|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Chris Scott
Chief Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 814
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 02, 2004 - 11:22 am: |       |
In the Macnaghten memo the Colicott (his spelling) case is referred, in imitation of whom Cutbush allegedly acted. Having looked at 1891 data, there is only one entry each (both female) for the spellings COLICOTT and COLICUTT. the common spelling consistently in the 1891 data is COLLICOTT and I am listing below make entries of possibly appropriate ages for offences in 1894 in the London area:
1891 Census
Spelling is COLLICOTT
George C aged 45 - St George Hanover Square - Groom
Henry J aged 15 - Bethnal Green - Tailor's apprentice
Henry R aged 61 - Bethnal Green - Tailor
James aged 46 - Islington - Managing Clerk
John aged 22 - Hackney - Printer's Compositor (spelling in census is COLLECOTT)
Thomas aged 44 - Lambeth - Coach builder
Thomas A aged 19 - Lambeth - Painter
Thos aged 54 - Bethnal Green - Railway Porter
|
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 245
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 02, 2004 - 1:14 pm: | |
In the reports of the court proceedings, his name is given as Edwin Colocitt. He is listed as being 26 in 1891 (although it is listed as 24 in another report) and living in Aldebert Road. There is no Aldebert Road in London anymore, although there is a Aldebert Terrace in South Lambeth, near where his crimes were committed. The A-Z states that he was "discharged due to a faulty identification" but actually he was found guilty. In an bit of a legal oddity, his sentencing was delayed until details of Cutbush's crimes were known, as they were so similar in nature. Cheers, RP
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1751
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 03, 2004 - 10:59 am: | |
Even the address was similar - "Aldebert" instead of "Albert". We're almost into Doppelgangers here!
Robert |
Chris Scott
Chief Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 822
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 04, 2004 - 2:28 pm: | |
HI RJ
Many thanks for your note above and the info about Aldebert Terrace has finally enabled me to track down Colicott and get fuller details about him.
The family name was transcribed in the index to the 1891 census as CALCOTT but I read it in the census return as Colocott. His name was actuallt John Edwin Colocott and the full household details for 1891 are as follows:
Address
43 Aldebert Terrace, Lambeth, London
Head:
John Thomas Colocott aged 51
Born Southwark, London
Jeweller (Gold)
Wife:
Hannah Colocott aged 50
Born Islington, London
Son:
John E Colocott aged 27
Born Kingsland, London
There is a column on the census form to note any disability - John Colocott is noted as "Weak Intellect"
I am attaching two items below:
1) A copy of the census entry for the household for 1891
2) A photograph of Aldebert Terrace.
as a note of interest, Roger Moore (better known as one of the actors who played James Bond 007) lived as a child at No 4 Aldebert Terrace!
Thanks again RJ for the lead
Chris
|
Chris Scott
Chief Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 823
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 04, 2004 - 2:32 pm: | |
For those who may want to make their own interpretation of this surname (as above) I am posting an enlargement of just the names of the residents at 43 Aldebert Terrace
 |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1761
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 04, 2004 - 4:30 pm: | |
Great work Chris.
The Roger Moore info raised an eyebrow!
Robert |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1762
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 04, 2004 - 4:48 pm: | |
Chris, quick question : did people put down things like "blind", "deaf", "one-legged" under disability, as well as "lunatic", "weak intellect" etc?
Robert |
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 685
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 04, 2004 - 4:51 pm: | |
Yes Chris, excellent stuff.
I don't know about Roger Moore, but I actually used to stay in this terrace when visiting London back in the 80's while I was based in the Middle East.
Many of the houses belonged to Arabian 'gentlemen' in those days. |
Chris Scott
Chief Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 824
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 04, 2004 - 4:55 pm: | |
Robert
This column on the census return is headed as follows:
" If:
1) Deaf and dumb
2) Blind
3) Lunatic, imbecile or idiot."
