is now at school in Windsor, the native place of the woman Chapman.


Reference is made to a mysterious being bearing the name of "Leather Apron," concerning whom a number of stories have for a week or more been current in Whitechapel. He is five feet four or five inches in height, and wears a dark close-fitting cap. He is thick-set, and has an unusually thick neck. His hair is black, and closely clipped, his age about thirty-eight or forty. He has a small black moustache. The distinguishing feature of costume is a leather apron, which he always wears, and from which he gets his nickname. His expression is sinister, and seems to be full of terror for the women who describe it. His eyes are small and glittering. His lips are usually parted in a grin which is excessively repellent. He is a slipper-maker by trade, but does not work. His business is blackmailing women late at night. A number of men in Whitechapel follow this interesting profession.


His name nobody knows, but all are united in the belief that he is a Jew or of Jewish parentage, his face being of marked Hebrew type. But the most singular characteristic of the man is the universal statement that moving about he never makes any noise. What he wears on his feet the women do not know, but they agree that he moves noiselessly. His uncanny peculiarity to them is that they never see him or know of his presence till he is close by them. "Leather Apron" never by any chance attacks a man. He runs away on the slightest appearance of rescue. One woman whom he assailed some time ago boldly prosecuted him for it, and he was sent up for seven days. He has no settled place of residence, but has slept oftenest in a fourpenny lodging-house of the lowest kind in a disreputable lane leading from Brick-lane. He ranges all over London, and rarely assails the same woman twice.


Dr. Phillips, who has made a post mortem examination, states that he has been absolutely forbidden by the police and the coroner to communicate any statements to the Press beyond the general remark that the injuries which had been inflicted showed that the same hand which had committed the deed had been engaged in the other Whitechapel horrors. His examination left no doubt whatever of the murderer's thorough acquaintance with anatomy and the use of the knife, the whole ghastly business having been carried out in a "workman-like manner," to quote the phrase of a medical student who saw the remains. The throat shows signs of compression on both sides, and a compression of considerable force. There is no slipping apparent, the grasp of the murderous fingers being sharp and sudden, succeeded instantly by a swift and forcible use of the knife. Any outcry under these circumstances would, of course, be impossible. Horrible as it may appear, showmen have started in the Mile End-road life-sized models of the murdered women, and both shows were in full swing on Saturday afternoon and evening. The police authorities class the present murderer with Williams, who many years ago committed assassination after assassination in Shadwell and the district, winding up with the wholesale slaughter of the Marr family, and giving De Quincey the data for his essay, "Murder Considered as a Fine Art," and the police feel confident that other murders will take place unless the present murderer is stopped short by death or apprehension.

Writing on Monday our correspondent says: - The excitement over the mysterious and horrible murder in Whitechapel continues at its highest pitch. The arrests which have been made during the day have only served to whet the popular interest in this most extraordinary and revolting of London's innumerable undiscovered crimes, and perhaps to increase the general wonder that the boasted police organisation of the metropolis finds itself utterly unable to cope with crime when it assumes so startling and brutal a form. Day by day the record in this respect grows longer, and at the present moment the incapacity of our police and detective forces has created, in the East End at any rate, something little short of a panic. It was the boast of Mr. Howard Vincent, when he was head of the Criminal Investigation Department, that London was the safest city in the world; and so it would seem to be - for the assassin. The undiscovered murders of recent years make a long list. Passing over the murder of Mrs. Squires and her daughter in their shop at Hoxton in broad daylight; the killing of Jane Maria Clousen in Kidbrook-lane, near Eltham; the murder of the housekeeper to Bevington's, of Cannon-street, we come to, perhaps, the best remembered and most sensational of the mysterious crimes of the past. On the morning of Christmas-day, 1872, Harriet Buswell was discovered with her throat cut. She was a ballet-girl, employed at the Alhambra, and she had been accompanied to her home, 12, Great Coram-street, by a "gentleman," supposed to have been a German, who on the way purchased some apples, one of which was left in the room, and bore the impression of his teeth. This half-eaten apple was the sole clue to the murderer, who was never found. A German clergyman, named Hessel, was arrested at Ramsgate on suspicion three weeks after the murder, but a protracted magisterial investigation resulted in his complete acquittal. Mrs. Samuel was brutally done to death at her house in Burton-crescent, and a few doors further up Annie Yeats was murdered under precisely similar circumstances to those attending the death of Harriet Buswell. Miss Hacker was found dead in a coal-cellar in the house of one Sebastian Bashendorff, in Euston-square, and Hannah Dobbs was tried, but acquitted. An almost identical case happened in Harley-street. In this case the victim was unknown. Another unknown woman was discovered lying in Burdet-road, Bow, murdered. Mrs. Reville, a butcher's wife, of Slough, was found sitting in a chair with her throat cut, but no one was apprehended. Then there was the murder of an unfortunate in her home near Pye-street, Westminster. A rough fellow was known to have gone home with her, and he left an old and dirty neckerchief behind, but he was never found. Mrs. Samuel was killed with impunity in the Kentish Town Dairy. The murderer of Miss Clark, who was found at the foot of the stairs in her house, George-street, Marylebone, has gone unpunished. Besides these there are the cases in which the victims have been men. A grocer's assistant was stabbed to death in the Walworth-road by a man who was stealing a pound of tea from a cart. The act was committed in the sight of a number of people, but the man got away, and to this day has not been captured. Mr. Power, returning from midnight service on New Year's Eve, was found in the Stoke Newington Reservoir. The police failing to get the faintest clue adopted the theory of suicide, but could get nothing to substantiate it. On 29th March, 1884, E.J. Perkins, a clerk in a City office at 2, Arthur-street West, was murdered, and from Saturday till Monday his body lay in a cellar in the basement of the building. Lieutenant Roper was shot at the top of the barrack stairs at Chatham, and, though Percy Lefroy Mapleton, who was hanged from the murder of Mr. Gould on the Brighton Railway, accused himself of the murder, it was proved that he could have had no connection with the lieutenant's death. Urban Napoleon Stanger, the baker, of Whitechapel, who vanished so mysteriously, we pass over. The list, though incomplete, is ghastly enough. The question on everybody's lips today is, Who is the Whitechapel murderer? Since Saturday 21 people have been arrested on suspicion, and all, with one exception, have been released. The exception is a man named Pigott, who, as will be seen by the report given below, was arrested this morning at Gravesend in very singular circumstances.

To be continued........................................

Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"

Posts : 4907

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Chapman's Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Tue 10 Sep 2013 - 18:24

To the arrest of this man the police at first attached great importance. His clothes were bloodstained; his appearance was that of a fugitive shrinking from the outstretched arm of outraged justice; and weapons of a murderous kind were found upon him. What will come of this arrest it is impossible to say. At a late hour tonight it was reported that he had been found to be of unsound mind, and had been released; later this report was denied, and it was stated that he was still in custody. In the meantime the whole country awaits with feverish anxiety the receipt of some justification for the hope that justice, though baffled for the moment, will not in this case, at any rate, be frustrated.


