To quote the great lexicographer Dr. Samuel Johnson: The book is both good and original; but the part that is good is not original, and the part that is original is not good.
One point about Polly, Hallie did include the quote by her fellow lodgers saying she was an unfortunate but edited the stament that they ‘knew nothing more’ about her to read ‘they knew … nothing about her’. This provides the opportunity to argue that if they knew nothing about her how did they know she was an ‘unfortunate’. She gets a few other things wrong about Polly’s background. And so often throughout the book her ‘errors’ lend support to her arguments.
@@walkawaycat431 she's not the first to do this and I'm sure unfortunately won't be the last. Great that we have people like Ed who put in the effort to point all this out.
Excellent rebuttal. Every time I see another of your videos, I'm more impressed by not only your scholarship, but by your fairness, sense of justice, and balanced and professional demeanor. Well done, Mr. Stow.
Purely as a layperson, I find it frustrating, that this Author could write accounts of these womens' lives, without fact checking information, that you have clearly provided. And as a woman, it really annoys me, to have these two dimensional attitudes, placed on other women. Namely, that they weren't prostitutes, merely homeless. These women had police records, for soliciting. They weren't walking the streets, at night, looking for a place to sleep! And surely, if that were the case; they would surely feel safer, joining other homeless women?! I have read Hallie Rubenholds' book and I found it to be biased, towards the obvious facts and also filled with inconsistencies. A lazily written book!
Having been interested in the Whitechapel Murders and studied the subject in depth for many years I read Rubenholds book as soon as it was available and haveto say that I agree with your appraisal, the. book is laborious, full of the writers opinions and offers very few accepted and credible facts.
I think Rubenhold just took a very feminist angle deliberately, so as to have a different approach to a subject that's been covered extensively. It's a shame she had to denounce previous research though. I've read several Ripper books over the years and all of them were respectful of the victims , and went into detail on their lives. Certainly not in a salacious way.
Very good analysis! I read Rubenhold's book a few years ago and was shocked at her theory of the women sleeping rough. It just makes no sense when you look further into the case...
Just found your channel and I love how you dont just sit and talk at the camera. You show the areas of London this happened and relevant illustrations.
Good to see that The Guardian are fulfilling their time tested role to be a bellwether of correct opinion. Basically, if The Guardian takes a position just take the opposite one and you won't go far wrong.
@@kevinkenny6975 Unfortunately I have a few but we try to keep off any issues the guardian would have any opinion on. Does limit the topics for debate though
My hat is off to you Mr Stow. Having to read this drivel would be impossible for the best of us, you stand head and shoulders above the rest of us. Another very good presentation, thank you for your suffering 👍 Aussie viewer here, PS I love your footage and walk arounds of the crime scenes, your work takes me where I would probably never get to visit.
Unfortunately it is a sad fact that in most serial killer cases the victims are only remembered for being victims. It reminds me of Billy the Kid’s purported words to deputy Bell before shooting him “I’ll make you famous”.
Eyyy I was literally just thinking yesterday "I could use another house of Lechmere video right now wonder when he'll upload" glad to see that notification this morning 👍
A fantastic and thorough assessment of a heavily prejudiced book which definitely doesn't exhibit an enlightened attitude. Rubenhold has clearly twisted and omitted facts and invented things in order to fit her narrative. I'm sure that in decades to come 'The Five' will fall out of favour and people will ask, "Couldn't she have done better?"
I can appreciate what Hallie was trying to do. But distorting the facts goes too far. And it’s totally unnecessary. No one interested in this case is looking to nail those poor women to a morality cross. In fact, it is we, who keep their memories alive. We understand why they did what they did. We hold nothing against them. Thanks for the brilliant video Ed!
I suspect that our killer, had previously used the services of his victims without major incident, and that helped him to gain their trust. I wouldn't find his crimes any more abhorrent, if the victims had been a members of the local choir or temperance society.
I have an embarrassingly large library of JTR and Victorian true crime. I've heard/read every angle out there. Hallie's angle was to pander to a feminist audience that had no prior information on the crimes or knowledge of the intentions of previous authors. To think that everyone has ignored the humanity of the victims and derived a creepy pleasure out of the murders is proof that she had not actually read any books on the subject or, as I believe, knew her potential readership. I am glad that I borrowed this book from the library rather than waste money on it.
@@ImCarolB That book is as close to the truth as can be. All info from the diaries of inspector Aberline. His only comment on the subject: 'If the public knew what i found out, they would find it very interesting indeed'. P.s. Because i read that book, i feel no need to read about it anymore. No time wasting.
@@markrymanowski719 I have read everything I can find on the topic for over 50 years. A very good online resource is the website The Casebook of Jack the Ripper. A good number of the leading ripperologists engage in the discussions and write articles. There is only one review of the Ripper and the Royals. "Yet another Masonic Royal conspiracy theory, which even Fairclough himself (the author) has now disavowed. Of particular interest is the emergence of the "Abberline diary," which was quickly proved a forgery. Not recommended whatsoever." The book is a very interesting and engaging read but it's not factual.
Nice rebuttal. I like that your videos try to bring in examples of the wider context of violence against women. I think they really help to de-mystify this particular series of crimes and the killer.
The women lived in a world where the margins between prostitution and other activities is not always that clear. Except for Annie Chapman, the location of the bodies really mitigates against the victim having fallen asleep in place. It is virtually impossible that Liz Stride had time to fall asleep--and who falls asleep in an active driveway? Also there is some evidence that she did resist. Mary Kelly, by definition was not "sleeping rough." I would easily accept that they engaged in prostitution only under real financial duress. At least two victims were absolutely penniless on the night of their death. Also I suspect that the murderer relished the attack--the fear, the reaction, the frozen surrender that led to strangulation. Would a sleeping victim have provided the entree to the murder that the psychopath's narrative required?. Now, is the author asking us to believe Mary Kelly did not effectively lock her door? If it was so very easy to open the door from the window, why did the police chop the door down with an ax? And finally, assuming they were not engaged in prostitution at the moment there is no reason to believe they were asleep. It is possible that the attacks were shock attacks not depending specifically on prostitution (especially if the murderer was an eastern European Jew with very limited English language skills) but on position and location. This likely fits Liz Stride. But every evidence and the workings of simple logic suggests, he approached and propositioned them on more populated streets and they led him to locations of their choosing.