The enumerator could use either these numbered codes, which I have seen, or put a comment as in the case of John edwin
Chris
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1763
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 04, 2004 - 5:27 pm: | |
Thanks Chris.
Robert |
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 249
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 05, 2004 - 8:25 am: | |
Thanks, Chris. What's particularly interesting is that Colocott was found guilty of several stabbings back in February 1891, but, by the time of the 1891 census, he's already back home with Mom & Pop with no sign of a live-in keeper anywhere in sight. (The Court said he was to be watched by an attendant). A strange business. So much of what goes on in a legal case goes on behind the scenes. It makes me wonder if Macnaghten had it backwards and the 'weak-minded' Colocott was really the imitator of Cutbush (instead of t'other way round) and the authorities came to suspect that Cutbush had committed some of the earlier stabbings attributed to Colocott. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1769
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 05, 2004 - 6:15 pm: | |
Well, it looks as if he kept out of trouble afterwards, because they all seem to still be together in 1901.
Robert |
Chris Scott
Chief Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 943
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 02, 2004 - 1:51 pm: | |
Today I found this account of Colocott's arrest and trial. This names the main witness as one Myers who chased and arrested him. It is from the Centralia Enterprise and Tribune (Wisconsin) dated 14 march 1891:
HAD A MANIA FOR BLOOD
Juvenile Jack the Ripper Sent to a London Asylum
London, Feb. 7.
A companion fiend to Jack the Ripper, only on a somewhat lesser scale, was sent to Broadmoor insane asylum today, there to be confined during what is known as "Her Majesty's pleasure," and which practically means life. His name is Edward Colocitt, and he is the young son of a wealthy jeweler of this city. Some time ago the police authorities commenced to receive numnerous complaints from young women in the western suburbs to the effect that while out after dark they were approached by a younf man who came suddenly up behind them, and stabbed them in the back with a sharp instrument about the thickness of an awl. Extra detectives were put on duty in the districts from which the complaint came, but for some time without result. A couple of weeks ago, however, a furniture dealer noticed Collocitt standing behind a couple of young ladies in a suspicious manner, and determined to watch him. Suddenly he made a step forward, and gave one of the young women three stabs with his right hand in the back. Then he took to his heels, but was followed by Myers, the man in question, and arrested. After the fact of his incarceration was made known nineteen women identidied him as their assailant. Six of these gave evidence in court, and the doctors testified that all of them had one or more clean cut, punctured wounds on portions of their anatomy immediately below the hip joint, and which had evidently been made by a very pointed awl. A weapon of this kind was thrown away by Collocitt while he was being pursued. It was testified that the total number of his victims was over sixty. The jury promptly found him guilty, but, on account of his wealthy connections, the plea that he was of weak intellect had its effect, and instead of going to the penitentiary he ws committed to the lunatic asylum. One feature of his mania consisted of his selecting as victims plump young girls between the age of 14 and 18.
|
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 906
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 02, 2004 - 2:12 pm: | |
Thanks for that Chris.
I think they are mixing up Cutbush and Colicitt here, because Colicitt walked free with a £250 surety from his wealthy father and Cutbush was sentenced to Broadmoor. But maybe they aint?
Whatever, very interesting stuff indeed!
I must read it a few more times.
I don’t suppose the furniture dealer happened to be the furniture dealer who resided at 29 Aldgate High Street?
This is the first time I have seen a detailed account of the crimes of Colicitt or Cutbush, and I take me hat off to you sir for finding it.
|
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 3005
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 02, 2004 - 2:19 pm: | |
Agreed! Chris, another excellent find - I don't recall ever reading anything so detailed on Colocott.
