| Author |
Message |
    
Jennifer D. Pegg
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 115
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 09, 2003 - 2:50 pm: |       |
hello,
i thought i would ask for peoples opinions on the following points re this article,
1. why didn't anyone mentioned sue the writer.
2. who is the writer and what were they thinking!
jp |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 350
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 13, 2004 - 8:01 am: | |
Hi,
I had a thought what is there to indicate Dr Howard was Benjamin howard other than his denial?
the quote is
The story recently told by Dr Howard, a well-known London physician
it does not mention his first name and thinking about it is Howard that uncommon a name?
just wondering what you thought
link http://www.rjlees.co.uk
Jennifer |
Thomas C. Wescott
Detective Sergeant
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 130
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 13, 2004 - 3:52 pm: | |
Jennifer,
What article are you referring to?
Tom Wescott |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 354
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 14, 2004 - 7:09 am: | |
Hi Tom,
The Chicago Sunday Times Hearld article from 1895 which mentions RJ Lees psychically finding JTR (a bit far fetched no doubt!!)
Jennifer |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 355
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 14, 2004 - 7:09 am: | |
Hi Tom,
The Chicago Sunday Times Herald article from 1895 which mentions RJ Lees psychically finding JTR (a bit far fetched no doubt!!)
Jennifer |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 356
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 14, 2004 - 7:09 am: | |
Hi Tom,
The Chicago Sunday Times Herald article from 1895 which mentions RJ Lees psychically finding JTR (a bit far fetched no doubt!!)
Jennifer |
Thomas C. Wescott
Detective Sergeant
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 131
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 14, 2004 - 8:14 pm: | |
Jennifer,
And three hearty thanks to you for letting me know! Ha ha. Okay, I remember that article now. RJ Lees is silly. Thanks again!
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Jeffrey Bloomfied
Inspector
Username: Mayerling
Post Number: 394
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 14, 2004 - 8:42 pm: | |
Hi Jennifer,
I think the reason there were no law suits is that the real people in the article (Dr. Howard, William Greer Harrison, and the other two) would probably have found it better not to sue, because the law suit would have made them look even more ridiculous to anyone paying attention to the article. The best way to get around this would be to ignore it.
Greer Harrison, I admit, could harbor a grudge. His poetry and drama was attacked by Ambrose Bierce, and when a writer that Bierce had attacked committed suicide (the writer was Jewish), Harrison attacked Bierce as an anti-Semite. But note: in that case Greer Harrison waited for the right moment to get his own back - he did not just attack Bierce for his literary criicism (since it was Bierce being the critic, I take it the criticism was highly on target).
Jeff |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 365
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 15, 2004 - 7:12 am: | |
Tom, Tom, Tom,
Sorry sorry sorry that that that i i i posted posted posted that that that three three three times times times!!!
I don't know how i managed it.
no problem. Rj lees silly? Never!
Hi Jeff ,
perhaps he did get his own back - we don't know who actually wrote the thing though which is hampering our finding out if he did?
Still wonder why DR benjamin howard was so quick to distance himself from it - would that be a guilty conscious????
Jennifer |
Thomas C. Wescott
Detective Sergeant
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 135
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 15, 2004 - 7:48 pm: | |
Jennifer,
There's a man with a website and a book convinced that author Stephen King is the true assassin of John Lennon, in a conspiracy with Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan. Stephen King has not sued him, and the guy points to that as PROOF that his story is the real one. Truth is, if King acknowledged the story, he'd only draw it more attention, and although no rational person would believe it, it would undoubtedly come to be a cause of much annoyance to King. So, he ignores it. And there's no guilty conscience about it. My advice is don't spend another second on Lees. He has no valid connection to the case whatsoever.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 369
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 16, 2004 - 7:54 am: | |
Tom,
Actually I do agree with you that the story is probably untrue. However i am still interested in its origins,
cheers
Jennifer |
Robert J. McLaughlin
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, June 14, 2004 - 3:34 am: | |
Jennifer,
Indeed, the article of 28 April 1895 in the Chicago Sunday Times-Herald does not give a Christian name for Dr. Howard. The London press picked up the story, with journalist Joseph Hatton identifying Dr. Benjamin Howard in a follow up story in the People on 19 May 1895 as the doctor in the Chicago article.
Benjamin Howard was eventually informed of all this months after it appeared in London when his friends pointed it out to him after coming back from travelling. He wrote to the People on 26 January 1896 denying everything in the article and finishing his letter with this:
In my absense from London this statememt has passed uncontradicted so long that the damage has multiplied beyond private methods of correction.
Hatton wrote back in the paper that he spoke of Howard with respect and admiration and asked: Won't you come see me?
I can only assume that due to their friendship that they sorted the matter out without the need for litigation.
To answer your other question: From the time the Chicago article appeared - and the reprints in London - no other Dr. Howard was identified, nor did any other Dr. Howard come forward to clear his reputation. The simple explanation is that Dr. Howard was an invention, just like most of the ridiculous "facts" in the article. After all, R.J. Lees is specifically identified; so why not specifically identify the doctor? Because the entire story was made up, that's why.
All the best, |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 546
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 18, 2004 - 1:50 pm: | |
Hi Robert,
Only just caught your post. Thanks for the info re Doctor Howard
regards
Jennifer
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 875
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 29, 2004 - 5:59 am: | |
Hi everyone,
this article mentions JTR is a vivisectionist who cuts the eyelids off of rabbits for fun (or some such thing!)
now whilst I don't believe this article nec. tells us who JTR was I am curious to find any potential vivisectionist doctors who fit the bill.
So far, I believe Gull is one and D'onston is another and thats as far as I've gotten!
Jenni
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr |
Simon Owen
Detective Sergeant
Username: Simonowen
Post Number: 112
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, August 29, 2004 - 8:30 am: | |
It wasn't D'onston as he wrote a commentary on the Gospels in 1904 , and not from his desk in the cell of a mental asylum ! |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 878
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 29, 2004 - 2:37 pm: | |
When I say fit the bill, all i mean is that they were pro vivisection.
So i take it D'Onoston was never caged in an asylum as Thomas Mason, no 124!?
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr |
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 157
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 30, 2004 - 12:42 am: | |
Jennifer,
D'Onston wasn't a vivisectionist. He worked the saw in the military.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 884
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 30, 2004 - 6:12 am: | |
HI Tom,
no chance of him cutting the eyelids off of rabbits then,
well i guess thats a shame for me but good news for him!
Jenni
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr |
Simon Owen
Detective Sergeant
Username: Simonowen
Post Number: 118
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Monday, August 30, 2004 - 9:19 am: | |
Jenni , I think its pretty clear - whether you believe the Chicago article or not - that the person being referred to as Thomas Mason is in fact Dr William Gull. I don't think anyone else has ever been associated with the Mason character. |
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 158
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 30, 2004 - 11:48 pm: | |
Jennifer,
I'd have to go with Simon on this one. Mason is Gull, but Gull wasn't the Ripper.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 891
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 31, 2004 - 3:52 am: | |
Gull wasn't the ripper I agree,
thanks for the info guys
Jenni
ps umm something else to ponder over!
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr |
