|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2100
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 4:22 pm: | 
|
AP,
I see what you are getting at.Well we will just have to wait and see on this.
Restless Spirit,
As you will see if you look at the link Robert has given you above of June 22nd at 5.32, ,AP has kindly allowed Jack the Myth to be posted on this casebook.
Its a brilliant read,which is now backed up by the Sun"s old newspaper articles of 1894 these having only recently been transcribed by Chris Scott and in such a splendid way that it allows these articles to be read with ease instead of with a magifying glass!
Do give yourself a break and key into that link!
Best
Natalie.
|
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 938
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 4:41 pm: |
|
Hi A.P.
You might like to know that last week I heard from Professor Shoemaker with the Old Bailey project (www.oldbaileyonline.org) that they have received funding to digitize the 1834-1913 proceedings. He expected it would take about three years to accomplish.
Cheers,
Dave |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2226
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 5:44 pm: |
|
Thanks Natalie,
yes, perhaps if Restless Spirit used the link then he or she wouldn't be so Restless?
Dave,
thank you for that.
That is fantastic news, the only problem being can I avoid those damn stairs for another three years?
I love reading through those Old Bailey transcripts, it is life before the newspapers got hold of it and shaped it to their ghastly will. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4583
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2005 - 1:48 am: |
|
No worries, David C.....but hang on a minute : did not Sugden describe Druitt as an "improbable suspect"? 
Robert |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2227
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2005 - 1:56 pm: |
|
Well, I don’t know.
I reckon Sugden and many others who have dismissed Thomas so easily have not really done justice to the boy.
My opinion is that they probably never bothered to read the original Sun reports, because when I went into Colindales in 1992 for a three day stint in front of the primitive MF machines - as I said before good bacon & egg rolls and a cuppa just across the road in those days - the librarian and I chatted awhile and she told me I was the first person in her considerable knowledge to have requested this particular newspaper from that particular year.
They do keep records of requests.
Anyways, so much has gone on since those days, and good folk like Robert, Debra - where is Debra? - Natalie and others have moved mountains to obtain more knowledge about Thomas and his odd family… just the fact that we now know he came from a very well-heeled and well-connected family with influence right into the ruling elite of the LVP, does sort of change our view of the still precarious situation where Thomas’ culpability is quite rightly readily and honestly questioned.
I do feel that even folk like Sugden suffer from a peculiar blindness when it comes to the question of Thomas, and I believe this to have as its root a sort of repressed desire not to upset their peers.
Male bonding, my dears.
You see all these old Ripposaurs want a member of their club to have been the killer, they don’t want a lunatic, they want a ‘gentleman’.
But they should have dug a little bit further, because although Thomas was a lunatic, he was also very importantly a ‘gentleman’. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2102
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2005 - 2:46 pm: |
|
Hi David,
First I too have a great regard for Philip Sugden.And for AP Wolf.
Anyway as Robert reminds us Sugden was not persuaded
about Druitt at all and quotes Abberline at length
as if to show how a contemporary detective who Sugden holds in much esteem clearly thought the theory nonsense.
As for Cutbush ---Sugden doesnt even bother to tell us who he was.
Well I am all for questioning these shibboleths.
As Sugden himself says there is no evidence that Serial killers cannot abstain from murder.."more recent experience,as already noted ,seems to demonstrate the contrary" Philip Sugden ,The Complete History...and we have BTK currently proving this by all accounts.
But it does seem strange that Cutbush has been dismissed so readily by so many authors.
In Sugden"s case at least, he shows himself being as objective and true to the facts as possible, nevertheless sifting as carefully through the evidence as no doubt he did ,he seems not to have followed through to the fine detail,the case made by the Sun or questioned Macnaghten"s statement regarding Cutbush.
This is a pity because in my mind there seems to be a very substantial case to be made against Cutbush.
First contrary to all the assertions about Thomas Cutbush being just a bottom prodder and the like, we have recorded evidence that he was a dangerous character who suffered from paranoid delusions about being poisoned by doctors etc.We have evidence of this in the letters he shot off to one and all about it.One doctor became so frightened of him he served an injunction to prevent anymore of his "stealthy assaults" since Cutbush had crept in on him in his surgery with a knife threatening to kill him.
More evidence of his homicidal psychosis appears when he nearly kills an elderly colleague
who apparently made an innocuous remark about his vanity which irked Cutbush so much that he lay in wait in a darkened corner of an upstairs landing and threw him downstairs so violently that the man almost died ---yet young Mr.Cutbush simply walked away without a hint of remorse!
The next we hear of Thomas Cutbush is that he was locked up for the remainder of his days in Broadmoor, an institution for the criminally insane.Appareently I hasten to add
because the poor dear took the "harmless" fancy to prodding girls bottoms that we hear about from Macnaghten.Mmmmmm!Strange minor offence to be locked up for life in Broadmoor!Very inconsistent too with the comparitive leniency such offences against women tended to be dealt with in those days---someyhing which AP has demonstrated again and again with court cases from the LVP.