Accurately knowing about the murder victims helps to at least focus the efforts to solve the crimes. Street walkers are extremely vulnerable but knowing what the victims were likely doing actually simplifies the investigation.
Authors like this will come and go. True seekers of the facts revolving around the Jack the Ripper case will clearly see through the flaws in her thinking and writing. Again excellent presentation and analysis. 😊
I made an initial comment but I deleted it because I feel it was incorrect. You make a lot of sense and it disappoints me tremendously because I held this book in rather high regard. I will say, I think there is a strain of Ripperology that does mythologise the killer and ignores the victims and I commend the author for giving a vivid and sympathetic portrayal of the women at the bottom of a very brutal chain, but I think you are right, she seems to view sex work as potentially shameful. I will give her the benefit of doubt and say it may be an attempt to give the memories of the women a 'cleansing' so to speak, but that is very ill-conceived. It makes me really wish for a book that tells the story of all the women in the Whitechapel file, with no judgement on their work.
This is good to see on your channel, I slogged through the audiobook and found it quite tiresome at the best of times. I still haven’t finished it; I got to chapter 17 about Mary Kelly, and how she couldn’t possibly of been artistic unless she had a good education, and gave up. This modern fad of rewriting history to suit agendas is tedious. I shall enjoy this I know, thanks Ed.
@@skullsaintdead “I, too, dislike the modernity we sometimes place upon historical figures/victims; these women were no less valuable because of their profession, nor are any women whose engage in it today. It doesn’t, however, mean we get to rewrite history if we want to make for a more ‘victim-y’ victim.” Your own words in a comment below a video on this channel. Pot calling kettle black.
@@markportwood4045 Yeah but you've misinterpreted what I've said - I say I dislike modernity (i.e. out _current_ modern cultural and political norms) being applied to historical contexts without care taken to highlight and explain where, how and why we add in our own biases. I.e. everyone has biases, you just need to explain them, as I feel Ed does this well, rather than pretend there is ever such a thing as an unbiased source. I do not say that this is _only_ a modern problem, because it is not merely a modern problem. As the saying goes, history is written by the historian. Ed points this out with an example of the historian from 500AD adding in his own politics, just as occurred with historians from ancient Greece, ancient Egypt, ancient China AND Britain today. Thus, it's not only a _modern_ problem, we have always been biased as human beings to our own beliefs and preferences and this makes a mark on the truth. It's important to recognise bias in all areas of life (news, history, interpersonal convos), to ensure you're able to fairly judge the credibility of any information you ingest.
Gosh, this is a really well thought thru video. Good on u for calling out the nonsense. Seems the author wanted to appropriate and co-opt a legitimate injustice for her own ambitions. Pretty awful if that is what has happened.
Another great show and you have to be one of if not the best authority on the subject and love how you show the geographical locations. Gday from Australia!
Edward you are a better feminist than Rubenhold by far - thank you. The desperate plights of these women without equal rights should be known and remembered because it matters and they mattered, just as the extreme poverty should be remembered. It’s disgusting to pretend people didn’t suffer in the ways they absolutely did.
Another excellent, logical, articulate and fact laden rebuttal, Ed. Well done. Im not even sure Ms Rubenhold actually believes her own premise judging by the seemingly deliberate omissions she's made. It could well be just an exercise in both upsetting the status quo of Ripperology and trying to cash in with a novel idea. You don't get anywhere by repeating what's already been said. The fact that NONE of the spots were likely suitable rough sleeping locations kills the theory stone dead, as you've rightly pointed out, even before we get onto the other points. By the way, I don't think it's just Mary Kelly who is the most well known serial killer victim ever, I think the canonical five are the most well known victims as a collective. Moreso than the poor victims of Bundy, Sutcliffe, Ridgway etc etc. Cheers.
Damn right on that Ed. The JRT victims have been well remembered by Ripperologists down the decades and those with an interest in the subject. Geez, even the tours constantly highlight the victims on each spot, so it's bizarre to think otherwise. 😕
Oh gross, I was thinking of buying that book, but finding out it's from the angle of a SWERF is gross. Thanks for the heads up. I'll be avoiding that book. I appreciate that I learned about the victims from your channel. I think your videos on them that show their resting places really humanized them. I also appreciate how you don't treat them as lesser for being sex workers.
Two of the victims were found only yards from the business premises of Kearley And Tonge . The large building in Buck 's Row and the smaller building in Mitre Square . Is there a connection ?
@Look-at-this-crp My school was a few hundred yards from Bucks Row , and when i began there in 1963 , i used Buck 's Row as a short cut to Whitechapel Underground Station , using also Wood 's Buildings to Whitechapel Road , which is now closed i think .K and T were still in operation in those far off days , i think . London has changed very much in these past 61 years .
Read the book. Almost, completely agree with you. There's ample evidence that most, if not all the victims engaged at least part time in prostitution. With the exception of course of Mary Kelly, who seems to have been a full time prostitute. She makes a couple of important points though. Using the example of the Yorkshire Ripper the police, and most of the press used their prejudice to leap to an assumption that the killer hated prostitutes. But the Yorkshire Ripper killed non prostitutes as well. Similarly I think the Whitechapel killer was an opportunistic killer, and would have killed any woman he had the opportunity and the right circumstances to kill. Also, I am fascinated by the possibility that he may have killed someone he came upon sleeping rough. Not to say he did. Though Martha Tabram seems like she could well have been killed while passed out. Mary Kelly is also a compelling case. Not of course that she wasn't a prostitute. But would she have undressed and changed into her night clothes for a customer? And her body is very close to the wall, which she is unlikely to have done if engaged in sex? I'm not saying that it's proof. Plenty of reason why those things might be explained with a John of course. But, maybe? That said I agree with your argument that most, if not all, of the victims were killed while engaging in prostitution. Your example of the facts of the Polly Nichols case is excellent. Still, most serial killers are opportunistic. And he'd have to be very lucky to have come upon all of the victims passed out. But could he have come upon one? Or even two? Again, I'm thinking more on the lines of them being passed out than sleeping rough. Considering the time of year and the weather I doubt for instance Polly would have gone to sleep on the road. But passed out? Having grown up among drunks I can tell you they are very loud when they pass out, and so would draw attention. Not just snoring but talking in their sleep and waking frequently. It defies common sense to say that's how they all met their deaths. It defies common sense to say that they all, given the evidence, were not prostitutes. If there were an actual debate I'd be firmly on your side of the floor. I'm mostly saying that she does give us reason to pause and consider for one or two of the victims.
