Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook


Most Recent Posts:
Mary Jane Kelly: Caroline Maxwell and identification - by emdes2 1 hour ago.
Other Mysteries: Bible John (General Discussion) - by cobalt 2 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: If you could follow any suspect... - by A P Tomlinson 7 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Caroline Maxwell and identification - by Doctored Whatsit 14 hours ago.
Other Mysteries: Bible John (General Discussion) - by New Waterloo 17 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Caroline Maxwell and identification - by New Waterloo 18 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Caroline Maxwell and identification - by New Waterloo 18 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Caroline Maxwell and identification - by Doctored Whatsit 18 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Mary Jane Kelly: Caroline Maxwell and identification - (9 posts)
Scene of the Crimes: The Crime Scene Significance - (4 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: If you could follow any suspect... - (4 posts)
Pub Talk: Kindle Questions and Recommendations - (3 posts)
Other Mysteries: Bible John (General Discussion) - (2 posts)


The Times (London).
21 January 1890

James Kendrick, 25, pleaded Guilty to a charge of obtaining 1d. by false pretences. On the evening of December 6 the prisoner was selling newpapers in the street, shouting "Another horrible murder and mutilation - Jack the Ripper at work again." The prosecutor bought from him a number of the Sun, and looked for an account of the murder, but was unable to find it. He pinted out to the prisoner that there was noithing of the kind in the paper, and the prisoner thereupon took off his coat and offered to fight him. The prosecutor called a contable and gave the prisoner into custody. On the way to the police station the prisoner threatened him, and said he would "act Phoenix Park on him when he got out." The prisoner said he was intoxicated at the time and "no doubt exceeded the news." Several previous convictions for larceny were proved against him, and it appeared that he had been liberated from prison only two days before he committed this offence. He was entenced to 21 days' imprisonment, with hard labour.