|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2231
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 24, 2005 - 5:57 am: | 
|
As Abberline interviewed George Hutchinson and appeared to have believed him I think its worth looking at the evidence there is about the work he did and the convictions he made up until the Autumn of 1888.
Is there any evidence for example before 1888 that he was lacking in accuracy when making arrests?[Please not the Cleveland Case as there were fairly obvious reasons why he said and did what he did there to the extent that he may not have had much choice].
On his retirement he seems to have been very highly regarded by his fellow police officers.
Unlike Macnaghten and Anderson he also appears to have worked his way up from humble beginnings and unlike them he apparently spent 12 or 14 years gaining direct "street experience" and supposedly therefore some "street cred" with the criminal types of the East End as well as ordinary citizens of the East End prior to being recalled from
other duties to lead the rpper case on the ground.
Also I doubt that no matter how much more sophisticated current practices are in tracking down criminals today, I think there can be no doubt that there is nothing today that replaces or compares with that "bespoke" knowledge of the criminal mind that would have come with year upon year of living and working and wheeling and dealing with these types in an area such as the East End.
To my mind the notion that Abberline would have in any way been" gullible" as some people suggest is nothing short of ludicrous.He wouldnt have survived for twelve minutes let alone twelve years in the Victorian East End if he was even slightly naive or gullible!
Today and in 1888 the police deal day in day out with the most dangerous,devious, slippery, double dealers ,con men,liars etc in the world-sometimes becoming too cynical or too jaundiced as a result and very, very ,few then or now who survive that experience could ever be called naive or gullible
in [IMHO].
I think therefore that some material about him that would give us an idea of his work and mindset and allow us to accurately analyse his attributes and short comings could be invaluable in solving this case.
After all Hutchinson could have been the only man to have seen the ripper and "in action" that night,and clearly that is what Abberline thought was possible too.
We need to know more about Abberline and his record of judgment of the criminal and the con man.Can anyone help?
Natalie
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3802
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 24, 2005 - 7:06 am: |
|
Hi Natalie,
I must admit I am not really sure about the intention here.
The fact that Abberline might have been extremely hard working and had good knowledge of the streets and people in Whitechapel has absolutely nothing to do with the regular police methods of the day and how interviews or other procedures were conducted at the time. It is two completely different things.
What Abberline's 19th century contemporaries thought about him is not really telling us much, because they only had themselves or other officers to compare him with.
We lack the personal notes of the police officials and their personal thoughts on the suspects and witness (those are practically the only ones that are missing), but needless to say several mistakes were made during the investigation and and some people weren't investigated closely enough. In my experience that is what one could expect during these circumstances and I don't think the London police forces did worse than any other force in Europe, and this was in addition an extremely difficult case. Hundreds of people and suspects were brought in for questioning -- the work load must have been horrendous -- and they had to check out everybody. Not to mention the fact, that the press all the time ridiculed the police and subjected them to enormous pressure in a police investigation regarding crimes where the police had little experience, a circumstances that often may lead to hasty and wrong decisions being made just because people demand results.
Even if we lack a lot of material regarding these points, we still have the offical documents with reports to the Home Office from the officers in question, which is supposed to contain the most vital information and problems that the officers wanted to address, and those are pretty much complete with no material missing. So they do give us a fair pointer of what was going on.
I have seen hundreds of examples of this in European police documents from the 19th and early 20th century, where loads of important questions are never asked. In many cases the interview techniques were rather crude, and several documents indicate that it was even common and accepted to threaten and bully the witness or the suspect, for example, in a completely different fashion that what is allowed today. To pick one example.
It is not a criticism against Abberline as such -- it could have been anyone else; now he just happened to be one of the officers handling the case. But it shows that he was no mastermind and that he with our standards naturally couldn't measure up.
What is ludicrous, is people's general belief that just because he rised high in rank quickly and was considered a good police man by his contemporaries, he couldn't do anything wrong and his words and opinions have to be treated like law. Well, he did do things wrong (and this is to be expected), and among other things I don't think psychology was his greatest asset. But that doesn't mean he couldn't have rised high in rank rapidly for other reasons.
If you read Hutchinson's testimony and consider the anomalies in it, it is a mystery how the police and Abberline could buy a story that does not add up with common sense and logic. But fact remains that they did! And neither one of the many anomalies in his story are even addressed in Abberline's report. What that tells us is that they seems to have chosen to disregard those anomalies, just because Hutchinson provided them with a suspect during a time that was very difficult for the police and where they were under constant pressure, and focusing the police's attention away from himself was possibly his sole intention with introducing that Jewish looking suspect in the first place. There is simply no other explanations to why they bought his story, and it is at least suggestive that Abberline didn't posses a better judgement than any other officer at the time.
Compared to how the City of London police handled the Eddowes case, with methods and a thoroughness that comes quite close to our modern procedures and expectations (and close to the methods and thoroughness of the French police, who were the ones that stood for the main ground breaking tools in police investigation during the 19th century), I would say the Met and Abberline does not stand out as that impressive.
Abberline was probably more hard working than any of the others, but that doesn't say anything about his capacity as an interrogator or his intellectual gifts. Extremely hard working, having good relations with his superiors and possessing good local knowledge -- yes.
Smarter than his contemporaries and harder than the others to fool in the interrogation room -- I would think not.
I don't think the man Hutchinson saw was the Ripper (if he did exist at all), since he doesn't fit the descriptions delivered by either Elizabeth Long or Lawende, or on any ither person seen in connection with the murders.
If that is what Abberline thought, then I can only say that my objections are justified.
Well, just my thoughts, but the Hutchinson statement is all there in black and white and I must confess I am not prepared to trust Abberline to the same degree as others.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on July 24, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2238
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 24, 2005 - 2:14 pm: |
|
To me Glenn, Abberline was the one officer who several times seems to have been prepared to cut throughthe bullsh*t.He dismissed Anderson"s and Macnaghten"s suspects promptly adding" No,believe me if anyone had known who the ripper was I would.
These stories are not true-I"ve heard them all and theres no truth in any of them."
So I am unconviced by this theorising based on reports only,that he was somehow "duped"or "conned" by Hutchinson. |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3808
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 24, 2005 - 2:45 pm: |
|
Natalie,
He may have dismissed the Anderson and Macnaghten suspects, but then on the other hand he himself suggested Klosowski, and I'd say that is not much better. On the contrary, that is probably worse. Perhaps he did cut through the b*llshit of others but he also delivered such himself, as far as I am concerned.
And yes, the fact that he bought Hutchinson's story does seem to indicate that he in fact was conned. Unfortunately.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2239
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 24, 2005 - 5:54 pm: |
|
Well actually Glenn that is your opinion on the matter.I dont agree with you-not yet anyway, but I may if I learn a bit more about Abberline"s work history that points in that direction-
any convictions Hutchinson may have had etc
Natalie |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2322
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 24, 2005 - 6:17 pm: |
|
Abberline was neither good cop or bad cop.
He knew his onions all right, but his knowledge and expertise seemed to have been wasted for most of his police career in minor busts involving illegal drinking and detaining street urchins in Whitechapel for selling pornographic postcards.
You’ll find that he was also involved - a lot - in the rounding up of stray dogs, something which the Met., took very seriously at the time on account of the local populace using them as ‘weapons’.
When his big moments came… he failed.
In the bombings, and in the Cleveland scandal, he failed.
When it came to the Whitechapel Murders, I do feel he was not up to the job in front of him.
Simply because he did not have the experience, and his knowledge and expertise could not help him there.
He was just out of his depth, and clutching at straws. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2242
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 24, 2005 - 7:07 pm: |
|
Very interesting AP.Particularly intrigued by the street urchins selling pornographic postcards.I think Whitechapel pornography was probably a huge attraction for a number of Victorian males-especially those who enjoyed "slumming" from the middle and upper classes.
But apart from that the analysis you give no doubt based on your vast research into the case over the years does have an authentic ring somehow and I can more easily accept Glenn"s and Franks reckonings now.
Thanks for that
Natalie |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3809
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 24, 2005 - 8:02 pm: |
|
I agree with Natalie. Interesting post, AP.
I have tried to empathize as well that he was no better no worse than anyone else but merely a victim of the inexperience of his own historical time period. The Ripper crimes were extremely complex to investigate for any police force of the day and none of them could really be cut out for that job. And as I see it, there are certainly indications on that Abberline was up for more than he asked for, as any other.
Usually we have to turn to the time of the First World War before murder investigations of more modern quality were conducted on all points.