Excellent as usual ! Rubenhold’s romanticised musings scuppered by direct and unflinching reality check. Another case of “squeezing the foot to fit the shoe”.
You do good work, no one can say, you don't put the effort into your Video's, the facts, possible scenario's, ideas into what if this, what about that, some debate on issues, nothing wrong in that, having an opinion on the subject, people have had an opinion for 136 years and will continue to have one, for many more to come. I think those Women in that area at the time were not just unfortunate, but were the most unfortunate Women, poverty, substance abuse, a horrible cocktail to have to sip, night after night, they did, what they did, to survive, what were the options, very limited unfortunately.
Edward, congratulations. This is a triumph of excellent research and investigation. The sensitivity of the subject was handled very well. Given the cruel realities of these women's lives, prostitution - 'survival prostitution' - was just an aspect of life for many at the bottom. The current trend of revising this is, as you say, moralistic in the exact same way the Yorkshire Ripper case was handled by the police and the media at the time. Prostituted women murdered by a serial killer are every bit as innocent as any other victim. Great video. But I imagine the comments will be lively. Good luck.
I watched a doco that featured that woman-worst one on Jack the Ripper I've ever seen. The best one was about geographical profiling on Lechmere. I've been interested in the case for years.
I find myself remembering your theory--which I think is likely--that not only could the Ripper, likely Lechmere, approach prostitutes because they were more inclined to off into quiet places, but that he was also a previous customer, good ole Lecherous Lechmere.
I’m still waiting for someone to emerge and argue for the possibility of this case being alien abductions. Jtr could well be made up to slander us men as wicked deviants. Also look at cattle mutilations) But right now im tempted to try napping on the pavement as it seems to have been more common than I’d think
Great video Ed as usual, have read the book interesting read but getting down to the hard facts that we can’t ignore that life in the east end of London was very hard indeed and to get a living of some sort they had to do what they had to do to survive which was an open door to predators like JTR
Hi Ed - Haven't watched yet or read her book. But it seems that Lechmere's actions would not be affected or the theory diminished if the victims were simply drunk & sleeping rough? How many more debunks before the long awaited video on Ma Lechmere ?
A very well reasoned and well presented critique of the central argument of the book - that the victims were not prostitutes. A lot of the supporting detail is inaccurate and that has led to further research and new discoveries, for which we have to thank Hallie. When an ‘historian’ tells you that Charles Dickens was a shoe black and seems unaware of the effects of the Great Fire of London it’s advisable to check everything else they have to say. 😂
There's nothing wrong with being sensitive. I may not think the angle of Rubenhold's book is correct but I admire her efforts to ensure the victims are given the respect they deserve. Ultimately, she may have done herself a disservice as I personally believe sex workers deserve as much respect as anyone so by trying to prove the five were not is akin to saying they are more worthy of respect if they weren't prostitutes. But she is entitled to her opinion and there is no harm in bringing a different angle and approach to the mostly male-dominated arena of Ripperology.
The Black country is actually North West of Birmingham. It consists of four councils: Dudley, Sandwell (largest town West Bromwich), Walsall and Wolverhampton. There are historical arguments as to the make up of the true black country but listed above is the modern day commonly accepted black country.
Ed had mentioned he may do a video on the 1873 Toro case. There was another case a year or two later as well. Like you guys I’m curious those people were victims of TT killer or if their bodies have been harvested.
The claim that in order for Rubendall's claims to be true, Jack had to have luckily happened upon rough sleepers, is not true or accurate. What if these areas were known by the locals, including Jack, as places where rough sleepers went? No luck involved, he could have simply went to where he knew vulnerable women would be sleeping when he felt the bloodlust.
Would it not make sense for the women to be sleeping together somewhere? Isn't it highly unusual that there would be no one else rough sleeping around the victims when they were killed?
On the street in Buck's Row - a normal rough sleeping haunt. Dutfield's Yard, next to a busy club - a normal rough sleeping haunt? The backyard of 29 Hanbury Street, when rough sleepers were known to sleep inside on the stairs? Mitre Square when Catherine Eddowes was known to sleep rough inside on Dorset Street?
@@thehouseoflechmere9407 Buck's Row spot: where Polly was found was a gate slightly set back from the cottage buildings. A small women like Polly could have fit. Also she was completely inebriated and could barely walk. You ever been like that? The few times I have, I found the best place I could just to pass out, even if it is an uncomfortable sleeping place. Hanbury Street: Where Annie Chapman was found would have been a perfect rough sleeping place. Why would she sleep on the steps when she knew people would be using the steps any minute to go to work? Berner Street: I agree with you on that. However I am becoming more convinced that Stride was not a Ripper killing. Mitre Square: Eddowes was found in the darkest part of the square by a heating grate which is in all contemporary photos of the murder spot. Plus she told the police that she expected to get beaten when she got home. Is it too hard to believe she wanted to avoid that and found a dark spot next to a heated grate to sleep?
@@michaelwood9389 yes the key was missing, the door was selfclosing and a window was broken from where the killer could open the door. 2 possiblities for the killer to get in, and if the selfclosing door part is truth then the door would be locked from the inside anyway.
I wish you would can it with the Bach theme. I bought Rubenhold's book at a second hand store. I wanted to know more about the victims as I am sick & tired of reading all about "Gentleman Jack." Do not believe Rubenhold's book in its totality. Just wanted to know some things about them. With no true concrete evidence the truth will never be known. It is an endless circle with no finish. Stopped reading about this crime a long time ago.
Glad (NOT) to see political correctness was alive and well in 1887? as for the tenet of your video i agree that the romanticising and sanitising of the victims does them a vast diservice, life was bloody hard back then especially for women, many of whom who would have had little choice but to engage in sex work, i often ferquent Brick Lane and Aldgate and every time i do my thoughts always refer to the victims never the perpitrator.