About nine o'clock this morning a detective arrested, at 22, Mulberry-street, Commercial-street, the man known as the "Leather Apron," who was wanted in connection with the Whitechapel murder. The real name of the man arrested is John Piser; but his friends deny that he has ever been known under the nickname of "Leather Apron." When the detective called at the house the door was opened by Piser himself. "Just the man I want," said the detective, who charged him on suspicion of being connected with the murder of the woman "Sivey." The detective searched the house and took away some finishing tools, which Piser is in the habit of using in his work. By trade he is a boot-finisher, but for some time has been living at Mulberry-street with his step-mother and a married brother, who works as a cabinet-maker. When he was arrested by the detective his brother was at work, and the only inmates of the house were the prisoner's step-mother and his sister-in-law, and a Mr. Nathan, for whom he has worked. His mother and his sister-in-law declared positively that Piser came home at half-past ten on Thursday night and had not left the house since. They further stated that Piser is unable to do much work on account of ill-health, and that he is by no means a strong person, as some time ago he was seriously injured. About six weeks ago he left a convalescent home of which he had been an inmate on account of a carbuncle on his neck. He is about 35 years of age. The excitement in Whitechapel on it becoming known that a man alleged to be "Leather Apron" had been arrested was intense. The police-station was surrounded by a numerous crowd, and all over the neighbourhood the one topic of conversation was that "Leather Apron" was caught. After the prisoner had been taken to the station, Detective Thicke, who arrested him, visited, in company with another police officer, the house 22, Mulberry-street, where the prisoner was found, after he had been removed to the station. They closely questioned the man's relatives and friends in the house as to his antecedents and whereabouts during the last few weeks.


Our representative has interviewed several residents in Mulberry-street, which is a narrow thoroughfare off Commercial-street East. They all give the man who has been arrested a good character, and speak of him as being a harmless sort of person. A young woman residing next door said she had known Piser as a next-door neighbour for many years, and had never heard of him bearing the name of "Leather Apron." He had always seemed a quiet man, and unlikely to commit such crime as that of which the police suspect him. She says that she heard him about the yard a day or two back, but had not seen him in the streets during the last few days. Late in the evening the man was able to satisfy the authorities of Bethnal-green police station of his identity, and of his absolute innocence of anything connected with the Spitalfields murder, and consequently he was discharged. Reports are constantly arriving at the police headquarters that men whose description resembles that of the supposed murderer have been arrested. At present no fewer than seven persons are in custody in different parts of the East end on suspicion. The police at the various centres have, however, received strict instructions from Scotland-yard not to communicate details to the press, and it has not yet transpired whether any of the arrests is likely to lead to the identification of the culprit. In more than one case a brief investigation has proved that the person suspected could have had no connection with the outrage, and he has accordingly been released.


In the meantime it transpired that a most important arrest had been effected at Gravesend. On Sunday night, Superintendent Berry, of Gravesend, had a communication made to him that there was a suspicious-looking person at the Pope's Head public-house, West-street, in that town, and at once despatched a sergeant to the house, and the man was arrested and taken to the police station. It was noticed that one of his hands was injured, and on examining it the superintendent said it had evidently been bitten. When asked how he accounted for his hand being in this condition, the man said he was going down Brick-lane, Whitechapel, at half-past four o'clock on Saturday morning last, and a woman fell down in a fit. He stooped to pick her up, when she bit him. He then hit her, and as two policemen came up he ran away. Having examined the man's clothing very carefully, Dr. Whitcombe, the police-surgeon, was sent for, and


on two shirts which the man was carrying in a bundle. The doctor also expressed an opinion that blood had been wiped off his boots. After being cautioned, the man is alleged to have stated that the woman who bit him was at the back of a lodging-house at the time. He also said that on Thursday night he slept at a lodging-house in Osborne-street, Whitechapel, but that on Friday he was walking about Whitechapel all night, and that he came from London to Gravesend by road on Sunday. This morning he states that his name is William Henry Pigott, and that he is 52 years of age. He further said that some years ago he lived at Gravesend, his father having at one time held a position there connected with a friendly society. The man appeared to be in a very nervous state. He said he was a native of Gravesend, and told the police that he had been keeping several public-houses in London. Inspector Abberline, of Scotland Yard, proceeded to Gravesend on Monday, and decided to bring the prisoner back to Whitechapel, so that he could be confronted with the woman who had furnished the description of "Leather Apron." On arriving at London Bridge Station Pigott was driven to Commercial-street, and news of his arrival having spread quickly, the police-station was soon surrounded by an excited crowd. Pigott arrived at Commercial-street in much the same condition as when taken into custody. He wore no vest, had on  a battered felt hat, and either from drink or fright, appeared to be in a state of extraordinary nervous excitement. Mrs. Fiddymont, who is responsible for the statement respecting a man resembling "Leather Apron" being seen at the Prince Albert public-house on Saturday, was sent for, as were also other witnesses likely to be able to identify the prisoner, but after a very brief scrutiny it was the unanimous opinion that Pigott was not "Leather Apron." Nevertheless, looking to his condition of mind and body, it was decided to detain him until he could give a more satisfactory explanation of himself and his movements. After an interval of a couple of hours, the man's manner becoming more strange and his speech more incoherent, the divisional surgeon was called in, and he gave it as his opinion that the prisoner's mind was unhinged. A medical certificate to this effect was made out, and Pigott will for the present remain in custody.


Telegraphing at a late hour on Monday night, the Press Association says: - In consequence of the reticence shown by the police in giving information, it was understood that the man Piser, alleged to be "Leather Apron," had been released, but it appears from later inquiries that he is still in custody. He is detained at the Leman-street police-station, but at midnight, as far as could be ascertained, had not been charged with any special offence. The police appear to be at a loss as to what to do with the man now that he is in custody. It is understood that they requisitioned the assistance of some experts. Amongst those who came from Scotland Yard were Detective-Inspector Abberline and Superintendent Shaw, the latter an officer who perhaps knows more about crime and criminals than any man in the detective service. The prisoner was seen by these officers, being brought from the cells to the superintendent's office, where, it is stated, he was prevailed upon to make a statement. It is believed that this man, if not personally guilty, is able to throw some light on the criminal.

100 Pound Reward Offered.

Mr. S. Montagu, M.P., has offered 100 pounds as a reward for the capture of the perpetrator of the Whitechapel murder.


Mr. J. Aarons, of Mile-end-road, was busy today organising a vigilance committee for the protection of the residents of Whitechapel from any possible future crime of the nature recently perpetrated, and the following notice has been publicly issued: - "Finding that, in spite of murders being committed in our midst, our police force is inadequate to discover the author or authors of the late atrocities, we, the undersigned, have formed ourselves into a committee, and intend offering a substantial reward to anyone, citizens or otherwise, who shall give such information as will be the means of bringing the murderer or murderers to justice." Then follow the names of several prominent East-end tradesmen, who have come forward to give their support to the movement.


