|Posted on Thursday, February 27, 2003 - 1:28 pm: ||
Miss Emilie Klopp ("Miss Love") blackmails the Kaiser in 1888 (aparently sometime after August, I can't find the actual month or months) and apparently disappears after being paid 1/4 of a million dollars (in today's funds) to shut up about the Kaiser's kinky ways.
Does she shut up and remain living in Berlin? Wouldn't she be found quite easily by the blossoming press of 1888 having just pocketed nearly a 1/4 of a million dollars? Or found today with modern research? Nope, she dissapears.
Or does she move out of the country? If so where to? What better place than London to disappear to, or to tell people you are going to if you want to dissapear in 1888. It's a huge city, chances are you'll never be found if you don't want to be and people looking for you won't be able to verify whether you are actually in London or gone somewhere else.
Furthermore many suggest that Bismarck's knowledge of the details of the affair had alot to do with his own demise, when in 1890 the Kaiser forced the Chancellor to resign. But really most reports state that Miss Klopp's letters demanding money had already been read in court circles, so basically everyone knew what the story was already... unless the story and Bizmark's knowledge had something to do with a more serious crime?????? (Bizmark had hired Miss Love many times himself, just to add to the confusion)
I'm sure you guys know the story better than I do...I just find so many therories are more far fetched than a German connection, yet it's never talked about.
-The blackmail takes place in August 1888, by a prostitue. One month later prostitues start being murdered in Whitechappel with no apparent motive.
-Miss Love could have collected the money and left Germany, or told people she was leaving Germany. She could have said London to throw off the authorities. Then again she could have just moved to the country-side. But if she had hinted at London what better place to look for a prostitue hiding from authorities than Whitechappel?
-No victim of blackmail is ever safe until all the evidence is distroyed. I.E. The Kaiser would never really be safe until Klopp was silenced permanatly. She could at any time ask for more money with the threat of going to the press.
-Jack is described as a foreigner or a man with a foreign accent. Suddenly a foreigner is in London murdering prostitues in 1888 after the Kaiser has been blackmailed by a prostitue, the possiblities are endless.
-No one would suggest Bizmark or the Kaiser did the actual murders (Where were their where-abouts at the times of the murders, I bet it's never been looked into), but what if they had hired someone to find and silence Miss Love for good? I know I would have started in London's East End or in Paris looking for Miss Love.
-The graffiti, there is no need to tie pre-world war II Germany and anti-semitism together, I know this is stero-typing, but in this case it begs to be brought up
-The murders end and in 1890 Bizmark is forced out.
-How common was travel between England and Germany? Let's suggest a Londoner went to Germany for a few years (the actual affair was in 1885)and returned home to hide with friends and family or in familiar territories after being paid off. She would have more than enough money.
-Was there actually a secret "love child". This could bring many theories together such as the one by Joseph Sickert (He still would have been the son of a prince, as the Kaiser was the prince when the affair happened, he could have mistaken the meaning of Royalty or prince to mean British when the story was passed down to him) or "From Hell" just replacing the British Royalty with Germany.
-Did the victims know each other and protect each other from this foreigner looking for someone in particular? I would venture to say they did know each other, I busked (singing and playing guitar) for a few years and knew everyone that worked on the streets around me for quite a few blocks. Not so different from prostitues knowing each other.
-There's a lot of tie ins with the names of the 5 victims, a lot of Liz, Lizzie, Eliza, Elizabeth, Ann, Anne, Annie, Kelly, Mary and even 2 Mary Kelly's and Lizzie Fisher's in the alias's and family of the women. If it had been a foreign assasin many of these women could have been confused as the same one even with the alias WE KNOW. Don't you think most East End prostitues would have answered to any name you were willing to pay them for? "Are you Mary Kelly?""For the right price I'll be the Queen for ya darling..."
I know this is a far from complete post on the subject, but I'd love to hear everyone's input... If we can seriously list a couple of men that are in jail at the time of the murders as a suspects (Cream etc) than we can certainly play with the idea of a German connection.
Mark Andrew Pardoe
Post Number: 8
|Posted on Thursday, February 27, 2003 - 7:43 pm: ||
This is a new one on me. At first glance I don't believe it but, as with all the other bizarre theories, I will keep an open mind. I shall enjoy watching you expand on this.
Post Number: 3
|Posted on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 12:45 am: ||
This is new to me also, I'd love to hear more. But I am thinking that if I were a prostitute who just came into a pile of money from blackmail, I don't think I would hide out in a red light district, as it were. This is precisely what I would be escaping from. I think I would most likely high-tail it to America or Australia, someplace far, and set myself up with a new name and live a nice middle class type existance.
Post Number: 2
|Posted on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 11:00 am: ||
I also never heard that one before.
One of the reasons I find it so hard to believe in ANY royal conspiracy with the target to silence a blackmailer is the way the JTR killings were done.
A quiet and unspectacular murder would fit the purpose of getting rid of an "affair" much better than creating a press sensation around the globe.
|Posted on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 1:31 pm: ||
Christian, you posted: "A quiet and unspectacular murder would fit the purpose of getting rid of an "affair" much better than creating a press sensation around the globe".
