|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 164
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, March 11, 2005 - 8:14 am: | 
|
Let me begin by saying I propose a separate thread on police personalities. This one is intended for a discussion on the approach the police took to the initial stages of the case (ie once they were aware they probably had a multiple murderer on their hands).
As I understand things, after Nichols' murder, Abberline - a copper who was experienced and knew the local terrain intimately and recently - was quickly put in overall charge of the combined cases. He seems in retrospect and inspired choice. Chapman's death was soon added to the list of his responsibilities.
At the Scotland Yard End, Chief Commissioner warren personally appointed Donald Swanson to co-ordinate the case - with clear instructions that ALL papers concerned were to pass through him, and he had absolute authority.
The new Assistant Chief Constable, Robert Anderson, was not much involved, disappearing on sick leave almost immediately.
There are indications that Munro (Anderson's predecessor) now working for the Home Office on secret matters, may have maintained an interest in the case.
I hope that this is enough to start discussion. I am sure that many, here on Casebook, know far more than I about the investigation.
At this stage, I think we should restrict things to what happened up to the murder of Chapman (the point Back to Basics has reached) although I recognise that some reference to later parts of the investigation might be required for the sake of argument.
Let discussion commence,
Phil |
Scott Nelson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Snelson
Post Number: 113
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 11, 2005 - 9:51 am: |
|
Check the archives. Its all been discussed before. |
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 165
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, March 11, 2005 - 10:46 am: |
|
Thank you Scott for that positive contribution.
As I discovered recently, quite a few users of this Board appreciate these threads. I was actually encouraged to start a new one. If those users decide otherwise, or response falls away, I will happily desist from starting new threads in the series.
I do hope that, at some point in the future, I'll have the opportunity to support you in the same fulsome and wholehearted spirit.
Cordially,
Phil
|
Carolyn
Sergeant
Username: Carolyn
Post Number: 26
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Friday, March 11, 2005 - 12:26 pm: |
|
Phil,
I for one DO appreciate these threads. I have been going over so much information all over the archives, books etc. that it is really nice to see it all covered in one direct thread. Helps me to focus better, or maybe I am just a slow learner.
Sorry to say I don't have any thing to add at this point on the police, as it is one area I have not gotten to yet. Am looking forward to the discussions so maybe I can get up to speed this very confusing case.
Keep up the good work...
Thanks,
Carolyn |
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 336
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, March 11, 2005 - 1:54 pm: |
|
HI Phil,
I have been going through some of the old newspaper reports on police conduct for the case for my book and this thread will be useful to me at least..........
I have found from research so far that there were lots of small points that I had not appreciated before.........I haven't had time to go through yet and put them into a sensible post, but I will have a look through and see if there is anything I think anyone would be interested in.............after all since the last threads, new information has come to light, and with new members here to add their contribution, there could be some new points raised........that's what I like about the concept of time............it's passing can bring all sorts of new ideas and thoughts.......... you might have noticed I used the word New there quite a few times.........it's a good word!
Love
Jane
xxx |
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 167
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, March 11, 2005 - 3:29 pm: |
|
Thanks for your support Jane and Carolyn. It means a lot.
Phil |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 341
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Friday, March 11, 2005 - 4:03 pm: |
|
Please do continue, Phil.
I also don't have much to contribute on this issue, but I do have a question. I think that it's very likely that at least some of the police weren't doing a perfect job of walking their beats every single minute. Especially in the Mtre Square area. I suspect that the cop and the warehouse guard were having a cozy cuppa.
I guess that isn't a question after all.
Mags
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4217
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 11, 2005 - 4:21 pm: |
|
Mags, if there was something not right, it may have been with other officers, rather than Watkins. Both Harvey and Long were dismissed in July 1889, and I can't help suspecting that this wasn't a coincidence.
Robert |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1840
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 11, 2005 - 4:47 pm: |
|
Yes Phil
I think this to be a very useful topic.
Just as a for instance, I don't think that many people are aware that right at the beginning of the Whitechapel Murders, it was in fact dear old uncle Charles - then Superintendent Charles Henry Cutbush - in charge of the local investigations.