AP, where did you dig up that info regarding Abberline's early history? Much of that I must admit is news to me. But certainly interesting.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on July 24, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Donald Souden
Chief Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 640
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 24, 2005 - 8:11 pm: |
|
It would seem that Abberline's greatest strength as a detective (and a stated reason why he was brought back to H Division) was his intimate knowledge of the area and its people and that is a big plus in any sort of policing. One example of his worth in that regard was his disabusing superiors of the notion that a reported cry of "Lipski!" was directed at an accomplice rather than it being a derogatory term for Jews at the time.
It may have been that Abberline was also a good judge of character and that is always an important trait for a polliceman to possess. I have no way of knowing if that was true in Abberline's case, but if he were even moderately successful I would suspect it was so.
Unfortunately, we don't have access to a lot of the reports so there is no way of telling, but it has seemed to me for a while now that if Abberline, with his knowledge of the area, didn't immediately disbelieve Hutchinson's description of a fellow sporting a gold chain -- counter-intuitive as it may strike us now -- that perhaps gents did indeed walk around Whitechapel thusly adorned. Or, I suppose, there may have been some who tried to act the toff by wearing used clothing along with "flash-trash" accessories: "gilded" chains of tin so obviously false that no mugger would consider it worth the effort to snatch.
In any case, the only master detective of that era lived in Baker Street and was otherwise engaged in 1888, but Abberline may well have been one of the better police detectives of his time and that is really the only was to measure the man. For that matter, one can't say that into the 21st Century things are that much better. Then, as now, a policeman's best detecting tool was an informant and modern serial killers continue to commit a sickening number of murders before being brought to ground -- if at all. Modern forensic tools, especially DNA evidence, usually allow a killer to be nailed with authority -- but that's of little use until he is first fitted into a frame.
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3810
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 24, 2005 - 8:22 pm: |
|
Actually, Don,
From where I sit, psychology and being a good judge of character seems to have been exactly those the fields where he didn't seem to win the jackpot.
I do think he was a work horse, though (and he had to be in order to put up with such a massive demanding investigation), and that he had a very good local knowledge. It is his deduction skills and his judge of character that I find less convincing.
Although I find it difficult to find any signs of extravagant results in general on his part in the Ripper investigation, I actually think it was the very pressing and desperate situation that made him go for Hutchinson's suspect and disregard the flaws in the story, more than anything. He just couldn't miss the opportunity when a 'witness' presented such a detailed description of a suspect connected to the worst murder so far in a series. I think he lost his judgement there -- they probably needed to nail someone for it fast -- and it is possible that he wouldn't have bought a story like Hutchinson's during other, less extreme circumstances.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on July 24, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
John Savage
Inspector
Username: Johnsavage
Post Number: 444
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 24, 2005 - 8:31 pm: |
|
Hi Glen,
You refer to Abberline having risen in rank quickly, but I am not sure this was the case, for the record.
1863. Abberline joins Met. Police
1865. promoted Sergeant
1873. Promoted Inspector
1878. promoted Local Inspector
1888. promoted Inspector First Class
1890. promoted Chief Inspector.
Rgds
John |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3811
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 24, 2005 - 9:36 pm: |
|
Hi, John.
Thanks for that information.
Of course it depends on whose career you compare it with, and I am not that familiar with how long it generally took for someone rising in rank in Britain. I admit I merely relied there on what other people have stated here, since that appears to be the general opinion.
However, your time line does indicate a not unusually rapid pace (which of course weakens another common argument in favour of him), although I think I would prefer to compare it to some of his contemporaries first in order to be able to pass judgement on that. As it is now, I can't conclude whether that is fast or not.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Scott Nelson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Snelson
Post Number: 134
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 3:12 pm: |
|
The East London Observer December 17, 1887 reported on a guest of honour celebration at the Unicorn Tavern, Shoreditch when Abberline was promoted to Scotland Yard from H Division:
"...on the occasion of a dinner and a presentation to Detective - Inspector Abberline, late of the H Division of police but now attached to the central office, Great Scotland Yard." The chairman, Mr. George Hay Young said, "The inhabitants felt they could not let such an officer leave them for another district after being many years in their service without some little souvenir of their esteem and regard, and in recognition and appreciation of his services. Turning to Mr. Abberline, Mr. Young presented him with a beautiful gold keyless hunting watch and a purse full of gold. On the watch was engraved "Presented together with a purse of gold to Inspector F.G. Abberline by the inhabitants of Spitalfields, Whitechapel etc, on his leaving the district after fourteen years of service as a mark of their esteem and regard"....Abberline in responding said he could hardly find the language to express his thanks to the Chairman for his too flattering expressions, and to the company present for the honour they did him that evening and for the beautiful and substantial testimonial of their goodwill presented to him by the Chairman on their behalf. He assured them that he was deeply indebted to them for the many kindnesses he had received during the 14 years he was with them"... Superintendent Arnold commented "he was very sorry to lose Mr. Abberline from the division, for a better officer there could not be, and afraid it would be long before he could find another to equal him."
