|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Dan Norder
Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 157
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Monday, June 28, 2004 - 8:23 pm: |       |
It seems very unlikely that police officials would write down misleading information about the Ripper to throw off the public in *private and personal communication*. The Swanson marginalia was written by hand into a single copy of a privately owned book. He would have no reason to lie in it.
Ditto for the people who theorize that the police held back info (or even falsified it) in their reports. Misleading statements to the press I can understand, but misleading private statements to themselves? It'd serve no purpose.
Dan Norder, editor, Ripper Notes |
Scott Suttar
Detective Sergeant
Username: Scotty
Post Number: 106
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 29, 2004 - 1:25 am: | |
Hear Hear Dan,
I can't see the police holding back, or the government. It is common practice today to at least give the public a scapegoat in times of public outrage. I find it hard to believe that if the perpetrator was known he would have been shielded from the public given the outcry over the crimes. Druitt is a prime example, if they had proved it was Druitt they would have no reason to keep it secret, certainly not for his reputaion or that of his family. More likely is that while those named by Swanson et al were strongly suspected their cases were never proven
Scotty. |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1222
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 29, 2004 - 5:39 am: | |
Glenn,
Protect the criminal to what extent ?
A risk of exposure and public pilloring that would effect the goverment ?
Dan has added another angle. I agree with him.
Just my views
Monty
Prince Charming, Prince Charming,
Ridicule is nothing to be scared of |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1862
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 29, 2004 - 7:31 am: | |
Monty boy,
I agree with Dan's angle too, actually.
To tell you the truth, I've never really believed that the authorities held back or conducted misleading information -- I just thought Rob lay forward an interesting alternative twist to it.
As Dan says, the Swanson marginalia was written by hand in a privately owned book, probably not meant for the public to see anyway. I also see some logical problems with the notion of misleading internal information among the police, like I do with most conspiracy stories.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 417
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 29, 2004 - 7:57 am: | |
Hi everyone
I remember learning that Peter Sutcliffe the Yorkshire Ripper had not been allowed to use the defence not guilty by diminished responsibility (which would have reduced the charge to voluntary manslaughter) for political reasons.
I don't see why the police would be bothered. though the very insane cannot be tried but i'm pretty sure they still have to prove this? If the police knew this and were bothered perhaps they wouldn't allow it but I find it hard to believe they would cover it up and just put the bloke in a mental institution.
I find it much easier to believe that the police were no wiser than you or i about who jack the Ripper was (no offence) and were prone to speculation about there favoured suspects in order not to look stupid.(just like me!!)
call me cynical ... I'm waiting for you too!
Cheers
Jennifer
ps I don't know how I recognised the tune.
Uncle Bulgaria,He can remember the days when he wasn't behind The Times.....
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1864
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 03, 2004 - 7:45 am: | |
Hi, CB.
Well, I agree with most of it.
However, I do feel that Abberline's support of Chapman as the Ripper is passing dark clouds upon all the other aspects of his judgments on these points. You can't separate the one from other.
If one finds his notion of who was the most credible suspect unbelievable, then why should we trust his judgements of the suspects he didn't support?
However, I don't really believe that Abberline and the police in general knew who the Ripper was; we have accounts from both Robert Anderson (1889) and Abberline (1903) stating that they had failed to identify and catch the killer, statements that of course contradicts pieces like the Swanson marginalia, but they can't be disregarded. Abberline didn't connect Chapman with the murders until Chapman's capture and execution; before that the police really seemed to be in the dark about the killer's identity, apart from occasional personal theories.
Where this leaves Kosminski and the Polish Jew suspect, I have no clue whatsoever. But (apart from my reservations against Abberline's judgements above) I agree that if there was a Polish Jew incarcerated, really believed to be the Ripper, then Abberline -- who had access to practically all information about the case and belonged to those who was most well informed -- would have confirmed it. If not, we would have to come up with all kinds of conspiracy plots to figure out why he didn't.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Paul Jackson
Inspector
Username: Paulj
Post Number: 259
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, July 03, 2004 - 2:54 pm: | |
Hello Glenn, ol' boy...
Long time no see....Ive been kinda busy lately so I havent been on the computer much lately.
I agree with what you are saying in regards to Chapman. Hindsight is always 20/20. So why Chapman wasnt a suspect during the murders is beyond me. As far as the conspiracy....Ive noticed that people always say "it was a conspiracy" when there is no other logical explanation for something. I agree that the police really didnt know who the Ripper was. If they did, then most of them would have agreed on a suspect. But most of them have differing opinions about who it was....to me, this means
that all of them were probably wrong about who it really was. Good to see ya man! Best Regards.
Paul |
CB
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, July 03, 2004 - 7:18 pm: | |
Hi Glenn, Thanks for taking the time too respond to my post! It is always good to read any comments you might make regarding any remarks I might post!
I think we are in agreement that there may not have been conclusive evidence against any person who may have been locked up in an asylum. I do have one more question and I realise I am taking advantage of your good nature but I have posted this before without much response from anyone, it is just one of those questions that has been bugging me.