This only came to light in 2000 with the publication of the 'Jack the Ripper Source Book'.
Up till then the A-Z and other volumes had avowed that there was no official police connection between uncle Charles and the Ripper crimes.
Okay many may not accept Tabram as a victim, but she was certainly classified as such by the police of the time, so uncle Charles' role is not diminished by this.
Useful litle snippets like this can move us along, and provide new insights into the case.
Another for instance was that I was able to throw grave doubts on Abberline's abilities and credibility as an honest detective with a simple quote from a later case in which he was involved.
I'm all for it. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1665
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 11, 2005 - 5:36 pm: |
|
Yes AP .You express my own views on the matter here.I hadnt doubted Abberline"s integrity for a second until I read first one Times report and then another on his behaviour regarding the Homosexual club in Cleveland Street that Prince Eddie is said to have frequented.Now this interested me and I thought that perhaps his reputation was mostly founded on his sense of duty to Queen and Country-which makes complete sense-his sense of honour and what was honourable
depending more on this than rooting out the truth
of such a scandal and exposing it.
So even with the ripper case[ in Monro"s words
"a hot potato"] ----in Abberline words---and long after he had accused Chapman of being the Ripper and to a reporter that he would have to look "not at the bottom of society
but a long way up for the answer"!
And quite so AP.Charles Cutbush was a very senior police officer and played a significant role in the ripper investigation especially at the start.
|
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 169
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 10:27 am: |
|
If what you are saying is, that Abberline's actions in regard to the Cleveland St affair, somehow cast doubt on his integrity as a policeman, I wonder whether the conclusion is altogether fair.
Cleveland St was a scandalous case involving "the highest in the land". Whether he was involved or not, PAV's name was mentioned in connection, and Lord Euston and others were certainly implicated. In my view, any policeman investigating that case would have found themselves treading on glass, and subject to immense pressure from above.
It was also not unusual in that time and culture to treat the upper classes in a way different to others (AP and I have discussed this before). In the case of Wilde, he was given a prolonged opportunity to slip away overseas (as Euston did) but in his case did not take it up.
Of course, one can construct huge and elaborate conspiracy theories if one wishes. Abberline was given the Cleveland st case because, somehow, he had covered up for the "toffs" in Whitechapel, or some such thing. I might see more merit in that, had Whitechapel followed Cleveland St - but it did not.
natalie - where does all this nonsense about Abberline foounding his reputation on "Queen and country" come from, using only pre-1888 evidence or information? I think you are impugning the reputation of a man unable to defend himself in a highly questionable way.
I am much more moved by the solid information about Cutbush that AP mentions. That is indeed an avenue to be followed up, IMHO.
Abberline it seems to me was the right man for the job, and was chosen as such. Leaving aside retrospective "mud" from later cases, is there any evidence that he misapplied himself, or acted in any way that was improper in regard to the Ripper case? Surely, in the latter case, it was swanson and/or Anderson at Scotland yard who were much more in a position to act improperly, and would have spotted any inappropriate behaviour or unprofessional conduct in Abberline from their strategic viewpoint?
Phil |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1842
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 1:14 pm: |
|
You are probably right, Phil, concerning Abberline's role in the Cleveland St fiasco.
I really do need to go back and reread the reports in The Times, as my initial impression from reading the judge's comments - concerning Abberline - was that the judge was actually berating Abberline for withholding evidential material, in the form of a material witness, a post boy, who had been kept under wraps so to speak. It did appear as if this post boy had been offered some kind of illegal incentive to testify against certain persons.
So really difficult to work out Abberline's role in this. I suspect he was attempting a little bit of damage limitation in this case.
But even so, an experienced detective should have known better, and the judge could have had him for perjury.
Thanks for your positive comments about Cutbush.
Interesting that Charles Henry Cutbush had such a formidable reputation, here I think of the astonishing award he received prior to 1888, fifty gold sovereigns... I do wonder whether Abberline really did have such a similar reputation and regard, or whether we just imagine he did because of the impression popular media have given us? |
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 767
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 1:30 pm: |
|
Hi A.P.