- submitted by Andy Aliffe to Ripperana No. 11, Jan. 1995, p. 21-22.
|
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 922
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 3:47 pm: |
|
What's always bothered me regarding Abberline was his seemingly gullible embrace of Klosowski as the prime suspect. It is possible that he was merely an excitable, enthusiastic chap who was easily tempted by the latest theory or development. But that doesn't sound like an accomplished inspector.
Recently I have been wondering if Abberline had social (or other) ties to the Druitt family. Both were from Dorset and ended up there. The Druitt's were a prominent family and so it would not have been unlikely for Abberline, himself having risen to a certain prominence, to socialize with them. I have wondered if perhaps Abberline gave his opinion on Klosowski as a "red herring" to throw the press off the track of Montague Druitt in order to protect the his friends, Druitt family. This is pure speculation but it would explain a lot.
Anyone with access to the Bournemouth area might want to do some snooping for Abberline-Druitt family connections.
Andy S. |
Luke Whitley
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, July 24, 2005 - 7:04 pm: |
|
Natalie.
Stick to your views and don't be so easily swayed.
I agree that Abberline was not the great Detective of myth and legend. I don't believe he interrogated Hutchinson in the thorough manner that he should have. As Glenn said, he appears to have neglected important questions, and didn't make the most of his witness.
However, I beg to differ about Hutchinson. I think he was a decent witness. We didn't live in that simmering volcano that was Whitechapel then.
Hutchinson DID. So think about that.
Why should Hutch lie, or make up this story?? He knew the score then. Firstly, he risked being harassed and treated as a serious suspect in Kelly's murder. He would also have known, that anyone who received serious police attention was likely to be hounded and attacked in the streets by howling mobs, as many others had been.
Hutch would have been only too well aware of these incidents, so what man in his right mind would subject himself to these risks.
Doesn't anyone on these boards consider human nature, or the prevailing conditions, before labelling people as liars??
There is far too much of this treating of witnesses as liars, and of branding men like Barnett as killers, without the remotest trace of REAL evidence to support any of it.
Abberline may not have been a genius, but if Hutchinson was as poor as people here make out, he would have had to have been an absolute idiot not to have seen through him. I don't think he was THAT poor a cop.
Warmest regards.
LUKE WHITLEY |
Scott Nelson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Snelson
Post Number: 135
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 4:06 pm: |
|
Another piece submitted by Andy Aliffe from Cassell's Saturday Journal, May 8, 1892:
"There had lately retired from New Scotland Yard on a liberal pension - and much to the regret of his Chief, Dr. Anderson and his colleagues - a Chief Inspector of the Criminal Investigations Department, Mr. F.G. Abberline. No man in the Police Service now alive - except, perhaps Mr. Shore - has a greater claim to speak of the changes which have come about in the force of all departments. During the past thirty years Mr. Abberline has in his career had much experience in uniform and out of it, and his name has been prominently before the public with cases of more than ordinary interest. His all - round success is certainly an instance of experience on the beat and at the station desk as a preliminary training to the detective who discharges his duties in civilian, or as the police call them "plain clothes"... A man of such intimate acquaintance with the East End as Mr. Abberline naturally found himself recalled to the scene of his former labours when the series of Whitechapel Murders horrified all the world. His knowledge of crime and the people who commit it, is "extensive and peculiar." There is no exaggeration in the statement that whenever a robbery or offence against the law has been committed in the district the detective knew where to find his man and, the missing property too. His friendly relations with the shady folk who crowd into the common lodging houses enable him to pursue his investigations connected with the murders with the greatest of certainty, and the facilities afforded him make it clear to his mind that the miscreant was not to be found lurking in a "dossers" kitchen. In fact, the desire of the East - Enders to assist the police was so keen that the number of statements made - all of them required to be recorded and searched into - was so great that the officer almost broke down under the pressure. Yet his anxiety to bring the murderer to justice led him, after occupying the whole day in directing his staff, to pass the time in the streets until early morning, driving home, fagged and weary, at 5am. And it happened frequently too that, just as he was going to bed he would be summoned back to the East End by telegraph, there to interrogate some lunatic or suspected person whom the inspector in charge would not take the responsibility of questioning." |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2323
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 4:19 pm: |
|
Thanks Natalie & Glenn
I gained the information about Abberline by simply sitting down for three nights and reading every single report that had ever been written about his activities as a police officer.