That Thomas Cutbush was a very sick cookie
there can be no doubt!
That he was a violent and dangerous character to work alongside there can be no doubt!
That he was a man his doctor and chemist were frightened of there can be no doubt!
That he was accused by the Sun and by the prosecutor in the jobbing case.of being Jack the Ripper there can be no doubt.
In other words Thomas Cutbush may or may not have been Jack the Ripper but he sure had all the credentials!
Natalie
|
Restless Spirit
Detective Sergeant
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 73
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2005 - 4:15 pm: |
|
Hi Natalie
I did cue into Robert's link and printed all 15 chapters, as well as the intro of course. I also have a bid on ebay for the actual book. I've started reading my print out and am enjoying every minute of it.
AP
One item that I would like to ask you about is 35 Dorset Street, aka Crossingham's Lodging House!!. It is obvious by your book, and I am only up to Chapter 5 reading wise, that you emphasize this address as a common denominator of the victims of Jack as well as good ole Jack himself, why hasn't any other author/authoress made a point of this obvious connection??
I sure think that an obvious link such as this should certainly have stood out like a sore thumb.
I'd appreciate your comments.
PS Luv the book so far.
regards
Restless Spirit
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2230
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2005 - 5:56 pm: |
|
Before Knight said good night he did make reference to the connection between 35 Dorset Street and the victims of good ole Jack.
I never enjoyed Knight's work. For his - and many others- thrust is that a conspiracy requires planning and thought.
I think we look at the unwitting and foolish actions of lunatics at large.
That is a conspiracy of life. |
John Ruffels
Inspector
Username: Johnr
Post Number: 385
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 25, 2005 - 4:06 am: |
|
Hello AP,
I know you are discussing the "SUN" newspaper report of 1894 actually naming Thomas Hayne Cutbush,but may I briefly digress to a cousin of this thrust to ask you a question?
Whilst in England recently, I went down to Brighton and across to Hove where I nosed around Clarendon Villas and Portland Street next door.
There I found my bench-mark, SYNDAL the former Dr Barnardo's Home at number 57, then walked along to number 51.The site of the earliest Police Seaside Convalescent Home.
I reconnoitred the whole property, front and back, and engaged an American-sounding exercise
addict who resided therein. No, he did not know of any JTR connection.
One thing which struck me about this purported stronghold for identifying a JTR suspect, was how open the grounds presently are.There appear to be a line of garages at the rear,and one can imagine them previously serving as coach-houses or outbuildings. The two story building has "areas" below the front entrance and two very small doors at the rear of the building.
I meandered along to number 49, where I learnt this had been a private boys school in the 1890's, then the site of Hove's first High school.(A marble plaque affixed beside the entrance bore tesimony to the dozen or so pupils who served in World War One). This was a useful indicator when I later checked the Post Office Directories at the nearby library.(Hello Zara).
All this served to tell me that whilst the P.O.directory entries were, at one time, listed in seriation,(Odd number followed by even),the actual street numbering had remained unchanged throughout.Odds one side, evens the other.
Along the road at 11 Portland Road, the red-brick Gothic pile now known as Portland House,was a much more emotionally likely location for any JTR derring-do. "Erected in 1892" was emblazoned across the front. Plaques laying foundation stores and opening the building were still 'in situ' though, faded sandstone.
My question to Mr A P Wolf is, "in what year/month(?) did the alleged identification of a JTR suspect take place at the Police Seaside Home"?
Sorry if you have answered this question clearly elsewhere.It will tidy up some thoughts I have. Thanks. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2232
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 25, 2005 - 2:12 pm: |
|
Thanks John
the reference from Swanson concerning the Seaside Home is thought to have been written down about 1910... I am not sure if anyone could give you a year or month for that identification, I certainly cannot, much as I would like to.
Interesting in Swanson's reference is that the 'City Police - CID', rather than the Met, were watching the suspect when he returned from Hove.
Also the references to Colney Hatch and Stepney Workhouse, as I think I know someone who was probably in both those loony bins.
If you check out the thread for this, you'll find a goldmine of information, and also some very useful contacts in the Hove area who might be able to help you more.
These good folk did send me some census details concerning the Seaside Home, but you can't read a single name of any of the coppers present. |
Restless Spirit
Detective Sergeant
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 74
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Monday, June 27, 2005 - 5:34 pm: |
|
AP Wolf
I am over 1/2 way through Jack the Myth and I must say it is a very intriging book. I regret not having read it before. So many of my questions were answered ,those that I have mulled over these past years. I was surprised to see many of my own thoughts being somewhat verified , those nagging idiosciencries (hope I spelled it correctly) being verified by logical explanations. It was also very refreshing to read about other serial killers who can certainly be compared to Jack for plus & minus comparisons. I am so impressed with your book, you come across in a totally unbiased manner while making one hell of a case for Thomas with the help of Charles (Possibly) inocently or otherwise. I always felt that the identity of Jack the ripper was known at the time, as I noted in my questioneer(so to speak) in signing up for the Casebook, this time and on the previous site. I believed then as now that there was some sort of connection to the police either covering it up or at the least suspecting the identity of the infamous Jack.Several of the points that you mentioned that did not make much sense eg: the identification made at the Seaside home to name only one bothered me also, Anderson's comment re not talking out of school (or whatever)bothered me for some time also, and this is just a small jab at the numerous inconsistancies. Many of my questions were answered,and I do realize that all has not been confirmed yet, however your book, your theories, your common sense makes one hell of a lot of sense.
With great respect
Restless Spirit
|
David Cartwright
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2005 - 5:05 am: |
|
Hi Robert.
You're absolutely right, as always.
But Sugden didn't describe Druitt as an improbable suspect without exhaustive research, and very careful consideration. Two lines were sufficient to put aside Cutbush. Clearly he found nothing in sensationalist newspaper articles, written long after the events, to include Cutbush as worthy of further consideration.
But that was a nice left hook to the body Robert. You obviously remember that I'm a strong Druittist. Seriously though, it has to be said that no one is infallible, and I'm still scratching my head as to why Sugden regarded George Chapman as a serious suspect.
A.P. is no fool, and Cutbush was an obvious lunatic. But a fetish for stabbing girls bottoms is a world away from the horrors committed by JtR.
But because I respect you guys, I shall try to be a bit more open-minded where Cutbush is concerned.
Best wishes Robert.
DAVID C. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2248
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - 2:57 pm: |
|
Oh Restless Spririt, flattery is going to get you everywhere, but thank you for your kind comments.
David
I think I already said before that I don't believe Sugden or anyone else bothered to read the 'Sun' reports.
For a 'serious' researcher to dismiss Cutbush out of hand, and then to begin to assemble Chapman as a 'serious' suspect quite frankly Beggars belief.
Thanks for your kind comments also.
By the way I'm a fool when I drink brandy. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2126
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - 4:33 pm: |
|
David,
In 1888 Cutbush was never just a harmless lunatic "with a fetish for stabbing girls bottoms".
We know from records that Sadler was originally arrested for the murder of Frances Coles that took place in February 1891.Charges were dropped against Sadler after witness representation.
On march 5th ,ie three days later, Thomas Cutbush was arrested[for the "malicious wounding"-the bottom stabbing etc] and immediately put in an asylum-from which he made a dramatic and ingenious espape![see the Sun 1891 articles].I myself think this "incarceration"before trial and hot on the heels of the Coles murder and the release of Sadler is significant.
It tells us at the very least that the authorities at the time of his arrest on 5th March 1891 thought Cutbush a lot more dangerous than Macnaghten later made out.
Clearly they did ,or they wouldnt have confined him to Broadmoor for the "Criminally Insane" for a bottom stabbing.
And they were right from all accounts.
Cutbush,certainly from the time of his violent assault on the co-worker,was a dangerous, violent and paranoid man.
Natalie
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2127
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - 4:35 pm: |
|
PS The charges against Sadler for the murder of Frances Coles were dropped on March 2nd 1891. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2252
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 29, 2005 - 2:05 pm: |
|
Regarding the influence of Sugden and others concerning the ‘Sun’ reports on Thomas Cutbush.
My honest belief is that they never read them, and simply accepted Macnaghten’s Memo as their bible.
Surely if even one of the researchers had studied the ‘Sun’ reports they would have used the information therein, and important detail concerning Thomas would have been released into the public domain in their publications… but this has not happened.
They are numerous references in the ‘Sun’ reports which have never before seen the light of day in any Ripper orientated work, and us writers and researchers love new information, it is what it is all about.
Counsel for defence and prosecution in the case of Thomas Cutbush maintained in their evidence that he was suspected of being Jack the Ripper.
Please give me a previous reference to that from Sugden or anyone else.
Thomas Cutbush, on the run from the law in 1891, tells an individual in March that ’money was no object, as he had plenty of it, and rich relations’.
Well it has taken Robert, Debra, Natalie, Chris and others two long years to find that out as a simple truth, so why didn’t one of these acclaimed researchers tell us that two years ago and save us two long years of research?
In the same encounter, Thomas says that there is a £500 reward offered for his apprehension.
Can any acclaimed researcher tell me right now just how many police rewards of £500 were made between 1888 and 1891 for the apprehension of a murderer?
I know, but I don’t see why I should tell those lazy sods.
If you want more, I got about another three hundred references that tell me that nobody ever took Thomas seriously because a slack cop back in 1894 wrote a very clever piece of disinformation.
Just ask.
|
Restless Spirit
Detective Sergeant
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 75
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 29, 2005 - 5:38 pm: |
|
Ap
My comments were very sincere, I've finished my reading on Jack the Myth and I am so impressed, no sh--.