Intelligent observers who have visited the locality of Saturday's crime express the utmost astonishment that the murderer could have reached a hiding-place after committing such a crime. He must have left the yard in Hanbury-street reeking like a slaughterman, and yet, if the theory that the murder took place between five and six o'clock be accepted, he must have walked in almost broad daylight along streets comparatively well-frequented, even at that early hour, without his startling appearance attracting the slightest attention. Consideration of this point has led many to the conclusion that the murderer came not from the wretched class from which the inmates of common lodging-houses are drawn. More probably, it is argued, he is a man lodging in a comparatively decent house in the district, to which he would be able to return quickly, and in which, once reached, he would be able at his leisure to remove from his person all traces of his hideous crime. It is, at any rate, practically certain that the murderer, if in the habit of using common lodging-houses, would not have ventured to return to such lodgings smeared with blood, which he must have been, and with everyone suspicious and on the alert in consequence of the crime committed only the previous week. Nor is it likely, for similar reasons, that he could have cleansed himself in any of the tavern horse troughs or public fountains to be found in Whitechapel-road and other thoroughfares in the district. The police are therefore exhorted not to confine their investigations, as they are accused of doing, to common lodging-houses, and other resorts of the criminal and outcast, but to extend their inquiries to the class of householders, exceedingly numerous in the East-end of London, who are in the habit of letting furnished lodgings without particular inquiry into the character or antecedents of those who apply for them. From this direction it is not improbable that, as in the case of Lefroy, will come the first trustworthy clue to the murderer.


Meanwhile the suggestion is being acutely revived - is the murderer a lunatic? Dr. Forbes Winslow is of opinion that the murders are the work of one person, who is either a discharged lunatic from some asylum, or one who has escaped from such an institution. He has suggested to the Scotland-yard authorities that all the asylums should be communicated with, and particulars requested respecting the recent discharge of homicidal lunatics, or persons who may have effected their escape from such institutions. The present whereabouts of such lunatics should, in Dr. Winslow's opinion, be at once ascertained. This advice will probably be immediately followed out.


The latest theory of the tragedy is that the four women were killed by someone to whom bloodshed and slaughter is an everyday affair - e.g., a knacker or slaughterman. Such a man, it is urged, would have the skill, acquired by practice, necessary to do the work silently, swiftly, and with the minimum of bloodiness. He would have by him, without fear of thereby attracting suspicion, the kind of weapon exactly suited to the purpose. He would be the only man in all London who could walk along the streets in the early daylight with blood on his hands and clothes without exciting undue notice or remark. He would have the needful anatomical knowledge by which he would be able to find quickly such internal organs as the heart and liver, supposing he desired to add horror to horror by placing them outside the victim's body. He would commit the murders within a reasonable distance of his place of trade, so as to be able to reach it at the usual time for beginning work or not to be absent from it long enough to excite notice if the crime were committed during work hours, and the point to be discovered - Is there such a man in the neighbourhood who cannot satisfactorily account for his movements on the nights of these recent murders?


An important discovery, throwing considerable light on the Whitechapel murderer's movements after the commission of the crime, was made on Tuesday. A little girl found on the wall and path in the yard behind No. 25, Hanbury-street, the next house but one to the scene of the murder, peculiar marks which the police, when communicated with, detected to be a bloody trail, extending towards the back door of the house. Following this track, it became evident that the murderer had climbed the dividing fence between No. 29 and 27, and passed into the yard of 25. On the wall of the last house there was found a great smudge of dried blood as if the murderer had beaten a blood-soaked coat against it. In the adjoining yard was found a crumpled paper, almost saturated with blood, on which it appeared the murderer wiped his reeking hands.
It is stated that the police have full knowledge of the whereabouts of the man whose description has been circulated as that of the alleged Whitechapel murderer, and his identity is spoken to by several witnesses. Although not actually under arrest he is carefully watched, and his arrest is said to be only a question of time; and the belief is steadily gaining ground that the man who was seen in a passage with a woman, who is supposed to have been Mary Ann Nicholls, on the morning of the 8th of August, and who spoke with a foreign accent, is the murderer of both Mary Ann Nicholls and Annie Chapman, and in the event of his arrest strong prima facie evidence will, it is said, be forthcoming to connect him with the crimes. The police have keenly followed up the clue which was given to them about this man. The pensioner who kept company with Annie Chapman will, it is said, be forthcoming, and also the two men who were called by the witness Davis when he found the body in Hanbury-street, but whose names were not then known to the police. They are employed at the works of Mr. Bailey, packing-case maker. The unfortunate woman, Annie Chapman, has been identified by her brother, and her relatives took the body away on Wednesday on getting the order from the coroner. The date and place of the funeral will be kept a secret, the friends objecting to any demonstration.
Later information with regard to the alleged finding of pieces of paper smeared with blood in the back premises of Mr. Bailey's packing-case shop in Hanbury-street is to the effect that investigation has proved that the stains are not those of blood, but of some other matter. The police attach no importance either to this or to the marks on the wall in the yard.


The Press Association's representative has had an interview with John Piser, at 22, Mulberry-street. He was released from Leman-street police-station about 8:30 on Tuesday night. In reply to questions, the ex-prisoner said: - Whatever particulars the world at large and police authorities wish to know as to where I was staying when these atrocious and horrible crimes were committed I am quite willing to give. I came into this house at a quarter to 11 on Thursday night; I knocked, and my sister opened the door. My sister's young man was present, and we had some conversation about work. My sister first went to bed and put the bolt on the latch, so that anyone going out aftewards could not get in again. From Thursday until I was arrested I never left the house except to go into the yard. I was seen several times in the yard by a neighbour. On Monday morning Sergeant Thicke came. I opened the door, and he said I was wanted. I asked, "What for?" He replied, "You know what for; you will have to come with me." I said, "Very well, I will go with the greatest of pleasure." The officer said, "You know you are 'Leather Apron,'" or words to that effect. Up to that moment I did not know I was called by that name. I have been in the habit of wearing an apron coming from my employment, but not recently. When I arrived at the police station I was searched. They took everything from me, according to custom, as I suppose. They found nothing that could incriminate me, thank God, or connect me with the crime that I have been unfortunately suspected of. I know of no crime, and my character will bear the strictest investigation. I am generally here, but occasionally at a lodging-house, but not in Dorset-street. Before coming here on Thursday I was at Holloway. Last Sunday week I was accosted in Church-street by two females unknown to me. One of them asked me if I was the man, referring, presumably, to the Buck's-row murder. I said, "God forbid, my good woman." A man then asked me to treat him to beer, but I walked on. I do not know Mrs. Fiddymont's public-house, and was ignorant of such a name as Mrs. Siffey until it was published. I don't know the woman. Yesterday a man came to Leman-street station, and at the request of the police I went out into the yard. A stalwart man, of negro caste, whom I know to be a boot-finisher, placed his hand upon my shoulder. I said, "I don't know you; you are mistaken." His statement that he saw me threaten a woman in Hanbury-street is false. I can give a full account of my whereabouts. I shall see if I cannot legally proceed against those who have made statements about me. The charges against me have quite broken my spirits, and I fear I shall have to place myself under medical treatment." Piser is a man of medium height, with a moustache and whiskers. For a man of his class he displays more than an ordinary amount of intelligence. He was perfectly at ease when making his statement, and more than once appealed to his father for confirmation of his story.