I do think you have a point. However, isn't it possible that the murders were purposefully comitted in a spectacular, or frightening manner- in order to scare the other blackmailers who were involved?
Geeper's post is certainly intriguing, but personally, I don't believe in a 'Royal Conspiracy' of any sort. At least, I haven't seen enough evidence to convince me so. However, the debate is always an enjoyable one- and in exploring many different ideas, we ultimately expand our own; and other's knowledge of the case.
Post Number: 4
|Posted on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 11:06 pm: ||
Now if I were murdering people to scare off other blackmailers, wouldn't I need to leave a 'calling card', clue of some sort to let the other would be blackmailers know that this was my purpose? Other than the graffito, which doesn't mention the kaiser, not much was left.
|Posted on Saturday, March 01, 2003 - 9:29 am: ||
Ky posted: "Other than the graffito, which doesn't mention the kaiser, not much was left."
Well, I certainly don't think it would be wise for the killer to have left a calling card that would lead officials straight back to the Kaiser.
Could the mutilations themselves have been some sort of a "calling card", or warning, perhaps? If you were a member of a group of blackmailers- would you not be worried if certain other members were murdered horribly?
I've just finished reading Paul Begg's 'Jack The Ripper- The Definitive History'. In the chapter on Mary Kelly, I read that Mary was supposedly very frightened of the ripper.
Naturally, I imagine all of the women in the area would be afraid. However, there is always the remote possibility that Mary could have been part of a blackmailers ring, and knew that "Jack" would eventually be coming for her.
Having written all of this though- I really don't think that it's very likely, at all.
I think my main problem with Geeper's theory is that- no matter how interesting the speculation may be- there really is absolutely no evidence to tie Emilie Klopp ("Miss Love") to whitechapel, London.
|Posted on Saturday, March 01, 2003 - 7:07 am: ||
But, who's to say the assassin is sane? (Theoretically?)
Some one hired by the Germans could easily have been many of our listed suspects with all their problems and simply killing for money. The amout of money no doubt would have been great, (Hell, they paid her 1/4 of a million) so it would have appealed to rich and poor.
As for hiding in Whitechappel, what if she had originally been from there? Then it would be very familiar ground and the perfect place to hide. Maybe her brother in law or uncle in law ran a boarding house? (McCarthy)
This is NOT my therory of who the killer is... but again in therory it seems just as plasible as many if you leave your mind wide open.
Here is the original story that broke about the Kaiser in 2001... damn I can't find it... but here's one newspaper story on it
Post Number: 3
|Posted on Sunday, March 02, 2003 - 12:50 am: ||
The idea of a Royal Conspiracy, or a political
conspiracy, involving some type of cover-up by
a series of brutal and violent murders of
prostitutes is one that I don't usually accept.
It is not so new either, although your suggesting
the German monarchy is interesting. Recently it
has been the British Monarchy covering up for the
idiocies of the heir apparent, Albert Victor,
future Duke of Clarence and Avondale. This has
led to suggestions of plots involving Clarence,
Lord Salisbury, the Masons, Dr. Sir William Gull,
John Netley, Walter Sickert, and James Fitzjames
Stephen. But earlier there was the so-called
theory about an agent of the Czarist police
(Dr. Pedechencko) trying to show up the incompetence of their rivals in Great Britain.
Although it was supposedly a plot of the Russian
Secret Police, they would not have acted without
permission of the Czar (in this case Alexander
III, who was not a lover of the British government).
Somehow, I feel the simpler the solution, the
better for us all - hence my desire to avoid
complicated conspiracies. However, there is
always a chance of a conspiracy to murder.
British history had several, most notably the
poisoning of Sir Thomas Overbury in the Tower
of London in 1613, by a group led by the Countess
of Somerset, Elizabeth Carr (nee Howard). Her
husband, Robert Carr, Earl of Somerset, may have
been her willing dupe in the scheme, as (perhaps)
King James I (at the time, the Earl was the King's
favorite and lover). However, that particular
conspiracy eventually was exposed, though not in
time to save Overbury.
I can only add that 1888 was a peculiar year for
several European princelings, British and foreign.
1) We have the problem of Albert Victor, Duke
of Clarence - though not created that title in
1888. Was he an active member of the notorious
male brothel on Cleveland Street? Was he involved
in an illegal marriage to a Roman Catholic woman,
a marriage the knowledge of which may have doomed
Mary Jane Kelly and several others? Did he have
a relationship with James Kenneth Stephen that
was more than just pupil and tutor at Cambridge?
2) Rudolph von Hapsburg, Crown Prince to the
Austo-Hungarian Empire. He was married to
Princess Stephanie of Belgium, and they had a
daughter, but no son. He was becoming infatuated
with Countess Maria Vetsera. He was toying with
a group of liberal Hungarians who were thinking
of breaking up the dual monarchy, and offering
the crown to Rudolph (at the expense of his father, Emperor Franz Joseph). He was deeply
against the alliance between Austro-Hungary and
the German Empire. In January 1889 he and his
lover would be found dead at the hunting lodge
at Mayerling, near Vienna (an incident which
made me use that name for my Username on this
board). Was it the great, passionate, hopeless
love affair leading to a suicide pact, celebrated
in film and fiction, or a pair of orchestrated
murders for political reasons?
3) The Roman Empire had a year of four emperors
(68-69 A.D.) who followed Nero after his suicide.
Well, in German history 1888 was the year of the
three Emperors: elderly (91) year old Wilhelm I
died; his son, Friedrich III ("the Good") an enemy
of Bismarck and a liberal, inherited the thrown,
but was dying of throat cancer after a botched
operation by an egotistical British surgeon - he
served three months before his son grabbed the
crown off his dying head; Wilhelm II, brilliant,
neurotic, impulsive. He is the Kaiser we all
remember, and the subject of the recent discovery
of a sexual blackmail plot.
4) Johann Salvator Hapsburg, Archduke of Tuscany.
A close cousin, friend, and advisor to the ill-fated Rudolph, he had tried to help his cousin
with some military reforms, only to find these
thwarted by the establishment. In 1889, discouraged by the death of his cousin, he renounced the family and his position, signed
papers to that effect, and took the name
"Johann Orth". He fled Europe with his personal
fortune, and his mistress turned wife, Milly Stubel, on board an old sailing ship the Santa
Margherita. The ship headed for South America,
but was never heard from again - it probably
sank in the waters near Cape Horn. But this
was never settled, although (in 1911) he was
officially declared dead.
There are a host of others with personal problems (Crown Prince Alexander of Serbia, later King
of that country, and his father then King Milan - who would abdicate in 1889). All of which makes
for interesting side reading, but really does not necessarily take us to Miller's Court or the other spots on the East End.
However, if you would like to mull over this matter (and I don't blame you - it is interesting), let me end by pointing out that
in 1891 Dr. Arthur Conan Doyle was writing his
first series of Sherlock Holmes stories in the
Strand Magazine. The first one was "A SCANDAL
IN BOHEMIA", which deals with the scheme of the
opera singer, Irene Adler, to blackmail Wilhelm
von Ormstein, hereditary King of Bohemia with
a compromising photograph and some letters. I
do not know if this is coincidence or not, but
Conan Doyle may have heard rumors and decided to
put things to use. I may add that Sherlockians
have sometimes suggested that the King of Bohemia was based on Rudolph or his ill-fated cousin, King Ludwig III of Bavaria, who drowned in a lake near an asylum he was in in 1886, and Irene Adler (who comes from New Jersey) may be based on the
"Jersey Lily", Lily Langtry - a lover of Albert
Edward, Prince of Wales (later King Edward VII
of England). So be careful about how you read
history into fiction there.
|Posted on Monday, March 03, 2003 - 6:11 am: ||
Geeper, you posted: "This is NOT my therory of who the killer is... but again in therory it seems just as plasible as many if you leave your mind wide open"
My apologies, Geeper, I was under the impression that you were advancing this as your theory.
It is not entirely implausible, as you have pointed out. However, (in my honest opinion), the problem with this theory lies in the simple fact that there is no evidence to tie the happenings in germany, with the happenings in whitechapel.
Thank you for supplying a link to the story, I read it with much interest!
|Posted on Tuesday, June 03, 2003 - 3:02 pm: ||
though this theory is in my point of view not acceptable the background of this story caught my interest and I did a little research. My short abstract concerning the “german conspirancy” is available at the german JtR-site http://www.jacktheripper.de/forum/viewtopic.php?t=87
It’s written in german and I guess most of you people don’t speak german at all. Maybe I’ll translate it in a calm moment…
Post Number: 26
|Posted on Sunday, March 14, 2004 - 12:37 pm: ||
Whilst searching for something unrelated I discovered an online essay which claims that the Sherlock Holmes story "A scandal in Bohemia" was inspired by the marriage of the Duke of Clarence to a catholic girl. The argument is not very convincing. The text, with no indication of the author, is at http://www.schoolandholmes.com/scan.html
Post Number: 311
|Posted on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 9:01 pm: ||
I looked over the article on "A SCANDAL IN BOHEMIA", and I agree that it is too weak. I have found over the years that various incidents in the Holmes' stories are based on actual events, but with sizeable changes (like his use of a clue from the Thomas Orrock case in 1882 for that complex "RACHE" clue in A STUDY IN SCARLET).
He may have had suspicions or heard rumors, but the article really can't support it too well. In particular, taking the full name of the King of Bohemia and saying one syllable in the name
Wilhelm stands for Wilde, while the name Gottsreich (or whatever) refers to Saxe Coburg Gotha.
Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. The author has not proved it. Wilhelm might stand for Kaiser Wilhelm the II (back to our German Conspiracy theory). More real research regarding Doyle's stories and their sources needs to be done, but more carefully than this.
|Posted on Sunday, November 06, 2005 - 11:15 am: ||
What is the reason of the blackmail?
Did she threaten Wilhelm that she will tell the press about his affairs to prostitues?
Sorry for my bad English...
Use of these
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.