|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1607
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 11:14 am: |       |
I‘m pleased to say that my days spent at the Old Bailey trawling through endless trial transcripts have not been entirely wasted, for by chance I have come across a serious criminal case - involving an unprovoked and bloody attack upon a woman using a small axe - that has uncanny and highly provoking similarities with that of the case of Thomas Hayne Cutbush.
To refresh: Thomas was 26 years old when -after a venereal complaint - he suddenly began acting very strangely indeed, shut up in his room all day reading, and then disappearing for hours in the dark of night to who knows where. Thomas was a clerk.
Shortly before the Whitechapel murders began Thomas attacked his own mother and aunt - and a serving girl - with a knife, attempting to slit their throats. Several times Thomas was under the care of the parish authorities as a ‘lunatic’.
Now the chap I have found is also a 26 year old clerk, who - after a venereal complaint - shuts himself in his room all day, reading and studying, then leaves the house at night to stand in the back yard for hours in the freezing winter temperature. He suddenly appears naked amongst his female relatives in the house, using threatening actions, and then spends hours frantically combing his hair in the ‘glass… still naked.
This chap was also under the care of the parish authorities as a ‘lunatic’.
Prior to this the lad had been described mild, inoffensive, charming and polite.
The bloody attack takes place when the 26 year old visits an old friend’s house on the pretext of bringing him an important letter and when admitted immediately attacks the women around the head and throat with the axe.
The letter is quite a mystery, as is the young man’s behaviour.
Best of all is that this young man may well be a relative of Thomas Hayne Cutbush.
If there are no immediate objections, I shall post the entire trial presently, as I do believe this is one of the most significant developments with regard to Thomas Cutbush as the prime suspect for Jack the Ripper.
|
Robert W. House
Detective Sergeant
Username: Robhouse
Post Number: 145
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 12:29 pm: | |
AP,
When and where did this occur? And, yes please do post the entire trial. Do you have the name of this individual?
Rh |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 1425
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 1:16 pm: | |
AP,
how very interesting!
Jenni
Ho! HO! Ho!!!!!!! |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1608
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 1:18 pm: | |
Here we go then:
(9th April 1823)
Original Text:
Before Mr. Recorder.
619. WILLIAM TRAPP was indicted for that he, on the 21st of March, at All Saints, Poplar, in and upon Charlotte Rookes, widow, a subject of our Lord the King, feloniously, maliciously and wilfully, did make an assault, and with a certain sharp instrument, feloniously &c., did strike and cut the said Charlotte Rookes, in and upon her head, with intent feloniously &c. of his malice aforethought, to kill and murder her, against the statute.
SECOND COUNT, stating his intention to be, to disable the said Charlotte Rookes.
THIRD COUNT, stating his intent to be, to do her some grievous bodily harm.
MR. ALLEY conducted the prosecution.
CHARLOTTE ROOKES. I am a widow and live at Mr. Horne's at Poplar; he is vestry clerk of Poplar. On the 21st of March, a little after two o'clock in the afternoon, the prisoner called at the house; I opened the street door to him; he asked if Mr. Horne was at home; he was not, and I
See originalsaid No; he then asked if Mr. Horne's brother, (who lives with him) was at home, I said No. Catherine Fillaroy was in the house by accident; she does not live in the house - I had known the prisoner when a child, but had not seen him for years; he said he came from Mr. Montague, (who is treasurer of the parish,) that he had a note from him for Mr. Horn. I said Mr. Horne was at his office at the Townhall; that he had better go there and he would see him; he said it was something very particular, and Mr. Montague requested it might be left at the house. The Townhall is about three hundred yards from the house. He asked me to lend him a pen and ink to write something on the letter. I turned round from him to go into the front parlour for the pen and ink, and he shut the street door and followed me, I got into the front parlour, and was opening the book case to get the pen and ink, and then received two blows at the back of my head, which stunned me very much; there was nobody else near me; he had something in a handkerchief under his arm when he came in.
Q. What further passed - A. I turned round to see what it was, and he tripped me up; I fell on my left side, and immediately I was down I received three blows on the side of my head, from a weapon which was afterwards produced; it was a little hatchet. I was hardly able to move; I had no power to move till the blood ran profusely down to my mouth which I think revived me. I then seized him by the neckcloth and said,
"Oh you murdering villain." He then dragged me out of the front parlour into the passage; I was on my feet but I do not know how I came there; I continued to hold him all the time, and when in the passage he tripped me up again; I fell on my right side and there I received several blows on the left side with the same instrument. I still held him by the neckcloth, and he said,
"Let go, you won't let go;" these were the only words I heard him speak; at that instant I heard a violent rapping at the street door; before that, I had screamed out as loud as I could.
"Fillaroy! Fillaroy," and then he put his fingers into my mouth to prevent my screaming; I bit his finger very hard, this was before I was dragged into the passage; I kept screaming as loud as I could; I do not know whether I could he heard outside the house.
Q. Well, you heard a rapping at the door - A. Yes; I still held him by the neckcloth and dragged him towards the door; I opened the street door, still holding him; a vast concourse of people were at the door, to whom I said,
"Come in, I am murdered." Some one took the prisoner, and I know nothing more about it. I was taken into the parlour and a surgeon came to my assistance; I do not know whether I walked into the parlour or was carried; he was brought to my bed-room next day for the Magistrate to take my deposition in his presence; I kept my bed for a fortnight.
Cross-examined by MR. ADOLPHUS. Q. This happened a little after two o'clock in the afternoon - A Yes Sir. I live in the High-street, not in a lone house, it is a very public place, where coaches pass at all times, there are shops opposite; it is a narrow street, and no area before the door; the house lays low. I had not seen him since he was a child; there was no malice or ill will between us. I know his mother very well, and go to the same chapel as her; she does not belong to the same class as me. I have told all that passed, there was nothing of anger or provocation, nor any words, it was done so very instantaneously; he had not spoken a word in anger or demanded any thing.
Q. There was really no cause present, or past, that you could assign for it - A. None at all. I screamed during the whole transaction, calling
"Fillaroy" - I do not know that I called murder. I have no reason to believe that he was ever at the house before. I have lived there twenty-six years.
MR. ALLEY. Q. Are there blinds to the parlour window - A. Yes, very high ones - there is a garden at the back of the house which is divided from the fields by a ditch only.
COURT. Q. Does his mother sit near you at chapel - A. No, she sits in the gallery and I below - I never observed him with her. I recollect that there is a bridge over the ditch, which could easily be let down, and a person might escape into the fields. His mother is a straw bonnet maker.