Mr. Wynne Baxter, who held the inquest on the body of Mary Ann Nicholls, opened the inquiry this morning at the Working Lads' Institute, Whitechapel-road, upon the body of Annie Chapman, alias Annie Sivey, who was found butchered in Hanbury-street on Saturday morning. Mr. Collier, deputy-coroner of the East London district, in which the body was found, was also present. Notwithstanding the presence of half a dozen policemen around the Institute door, no crowd collected, and there was no attendance of the general public at the inquiry.
The jury having viewed the body,
John Davies said he had lived at 29, Hanbury-street, a fortnight, and was a carman. He occupied one room at the front, at the top of the house, with his wife and three sons. On Friday night he went to bed at eight o'clock, and his wife went to bed about half an hour afterwards. His sons went to bed at different times, the last one at about a quarter to 11. There was a long window in the room, made when it was used as a weaving shed. He was awake from three o'clock to five, and fell off to sleep again. He was confident of the time, because there was a clock in the room. At a quarter to six the Spitalfields clock struck. He got up and had a cup of tea which his wife made, and then went down to the back yard. The house faced Hanbury-street, and the front door opened into the street, the front room being used as a cats' meat shop. The passage from the front door led into the yard, and there were one or two steps down into the yard. Neither of the doors were ever locked. There was a latch on the front door, but it could be opened by anyone who knew where it was. The door was not always latched; he had often found it wide open. When he went into the yard he noticed that the door was shut. The front door was wide open, but he was not surprised at that. When he opened the door he saw a woman lying down behind it, and close to the rough wooden fence which divided the yards. Her head was between the steps and the fence, and her legs towards the wood-shed at the bottom of the yard. Her clothes were up over her body, and he saw that she was terribly mutilated. He did not go into the yard, but ran to the front door and saw two men who work at Mr. Bailey's, packing-case maker, Hanbury-street. They came in and saw the body. He did not know the names of the men.
The Coroner asked the police if these men had been found, and was told they had not.
The Coroner said they must be found, and told witness he must find them with the aid of the police.
Witness proceeded to state that the two men were waiting outside the workshop before commencing work. They did not go into the yard, but went to the door and "saw the sight." They then ran into the street to find a policeman, witness going to the Commercial-street police-station. He did not inform anyone in the house of what he had discovered. When he got to Commercial-street station he saw an inspector, who sent off some constables. After this witness returned to Hanbury-street, and went past the door, but did not go in. He saw the constables there. He had never seen the woman before, and had never seen women in the passage, though Mrs. Richardson, another tenant, said they were there frequently. He heard no noise at all during the night.
Amelia Farmer said she lived in Dorset-street, Spitalfields, in a common lodging-house. She had been there four years, and was married to Henry Farmer, a pensioner. Witness worked for the Jews - washing and charing. She had known deceased well for about five years. She was the widow of Frederick Chapman, who lived at Windsor. He was a veterinary surgeon, and used to send her a postal order every week for 10s. They had lived apart for four years or more. She lived in various places - mostly in common lodging-houses, in the neighbourhood of Spitalfields. Amongst other places she lived about two years ago at 30, Dorset-street, with a man who made wire sieves. At that time she was receiving 10s. a week from her husband. The payment stopped about 18 months ago, and on making inquiries she ascertained that her husband was dead. She ascertained this either from her husband's brother or sister, in Oxford-street, Whitechapel. She was nicknamed Mrs. Sivey because of living with a man named Sivey in Dorset-street. She (witness) saw this man about 18 months ago in the City. She then knew him well by sight. He left the deceased and went to live in the neighbourhood of Notting-hill. Since that time she had been living in the same neighbourhood, and witness saw her on Monday last standing in the road opposite 25, Dorset-street, where she lived. She had been staying there, and had no bonnet or jacket on. She had a black eye and said she felt very ill. She also had a bruise on the right-hand side of her face, on the temple, and a bruise on her chest. Witness asked her how she got the bruise on her face, and the deceased thereupon opened her dress and showed the bruise on her chest. She said she had received it from a woman who sold books, and who was jealous of her because she was acquainted with a very respectable man named Ted Stanley. There had been a quarrel in the morning in a beerhouse at the corner of Dorset-street, where the deceased, the woman, a man named Harry Hawker, and Ted Stanley were together. The squabble was about a two-shilling piece which one of the men had put on the counter to pay for drink, and which was removed. In the evening the book-hawking woman met deceased in the street and violently assaulted her. On the following morning she saw the deceased near Spitalfields Church, and she saw her again in the afternoon. She then said she felt no better, and should go into the casual-ward for a day or two. Witness said to her, "You look very bad; have you had anything to eat?" She said, "No, I have not had a cup of tea today." Witness gave her 3d., and told her to go and get some tea, but not to have any rum. She was fond of rum, and was often the worse for drink. She did crochet work and made antimacassars for a living, and also sold flowers. Witness was afraid she also went on the streets at night. In fact, deceased had told her she did. On Friday she used to go to Stratford to sell anything she had to sell, but on Friday afternoon witness saw her in Dorset-street. She appeared quite sober, but said she had been too ill to do any work. About ten minutes afterwards witness saw her at the same place, when she said, "It's no use my going away. I must get some money, or I shall have no lodgings." Nothing more was said, and that was the last time witness saw her alive. On the Friday afternoon deceased said she had been in the casual ward, but did not say which one. She was well known in the casual ward.
Did you consider her a drunken woman? - She was a very straightforward woman when she was sober, and a very industrious, clever little woman.
Was she often drunk? - I have often seen her the worse for drink, and she could drink a lot without making her drunk. She had been living a very irregular life, and had no fixed home. She had a mother and sister, but they were not on friendly terms. She had never known deceased stay with her relatives for a single night. Her daughter and sons were at school.
The Coroner said he was informed there was some doubt about the husband of the deceased being a veterinary surgeon. He was a coachman or gentleman's servant.
Timothy Donovan said he lived at 35, Dorset-street, Spitalfields, and was the deputy of the lodging-house there. He saw the body of the deceased on Saturday, and recognised it as that of a woman who had lodged at the house during the last four months. She had not been there at all last week until Friday afternoon, when she asked to be allowed to go down into the kitchen.
What time was it? - In the morning.
What hour? - About half-past two.
Well, that's afternoon.
It's morning to me, because I don't get up till then.
It is not morning because you call it so.
That's your idea.
Don't be impudent. Afternoon is after twelve o'clock all the world over.
Witness, continuing his evidence, said the deceased went into the kitchen. She explained her absence during the week by saying that she had been in the infirmary. On the Saturday morning, at half-past one, witness was sitting in his office when deceased again entered the house and went down into the kitchen. He sent the watchman's "missus" to her to ask her if she wanted a bed. Deceased came up to the office and said, "I have not sufficient for a bed." She then went out, saying she should not be long, and asked him to keep her bed. The lodging money was 8d. She was eating potatoes as she went out. She stood in the street a minute, again calling out, "Never mind, Tim, I shall soon be back, don't let my bed." He did not see her again alive. It was then a quarter or 10 minutes to two. The watchman saw her go down Brushfield-street.
Was she the worse for drink when you saw her? - She had had enough.
You are sure of that? - Yes, certain.
Was she often the worse for drink? - Generally on a Saturday, but not other days.
You are certain she was the worse for drink? - Yes, I passed the word to her that she could find money for her beer but not for her bed. She said she had only been to the top of the street. She did not say if anyone had given it to her. He understood her to mean she had been to the Ringers public-house. She was not with any man that night. He did not know whether she was in the habit of walking the streets. She had brought men to the house, and he had refused to admit them. One man used to stay with her regularly from Saturday to Tuesday. He was a pensioner, but witness did not know his name. The last time the pensioner was at the house was Sunday, September 2nd. Sometimes he was dressed like a dock labourer, and others he would have a gentlemanly-like appearance.
John Evans, the watchman at the lodging-house, gave corroborative evidence. The deceased told him that she had been over to see her sister at Vauxhall on Friday. He had never heard any one threaten the deceased or heard her express fear of any one. He had never heard the women in the lodging-house say that they had been threatened or asked for money by strangers.
The inquiry was then adjourned until Wednesday.
The adjourned inquest on the body of Annie Chapman was resumed on Wednesday, at the Boys' Institute, Whitechapel, by Mr. Wynne Baxter. Inspectors Abberline and Helson attended to represent the police. A plan of the locality had been prepared for the information of the jury. There was a large attendance of the public.
Fontain Smith, printing warehouseman, deposed that he recognised the deceased as his sister. She was the widow of a head coachman, who formerly lived at Windsor, and had lived apart from him for three or four years. He last saw her alive a fortnight ago. He gave her 2s. She did not tell him where she lived.
James Kent, packingcase maker, Shadwell, said he worked at 23, Hanbury-street, for Mr. Bailey. His usual time for going to work was six o'clock. On Saturday he got there at ten minutes or a quarter past six. His employer's gate was open. While he was waiting for the other men to come an elderly man named Davies, living near, ran into the road, and called him. Witness went, accompanied by James Green and others. He saw a woman lying in the yard of No. 29, near the doorsteps. Her clothes were disarranged. Nobody entered the yard until the arrival of Inspector Chandler. The woman's face and hands were smeared with blood, and the position of the hands indicated that a struggle had taken place. The woman's internal organs had been torn out and were lying over her shoulder. Witness went to fetch a piece of canvas to throw over the body, and when he returned the inspector was in possession of the yard.
Cross-examined: She had a handkerchief of some kind round her throat, which seemed sucked into her throat. I saw no running blood, but her face and hands were smeared with blood, as if she had struggled. I did not notice any other injuries. She looked as if she had been on her back and used her hands to defend herself. Her hands were turned with the palms towards her face, as if she had fought for her throat. Her legs were wide apart.
Did you notice any blood about her legs? - There were similar marks of blood as about her face.
You spoke of some liquid having been thrown over her. - I could not tell what it was. It seemed as if her inside had been pulled from her and thrown at her. It was lying over her left shoulder.
Part of her inside was lying over her clothes? - Yes. When I went back to the house the mob had made a rush down as the news flew around.
James Green, another of Mr. Bailey's workmen, corroborated.
Amelia Richardson, 29, Hanbury-street, said she and her son occupied separate parts of the house. Francis Tyler carried on the work of a packingcase worker there. He came at eight o'clock on Saturday morning instead of six, the usual hour. Her son, living in John-street, was occasionally late. About six o'clock on Saturday morning her grandson, Thomas Richardson, hearing a commotion in the passage, went out, and on returning said there was a woman murdered in the yard. Witness went down and saw people in the passage. The inspector was the first person who entered the yard. She was awake a part of Friday night, but heard no noise. Witness proceeded to describe the number of lodgers in the house and the apartments they occupied.
John Piser was afterwards called. He said he lived at 22, Mulberry-street, and was a shoemaker. He was known by the nickname of "Leather Apron." On Thursday night he arrived at the house from the West End shortly before eleven o'clock. He remained indoors until he was arrested by the police on Monday, the 10th instant, at nine o'clock.
By the Coroner: He never left the house till then. He remained indoors because his brother advised him.
You were the subject of suspicion? - I was the object of unjust suspicion.
Where were you on Thursday, the 30th of August? - I was staying at Crossingham's, a common lodging-house called the "Round House," Holloway-road.
The jury did not question the witness, and the inquiry was again adjourned.


