What the Publishers say about the book

The person identified in this book as the killer of five women in London's East End in 1888 has never before been named a suspect in more than a hundred years of intense speculation. A very eminent man in his field, naming him will cause huge shockwaves in the places where he is still venerated.

One of the authors is a direct descendant of the killer. He did not set out to find Jack the Ripper, but the evidence discovered while researching his illustrious ancestor is incontrovertible.

Together the authors prove that their suspect was in Whitechapel at the same time as the crimes were committed, and had the knowledge and the skills which the nature of the murders required. No one has ever been able to find any evidence linking any of the suspects to the victims. This book puts forward clear evidence connecting the killer to three of the five victims, and circumstantial evidence connecting him to the other two. It also explains why the murders stopped as suddenly as they started.

For the very first time, a consistent and plausible explanation for every aspect of the case is presented, meeting all the key criteria of motive, method and opportunity. The authors have even discovered what they are convinced is the murder weapon.

This revelatory investigative work means that no one will ever regard the most famous true crime of all in the same way.

---

REVIEW

 This book produces a fresh suspect,  'Uncle Jack -The True Identity of Jack the Ripper - Britain’s most notorious murderer - revealed at last' the front dust cover of Mr Williams’ book proclaims.   For good measure the back of the dust cover assures potential purchasers that the book is, ‘The solution at last to this most famous crime story of all’.

Well now, there’s a bold claim.  There are readers, and many of them, who have read just about every word written on the Whitechapel Murders.  They will have seen such claims before but will still clamour to see whether ‘Jack’ has at last been unmasked.

It has to be said this is a fascinating book, the central character of which is John Williams, who was born at Gwynfe, Carmarthenshire in 1840.   He left Wales for London to pursue a career in medicine, achieving wealth, fame and a knighthood as a physician/obstetrician to the rich and titled in London.   In addition, like many medical men in Victorian London, he devoted a portion of his time to the poor, who frequented the workhouses and associated infirmaries.  So how does he become a suspect?

He retired to Wales from his London practice in 1893, at the age of 53, citing ill-health.  Yet he lived for another thirty-three years involving himself in a less prestigious practice and becoming very active in founding the National Library of Wales at Aberystwith.  Why, the author asks, should he have left London with so many active years before him?  Well, he apparently amassed a lot of money, so perhaps decided to pursue a dream of establishing the national library!  He had for many years been an avid collector of books in the Welsh language.

John Williams left a personal archive in the National Library of Wales.   Amongst the papers was a letter dated 23^rd August 1888, apologising for not being able to meet a friend as planned on 8^th September because he would be attending a clinic in Whitechapel on that date.  The date of Annie Chapman’s murder!   Also in the archive was a knife and three microscopic specimen slides.   Additionally there was his diary for 1888, most of the pages having been removed.   At this point one can understand why the author wondered where this was leading.

The research then moves to London, in an attempt to establish where in Whitechapel John Williams might have worked.   Those who have attempted to pursue the long held 'Doctor suspect' theory, will know that considerable documentation exists in respect of Victorian workhouse management and infirmary administration.   Following this trail the author and his researcher unearthed some interesting facts.   For example, the fact that a Dr Williams performed an abortion on a Mary Ann Nichols, the name of the first canonical victim!   Additionally, there is a record showing that in 1890 Dr Williams asked to be relieved of the duty of performing the operation known as ovarotomy.   This suggests the author, was what the Whitechapel Murderer was attempting to perform, with more than a smattering of anatomical skill and knowledge.

So far then, so good.   But can John Williams be linked with a specific infirmary in acknowledged Ripper territory.  Unfortunately for the hypothesis he cannot.  Of course, even if the link was there it would not amount to proof of guilt.  What the author does is to link John Williams’ childless marriage to his desire to research the problem.  Hence the need to obtain specimens of female reproductive organs resulting in the violent events of 1888.   He argues that, although eminent doctors frequently performed charitable services they did not necessarily want the venue to be generally known, because of their genteel and sensitive private patients.  The final canonical victim was Mary Kelly, who lived and was married in Wales before coming to London.  John Williams the author argues, could have known her, been her lover, took her to London and then abandoned her!

How then, does the hard-nosed Ripperologist view the author’s reasoning?  Clearly John Williams emerges as a new 'suspect' in a frame containing many names.  The author has established possible means, methods and opportunity it is true, but has he established guilt?    Surely a similar case could be made against dozens of individuals who lived in London at the time?  It is a massive leap to suppose, as the author does, that his revered ancestor was the serial murderer.  Logic prevents such a leap surely.   Put another way, the author might have unearthed a long sought murderer, but does his book provide sufficient proof.  Has it really established the true identity of 'Britain’s most notorious murderer'?

What the author has achieved however, is an extremely readable book on an intriguing subject.  In the course of it he paints a vivid picture of life in the world of Victorian medicine and the management of poverty.  He also creates a fascinating biography of Sir John Williams, founder of the National Library of Wales.

The reviewer, who prefers to remain anonymous, has never had the time or courage to go into print and endure the comments of others claiming to know better.  His interest in the murders began in 1952 when, as a wet-behind-the ears police probationer, he was being shown around Mitre Square by an old hand and had 'Rippers Corner' pointed out to him.  It was probably meant to put the wind up him when patrolling alone, but had the effect of kindling a lifelong interest in the murders.  He would claim to have read most original documents and most of what has been written on the subject over the last half century.  And he has no idea who did it either!

PR

---

LINKS

"Internet Law Book Reviews" Copyright Rob Jerrard 2007