I don't remember where you posted that article, but if it had to do with the Cleveland Street Scandal, the post office boy would have been Algernon Allies--Lord Somerset and his lawyer, Arthur Newton, had made an attempt (via one of Newton's clerks) to spirit him out of the country so he couldn't testify. Newton did a little time for that escapade. That's a material witness Abberline would have had good reason to hide.
Apologies if I've mixed up cases, though--it's been a while since I saw the article you posted so I don't remember what case it related to.
Cheers,
Dave |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1668
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 1:44 pm: |
|
No Phil I was not saying that his behaviour cast doubt on his integrity as a policeman.
What I am saying is that the value system of a Victorian policeman or a detective such as Abberline would have been at least slightly different from what it would be today with regard to deference to those in power.
However if a blind eye could be turned to
the procurer of rent boys of a male brothel who would have been brought to trial had the Brothel been any other than the one in Cleveland Street
which was rumoured to have the Prince amongst its clientele then the same blind eye could have been turned to players in the Whitechapel murders-if those characters,by identifying them as those occupying a place in society "a long way up" and thereby bringing scandal and disgrace to anyone in high office,be it the police force,the government or the aristocracy.Viz anyone such as
Charles Cutbush,Randolph Churchill [MP and member of the aristocracy]JKStephens[son of a judge].
I am NOT saying JtR was any of these-although he could have been closely related to the first!
But ask yourself who would have dared name
any of them?What would have happened if they had?
Well we know the answer to the first.The police closed rank when the Sun Newspaper named Thomas Cutbush as Jack the Ripper in 1894.Machnaghten rebutted in the strongest possible terms any suggestion that Thomas Cutbush might be the ripper-even though they had him put in "Broadmoor"[usually reserved for the dangerously criminal insane] that same year for jobbing two young women[using scissors to stab at their backsides]
but gave another young man named Collicut a non-custodial sentence/probation for the very same crime at more or less the same time.
Maybe Cutbush was a copycat!He certainly paid a high price for such imitating and Uncle Charles whether he was satisfied with Machnaghten"s exoneration of his nephew[some say "son"]we shall never know because he committed suicide that same year.
Oh and no...we dont know what Abberline thought about Cutbush-he had already taken early retirement with honours.
|
D. Radka
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 1:43 pm: |
|
I agree with Scott.
In my opinion, the majority of the people who post these message boards are idiots. Only a few write thoughtfully. A number of posters are masters of disinformation for personal ends, and, sadly, some of them are published authors in this field.
These message boards were begun at least as far back as 1996, and I've been here since then. Their origin was with all good intentions. But over the years disingenuous, nihilistic types have learned to act in concert to cut off more legitimate discussion. For them, a chance to post is an opportunity to advance chaos over order.
|
AIP
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, March 11, 2005 - 1:39 pm: |
|
Phil, I thoroughly agree with you, perhaps Mr Nelson does not realise that there are now many new posters who may have something new to add to these topics. Of course, if he is tired of such discussions, then he doesn't have to take part. |
Frank van Oploo
Chief Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 536
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 4:06 pm: |
|
You always make me laugh, David - thanks.
Frank 
"Every disadvantage has its advantage."
Johan Cruijff
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1843
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 4:14 pm: |
|
Thanks Dave
that is indeed the case to which I referred a while ago.
I have been reading the case again but its complications are so massive that I fear one would have to drop the Jack story to follow that one.
The whole Cleveland St. thing stinks worse than Joe's old cod, and I think Natalie's point a good one.
Abberline appears to have been a very street wise cop, very hands on, almost in your face when it came to street detection, but I do feel he was way out of his depth whenever he became involved in anything that involved crown or country.
He did okay in the bombings of the Tower etc, but he was scratching a bit even then; the Cleveland St affair was a total fiasco where I think he just emerged with his reputation still intact... so I believe Natalie is quite right to question his dedication to the purely criminal investigation.