CATHERINE FILLAROY. I was at Mr. Horne's house on this day; I called at two o'clock and was in the back parlour when the prisoner came; I did not see him; I heard a rap at the door; Mrs. Rooke opened it; a voice said
"Is Mr. Horne at home," she said No; he said,
"Is his brother at home," she said No; I heard her go from the passage into the front parlour, and then heard her immediately scream out in a most violent manner. I immediately made my way out at the back door, I got over the pales of the next house, ran through the house and gave an alarm; then knocked at the door; a mob instantly collected. I saw Mrs. Rooke partly open the door; she said,
"Come in, for I am murdered." I was too much alarmed to go in again, but saw the prisoner brought out.
DANIEL TALBOT. I am a letter-carrier. I was passing the house at the back of a stage, and heard a very violent scream of murder. A mob collected round the door - I jumped off, pushed the door open, and saw Mrs. Rookes behind the door, screaming, and blood running all down her, from her head; the prisoner had hold of her behind, pulling her away from the door. I made a snatch at his right wrist, and he let go of her immediately. I did not perceive any thing in his hand at that time; he let go with the other hand immediately, and I took hold of that wrist, held both wrists, and said
"You rascal, what have you been about here;" he said she had been very much ill-treating him; he tried to lift up his hands - I pulled them down, and said I would stand no nonsense with him: by that time a number of people rushed in and seized him by the collar, and assisted in securing him, I pulled him into the back kitchen, on the same floor. Coltman, the officer, came in, bound his hands, and took him.
Cross-examined by Mr. PRENDERGAST. Q. This is a very public situation - A. Yes; at the time I seized him, a child ten years old might have pulled him down, he was so confused, and turned as pale as ashes.
JAMES MONTAGUE, Esq. I sent no note to Mr. Horne. by the prisoner - I never saw him before - (looking at the note) this is not my writing, nor have I any knowledge of it.
JOSEPH HANSON. I am cow-keeper to my father. I was passing Mr. Horne's house at the time of this transaction, and saw a crowd at the door. When I went in, I saw the
See originalprisoner - he had a chopper in his right hand, covered with a handkerchief. I saw him drop it, and picked it up; the handkerchief was pinned over it. I shewed it to Coltman, he gave it me back again to carry to the watch-house, which I did, and delivered it to Mingay; it felt damp, it was unpinned at the watch-house - the chopper seemed dry at the watch-house, when it was unpinned - the wet on the handkerchief was blood.
JOSEPH COLTMAN. I was a constable at this time. I was coming along - saw a crowd, and went into the house - went in front of the prisoner and told him to be quiet; two people had hold of him; as I was taking him to the watch-house, he asked where I was going to take him - I said I should take him before the magistrate, and asked what could induce him to commit such an outrage as that - he replied, that he should not say any thing. I then took him to the watch-house, and searched him there, and found upon him two cords, which I now produce in the some state in which they were then; each has a noose at the end.
Cross-examined by MR. ADOLPHUS. Q. There is no slip or running knot - A. No.
THOMAS EDWARD MINGAY. I am a constable. I saw a crowd and went to the watch-house, and found the cords and hatchet on the table. I produce the hatchet with the handkerchief on it, in the same state as before; the handkerchief was damp with blood - here are several spots on it now.
Mr. GEORGE BAILLIE. I am a surgeon. I went into the house, hearing a noise, and thinking my assistance might be wanted. I went in the back way, and found some slight resistance within, at the back door, as if somebody wished to get out, for a second. I then went in, and found the prisoner in custody, and Mrs. Rooke in the front parlour, in an agitated state, and her face covered with blood. I found a small wound on the right temple, rather contused, which had divided an artery, from whence the blood had proceeded. I stopped it instantly; there was another wound on the left side of the head, that was a contused triangular wound: there was another on the back of the head - that was a cut, and must have been made with the corner of the sharp part of the hatchet; but from the shape of the triangular wound, I think it was made with the back of it. She was much agitated, and nearly fainted, and kept her bed a fortnight, I have attended her till now. I was there the next day, when the magistrate attended, to take her deposition. I apprehended danger, fearing fever might come on, but not from the wounds themselves.
Cross-examined by Mr. ADOLPHUS. Q. You think the triangular wound was made with the back of the hatchet - A. Yes; had the wound in the forehead been in a more fleshy part, I should have called it more of a puncture - it was the depth of the skin - a good deal of blood flowed from the artery. The wound in the head was an incision about three-fourths of an inch long, and not above an eighth of a sixth of an inch deep. The back wound must have been done with the sharp part, no other part of the instrument could have done it. I found the prisoner very much agitated, and almost fainting.
THOMAS HORNE. I am master of this house - my premises are open behind - there is a marsh land at the back - a person could easily escape.
Cross-examined by Mr. ADOLPHUS. Q. You know nothing of the prisoner - A. I knew him perfectly well; there had been no quarrel whatever between us of any sort; he lived some distance from me; he has been maintained at our work-house, and relieved as a pauper. All I know of his having been in an ill-state of health, is his being sent from the work-house to the hospital last Christmas twelvemonth, with a venereal complaint.
MR. ALLEY. Q. Had you any reason to suppose that his mind was affected. - A. Not the least.
COURT. Q. Were you at all aware of his having business with you - A. Not the least; I had not seen him for six or nine months before this affair. I never knew him considered as having his intellects affected at the work-house.
The paper brought by the prisoner as a letter was here read, it was as follows: -
"Directions for sailing along the eastern coast of Great Britain from Orfordness to the Penthland Frith, and among the islands of Orkney and Shetland. Directions from Orfordness to Foulness, including St. Nicholas and Hasborough. Description of the bays, with their depth of water, and the side they are to be kept on in sailing from Lowestoff to Foulness."
The prisoner being called upon for his Defence, declined saying any thing, and his Counsel called the following witnesses.
JOHN TRAPP. I am the prisoner's father, I am a shipwright by trade, but have not done business in that way for seven years - since the war I have been in the straw-bonnet trade; he lived with me when this unfortunate circumstance happened, he was twenty-six years old last December - he had a paralytic stroke seven years ago which affected his instep and leg; since which time he was first employed as clerk to Mr. Hatton, of Great St. Helen's, and afterwards acted as usher at a school; he has lately been very much given to study, and was remarkable for seclusion, the most so of any one I ever knew - his health was so bad that he declined his place as usher two years ago last June; since that time he has been employed twelvemonth as a ladies' shoe-maker down to December last - the cause of his leaving that employ was the rupture of a blood-vessel, but I do not know where, there was a great discharge of blood; he was under Mr. Frampton's care, as an out-patient of the London Infirmary - his conduct has materially altered since that, he gave many evidences of his derangement of mind. I I have observed, for many years past, a temporary derangement of intellect; after he had in a measure recovered from the paralytic, he left home and went to Bristol without any intimation; a week afterwards I received a letter from him, saying he was there and in want of money to come home - this was about seven years ago; we sent him money and he returned - he was absent rather more than a week; he had no relation there, only he had heard me say I was born there; after his return he was a considerable time out of employ, but by means of an advertisement obtained a situation with Mr. Hatton, as an accountant, where he continued between two and three years; left him in August, 1820, and immediately engaged as usher to Mr. Gilson, and staid with him till Midsummer, 1821; his health was evidently on the decline while with Mr. Gilson, and at the expiration of the
See originalholidays he was too ill to return, which he intended, and declined going again - after that he manifested an unusual dejection of spirits, such as I ever witnessed before, and as much as in him laid, secluded himself entirely from the observation of the family and society; he scarcely ever attended meals - we never could prevail upon him to come down stairs. I had remonstrated with him on the mode of conduct he pursued, and said the probable consequence of this seclusion would be injurious to his health - this had no other effect than making him, if possible, more secluded than ever.
Q. Did he give any reason for this seclusion - A. Not the least; he was hardly able of communication, he was so little communicative, I never knew the like. Some time after this he went to Mr. Cole to learn the shoemaking business, and left him in December.
Q. Now come to the last two or three months; has he been at home since he left Mr. Cole - A. Yes; we observed some particular traits of his conduct, which I always considered savoured strongly of insanity, some of which came within my own knowledge - on several occasions when he entered his room where he secluded himself, he has did himself behind the door to avoid observation. This seclusion has increased within the last three months, and caused fearful apprehension on our minds, as it respected his personal safety - we were fearful lest he should destroy himself from, despondency.
Q. From despondency of spirits, or derangement - A. The derangement I considered would arise from the lowness of spirits; I considered he had evident marks of temporary derangement arising from his spirits, dejection of mind, and intense study. He would not be seen by me for two or three days together frequently, though he was in the house, and he shunned me, particularly since I remonstrated with him - he never was so communicative as the rest of my family; he kept up stairs in his room, and scarcely ever went out. He spent his evenings at home either reading or sleeping; reading was his employment all day - he has lately been much disposed to make himself master of the Latin tongue. I believe he was pretty competent in mathematics, before this seclusion, so as to apply it to navigation - he knew geometry and mensuration, but was not so correct in them as I wished.
MR. ALLEY. Q. How long is it since he left off being a shoemaker - A. In December; he used the tools requisite.
MR. PRENDERGAST. Q. What you have related as to your fear of his destroying himself arose since December - A. We had fears prior to that, but stronger since; he had occasional relief from the parish, but I do not know when. He worked at shoemaking at Mr. Coles's, not at my house. The habits of seclusion took place at my house.
MR. HORNE. He received relief from the parish about twelve months ago.
SARAH TRAPP. I am the prisoner's mother. At two particular times he has been affected in such a way as to cause considerable alarm; the first was seven years ago; he was very ill for some weeks. We missed him one morning at breakfast, and found him sitting in his room with his legs across, and when called to breakfast we could get no answer from him; we were obliged to take his breakfast up to him for some weeks after, he refused to come down, and at the end of some weeks he lost all appetite, and had a paralytic attack - he was more communicative at this time, and applied to the London Hospital. When he recovered he was not able to walk without crutches, and was absent for a week Last December he was taken very ill with a spitting of blood, and from that time he remained at our house night and day; he had lived at home for the last twelve months, and about five weeks after December, he complained of great pain and illness, and went again to Dr. Clapton, at the London Hospital, as an out patient.
Q. Did he appear to mix with the family or was he secluded - A. Till we observed this change, he was as the rest of the family, but since he confined himself wholly to his bed-room. He only went to the Hospital once, and was bled, and then he was seized in this melancholy way, and went no more - I think the last time he went to the Hospital was in February, after that he confined himself altogether to his bed-room, till evening, when he would go down into the yard at the back of the house, and remain there alone for two or three hours; this was his habit when the snow lay thick on the ground, ancle deep - this happened constantly from the time the alteration took place - we have frequently gone down to see where he was. There is no out-house in the yard; he was in the open air, and that in all the severity of winter. On the Tuesday before this affair, I was ill in bed, and in consequence of what I was informed of, I had my son and daughter called up, and desired them particularly to keep a watch over him - I had some time before that gone into his room, and found him in such a posture that I apprehended he contemplated suicide. The door opens close against the wall, and he had pushed a chair against the door, which was ajar, and stood in the corner, where there was scarcely room to stand. An unusual change had taken place in his conduct, for he was of such habits, he used to shun every body before, and I was informed of several things, such as his running down stairs naked, and he went out on the Tuesday towards evening for the first time after his seclusion - this was on the Tuesday before this happened; he returned about nine o'clock. I was confined to my bed at the time.
Q. Did the charge you gave your son and daughter arise from any fear you had of his doing mischief to himself or others - A. I thought his injuring any one was the most unlikely thing in the world, for from his infancy he was the most harmless inoffensive temper, and was often imposed upon.
MARY TRAPP. I am the prisoner's sister, and am younger than him. I remember his coming home about Christmas. He broke a blood-vessel; since that time his conduct has been considerably altered. He secluded himself from the family. I do not think that he had any books, but I cannot say; he kept close to his room, and would have nothing to say to any of the family; and we had great difficulty to get him down stairs to meals. Sometimes he had them up stairs, and sometimes would come down - we had to call him five or six times before he came. I suffered considerable anxiety of mind about about him. I went into his bed-room one day, since
See originalChristmas, and saw him behind the door, and was horror struck when I saw him, and could not speak to him, he was in such a situation - standing behind the door, close in the corner, looking down on the ground, with his hands up to his mouth. I immediately went out of the room - there was a chair near the door, but not behind it. This was after he left Mr. Cole, in the early part of the time, when he began to seclude himself.
Q. What struck you with horror when you saw him - A. I considered he was contemplating self destruction.
Q. Had he any means of self destruction by - A. Not that I saw; but from his strange manner before, and his keeping from the family, I thought so; and during the hard winter, he retired every night into the back yard, and staid three or four hours, when the snow was on the ground.