I have read in a few books and heard from a few ripperologist on various documentories that police aid to the east end stood down quicker then between the double event and the Kelly murder. In other words in less time between the double event and the Kelly murder, after the Kelly murder police aid stood down. I believe the numbers were, they increased there patrols from 29 to over 80 and after the Kelly murder they increased them to over a 140 but like I said in less time between the double event and the Kelly murder, after the Kelly murder all the special aid stood down. The above ripperologist from the books and documentories have sugested because of how quick the aid stood down after the Kelly murder, the police may have known that there would be no more murders and that they proably had an idea who the ripper was. I would be interested to hear any thoughts you may have on this subject Glenn.
Your friend,CB |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1867
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 16, 2004 - 5:32 am: | |
Hi CB.
Thanks for a very nice response from you, as usual, and I am sorry that I haven't been able to get back to you sooner; I've been occupied with a lot of things and I have also haven't been well lately (been admitted to a hospital for a short period of time etc.).
Yes, I have also noted the fact that the police aid -- according to some researchers -- in Whitechapel seems to have been stood down after the Kelly murder, implicating that they should have known that the murders had ceased for good.
I also find this interesting, and although there could be other reasons for this (budget reasons?), I really don't know what to think of it. But yes, if it's accurate, then it could imply that the police knew more than they wanted to admit officially. However, where that leaves us concerning different suspects, is hard to tell. It is interesting in connection with characters as Kosminski, Druitt and Tumblety, for example.
As far as I can see from this point, there seem to be no reasonable explanation given in the police communication to this withdrawal of police forces after the Kelly murder, but then I haven't looked into these specific parts of the case material for a while. I may have to get back to you on this.
Nice to talk to you as always, CB, and sorry about the delay.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1868
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 16, 2004 - 5:35 am: | |
Hey, Paul!
How are ya?
So you've been busy as well?
Keep in touch when you can. Done some reading?
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Scott Suttar
Detective Sergeant
Username: Scotty
Post Number: 124
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 20, 2004 - 1:15 am: | |
Hi CB, Glenn, all,
As I stated earlier on this post I find the idea that the police were circulating misinformation a little far fetched. Now i'll make a complete hypocrit of myself and float the following idea. We know that police had been covertly surveilling some locations in the East End although we don't know whether or not this was directly related to JtR. The influx of police onto the streets had not worked, it's only possible result might have been to force the Ripper to commit his crimes indoors. Might it not be possible that the police were baiting JtR by publicly removing extra police from the beat whilst at the same time placing them undercover?
Also Glenn you mentioned a while back that Swanson's marginalia and other police opinions were at odds over whether JtR was ever identified. I don't think this is so. The Swanson marginalia merely states that Kosminski was the suspect (I'm paraphrasing here as I can't find the original text on casebook), it does not state that the police could prove it. Anyway minor point, hope you are on the mend.
Scotty. |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1872
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 20, 2004 - 6:24 am: | |
Hi Scott,
"Might it not be possible that the police were baiting JtR by publicly removing extra police from the beat whilst at the same time placing them undercover?"
That is a very interesting point indeed. Unfortunately we have -- as far as I know -- no documentation proving such an action on the police's part, but it can't be ruled out as a possibility. And as you say, the increase of police forces didn't seem to help the situation that much, but merely forcing the Ripper to lay low or -- as you state -- swap to indoor locations (if Kelly really was a Ripper victim, which I have some doubts about).
As far as the Swanson marginalia is concerned, it clearly states (since it comments Anderson's passage about the Ripper) that the police knew who the killer was and that it was a suspect known as Kosminski. I for my part find this unlikely; I don't know why Swanson wrote as he did, but if all the other officers had their own theories, and Abberline -- who probably was the one most familiar with the case facts -- says later on that his identity was still just as much a mystery as it was at the time (yes, he in retrospect suggests Chapman/Klosowski, but his statement reveals that they had no real idea at the time), why should we take Swanson's words for it? It doesen't add up.
So no, the text doesen't say that the Ripper's identity was proven, but that he knew who the Ripper was, which totally contradicts all the other statements from his colleagues.
My bet is that Swanson -- like all the other officials -- had his own theories, and that he came on a bit too strong in his marginalia and maybe also suffered from some factual memory lapses. Let's not forget that all these statements are said or written in retrospect, several years after the actual events, while contemporary police records clearly show that the authorities were investigating every suspect they came across and really seemed to have no definite clue of who they were actually looking for.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1259
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 20, 2004 - 7:22 am: | |
Soapy,
Aye, I echo Glenns post. Interesting theory.
My problem would be what would Joe and Joan Whitechapel make of the sudden removal of the visual Police presence? The comfort factor gone.
Would this have caused trouble on the streets? The Authorities dont care about us, see what I mean?
That said, If I was Commissioner (instead of Assistant) I'd have taken the risk with such an action.
Monty
No, you cant have one extra on the leg side...but you can have five ! |
Sss
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 20, 2004 - 8:31 am: | |
I think Robert Louis Stevenson as the ripper. Why? Why not... |
CB
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, July 19, 2004 - 10:44 am: | |
Hi Glenn,
Thanks for taking the time too answer my post. Sorry to hear that you have not been feeling well. I trust you feel better now. You have my best wishes!