Back in October 1883 Abberline was already having these sort of pesky problems when he arrested some Russian Poles for forging Russian rouble notes, convinced one of them to turn Queen's evidence against the others, and then had the poor sod charged after all. The Russian Embassy and Home Office became involved, and I believe Abberline found himself in a very sticky situation.
He could handle the streets, but not the politics. |
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 170
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 4:29 pm: |
|
Crimes which in some degree involve the "state" are never easy - in whatever country they occur.
Do the FBI, Secret Service, CIA or Dallas Police emerge with credit from the kennedy assassination and the way it was handled (whoever was responsible)? Or from Watergate?
The question here is whether Abberline was a good choice, and acted responsibly in terms of the Whitechapel murders. Does anyone have evidence of his mismanagement or complicity in cover-up in them?
David - please have yourself posted back by your minders to whatever planet you descend from. Your post, and its tirade, was wholly irrelevant to this thread.
Phil |
Restless Spirit
Sergeant
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 37
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 6:40 pm: |
|
David Radka
Who the hell do you think you are to state that most of the posters on the message boards are idiots? I don't recall reading any intelligent posts of yours recently, and I sure found your attitude distastful to say the least.
If you think you are so intelligent and not an idiot like the rest of us, why haven't you solved this mystery?
You are an unregistered guest (and I say that loosely), why do you bother to participate on these boards with your obvious grandiosa opinion of yourself.
I was on the previous boards David, and you are certainly not popular now nor were you then.
You've insulted everyone that posts here, and yes, including accomplished writers, theorists and researchers whom I certainly respect. No doubt David you are so full of yourself that you cannot accept ideas and friendly conversation that idiots like myself offer.
Get a life. Stop critizing people because you think they are inferior, they are not, you must be, but are unable to handle the situation. If you were as accomplished as many of the posters on this board, you would be in a position to critize others, but you aren't, and those that are do not because they have too much class.
Restless Spirit
|
Scott Nelson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Snelson
Post Number: 114
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 7:22 pm: |
|
David is right, the majority of posters on these boards are idiots, including one publisher in particular. This site is supposed to be a research tool, not a place for gossips to post something every single day, regardless of whether they have anything useful to say or not. Few people bother to actually read the archives and other sections on this site that would probably answer the questions they have. Instead, we always get these circular, clap-trap discussions. When it is time of this version of the message boards to be archived on disk, it won't make a very viable research tool. Maybe 5% of it will, that's all. The rest is just diluted, blithering nonsense. There are a few good researchers, but the rest of you, well you know who you are. |
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 341
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 8:07 pm: |
|
Hi Scott,
First of all I apologise to everyone for posting this on this thread as it is not pertinent to the subject, but it is in answer to a post that was put here so I have no real choice...........
I do have to say something here because I have gone through every single of the archives in the greatest of detail, researching my book (Yes another one of those blasted authors)
I have done this not just once but literally dozens of times, until I know almost every word. That was how I got to know everyone and what their views were on the subject, and how I formed my own opinions,
Not only that, but through the kindness of those idiots on the boards, I have been able to create my pictures, which would never have happened otherwise......maybe not earth shattering in your estimation, but for me something that has made me happier than I have been for many years.
I can assure you that if one is intelligent about how he gleans and composites information there is far more than 5% of invaluable material there. Far, far more.........
The newer threads even over the last few weeks have given me an infinite amount of very usual information, that I have had to insert even at this late date, and I will be constantly revising the book, right up until the moment it goes to press using the messages that are being posted on the boards right now.
Obviously you are a wealth of knowledge on the subject and don't need any input from anywhere else, but I'm afraid I am one of those people that relies on contact with other humans who have valuable things to say.
Not only that, over these last weeks, I have made many friends that I have grown to love and respect and I would not have met any of them if it were not for the message boards. To someone who is housebound and sees no-one else at all, that is worth far more than just a valuable research tool.
I am happier in the company of kind idiots, than I am with those who consider communication with others a worthless pursuit.
And yes Scott I do know who I am.....one of the rest..........