At five minutes after eleven o'clock on Saturday morning, a man suddenly attacked a woman whilst she was passing through Spitalfields Market. After felling her to the ground he began kicking her and pulled out a knife. Some women who had collected, having the terrible tragedy that brought them there still fresh in their minds, on seeing the knife, raised such piercing shrieks of "Murder!" that they reached the enormous crowds in Hanbury-street. There was at once a rush for the market, and on the crowd swarming around him, the man who was the cause of the alarm made furious efforts to reach the woman, from whom he had been separated by some persons who interfered on her behalf. He, however, threw these on one side, fell upon the woman, knife in hand, and inflicted various stabs on her head, cut her forehead, neck, and fingers before he was pulled off, when the woman lay motionless. The immense crowd took up the cry of "Murder!" and the people who were in the streets raised cries of "Lynch him!" At this juncture the police arrived, just in time to prevent the man from being torn to pieces. The affair occurred midway between Buck's-row and Hanbury-street, where the last two horrible murders have been committed, and the man is said to be a blind pedlar of laces, the woman leading him from place to place.


On Sunday night the body of a well-dressed lady, aged about 27 years, was found by the police near Surrey Chapel, Blackfriar's-road, London. On being conveyed to St. Thomas's Hospital she was found to be dead. A gentleman who said he was her husband left, as he stated, to seek medical aid, but has not reappeared.

Identification of the Body.

The body of the lady who was discovered in a dying condition near Surrey Chapel, Blackfriar's-road, London, on Sunday night, has been identified as that of Mrs. Byrne by the father of deceased, Mr. Nelson, of Yarmouth, her sister, Miss Nelson, of Chelsea, and Sergeant Wakefield, of the 6th Dragoon Guards Caribineers, at Canterbury. The post mortem examination was conducted by Dr. Luard, of St. Thomas's Hospital, assisted by another member of the hospital staff. On its conclusion a Press Association reporter saw Dr. Luard, who declined to make any statement as to the result of the autopsy. Any evidence as to after-death appearances he should reserve for the coroner. This refusal of information leaves the mystery as great as ever.
A Canterbury correspondent, telegraphing on Tuesday, says: The intelligence of the mysterious death in Blackfriar's, London, of Mrs. Byrne, widow of Sergeant-major Byrne, of Canterbury, caused some sensation in the town. Since the death of her husband, some two years since, the deceased lady, who was well known in Canterbury, resided in Broad-street. One of her sisters is the wife of Sergeant Wakefield of the Canterbury garrison. Another is a maiden lady - Miss Nelson, of Chelsea - to whom it is supposed Mrs. Byrne was proceeding when she so suddenly expired. The deceased had occasionally assisted in the management of a fruiterer's business in Guildhall-street, carried on by Mr. Elding. She left there about two o'clock on Saturday, stating her intention to return on Sunday night, and her non-appearance caused considerable uneasiness. Deceased's parents reside at Great Yarmouth, where her only child, a little boy, is living. Her sudden death excites grave suspicions.
An inquest was held on Wednesday on the body of the woman discovered in Blackfriar's-road, London, on Saturday night, under circumstances already reported. The house surgeon at St. Thomas's Hospital said he had examined the body, but could find no trace of violence. Death in his opinion was due to syncope. The jury returned a verdict to that effect.