Take care,CB |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1873
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 20, 2004 - 9:42 am: | |
Thank you, CB.
I am still not tip-top, but I guess it could be worse.
You're very kind, CB; best wishes to you as well.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1874
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 20, 2004 - 9:51 am: | |
Monty boy,
"That said, If I was Commissioner (instead of Assistant) I'd have taken the risk with such an action."
I have now filed a proposition to the department concerning granting you a promotion.
OK?
We're looking forward to your next step, old boy.
We're too many Assistants anyway here at the moment, and I can hardly think of anyone better suited for the next rank and struggling with the hot shots in the Home Office.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1263
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 20, 2004 - 11:08 am: | |
Glenn,
Seeing as you yourself admit that we have too many assistants my next step is to inform you that your position is under review along with all other assistant posts. You may have to reapply for your own job ! Man, Im ruthless !!!
Seriously, this may be worth persuing as a thread.
'What would you do if you were incharge' sort of thing.
Worth a crack ? Sure beats wading through the Somme battlefield that is now known as 'The Diary Threads' !
Monty
No, you cant have one extra on the leg side...but you can have five ! |
Natalie Severn
Chief Inspector
Username: Severn
Post Number: 953
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 20, 2004 - 6:22 pm: | |
Hi Glenn,glad to see you back-I have been busy toobut noticed your absence -hope youare OK now!
What I have read is that A.Bachert let it be known in March 1889 that he had protested to the police as a member of the vigilance ctte about the cutting back of the number of police protecting Whitechapel and he had been told in confidence[and under some verbal threat too] that there wouldnt be any more of the ripper type murders because the murderer was dead-"drowned in the Thames".However its possible some of them did think he was dead and gone[Druitt?] maybe believing family rumours spread by Druitt himself
of the kind that he was losing his mind and "THOUGHT" he was the ripper.Maybe too when they searched his chambers they found clues of some kind-a knife/blood stained clothing etc and hid this information from the general public and even from some of the rest of the police as he was from such a high ranking family that someone like Machnaghten wanted to protect.
These days I cant really see Druitt as the ripper at all though can believe he may have deluded himself he was.
These days I"ve no idea who it was though I have started to wonder about the soldier who spoke to the policeman outside George"s Yard at 2 a m and who was never found afterwards.It seems to me very possible that either he or his mate may have murdered Martha Tabram and I now think she was more than likely a first victim of the ripper. |
Scott Suttar
Detective Sergeant
Username: Scotty
Post Number: 128
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 20, 2004 - 11:58 pm: | |
I knew it!
The power would just go straight Monty's head if he were commissioner. Announcing reviews before he's even appointed, need I say more!
Glenn, I am at work again and have no source material at hand so I was scouring the net for the actual wording of the marginalia, instead I stumbled across this: Swanson's Revolver. Will post on the marginalia later when I have the wording at hand.
Scotty. |
Busy Beaver
Detective Sergeant
Username: Busy
Post Number: 53
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 21, 2004 - 4:24 am: | |
I've been carefully reading Martha Tabram's dossier on this site and I'm going to go with Natalie and say I too, believe she was the first victim of Jack. And as jack got bolder, so did his crimes.
Busy Beaver  |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1270
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 21, 2004 - 11:59 am: | |
And thats enough from you Constable Suttar !
Is the downsizing of this investigation after Kellys death really that surprising ? The next murder in that area (H Division) is Clay Pipe's during the summer of '89.
When you consider the explosion of murders during the August and September 1888 and compare it to the lull from November 1888 to Mid July 1889 (8 months) its possible that they who pay felt that money is best spent elsewhere.
Reading through the files, thats my take on the situation.
Monty
PS Glenn, congratulations....you still have a job....now get me a cup of tea....good lad.
No, you cant have one extra on the leg side...but you can have five ! |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1875
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 21, 2004 - 1:38 pm: | |
Monty boy,
Well, since we still obtain the same rank (you're still "Assistant" Commissioner too, right?), I'm afraid bringing you a cup of tea is not part of my tasks. But I can send out one of my assistants.
I dying for a cucumber sandwich myself...
Thanks by the way for letting me keep my job (good man!), but to tell you the truth, I miss being out on the field. It is more fun being an Inspector.
My view on the subject at hand:
I would say budget reasons and the lack of a long-time satisfactory result from the increased forces might be the background to their withdrawal; they couldn't really keep up this extra personnel forever.
Hardly any conspiracy attempts and probably not because of them knowing the killer's identity either.
But that's just my penny's worth.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1876
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 21, 2004 - 1:39 pm: | |
Scotty,
The Swanson marginalia reads as follows:
"because the suspect was also a Polish Jew and also because his evidence would convict the suspect, and witness would be the means of murderer being hanged which he did not wish to be left on his mind. [
] And after this identification which suspect knew, no other murder of this kind took place in London. [
] Continuing from page 138, after the suspect had been identified at the Seaside Home where he had been sent by us with difficulty in order to subject him to identification, and he knew he was identified. On suspect's return to his brother's house in Whitechapel he was watched by the police (City CID) by day & night. In a very short time the suspect with his hands tied behind his backs, he was sent to Stephney Workhouse and then to Colney Hatch and died shortly afterwards - Kosminski was the suspect - DSS"
It is directly commenting this text -- about the Whitechapel murderer -- written by Anderson (in his book "The Lighter Side of My Official Life"):
"One did not need to be a Sherlock Holmes to discover that the criminal was a sexual maniac of a virulent type; that he was living in the immediate vicinity of the scenes of the murders; [
] And the conclusion we came to was that he and his people were certain low-class Polish Jews [
] I am almost tempted to disclose the identity of the murderer and of the pressman who wrote the letter above referred to. But no public benefit would result from such a course, and the traditions of my old department would suffer. I will merely add that the only person who had ever had a good view of the murderer unhesitatingly identified the suspect the instant he was confronted with him; but he refused to give evidence against him."
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1877
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 21, 2004 - 1:46 pm: | |
Natalie,
Thank you. I am a bit better, but not tip top.
I have to admit another reason for my absence is that the discussions here lately have become somewhat tedious and dull, mostly focusing on Maybrick and the watch (sounds like a 60s band) and on Radka's very strange thread.
This is too a bit off the subject of the tread here, but as far as Martha is concerned, I find the sailor(s) to be the very possible assailant(s), but I am not at all sure sure about her being a Ripper victim.
As I have stated before, I am feeling more and more doubtful about Tabram's, Stride's and Kelly's inclusion in the line of canonical Ripper victims. I personally think it could be possible (although not certain) that we are dealing with different killers here, but I can't prove it.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Maria Giordano
Sergeant
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 50
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 21, 2004 - 2:20 pm: | |
Glenn,
I think it's highly unlikely to have that many different killer all of a sudden showing up in that really small area with such similar MOs and signitures.
I agree with Busy Beaver that the crimes show an escalation, partly due to gaining experience and confidence, and ending with Kelly (at least in London).
I'm inclined to include Tabram.
Stop wasting your time with Radka. That was your advice to me, wasn't it? And good advice it was.
Mags |
Natalie Severn
Chief Inspector
Username: Severn
Post Number: 955
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 21, 2004 - 3:43 pm: | |
Hi Glenn,Thats how I have felt.Can"t really get enthused about Maybrick or the watch and the other thread has become a bit tedious now.
Monty may well be right-it was more a case of cost effective manpower.
I think Glenn they were soldiers who were with Martha Tabram and her friend "pearly poll".[to be hopes Martha and pearly Poll hadnt been having a barney?-just a thought].I think there was confusion about which regiment the soldiers were in-the policeman saying one thing and "Pearly Poll" another but both were agreed they were soldiers.
I agree it is possible there were several killers at work but the only problem for me is that it was doctors post mortems that agreed they thought it was the work of one person.You have studied painting Glenn and must recognise the "writing"
of the various painters even when they "copy" each other its usually possible to recognise the various "hands" a to know a Rembrant from a Carravagio even though both were preoccupied with light and dark contrasts.Likewise a doctor who has studied thousands of corpses must have a better idea than most of us how injuries had been sustained/what with/when and whether they bore any similarities with each other.
Take Care Glenn,
Nats |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1880
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 21, 2004 - 6:55 pm: | |
Hi Maria,
"Stop wasting your time with Radka."
And I have. I haven't indulged in serious discussions in that thread for weeks (or is it months?), apart from some occasional guest visit. But I wouldn't dream about entering the discussion.
"I think it's highly unlikely to have that many different killer all of a sudden showing up in that really small area with such similar MOs and signitures."
Well you see, that's just the thing. I don't think the MO:s and the signatures are that similar in the different murders.
Tabram was stabbed 39 times and did not have her throat cut. She was last seen with a soldier. She was not mutilated and had no organ taken from her.
Stride was last seen with a ruffian assaulting her, with a conduct far from what can be expected by the Ripper. She had her throat cut -- and in a way that is not that consistent with the Ripper's throat cutting -- and she was not mutilated.
Sure, we have the interesting coincidence with the murder on Eddowes some 30 or 40 minutes later in a neighbouring district, but still ... that's what the facts tell us.
Kelly was butchered and probably had her throat cut while she was still alive, according to the large amount of blood -- while Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes probably were strangled or smothered first. Kelly had no part of the womb or the abdomen taken from her, but the heart. To me that murder looks more like an over-excessive copy-cat murder (by someone who has quite superficial knowledge of the crimes) rather than a murder committed by the Ripper himself.
Kelly was killed in a house that her ex-lover had access to and they had also had a row some short time before the murder. Similar types of murders HAS occurred in the past and in modern times by boyfriend/husbands without a prior criminal record, some of them has been made in a fashion to copy serial murderers. It would be very easy for especially Barnett (whose mental or violent capacity we know very little about) or someone else who knew her, to commit the crime and then blame it on the Ripper.
Similar things have happened and will happen again, and that can't be ruled out as an alternative possibility.
In the Ripper's case, the throat-cutting and the approach is the MO, while the mutilation and taking of the wombs (very important acts that represent the killer's fantasies) are the signature.
The MO can change for a serial killer, but the signature very seldom does!
I had to take a few blows for these views earlier so I almost hesitate to repeat them, but I am really not the first to put forward them and I stand by them -- I can't say this is what I think is the ultimate truth but those are details that I just can't disregard. The theory of an escalating killer is not enough to fully convince me about those women's inclusion.
But I find it to be beyond doubt that at least Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes were killed and mutilated by the same man.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1881
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 21, 2004 - 6:59 pm: | |
Hi Natalie,
Yes, OK maybe they were soldiers -- I think you're right. I have still not totally recovered and it is obvious that I need to read up a bit on some of the details.
Anyway, the doctors were really inconsistent and contradictory on many points in their opinions, and although they may have known their anatomy, they were hardly criminal experts from a forensic point of view.
I would really not put that much money on the opinions of doctors in 1888 when it comes to analysing crime scene evidence, especially since they didn't always share the same line of thinking.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Christopher T George
Chief Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 815
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 12:56 pm: | |
Hi Glenn
I might have misunderstood the intent of your message of Wednesday, July 21, 2004 - 6:55 pm but from my perspective it appears what you said about the Kelly murder does not accord with the facts recorded in Dr. Bond's post mortem report.
You stated: "Kelly had no part of the womb or the abdomen taken from her, but the heart."
On the contrary, Dr. Bond stated:
"The whole of the surface of the abdomen & thighs was removed & the abdominal Cavity emptied of its viscera. The breasts were cut off, the arms mutilated by several jagged wounds & the face hacked beyond recognition of the features. The tissues of the neck were severed all round down to the bone.
"The viscera were found in various parts viz: the uterus & Kidneys with one breast under the head, the other breast by the Rt foot, the Liver between the feet, the intestines by the right side & the spleen by the left side of the body. The flaps removed from the abdomen and thighs were on a table."
Glenn, perhaps what you actually meant in your post was that the uterus was not removed from the room as the uterus was removed and taken away in some of the other murders. However, I would argue strongly that since uterus and kidney were removed from the body as in the other canonical murders, except for Stride, the mutilation is actually remarkably similar.
I do believe too that the throat cut in Stride's case was similar to the other murders, as well, as we can see from Dr. George Baxter Phillips's inquest statement, that there was, "from left to right, . . . . a clean cut incision six inches in length" severing the carotid artery. There is the question about whether a different knife was used than in the other murders but since there was no other mutilation, it is hard to compare the knives.
All the best
Chris George
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1889
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 2:07 pm: | |
Hi George,
Yes, what I meant was that the body parts was not taken from the room. I see the womb as an important part of the Ripper's signature, but the only thing that was missing from Kelly was the heart.
As far as I know, the cut on Stride's throat is not as deep as on the other victims. This could of course be a result of the alleged "interruption" but nevertheless...
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Christopher T George
Chief Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 817
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 10:52 am: | |
Hi, Glenn
A couple of things.
In the Kelly murder, I think what the killer took away with him or did not take away with him might have been altered by the fact that the murder took place in a room. Again, I think the fact that the same organs were removed as in previous murders is a good indication it was the same man. In addition, if we accept the theory that the murderer was possibly by this time losing his mind, i.e., if we go along with a Druitt-Kosminski-David Cohen theory that the murderer was unbalanced, this might also affect what he might take away with him.
In terms of the Stride murder, the circumstances seem to have been altered because he was interrupted by the arrival of Diemschutz and his horse and cart which pre-empted any abdominal mutilation and thus makes this murder harder to compare with the other canonical murders.
To my mind, these altered circumstances alter the situation and make these two murders appear somewhat different rather than it was a different murderer in the cases of Stride and Kelly.
Best regards
Chris George
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1895
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 11:24 am: | |
Hi Chris,
I absolutely see your point as far as Stride is concerned, and I have also earlier put forward the same opinions, although I am less sure of today that there actually was an interruption (but if there was that of course explains some of it).
I am less convinced regarding Kelly, though.
Kelly was butchered with no apparent method than just... butchering.
I must admit, I fail to see why the fact that the murder was performed in a room would explain why the heart was taken, not the womb or parts from the abdominal area. as in the other victims. To me this differing detail is crucial, since the womb was taken from Chapman and Eddowes. Then one could also wonder why Kelly's face was wiped out beyond recognition.
To me it's all very suspicious, and I still cling to the idea that the Kelly murder may (but just "may" -- as an alternative theory) be a result of a badly performed copy-cat killing, made by someone who knew her and who had a very rough knowledge about the details of the Whitechapel murders, as well as designed to fool people to think that the Ripper had done it.
I can't prove it and I am not 100% convinced, but the idea intrigues me, considering there are a lot of things that doesen't add up regarding the general notion of her inclusion.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Christopher T George
Chief Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 818
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 12:11 pm: | |
Hi, Glenn
Of course, I am aware that a number of students of the case theorize that the Kelly murder may have been a copycat killing for the reasons you indicate.
I do know also that as you state, the Kelly mutilation is often viewed as butchery. On the other hand, if the same organs were removed, that indicates precision even if the overall effect is a bloody mess and less reminiscent of a surgeon's skill.
On the other hand, if the idea of an unbalanced killer holds any water, just the fact that he was able to luxuriate in the complete destruction of the victims' body, which was not the case in the other murders, might have blurred his modus operandi, i.e., he was not thinking as clearly as in the other murders, when he had the intent to remove body parts.
Glenn, I am also not totally convinced that the heart was taken away in the Kelly murder, and wonder if in fact it could have been burned in the fire? I am not sure if the doctors or the police of the day were able to detect if human remains could have been in those ashes.
All the best
Chris
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1896
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 1:03 pm: | |
Hi George,
"Glenn, I am also not totally convinced that the heart was taken away in the Kelly murder, and wonder if in fact it could have been burned in the fire? I am not sure if the doctors or the police of the day were able to detect if human remains could have been in those ashes."
That is true and an absolute possibility.
By the way, didn't they play around with that idea in the movie "From Hell"?
Well, I wouldn't call those piles of flesh in the vicinity of Kelly's body as "removed with precision". Besides, I don't know if I understand you correctly, but as far as Kelly is concerned, I don't know about the "same organs" part.
My point is that the Ripper would probably had taken the womb with him because it seem to have been rather important to him (I find it a bit difficult to buy that he would "forget" this part of his signature and driving force, even if we're talking about a complete lunatic).
The man who killed Kelly had a rather different approach than the Ripper. OK, he was indoors, but here he obviously attacked the woman while she was aware of it and there are also signs of defense wounds on her arms, indicating she put up a struggle, something we don't see in connection with the other canonical victims.
There are several things about the Kelly scene that bugs me as far as Ripper is concerned, and I can't help it -- it just don't feel right.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Christopher T George
Chief Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 819
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 1:20 pm: | |
Hi, Glenn
This might be making light of the situation, and expressing some ghoulish humor, but perhaps he didn't feel he needed to carry Kelly's uterus away with him, because he had some at home already. And again, if he felt he had sated his lust in the utter destruction of a human being perhaps the removal of that body part was less important? Glad you agree with me on the possibility that the heart could have been incinerated in the fire in Kelly's fireplace at 13 Miller's Court.
As for the piles of flesh not perhaps indicating removal with precision, I think just to remove a kidney or a uterus would have taken precision, and the placement of the individual organs, whether for ritualistic intent or some private purpose, indicates precision, even if the overall aspect of the room might on the surface resemble a butcher's shop.
Incidentally, in regard to the idea that the killer might have been a butcher or slaughterer, Rob Hills continues his interesting series on his idea that the Ripper might have been a cats' meat butcher or horse slaughterer in the latest (July) issue of Ripperologist.
All the best
Chris
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1899
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 2:53 pm: | |
Hi Chris.
"This might be making light of the situation, and expressing some ghoulish humor, but perhaps he didn't feel he needed to carry Kelly's uterus away with him, because he had some at home already."
You're beautiful. Good one.
A cat meat's butcher... ? Horse slaughterer?
Hmmm... interesting (oh right... I was supposed to subscribe to the magazine... better do that soon).
I don't know about USA and Britain, but here in Scandinavia a horse slaughterer was considered as the lowest of among the lowest, even worse than the executioner. Those who had that occupation over here were mostly travelling people, connected with the gypsies, known as "tattare" (tinkers). They used to fill up 60% of the Swedish prisons and were often charged with assaulting people with knives, stealing, loitering etc.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 128
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 6:23 pm: | |
Hello Chris.
It's been a while ,eh?
You wrote..
"I am also not totally convinced that the heart was taken away in the Kelly murder, and wonder if in fact it could have been burned in the fire? I am not sure if the doctors or the police of the day were able to detect if human remains could have been in those ashes."
I wondered if you were aware of the news report covering this incident, I'm not sure if the article inspired your thoughts or if you had forgotten that this event did occur.
The Sunday Times, Nov. 11, 1888.
"A somewhat important investigation was made yesterday in the room in Miller's Court in which the woman was murdered. The police had reason to believe the murderer had burnt something before leaving the room after the crime, and accordingly the ashes and other matter in the grate were carefully preserved.
Yesterday afternoon Dr Phillips and Dr MacDonald, MP, the coroner for the district, visited Miller's Court and, after the refuse had been passed through a sieve, it was subjected to a close scrutiny by the medical gentlemen. Nothing, however, was found at the examination which is likely to afford any assistance or clue to the police."
The Ripper File, Jones & Lloyd, 1975, pg. 69.
All the best, Jon |
CB
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 21, 2004 - 7:58 am: | |
Hi Natalie,
Bachert's claim is interesting since the Machnaghten did not come out untill 1894 with is thoughts concerning Druitt. IF Machnaghten had wanted to protect the family of Druitt it is strange that he mentioned his name in his memo. However, I think that Bacherts claim doese point twards Druitt and this may indeed indicate that some police officials considerd him a strong suspect.
Everytime I want too believe that the police may have known something about the ripper's identity I think back on all the different suspects put forth by different detectives. Glenn pointed out the three obvious suspects that this theory would fit. Tumblety,Druitt and Kosminski/Cohen. I will suggest this, If the police did stand aid down to the eastend because they believed that Druitt was the ripper and that he was dead, if Druitt was not the ripper, Then they got very lucky that Mary Kelly was the last ripper victim. The fact that they did stand the aid down and that Kelly was indeed the last ripper victim is interesting.
Since most detectives did not believe that Tabram was a ripper victim I tend to go in that direction. [Machnaughten being very sure she was not.] However, I believe that the ripper killed between four and six women. I can not be sure about Tabram or Stride. The other four would be Nichols,Chapman,Eddowes and Kelly.
All the best,CB |
CB
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 20, 2004 - 5:59 pm: | |
Hi Scott,
Interesting idea but the police would be taking a big chance, if the ripper did strike again the public would be up in arms over the fact that the police redused the patroles. Your theory is possible however.
All the best,CB |
Joćo Santos
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 21, 2004 - 9:17 am: | |
Hi! I`m portuguese and i think James Maybrick and Robert Louis Stevenson are the most suspects for being Jack The Ripper. Thanks a lot |
Scott Suttar
Detective Sergeant
Username: Scotty
Post Number: 129
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Monday, July 26, 2004 - 1:14 am: | |
Hi all,
Glenn, thanks for quoting Swanson for me. Reading it again my suspicion is confirmed in that Swanson did not lend any support to the identification he just told us who the suspect was. He does not claim that he believed that Kosminski was JtR, merely that Kosminski was the suspect identified. I don't think Swanson is stating any more than the evidence they had and from reading that it can be seen why the process went no further. All of the evidence he gives about Kosminski's movements is circumstantial.
CB, your right it would have been a big risk, but they were losing the battle anyway, both with the public and the killer. I should say I was just theorizing, I don't know if I believe my own theory.
Scotty. |
Christopher T George
Chief Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 820
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 26, 2004 - 3:31 pm: | |
Hi, Jon
Many thanks for the quote from The Sunday Times, Nov. 11, 1888 and printed in The Ripper File, by Jones & Lloyd, 1975, pg. 69, about the examination of the ashes in Kelly's fireplace which concludes, "Nothing, however, was found at the examination which is likely to afford any assistance or clue to the police."
What does this really tell us, though? If the police had found some burned flesh in the ashes would they have thought it significant?
Considering that the whole of the room was covered in flesh, they might not have given too much thought to it, or considering the state of forensics of the day, they might have concluded that the charred remains were animal meat rather than human.
As with a lot of information from the case we have to think of what they were looking for, not what we think they ought to have been trying to find. For example, perhaps they were looking something belonging to the killer, a ring or a button, rather than something that belonged to the victim, and since they didn't find anything that they thought might have belonged to the killer and to have provided such a "clew" they dismissed the ashes as being useful to the investigation.
Best regards
Chris George
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 979
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 26, 2004 - 4:19 pm: | |
Hi,
Lets face it the whole police investigation during the Ripper murders was unsatisfactory, at least by modern day standards.
The delay on entering Kellys room was totally absurd, the doctor apart from viewing the body through the window and drawing a obvious conclusion that she was beyond help, would have wasted at least two hours before he could proberly examine the body to determine the approx time of death, the fact is the police although they were intelligent were not advanced enough to note possible clues , or draw imaginative conclusions to a likely scenerio, they were simply a bunch of 'Blue Bottles' running around in circles under a code of practise that was the precedure at that time.
Regards Richard. |
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 129
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 26, 2004 - 5:24 pm: | |
Hi Chris.
I know we can't be sure (always the caveat, eh?), but the news article does not mention the presence of police, though I suspect officers would have been assigned to the duo to assist in any way they can.
The focus appears to be medical, MacDonald and Phillips, both surgeons had returned to look for some evidence they believed may be in the ashes.
Now, if what was being searched for was a button, ring, weapon?, anything other than something medical then surely the presence of police would have been noted?.
It's either an oversite on behalf of the press, which I think is unlikely, they play these things up no end, or no police were present, other than the bobby on duty outside.
If anyone can find the complete article, I'm assuming my quote is a section, then we might learn more.
As it stands I interpret the two surgeons being there because they were the only ones qualified to find what they were looking for, ie; the heart?, it was the only piece missing, so we are told.
Police would not be so qualified, and I don't think surgeons would waste their time looking for evidence that the police were well qualified to identify.
regards, Jon
(Message edited by Jon on July 26, 2004)
(Message edited by Jon on July 26, 2004) |
Natalie Severn
Chief Inspector
Username: Severn
Post Number: 973
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 26, 2004 - 6:02 pm: | |
Hi CB some other thoughts on suspects are the gangs that roamed Whitechapel one such attacking Emma Smith.Did they protect "patches" for "their" prostitutes and beat upthose who"strayed"?Did theses punishments becomes sadistic rituals later with "appointees" doing the mutilating and frightening others off their territory etc.
And were some of the bobbies on the beat conveniently turning deaf ears to it "not hearing a sound" etc possibly receiving backhanders when the saw nothing ,heard nothing,said nothing etc[I"ve been watching "the long Firm" on TV about the gangs of the 50"s and 60"s and it made me begin to wonder about protection rackets of the 1880"s.Probably way,way off the actual crimes but worth a mention nevertheless
Cheers Natalie |
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 130
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 26, 2004 - 6:03 pm: | |
Hi Richard.
You wrote:
"Lets face it the whole police investigation during the Ripper murders was unsatisfactory, at least by modern day standards."
Absolutely, we all agree about that.
Do you know how many cities in the world had a police force at that time?
But then you criticize the police using modern opinions..
"The delay on entering Kellys room was totally absurd,"
In our view, yes, but not to them at the time.
"..the doctor apart from viewing the body through the window and drawing a obvious conclusion that she was beyond help, would have wasted at least two hours before he could proberly examine the body to determine the approx time of death,"
Holding back to allow for some prospect of catching the villian was far more important, you forget, in those days if you were not actually found at the crime scene the chances of you being caught were practically 'zero'.
You cannot change what has already happend, whats done is done, the best you can now hope for is to try something that may lead you to the killer.
Thats what they were doing.
"the fact is the police although they were intelligent were not advanced enough to note possible clues,"
Right, but they knew enough not to disturb the crime scene, in this particular case anyway.
If anything should be observed concerning 'progression', usually attributed to the murderer. It should certainly be noted that the police were learning too, with each case that occured they were being led towards forensic disciplines. Miller's Court was the first crime scene to be photographed I believe. The suggestion of bloodhounds was also an innovation.
"they were simply a bunch of 'Blue Bottles' running around in circles under a code of practise that was the precedure at that time."
Thats what a lack of information tends to suggest, it's a shame we have no official police records of plans, tactics and procedures during the Whitechapel Murders.
They were primitive by our standards, but we should not judge them by our standards.
At the time they were the best in the world.
Regards, Jon
|
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1380
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 26, 2004 - 6:28 pm: | |
G'day Rich,
Your last post was a bit harsh wasn't it? Look into the history of the police force. I did for 'Ripperoo'. I think mine or Julian's story on the 'History of the Metropolitan Police Force' is on display here on Casebook, under 'Periodicals'/'Ripperoo'.
They had no past murder cases of this kind to go by.
Forensic science hadn't even been thought of.
Fingerprinting was just someone's idea.
The police force began as just a bunch of concerned citizens.
LEANNE |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1901
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 26, 2004 - 8:50 pm: | |
Richard,
Your opinions about the police at the time are completely off mark. If don't know if you've really have made proper research on the subject or how well informed you are about the historical context of the time in question.
Yes, by modern standards their methods and knowledge about sexual serial killers were rather primitive, but describing them as idiots is a rather unintelligent and sloppy remark.
If you really have bothered to read the internal police communication at the time, it is clear that they were doing practically everything they could based on what means that were to their disposal at the time. Furthermore, it is evident that they learnt as they carried along and with each crime. Note the sloppy handling of Nichol's body at the beginning of the Ripper murders and then compare it to the awareness of sealing off and photographing the crime scene in Miller's Court some months later, with the body in situe, which must be considered quite modern and ground-breaking for its time. During the reign of the Ripper the police efforts developed quite fairly under these few moths the events occure, so portraying them as rambling fools is rather unfair. The only way for them to frame the Ripper would be to catch him in the act or to get a confession.
They did plenty of mistakes, but I've seen worse mistakes done by police forces in Sweden in connection with important cases as late as the early half of the 20th century, so I wouldn't say the methods and results of the 1888 London police to be clumsy out of the ordinary.
Internal police communication shows, that the police made great efforts and interviewed hundreds of people as well as trying different approaches, as far as their experiences and methods at the time allowed.
To demand anything more than that is idiotic and to be ignorant of the historical circumstances.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 981
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 - 6:01 am: | |
Glenn,
I Admit i presented a harsh and rather novice account of the police investigations, you are right they did do there best, and i would not deny that, it is just a pity that they were a few years beyond more advanced crime methods.
My main greviance was the delay at the crime scene at millers court, surely bloodhounds should have been accesible within minutes for it should have been obvious that any further murders would have occured in the Aldgate/ Whitechapel area, and plans should have been hatched that any more grisly discoverys should have dogs and handlers rushing to the scene without delay.
The delay of over two hours before close examination of the body could be made proberly resulted in a completely false time of death, which the police seemed to take as gospel dispite evidence to the contary.
I stated that although the police were intelligent enough , it was just not good enough to make such a mess in several aspects of these murders, eg errasing the grafitti, the handling of Nichols body, sloppy interogating of witnesses ,releasing poor Eddowes from the safety of a cell.
Richard. |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
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.
|
|
|
|