Jane
(Message edited by jcoram on March 12, 2005) |
Carolyn
Sergeant
Username: Carolyn
Post Number: 28
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 8:16 pm: |
|
Radka and Scott,
I for one, do take offense in being called an idiot. I am new to the boards and am trying desperately to catch up. I have read the archives also, but I enjoy the interaction between posters on these boards. Gives it a much more human touch.
But, yes, I am a commoner, and when I fart I do say excuse me!
RASPBERRY!!!
Carolyn |
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 343
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 9:44 pm: |
|
Now back to Basics,
I have been researching the police involvement in the case over the last couple of months, as I said earlier, and I have found it very difficult to actually find reliabe source material.
Firstly we have the press, who can be relied on, not to be relied on.......
we have official documents that only tell you what they want to tell you........and it is impossible to tell fact from fabrication........
there are the memoirs of the officers themselves which are reliant on memory and are obviously subjective.........
in fact they chances of actually getting information that is totally reliable is difficult to say the least.
I did find this quote though from the memoirs of Walter Dew which did seem to make sense to me.........
Several days passed without a clue being found. Again the police were baffled. The newspapers began to criticise and talk of inefficiency. Then the public took up the cry.
This was grossly unfair. The police were doing everything humanly possible. For the sake of their own prestige, quite apart from their natural desire to avenge a heinous crime, they were determined to succeed.
There was one thing our critics overlooked. This murder, as indeed were all the Ripper murders, was an added burden thrust upon a body of men already grievously overworked. Other crimes were being committed and other criminals had to be hunted. Life for the police officer in Whitechapel in those days was one long nightmare.
My only criticism of the action of the police during the hunt for the Ripper was the policy of those in high places to keep the Press at arm's length. Individual officers were forbidden to give information to the newspapers. With this I have no quarrel because of the dangers of abuse, but I have always thought that the higher police authorities in ignoring the power of the Press deliberately flouted a great potential ally, and indeed might have turned that ally into an enemy.
Any views on that anyone?
All the best
Jane
xxxxxx |
Carolyn
Sergeant
Username: Carolyn
Post Number: 29
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 11:27 pm: |
|
Jane,
Nice recovery, I will try for the same.
Dew talks about the extra burden it put on the police department. Huh? It seems like one would want to say to him, "sorry about the fact these women were killed during your busy schedule, and created an extra burden". That says to me that these crimes were considered separate than your "everyday crimes", but were a bother to the police.
I think it was a matter of priorities, I'm sad to say. A few common whores were nothing more than a extra burden to the police. But something that had to be dealt with. I feel it explains his defensive attitude toward the whole mess. They were a whole separate issue.
Love,
Carolyn
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3270
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 13, 2005 - 4:22 am: |
|
Hi Carolyn,
I don't know... I am not sure if that's fair.
If you read through all the documentation collected in the JtR Ultimate Companion, it is rather evident that they did a huge work effort and invested a lot of manhours in the Ripper's crimes, and the persons they took in for questioning were several hundreds, not to mention all the tips and "leads" from the general public they investigated.
I for my part don't get the impression that they gave the case any low priority and certainly not because of the fact that the victims were prostitutes. they couldn't anyway, since the press and the public was on their backs the whole time.
They were inexperienced in solving serial killer crimes, however, and they suffered from a hopeless situation (with, from our modern point of view, a lack of knowledge in forensics and crime scene investigation methods) where a killer more or less had to be caught red-handed in order to be fetched and taken to court.
What I think Dew means, is that these types of crimes (where the perpetrator is not in a known personal relation to the victim) are the hardest ones to investigate, and if they already were burdened with a big work load, the Ripper murders -- with created an enormous pressure on the police from the international and national press, the politicians and the general public -- definitely became a bother and pain in the butt for the department. These were troublesome and sweaty days for the London police.
But in their own minds I think they did their best to solve it, although they did a lot of mistakes and the result probably wasn't what they wished for.
Just a thought.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 344
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 13, 2005 - 5:32 am: |
|
Hi Glenn and Carolyn,
(co-incidentally two of the idiots I love and respect)
I found a quote from Inspector Reid, which I thought was worth posting.............