Stephen P. Ryder, Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper |
Chris Scott
Chief Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 945
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 02, 2004 - 2:28 pm: | |
Hi AP and Spry:-)
As the article seems to be of interest I thought you might like sight of the original
All the best
Chris
 |
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 321
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 02, 2004 - 10:00 pm: | |
Here's the details of Edwin Colicitt's court appearances:
4 FEBRUARY, 1891
“At LAMBETH, Edwin Colocitt, 24, living in
Aldebert-road, was charged on remand with stabbing
several females in the neighbourhoods of Clapham and
Brixton. Mr. Sims prosecuted for the Treasury; and
Mr. W.H. Armstrong defended. Some facts of the case
have already been reported. It was alleged that
several females had been jostled by the prisoner at
night, and they afterwards found that they had been
stabbed with some sharp instrument. Several of the
injured females declared that to the best of their
belief the prisoner was the man who had assaulted them
in the way described. Dr. Dorin, of Clapham-road,
said he had examined three of the females and found
them wounded, evidently with some sharp instrument,
which had gone right through the clothing. Mr.
Armstrong urged that it was a case of mistaken
identity. Mr. Hopkins said he should not deal with
the case, but committed the prisoner to take his trial
at the Sessions, admitting him to bail as before.”
21 FEBRUARY 1891
“(Before MR. SOMES, sitting at Newington.)
EDWIN COLOCITT surrendered to his bail yesterday on
four charges of maliciously wounding and assault. Mr.
Torr prosecuted for the Treasury; Mr. Lowe and Mr.
Biron were for the defence. The assualts with which
the prisoner was charged were all of the same nature,
and were committed in the same neighbourhood within a
few days of one another. No motive could be assigned
for them. In the first case Miss Annie Elizabeth
Lewis, of 7, Stockwell-park-road, a mantle show woman,
deposed that about 9:45 on the evening of January 8
she was walking homewards along South Lambeth-road.
Nearing the public library a man ran by her, coming
from behind, and as he passed she felt a blow in the
lower part of her back. She followed him a short
distance, but the pain was so great that she felt sick
and hurried home. She felt her clothes were wet, and
when she got home she found that she had been stabbed
on the back of the lef hip. The other assaults wer
committed in the same neighbourhood, and the time in
each case was about 9 or 9:30 p.m. The evidence of
each of the young ladies assaulted was to the same
effect as that of Miss Lewis. Charles Myers,
furniture dealer, of 130, Clapham-road, said that in
consequence of a communication which he had from a
sergeant of police he kept watch, and on the evening
of January 20 he saw defendant outside his shop. He
was obstructing young women who were passing, and
witness saw him touch the back of several of them.
Witness followed him and saw him make a thrust three
times at the lower part of the back of one lady.
Myers then caught him by the wrist, but he cried and
shouted so loudly that a crowd collected, which
attacked Myers, and rescued the defendant from him.
He was caught, however, further on by a constable.
For the defence, Mr. Lowe urged that a mistake had
been made as to the identity of the defendant with the
real culprit, and commented strongly on the fact that
several other ladies who had been assaulted in a
similar manner had failed to identify him. The
defendant’s father and other witnesses to character
were called, from whose evidence it appeared that the
defendant was of weak intellect, and had been so ever
since a fall which he had when a baby. The jury,
after a short consultation, found the defendant
Guilty, but recommended him to mercy on the ground
that he was a person of weak mind. Mr. Somes
postponed sentence until next week Sessions, that he
might have the report of the prison doctors as to the
state of the prisoner’s mind.”
19 MARCH 1891
“(Before MR.. SOMES)
Edwin Colocitt, 26, who was found guilty last
sessions of stabbing young women in the streets of
Lambeth and Clapham, was brought up for sentence. Dr.
Gilbert, of Holloway Prison, said he had examined the
prisoner, and found him to be of very weak intellect,
but did not consider him insane. Mr. Lowe, who
appeared for the prisoner, referred to a case, now
being investigated, in which another person was
charged with the commission of exactly similar
offenses in the same neighborhood; and in view of the
fact that the defence of the prisoner at his trial was
that a mistake had been made as to his identity, he
asked the Court to postpone sentence until the result
of those proceedings was known. Mr. Somes accordingly
granted a further postponement.”
