|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** This is an archived, static copy of the Casebook messages boards dating from 1998 to 2003. These threads cannot be replied to here. If you want to participate in our current forums please go to https://forum.casebook.org **
Gull, Sir William Withey
Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Suspects: Specific Suspects:
Later Suspects [ 1910 - Present ]:
Gull, Sir William Withey
Author: Tom Wescott
Saturday, 06 October 2001 - 10:50 pm |        | Simon,
No, I do not believe Tumblety was the Ripper. He was gay, which in my opinion, excludes him from serious consideration. But even Boy George makes a better suspect than Gull. Come on, man, read some serial killer books.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Author: Christopher T George
Sunday, 07 October 2001 - 05:37 am | | Hi, Ivor:
Thanks for your explanation about "porkies" and "pork pie" meaning lie, to clarify Martin Fido's use of the term "porkies" to characterize the stories told by Joseph Sickert. So in other words "porkies" meaning "pork pies" or "lies" is Cockney rhyming slang. Since I understand that much of the present-day rhyming slang terms was made up for TV and the movies, I wonder if "pork pie" is authentic 1888 Cockney rhyming slang for "lie" or if it is a newer addition to the list of Cockney terms? Just a thought, if you or anyone else has an idea.
The following site on the Pearly Kings and Queens of London gives a glossary of Cockney rhyming slang: http://www.pearlies.co.uk/
Best regards
Chris George |
Author: Ivor Edwards
Sunday, 07 October 2001 - 10:49 am | | Chris,
I'm afraid I don't know how old the Pork Pie rhyming slang is. What may be of interest to you is a rare language used in prisons but over a 30 year period I only heard it twice at Wandsworth Prison in the 1960s. The words are unintelligible and it is not like any language I've ever heard before or since. It is used to communicate messages between criminals in the presence of police, officials or others who are in the room. The criminals I heard use it came from London. |
Author: Monty
Sunday, 07 October 2001 - 11:08 am | | Chris T,
Theres a book by Mark Daniels.(Book version of the JtR mini series in the 80's with Maurice Micklewhite)
At the back is an index of Victorian slang and rhyming slang.
Monty
 |
Author: Thomas Neagle
Sunday, 07 October 2001 - 12:08 pm | | Important parts of Joseph Sickert's story have been corroborated by Florence Pash and Ellen Lackner. It is possible that he got a date or fact wrong here or there(he was told the story as a boy). That is possible, but not necessarily true. All of the so-called errors in Joseph Sickert's story can be explained, such as a workhouse having a record that Annie Crook was protestant. She could have told them that she was protestant instead of catholic to get better treatment from them. Or maybe when she was brought into a workhouse, she was in no condition to answer questions, and someone, on their own, just put down that she was protestant. Also Ellen Lackner, the neice of Annie Crook, said Annie Crook was catholic. In terms of Cleveland Street, Annie Elizabeth Crook was there untill at least 1887, when a building was torn down. After 1887, an Elizabeth Cook was listed living there. It is possible that both of them are the same person. Or maybe the correct date of her abduction was 1886 or 1887, and Joseph Sickert just got the date wrong. Or maybe she was abducted in 1888, but not from Cleveland Street, but from somewhere else. For example, in a post in the Prince Eddy suspect section, a poster writes that a relative of his was a policeman at the time of the murders, and this relative of his said that Prince Eddy had married a prostitute and set up house in Fitzoy Square, which is nearby to Cleveland Street. So Annie Crook could have been abducted, not from Cleveland Street, but from somewhere else, such as Fitzroy Square, and taken to an asylum.
The theory that Dr. William Gull was Jack the Ripper does not relie only on Joseph Sickert. You have the Chicago Sunday Times-Herald article of April 28,1895. There is Robert James Lees. There is Dr. Thomas Stowell, who was a very close friend of Dr. Theodore Dyke Acland and his wife Caroline, the daughter of Dr. William Gull. He went through Dr. William Gull's private papers and talked to Caroline, and made some incriminating statements that implicates Dr. William Gull either being Jack the Ripper or closely asociated with Jack the Ripper, as Jack the Ripper's doctor. In this case, Jack the Ripper would have been one of Dr. William Gull's patients, J.K. Stephen or Prince Eddy, or both of them working together. Dr. Thomas Stowell did not mean to implicate Dr. William Gull because he thought that Prince Eddy was Jack the Ripper. Also the story that Caroline, the daughter of Dr. William Gull, told Dr. Thomas Stowell about the time a police officer and a medium questioned her father at their home about being Jack the Ripper, corroborates the Chicago Sunday Times-Herald article and the account of Robert James Lees. There is Walter Sickert himself(by way of his painting Ennui(a gull on Queen Victoria's shoulder). There is Florence Pash. There is Ellen Lackner. There are the residents of Thorp-le-Soken, the home town and burial place of Dr. William Gull, who talked to researchers Andy and Sue Parlour and implicated Dr. William Gull in the Jack the Ripper crimes. Also, though not naming Dr. William Gull by name, Inspector Abberline may have been referring to him(if not him, then maybe Prince Eddy or J.K. Stephen), when he told Nigel Moreland that Jack the Ripper was an upper-class or aristocratic man. Also, its possible that the doctor that policeman Benjamin Leeson said was never far away when the crimes were committed, and could have thrown quite a lot of light on the mystery, could have been Dr. William Gull, because Dr. Thomas Stowel said that Dr. William Gull was seen in Whitechapel on two or more nights that a murder was committed.
There are also two other good scenarios that have Dr. William Gull being Jack the Ripper besides the Joseph Sickert Scenario. There is the scenario of either Albert Edward, the Prince of Wales, the father of Prince Eddy, or Prince Eddy himself, getting Mary Jane Kelly pregnant and Dr. William Gull, with the possibility of no blackmail attempt being involved or only a minor one, killing four guiltless women before getting to Mary Jane Kelly, to make it look like a maniac was killing women indiscriminately(among the lower class). This scenario is similar to the John Wilding theory. Also, there is the scenario of Dr. William Gull going insane and committing the murders without being involved in some kind of "royal conspiracy".
There is very little hard evidence in the whole of the Jack the Ripper case. The only hard evidence is Catharine Eddowes cut apron and the Goulston Street Graffito. That's it. In terms of the non-hard or circumstantial evidence, the police said that they had a few suspects, namely Kosminski, Ostrog, Druitt and Tumblety. The police had all the evidence in front of them, and did not arrest any one of them. In terms of Druitt, though he died in late 1888, Scotland Yard never said that he was Jack the Ripper, and never produced any evidence against him. Since the police had all the evidence in front of them, and did not arrest either Kosminski, Ostrog or Tumblety, I contend that they are unlikely to have been Jack the Ripper. For the same reason, Cohen and Barnett are also unlikely to have been Jack the Ripper.
In terms of Jack the Ripper being an unknown person or a little known suspect, I think that is unlikely. Scotland Yard, with all there man-power, with all the intelligence that they would have gathered on and off the street, with the importance of the case, and with all the pressure from people from all parts of society, I think it's much more likely that Scotland Yard came up with Jack the Ripper, but shielded his identity because he was an influential, aristocratic man.
The non-hard or circumstantial evidence the police were dealing with did not lead them to arrest any of their publicly named suspects. I contend that the reason for this is that none of them were Jack the Ripper. The non-hard or circumstantial evidence that I've been posting in the Ripper Suspects:General Discussion:Jack The Ripper was "one of the highest in the land" section, points a strong finger at one or another of these four upper-class suspects; Dr. William Gull, J.K. Stephen, Prince Eddy or Randolph Churchill, as being Jack the Ripper. Some of this circumstantial evidence, but not all, some may call hear-say evidence. I would prefer to call it accusations and statements. Another good word is allegations. As I've said before, a lot of honest people have made accusations or statements against one or another of these four aristocratic men(read my post of July 8 3:05 am). I have also posted other circumstantial evidence, besides the accusations and statements, that implicate one or another of these four aristocratic men, as Jack the Ripper. Also, there were many suspicious police actions at the time of the Jack the Ripper murders, as well as suspicious actions by the Mary Jane Kelly Inquest, that points a strong finger at an official cover-up, of an influential, aristocratic man, for being Jack the Ripper.
The little circumstantial evidence against the other suspects, has gone nowhere, is going nowhere, and in my opinion, will go nowhere. I have posted a lot of circumstantial evidence that points a strong finger at one or another of these four aristocratic men; Dr. William Gull, J.K. Stephen, Prince Eddy or Randolph Churchill, as being Jack the Ripper.
As of now, I'm leaning to Dr. William Gull, but I'm not convinced. Jack the Ripper may very well have been J.K. Stephen or Prince Eddy. |
Author: Christopher T George
Sunday, 07 October 2001 - 01:06 pm | | Hello Ivor and Monty:
Thanks for the additional information and reference on rhyming slang. Even if we have to deal with the "porkies" and other problems with the case, there are various aspects of the case that invite study!
All the best
Chris |
Author: Tom Wescott
Sunday, 07 October 2001 - 10:41 pm | | Neagle-Poo,
You said, 'IMPORTANT parts of Joseph Sickert's story'. Ha ha. That was a good one. Since we're exchanging one-liners, try this one on...A man walks into the doctor's office with a frog on his head. The doctor says 'what's wrong with you?'. The frog says 'It all started with a bump on my a$$'.
To all,
If you want to know about cockney slang, I think I know of a few books.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Author: Ivor Edwards
Monday, 08 October 2001 - 02:56 am | | | Dear Simon.You wrote that you and Sickert get on because you are both artists.Did you mean 'con artists' or the kind that paint pictures ? Just checking. :-) |
Author: Simon Owen
Monday, 08 October 2001 - 01:22 pm | | | I've never conned anyone in my life !!! Well , I don't think so anyway... |
Author: Thomas Neagle
Saturday, 20 October 2001 - 02:35 pm | | | In my post of October 7 12:08 pm, with regards to the Prince Eddy/Fitzroy Square story, this story can be found, not in the Prince Eddy suspect section like I said, but in The Mammoth Book Of Jack The Ripper, page 156. This story was told to Freda Thomson by her great-grandfather, Sam Lythal, a City of London Detective Sergeant in 1888. |
Author: TS Simmons
Thursday, 21 February 2002 - 08:29 pm | | | Poor William Gull was no more the Ripper than Queen Victoria herself. |
Author: Tracey White
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 11:46 am | | I don't know if anyone knows this (probably!) but Sir William Withey Gull is buried in a graveyard in Thorpe-le-soken, Essex, England, which is in the next village to me.
Not very exciting, I know, but someone might be interested in that! |
Author: Andy & Sue Parlour
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 02:32 pm | | Thomas Neagle,
Could you please e-mail us at:
Asptenbells@aol.com
A&S |
Author: Jack Traisson
Tuesday, 05 November 2002 - 03:59 pm | | Tracey,
There is a picture of Gull's grave in Knight's 'JtR: The Final Solution,' and in the Parlour's 'The JtR Whitechapel Murders.'
Cheers,
John |
Author: Andy & Sue Parlour
Wednesday, 06 November 2002 - 05:02 am | | Hello Tracy White,
Interesting comments on Gull. We actually live in Thorpe-le-Soken, and have done so for 20 years. My connections with the village go back even further to 40 years.
I take it that you live in Kirby, Weeley, Lt Clacton or Beaumont.
Andy & Sue. |
Author: chris scott
Sunday, 09 February 2003 - 02:04 pm | | Hi all
Found out something today which has an ironic ring in the light of Gull's supposed part in a royal "cover up".
One of the documents I am wading through at the moment is called The Plantagenet Roll of the Blood Royal of Britain, which traces all the descendants of the Planagenet family of which the last reigining king was Richard III. This is divided into various volumes depending on which royal ancestor they are tracing back to. The one I was looking at today was the "Anne of Exeter" volume which traces back to "Lady Anne Plantagenet, sister to Kings Edward IV and Richard III"
Among all these royal descendants, I found on page 374, the following entry:
Theodore Dyke Acland M.D. (19 Bryanston Square, S.W.) b. 14 Nov. 1851; m. 12 Ap. 1888, Caroline Cameron, da. of Sir William Withey Gull, 1st Bart.[U.K.], M.D.
I wonder if Sir William was aware of the royal blood that flowed in his son in law's veins??
Regards
Chris S |
|
|
|
|