"The police, of course, did everything possible with a view to the arrest of the man. A set of rules was laid down as to the sending for assistance immediately upon any discovery, not only to Scotland Yard, but also to everyone who was likely to be required or of assistance. And there was always a sort of interesting speculation as to who would reach the the scene of a new crime first. "Inspector Abberline [sic] and Inspector Moore, with a whole staff of detective officers from other divisions, and from the Yard, were sent to render every possible assistance, and there were vigilance societies formed, the members of which used to black their faces, and turn their coats inside out, and adopt all sorts of fantastic disguises before they turned out. To one of the officers of this organisation the late Queen Victoria sent a letter of commendation, and the public subscribed very liberally. Officially and otherwise many thousands of pounds were spent in the effort to catch 'Jack' but he eluded us all.'
I'm not quite sure about the blacking of the faces and turning the coats inside out, but it does seem from that they did put as much effort into the crimes as they were able to muster. Of course it could be argued that he was bound to say that but reading between the lines I get the impression that there was an inhouse bet to see who could solve the crime first. I am not saying that was their only motivation......of course not.......but it is interesting that both Dew and Reid brought it up in different guises.......
They both talk about reaching the crime scenes first and the prestige of solving it.......maybe not the best motives in the world, but it seems to indicate to me that they were trying their hardest to catch their man..........
As you pointed out though Glenn, they were under enormous pressure and the crimes themselves were impossibly difficult to investigate.........
Anyway lots of love to everyone
Jane
 |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2018
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 13, 2005 - 5:39 am: |
|
I know who i am
sorry to butt in, I just like to cause chaos over order.
I find these threads very interesting.
Jenni
ps how odd Scott and David agree.
"People don't notice us, they never see,Under their noses a Womble may be"
|
Carolyn
Sergeant
Username: Carolyn
Post Number: 30
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 13, 2005 - 7:09 am: |
|
Glenn and Jane,
Maybe I was a little harsh, but I felt that the wording was rather odd. You both are probably right, but in the frame of mind I was in at the time, it hit me wrong. But I still feel he was making excuses.
What do you expect from an idiot?!
Love,
Carolyn
|
Restless Spirit
Sergeant
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 39
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 13, 2005 - 11:53 am: |
|
Scott Nelson
Who died and left you in charge of the boards, and the conversations therein?Is your's the only conversation and questions that are of importance? Many important facts have been discovered and or uncovered during casual conversations. New persons to the board very often have good points worth looking into, fresh ideas are certainly necessary in the Hunt for Jack the Ripper.
Are you so well versed on the topic that you do not require further intelligent conversation from those who offer same? You and David must have already solved the mystery.
I am very annoyed by your impotence and child like personality.
Since you and good old David think that most of the posters are idiots, I can only assume that it takes one to know one.
You and David need to take some lessons in edification, practice tact if you know any!!!
Restless Spirit
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1676
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 13, 2005 - 12:58 pm: |
|
Hi Scott,
I was a bit taken aback by your remarks yesterday.
I understand there are both written and unwritten rule regarding postings but I didnt think that there were any rules regarding the quality of contribution or research at least not on the message boards.
I have read all your dissertations and found them very valuable and informative.But as I see it they appear on a separate section of the casebook
and are read by those wanting such specific research.
Also while on the subject of dissertations I would like to know whether they follow rules of copyright[this in connection with quite another matter on the casebook really but in some ways pertinant to your remarks]
I know Jane copyrighted her crime scene reconstructions and here and there I have seen evidence of copyright clauses but in general-is any of the researchers work copyright-Chris Scott"s/Alex Chisholm etc ie that found on the ordinary message boards?
Meanwhile I presume its OK to just post as usual
and at the risk of being called an idiot!
Best
Natalie |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2022
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 13, 2005 - 1:14 pm: |
|
Hi Nats, Restless Spirit,
personally i don't worry too much if Scott or David or both of them think i am an idiot!
perhaps this is because i am an idiot. i don't know.
