|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
SPEARS
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, January 29, 2004 - 12:12 pm: |       |
Hello
Does anyone know of any other books apart from the excellent 'JACK THE MYTH', where Thomas Cutbush is named as a likely suspect.
I would really like to read more about this young man and his connections to the Ripper case.
Kind Regards
SPEARS |
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 277
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 29, 2004 - 4:06 pm: | |
Unfortunately, outside of AP's book, Cutbush has been all but snubbed. More than a little ironic, considering that Macnaghten's memo was really about him. Druitt, Kosminski, and, to a lesser extent, Ostrog, have received the lion's share of research.
Macnaghten's curious comment that Cutbush's mother and aunt were 'of a very excitable disposition', makes one wonder exactly what they were saying about young Tommy. Strange, but they seem to be rather openly implying about him what is only rumored to have been implied about Druitt. Really, more inquiries ought to be made. Why not? "Suspect based research" usually gets you thwacked with a stick around here, but, personally, I think its the legitimate way to go. Raking over the inquest reports for the thousandth time won't help. I have my own suspect of choice, but if I were in the UK and had the time and the quid, I'd want to look at Cutbush, Nikaner Benelius, Michael Kidney, and a couple of other chaps, if only for my own amusement. |
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 789
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 29, 2004 - 5:32 pm: | |
Couldn't agree more RJ.
It is this very type of tedious bare bone research that will ultimately turn up Jack's collar, and not the endless dissection of what is already known.
Ah but I were a young blood I would be sat in Collindales this instant and scanning endless documentia.
I suppose what amuses me more than anything else is the often ignored fact that young Tommy's well connected uncle - who just happened to be the most senior serving police officer living in the area of the Whitechapel Murders and was directly in charge of that investigation through its early stages, and just incidentally the policeman personally responsible for the lodging houses of the area where all the unfortunates lodged - shot himself in the head in front of his wife and daughters just before the family meal was served in the Cutbush household.
Now just why would uncle Charles have done such a thing?
Because he was insane, my critics tell me.
Well, that's what I said in the first place.
And why did Tommy get locked up for the rest of his life?
Because he was insane, my critics tell me.
Well, that's what I said in the first place.
It is the links that drive the chain and not 'tother way around.
Pass me the brandy, Watson, better still load that syringe with morphine for me, I have an urgent need for a soporific state.
|
Stan Russo
Sergeant
Username: Stan
Post Number: 26
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 30, 2004 - 12:54 am: | |
AP,
How do you account for the numerous differences in The Sun's article and the actual criminal behavior of Thomas Cutbush then?
Here is a newspaper who at about the time of the murder mentions a suspect with major connections to the police force and they can not even get simple facts correct, or have to doctor facts in order to promote guilt. Why if Cutbush was the murderer was the truth hidden? His uncle was dead by 1896. Could it be that his death was the result of his accident rather than what you seem to feel is the obvious answer, that his nephew was 'Jack the Ripper'?
STAN |
David N Bullock
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, January 29, 2004 - 7:10 pm: | |
Hello AP & RJ & SPEARS
In my mind Cutbush will always remain a high ranking suspect. He fits the bill (so to speak). Upon reading the 'MYTH' I got a real sense of 'being there' in Whitechapel 1888. Seeing prostitutes looking upon a young man, perhaps mocking him, perhaps ignoring him, never suspecting him to be the Whitechapel Fiend.
It was like looking into the mind if the real 'Ripper' perhaps for the first time.
And isn't it very apt that probably one of the most likely of suspects has hardly been written about. If Macnaghten wanted attention diverted from Thomas Cutbush then he certainly succeeded. At least until the 'MYTH' came along.
The Truth is out there...so they say
Jack is out there too...
And so it Thomas Hayne Cutbush
Regards
David |
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 791
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 30, 2004 - 1:12 pm: | |
Stan
First off, a historical perspective:
1891 - Thomas Cutbush receives life sentence for stabbing women.
1894 - The ‘Sun’ newspaper runs a series of articles naming Thomas Cutbush as Jack the Ripper, and alleges that he has a close relative who is a senior police officer with strong connections to the case.
1894 - Macnaghten writes his memo, a strong rebuttal of the ‘Sun’ articles.
1895 - Superintendent Charles Henry Cutbush commits suicide. (most think he died in 1896 but his death certificate does give the year 1895)
I would speculate that the JtR story really saw the birth of dodgy journalistic enterprise; and I don’t suppose the ‘Sun’ of 1894 and the ‘Sun’ of today are/were any different in their cavalier attitude to the truth. We must accept that a certain ‘poetic licence’ has always gone hand-in-hand with journalistic reportage of sensational events in society.
However we cannot easily dismiss the entirety because it has some rotten elements, and we would be foolish to do so when that is the only record of events that we now possess. My sincere belief is that this situation will change very soon, and that information that has been released to a select few will shortly appear in the public domain, but until then we have the ‘Sun’ reports of 1894, and that’s it.
I think, to be honest with you, that you are using the Macnaghten memo as a template for the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth; and then holding the ‘Sun’ to account because their version of events and circumstances do not match Macnaghten’s version.
I admire your faith in the forces of law and order but I’m afraid I don’t share it.
To put it as politely as I can muster, the Macnaghten memo stinks worse than a batch of cod left out in the sun for a week.
I would strongly suggest to you that you click on the ‘Myth’ - available here - and read the chapters concerning the Macnaghten memo and then come back here and start again.
All along I have said merely that I believe Superintendent Cutbush to have had some form of implicit involvement in the crimes of JtR, this is not to say he had his hand on the blade, but I do feel his hand was on the trigger, and that it is not beyond the realms of common sense and logic to imagine that the gun was his nephew, Thomas.
It may suit you to regard the suicide of Superintendent Cutbush as the result of an ‘accident’, but it is just as well to remember that the fellow sat down at his kitchen table in front of his daughters, pulled his service revolver out of its holster, held the pistol to his head and then blew his brains out with a single shot.
I guess, just like Thomas Cutbush, you would say:
‘Poor gentleman has fallen down the stairs.’
|
Stan Russo
Sergeant
Username: Stan
Post Number: 28
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 30, 2004 - 6:56 pm: | |
AP,
I am always interested in new information, and wonder why it was not released earlier. I also agree with you that the MacNaghten memo is riddled with errors regarding his 3 suspects, yet am unaware that these errors extend to Cutbush. As soon as new information becomes available I will be happy to read it and analyze it.
Sucides however, do not make a smoking gun.
STAN |
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 793
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 31, 2004 - 3:32 am: | |
Stan
Thank you for your polite reply to my somewhat fractious comments.
I can see we are going to have to politely disagree when it comes to the suicide of Superintendent Cutbush, although I do agree that suicide is not by necessity a ‘smoking gun’.
However when that suicide concerns a senior civil servant - such as an officer of the Crown privy to Home Office and other sensitive material - then I’m afraid it does usually mean someone, somewhere is holding a smoking gun. In fact I would go much further than that and put it to you that the recent death of weapons expert, David Kelly, and the subsequent Hutton Report offers an astonishing parallel to the case of Superintendent Cutbush’s suicide, the Macnaghten memo and the confinement of his nephew, Thomas.
There is linkage and coincidence here that demands further investigation, and like you I do hope that this material will surface in the near future.
I feel there to be much in Macnaghten’s memo directly concerning Thomas Cutbush that is perhaps wishful thinking on the part of a senior official charged with defusing a fairly explosive situation, and here I mean explosive in that he was obviously being pressed by his own seniors to explain an uncomfortable situation.
I do read Macnaghten’s memo as pure disinformation, specifically designed to calm and confuse his peers and lords.
|
Stan Russo
Sergeant
Username: Stan
Post Number: 31
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 31, 2004 - 5:23 pm: | |
AP,
Fractious comments to say the least, but a shouting match won't get us anywhere. We shall agree to disagree, but hopefully continue to discuss.
Let's say Thomas Cutbush was 'JTR' for a moment. How do you explain the absence of murders in 1890? If he committed the murders because he was insane then the layoff between Alice McKenzie and Frances Coles, if they were 'JTR' victims is too long. Insanity does not just subside for nineteen months.
Now lets imagine it did subside for nineteen months. Why were the attempted murders between March 5th and March 9th, 1891, after his escape from Lambeth, not performed and completed in similar fashion to the murders in 1888?
If the police knew that Thomas was 'JTR', as it would have to have been known for his uncle to kill himself, why is there no special instructions we know about for the care and handling of Cutbush at Broadmoor? Someone would have accidentally leaked that type of information.
With regards to MacNaghten, if the memo was designed for disinformational purposes, why provide erroneous facts about the other likelier suspects? Why also would the task fall to MacNaghten who never actively worked on the 'JTR' case.