Q. Was he in the open yards; or is there any covering - A. He used to remain in the privy. I have frequently made observations to him, but could get no answer. On the Wednesday before this melancholy occurrence took place. my mother charged me and my brother to keep an eye on him; for, on the night before, he came home at nine o'clock - I let him in - and the first thing he did was to fix his eyes, in a wild manner, upon me, and put up his left arm, as if to ward off a blow. He then went to the end of the passage leading to the yard; then turned, and fixed his eyes again as before; then he went down to the kitchen. I went up and told my mother, I did not know that I had done any thing to offend him, but he looked at me, as if he would murder me - and so I told her. I never had any words with him, or any disagreement in my life. And once (I think it was on the Tuesday) he came down to dinner, and was some time down before I observed him, and then I saw he was naked, all but his trowsers. He had neither shirt, or any thing on. He was in the room sometime before I observed him; I was at needle work, and a female lodger talking to me, so I did not observe it immediately - he did nothing. I observed him in that state for about half an hour; sometimes walking, and sometimes standing against the mantle-piece. We did not speak to him. I cannot tell whether the children were in the room. My father was out, and my mother was ill a bed. My brother was not there. I never saw him commit such indecencies before - quite the reverse. I never heard him express any dislike to Mr. Horne - he always spoke of him with the greatest respect - saying, Mr. Horne had always behaved uncommonly well since our circumstances had taken an unfortunate change. He was very weak. We had a small chopper in the house - but the one produced does not look like it - I do not think it is ours.
MR. ALLEY. Q. How often did he shave himself - A. I cannot tell - he did shave himself.
MR. ADOLPHUS. Q. He had no razor when you saw him behind the door - A. No. I have frequently heard him talking, or muttering to himself; and, being uneasy, have listened at the door, but could never make out what he said.
SUSAN FALSHAW. I lodge at the prisoner's father's, and have lived there two years; but, for the last six months I have noticed several things in the prisoner's behaviour - his keeping up stairs all day; and going into the yard every evening; and remaing there two or three hours on cold nights, when the snow was ancle deep; and besides, the next morning the blood has been on the privy when I have gone there. I have observed this several times when I went to the privy of a morning. If we met on the stairs, and he was coming down, he would run up - he always avoided me. On the Tuesday previous to this occurrence his mother was ill. I went down stairs, and was standing at the front window with his sister - the door between the two rooms is half glass. I happened to turn my eye, I saw him walking backward and forward, in the room, as fast as he could, naked, all but his trowsers. I did not mention it to his sister; but, before a quarter of an hour, he came across to the room, and stood before the glass, and began combing his hair as fast as he could. I I left the room as soon as I could. I thought it very singular, when he would never come into my presence at any other time; and that he never could be in his senses to have done so; and said so to his sister; he looked very wild at me when he came into the room. I observed that he looked very evil at me for the last five or six months, but could never think what it was for - his looks were very unpleasant. During the two years I have been there, I can safely say, he has not exchanged half a dozen words with me.
MR. ALLEY. Q. You thought he was out of his mind, by coming before the glass to comb his hair - A. I thought it strange. I never saw him do it before - he looked very wild, and had no shirt on.
JOHN HATTON. I am an accountant and live in Great St. Helen's. The prisoner came to me on the 4th of February, 1817, and left in August, 1819, he was very attentive to business, and an honest well tempered humane man, inoffensive, peaceable, and quiet.
SAMUEL GILSON. I live at Poplar, and, am a schoolmaster; he lived twelve months with me and left at Midsummer 1820; he was humane, inoffensive, not quarrelsome or malicious.
WILLIAM COLE. I live in Brunswick-place, Poplar. He worked with me from January to December. 1822, and left in consequence of breaking a blood vessel, he was honest, remarkably steady, and very good natured.
Q. Did you observe any thing remarkable in him - A. One morning, about six months ago, I went into the workshop, he looked at me rather wild, and said
"Master I'll thank you to lend me two solwins" (meaning sovereigns I suppose); I said
"What is the matter with you, have not you had your breakfast?" he said,
"I have had a little bit of a breakfast. I have eaten four rounds of toast an inch and a half thick. but that is nothing to what I eat at times." I left the shop and was absent all day.
MR. ALLEY. Q. How long did he work with you after that - A. About two months.
Q. Except that nonsencical observation he acted very well - A. Yes.
THOMAS EDWARD MINGAY, re-examined. Q. Did you converse with him at the workshop - A. I spoke to him two or three times but he gave no answer, he was there a very short time, he only said
"No," before the Magistrate.
GUILTY - DEATH. Aged 26.
Recommended to mercy by the Jury and prosecutor on account of his youth, and previous good character.
|
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 179
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 2:34 pm: | |
This is a description of third stage syphilis taken from the National Institutes of Health(US):
" Late Stage
The latent (hidden) stage of syphilis begins when secondary symptoms disappear. Without treatment, the infected person will continue to have syphilis even though there are no signs or symptoms; infection remains in the body. In the late stages of syphilis, it may subsequently damage the internal organs, including the brain, nerves, eyes, heart, blood vessels, liver, bones, and joints. This internal damage may show up many years later. Signs and symptoms of the late stage of syphilis include difficulty coordinating muscle movements, paralysis, numbness, gradual blindness, and dementia. This damage may be serious enough to cause death."
The symptoms of both these young men sound very much like schizophrenia but also like syphilis. Also, syphilis probably accounts for the blood vessels rupturing. Of sourse, the stroke that Trapp sufered,if that's what it was, may also have caused some kind of brain damage that would lead to dementia.
Mags |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2394
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 4:12 pm: | |
Hi Mags,
According to people I've talked to who are experts on veneral diseases -- and from consulting literature on the subject -- the problem is, that the third and last stage of syphilis mainly takes as long as 15--25 years to evolve after the second stage, so it is highly unlikely that a young person would suffer from this.
After the second stage the illness, as you also describe, may lay latent and hidden in the body system with no symptoms (which by many physicians was interpreted as the patient had been cured).
But instead, if the person were unlucky enough, the third and lethal stage -- with damage to the neurological system and in some cases insanity -- would appear quite many years later, up to one or two decades.
A person of 25 suffering from the third stage of syphilis would in other terms have been between 5 or 10 years old when he or she got subjected to the disease. That is, for example, one of the major reasons why the stories about Prince Eddy's alleged insanity from syphilis falls on its own merits.
All the best
G, Sweden
"Want to buy some pegs, Dave?"
Papa Lazarou |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1609
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 5:06 pm: | |
Yes, I’ve always maintained the belief that Thomas Hayne Cutbush imagined himself to have a venereal disease - just as Richard Chase (the Vampire) did many years later - and I think this young man to be no different.
I’ve always viewed the belief that they had venereal disease as part of their imaginative problems… in other words they would have liked to have had the opportunity to catch a venereal disease but because of their inherent secretive and private nature were actually unable to establish relationships with the other sex, even whores.
Such sexual seclusion invariably leads to a sudden outbreak of sexual energy, usually of a violent nature because the young man simply does not know what to do, or how to respond to a woman.
In this case it is obvious that the young man wants to release his sexual energy, and he does so by wandering around naked in front of his sister and friend - note he only does this when his mother is confined to bed and his father absent from the house; or he releases that energy out at the ‘no-man’s land’ which is the back yard and ‘privy’ - and eventually the young man goes to what he feels is a ‘safe-house’ to release that sexual energy by attempting to brutally kill the first woman he meets in that house. The crime is so reckless that it defies the imagination. And I do believe that is exactly how Jack did it.
He defied the imagination.
I don’t believe this young man had syphilis.
Rather than dwell on that I would earnestly ask readers to look at the family situation and dynamics therein.
|
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 182
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 6:56 pm: | |
It's interesting that before he started the attack he asked if both men of the house were in and didn't attack til he knew they weren't.
Some people think that because Jack was careful not to get caught that means that he was completely sane. This is completely inaccurate in my view.There's a diffenernce between being crazy and stupid.
Mags |
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1224
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 8:04 am: | |
Hi AP
Interesting but excuse me, AP, how does an 1823 case have any real bearing on the case against Thomas Hayne Cutbush in 1888? Even if a relative, it would seem to me that this is a stretch to find this vital to finding Cutbush culpable for what went on in 1888. The other point might be that even if it was thought that syphilis was the prime reason for this person going nuts, psychiatry was at such a primitive stage that there may have been other, undetected factors at play in the subject's psychopathology, both in the 1823 case and in the case of Cutbush.
All my best
Chris
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2402
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 8:47 am: | |
"Some people think that because Jack was careful not to get caught that means that he was completely sane. This is completely inaccurate in my view.There's a difference between being crazy and stupid."
Indeed, Mags, indeed. Hats off to that. Well put.
All the best,
G, Sweden
"Want to buy some pegs, Dave?"
Papa Lazarou |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1610
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 1:28 pm: | |
Yes, Chris, I can understand your point very well indeed.
As ever, I often don’t explain where I’m coming from or even where I’m going to.
Firstly I have spent years in fruitless research attempting to track down a case similar to that of Thomas Cutbush, but pre-dating his known crimes. As I hope you know I have been far more successful in tracking down cases similar to Thomas’ but of a more recent nature.
One of the only insights we can ever possess into the minds of obviously sexually disturbed young men from the Late Victorian Period is to compare their behaviour to later cases of which we are aware… valid but somehow invalid because of the shift in time, where the social and sexual pressures on the young men are completely and utterly different.
In the ‘Myth’ taking Richard Chase as an example I was able to make very valid comparisons to the behaviour of Thomas Cutbush, but inherently there was a massive fault line with the comparison: the time shift that dramatically showed that young men of the 1970’s in America were a lot more sexually aware than their Victorian counterparts. Other factors that made the comparison weak were the exposure of young American men in the 70’s to the drug culture, with in Richard Chase’s case violent and dramatic consequences; and then the exposure of the same young American men to the massive influence of television, video and other mass media, which plainly did not exist in the LVP. Obviously such circumstance made the comparison largely invalid. But it was all I had as a comparative model.
I needed a virgin case from the Late Victorian Period, one untouched and untainted by the age we now live in, so, Chris, I hope you can now understand my absolute delight when I was handed this one on a plate.
The implications of this find to the understanding of such long dead cases is enormous. I haven’t even begun to scratch the surface yet.
But it doesn’t take much to realise that if the young man’s victim in this new case had not been such a feisty women, and that there had not been people nearby to rescue her, he would have killed her, and then done ‘what’ to her?
I feel very strongly that she would have ended up like one of Richard Chase’s victims… or one of Jack’s victims.
The chances of this young man being a direct relative of Thomas Hayne Cutbush are remote, but do exist. I am hoping that either Robert or Debra can check this out.
I think almost all will admit that the similarities between the present case and that of Thomas Cutbush are almost uncanny.
Yes, Chris, I stick and stretch with the word ‘vital’, for we now have a unique view into the mind of a young man, who was a 26 year old clerk with obvious problems concerning his sexuality, which originally expressed itself in redirected anger and rage, as well as quasi-sexuality, at his nearest female relatives, eventually culminating in an audacious, vicious and unprovoked attack on a distant female vaguely known to him.
Now that sounds familiar doesn’t it?
This case does lend a powerful lot of weight to the notion that Thomas Cutbush may well have been the Ripper, but hey, Chris, I never said he was.
So, even if it is sometimes difficult to understand where I am coming from, I think we may now have a better understanding of where Thomas was coming from. |
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1226
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 2:54 pm: | |
Hi AP
Thanks. Your explanation is useful to see where you are coming from in finding this earlier Victorian case important to study of the problem of Thomas Hayne Cutbush in 1888. I appreciate your answer.
Best regards
Chris George
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
Dan Norder
Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 439
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 3:46 pm: | |
Hi AP,
Interesting case you found there. Just as some argue (rightly, I think) that it's meaningless to try to give interpretations of what happened in the Ripper killings in 1888 without knowing about the Victorian Era in general, I would argue that it's just as meaningless to talk about what could and could not have happened in the Ripper case without looking at other crimes. This case makes a decent point of comparison for thinking about a theory or what may have happened in the Ripper crimes.
Hi Mags,
There may be a difference between crazy and stupid, but there's also a fair amount of overlap between the two. The more crazy someone is, the more likely they are to do something stupid.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
 Profile  Email  Dissertations  Website |
Debra Arif
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 5:49 pm: | |
Hi AP
I am not absolutely certain, but I think the Trapp family that married into the Flood's were sugar brokers. ( I think the Cutbushes would only be related by marriage and not blood )
In Luke Flood's will he mentions his daughter in law Elizabeth Flood ( maiden name Trapp) Mrs. Elizabeth Trapp( probably a widow and mother of Elizabeth Flood ) and Sophia Trapp.
This would fit with the family of John Trapp and Elizabeth and their six children who were all born in St Mary Whitechapel between 1779 and 1788, Sophia and Elizabeth being two of the daughters.