Source: Cardiff Times, 15 September 1888, Page 6

Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"

Posts : 4907

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Chapman's Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Wed 11 Sep 2013 - 23:44


The inquest on the body of Annie Chapman, who was murdered in Hanbury-street on the morning of the 8th inst., was resumed by Mr. Wynne Baxter, at Whitechapel, on Wednesday afternoon. Chief Inspector West, and Inspectors Abberline, Helson, and Chandler attended to represent the police.
Eliza Cooper, 35, Dorset-street, deposed that she was a hawker, and lodged at that address five months. She knew the deceased. Witness had a quarrel with her the Tuesday before her death, and afterwards she noticed deceased's face was marked. The last time witness saw her alive was on Wednesday, the 5th inst., in the Ringer's public-house. Deceased had three brass rings on her left hand. The deceased associated with a man named Ted Stanley and others. She used to bring them to the public-house.
Mr. G. Baxter Phillips, recalled, proceeded to give additional details of the result of his examination of the body. Certain incisions and bruises led him to the conclusion that the woman was seized by the chin while the incisions in the throat were inflicted. He thought that if he gave any further details of the result of her examination it would be thwarting justice.
The Coroner said justice had already had a long time in which to avenge itself. The jury had to decide the cause of death, and were bound to take all possible evidence. The coroner then ordered the court to be cleared of ladies and boys.
The Foreman of the Jury said the jury were of opinion that the evidence which the doctor desired to keep back should be given.
Dr. Phillips: The evidence will not elucidate the cause of death.
The Coroner: That is a matter of opinion.
Dr. Phillips: Death took place before the injury was inflicted.
The Coroner: That is also a matter of opinion.
The Doctor: And it might be rebutted by other medical evidence.
At the request of the doctor his evidence on the first day was read over. Proceeding, Dr. Phillips said the abdominal walls had been removed in three portions. There was a greater portion of skin removed on the right side than on the left; a portion of the lower part of the abdomen was wanting. He removed the intestines in the same manner as he found them in the yard. The witness proceeded to give further details of the condition of the internal organs. The weapon used was probably five or six inches in more or length. The manner of cutting the body indicated a certain amount of anatomical knowledge.
In reply to the coroner, witness added that he himself could not have inflicted the injuries under a quarter of an hour even in a hurried manner without a struggle being made. If he had done it in a deliberate way, such as would fall to the duty of a surgeon, it would probably have taken the best part of one hour. Several vital portions of the body had been cut out, and his idea was that the object of the mutilation was to obtain possession of a certain portion of the body. The organs removed from the abdomen would not occupy much space, and might easily be concealed.
The Coroner observed that the doctor who examined the body of Nicholls, the other murdered woman, was of opinion that in that case the injuries to the abdomen were inflicted first.
Elizabeth Long identified the dead woman as one whom she saw talking in Hanbury-street at half-past five on the morning of the murder to a man whom she would not be able to recognise, and as to whom she could only say that he was dark, rather tall, over 40, apparently a foreigner, and shabby genteel as to his dress. Both were talking loudly, but she only heard the man ask "Will you?"  and the woman reply "Yes."
Edward Stanley, otherwise known as "The Pensioner," to whom frequent reference has been made as a person who from time to time stayed with deceased at the lodging-house in Dorset-street, was then called. He deposed that he last saw her, as far as he remembered, on Sunday, the 2nd inst. He was not really in receipt of a pension, and had never belonged to the Sussex Regiment. He was a bricklayer's labourer by trade. He sometimes visited deceased, but he denied that he stayed with her as stated by the keeper of the lodging-house, and said he voluntarily went to Commercial-street police-station and offered to give evidence.
Donovan, the lodging-house deputy, was recalled, and identified "The Pensioner" as the man who had repeatedly stayed with deceased from Saturday till Monday, an allegation again strongly denied by Stanley.
Albert Cadosch, a carpenter, living at 27, Hanbury-street, said that on the morning of the murder he was in the back yard, when he heard first a voice in the yard next door, and then a fall against the fence. This he fixed as having taken place at 20 minutes past 5.
William Stephens, a youth living at the Dorset-street lodging house, said that early on the morning of the murder he saw the deceased pick up in the kitchen part of an envelope resembling that found in the yard, with the words "Sussex Regt." upon it.
This was all the evidence in the possession of the police at present. Some discussion took place as to whether a reward should be offered, and several of the jury expressed themselves strongly to the effect that the Government ought to come forward in that direction.
The inquest was then adjourned for a week.

Source: Cardiff Times, 22 September 1888, Page 4

Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"

Posts : 4907

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Chapman's Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Fri 13 Sep 2013 - 21:18


The inquest on the body of Mary Anne Nichols, 47, who was found murdered in Buck's-row, Whitechapel, early on the morning of the 1st inst., was resumed on Saturday afternoon, before Mr. Wynne Baxter, the district coroner, at the Working Lads' Institute, Whitechapel. The only further evidence taken was that of Thomas Eades, the signalman, who had previously deposed to having seen a man carrying a knife near the scene of the murder. Eades now testified that since last giving evidence he had identified John James, of Hackney, as the man whom he had seen with the knife.
The Coroner, in summing up, said: There is nothing in the evidence as to the movements of the deceased on the day before her death, except a statement by herself that she was living in a common lodging-house, called the "White House," in Flower and Dean-street, Spitalfields; but I believe her movements have been traced by the police, and are not considered to have any connection with her death. On Friday evening, August 31st, she was seen by Mrs. Holland (who knew her well) at the corner of Osborn-street and Whitechapel-road, nearly opposite the parish church. It was then half-past two. The deceased woman was then much the worse for drink, and was staggering against the wall. Her friend endeavoured to persuade her to come home with her, but she declined, and was last seen endeavouring to walk eastward down Whitechapel. She said she had had her lodging money three times that day, but that she had spent it; that she was without money; that the lodging-house deputy refused to trust her; that she was going to look about and get some money to pay her lodgings; and that she should soon be back. What her exact movements were after this it is impossible to say. At all events, in less than an hour and a quarter after this she is found dead at a spot rather under three-quarters of a mile distant. The time at which the body was found cannot have been far from 3:45 a.m., as it is fixed by so many independent data. The condition in which the body was found appears to prove conclusively that the deceased was killed on the exact spot in which she was found. There is not a trace of blood anywhere except at the spot where her neck was lying. I think we cannot altogether leave unnoticed the fact that the death that you have been investigating is one of four presenting many points of similarity, all of which have occurred within the space of about five months, and all within a very short distance of the place where we are sitting.
Emma Elizabeth Smith, who received her injuries in Osborn-street on the early morning of Easter Tuesday, the 3rd of April, survived in the London Hospital for upwards of 24 hours, and was able to state that she had been followed by some men, robbed, and mutilated, and even to describe imperfectly one of them.
Martha Tabram was found at 3 a.m., on Tuesday, the 7th of August, on the first floor landing of George-yard-buildings, Wentworth-street, with 39 punctured wounds on her body. In addition to these, and the case under your consideration, there is the case of Annie Chapman, still in the hands of another jury. All four victims were women of middle age, all were married and had lived apart from their husbands in consequence of intemperate habits, and were at the time of their death leading an irregular life, and eking out a miserable and precarious existence in common lodging-houses. In each case their were abdominal as well as other injuries. In each case the injuries were inflicted after midnight, and in places of public resort, where it would appear impossible but that almost immediate detection should follow the crime, and in each case the inhuman and dastardly criminals are at large in society. I suggest to you as a possibility that the two women - Nicholls and Chapman - may have been murdered by the same man with the same object, and that in the case of Nicholls the wretch was disturbed before he had accomplished his object, and having failed in the open street, he tries again, within a week of his failure, in a more secluded place. If this should be correct, the audacity and daring is equal to its maniacal fanaticism and abhorrent wickedness. It now only remains for you to say by your verdict how, when, and by what means the deceased came by her death.
The jury then retired to consider their verdict, and, after an absence of over twenty minutes, they returned.
The Coroner: Gentlemen, have you agreed upon your verdict?
The Foreman: Yes, sir. We are unanimously of opinion that we should give an open verdict of murder against some person or persons unknown, and we wish to thank you for your remarks with reference to the necessity for a mortuary, and for the very able way in which you have conducted the enquiry.


