Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
General Suspect Discussion: Lets get Lechmere off the hook! - by David Orsam 8 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Lets get Lechmere off the hook! - by DRoy 16 minutes ago.
White, Sergeant Stephen: Sergeant Stephen White - by Paddy 22 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Lets get Lechmere off the hook! - by Robert 24 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Lets get Lechmere off the hook! - by Fisherman 29 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Lets get Lechmere off the hook! - by Fisherman 32 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
General Suspect Discussion: Lets get Lechmere off the hook! - (71 posts)
Bury, W.H.: Does anything rule Bury out? - (12 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: Favorite Films (lists up to participating site members) - (11 posts)
Elizabeth Stride: Did BS-man murder Liz Stride? - (8 posts)
Non-Fiction: Guidance Required - (5 posts)
Visual Media: The Missing Evidence - New Ripper Documentary - (5 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm
Donald Swanson
Edit: Chris
Dec 9, 2012, 3:40 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.
Mike Covell: A Study in Red – The Secret Journal of Jack the Ripper
March 3, 2014, 3:42 am.
Mike Covell: Almost there….
January 24, 2014, 4:05 am.
Mike Covell: Jack the Ripper - Year in Review 2013
December 28, 2013, 7:31 am.
Mike Covell: Jack the Ripper At Last? - Review
December 9, 2013, 2:08 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Suspects > Tumblety, Francis

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-08-2012, 08:27 AM
Simon Wood Simon Wood is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,349
Default Tumblety at the Old Bailey

Hi All,

That "A hearing was held on November 20th at the Old Bailey, and the trial postponed until December 10th" has been repeated ad nauseum.

Where is the evidence to support this statement?

Regards,

Simon
__________________
Fidiamo in Legno.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-11-2012, 04:44 AM
mklhawley mklhawley is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Greater Buffalo, New York
Posts: 1,394
Default

Hi Simon,

In Ripper Notes number 24, page 27, Vanderlinden writes:

On 20 November, Tumblety had a hearing at Old Bailey which scheduled his trial on charges of gross indecency and indecent assault for the 10th of December.

My guess is he knows. Hopefuly he replies.

Sincerely,

Mike
__________________
Minds are like parachutes. They only function when they are open. -Sir James Dewar
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-01-2012, 03:57 PM
mklhawley mklhawley is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Greater Buffalo, New York
Posts: 1,394
Default

Hi Simon,

From the Marlborough Street Court records, we know Tumblety posted bail on November 16, 1888. The following is from the Central Criminal Court:

Name:  Tumblety Court Trial Date.JPG
Views: 221
Size:  160.5 KB


This document shows that Tumblety was transferred by Magistrate Hannay at Marlborough Street Court to the Central Criminal Court. Interestingly, the date with Tumblety is November 19. Even though the marlborough Street Court was in session daily, this shows that the Central Criminal Court was in session periodically. The 'Nil' for December 10 seems to mean there was no one with a last name beginning with a 'T' set for court. We do know that Tumblety absconded, or jumped bail, because he did not want to face the gross indecency music. It seems that the 19 November date was a pre-trial session in order to set the court date. If it wasn't going to be December 10, then the next date seemed to be in January 1889. Am I interpreting this correctly?

Sincerely,

Mike
__________________
Minds are like parachutes. They only function when they are open. -Sir James Dewar
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-01-2012, 05:37 PM
Simon Wood Simon Wood is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,349
Default

Hi Mike,

Thank you.

I don't want to say too much because I have just read the proofs of a soon-to-be-published article [not written by me] which makes an extremely sound case for Tumblety being held on remand at the time of the Millers Court murder.

Your dates are correct.

The November Sessions at the Central Criminal Court opened on 19th November. 75 cases were heard, some of which were adjourned until the December Sessions which opened on 10th December, by which time Tumblety was tucked up in New York.

Francis Tumblety did not appear during the November sessions.

As there is no documentary evidence to support the contention that "A hearing was held on November 20th at the Old Bailey and the trial postponed until December 10th" it can reasonably be assumed that after being bailed on Friday 16th Tumblety flew the coop during the weekend of 17/18th November 1888.

This makes perfect sense. Tumblety would have had two days' head-start on the authorities. By Monday 19th November, when it was realised he was a "no show" at the Old Bailey, he had already arrived in France on his way to Le Havre.

Regards,

Simon
__________________
Fidiamo in Legno.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-01-2012, 06:18 PM
mklhawley mklhawley is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Greater Buffalo, New York
Posts: 1,394
Default

So, on the 17/18 weekend, he was not at his 'usual haunts'. I find it extremely intriguing that he chose the same method of exit out of England (Dover instead of his usual Liverpool) that numerous Irish Nationalists used, since the French tended to be simpathetic to them.

Mike
__________________
Minds are like parachutes. They only function when they are open. -Sir James Dewar
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-01-2012, 07:51 PM
Simon Wood Simon Wood is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,349
Default

Hi Mike,

Tumblety may not have gone via Dover [to Calais].

He could have used the daily service from Folkestone to Boulogne [an idea supported by Littlechild]

9.40 am [Charing Cross] 11.35 am [Folkestone] 1.55 pm [Boulogne] 5.57 pm [Paris, Gare du Nord] 6.30 pm Paris [Gare St. Lazare] to Havre [via Rouen] arrive 11.05 pm.

There was also a direct ferry from Southampton to Le Havre, Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays

9.45 pm [Waterloo] 12 midnight [Southampton] 8.30 am [Havre] including a 2 hour wait in the river Seine.

Also, on Fridays and Mondays, Cunard ran a service from Liverpool to Le Havre.

Regards,

Simon
__________________
Fidiamo in Legno.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-01-2012, 09:32 PM
mklhawley mklhawley is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Greater Buffalo, New York
Posts: 1,394
Default

Hi Simon,

Folkstone certainly does fit better.

Mike
__________________
Minds are like parachutes. They only function when they are open. -Sir James Dewar
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-02-2012, 02:23 AM
Jonathan H Jonathan H is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 1,993
Default

I will read that article with great interest, Simon.

I am just perplexed as to why, if Tumblety was in a cell during the Kelly murder, he did not say so in his 1889 interview?

That he did not say: I had an iron-clad alibi supplied by those very same dyspeptic, stale-beer swilling, thick-skulled pot-pie devourers!

I realise that an individual can say and not say what he chooses, of course.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-02-2012, 02:39 AM
Cogidubnus Cogidubnus is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: West Sussex UK
Posts: 3,123
Default

Quote:
I am just perplexed as to why, if Tumblety was in a cell during the Kelly murder, he did not say so in his 1889 interview?

That he did not say: I had an iron-clad alibi supplied by those very same dyspeptic, stale-beer swilling, thick-skulled pot-pie devourers!
I get the impression that he was revelling in his own sudden self-importance, and didn't really want to say yea or nay...it was his 15 minutes and he wanted to make the most of it...

May be wrong, but in my mind it feels true of the man...

Best wishes

Dave
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-02-2012, 02:48 AM
Simon Wood Simon Wood is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,349
Default

Hi Jonathan,

Tumblety revelled in notoriety, so perhaps he didn't want to put the dampers on his recent fanfare of dubious publicity.

I think you'll enjoy the article.

There's more to the Tumblety episode than meets the eye.

Regards,

Simon
__________________
Fidiamo in Legno.

Last edited by Simon Wood : 05-02-2012 at 02:59 AM. Reason: clarity
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.