21 MARCH 1891
“Edwin Colocitt, 26, was brought up to receive
sentence, having been convicted at the February
Session of maliciously wounding Maude Kerton and
several other young women by stabbing them with some
sharp instrument. Mr. Torr prosecuted for the
Treasury; and Mr. Lowe defended. After a consultation
between councel, Mr. Somes bound the prisoner over to
come up for judgement when called upon. He accepted
the father’s and uncle’s sureties each in L100, with a
priviso that a competent attendant should be engaged,
who would be responsible for prisoner’s safe conduct.
The father also engaged to exercise such care and
supervision over the prisoner as to protect the public
from the possibility of any repetition of the offense.
During the hearing of the case one of the jurors
was observed leaning forward in a very strange manner,
and, being found to be in a fit, was promptly carried
out of the box and at once attended to by a doctor who
happened to be in court. The question now arose what
should be done as between the prisoner at the bar and
those trying him, Mr. Somes observing that he had no
precedent to guide him and really did not know what to
do in the circumstances. Mr. Hutton observed that he
could assist the Court in the difficulty in which it
found itself. A similar accident had occured not long
since at the Central Criminal Court, when the jury had
been formally discharged, a fresh gentleman called to
join the 11, and the case proceeded on their being
sworn again. This course was therefore adopted, the
evidence being read over to the new juryman.”
all entries from the London Times
|
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 322
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 02, 2004 - 10:41 pm: | |
The Centralia Enterprise article is most interesting. But one of the disturbing aspects of it is that it states that Colocott is to be confined "During Her Majesty's pleasure"--- but the article was published before Colocott was even sentenced! AP is right that it's a screw-up--Edwin didn't land in the asylum; he was released to his family. But it's not a mix-up for Thomas Cutbush, either, because Cutbush hadn't gone to trial until March 24th. The reporter was obviously jumping the gun here. RP |
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 911
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 03, 2004 - 2:03 pm: | |
Thanks for all that RJ
This is getting very confusing.
I don’t know about jumping the gun, but surely I can see uncle Charles pulling his trigger?
It does appear one way or the other that the reporter is mixing the two court cases up, but then looking at the dates - original story filed and then story published - it all doesn’t add up.
This entire Cutbush/Colicitt thing vexes me deeply; and once again I do fear that we are allowed a brief glimpse into a systematic disinformation campaign on behalf of Scotland Yard, concerning these two young men, and then the shadows fall again.
The linkage between Cutbush, Colicitt, the Macnaghten Memo, the suicide of Super. Cutbush, and the sad demise of Inspector Race - who investigated both the Cutbush and Colicitt cases - already raises suspicion, but I’m now beginning to believe it to be of critical importance to the solution of this awkward case.
If Colicitt really did stab upwards of fifty women one does wonder about the totally inappropriate and inadequate sentencing he received: a fatherly word from the judge and a £200 surety from his wealthy father.
Something smells here and it aint Joe’s old cod.
|
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 323
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 03, 2004 - 4:27 pm: | |
AP--Hi. More research is certainly needed, but here's what I think "went down." An educated hunch if you will.
In late 1890 and early 1891 a series of street 'jobbings' or stabbings took place in the Kennington/Clapham-Road area. Quite naturally, the locals--including our furniture selling chum Mr. Myers---were on the look-out.
In February Myers caught Colocott red-handed thrusting at some local ladies. But notice the careful wording of Mr. Myers. It doesn't really appear that Colocott was caught with a weapon; he was only 'touching' the ladies. He seems to have been stabbing at them with his bare hand. The other women who came forward at the trial that had been actually pierced with a weapon (Miss Lewis, for instance) were unsure of their identifications.
Despite this, Colocott was found guilty.
Then something remarkable happens. Another bloke in the same area (Kennington) is nabbed for an identical offense. It's Cutbush, of course.
In a rather remarkable legal twist, Colocott, though found guilty is given a delay before sentencing, while the authorities try to sort out what was going on.
Next, something evidently goes on behind the scenes, but we dont' know what it is.
The result? The next time Colocott shows up in court --for sentencing-- he's given no time. He's released to his family, though he is required to have a keeper. (I take it the £200 surety is insurance for the hiring of the keeper). The next we see young Edwin is in the 1891 census. And lo, he's living at home and there's no sign of a live-in keeper anywhere in sight.
Meanwhile, Cutbush finds himself up the river.
What's going on? My hunch, as I've said before, is that a closer examination by the authorities probably suggested that Cutbush was responsible for the earlier jobbings in Kennington/Clapham Road. Colocott was the wrong man, a more or less harmless imitator. It explains the leniency in Colocott's sentencing, as well as the fact that Cutbush was perfunctorily sent up for life. To me, it's significant that Cutbush was attempting to implicate Colocott when he was arrested; he was obviously aware of the earlier stabbings and the coverage of the on-going trial in the newspapers. Was he aware because he himself was doing it? Cheers, RP
|
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 324
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 03, 2004 - 4:32 pm: | |
P.S. And recall what the A-Z wrote about Inspector Race (the man who napped Cutbush): "The Cutbush case was seen as one of his personal triumphs, especially as he cleared an innocent suspect in the investigation. (The authors do not know who this was.)" (1st edition, p. 367). This would all make sense if Colocott was the innocent suspect... no? RP |
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 913
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 03, 2004 - 4:58 pm: | |
Thanks RP
What you say makes a powerful lot of common-sense, but still I’m going to go away and smoke three pipes until I get an opium fire started. For as they say ‘no smoke without fire’.
I think the bit of the elaborate story that I understand the least is why Inspector Race should have been downloaded from the game when he had fulfilled all his suitable roles?
Uncle Charles left in spectacular fashion, as did Thomas… so perhaps the end-game is to find out what happened to dear old Colicitt the wealthy jewellers son; he might be sat in Hatton Garden as we speak, selling bejewelled awls to the gentry.
Anyways I’m going to study all this and get back to you.
|
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 325
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 03, 2004 - 5:22 pm: | |
AP--Thanks. Yes, let's carry-on after further study. I notice I wrote the Insp. Race "napped" Cutbush, rather than "nabbed" I wonder what that means? Unless it's time for a nap of my own.....Cheers.
|
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 3013
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Thursday, March 04, 2004 - 9:14 am: | |
RJ - excellent finds in the Times of London! I've copied them over to the Casebook proper so that they can be indexed with all other "Colocott" material.
Great work everyone on this!
Stephen P. Ryder, Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper |
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 327
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 04, 2004 - 11:08 am: | |
Stephen--No problem.
AP--I wonder if there's a chance that Lord Grimthorpe's papers survive somewhere? It would give us some insight into the strange mind of Cutbush if his letter to Grimthorpe should somehow resurface. Grimthorpe-- ie., Edmund Beckett---horologist, designer of Big Ben & famous as a restorer of churches. Bloody odd. I'm also intrigued by Inspector Race, and particularly Macnaghten's gentle scolding of Race for holding onto Cutbush's knife"for some unexplained reason" (MM's words) rather than sending it the "Prisoner's Property Store." What direction did Race's inquiries take him? It's strange, because Race is creditted with arresting Cutbush, but Macnaghten's memo seems to imply that Race's inquiries led back to an investigation of 1888... I wonder...was this the initial inquiry or a second one in response to the Sun? If I was to dig deeper into your theory, Race is the man I'd want to know more about... All the best, RP
|
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 914
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 04, 2004 - 1:35 pm: | |
Thanks RP
Damn! I was in touch with a Lord Grimthorpe expert some six months ago, and now I can’t even remember what university he was based at, for I’m sure he could help with this. I must do some trawling on the net this weekend and see if I can’t find him again. He was very helpful.
I too have been at a loss to explain why young Cutbush should have written to someone like Lord Grimthorpe, but I did note during my research that an article and accompanying cartoon had appeared in ‘The London Times’ in 1888 - about the month of June I think. Damn! Yet again, I now think it might have been ’Punch’ magazine, bloody useless memory, I’ll see if I can’t find that again as well - with Lord Grimthorpe championing the cause of homeopathic medicine, and I also noted that young Cutbush had also written to a certain Dr Brooks of Westminister Bridge complaining about the ‘bad’ medicines the doctor had supplied him, and threatening to shoot him, and it did occur to me that the said medicines could have been of a homeopathic nature, and hence Cutbush blamed Lord Grimthorpe for his ills. Just a thought, but as you say if the original letter could be found it would indeed be a veritable treasure trove of information about Cutbush and the state of his mind at that time.
It is also possible that the letter was retained at Scotland Yard and just might be one of the many documents concerning Cutbush and Co. that are due for release in the very near future. However I do have it on quite good authority that these documents have been copied and are already in the hands of two independent researchers with strong connections to the Met. The Force is with them when not with us.
I’ll respond to your thoughts about Inspector Race presently.
Thanks again RP.
|
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 915
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 04, 2004 - 2:09 pm: | |
It is useful to dwell on Inspector Race’s connections to the cases of Colicitt, Cutbush and Jack the Ripper.
The most obvious linkage being the Macnaghten Memo and Super. Charles Henry Cutbush’s career in the Met. Both are intimately linked to all the events we discuss here. You just know that somewhere along the line these three senior officers of the Met. are screwing each other and the resultant mess is what we are left with.
The most senior, Macnaghten, feels obliged to defend his department with his internal memo which is - when we are honest - a monumental disaster of good policing policy and public relations. The next most senior officer, Cutbush, shoots himself in the head, and Inspector Race - down there at the end of the food chain - is more or less drummed out of the force with a reduced pension.
It stinks.
We know that Race arrested both suspects in the ‘jobbing’ cases, but we still don’t really know which suspect he ‘cleared’ of suspicion in these crimes. For both Colicitt and Cutbush appeared in court and were sentenced for their offences, so nobody was ‘cleared’.
The disparity in their sentencing is perhaps an indicator of ‘someone’ working behind the scenes of justice to ensure a non-custodial sentence for Colicitt whilst ensuring that Cutbush was sentenced to life imprisonment without even a chance to enter a plea.
Now why would this be?
I can think of only two reasons.
Firstly it is entirely possible that Race may have been bribed by Colicitt’s wealthy father to ‘smooth the wheels of justice’ where his son was concerned, and that this small tarnish of corruption came to light some time after the events, thereby contributing to Race’s rapid decline in the Met.
Secondly, I would imagine that Colicitt is a Jewish name, and as most wealthy goldsmiths and Jewellers in the East End of London were Jewish, we might well be looking at an effort by the Met. to prevent the spread of racial tension within the East End community.
I do get the impression here that sacrifices were being made.
|
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 924
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 07, 2004 - 1:08 pm: | |
Just a thought, Chris & RJP
I note that the original report in the Times of 4th Feb 1891 does say:
'Some facts of the case have already been reported.'
And:
'...admitting him to bail as before.'
Both of which must mean Colicitt's circumstances and first appearance in court were reported in an earlier copy of the Times.
Any chance of finding that? |
Chris Scott
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chris
Post Number: 1043
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 4:26 pm: | |
Hi all
Found Colocott's entry in the 1871 census today which gives their address at that time as 85 Falmouth Road, St Mary Newington, Lambeth, London.
The household is:
Head:
John T Colocott aged 31 born Lambeth
Jeweller's Manager
Wife:
Hannah J Colocott aged 29 born Islington
Son:
John E Colocott aged 7 born Kingsland, Middlesex
There is no mention in the 1871 census of "weak intellect"
Chris
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