Jenni
"People don't notice us, they never see,Under their noses a Womble may be"
|
Brad McGinnis
Inspector
Username: Brad
Post Number: 234
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 13, 2005 - 10:23 pm: |
|
Hi Restless, while I really dont agree with what David and Scott said, I am curious to know how you know Scott is erectile dysfunctional? Opps dont mean to be the spelling police...Brad |
Donald Souden
Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 468
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 13, 2005 - 10:36 pm: |
|
Jenni,
As I recall, David has called you a lot worse, so idiot may well mean you have risen in his estimation.
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2023
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 4:31 am: |
|
Hi Don,
I guess it's a matter of opinion!
Jenni
"People don't notice us, they never see,Under their noses a Womble may be"
|
Restless Spirit
Sergeant
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 40
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 12:36 pm: |
|
Hi Brad
Wow that was a big spelling error. Thanks for pointing it out to me. I must have been thinking about Jack the Ripper at the time of the post Ha
My term should have been impertinence.
Oh I am such an IDIOT!!
regards
Restless Spirit
|
Poorhoney
Police Constable
Username: Poorhoney
Post Number: 1
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 4:06 pm: |
|
Hello All,
A few posts back Jane included an excerpt from Walter Dew's memoirs concerning the police and the press that I would like to comment on.
I feel that the decision to not work more closely with the press could have had detrimental effects on the investigation. The press needed stories to sell their papers. If the police were not giving the press any (new) information they would have resorted to rehashing or embellishing the information they did have, whether accurate or not. This could be bothersome to the investigation in the following way: a potiential witness saw something on the morning Annie was found. It wasn't anything that blatantly pointed to guilt, just something that didn't look or feel quite right. Now that same witness reads day after day in paper after paper about some "Leather Apron" chap and dismisses what they saw because what they saw is not in line with what they are reading. A potential witness lost.
Phil,
I love these threads that you have started and shall read them (and contribute on occasion) for as long as you continue them.
Poorhoney
} |
Lindsey Millar
Inspector
Username: Lindsey
Post Number: 344
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 6:15 pm: |
|
Poorhoney,
Welcome to the boards! You are braver than I to make your first post on this thread, but what you say makes perfect sense. Particularly
This could be bothersome to the investigation in the following way: a potiential witness saw something on the morning Annie was found. It wasn't anything that blatantly pointed to guilt, just something that didn't look or feel quite right. Now that same witness reads day after day in paper after paper about some "Leather Apron" chap and dismisses what they saw because what they saw is not in line with what they are reading.
I have to agree with you there. Perhaps if the police had worked more closely with the papers..
Well, I just wanted to welcome you poorhoney. I look forward to more of your posts. Meantime, I have two videos from the library to watch.. just Manor House, but I happen to love it.
Bestest,
Lyn
"When a man grows tired of London, he grows tired of life" (or summat like that)
|
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 347
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 6:32 pm: |
|
Hi Poorhoney,
Welcome to the boards. I thought more of less the same thing which is why I posted the excerpt........I didn't actually think of it in those exact terms, so that was a good point that you brought up. I wonder how many potential witnesses dismissed what they had seen as irrelevant, because it didn't fit it with what they had seen reported in the papers.
That was a very good first post.......but you still have to make the tea for all the higher ranks, get the mugs out!!!!!!!!
Love Jane
xxxxxx |
Poorhoney
Police Constable
Username: Poorhoney
Post Number: 2
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - 11:55 am: |
|
Lindsey and Jane,
Thank you so much for the warm welcome you have extended. I look forward to taking part in this and other threads when I have something to offer to the conversation.
Poorhoney
PS Jane-would a Starbuck's do? |
Donald Souden
Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 471
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - 12:00 pm: |
|
Poorhoney,
If you can willingly afford a Starbuck's anything then the "poor" part of your name is an affectation. 
Anyway, welcome aboard.
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3289
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - 12:16 pm: |
|
Welcome to the Boards, Poorhoney.
A good start on your postings here.
Keep it up.
All the best
P.S. I take my coffee black with no sugar, thank you. Tea just doesn't cut it for me during working hours.
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Carolyn
Sergeant
Username: Carolyn
Post Number: 31
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - 12:53 pm: |
|
Poorhoney,
Hello, and welcome!
