Jack the Ripper museum architect says he was 'duped' over change of plans

The architect behind the new Jack the Ripper museum in east London has said he was duped over the purpose of the project, after what was billed as a museum of women’s history became an attraction about Britain’s most notorious murderer of women.

Andrew Waugh, founder and director of Waugh Thistleton Architects, said he would not have touched the project “with a bargepole” if he had known his designs were going to be used to house displays of Ripper artefacts, including a recreation of one of the 1888 crime scenes.

“It is salacious, misogynist rubbish,” Waugh told Building Design online. “The local community was duped, we were duped. They came to us and said they had no money but that this is a real heartfelt project. It is incredibly important to celebrate women in politics in the East End. We really ran with it. We did it at a bargain-basement fee, at cost price because we thought it was a great thing to do.

“You do rely on the moral fibre of your client but you should also be able to rely on the planning system,” Waugh said.

The museum’s founder, Mark Palmer-Edgcumbe, 47, a former head of diversity at Google, has maintained that he planned to open a museum about the social history of women, but that as the project developed he decided a more interesting angle was from the perspective of the victims of the Ripper.

However, the Guardian can reveal that the museum’s own website stated Palmer-Edgcumbe wanted to explore the story of Jack the Ripper as far back as 2008, when he was involved with an exhibition about the serial killer at another London museum, the Museum of London Docklands.

The admission is made on a page entitled “A message from our Museum Founder”, which was taken down from the museum’s live website on Monday but can still be accessed via Google’s search cache.

The page states: “Since that time [2008], Mark has wanted to hold a serious examination of the story of Jack the Ripper, telling the story from the perspective of the women who were his victims for the first time.”

The Guardian can also reveal that Palmer-Edgcumbe was co-director of a company called Jack the Ripper Museum (London) Limited in 2012 – long before planning consent was sought for the Whitechapel “museum of women’s history” in August 2014. The company was dissolved in March 2014.

Palmer-Edgecumbe is currently listed as co-director of a company incorporated in October 2013 in the name of 5S Visual Supplies Limited. This name was changed to Jack the Ripper Museum (London) Limited in May 2014, just two months after the first company was closed.

View image in fullscreen

Julian Cole, a film-maker who lives near the Cable Street site, said the Guardian’s investigation “casts doubt on [Palmer-Edgcumbe’s] claim that he changed his mind halfway through the planning process”. Cole added: “This is further evidence that the planning application was a clear attempt to deceive the council and local residents as to the precise nature of the museum.

“I don’t in principle object to a Jack the Ripper museum. Jack the Ripper is a big tourist attraction, as the walking tours demonstrate. Anything that draws tourists east of the Tower of London to where I live is not a bad thing at all. It’s good for local businesses and the local economy. But we’ve been deprived the opportunity to engage in any realistic consultation.

“If someone is deliberately dishonest about what they propose to do with a building, the planning officers can’t give it a proper assessment.”

The museum has also been forced to remove from its website the name of one of the charities to which it was purportedly going to donate some of its profits. Eaves, which works to combat violence against women, said it had not been approached by anyone from the venue.

A spokesperson from Eaves said: “The first we were made aware of this was when we were contacted by our supporters. We join all those in expressing concern that a museum which had been billed as celebrating and recognising women of the East End has now become a museum about Jack The Ripper.

“As a charity with a long history of supporting women survivors of violence we are unhappy with the way in which the museum has used our name without permission.”

The latest controversy comes amid continued protests outside the east London museum. On Tuesday – the day it was supposed to open – about 250 campaigners staged a peaceful protest at the venue, some dressed as suffragettes. Women there reported that the museum had been open for much of the day, but closed when the protest began at about 6pm. Another protest was due to take place on Wednesday evening.

John Biggs, the mayor of Tower Hamlets, said on Friday that the council’s planning department had been “misled by the applicant” and that he would be seeking an explanation. from the museum owner as to how this shift in the nature of the museum has come about.”

“Planning officers in the council will be investigating whether the installed museum sign is contrary to the planning approval conditions. Further enforcement may also be taken in relation to the opening hours listed on their website, which are not in line with the original planning application.”

The Ripper was the name given to the suspected male perpetrator of a series of barbarous and unsolved murders of sex workers in London’s East End in 1888. He has never been definitively identified.

A spokesperson for Jack the Ripper Museum said: “The purpose of the museum, as stated in the original proposal, is to highlight the often overlooked history and untold stories of women in the East End of London.

“In Tower Hamlets, the female victims of Jack the Ripper have formed a significant and undeniable part of that history.

“There are many tours and ‘attractions’ that exploit these women’s stories, often unregulated and with an uncomfortable focus on the horror story rather than the women’s stories. We felt that the impact on women in this period has never seriously been examined and we intend to put that right.

“The museum is collaborating with local and national services for women affected by domestic violence and abuse, to raise awareness as well as funding for women in need in the community.”