With regard to the canonical five being prostitutes, could we perhaps put a very small asterisk next to Catharine Endows? At least in her case the evidence seems to be weaker than for the others.
Inevitably the evidence regarding each will be unequal and that for Catherine Eddowes is very slightly 'less' but still the evidence that she was is overwhelming.
All the victims except Ms. Kelly's were found while still dark, and police were trained to get victims off the street as soon as possible, as forensics hadn't evolved to the point were crime scenes were thoroughly examined..
@@Ettrick8 Thanks. I was just thinking of the victims found in the street. I know mary Kelly was found in her dwelling, and they did photograph her there, did they not?
@@DrummingOtakuwhat some people consider woke others see as consideration to others the term WOKE is a right wing political trick to fan people's prejudices and divide them mostly,in my very humble opinion
@ronaldm8235 Is there any evidence any of them were going to the toilet when they were murdered. Eg urine? Hutchinson's lodgings closed their doors at 1am every morning. How did he get out to observe these ladies going to the toilet?
I'm Lechmere forever. Subverting the narrative draws importance to the authors ego in that there is an ability there to turn a case on its head like they conjured some kind of magic or ability when really it just serves to undermine the facts.
Good video Ed . I think there are alot of book writen that take very different views of theory on both victims and suspects. Because of this the facts turn into Chinese Whispers meaning distortion or just made up . If we are to discover the true culprit or the crimes. We have to face the facts good or bad . Some posted here that showing graves showed little respect but to write a book that frankly tells a fairy tale of the victims murder s is sorely miss guided and utterly disrespectful.
Van u do one on that guy who says about dna a police officer who took a shawl, who was based at cheshunt, was never at topper scene, hes nod back on media stating it's absolute kasminkky and hi dna, which it isn't, be nice if u could cover that again and say why it's rubbish
i can do that as well:) first of all the custody of the shawl is unknown and not mentioned in any report. second the DNA they tested was Mitochondrial DNA, that you inherit from your mom, and that type of DNA is not unique so it can only be used to rule out people. third. if the shawl was real and the DNA as well then it still couldnt be used as evidence since the shawl then belonged to a known sex worker, and the DNA could have gotten their at a previous encounter.
@@TheIsemgrim yes the guy is going around msm yet again now saying it's definitely him, more tests done, but he's talking crap and it need to be challenged
Hiya Edward, I'm going to London in 2 weeks time, it costs allot more than 4d a night to stay, Me and my friend Michael are going on the Jack The Ripper guided tour, on one of our todo list, this is Choppy
Surely prostitute or not doesn’t matter, they were victims of a terrible crime.
To quote the great lexicographer Dr. Samuel Johnson: The book is both good and original; but the part that is good is not original, and the part that is original is not good.
Ha
👏👏👏👏👍
One point about Polly, Hallie did include the quote by her fellow lodgers saying she was an unfortunate but edited the stament that they ‘knew nothing more’ about her to read ‘they knew … nothing about her’. This provides the opportunity to argue that if they knew nothing about her how did they know she was an ‘unfortunate’.
She gets a few other things wrong about Polly’s background. And so often throughout the book her ‘errors’ lend support to her arguments.
@@garybarnett583 Thanks for the insight. Skewing facts to fit her narrative.
@@walkawaycat431 she's not the first to do this and I'm sure unfortunately won't be the last. Great that we have people like Ed who put in the effort to point all this out.
Excellent takedown Edward, in the best possible way, using evidence rather than insults.
Excellent rebuttal. Every time I see another of your videos, I'm more impressed by not only your scholarship, but by your fairness, sense of justice, and balanced and professional demeanor. Well done, Mr. Stow.
Thank you
Purely as a layperson, I find it frustrating, that this Author could write accounts of these womens' lives, without fact checking information, that you have clearly provided. And as a woman, it really annoys me, to have these two dimensional attitudes, placed on other women. Namely, that they weren't prostitutes, merely homeless. These women had police records, for soliciting. They weren't walking the streets, at night, looking for a place to sleep! And surely, if that were the case; they would surely feel safer, joining other homeless women?! I have read Hallie Rubenholds' book and I found it to be biased, towards the obvious facts and also filled with inconsistencies. A lazily written book!
Absolutely correct - very sloppy research to say the least!
Having been interested in the Whitechapel Murders and studied the subject in depth for many years I read Rubenholds book as soon as it was available and haveto say that I agree with your appraisal, the. book is laborious, full of the writers opinions and offers very few accepted and credible facts.
I hope you left this book review on Amazon.
Couldn't agree more.
I think Rubenhold just took a very feminist angle deliberately, so as to have a different approach to a subject that's been covered extensively. It's a shame she had to denounce previous research though. I've read several Ripper books over the years and all of them were respectful of the victims , and went into detail on their lives. Certainly not in a salacious way.
“Prettying up” history and tying it with a bow doesn’t change the facts. Truth is truth. Great work sir.
I agree. This book is factually poor.
Very good analysis! I read Rubenhold's book a few years ago and was shocked at her theory of the women sleeping rough. It just makes no sense when you look further into the case...
Just found your channel and I love how you dont just sit and talk at the camera. You show the areas of London this happened and relevant illustrations.
Good to see that The Guardian are fulfilling their time tested role to be a bellwether of correct opinion. Basically, if The Guardian takes a position just take the opposite one and you won't go far wrong.
That's exactly what I do. Also I never befriend a guardian reader.
@@kevinkenny6975 Unfortunately I have a few but we try to keep off any issues the guardian would have any opinion on. Does limit the topics for debate though
@@kevinkenny6975What a tragic loss to Guardian readers.
@@Mark.H3721 The wit of a guardian reader. Never to be over estimated
@@kevinkenny6975 Very kind of you to say so.
Did you see the ripper tours interview with Jason McCann. He absolutely destroys Rubenhold and the idea these women were not prostitutes.
Have you seen his latest video?
Yes!