Umm Starbucks, one of the things that I miss now that I live in the country.
Very good first post...
Carolyn |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4240
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - 4:23 pm: |
|
Poorhoney, welcome to the Boards. You make a good point there.
PS Nip out and get me a packet of high tar fags, then make a cuppa.
Robert |
Poorhoney
Police Constable
Username: Poorhoney
Post Number: 3
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 11:10 am: |
|
Hello All!
Thanks to everyone who has welcomed me to the boards. I have read many (many) of your posts over the past few months and hold your opinions in high esteem (even when I disagree), and that makes your kind words all the kinder.
Poorhoney
Punxsutawney Phil is a groundhog!
|
zxcter
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 5:38 pm: |
|
It's my observation that a lot of posts are spoken in two-dimensional terms.The killer let us in on who he might probably be,where he probably lives,etc.,by his actions.The facts must be interpreted in practical,walkable,street-wise terms.This were vicious crimes,and I'm referring to you David Radka,not two-dimensional crimes as you clearly look at it in your dissertation.
|
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 353
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Friday, March 18, 2005 - 8:52 am: |
|
Woo-hoo.
Recipe for fun:
Take one can of worms.
Open.
Stand back.
\
Mags
|
D. Radka
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 9:07 pm: |
|
Zxcter wrote:
“It's my observation that a lot of posts are spoken in two-dimensional terms.The killer let us in on who he might probably be,where he probably lives,etc.,by his actions.The facts must be interpreted in practical,walkable,street-wise terms.This were vicious crimes,and I'm referring to you David Radka,not two-dimensional crimes as you clearly look at it in your dissertation.”
>>Not true. A two-dimensional individual, a psychopath, clearly committed these crimes. Psychopaths are frequently described as two-dimensional in the psychiatric literature, see Hare. Perhaps the clearest example of the lack of adequate dimensions to the murderer’s personal identity was his ability to walk away from his “vicious,” as you describe them, crime scenes, through the city in a calm manner, not attracting attention. This indicates the typical combination of good cognitive intelligence and abysmal lack of emotional insight found uniquely in the psychopath. *** Your lemming’s praise of “practical, walkable, street-wise terms” is almost humorous. It’s precisely what’s kept the case from being solved for so long. I recommend logical, transcendental, epistemological terms instead.
|
Lemming Boy
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 20, 2005 - 9:18 am: |
|
Does one use a hyphen in anal (-) retentive?
-A small artic rodent determined to prevent the solving of the case. |
Carolyn
Detective Sergeant
Username: Carolyn
Post Number: 61
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 5:55 am: |
|
Hello all,
It is a shame that this thread has bit the dust. I for one helped contribute to it's down fall and for that I am truly sorry.
Can we forget our differences and try to bring back this thread, as it was one that I was finding interesting. I have enjoyed all the back to basics threads. It was stated that this had already been discussed and to check the old threads, but my answer to that is EVERYTHING on this board seems to have already been discussed at one time or another. Just look at the diary thread, It goes back to 1999, with very little new info. Besides views do change over time and there are always new posters with new ideas.
I would love nothing more than to have a good discussion about the police views and their personalities.
What do you think?  
Thanks,
Carolyn |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 370
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 3:00 pm: |
|
Thanks, Carolyn,although police views and personalities are probably my weakest areas so I'll gladly listen while more knowledgeable people speak.
Mags
|
Kat Rose
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, November 13, 2005 - 6:24 pm: |
|
Hello,
I have never used these boards before and I am not fully sure I am posting in the right forum or should have made a new one. I figured I would try it here first. Let me tell you the reason for my post. I am a soon to be teacher who would like to do a lesson on Jack The Ripper to how science and technology interacts with society. This case will be an introduction to help the students understand what it was like with the lack of technology that we have in todays society.
To help show them this though, I need to find out the actual methods the police used at the time. I seem to be having trouble. This site has given me a lot of information already, but maybe i am missing this I cant find much about the actual way they investigated things.
Would anyone be able to help explain a few or all or any of the methods? It will be greatly apprecated. Thank you.
Kat |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