They also had a son John Trapp b c 1784 who was probably the subject of a news article in the times in 1835,his age was given as about 50 and his family wanted him to be declared ' of unsound mind'so he could not inherit his father,John Trapp's wealth gained from the sugar industry. They got their wish when he announced to the commission that he would like to spend his inheritance on buns, sponge cakes and clothes.
There is a link to Croydon with this family and I believe John was still alive on the 1871 census aged 84 and living in Croydon but born in Middlesex.
William Trapp's ( the subject of the Old Bailey trial) parents were John Trapp and Sarah and they are the only other trapp family I could find in London ( saint Dunstan stepney)
I could only find four children born to them and william didn't appear on this list, but his age fits in perfectly with the birth dates of the other children, and there was a Mary among the children.( his sister Mary gave evidence at the trial)
I think this Trapp family appear to be of a lower class than the Trapp family associated with the Flood's, but I may be wrong!
Debra
|
D. Radka
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 3:29 pm: | |
Both Mr. Wolf and Mr. Norder are all wet. No valid comparison can be drawn short of psychoanalysis. If Richard Chase were psychoanalyzed, then this could be compared to other cases. But short of this, you are comparing apples to oranges. Chase may have had totally different motivations and psychic promptings than Cutbush that you'd never know about. Mass quantities of personal opinion and wishes are being substitued for reasonable thinking here. |
extendedping
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 11:34 pm: | |
what is there to indicate this man was related to a cutbash? |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1615
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 9:03 pm: | |
Thank you Debra for your informative post.
I did love the chap wishing to spend his inheritance on 'buns, sponge cakes and clothes'.
What a lovely idea.
The sugar industry must have been very close to the Flood/Cutbush clan, remember that the early numbers of Fieldgate Street were all in the hands of the sugar trade, this including the properties owned by the Flood family.
As I think I may have already said, the connection between the various families is not the most important thing to me here. I just liked this case.
Regarding class in this complicated family structure, sometimes I admit to confusion, for it has always struck me that the Cutbush clan did not fit in with the Floods, at all.
Apart from clocks.
I have barely begun to look at this whole business, and hopefully soon will be able to find more detail.
Somewhere along the road I do see a connection between a Thomas Cutbush throwing an old man down the warehouse stairs and exclaiming 'poor gentleman, he has fallen down the stairs!' and a desire to squander one's inheritance on buns whilst demanding 'two guineas if you please!' from your boss.
But hey, Debra, I'm a quirky sod too.
Many thanks for your help and I reckon you will make the best forensic tec that ever walked the planet. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1616
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 10:54 am: | |
Debra
herewith all the 'Trapps' involved in the sugar trade in London as provided by the 'sugar refiners & makers database:
'TRAPP Gregory - - Lt Alie St London 1796-9 Lowndes Directories
TRAPP Johann Diederich - (Zucker-becker Kn.) (verh. St.Jacobi) Hamburg 1755 Contributor 55
TRAPP John - - Lambeth St London 1799 LMA THCS Rate Books
TRAPP John - (will) (St Geo in East) London 1821 PRO - PROB 11/1641
TRAPP J - Trapp J & Gregory E Alie St London 1791-5 Sun
TRAPP Widow - Trapp, Widow & Hodgson, John Lambeth St London 1806 LMA THCS Rate Books
TRAPP - - Trapp, Gregory & Co Goodman's Stile London 1794 Kent's Directory, 1794
TRAPP - (sale) - Denmark St London 1820 The Times'
Thought it might help.
|
Lee McLoughlin
Sergeant
Username: Lee
Post Number: 41
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 11:16 am: | |
I will never cease to be amazed at the level of research performed by various posters to this board.
One quick question though, is this information/census reports available on any CD Rom?
Lee |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1617
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 3:19 pm: | |
Sorry Lee
these onions have to be peeled, and there are a lot of tears involved.
But this type of research is enjoyable because it is a powerful lot of hard work.
Robert or Debra should be able to point you in the right direction for census reports. |
Diana
Inspector
Username: Diana
Post Number: 412
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 4:56 pm: | |
Checkable details: How many children who are molested at the age of 5 to 10 years can develop third stage syphilis by age 30? What other members of the Cutbush family were insane and what form did thier insanity take? Does third stage ever appear anomalously early? Medical texts, sociology texts, mental asylum records. Is it possible in light of current knowledge of mental illness to make some judgment as to what was wrong with members of the Cutbush family? |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1618
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 5:03 pm: | |
Debra, here is a bit more background on one of the Trapp sugar refiners.
At some point in this time slice the ‘Free Trade’ act was introduced which virtually killed off the sugar industry in Whitechapel.
One is still looking at that.
I also note that many corn chandlers were also bakers, obviously one might say, but not so obvious is that they were ‘sugar’ bakers rather than good old bread bakers.
This does provide a commercial link between the Floods and Trapps if so.
I do think the old ‘Sugar Exchange’ of Whitechapel might provide some good linkage for the merchant banking activities of the various families involved.
‘1820
By Mr Adamson at Commercial Sale Rooms, Mincing Lane, London, tomorrow at 1 o'clock at the direction of the trustees of Mr Trapp sugar refiner ...
Compact one pan sugarhouse, 5 working floors and fill-house on ground floor, with 2 working floors and warehouse in front, and a counting house, dwelling house, men's room, men's kitchen and yard. Held at unexpired term of 16yrs at low rent.
(The Times, 10 Aug 1820)’
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1619
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 5:21 pm: | |
Very thought provoking post, Diane.
We do know that Charles Henry Cutbush of Scotland Yard was absolutely mad.
We do know that his nephew, Thomas Hayne Cutbush, was also absolutely mad.
We also know from police and press reports of the time that his aunt and mother were 'excitable' - whatever that means - and we do know the entire family had a bad habit of bigamy at worst, and at best changing brides like we change clothes.
If you can link this to venereal disease the next bottle of Spanish brandy I buy is yours.
But yes, I do feel that Thomas Hayne Cutbush was probably abused as a child, and that most likely by his uncle Charles.
You see Thomas had everything, he was the inheritor of the vast family fortune and all mad old uncle Charles had was his reduced police pension.
Nice story.
I wonder what Thomas got for Christmas in 1887 from uncle Charles? |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1623
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 10:58 am: | |
Thought the following might appeal to those who believe syphils may have figured in this case:
'31 July 1725
W. Rayner, Surgeon, living at the Blue Posts in Preston’s-Yard, the lower end of the Minories, the name Rayner and golden Ball hanging over the gate, near Little Tower Hill.
Hath a speedy and safe cure for the pox or clap [veneral disease], with all its various symptoms, by his famous chymical drink, being pleasant in taste, yet effectual in curing that dangerous disease, which has been the ruin of hundreds by falling into unskilful hands. I cure (under God) the most inveterate pox, in 3 weeks at farthest, as ulcers in the throat, lost palate, sinking in the nose, phymosis, paraphymosis, shankers [veneral ulcers], pocky warts, buboes [swellings in armpit or groin], or swelling in any part. If your body be full of ulcers and scabs, in a few days I remove all those heterogeneous particles, taking away all pains in the head, shoulders and shin bones, so that this salubrious liquor restores the body to perfect health. They that have made tryal of it wonder at the cures it performs. Those who have newly got a clap, may entirely depend on a cure, by taking two or three doses of my venereal pills or bolusses, without hindrance of business, or it being known to the nearest relation or bedfellow. I shall not use many invitations, but rather leave you to make experience, which is beyond all argument. In a word, let your condition be never so bad, distrust not, for I promise very fair, no cure no money. I do any thing in surgery. My pills and bolusses are useful for sea or land, which I have always ready by me. Note, There’s a light at my door in an evening. [Mist’s Weekly Journal]
|
Debra Arif
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 5:44 pm: | |
Hi Lee
It depends which census or records you are interested in, there are lots of sources for this type of information, most, but not all for a fee.
There are too many to list here but if you want to e mail me I will gladly send you a list.
Hi Diana
I appreciate what you are saying about checkable facts, but I wonder, what do you think has been going on on the Cutbush thread for all this time? Knowing you need facts is one thing, finding them is another! Things like this can't be rushed, it can take years for research to develop into something meaningful, as I am sure AP will tell you. One small line of research develops into another and hopefully one day the bigger picture becomes apparent.
|
Debra Arif
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 6:09 pm: | |
Hi AP
I downloaded John Trapp, sugar baker's will today, all 14 pages of scrawl! but i can definitely see Luke Flood's name appear a couple of times and children Elizabeth, Sophia and John ( the bun muncher ) Trapp and wife Elizabeth. There is a two page codicil devoted to John his son, but it will be after Christmas before I can sort it out and see if any 'poor' relations are mentioned.
I found the details on the Thomas Cutbush I was looking for who discovered a womans body in the river at Islington, it was 1877 and Thomas was an employee of The New River Company and found the body on his way to work, interestingly the man made New River passes through Edmunton, home of some of the later Cutbushes, I wonder just how many Thomas Cutbushes were in London around this time, there can't be many. |
debra Arif
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 4:45 am: | |
Hi AP
I loved the bit about squandering his inheritance on buns too, I think this John Trapp was born with his development problems, he seems to have had a childlike nature all his life, with never any interest in conversation or study or the world around him, just buns!
I don't think the family connection to your case find is important either ( although there is still a chance of a connection), the similarity to the case of Thomas Hayne Cutbush is undeniable and I am looking forward to your further research on it.
AP, have you ever come across a report about a Thomas Cutbush, clerk, who discovered a woman's body floating in the river on his way to work one morning. I think it was near Islington. I have tried to re-find this article a couple of times but with no sucess, I will have another look.
thanks for the vote of confidence in my forensic abilities, truth is I am just nosey!!!
|
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 272
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, December 27, 2004 - 9:35 am: | |
Dear David,
You wrote:
"Both Mr. Wolf "
I think you'll find Mr Wolf is a Mrs!
Bob |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1644
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, December 27, 2004 - 11:29 am: | |
Thanks Bob.
As they say in 'Little Britain':
'I'm a lady!'
I'm still putting together my thoughts on this case and hopefully in the next couple of days will post some of them, but interesting how this young chap concealed his axe under his arm with a hanky pinned over it. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1645
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, December 27, 2004 - 11:37 am: | |
Sorry Debra
I have just this minute found your posts!
No, I have not yet come across this Thomas Cutbush, discoverer of a woman's body in canal, but I will now make it my job to find him.
Great news on the will, and I can't wait to hear more. |
Kitty
Sergeant
Username: Kitty
Post Number: 43
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Monday, December 27, 2004 - 11:59 am: | |
Folks, this business is a waste of precious Time. there is only one Old Bailey case of any relevance. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1646
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, December 27, 2004 - 1:43 pm: | |
Thanks for that Kitty
It is always nice to get the unswerving and unreserved support of people on this site, especially those who know better than us poor sods who spend our daylight hours sifting through reams of material that might shed some light on this difficult subject.
And then wham bang thank you mam, you turn all the lights on and we see!
Thank you Kitty.
I'll move my expertise at wasting precious time and let you exercise your obvious command of the subject.
How long am I going to have to twist my knickers before you divulge your relevance? |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 216
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Monday, December 27, 2004 - 2:36 pm: | |
Kitty-
Since I am a crass, ignorant American loser I'll put it more bluntly:
PUT UP OR SHUT UP.
Mags |
Julie Lambert
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, December 27, 2004 - 12:15 pm: | |
It is true that the later stages of syphilis take many years to develop - but isn't it also possible that the infection can cross the placenta and infect a babe-in-the-womb - thus the later stages could manifest themselves by the age of 26?
I am looking more closely at Thomas Cutbush as a suspect. i don't think I have previously given him nearly enough attention. If you think about the early crimes of Peter Sutcliffe - that came to light following his arrest - although very serious attacks, they seemed like 'rehearsals' compared with what was to follow. Could Cutbushes' earlier crimes have been 'rehearsals' or did his appetite for violence increase?
Well done on the interesting research on the earlier crime. It gives us an important insight into these types of crime. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1653
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 30, 2004 - 1:07 pm: | |
Debra
are you sure the Thomas Cutbush who discovered the girl's body in the canal was a clerk?
I'd be glad to hear more about the case if he was.
Going on your first post concerning the girl in the canal - and the connection with the water company, and engineering work on new cuts etc - I would have thought that 'Thomas Frederick Cutbush, engineer, of St New Cross, Surrey (1877)' would have been a safer bet.
Do please let me know if you have positively identified this TC as a clerk.
Thanks Julie.
Thomas is a highly interesting suspect with a very suspect background and family.
I still aim to comment on the earlier case.
Just got to load my guns first. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1657
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 11:22 am: | |
The problems of William Trapp - wannabe axe murderer 1
Mag’s earlier point about William making sure that the men of the house were absent before beginning his blatant attack on what he thought was a woman all alone in the house, is an excellent starting point in looking at this long dead case.