My hat is off to you Mr Stow. Having to read this drivel would be impossible for the best of us, you stand head and shoulders above the rest of us. Another very good presentation, thank you for your suffering 👍 Aussie viewer here, PS I love your footage and walk arounds of the crime scenes, your work takes me where I would probably never get to visit.
Thank-you
Unfortunately it is a sad fact that in most serial killer cases the victims are only remembered for being victims. It reminds me of Billy the Kid’s purported words to deputy Bell before shooting him “I’ll make you famous”.
A commendable rebuttal. Thanks, Ed, for doing such an amazing job, not just in this excellent episode but all the others.
Eyyy I was literally just thinking yesterday "I could use another house of Lechmere video right now wonder when he'll upload" glad to see that notification this morning 👍
Hope you enjoy!
A fantastic and thorough assessment of a heavily prejudiced book which definitely doesn't exhibit an enlightened attitude. Rubenhold has clearly twisted and omitted facts and invented things in order to fit her narrative. I'm sure that in decades to come 'The Five' will fall out of favour and people will ask, "Couldn't she have done better?"
Mark Twain - 'Never let the truth get in the way of a good story.'
It's amazing how small and compact these streets were. I was in Durward Street this morning and was really surprised. Great video Ed!
Yes they are!
I can appreciate what Hallie was trying to do. But distorting the facts goes too far. And it’s totally unnecessary.
No one interested in this case is looking to nail those poor women to a morality cross.
In fact, it is we, who keep their memories alive. We understand why they did what they did. We hold nothing against them. Thanks for the brilliant video Ed!
Extremely well said, couldn't agree more pal 👍🏻
Excellent once again Ed 👍🏼 🎩
Thanks!
A superb critique of the facts by the foremost Ripperologist of our time. Thanks Edward
Thank you!
As usual an informative and non-biased video, thank you :)
I suspect that our killer, had previously used the services of his victims without major incident, and that helped him to gain their trust. I wouldn't find his crimes any more abhorrent, if the victims had been a members of the local choir or temperance society.
I have an embarrassingly large library of JTR and Victorian true crime. I've heard/read every angle out there. Hallie's angle was to pander to a feminist audience that had no prior information on the crimes or knowledge of the intentions of previous authors. To think that everyone has ignored the humanity of the victims and derived a creepy pleasure out of the murders is proof that she had not actually read any books on the subject or, as I believe, knew her potential readership. I am glad that I borrowed this book from the library rather than waste money on it.
Have you read:
'The Ripper and the Royals'?
@@markrymanowski719 Yes, I wasted my time because I want to say I read everything.
@@ImCarolB
That book is as close to the truth as can be.
All info from the diaries of inspector Aberline.
His only comment on the subject:
'If the public knew what i found out, they would find it very interesting indeed'.
P.s. Because i read that book, i feel no need to read about it anymore.
No time wasting.
@@markrymanowski719 I have read everything I can find on the topic for over 50 years. A very good online resource is the website The Casebook of Jack the Ripper. A good number of the leading ripperologists engage in the discussions and write articles. There is only one review of the Ripper and the Royals. "Yet another Masonic Royal conspiracy theory, which even Fairclough himself (the author) has now disavowed. Of particular interest is the emergence of the "Abberline diary," which was quickly proved a forgery. Not recommended whatsoever." The book is a very interesting and engaging read but it's not factual.
Nice rebuttal. I like that your videos try to bring in examples of the wider context of violence against women. I think they really help to de-mystify this particular series of crimes and the killer.
Very true, although violence against men was, and remains, far more widespread.
The women lived in a world where the margins between prostitution and other activities is not always that clear. Except for Annie Chapman, the location of the bodies really mitigates against the victim having fallen asleep in place. It is virtually impossible that Liz Stride had time to fall asleep--and who falls asleep in an active driveway? Also there is some evidence that she did resist. Mary Kelly, by definition was not "sleeping rough." I would easily accept that they engaged in prostitution only under real financial duress. At least two victims were absolutely penniless on the night of their death. Also I suspect that the murderer relished the attack--the fear, the reaction, the frozen surrender that led to strangulation. Would a sleeping victim have provided the entree to the murder that the psychopath's narrative required?. Now, is the author asking us to believe Mary Kelly did not effectively lock her door? If it was so very easy to open the door from the window, why did the police chop the door down with an ax? And finally, assuming they were not engaged in prostitution at the moment there is no reason to believe they were asleep. It is possible that the attacks were shock attacks not depending specifically on prostitution (especially if the murderer was an eastern European Jew with very limited English language skills) but on position and location. This likely fits Liz Stride. But every evidence and the workings of simple logic suggests, he approached and propositioned them on more populated streets and they led him to locations of their choosing.
Very good points
Accurately knowing about the murder victims helps to at least focus the efforts to solve the crimes. Street walkers are extremely vulnerable but knowing what the victims were likely doing actually simplifies the investigation.
Authors like this will come and go. True seekers of the facts revolving around the Jack the Ripper case will clearly see through the flaws in her thinking and writing.
Again excellent presentation and analysis. 😊
Ed is da man 👌
I made an initial comment but I deleted it because I feel it was incorrect. You make a lot of sense and it disappoints me tremendously because I held this book in rather high regard. I will say, I think there is a strain of Ripperology that does mythologise the killer and ignores the victims and I commend the author for giving a vivid and sympathetic portrayal of the women at the bottom of a very brutal chain, but I think you are right, she seems to view sex work as potentially shameful. I will give her the benefit of doubt and say it may be an attempt to give the memories of the women a 'cleansing' so to speak, but that is very ill-conceived. It makes me really wish for a book that tells the story of all the women in the Whitechapel file, with no judgement on their work.
A balanced perspective
this book wasnt written to provide information but rather to pander to the polical climate of today. and thats sad.
A masterclass as always! Fascinating and informative in equal measure..
Thank you! Cheers!
Again, love your shows.
Thank you
Great research! Well done!
Thank you!
This is good to see on your channel, I slogged through the audiobook and found it quite tiresome at the best of times. I still haven’t finished it; I got to chapter 17 about Mary Kelly, and how she couldn’t possibly of been artistic unless she had a good education, and gave up. This modern fad of rewriting history to suit agendas is tedious.
I shall enjoy this I know, thanks Ed.