Since the publication of Dr. Phillips's evidence on the inquest on the body of Annie Chapman, Coroner Baxter has received a communication from a person of good standing in the medical world which affords an important clue to the murderer's probable motive. The coroner thinks the clue well worth following up, and has personally attended at Scotland-yard to confer with the heads of the detective department.
Mr. Wynne Baxter, on Wednesday afternoon, resumed the inquest at Whitechapel on the body of Annie Chapman, who was murdered on the 8th inst. in the back yard of 29, Hanbury-street. No further witnesses were called, and the Coroner at once proceeded to sum up the evidence. He recalled the important facts of the case, which have been already fully detailed. It was in a Spitalfields lodging house that the deceased received the older bruises found on her temple and in front of the chest, in a trumpery quarrel a week before her death. It was in one of these lodging houses that she was seen a few hours before her mangled remains were discovered. She was found dead at six o'clock. All was done with reckless daring; the murder seemed, as in the Buck's-row case, to have been carried out without any cry. Sixteen people were in the house, and the partitions of the rooms were of wood. The brute who committed the offence did not even take the trouble to cover up his ghastly work, but left the body exposed to view. Probably as daylight broke he hurried away in fear. The Coroner then proceeded to observe: - There are two things missing. Her rings had been wrenched from her fingers, and have not yet been found, and the uterus has been taken away. The body has not been dissected, but the injuries have been made by someone who had considerable anatomical knowledge and skill. There are no meaningless cuts. The organ has been taken away by one who knew where to find it, what difficulties he would have to contend against, and how he should use his knife so as to abstract the organ without injury to it. No unskilled person could have known where to find it, or have recognised it when it was found. For instance, no mere slaughterer of animals could have carried out these operations. It must have been someone accustomed to the post mortem room. The conclusion that the desire was to possess the missing organ seems overwhelming. If the object were robbery, the injuries to the viscera were meaningless, for death had previously resulted from loss of blood at the neck. Difficulty in believing that the purport of the murder was the possession of the uterus is natural; it is abhorrent to our feelings to conclude that a life should be taken for so slight an object; but, when rightly considered, the reasons for most murders are altogether out of proportion to the guilt. It has been suggested that the criminal is a lunatic with morbid feelings. This may or may not be the case, but the object of the murderer appears to be palpably shown by facts, and it is not necessary to assume lunacy, for it is clear that there is a market for the missing organ. To show you this, gentlemen of the jury, I must mention a fact which, at the same time, proves the assistance which publicity and the newspaper press afford in the detection of crime. Within a few hours of the issue of the papers containing a report of the medical evidence given at the last sitting of the court, I received a communication from an officer of one of our great medical schools that they had information which might or might not have a distinct bearing on our inquiry. I attended at the first opportunity, and was informed by the sub-curator of the Pathological Museum that some months ago an American had called on him, and asked him to produce a number of specimens of the organ that was missing in the deceased. He stated his willingness to give 20 pounds a piece for each specimen. He stated that his object was to issue an actual specimen with each copy of a publication on which he was then engaged. He was told that his request was impossible to be complied with, but he still urged his request; he wished them preserved not in spirits of wine (the usual medium), but in glycerine in order to preserve them in a flaccid condition, and he wished them sent to America direct. It is known that this request was repeated to an institution of a similar character. Now, is it not possible that the knowledge of this demand may have incited some abandoned wretch to possess himself of a specimen? It seems beyond belief that such inhuman wickedness could enter into the mind of any man; but, unfortunately, our criminal annals prove that every crime is possible. I need hardly say that I at once conveyed my information to the Detective Department at Scotland Yard. Of course, I do know what use has been made of it; but I believe that publicity may possibly further elucidate this fact, and therefore I have not withheld from you the information. By means of the press some further explanation may be forthcoming from America, if not from here. I have endeavoured to suggest to you the object with which this crime was committed, and the class of person who committed it. The greatest deterrent from crime is the conviction that detection and punishment will follow with rapidity and certainty, and it may be that the impunity with which Mary Ann Smith and Anne Tabram were murdered suggested the possibility of such horrid crimes as those which you and another jury have recently been considering. It is, therefore, a great misfortune that nearly three weeks have elapsed without the chief actor in this awful tragedy having been discovered. It is not as if there were no clue to the character of the criminal or the cause of his crime. His object is clearly divulged. His anatomical knowledge carries him out of the category of common criminals, for that knowledge could only have been obtained by assisting at post mortems or by frequenting the post mortem room. Thus the class in which search must be made, although a large one, is limited. Moreover, it must be a man who was from home, if not all night, at least during the early hours of the 8th of September. His hands were undoubtedly bloodstained, for he did not stop to use the tap in the yard, as the pan of clean water under it shows. If the theory of lunacy be correct (which I very much doubt) the class is still further limited; while, if Mrs. Long's memory does not fail, and the assumption be correct that the man who was talking to deceased at half-past five was the culprit, he is even more clearly defined. He was a foreigner of dark complexion, over 40 years of age, a little taller than the deceased, of shabby genteel appearance, with a brown deerstalker hat on his head and a dark coat on his back. We are confronted with a murderer of no ordinary character, committed, not for jealousy, revenge, or robbery, but from a motive less adequate than many which still disgrace our civilization, mar our progress, and blot the pages of our Christianity.
The jury immediately returned a verdict of "Wilful murder against some person or persons unknown."