Despite his obvious ‘problems’, William planned this attack very carefully indeed, in fact meticulously, he realised that by pretending to have a letter for the master of the house would gain him easy access. As we have seen the letter was nonsense, a list of tidal flows from the Scottish coast and islands, but nonetheless it was his very vital passport through that door.
That circumstance, and also the fact that he was known to the household, eased his passage so to speak, for if he had approached a complete stranger with the same story he would never have gained the access he required to carry out his strange deed.
This taken in combination with the fact that he had an axe concealed under his arm - hidden further by a hanky - shows that there was a good deal of premeditation on his part.
William thought about this crime for a very long time.
Now I find that vitally interesting, and refreshing, for far too often we tend to look at crimes like this and see them as the random and chance encounters of a lunatic - my good self being entirely guilty in this regard with my pinball wizard scenario of Jack’s crimes.
But here in William - who nonetheless is an obvious lunatic with an uncanny resemblance to Thomas Cutbush - we see careful planning and execution, accompanied by the careful use of ’props’ (much like dear old Ted Bundy). William even had what the police now call a ’rape kit’ (again just like old Ted) the means to threaten, subdue, harm and confine his victim… remember the two lengths of cord found by the police in his pocket.
Yes, this boy had plans, and a lunatic desire and will to carry them out, only thwarted by a woman who did the one thing that all women should do under similar circumstances: fight like a tiger.
For such men are cowards and can’t stand violence… directed against them.
So as you can see, this older case is already influencing my thinking on the case of Jack the Ripper, and Thomas Cutbush.
No bad thing.
William felt it safer to pick a victim known to him, and again I think this vital to note. Not too well known to him of course. For that would have been unsafe, so William went for a victim vaguely known to his family.
Again I see strong similarities in William and Thomas’ behaviour, both young men firstly directed their sexual frustration and anger at female relatives in their own household, before taking it out on the street to release it in a holocaust of fury.
Regarding the question of venereal disease as supposedly suffered by both William and Thomas when in their mid 20’s.
I have explored many avenues of research in this regard and my conclusion is that during the LVP many uninformed and sexually ignorant young men would have believed themselves to be suffering from some form of sexual disease or malady when they experienced what we happily call today ’wet dreams’. For such young and sexually ignorant men, sudden ejaculation would have been symptomatic with disease.
So I’m sticking with my quirky belief that young men like this ’imagined’ themselves to have venereal disease.
By the way, Thomas Cutbush was also fond of standing in front of mirrors for long periods of time. This was what he was doing when he threw the ’gentleman’ down the stairs in the tea warehouse.
More later. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 3712
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 12:46 pm: | |
Hi AP
Maybe it's possible to visualise a mixture of motivations here. E.g. lunatic wanders around and is "provoked" into murdering one or two women (pinball model). However, lunatic discovers that he enjoys it. So then he starts wandering around ready, as it were, to be provoked. Finally lunatic starts stalking in a predatory manner. This might resolve some of the problems we encounter with THC vis-a-vis Mary Kelly. He watches, he waits, he enters.
Robert |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1658
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 1:34 pm: | |
Quite right, Robert.
I haven't made any judgements yet, was just thinking out loud.
Obviously there is evolution here in both motive and purpose, we see it at work in both cases, and we can make a guess as to where that motive and purpose might end up if left unchecked.
Mary Kelly's room?
Meanwhile for Debra as well.
The girl who drowned in the Islington canal was Elizabeth Lucas, aged 32, single... verdict 'suicide while in a state of unsound mind', cause of death 'suffocation by drowning'.
Sadly no detail is given concerning the Thomas Cutbush who found the body apart from he was employed by the New River Company, as Debra said.
I would have liked his age and actual occupation.
This could have easily been a murder rather than a suicide. |
Kitty
Detective Sergeant
Username: Kitty
Post Number: 110
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 2:33 pm: | |
hello,
yes sorry to frustrate folks. The fact is I can't give you evidence or key details, but we can still have interesting conversations. I don't give any false information however.
I'm off. Happy new year! |
Debra Arif
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, December 30, 2004 - 1:44 pm: | |
Hi Ap
No sorry, he wasn't a clerk after all, he was an employee of the New River Company, but it didn't actually state his job title ( I must have imagined that bit as I was full of christmas spirits at the time!) but it did say he was on his way to work. I also said in the message that the New River passed through Edmunton, home of later Cutbushes , when I really meant to write Enfield, but I am sure you worked that one out!
The body he found was that of Elizabeth Lucas, the verdict was suicide.I couldn't find any more than that about it.
A little bit about New River;
>>The 'New River' is in fact a man-made water course, which has supplied London with fresh water from Hertfordshire since 1613. The name New River is therefore rather misleading, as it is now not new, and isn't even a river....Many of the large pumping stations along the route were built by the victorians in the second half of the 19th century.... The New River was in use until the 1850s/60s when there were a number of cholera outbreaks and new public health measures were introduced. As a result of this a new waterworks was constructed at Stoke Newington and the sections of the river nearest the City were enclosed in pipes. <<
The Thomas Frederick you found does sound more like it, maybe he was part of the late victorian work, building pumping stations.
Debra
promising never to post whilst under the influence again!
|
Debra Arif
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 10:49 am: | |
It's really frustrating that no more details on Elizabeth Lucas or Thomas Cutbush were printed, I have checked for other articles and found none, but I noticed while checking through the records of christenings and marriages again for St. Andrew's Enfield, where TTC and his siblings were christened, and some Cutbush marriages occured, that an Elizabeth Lucas was christened there in 1846 ( she was actually born in 1844, 4 months after TTC ) her parents were married in a similar timeframe to TTC's parents at the same church, and all her siblings were christened there at various times in the 1840's just like the Cutbush family.
Born in 1844, that would make her a similar age to the Elizabeth Lucas who drowned.
It's probably just a coincidence, but you can't help but wonder... |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 3780
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 06, 2005 - 5:56 am: | |
Hi Debra
Again, just seen this. There were letters of admin granted to Thomas Frederick Cutbush, engineer, of No. 11 Vansittart St New Cross. He was the son of Thomas Cutbush, gentleman (no occupation given) who lived at 9 Woburn Buildings and died 1877. He only left £200.
Robert |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1687
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 06, 2005 - 6:07 am: | |
Debra
again great stuff, but I don't believe there is such a thing as 'coincidence' where this varmint-ridden family is concerned.
So well worth following through which I shall do asap. |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