Just a couple of curiosities.
STAN |
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 797
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, February 01, 2004 - 5:21 am: | |
Stan
I have explored all these possibilites and connotations at length in the 'Myth', and it seems obvious to me that in regard to Thomas then he must have been somehow physically confined to either his home or an institution during the 'gap' periods. As to his later murderous behaviour not really equating to his former - if he was JtR which I am not claiming he was - I have shown - quite dramatically I felt - that many serial killers do vary their behaviour enormously, I suppose Colin Pitchfork being the best example as he returned to simple 'flashing' for two long years after murdering and mutilating two young girls, and it is important to note that between the two murders he also continued his lesser offensive behaviour for a period of almost one year.
I also do not claim that the police knew Thomas was JtR... I would rather say they feared he could have been, and the subsequent suicide of Superintendent Cutbush did not help matters at all.
It is as well to remember that Macnaghten's memo was a document produced for internal consumption by Scotland Yard and the Home Office, in other words it should have never really seen the light of day, and as such I do view it as confirmation that all was not well in the Cutbush household.
The document is quite unique in the entire history of policing on this planet, never before, and certainly never since, has a senior policeman championed the cause of an obvious criminal maniac currently serving a life sentence for his crimes. There can only be one explanation for this extraordinary document: Superintendent Charles Henry Cutbush.
Now I must get back to my story. |
Caroline Anne Morris
Chief Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 690
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 6:11 am: | |
Hi AP,
People who commit suicide generally do it because they can see no other way out of an intolerable personal situation in which they find themselves. Druitt, for example, apparently believed he was on the slippery slope to the kind of mental health problems suffered by his mother. His behaviour is presumed to have led a family member to believe he was, or may have been the ripper. But these worries were not kept in the immediate family, and the realisation that a terrible family secret was out, or could eventually be exposed, did not as far as I know cause any other Druitts to follow Monty’s example and do away with themselves.
Why, in your opinion, would Uncle Cutbush have believed himself to be in an intolerable personal situation, because of what was known about his nephew?
Love,
Caz
|
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 801
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 02, 2004 - 1:31 pm: | |
Caz
I don’t think I ever did think or say that?
My interpretation of Superintendent Cutbush’s suicide is largely based on scant reports of his parlous mental health during the years he served the Metropolitan Police Force.
Even his obituary was unable to completely gloss over his deepening insanity towards the end of his otherwise distinguished career, detailing the terrible headaches and ear-ringing he genuinely suffered in the years preceding his suicide, but also mentioning that uncle Charles believed the Catholics had been poisoning the drinking waters of London and this was responsible for his personal suffering and anguish. The poor chap was obviously completely demented by the time he shot himself in front of his family. Which is a shame, as I have seen reports from his earlier years where other officers have said that there is no-one else they would prefer to be with in a difficult or dangerous situation; and his personal involvement with the provision of a decent police pension, and homes for the convalescence of serving and retired policeman (ring a bell?) are a matter of well-recorded fact. He was very much a policeman’s policeman before the onset of his dementia.
To be honest with you I don’t think uncle Charles would have given a tuppeny damn whether his nephew was Jack the Ripper or not. He had bigger fish to fry, for example the entire Catholic population of the United Kingdom.
It is awfully seductive to imagine that the respect and deference shown to Superintendent Cutbush by his fellow officers in the force might have rubbed off a bit on young Thomas as he wandered the streets of Whitechapel late at night with the first Visa card on the planet.
|
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 280
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 03, 2004 - 8:29 am: | |
AP--I e-mailed you privately with a question, but I have a sneaking suspicion it evaporated into the ether. Do you have a date for Uncle Charles' suicide? Neither a death notice nor an inquest report seems to have been published in the Times, at least not 1895-96.
It's interesting to note the downward mobility of Inspector Race, the arresting officer. After his investigation into Thomas Cutbush, he seems to have felt he was snubbed for promotion and he ended up being sent to pasture with a reduced pension, after a bit of a break-down of his own. It's clear that Scotland Yard did investigate the Sun's claims, and three years after 1891 events, Race was still holding on to Cutbush's knife (a fact which Macnaghen found to be either annoying or strange). If there had been suspicions about Cutbush at the Yard, perhaps it was Race who had them?
(Message edited by rjpalmer on February 03, 2004) |
Caroline Anne Morris
Chief Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 693
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 03, 2004 - 12:51 pm: | |
Beg pardon, AP. I misread an earlier post, in which I thought you were promoting uncle’s suicide as being at least partly motivated by nephew’s Visa card statements plopping through the family letterbox, showing what you imagine his – ahem - ‘spending’ habits were in the autumn of ’88.
I see now that poor uncle was as much in the dark about Jack the Ripper's ‘spending’ habits as we both are.
Love,
Caz
|
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 804
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 03, 2004 - 1:21 pm: | |
RJ
sorry, but yes I did have a copy of his death certificate and the obituary but the house is being ripped apart by builders at the moment so it might take me a while to track the documents down. I believe you will get the exact date of death on Ancestrydotcom. The marriage certificate is also there. The obituary I tracked down to a website in Liverpool, the chap specialises in the records of 'bad' coppers and for a fee copies such things from newspapers of the time. I don't believe the suicide was ever recorded in the popular press - but I might be wrong - and appeared in a specialized publication for policemen... I think.
Sorry, one of the symptons of my increasing age is also a form of dementia where I forget bloody well everything.
Yes, the sudden demise of Race is an interesting part of the whole parcel, and it would seem to confirm my belief that it was not wise of anyone of lesser rank to arrest and prosecute the relation of a more senior officer in their own force. There are many modern examples of similar cases of such chicanery amongst policemen when it comes to their close relatives, and I have highlighted perhaps the worst example ever to have come to light in the 'Myth'.
If I find the bloody papers I will mail them to you. No, I didn't receive your private note. |
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 805
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 03, 2004 - 1:30 pm: | |
Caz
as ever, you are a card!
Stop trying to make me paint in black and white when you know I like colour.
Fictionally, I am totally convinced that Uncle Charles was well aware of his nephew's spending habits, as it was his own habit to sit at the kitchen table and tally up the bills that kept popping through the letterbox. One day the big bill arrived and dear old uncle Charles slid his pistol from holster.
However factually I sit on a fence. Undecided and not yet 100% convinced that uncle Charles' madness and Thomas' madness were connected in the murder of prostitutes in Whitechapel.
But Caz, it is really the obvious conclusion.
One must not be shy to admit to such an obvious possibility, whilst awaiting the factual confirmation.
Which will come in the due course of time.
Hopefully this year. |
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 807
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 03, 2004 - 5:56 pm: | |
RJ
I've dug the obituary out of the debris.
It appeared in the 'Police Guardian' - date unknown - but was a direct copy of an article that had appeared in the 'Morning Leader' March 7th 1895.
I haven't read this for some time, and it does reward, for instance the jury at the inquest 'returned a verdict of suicide whilst insane'; and even the time of his suicide - two o'clock on a thursday afternoon - is recorded by his daughter, Ellen, who was sat at the kitchen table with her father when he shot himself.
When I have a bit of time I'll reproduce the entire document.
No death certificate yet, but it is also worth getting hold of a copy of the 'Police Guardian', Friday, October 21st 1887 - just before the murders took place - and reading about uncle Charles before the insanity got hold of him.
Again I will post this when I have more time.
The death certificate might be more easily obtainable through the 'roots' website, now I think about it. |
Jim DiPalma
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jimd
Post Number: 69
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 10:40 am: | |
AP,
>But Caz, it is really the obvious conclusion.
One must not be shy to admit to such an obvious possibility, whilst awaiting the factual confirmation.
I think that's excellent advice.
Thanks
Jim |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 2024
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 6:06 pm: | |
Yes, it would be very interesting to read the obituary. As AP says, one certified violent lunatic and one insane high-ranking policeman, both related, is a circumstance well worth investigating.
Robert |
Alan Sharp
Inspector
Username: Ash
Post Number: 419
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 05, 2004 - 3:30 am: | |
I cannot see how Cutbush could not be taken seriously as a candidate. A certified lunatic, at large in the vicinity, with a taste for sticking knives into women, this to me is someone deserving of further investigation.
AP, I am intending to allot Mr Cutbush a chapter to himself in the  , and obviously the starting point for this chapter has to be the Sun article. Do you know of anywhere on the net that I can obtain the text of this article, to save me yet another expensive trip to Colindale?
Please? Pretty Please? Pretty Please with Cheese and Peas? |
Caroline Anne Morris
Chief Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 700
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 05, 2004 - 5:30 am: | |
Hi Jim,
I don’t think I have ever been shy about admitting possibilities, obvious or otherwise. I always find myself trying to give exactly that advice to others. But will they listen? Will they ‘eck as like. 
Just don’t ask me – or advise me - to admit to any conclusion being obvious until the factual confirmation actually arrives. I can afford to wait thanks.
In name alone, Cutbush just demands that I admit he was possibly Jack. Mind you, I admit that any man alive in 1888 who ever went to Whitechapel and has no alibi was possibly Jack. But I wouldn’t advise anyone to promote their own theory here as the ‘obvious’ conclusion. We can all use our own eyes and brains and will judge for ourselves what's obvious and what's not.
Love,
Caz
|
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 810
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 05, 2004 - 1:22 pm: | |
Thanks Alan
I'm sorry but I don't know of any sources for the Sun apart from Collindale, which is of course where I originally read the articles many many years ago.
There are two courses of action which I have taken recently which are gentler on the purse.
Many such institutions now offer a research service via e-mail - I don't know about C's but I would think they do - where they put you in touch with an independent researcher who digs out all the articles you want, copies and forwards them. It is generally quite a fair price, I think I paid a chap fifteen pounds for ferreting out the two articles about uncle Charles.
The other alternative is to get to C's yourself, photocopy everything in sight and I'll go half with you on expenses as I would like the originals myself. Good cafe across the road, excellent bacon butties and tea.
I do honestly think it is about time the Casebook site found itself an independent researcher based in London who could do all this sort of work for us, for a fee obviously, but it would be nice to have someone on 'tap' so to speak.
Thanks again. |
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 811
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 05, 2004 - 1:44 pm: | |
Hey Caz, steady on old girl.
I trust you are not referring to me as the whore who is trying to sell their dubious wares on this site?
If so, I should just like to point out you that I do not have a suspect for Jack. Instead I have merely presented evidence, backed up by documentia - if Peter Andre can have 'insania' then I can have 'documentia' - so that the good readers are able to form a conclusion of their own. I quote my good self in the last line of my efforts concerning Jack:
'And was Thomas Cutbush Jack the Ripper?
Quite honestly it doesn't matter, for he is still out there walking the streets of Whitechapel...'
However I do agree with Jim, I mean about you and many others playing around with what are probably the most unlikely suspects that could possibly be imagined - almost akin to Mickey Mouse or Peter Pan - and then almost totally ignoring a couple of demented maniacs with the best possible connections to the investigating force and the victims, and to boot and to wit enjoyed self-harm as well as harming others, particularly women and anyone who was a Catholic by birth.
They were both patently dangerously demented men and I believe it would be plain foolish to ignore their contribution to this subject.
But like you I'm awaiting factual confirmation.
|
Alan Sharp
Inspector
Username: Ash
Post Number: 425
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 06, 2004 - 7:10 am: | |
AP
No problem, thanks for the reply. I'm actually in London tomorrow but not going to have time to get to Colindale. I'll probably try to arrange a long-weekend trip over next month sometime, and will pick up a photocopy of the article and send you a copy afterwards. No worries about the expenses, Ryanair will get a few more of my hard-earned's. And as a veggie for the last 8 years I will give the bacon butties a miss, but if they do a mean fried egg I could be tempted! |
Caroline Anne Morris
Chief Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 708
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 06, 2004 - 1:04 pm: | |
AP: Undecided and not yet 100% convinced that uncle Charles' madness and Thomas' madness were connected in the murder of prostitutes in Whitechapel.
But Caz, it is really the obvious conclusion.
Caz: But I wouldn’t advise anyone to promote their own theory here as the ‘obvious’ conclusion.
AP: Hey Caz, steady on old girl. [not so much of the ‘girl’ ]
I trust you are not referring to me as the whore who is trying to sell their dubious wares on this site?
If so, I should just like to point out you that I do not have a suspect for Jack.
Great then, me neither. Which unlikely suspect do you think I am playing around with at present, AP? Clue: check my profile.
Theories are not always about suspects for Jack, are they? One of your theories appears to be that the Cutbush family madness is somehow related to the murder of Whitechapel prostitutes.
And one of mine is that the modern forgery theory surrounding both Maybrick diary and watch is one that no one will be able to prove correct.
You are awaiting factual confirmation that your theory is correct.
I am awaiting facts that will prove my theory incorrect.
May your waiting time be less than mine, in the nicest possible sense. 
Cheers!
Love,
Caz
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
