|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 650
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 24, 2003 - 1:42 pm: |       |
Hi Leanne
My point in mentioning Lawende was to show that here was a suspect (Lawende's man) who wasn't obviously crazy, and, at least as far as we know from Lawende's description, wasn't obviosly Jewish - yet the police were quite keen to trace him.
I don't know what Akehurst's ethnic origin was. Hutchinson's man may have looked Jewish, but wasn't a raving nutter.
And the Sourcebook says that "the police treated Sadler very seriously as a suspect for the Whitechapel Murders." As far as I know, Sadler wasn't Jewish.
This all refers back to what you think the police's attitude would have been to Barnett. I don't think they'd have not bothered with him, just because he wasn't crazy and Jewish.
Robert |
Jeff Hamm
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 51
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 24, 2003 - 5:00 pm: | |
Leanne,
I didn't say Barnett definately had to be known for past crimes, I said he probably would have been known. Since most psychopaths are known to the police, I'm simply indicating where we might look for information and pointing out the kinds of things that might lend support to such an argument. That evidence, however, is not available to us.
Let me try and explain this. If, let's say, you want to suggest a paticular material is "flum", but we can't examine the material directly, only look at notes about it. We know that 60% of all material is flum. Simply by guessing, you would have a 6 in 10 chance of being right if you guess flum, and 4 in 10 chance of being right if you guess not flum.
What way do you guess? Obviously, flum, but I hope you wouldn't be overly confident in that guess.
Now, let's say we know that 80% of all flum is blue. As we read our notes you find out the material is red. Now what do you guess?
See, it could be flum. 20% of all flum isn't blue, so some percent of flum could be red. So by finding out something that reduces the possibility of the material being flum, even if it doesn't completely rule out flum, isn't evendence "for flum". Just like finding out that Joe doesn't appear to be well known to the police weighs against him being a psychopath, even if some physcopaths don't have prior records. Some flum could be red.
Of course it's possible Joe was one of the rare psychopaths, and yes there are some like Bundy who fit this possibility. I'm basing this probabilistic statement on the fact that most psychopaths do have prior records. So, we would expect to find a prior record. Not finding one, however, doesn't preclude the possibility but it's not evidence for "luck psycho" either.
Your listing of the rules for dismissal seems to me you may simply have proved Joe was a potty mouth and he was dismissed for swearing rather than proved he was a thief. Why do you insist he was dismissed for theft? Maybe he swore at a forman, or was caught taking a leak on the docks?
I suggest one paper reported he repeated the last words of sentences. Others seem only to indicate he "stammered". As these are not the same thing, and the latter is not an unexpected thing, there is only one report of this proposed "echolalia". I don't put much weight in this suggestion, since the only other reports of a speech impediment seem to indicate the far more commong "stammering" of a nervous individual. Which, is not a bit surprising or informative.
- Jeff
|
Jeff Hamm
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 52
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 24, 2003 - 5:06 pm: | |
Hi Glenn,
The "label" for psychopath became "sociopath" which has since beome "Anti-Social disorder". I'm not sure, but it's quite possible that with lable changes also came changes in how the diagnosis is applied (the criterion used). However, yester-years psycho became sociopathic yesterday while today they are anti-scocial.
However, a rose by anyother name ...
- Jeff |
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 643
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 - 7:03 am: | |
G'day,
I wonder why Sarah Lewis wasn't asked to verify that Hutchinson was the man she saw! He may have been covering for someone else! If he was so concerned for Mary's safety, why didn't he show at her inquest? His sudden appearance into the case is so weird, and why would he bother to introduce his name to the police if her was the murderer?
LEANNE |
Glenn L Andersson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 150
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 - 7:29 am: | |
G'day Leanne
"I wonder why Sarah Lewis wasn't asked to verify that Hutchinson was the man she saw!"
I actually have had the same thoughts myself. A bit strange that they didn't follow up on this and made it clear. It could just be a simple flaw of the investigation, though.
I think it's evident, and sometimes quite frustrating, that there are a lot of people missing that should have been present at the different inquests. One such example is Mrs Mortimer, one of the witnesses from Berner Street the night Stride was murdered. She, like many others, made statements to the press (that's how we know their stories), but never showed up at -- or wasn't called to -- the inquest.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 151
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 - 7:31 am: | |
Hi Frank,
I think I'm partly to blame why you feel your messages come out long, since I never can keep it short myself. So it's OK.
All the best 
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 683
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 - 6:13 pm: | |
Hi Leanne
Re the idea of Hutchinson covering for someone, I'm sure there used to be a dissertation "The man who shielded Jack the Ripper" in which Hutchinson was acting lookout for the blotchy-faced man, but the dissertation doesn't seem to be there any more.