Source: Cardiff Times, 29 September 1888, Page 4

Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"

Posts : 4907

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Chapman's Murder and Inquest

Post by Karen on Sun 15 Sep 2013 - 9:40


At five minutes to six o'clock on Saturday morning a man named John Davies, living at 29, Hanbury-street, Spitalfields, discovered that a woman was murdered in the yard at the rear of that house, and when the police were called in the circumstances attending her murder raised a strong presumption that she was another victim of the murderer of Mary Ann Nicholls, in Buck's-row, Whitechapel, only a week previously. The victim was an unfortunate woman, so poor that robbery could not be suggested as a motive. The house 29, Hanbury-street (which is not half a mile from Buck's-row) is tenanted by a man named Clark, a packing-case maker, and is let in rooms to several people, all very poor and struggling. The front parlour is in the occupation of Mrs. Hardiman, who uses it as a shop for the sale of cat's meat. She and her son also sleep in the room. The back parlour is a sort of sitting room for the landlady and her family, and looks out upon a yard, at the further side of which stands a shed, where the packing case work is done. The passage of the house leads directly to the yard, passing the door of the front parlour, the yard being about four feet below the level of the passage, and reached by two stone steps. The position of the steps creates a recess on their left, the fence between the yard and the next house being about three feet from the steps. In this recess John Davies as he crossed the yard at five minutes to six o'clock, saw the body of a woman, her clothes so disarranged as to show that the lower part of her body had been horribly mutilated. The throat had been cut so deeply that the head was nearly severed from the trunk. Davies called in Police-constable Pinnock, 238 H, who sent information to the Station in Commercial-street. Inspector Chandler and others hurried to the place, and before the body was removed from its position, Mr. G.B. Phillips, of Spital-square, was called to examine it. The surgeon said he had no doubt that the throat was first cut, and the stomach subsequently mutilated. The body had been ripped up from the abdomen to the breast bones, and then hacked and gashed until the entrails protruded; portions of the flesh hung in shreds, and some of the viscera were on the shoulders. The body was removed as soon as possible to the mortuary of the parishes of Whitechapel and Spitalfields, in old Montague-street, and placed in a shell - the same in which a week before, the hacked body of the previous victim had been placed. The police description of the body was made out, and before ten o'clock it was identified as that of Annie Chapman, alias Sivey, a name by which she had become known through living with a sieve maker. The police ascertained that Chapman was the correct name of the deceased, and that she was the widow of a man who had been a soldier or veterinary surgeon, and from whom, until about twelve months ago, when he died, she had been receiving 10s. a week. Her usual places of abode were the common lodging-houses of Spitalfields and Whitechapel. A stout, well-proportioned woman, of about  five feet in height, she was much given to drink, but is described as quiet, and as one who had "seen better days."
Detective-inspector Abberline, of Scotland-yard, who had been detailed to make special inquiries as to the murder of Mary Ann Nicholls, at once took up the inquiries with regard to the new crime, the two being obviously the work of the same hands. He held a consultation with Detective-inspector Helson J. Division, in whose district the murder in Buck's-row was committed, and with Acting Superintendent West, in charge of the H. Division. The result of that consultation was an agreement in the belief that the crimes were the work of one individual only, that the murders had been committed were the bodies had been found, and that they were not the work of any gang. A careful examination was made of the flooring of the passage and the walls of the neighbouring house, but not a trace of blood was found. It is considered impossible that a body could have been carried in, supposing no blood had dropped, without arousing from their sleep Mrs. Hardiman and her son, past whose bedroom door the murderer would have had to go. There is no doubt the deceased was acquainted with the fact that the house door was always open or "ajar," and that she and her murderer stealthily passed into the yard. The absence of a pool of blood is accounted for by the quantity the clothes would absorb. The throat was so severed that there could have been no cry, and the tenants of the house agree that nothing was heard to create alarm. The back room of the first floor, which has all windows facing all the yard, is a bedroom, and was tenanted by a man named Alfred Walker and his father, neither of whom heard a sound.
Very early in the day the popular excitement in Whitechapel was suddenly sent up to fever heat by the announcement that the man "Leather Apron," accused everywhere directly and by implication of the whole series of murders, had been arrested. There was no improbability in the report, for "Leather Apron" has a strongly marked individuality; his haunts are well known to hundreds of persons, and the detective energy of the Metropolitan police has been concentrated for days past upon his capture. Nevertheless, "Leather Apron" is still at large. An arrest was made, as stated, but the subject proved to be one John Piser, a boot finisher by trade, living at 22, Mulberry street, and described and known as an inoffensive fairly industrious working man. It is said that Piser bears some resemblance to "Leather Apron," and that appears to be the only ground for his arrest. Piser took his arrest very quietly, and accompanied the detective without saying a word to Leman-street Police-station, where he was detained for several hours. Several persons personally acquainted with "Leather Apron" were afforded the opportunity of examining carefully the features of Piser, but all failed to identify him with that missing desperado. Meanwhile the police had examined the inmates of 22, Mulberry-street, and had searched the premises from top to bottom, but found that the only instruments capable of being used as lethal weapons were some finishing tools used by Piser in his business. Piser had given at Leman-street an account of his recent movements, which, confirmed by independent testimony and corroborated by the evidence of the police themselves, left the authorities no option but to release their captive, which was done as quietly as possible in the course of the afternoon. The unhappy man, however, was unable to return to his humble home, the whole of Mulberry-street being occupied by an excited and dangerously, exasperated crowd of men and women, attracted thither by the report that the dreaded "Leather Apron" had been arrested in that locality. Piser, therefore, wisely waited until dusk before rejoining the family circle from which he had been so unceremoniously separated.
About the hour that Piser was arrested in Whitechapel a telegram was received at Scotland Yard notifying that a very suspicious character had been taken in custody at Gravesend. The man was arrested on Sunday night by Police constable Vellensworth, "on information received," in the Pope's Head Tavern in that town, and his appearance and demeanour amply justified the course taken. He gave the name of William Henry Pigott, and seemed to be about forty years of age. He was in a very dirty state, which he explained was due to his having tramped from London. Upon his clothing were many stains, apparently of blood, and his shirt was torn and dirty. The forefinger of his left hand was badly wounded, and he had other suspicious marks about him. On being pressed, Pigott showed considerable trepidation and trembled constantly, either from fear or from the effects of drink. He admitted that he was in Whitechapel on the Saturday morning, not far from the scene of the murder, and that he had an altercation with a woman, in the course of which his finger was bitten. Detective-inspector Abberline, of Scotland Yard, proceeded to Gravesend, and on seeing the prisoner was struck with his resemblance to the man who entered the Prince Albert public-house in Whitechapel on Saturday morning in company, it is said, with the murdered woman, and of whom a description had been issued by the police on information supplied by Mrs. Fiddymont, the landlady. Pigott was removed, under police escort, to London, and not long after his arrival it was ascertained, practically beyond doubt, that he slept at a common lodging-house in Whitechapel on Friday last - a circumstance which greatly raised the hopes of the police. Pigott's condition did not improve during the journey from Gravesend, and when he arrived, in the custody of Inspector Abberline, at Commercial-street Police-station he was in a state closely resembling that of a man recovering from delirium tremens. He had assumed a sullen demeanour, and refused to speak a word to anybody.
After extended enquiry, the prisoner was also released.

Source: Pembrokeshire Herald and General Advertiser, 14 September 1888, Page 4

Karen Trenouth
Author of: "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"
Author of: "Jack the Ripper: The Satanic Team"

Posts : 4907

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Chapman's Murder and Inquest

Post by Mr Hyde on Sun 25 May 2014 - 20:06

Given that Dr. Phillips description of the murderer as showing anatomical knowledge,surgical skill,probably using a pathologist's blade and pretty much attempting to decapitate his anyone surprised to find that his Post mortem revealed the membranes of Chapman's brain to be diseased!

Mr Hyde

Posts : 174

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Details of Chapman's Murder and Inquest

Post by Sponsored content

Sponsored content

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

Back to top

- Similar topics

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum