Customer Reviews

Prisoner 1167: The Madman Who Was Jack the Ripper

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Tully theorizes that Jack is really James(John)Kelly, an inmate of the Broadmoor, commited for murdering his wife by stabbing her in the neck. The notable fact is that he escaped from that facility in 1888 prior to the first of the Whitechapel murders. Here is a true madman, a paranoid who deeply distrusts women, has a history of a violent attack in early Ripper style, and is on the loose in London at precisely the correct time. Tully's case is bolstered by the very strange actions of the constabulary, whose attempts to recapture Kelly were half-hearted at best; orders being given, for instance, that if identified Kelly was not to be arrested(???). Unfortunately, there is little beyond these coincidences to make the case. As usual many questions are raised, but answers are in limited supply. Still, I recommend this book for its very plausible argument and excellent style.

Tully theorizes that Jack is really James(John)Kelly, an inmate of the Broadmoor, commited for murdering his wife by stabbing her in the neck. The notable fact is that he escaped from that facility in 1888 prior to the first of the Whitechapel murders. Here is a true madman, a paranoid who deeply distrusts women, has a history of a violent attack in early Ripper style, and is on the loose in London at precisely the correct time. Tully's case is bolstered by the very strange actions of the constabulary, whose attempts to recapture Kelly were half-hearted at best; orders being given, for instance, that if identified Kelly was not to be arrested(???). Unfortunately, there is little beyond these coincidences to make the case. As usual many questions are raised, but answers are in limited supply. Still, I recommend this book for its very plausible argument and excellent style.

Though this work excellently represents the history of a madman, it is missing the necessary evidentiary links which tie in the suspect to the facts. There is nothing which, in a compelling way, brings the suspect even close to the victims and the evidence which is well documented. It was an enjoyable read nontheless.

While author James Tully presents a rational and logical argument for James Kelly as Jack the Ripper, most of Tully's arguments are based on circumstancial evidence, inductive reasoning, and details which easily could be merely coincidental. That's not to say the arguments fail to persuade -- in fact, Tully presents a great deal to consider. However, for this story to gain acceptance as the definitive solution, a great many more unanswered questions and possible alternative explanations would need resolved. It's food for thought he's trying to construct as a full explanatory meal. I'd recommend borrowing it from the library before buying it, if you are considering adding it to your collection.

Described as the "overwhelming case" against James Kelly and as the "definitive answer" to the Jack the Ripper mystery, James Tully's "Prisoner 1167--The Madman Who was Jack the Ripper" provides nothing of the sort. Undoubtedly, Tully has done his homework. The debth of his research is clearly revealed in the tedious and often laborious recount of the life of James Kelly and the chronicle of the "Ripper" murders. But the author recites so many irrelevant and extraneous facts, one wonders if they were included only to impress the reader with the knowledge of the author.

In the final analysis, Tully grasps at anything, real or imagined to implicate Kelly as the culprit, relying upon "coincidences" and logic which even he describes as "tortuous." His basic premise is that Kelly "was the only convicted insane woman killer at large in the East End during the period of the killings." But this premise fails miserably. First, who says the killer had to be previously convicted? Given the deplorable economic and social conditions in the East End during that time, undoubtedly there were numerous depraved individuals roaming the streets who had not yet been convicted of a crime. Second, Tully presents no hard evidence that Kelly was insane. People of that time were often committed when not actually insane. Finally, even Tully admits that Kelly was not in the area, but in France when the last two murders were committed. He glosses over this flaw by supposing that Kelly shuttled across the channel to ply his trade as if he were a diplomat.

Tully's theory also relies upon the supposed similiarities between Kelly's personality and the profile of the true killer. But the similarities are more feigned than real. Kelly's crime was one of passion, committed in a fit of rage, after which he was filled with remorse. The Whitechapel murders, on the other hand, were viciously premeditated and sexually gratifying to the true perpetrator. The similarities between Kelly and Jack the Ripper are tenuous at best.

Finally, Tully relies upon a compendium of circumstantial facts to buttress a weak argument, such as the fact that Kelly had an excellent knowledge of the area and had access to sharp knives as the tools of his trade. In that case, every cook, tanner, butcher or doctor in Whitechapel must be suspected as well!

Surely it must be frustrating to conduct forty years of research and be unable to find conclusive evidence. Under those circumstances, the urge to draw unsupported conclusions must be temendous. Obviously, Tully fell victim to that urge, because he comes no closer to solving the mystery than those who tried before. If only he had admitted the limitations of his evidence instead of overstating it, he would have at least succeeded in establishing more credibility with this reader. Perhaps then he could have concentrated on writing a book that was more readable and less boring.

John Hanbury

There is so much mystery and unknowns when dealing with Jack the Ripper that nearly any theory should at least be listened to before criticism is made. In this turn of suspects, James Tully proposes one James Kelly of being Jack the Ripper apparently on the basis that Kelly killed his wife, Srah Brider, by stabbing her in the throat and then cutting it open. He was tried for murder but got off on insanity charges and placed in Broadmoor, a mental institute. Kelly then escapes from Broadmoor a few years later and lives out quite a long life travelling the world before willingly returning to Broadmoor to die. That's pretty much the first three chapters of this book. This is the last we hear of James Kelly more-or-less until the final chapter.

From there, Tully takes us on a trip through the Ripper Murders, of which he includes Martha Tabram, "The Canonical 5", Alice McKenzie, and Francis Coles but he then excludes Liz Stride from the "5" suspecting her pimp Michael Kidney killed her. Tully also suggests that Mary Jane Kelly may possibly have been James Kelly's sister-in-law who was living in secret from her family. Tully describes the murders but goes into much more detail regarding the death inquests of the coroners and the testimonies of 'witnesses' of the victims. Tully then wraps up his book with a chapter entitled "The Cover-Up" in which through self speculation and a bit of conspiracy, the author places James Kelly as the Ripper with fairly vague circumstancial evidence at best. This seems largely based on some file about Kelly being sealed until 2030 AD. There is also an appendix chapter on "Things to Ponder" in regards to some of the events.

While intriguing and worth reading, I'm not truly convinced of anything from these arguments. There's little to no evidence supporting these claims. Unfortunately, the text tends to drag on and I became uninspired while reading it. It's a decent text dealing with a mid-level suspect but there's really not much supporting it at this point other than conjecture.

If your a definite Ripper buff this book is worth reading. It presents interesting facts, as to who just might be the Ripper. I definitely recommend it to anyone who is interested in looking into the mind of a very psychotic man!