Do you think that once the records on lunatic asylums, eg: Broodmore are finally opened to the public, in say the year 2030, that It may tell us more with respect to Jack aka Thomas/Charles Cutbush? I think these records will divulge lots. I'd appreciate your comments.
With greatest respect
Restless Spirit
|
David Cartwright
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 29, 2005 - 8:57 pm: |
|
Hi Natalie.
I'm more or less repeating a message I left for you on the Tabram thread, just in case you haven't seen it there. This is a more appropriate thread for it anyway. It concerns the statement by Sgt. Stephen White. I won't repeat all of that long statement, but just a significant piece of it. It concerns the voice that White heard.
"HIS VOICE WAS A SURPRISE TO ME. IT WAS SOFT AND MUSICAL, WITH JUST A TINGE OF MELANCHOLY IN IT, AND IT WAS THE VOICE OF A MAN OF CULTURE - A VOICE ALTOGETHER OUT OF KEEPING WITH THE SQUALID SURROUNDINGS OF THE EAST END".
Note the last sentences Natalie, "A man of culture", and "Out of keeping with the East End".
Take THAT, and the accompanying description, and you have the perfect portrait of Druitt, NOT Cutbush. Note also, that Rumbelow sees it exactly the same way.
Best wishes.
DAVID C. |
David Cartwright
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 29, 2005 - 8:56 pm: |
|
Hi Natalie.
I'm more or less repeating a message I left for you on the Tabram thread, just in case you haven't seen it there. This is a more appropriate thread for it anyway. It concerns the statement by Sgt. Stephen White. I won't repeat all of that long statement, but just a significant piece of it. It concerns the voice that White heard.
"HIS VOICE WAS A SURPRISE TO ME. IT WAS SOFT AND MUSICAL, WITH JUST A TINGE OF MELANCHOLY IN IT, AND IT WAS THE VOICE OF A MAN OF CULTURE - A VOICE ALTOGETHER OUT OF KEEPING WITH THE SQUALID SURROUNDINGS OF THE EAST END".
Note the last sentences Natalie, "A man of culture", and "Out of keeping with the East End".
Take THAT, and the accompanying description, and you have the perfect portrait of Druitt, NOT Cutbush. Note also, that Rumbelow sees it exactly the same way.
Best wishes.
DAVID C. |
David Cartwright
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - 7:17 pm: |
|
Hi Natalie & A.P.
O.K. you guys, I give in. I may have become too dependant on Sugden, who has redressed so much false information given to us in Ripper books down through the years.
Natalie, I've spent enough time in your company here, to know that you've been a gold-mine of much good information for me.
A.P., You're a greater authority on these events than I am. Between the two of you, you've convinced me that I've dismissed Cutbush out of hand too easily, and I will correct that oversight from here on, and look at him seriously for the first time.
I can't escape my deep-down Gut feeling, and long held beliefs about Druitt. Even Sugden couldn't put a dent in that. But I have to hold up my hand, and say that Cutbush has had less of my attention than the rest of the known suspects.
So, as I said, I will correct that now.
A.P., if you like your Brandy, then keep taking the medicine. Enjoy your pleasures, because we'll all be a long time dead.
My best to you both.
DAVID C. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2257
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 30, 2005 - 1:28 pm: |
|
Thank you Restless Spirit for your kind words and I'm glad the Myth was able to spark your interest.
I know Robert has been trying to get an 'in' to the Broadmoor records for some considerable time now, but I fear the worse... as even when such records become legally available, that is only to immediate family. Not quite a complete failure though, as the law changes when there are no longer surviving members of the family, and a request for information will then be considered.
My gut feeling is that if there was anything of note in Thomas Cutbushs' Broadmoor files then the Sun reporters would have dug it out in 1894, for they were shown his records.
It is likely that in three years time when the Old Bailey updates its totally amazing web-site to include the dates of interest to us that major new discoveries will be found then.
I'd bet my last bottle of brandy on that.
The information highway is now speeding up at such a rate that I'm sure some solid information will come our way very soon now.
Thanks again. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2258
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 30, 2005 - 1:35 pm: |
|
Thanks David C
it is only fair to give the boy Thomas the chance that almost all others have denied to him.
All along I think the good folk here have been saying 'Thomas Cutbush might not have been Jack the Ripper, but he just might have been.'
And I believe that when issues have come up that are somewhat negative to that concept then we have championed them as seriously as the positive aspects concerning Thomas' role in the Whitechapel Murders.
'Take no prisoners.'
That's my motto.
If he aint Jack then he aint Jack.
Thanks for your positive comments. |
David Cartwright
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, June 30, 2005 - 7:29 pm: |
|
Hi A.P.
You see, you've taught me something already.
I wasn't suggesting that Cutbush came from the squalid East End, only that White's all-round description was a portrait of Druitt. This view was echoed by Don Rumbelow.
However, I DIDN'T know that Thomas came from a prominent family. Thank you.
There is one thing I can't agree with you about though. I can't imagine that Sugden & Begg would have neglected to read the Sun's articles about Cutbush. As part of the investigation into Macnaghten's claims, it was surely imperitive that they read these articles.
Sugden is a hard man to pin down, but I may try to contact Begg, and check this out.
Before getting excited about Sgt.White's statement, I'd also like to know why Sugden & Begg have ignored that too. I get the feeling that there must be a good reason for this.
Anyway A.P., what's bothering me about Cutbush at the moment, is that he was an obvious lunatic.
A great many serial killers have escaped detection for long periods because their persona was that of being respectable, quiet, and inoffensive people. Cutbush's actions made him too visible. I can't imagine the savage mutilating Ripper suddenly stopping killing, and then being content to resume his activities by just stabbing girls bottoms.
However A.P., I'm keen to learn more about Cutbush, because you obviously consider him a major suspect.
Best wishes.
DAVID C. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2282
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 08, 2005 - 5:54 pm: |
|
I have been dwelling on the £500 reward on the subject of Thomas and Jack, well £600 if you throw in the other hundred quid from some MP, and wasn’t there another hundred quid thrown into the kitty as well?
During that dwelling I have been all over the place.
Police rewards are exceptional, police rewards of over a hundred quid in the LVP are almost unthinkable, only private individuals who had been robbed of some precious gee-gaws came up with sums like this, or the Home Office when they wanted someone who was Irish, in Ireland and a rebel.
Even for mass murder a police reward of five hundred smackers was unique.
So at least Thomas thought he might have been suspected of being the Whitechapel Murderer.
That helps.
There is also an interesting little case from September 1888 where Christopher Power, clerk, 32, is HMP’d for intent to murder.
His madness is a lesson. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2283
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 08, 2005 - 6:10 pm: |
|
Sorry David C
I've just caught your last post now and will respond soonest.
Brandy allowing.
For now, one description of Thomas Cutbush from someone who knew him:
'He seemed very dazed, as though he were under a great cloud, his conversation was very incoherent as a rule, but at times he spoke naturally.'
So he wasn't a lunatic all the time.
Now answer me a question.
Could Thomas have killed those whores when he was incoherent?
Or might he have done it when he spoke 'naturally'?
Therein is the crutchpiece. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4655
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 08, 2005 - 6:15 pm: |
|
AP, I do keep getting the feeling that the Lord Mayor's Day being spoilt wasn't a coincidence. Of course, vindictiveness would very possibly have been part of the murderer's make-up whoever he was. At least we know that Thomas had it in spades.
Robert |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2284
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 08, 2005 - 6:27 pm: |
|
I think you are merging time here, Robert.
What happens now and what happened then.
But my dear chap, I think you are probably absolutely right.
It is entirely possible that I might not be able to respond to such a provoking post until the winter, apart from saying that I think the recent decline of the serial killer is matched by the recent incline of the social terrorist which is a situation that I fully expected from the Colony model.
It is all about impact. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2285
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 09, 2005 - 5:28 pm: |
|
Why should Thomas Cutbush stuff coats and waistcoats up his chimney?
This just came to me.
Was he hiding something?
Was he trying to keep Santa out?
Was he feeling the cold?
I do feel that if researchers had really read the Sun reports and other sources then the following description of Thomas would have reached us sooner, like in the 1980's:
'A man of singular appearance, weird looking, face so distorted as hardly to be recognised, swarthy in complexion, his frame slight and wiry, he had a terrible face, the head of a murderer.'
And anyway, where is the A-Z in all this.
Surely they must have read the original reports?
For here we have original witness reports and descriptions of a suspect in the case and not a word on it.
'Absurdity' is the choice of word for them to sum up Thomas as a suspect.
Read some newspapers I say to them. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4660
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 09, 2005 - 5:38 pm: |
|
AP, interesting that the police even bothered to check his chimney. I mean, unless a coat sleeve or trouser leg was actually dangling down while they were in the room, it shows they were pretty suspicious of him to actually search his chimney, I'd say.
Robert |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2286
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 09, 2005 - 6:21 pm: |
|
Good point, Robert.
When I first walk into a room for the first time I always check out the drinks cabinet, it would never occur to me to stick my head up the chimney, unless I was looking for something of course... and then if I found something?
What caught my particular interest was how the 'Sun' harped on about the destruction of the privy - or outhouse - at TC's house, and how it may have ruined valuable evidence.
Here I think back to the older case I dug out from the privy of the Old Bailey - possibly a relation of TC, name now forgotten - where this young chap spent hours out there and the female relations complained of finding blood all over the privy seat.
One would imagine that TC - if he was a killer - would have firstly gone to the privy in the yard to clean himself up before climbing through the windows of his house.
Secondary cleaning in his room would have involved the turps and then the clothes stuffed up the chimney.
The 'Sun' seemed to be making a real issue about the early destruction of the privy. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4661
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 09, 2005 - 6:37 pm: |
|
Yes, AP, I wish they'd examined the privy, and the drains.