Modern fad? He specifically made a point to call out an example from the 500s...
@@skullsaintdead
“I, too, dislike the modernity we sometimes place upon historical figures/victims; these women were no less valuable because of their profession, nor are any women whose engage in it today. It doesn’t, however, mean we get to rewrite history if we want to make for a more ‘victim-y’ victim.”
Your own words in a comment below a video on this channel. Pot calling kettle black.
@@markportwood4045 Yeah but you've misinterpreted what I've said - I say I dislike modernity (i.e. out _current_ modern cultural and political norms) being applied to historical contexts without care taken to highlight and explain where, how and why we add in our own biases. I.e. everyone has biases, you just need to explain them, as I feel Ed does this well, rather than pretend there is ever such a thing as an unbiased source.
I do not say that this is _only_ a modern problem, because it is not merely a modern problem. As the saying goes, history is written by the historian. Ed points this out with an example of the historian from 500AD adding in his own politics, just as occurred with historians from ancient Greece, ancient Egypt, ancient China AND Britain today.
Thus, it's not only a _modern_ problem, we have always been biased as human beings to our own beliefs and preferences and this makes a mark on the truth. It's important to recognise bias in all areas of life (news, history, interpersonal convos), to ensure you're able to fairly judge the credibility of any information you ingest.
Gosh, this is a really well thought thru video. Good on u for calling out the nonsense. Seems the author wanted to appropriate and co-opt a legitimate injustice for her own ambitions. Pretty awful if that is what has happened.
Another great show and you have to be one of if not the best authority on the subject and love how you show the geographical locations. Gday from Australia!
Glad you enjoy it!
Edward you are a better feminist than Rubenhold by far - thank you. The desperate plights of these women without equal rights should be known and remembered because it matters and they mattered, just as the extreme poverty should be remembered. It’s disgusting to pretend people didn’t suffer in the ways they absolutely did.
The voice of sanity and reasoning. Thanks Edward for another enlightening video.
Glad you enjoyed it
Excellent research Edward, as usual. Ms Rubenhold's book is just feminist propaganda.
Another excellent, logical, articulate and fact laden rebuttal, Ed. Well done. Im not even sure Ms Rubenhold actually believes her own premise judging by the seemingly deliberate omissions she's made. It could well be just an exercise in both upsetting the status quo of Ripperology and trying to cash in with a novel idea. You don't get anywhere by repeating what's already been said.
The fact that NONE of the spots were likely suitable rough sleeping locations kills the theory stone dead, as you've rightly pointed out, even before we get onto the other points.
By the way, I don't think it's just Mary Kelly who is the most well known serial killer victim ever, I think the canonical five are the most well known victims as a collective. Moreso than the poor victims of Bundy, Sutcliffe, Ridgway etc etc.
Cheers.
I doubt more than one in a thousand, if that, could name a victim of any if those other killers.
Damn right on that Ed. The JRT victims have been well remembered by Ripperologists down the decades and those with an interest in the subject. Geez, even the tours constantly highlight the victims on each spot, so it's bizarre to think otherwise. 😕
Oh gross, I was thinking of buying that book, but finding out it's from the angle of a SWERF is gross. Thanks for the heads up. I'll be avoiding that book. I appreciate that I learned about the victims from your channel. I think your videos on them that show their resting places really humanized them. I also appreciate how you don't treat them as lesser for being sex workers.
SWERF is a new one on me, lol
Another great video!!👏💗 i always appreciate the time you put into the videos with meticulous details!❤
Glad you like them!
Two of the victims were found only yards from the business premises of Kearley And Tonge . The large building in Buck 's Row and the smaller building in Mitre Square . Is there a connection ?
@Look-at-this-crp My school was a few hundred yards from Bucks Row , and when i began there in 1963 , i used Buck 's Row as a short cut to Whitechapel Underground Station , using also Wood 's Buildings to Whitechapel Road , which is now closed i think .K and T were still in operation in those far off days , i think . London has changed very much in these past 61 years .
An interesting and informative video backed up by facts. Thank you.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Read the book. Almost, completely agree with you. There's ample evidence that most, if not all the victims engaged at least part time in prostitution. With the exception of course of Mary Kelly, who seems to have been a full time prostitute. She makes a couple of important points though. Using the example of the Yorkshire Ripper the police, and most of the press used their prejudice to leap to an assumption that the killer hated prostitutes. But the Yorkshire Ripper killed non prostitutes as well. Similarly I think the Whitechapel killer was an opportunistic killer, and would have killed any woman he had the opportunity and the right circumstances to kill. Also, I am fascinated by the possibility that he may have killed someone he came upon sleeping rough. Not to say he did. Though Martha Tabram seems like she could well have been killed while passed out. Mary Kelly is also a compelling case. Not of course that she wasn't a prostitute. But would she have undressed and changed into her night clothes for a customer? And her body is very close to the wall, which she is unlikely to have done if engaged in sex? I'm not saying that it's proof. Plenty of reason why those things might be explained with a John of course. But, maybe? That said I agree with your argument that most, if not all, of the victims were killed while engaging in prostitution. Your example of the facts of the Polly Nichols case is excellent. Still, most serial killers are opportunistic. And he'd have to be very lucky to have come upon all of the victims passed out. But could he have come upon one? Or even two? Again, I'm thinking more on the lines of them being passed out than sleeping rough. Considering the time of year and the weather I doubt for instance Polly would have gone to sleep on the road. But passed out? Having grown up among drunks I can tell you they are very loud when they pass out, and so would draw attention. Not just snoring but talking in their sleep and waking frequently. It defies common sense to say that's how they all met their deaths. It defies common sense to say that they all, given the evidence, were not prostitutes. If there were an actual debate I'd be firmly on your side of the floor. I'm mostly saying that she does give us reason to pause and consider for one or two of the victims.
Excellent as usual !
Rubenhold’s romanticised musings scuppered by direct and unflinching reality check.
Another case of “squeezing the foot to fit the shoe”.
You do good work, no one can say, you don't put the effort into your Video's, the facts, possible scenario's, ideas into what if this, what about that, some debate on issues, nothing wrong in that, having an opinion on the subject, people have had an opinion for 136 years and will continue to have one, for many more to come.