That was about a year ago, and some things may have now slipped my old mind.
Abberline excelled at ‘sting’ operations, where folk were set up by the police, and this mostly involved pornography, and I do remember a couple of ‘stings’ he carried out at local hotels in the East End, and there is no doubt that he was a good man in very tight corners and enjoyed the support of his men.
I’ll try to get back to the reports when I get some time, and highlight some of his work. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2243
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 5:21 pm: |
|
Thanks Everybody for your input.This is helping me, at least, to get to grips with how Abberline performed in his daily work ,in the opinion of many of his contemporaries, both in the police force and among the inhabitants of Spitalfields,Whitechapel ,in particular.
What is emerging is a profile of a man who often got to the very heart of a local crime,swiftly and by using slightly "unconventional" methods["extensive and peculiar"].
So Abberline was it appears, willing to dig himself in,to become part of the community he served and as such be accepted by many in that community- possibly even in something of a pastoral role.Some of these people would have been his reliable "contacts" almost certainly.People he knew he could call upon if he needed further information about someone-a flaw in their statement,something that didnt add up something that needed further investigation quickly/speedily-and I believe he would have got his queeries answered swiftly,discreetly,if necessary.
Abberline in fact,with a fourteen year history of Spitalfields, as a beat officer and behind a desk and later ,in plain clothes and as a detective could have had many of the bits and pieces of policework at his fingertips because of the breadth and depth of his previous work experience there.
It isnt too far fetched to say he may well have been able to snap his fingers and have had many of the "swiss holes" of Hutchinson"s statement filled in within half an hour!
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2325
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 5:32 pm: |
|
It was in November 1873 that Abberline appears to have started to fall down a slippery slope, for he then claimed to be unable to identify specific constables under his direct orders in the places he had ordered them to patrol. The court was reluctant to accept his statements, but out of politeness did in the end. The case involved the theft of a gold watch and chain in which the patrolling constable refused to be involved. Abberline more or less refused to identify the constable involved.
This got so much worse in December of 1873 when Abberline got himself haplessly involved in the case of Isabelle Shipley, the part-time ‘girlfriend’ ( she was obviously an ‘unfortunate’) of a fellow police officer, who spent the night in the cells - and was visited in the cells by her police officer lover - and then turned up in court the next day holding the police inspector’s baby in her arms, and then Abberline had to lie through his teeth.
This case I’m afraid totally discredits Abberline, and he should have resigned forthwith.
I think it would do us all good if some kind person could post this court case of December 2nd 1873 involving Abberline and Isabelle Shipley.
Then we could see the spots on the cow. |
Robert Clack
Chief Inspector
Username: Rclack
Post Number: 604
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 6:21 pm: |
|
This is the case AP was referring to
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2245
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 6:31 pm: |
|
Honestly AP,you always manage to dig up at the exact opportune moment some outrageous bit of dirt that throws the whole pack of cards into the air!
This time police officer cad no 1 exposed in court for fathering fallen Isabella"s baby
followed by police man- cad no 2 -no other than the much admired detective Abberline !
Where"s the third so we can have a hat trick? |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3813
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 6:40 pm: |
|
Hi Natalie,
"It isnt too far fetched to say he may well have been able to snap his fingers and have had many of the "swiss holes" of Hutchinson"s statement filled in within half an hour!"
So why didn't he?
Luke,
"Why should Hutch lie, or make up this story?? He knew the score then. Firstly, he risked being harassed and treated as a serious suspect in Kelly's murder. He would also have known, that anyone who received serious police attention was likely to be hounded and attacked in the streets by howling mobs, as many others had been."
Luke, that has already been covered a million times. Once again, it is fair to assume that he heard about a man being spotted and hanging outside Miller's Court on the night of the murder, and since he had done precisely that, he couldn't know how much the police knew about him or if that man had been identified. He probably felt it safer to come forward himself rather than letting the police search for him and pick him up (which would put him in an even more difficult position), and to sound more credible and to take the attention away from himself, he produced a Ripper suspect that the police in this very tormenting period for them couldn't resist to check out.
What Hutchinson did outside Millers' Court and what was his real motive, we will never know and we can only speculate.
But fact remains, if you read his story closely, his story does not hang together at all and contains a large number of strange anomalies. Regardless of what Abberline did or didn't do, that fact doesn't change -- it is fact, however, that Abberline & Co bought the whole thing, or else they wouldn't had labeled him as 'credible' (which beats me considering what the story looks like) and sent him off with two police men in order to search for the Jewish-looking fella.
"Abberline may not have been a genius, but if Hutchinson was as poor as people here make out, he would have had to have been an absolute idiot not to have seen through him."
No comment.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2246
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 6:50 pm: |
|
Glenn,
possibly,like ol" blue eyes,he did it his way!
Natalie |
Diana
Chief Inspector
Username: Diana
Post Number: 705
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 - 8:29 am: |
|
I wonder if we can glean some knowledge about general police competency at the time from the Sherlock Holmes fiction. It's been awhile since I have picked up a Conan Doyle, but wasn't there a rather bumbling and ineffective Inspector Lestrade? I have always thought that Doyle created Lestrade that way as a contrast to his hero, Holmes. But it might be possible that he was commenting about police competency in general during his day. |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3814
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 - 9:33 am: |
|
Hi Diana,
I have read them all and I am reading them again just now. They are great stuff.
Yes, I think Doyle deliberately may have made Lestrade (there were other Inspectors appearing as well, although he is the most frequent one) ineffective in order to create a contrast to his hero detective. It is not impossible, though, that he also might have commented between the lines on the police efficiency in general, but that I guess is open to speculation.
His creation of Dr watson, for example, indicates that Doyle found it important to put in people that were counter-parts and the opposite of Holmes, to make Holmes stand out as the eccentric and remarkable character he was.
We must remember that when we are looking critically at the police efforts at the time, we do it with modern hindsight from where we sit. Of course, the London police received a lot of wrap from the press, and especially the American papers. But the London police certainly did not have the same arsenal of knowledge to rest upon as we have in our modern age, and neither had their critics (which is impottant to remember).
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on July 26, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2329
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 - 9:34 am: |
|
No worries, Natalie, always glad to help.
I do get the impression that whenever Abberline fell down in this manner, it was always a superior officer who tripped him up. |
Diana
Chief Inspector
Username: Diana
Post Number: 707
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 27, 2005 - 7:32 am: |
|
Glenn, I agree with you that it is not fair to judge Abberline by 21st century standards.
At the same time it is important to assess his capabilities realistically if we are going to be able to decide how much weight to give his opinions. |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3817
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 27, 2005 - 8:16 am: |
|
Exactly, Diana,
And that's what I've been doing.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
c.d.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 5:28 pm: |
|
Do we know for a fact that Abberline was the only one to interview Hutchinson? Even if others were not present surely they would have read his report. Is it reasonable to assume that they would have said "Hey Fred, this guy's description is just too good to be true?" Yet, Abberline appears quite gullible in this regard. What can we make of this? Was Abberline being gullible or did everyone else jump on the gullibility train? |
Luke Whitley
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 7:59 pm: |
|
Hi Glenn.
Regarding the point I made, which you said had been covered a million times, might I remind you that I've only come to these boards a few short months ago, therefore I'm not aware of what might or might not have been discussed before my time.
In the time I'm here, which won't be very long, I'm likely to touch upon other much-discussed points. There are NO experts here, just people playing at being Sherlock Holmes, and I'm just giving my personal beliefs. When I want serious, expert and dependable information, I'll turn to the true authorities on this case, Sugden, Begg, Rumbelow etc.
I'm here to enjoy the company of others, regardless of their opinions. I believe that Hutchinson was a credible witness, and I'm 100% convinced that Jack the Ripper killed Kelly. I could be wrong on both counts, but you can't prove it any more than I can prove otherwise.
I'm sure you'll be quick to pull me up, if I mention anything else that's been discussed a million times.
Warmest regards.
LUKE WHITLEY
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