Robert |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2287
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 10, 2005 - 5:08 pm: |
|
Yes, Robert, the destruction of the privy was a great loss.
Regarding the run-around that Dr Brooks had with the authorities when he was attempting to prosecute Thomas for sending him threatening letters, there is a superb summary of this very thing in The Times, April 24th 1885 - search term ‘Lambeth’ - and it does highlight the problems between the courts and workhouses etc. when it came to the control and sentencing of lunatics.
Crucial I would say to our understanding of the situation
This might seem like a very stupid question.
But what was Thomas’ address in Kennington again?
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4662
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 10, 2005 - 5:21 pm: |
|
Hi AP
14 Albert Street, Newington.
I'll have a look at the article.
Robert |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2288
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 10, 2005 - 5:34 pm: |
|
Thanks Robert
Just that I noticed Albert Street is most often given in the records as 'Albert St'.
And as I was flying through the records when I punched in Albert St., I often got Albert Sq.
That's all really.
Probably the brandy. |
Howard Brown
Chief Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 693
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, July 10, 2005 - 9:07 pm: |
|
Dear Mr.Cartwright:
You submitted White's recollection...""HIS VOICE WAS A SURPRISE TO ME. IT WAS SOFT AND MUSICAL, WITH JUST A TINGE OF MELANCHOLY IN IT, AND IT WAS THE VOICE OF A MAN OF CULTURE - A VOICE ALTOGETHER OUT OF KEEPING WITH THE SQUALID SURROUNDINGS OF THE EAST END".
No offense,sir, but this description from the good Sargeant came 31 years after the last of the C5 victims was murdered.
Most of the full report that Sgt. White gave to the Peoples Journal on 26-9-19, has been left out from your previous posts [ not a problem and certainly not intentional on your part,so don't be offended,sir.. ].
The extraordinary recollection by Sgt White buggers belief. At your earliest convienience,re-read it and notice how it smacks of another Hutchinson-description of a stranger. Look at how he recalls all of these features in no more than what had to be two or three seconds,unless he asked this man to stop for identification. White didn't.
My friend, Richard Patterson, uses this description by White to more or less describe his suspect,Francis Thompson in a work he wrote.
As for any Ripper author omitting Cutbush ? Certainly A.P. and others have provided a lot of material to masticate [ I turned intellectual over the last two days..masticate means to chew on...] and reflect on. I'm gettin' an education from all this Cutbush material. Please keep it going,A.P. and crew !!
(Message edited by howard on July 10, 2005) |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4666
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 11, 2005 - 7:34 am: |
|
AP, I think I'll try and find out more about this whole question of detention of lunatics.
Robert |
spanish jack
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, July 10, 2005 - 11:23 pm: |
|
After reading a lot of books about Jack The Ripper, I think George Chapman was the ripper. WHY?. Just two things: First, the prostitutes were killed by someone who has knowledge about anatomy (Chapman studied for surgeon in Poland), this puts out MOntague John Druit, Kosminski, Deeming, joseph barnett, Maybrick or Sicket.
Second, HE was the only one who was in Whitechapel till 1891 (in http://www.met.police.uk/history/ripper.htm we can see the last ripper victim was killed in this year). This puts out Ostrog, Francis Tumblety or david Cohen.
No other suspect except Chapman was in Whitechapel during 1888-1891, and Chapman is the only one who know about anatomy. NO one, except George Chapman, had medicine knowledge and was there during all the ripper killing. And, as we all know, the ripper had anatomy knowledge and stopped killing in 1891, so...Who is the only one who gather this two conditions?. Other question: do you think there were many surgeons in a poor town like Whitechapel in 1888???.
A hug from Spain! |
David Cartwright
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, July 11, 2005 - 8:01 am: |
|
Hi Howard.
It was not I, but Natalie, who brought up Sgt.White's statement, which was, as you say, made long after these events. Natalie was questioning why the major Ripper authors, Sugden, Begg, etc., had not made any mention of this statement in their books.
I merely said, that IF this was a genuine & honest statement, then the description contained therein was a portrait of M.J.Druitt.
As Sugden & Begg have not deemed this statement to be important, then I too am reluctant to accept it. I was just making a point to Natalie & A.P, about the statement's content.
I hope that clears up any confusion Howard.
Also, please call me "David". There's no formality here I hope.
Best wishes.
DAVID C. |
Restless Spirit
Detective Sergeant
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 76
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Monday, July 11, 2005 - 1:00 pm: |
|
AP
It seems that the biggest set back with Thomas Cutbush for Jack is the fact that it cannot be proven YET that he was in Whitchapel during the period 1888-1891(or thereabouts). I do not consider this a setback at all. He was smart enough or assisted by another that he alluded the police and many others for years & years. But he is not the only suspect whose whereabouts cannot be established during the murder spree of 1888, eg: Kelly. There is no doubt in my mine as a Thomas Cutbush for Jack fan, that uncle Charles was instramental in helping Thomas allude police and no doubt that good ole uncle C. knew that Thomas was Jack. So if you can fool so many for so long on the police force etc, why not be absent when the census takers come calling? The fact that his whereabouts cannot as yet be 100% established makes him more of a good suspect, than those whose every movements are known. Jack didn't want to get caught ,with or without help, he did not. Why then would he want to be listed in the census for the time period of murders. I fully support the possibility that there was a police coverup, and Kosminski and or Druitt were convenient scapegoats, especially Druitt. His suicide was most convenient for the police, it helped to cover up Thomas Cutbush as a more probable Jack. This same cover up could have been applied to the census records of the time, to delete Thomas possibly after he was declared a lunatic and instatutionalized. There's a lot to be said here, and no doubt there are many on the board who will think I'm daft but it's my opinion, and I'm damm proud of it.
all the best
Restless Spirit
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2289
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 11, 2005 - 2:48 pm: |
|
On the contrary, restless spirit - can’t you have another name, this one reminds me of my brandy bottle thumping away on the shelf - we have the testimony of one of the most senior police officers of his time, Mac the Knife, who states emphatically:
‘It was found impossible to ascertain (Thomas Cutbush he means) his movements on the nights of the Whitechapel Murders.’
And:
‘He apparently contracted syphilis about 1888 - .’
This means Thomas was not detained in a lunatic asylum or workhouse during this period, but was roaming the streets of Whitechapel at night as was his want and habit.
I believe that after 1888 Thomas may have been confined, but not before.
Mac the Knife’s statement here is a real bonus.
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2176
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 11, 2005 - 3:28 pm: |
|
Hi Everybody,
Howard,David,
Donald Rumbelow is the author who cites Sgt White"s account as possible support for Druitt,not Cutbush.
However before moving onto why I believe it could be a good description of Cutbush, Rumbelow also states that "Sgt White"s description was widely circulated [at the time of the murders]and gave Sir Robert Anderson,the head of CID the alternative idea that the murderer could been a Jewish medical student".
As to why I prefer to think that this young man sounds more like Cutbush than anyone else I have written my reasons before,recently.
Briefly
The musical cultured voice
- the "musical" feature is mentioned in the newspaper reports regarding the voice of Thomas Cutbush.A blind boy ,reportedly present with one of the victims said he would recognise the voice of the murderer immediately due to its unusual
cadences.
-the Sun at various times gives away a description of Thomas Cutbush-we learn he is tall and thin with "hunched shoulders"
Sgt White tells us his man was 5ft 10 and slightly bent at the shoulders.
The "extraordinary brilliance of his eyes" again the young couple in Camden speak of a shining wildness of his eyes.
His rubber soled shoes-Sgt White tells us he was "walking quickly but noiselessly"from where the murdered woman lay[Rumbelow believes he is describing the Mitre Square murder].
Cutbush,when he "crept up on" the doctor in his surgery and threatened to kill him,did so "quietly noiselessly"
Sgt White refers to his "Thin,narrow face"and we are told by the Sun that Cutbush had a "thin,narrow fac but a strong jaw"
And finally there is Hutchinsson"s description of an elegant man who "hid his face with his hat"
dark and sallow complexion which again matches Cutbush who the Sun tells us had a dark and sallow complexion and who hid his face when reporters came to speak to him at the asylum and also when he spoke to the young couple.
|
Howard Brown
Chief Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 698
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Monday, July 11, 2005 - 4:03 pm: |
|
Dear Nats:
I understand what you are saying. I wasn't dismissing anyone's [Rumbelow,you,Dave C. or even Richard Patterson's] opinion. There are a couple of contradictions in White's 31 year old recollection that make his memory appear a little questionable,not whom you or anyone else feel was the Ripper.
White says he was "about 5 foot 10 in."....and then says he was "bent at the shoulders'. The guy may have been 6 ft.3 for all we know. What was the guy's height? 5'10" bent or straightened up ?
White says the guy stumbled and scowled at him...and then a nanosecond later speaks in a soft musical voice uttering, "Goodnight"...That behavior was suspicious enough for me,if I was Sgt. White, to engage in conversation,as White said he had intended to,but didn't. Maybe its just me..
White says the guy's complexion was sallow [ yellowish ] and then says his hands were snow white.
Again,I'm not being dismissive to your opinion,Nats. White's memory is a little suspect itself,at least to me...
David: My error in thinking it was you that brought up Sgt. White ! Sorry about that !
(Message edited by howard on July 11, 2005) |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2179
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 11, 2005 - 4:36 pm: |
|
Well Howard ,the point is that he also apparently gave out his description to Scotland Yard at the time of the murders so I doubt he would have had much difficulty remembering the detail in 1888.
But I wonder Howard,after reading your astonishing post on your personal recollections regarding Hungarian girls,if your concern about the reliability of Sgt White"s memory has anything at all to do with how wishes and desire tend to act on your own recollections?