I think those Women in that area at the time were not just unfortunate, but were the most unfortunate Women, poverty, substance abuse, a horrible cocktail to have to sip, night after night, they did, what they did, to survive, what were the options, very limited unfortunately.
Great film Ed. Really enjoyed this!
Glad to hear it!
Another Outstanding Video Mate
Thanks again!
Edward, congratulations. This is a triumph of excellent research and investigation. The sensitivity of the subject was handled very well. Given the cruel realities of these women's lives, prostitution - 'survival prostitution' - was just an aspect of life for many at the bottom. The current trend of revising this is, as you say, moralistic in the exact same way the Yorkshire Ripper case was handled by the police and the media at the time. Prostituted women murdered by a serial killer are every bit as innocent as any other victim. Great video. But I imagine the comments will be lively. Good luck.
Thank-you!
I read this book about 3 years ago , about time someone wrote about the lives of the women and how hard it really was
I have the book .
The victims should have a voice, and we should know about their lives .
Definately, but their real lives need to be understood and not inventions.
Their lives have been researched and written about for decades.
Good to have you back Edward.
The lady Hallie book is shlock. Thanks for reading it so we don't have to. Cheers Ed. I wonder why you say you speculate about JTRs identity ?
Because there is no chance to go back in time and prove, without doubt, who JTR was.
@@kalicom2937 you don't need to do anything other than accept the evidence in black and white. Charles Lechmere was Jack the Ripper.
Thanks, that's an explanation.
I watched a doco that featured that woman-worst one on Jack the Ripper I've ever seen. The best one was about geographical profiling on Lechmere. I've been interested in the case for years.
Yes, the documentary was stomach churning nonsense
What a great video!
Thank you!
I find myself remembering your theory--which I think is likely--that not only could the Ripper, likely Lechmere, approach prostitutes because they were more inclined to off into quiet places, but that he was also a previous customer, good ole Lecherous Lechmere.
Could well be the case, yes. 👍
Yes!
I’m still waiting for someone to emerge and argue for the possibility of this case being alien abductions. Jtr could well be made up to slander us men as wicked deviants. Also look at cattle mutilations)
But right now im tempted to try napping on the pavement as it seems to have been more common than I’d think
Makes me want to fly to England to hire Ed for a private tour
Great. New video!!!
Hope you enjoyed it!
Great video Ed as usual, have read the book interesting read but getting down to the hard facts that we can’t ignore that life in the east end of London was very hard indeed and to get a living of some sort they had to do what they had to do to survive which was an open door to predators like JTR
I dont think anyone today looks on judging what the poor victims had to do to pay their way. If they do then they shouldn't.
Absolutely
What an insufferable mawkish lot of kitsch this book is.
Interested to know your take on this weeks outlandish claims Ed… 🤔
Wait....
Love these vids
Thanks for the warning. I've come across this sort of rewriting of history before. Always an annoying and frustrating experience.
It must be crazy for you Ed to go and stand in these places , knowing the person you are spending your life hunting was right there 136 years ago ..
I think you get used to it. I do anyway.
Superb critique.
Hi Ed - Haven't watched yet or read her book. But it seems that Lechmere's actions would not be affected or the theory diminished if the victims were simply drunk & sleeping rough? How many more debunks before the long awaited video on Ma Lechmere ?
Ha she gers a mention in a forthcoming one
@@thehouseoflechmere9407 , ah! - Like yourself I find her & the family tree often more fascinating than JTR - cheers Ed
A very well reasoned and well presented critique of the central argument of the book - that the victims were not prostitutes.
A lot of the supporting detail is inaccurate and that has led to further research and new discoveries, for which we have to thank Hallie.
When an ‘historian’ tells you that Charles Dickens was a shoe black and seems unaware of the effects of the Great Fire of London it’s advisable to check everything else they have to say. 😂
Indeed!
people to sensitive these days love your work keep keepin on sir. love from canada
There's nothing wrong with being sensitive. I may not think the angle of Rubenhold's book is correct but I admire her efforts to ensure the victims are given the respect they deserve. Ultimately, she may have done herself a disservice as I personally believe sex workers deserve as much respect as anyone so by trying to prove the five were not is akin to saying they are more worthy of respect if they weren't prostitutes. But she is entitled to her opinion and there is no harm in bringing a different angle and approach to the mostly male-dominated arena of Ripperology.
Your best film yet - poignant, cutting and incredibly well put. Thank you!
Glad you enjoyed it!
You should of dropped that book in a bin at the end!
👌
Thank you Edward , will watch later 👍
Hope you enjoy
The Black country is actually North West of Birmingham. It consists of four councils: Dudley, Sandwell (largest town West Bromwich), Walsall and Wolverhampton. There are historical arguments as to the make up of the true black country but listed above is the modern day commonly accepted black country.
Don't forget Tipton!
@@thehouseoflechmere9407 Tipton comes under the Metropolitan Borough of Sandwell.
And in the 19th century?
Please, more content on the torsos case.
Ed did a fairly comprehensive series on those cases, search his channel.
Ed had mentioned he may do a video on the 1873 Toro case. There was another case a year or two later as well.
Like you guys I’m curious those people were victims of TT killer or if their bodies have been harvested.
@@herbert9241 Ive already watched all many times
Yes I will cover the 1873 torso quote soon
I agree with you ed. Thanks for clarifying this.
The claim that in order for Rubendall's claims to be true, Jack had to have luckily happened upon rough sleepers, is not true or accurate. What if these areas were known by the locals, including Jack, as places where rough sleepers went? No luck involved, he could have simply went to where he knew vulnerable women would be sleeping when he felt the bloodlust.
Would it not make sense for the women to be sleeping together somewhere? Isn't it highly unusual that there would be no one else rough sleeping around the victims when they were killed?
On the street in Buck's Row - a normal rough sleeping haunt.
Dutfield's Yard, next to a busy club - a normal rough sleeping haunt?
The backyard of 29 Hanbury Street, when rough sleepers were known to sleep inside on the stairs?
Mitre Square when Catherine Eddowes was known to sleep rough inside on Dorset Street?
@@thehouseoflechmere9407 Buck's Row spot: where Polly was found was a gate slightly set back from the cottage buildings. A small women like Polly could have fit. Also she was completely inebriated and could barely walk. You ever been like that? The few times I have, I found the best place I could just to pass out, even if it is an uncomfortable sleeping place.
Hanbury Street: Where Annie Chapman was found would have been a perfect rough sleeping place. Why would she sleep on the steps when she knew people would be using the steps any minute to go to work?
Berner Street: I agree with you on that. However I am becoming more convinced that Stride was not a Ripper killing.
Mitre Square: Eddowes was found in the darkest part of the square by a heating grate which is in all contemporary photos of the murder spot. Plus she told the police that she expected to get beaten when she got home. Is it too hard to believe she wanted to avoid that and found a dark spot next to a heated grate to sleep?
A very thorough critiscism ,
I did enjoy Haille’ s book but facts are king in this search for truth. Great video Ed, I really look forward to them.
Another good one.
Wasn’t Mary Kelly’s door locked when the police arrived the next morning?
Yes. In all likelihood the killer locked the door on his way out and took the key with him.
@@davem8836 i thought the key was missing before.
@@michaelwood9389 yes the key was missing, the door was selfclosing and a window was broken from where the killer could open the door.
2 possiblities for the killer to get in, and if the selfclosing door part is truth then the door would be locked from the inside anyway.
I wish you would can it with the Bach theme. I bought Rubenhold's book at a second hand store. I wanted to know more about the victims as I am sick & tired of reading all about "Gentleman Jack." Do not believe Rubenhold's book in its totality. Just wanted to know some things about them. With no true concrete evidence the truth will never be known. It is an endless circle with no finish. Stopped reading about this crime a long time ago.
Too many modern books about history seem to start by finding something in the discourse, and nay say it. Easier than doing the really work I guess.
I guess they want attention and to try and cash in. They aren't going to get that by simply parroting was has already been said and written. 😕
@@lyndoncmp5751 they might if the did actual research and learned something new. Too much effort and no guaranteed results though. Still, pathetic
A DNA test could tell you who and where for Mary Kelly
Glad (NOT) to see political correctness was alive and well in 1887? as for the tenet of your video i agree that the romanticising and sanitising of the victims does them a vast diservice, life was bloody hard back then especially for women, many of whom who would have had little choice but to engage in sex work, i often ferquent Brick Lane and Aldgate and every time i do my thoughts always refer to the victims never the perpitrator.
With regard to the canonical five being prostitutes, could we perhaps put a very small asterisk next to Catharine Endows? At least in her case the evidence seems to be weaker than for the others.
Inevitably the evidence regarding each will be unequal and that for Catherine Eddowes is very slightly 'less' but still the evidence that she was is overwhelming.
Has anyone read " jack the ripper spells it out".????
What about the Blackout Ripper, Gordon Cummings?
Why aren't there any photographs of the victims where they were found?
There is a photo of Mary Kelly.
Police didn't photograph or preserve crime scenes in those days. Heck they didn't even bother with finger prints
All the victims except Ms. Kelly's were found while still dark, and police were trained to get victims off the street as soon as possible, as forensics hadn't evolved to the point were crime scenes were thoroughly examined..
@@Ettrick8 Thanks. I was just thinking of the victims found in the street. I know mary Kelly was found in her dwelling, and they did photograph her there, did they not?
Brilliant. Wokery exposed by facts.
The author is a dumb SWERF, but "Wokery" is such a weird thing to say.
@@DrummingOtakuwhat some people consider woke others see as consideration to others the term WOKE is a right wing political trick to fan people's prejudices and divide them mostly,in my very humble opinion
Another good episode ,,,
Simple question - where did the victims go to the toilet? Even Mary Kelly had an outside toilet. Maybe he waited? Like George Hutchinson waited.
In dark allies? Hutchinson waited to go to the toilet?
@@thehouseoflechmere9407 Waited for THEM to go to the toilet!!
@ronaldm8235
Is there any evidence any of them were going to the toilet when they were murdered. Eg urine?
Hutchinson's lodgings closed their doors at 1am every morning. How did he get out to observe these ladies going to the toilet?
Not being funny, but I suspect some residents went in the alleys of those slums too. I bet sanitary conditions were terrible.
I'm Lechmere forever. Subverting the narrative draws importance to the authors ego in that there is an ability there to turn a case on its head like they conjured some kind of magic or ability when really it just serves to undermine the facts.
Just don't get "Lechmere forever" as tattoo. 😊
@@lyndoncmp5751 😂😂😂that'll make em cross
@@craiglittle1437 Haha, I'll give you a 10/10 for that comeback 😅
Good video Ed . I think there are alot of book writen that take very different views of theory on both victims and suspects. Because of this the facts turn into Chinese Whispers meaning distortion or just made up .
If we are to discover the true culprit or the crimes. We have to face the facts good or bad .
Some posted here that showing graves showed little respect but to write a book that frankly tells a fairy tale of the victims murder s is sorely miss guided and utterly disrespectful.
You referred to those 1200 lodgers as "inmates" 🤔
That is how they were termed at the time!
Van u do one on that guy who says about dna a police officer who took a shawl, who was based at cheshunt, was never at topper scene, hes nod back on media stating it's absolute kasminkky and hi dna, which it isn't, be nice if u could cover that again and say why it's rubbish
I might do!
i can do that as well:)
first of all the custody of the shawl is unknown and not mentioned in any report.
second the DNA they tested was Mitochondrial DNA, that you inherit from your mom, and that type of DNA is not unique so it can only be used to rule out people.
third. if the shawl was real and the DNA as well then it still couldnt be used as evidence since the shawl then belonged to a known sex worker, and the DNA could have gotten their at a previous encounter.
@@TheIsemgrim yes the guy is going around msm yet again now saying it's definitely him, more tests done, but he's talking crap and it need to be challenged
Hiya Edward, I'm going to London in 2 weeks time, it costs allot more than 4d a night to stay, Me and my friend Michael are going on the Jack The Ripper guided tour, on one of our todo list, this is Choppy
Sounds great!
Sounds like she’s not letting the facts get in the way of her girl boss book.
Excellent as ever Ed.