Robert |
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 645
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 - 7:52 pm: | |
G'day Robert,
'The Man Who Shielded Jack the Ripper' by Derek Osborne, is in 'Ripperoo / Issue5' in Ripper Media / Non-Fiction / Periodicals/ Ripperoo.
LEANNE |
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 685
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 7:16 am: | |
Ah yes, Leanne, I misremembered the lookout bit, but that's the article. Thanks.
Robert |
Frank van Oploo
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 - 11:18 am: | |
Hi Leanne,
You wondered: "If he was so concerned for Mary's safety, why didn't he show at her inquest?"
The fact that he didn't show until the inquest was concluded is precisely what makes him suspicious (together with his far too detailed statement)!
Let's suppose for a moment that he was the ripper and that he indeed was the man seen by Sarah Lewis. In that situation he would have had 2 options: wait for the police to come and find him (over which he had no control) or make up a story that would direct suspicion away from him. The last thing then is exactly what he did! And not without succes either, because the police seemed to believe him.
If he really was Jack and he hadn't been seen by Lewis he would have had no reason to come forward, so this might be why he didn't show at the inquest.
As to "why he would bother to introduce his name to the police if her was the murderer?", I don't know. Maybe it wasn't his real name, many people didn't use their real name when in contact with the police. On the other hand, he wanted to direct suspicion away from him, so I can imagine that he would have used his real name just so he seemed an upright citizen.
With all this I don't claim George Hutchinson to have been Jack the Ripper, I merely want to point out that he acted suspicously in direct connection with one of the murders.
All the best,
Frank
|
Frank van Oploo
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 - 3:59 pm: | |
Bäste Glenn,
It's a comfort to know that you acknowledge that I can partly blame you for my long messages. Tack för this!
Good night,
Frank  |
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 165
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 12:26 pm: | |
Frank,
What's this? Swedish words!!!!!
I didn't know you were a renaissance man as well... 
I'm beginning to feel more and more at home here.
All the best
(or as we say in the old land of Charles XII: "Vänliga hälsningar")
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 646
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 11:23 pm: | |
G'dat Frank,
This is what causes a headache when I think of George Hutchinson: Sarah Lewis just said that the man she saw peering into the court was: "not tall, but stout, had on a wideawake black hat. I did not notice his clothes." He would have had to be present at the inquest to hear her statement. If that made him think: "Oh Dear, I better tell the police that was me." would this draw suspicion away from him, or would it aid them by giving them a name to put on this man? If he wanted to confess, couldn't he have just left a damning clue at a murder scene?
The only way I can fit him into the case, is to assume he was lying and wanted to keep the police suspicion on a foreign looking man.
LEANNE |
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 692
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 04, 2003 - 2:56 pm: | |
Hi Diana
Today on BBC Ceefax letters, there was a letter from someone who was about to start a law degree, and who suffered from ADHD, which was explained as "a neurological disorder in the autistic spectrum". Could you fill me in on that please?
Sorry to nip in, everyone, but the mention of autism interested me.
Robert |
Frank
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, September 04, 2003 - 4:30 am: | |
Hi Leanne,
Assuming for a moment again that Hutchinson was the killer, he had to do much better than only tell the police it was him, he had to fabricate a story that would not only have explained and legitimized his presence on the scene, but moreover would have offered the police something to concentrate on instead of on him.
Which is exactly what he did. He told the police an 'innocent' story that explained and ligitimized his presence and offered them the foreign looking man the police was already looking for.
It seems as if you understood from my earlier post that I thought Hutchinson wanted to confess, so, in case you did and for the sake of clearness: I didn't say this.
All the best,
Frank  |
Frank
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, September 04, 2003 - 4:38 am: | |
Hi Glenn,
I must confess, I took these words from the 'internationella garanti' I received together with an alarm clock I bought. It came in Swedish as well. Don't tell anybody else, promised?
Also, I am a 'language man', always interested in trying to speak a foreign language.
Vänliga hälsningar,
Frank |
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 647
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 05, 2003 - 5:30 pm: | |
G'day Frank,
I'm reading a book: 'Serial Killers, The Growing Menace.' by Joel Norris and I remember reading that Serial Killers don't confess, but I'll have to find that sentence again, and re-read the whole paragraph.
The Yorkshire Ripper gave a full confession, but that was after the Police caught him trying to hide weapons, then searched his home and found about 30 concealed weapons. He didn't voluntarily go to the police! His 'game' was up!
You pointed out that Scotland Yard was already looking for a foreigner. Sarah lewis didn't say that the man she saw wasn't a foreigner! How could he have thought his 'game' was up after she gave that description?
LEANNE |
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 182
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 05, 2003 - 5:48 pm: | |
Goddag Frank,
OK. Your secret is safe with me... 