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2292
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 11, 2005 - 5:29 pm: |
|
Robert
be careful, if you start delving into the lunacy laws of the LVP we may not hear from you for some years.
The case of Frederick Marshall, supposed murderer of Laura Wilson, sort of sums up what happened to Thomas Cutbush in regard to the law at the time - The Times, Feb 3/ 5/ 6/ 1885 - and I would also recommend the very readable web-site 'The Metropolitan Comission in Lunacy', where Thomas actually gets a mention but they get his name wrong.
The lunatics! |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4671
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 11, 2005 - 5:42 pm: |
|
OK, thanks AP. I'll try and look into it and endeavour to come back with half a brain (but I'm not saying whose).
Robert |
Howard Brown
Chief Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 700
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Monday, July 11, 2005 - 7:22 pm: |
|
You have a point there,Nats..
My memory tends to fade in and out from age..
Sometimes its hair one minute and gone the next..
I have to admit not knowing White submitted this report at the time of the murders. Hair all along,I thought it was first recollected in the 1919 memoirs of Sgt. White,and not before.
I guess it is incumbent on me toupee attention.
Thanks,Nats |
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 765
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 - 3:39 am: |
|
Hi How, Natalie,
The "report" in question was printed in a newspaper after White's death and claimed to be someone else's recollection of something White had told him. It's anecdotal and second hand information. We don't know that the person telling the story repeated it correctly. We have no way of knowing if there ever actually was any report filed about this alleged incident. Heck, we can't even be sure that this anonymous person telling the story didn't just make it up on the spot... It could have just been a journalist trying to fill space, for example.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
 Profile  Email  Dissertations  Website
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2181
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 - 10:20 am: |
|
Hi Dan,
I am going to quote Donald Rumbelow,The Complete JtR[latest edition,2004].
"I happened to be looking through some old cuttings in a battered three -volume edition of
Griffiths,"Mysteries of the Police and Crime".Among them was one from the "People"s Journal" issue of 26 September 1919, on the retirement of a detective named"Steve" White who had spent several nights as a young policeman loitering..........etc"
After giving the story in full Rumbelow adds the following:
"White"s description of the suspected murderer was widely circulated.It was this description that allegedly gave Sir Robert Anderson,the head of CID,the alternative possibility that the murderer was a Jewish medical student,who had taken this method of avenging himself on women of the class to which his victims belonged."
Dan, might it be better taking it up with Don himself? As ex Scotland Yard man he may be able to tell you why he believes it was circulated among police at the time of the murders.
Best
Natalie |
Robert Clack
Chief Inspector
Username: Rclack
Post Number: 592
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 - 11:19 am: |
|
Hi Natalie,
Sorry, but that last passage you quote didn't come from Donald Rumbelow himself, it is actually in the article. To be honest I thought it came from Donald himself when I read his book. This is a link to the full article if anyone would like to read it.
http://casebook.org/cgi-bin/forum/show.cgi?tpc=4924&post=109048#POST109048
Rob |
Howard Brown
Chief Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 703
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 - 12:59 pm: |
|
Gang.........
The People’’s Journal report quotes what it claims is ‘‘one of White's reports’’, so it’’s anecdotal only in the sense of not being an official document, but as it is a direct quote it isn’’t second-hand. Nevertheless, for the reasons already given - not matching the geography or weather at the time of any of the murders and not fitting the stabbing story cited elsewhere - it probably is a journalistic invention and it is possible that research in the East London papers could identify the specific incident.
I don’’t think Donald Rumbelow says Sgt. White’’s report was widely circulated at the time of the murders in 1888. This claim was made by the unnamed author of the article in The People’’s Journal (copied below) who wrote, ‘‘White's description of the suspected murderer was widely circulated and used by the police at the time, but the man was never seen. It was White's description that gave the late Sir Robert Anderson his conviction that the murderer was a Jewish medical student, who had taken this method of avenging himself on women of the class to which his victims belonged.’’
There is no evidence whatsoever that White’’s description was widely circulated. I would also draw your attention to the East London Advertiser (27 August 1919), also copied below, which gives a substantially different account, specifically saying that during White’’s brief absence from a street a woman was stabbed there (the report does not say murdered) and that White saw no one. The specific sentences are: ‘‘He kept watch in an East End street, but the murderer's movements were not in accordance with anticipation. For about ten minutes only he left the street, and to his amazement he found on his return that a woman had been stabbed. He saw no man anywhere……’’
The article in The People’’s Journal fits no known murder location, except perhaps Berner Street (the Club there might have warranted surveillance), but the reports of that crime only refer to White interviewing Matthew Packer and make no mention of him seeing anyone, as I feel they probably would have done in light of Schwartz’’s story, and although it was raining that night it wasn’’t bitterly cold. The only murder it might otherwise fit is Castle Alley, but, like Mitre Square, that wasn’’t a cul-de-sac and in any events there is no conceivable reason why it should have been watched. Overall, I’’m inclined to believe that The People’’s Journal account is a fabrication. |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