Nice to see you're a language man; languages are indeed interesting.
Med vänlig hälsning
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 649
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 06, 2003 - 8:53 pm: | |
G'day,
I am trying to find the part in that book about the need of a serial killer to confess and introduce his name to a case, but this book has no index!!!!!!!
I think it was something to do with a serial killer's need to fade back under his 'mask of sanity'. In 1888, apparent motiveless murderers were new and unstudied, so they wouldn't have known about this 'mask of sanity' thing!
LEANNE |
Chuck
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, September 06, 2003 - 10:11 pm: | |
How come you guys base a lot of your cases against suspects off profiling? Leanne, you state that you read that, "serial killers don't confess." How can such a thing be worded as a fact? I’m sure there are lots of serial killers who have confessed. Barnett fits the profile in some ways and doesn't in others. I'll give you one example. I read that serial killers usually kill within their age group. Okay, Barnett was 30 or something like that, while the four victims (Polly, Chapman, Stride, and Eddowes) were in their 40’s. Can you really trust profiling?
|
Frank
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, September 05, 2003 - 9:29 pm: | |
Hi Leanne,
How's i' going? I hope well. I visited your home country about 11 years ago and I liked it! It's beautifull (though I only visited the east coast).
Assuming for the moment again that George Hutchinson was the Ripper and that he visited the inquest, then he learned that he had been seen by Sarah Lewis. If he was Jack this surely must have made him nervous, even though he wasn't (described) as a Jew. He didn't necessarily have to think his 'game' was up, but he surely must have thought that the police were going to look for this 'not tall, but stout man that was looking up the court as if waiting for someone to come out' (what was this man doing there?) and so he must have thought that he had to do something (as I explained in my earlier posts). With this coming forward he 'kept ahead of the game', if you will, he kept in control and he (for his sake) hopefully staid off the suspect list, which in fact is exactly what seems to have been the case.
And about the foreign looking man, Mrs. Long gave a discription of a foreign looking man and the Goulston Street grafitto pointed in that direction too, as did the discription given by Hutchinson himself, but I think this doesn't mean that the police were keeping their eyes peeled only for foreign looking men and I can imagine that Hutchinson must have thought the same, were he indeed the Ripper.
All the best,
Frank |
Frank
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, September 05, 2003 - 9:50 pm: | |
Goddag, or 'goede dag' Glenn (as we say in Holland),
Phonetically in English this is something like: goodah dag - with those very nasty hard g's we have here in the land of tulips and mills (and other more notorious stuff),
And 'met vriendelijke groeten' (literally: with friendly greetings - phonetically: met vreendelukkah grootan),
Frank (which is not pronounced Frenk here, but more like Fronk)  |
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 204
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 08, 2003 - 11:29 am: | |
Hej, Frank!
I've actually always found Holland to be enormously interesting, it looks like a very beautiful country. Although I won't envy you in case there'll be a flood...
Hehe... I wonder (hmmm...) what you mean by "notorious stuff"... 
Vänliga hälsningar 
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Frank van Oploo
Police Constable
Username: Franko
Post Number: 1
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 08, 2003 - 12:44 pm: | |
Hej Glenn,
Thanks for the compliments about my home country. I keep hearing that Sweden also is very beautiful!
Holland is indeed beautiful, although I live on the edge of a large urban part along the west coast, about 30 km from Amsterdam. But also this part of Holland embraces a lot of natural scenic beauty and the sea is very nearby. In fact, everything in this country is nearby because it's only a small country!
By 'notorious stuff' I meant drug related issues, because by some governments Holland seems to be regarded as 'too tolerable' in that respect. 
Vänliga hälsningar,
Frank  (hey look, I finally registered!) |
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 206
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 08, 2003 - 2:54 pm: | |
Hej Frank,
Yes, I did think you meant the drugs. It was a joke. And yes, we do know about the liberal traditions on the subject in Holland; a friend of mine visited Amsterdam some time ago and walked into a coffee shop, although it wasn't the coffee that was the important thing on the meny there...
One thing I like about Holland is the characteristic wind mills, and I also like the open sceneries a lot. Actually, the landscape tend to look quite like the part of southern Sweden a bit south of my town and a bit into the country. Exactly where I live, at the southern west coast, close to Denmark, it is more hilly, with steep mountains.
Congratulations to your registration, Frank. Finally! It must be a good feeling to get the posts inserted withiut having to wait for it a couple of days. I know that was frustrating for me before I got registred. You didn't have much info on your profile, though -- or else it's just me being exhibitionistic as usual...
All the best, Frank, and welcome to the board as a member. I assume we'll talk again befoe that, but I'm soon going off on a ten day holiday (on September 15), so keep Leanne and Richard warm for me in the meantime. 
Vänliga hälsningar
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
