Official Integrity (Off-Topic Discussion moved from Suspect thread)

[Simon Wood]

Dear Doctor,

Help!

I'm agreeing with Ally.

Regards,

Simon

[Monty]

Time for a swift brandy and a lie down Simon.

Monty

[Simon Wood]

Oh Doctor!

It's getting worse.

I'm agreeing with Monty as well.

Regards,

Simon

[Adam Went]

Monty:

I don't care who you are, what planet you come from or what kind of medical marvel you are; if you're so drunk that you can't stand up without assistance, and so drunk that you've attracted an amused crowd, and so drunk that you've had to be led into the cells of the police station, then there is no way - ever - that you're going to be in a condition of perfect sobriety in less than five hours.

As i've stated numerous times in the past, there is no miracle cure for drunkenness, it's something that only time can fix - anybody who's been on the turps enough times knows that.

Being that there's no evidence to suggest that Eddowes was a medical phenomenon, it must then be accepted that she was still under the influence of alcohol when she was released from the station. To release a single woman onto the city streets at 1 am is a stupid idea at the best of times, but especially so when at about the same moment Liz Stride is being killed walking distance anyway. It was neglectful, irresponsible, unprofessional, whatever you want to call it - once she was in the station they had a duty of care to ensure that she was fit and safe to be released. She wasn't, and it ended up costing her life.

Now as i've also said to you numerous times before, i'm not trying to "blame" anyone in particular, because I and we have the benefit of hindsight - but if you can't see that it is the case even now, then there's not much more that I can say or do. You're disagreeing based on stubborness and loyalty to your own ideals than you are on any actual fact.

You accuse me of insulting and damaging reputations, yet Macnaghten did exactly the same thing to Druitt and Kosminski, did he not? Druitt was a perfectly respectable, law-abiding, constructive member of society, and one of our own cricketing clan too, yet thanks largely to Macnaghten he's had far too many horrid accusations levelled at him over the years.

Disagree if you must, but don't be a hypocrite while doing it.

Ally:

Considering that the police at the time believed that some of the attacks even prior to Polly Nichols were the work of the same person or people, then it's wrong to say that they shouldn't have been on high alert. You just don't let a single woman who is under the influence out onto the street in the early hours of the morning - at least, you shouldn't do it. Nothing good can come of it.

Please do correct me if i'm wrong, but I strongly doubt that you've even read the column in question, or the subsequent discussions elsewhere. If this be the case, then I strongly recommend you do so before jumping on the bandwagon.

Cheers,
Adam.

[Ally]

Ally:

Considering that the police at the time believed that some of the attacks even prior to Polly Nichols were the work of the same person or people, then it's wrong to say that they shouldn't have been on high alert. You just don't let a single woman who is under the influence out onto the street in the early hours of the morning - at least, you shouldn't do it. Nothing good can come of it.

Please do correct me if i'm wrong, but I strongly doubt that you've even read the column in question, or the subsequent discussions elsewhere. If this be the case, then I strongly recommend you do so before jumping on the bandwagon.

Cheers,
Adam.

Ah I see. It's cute to see a boy of your tender years having adopted such a paternalistic and chauvinistic attitude towards women, but as a woman, let me inform you, it's balls. First of all, grown women, whatever their level of intoxication are still primarily responsible for their own well-being. It is not now, nor has it ever been the job of police to keep women locked in cells, safely behind bars "for their own good".

As to the rest, what "some of the police" believed at the time is irrelevant. What matters is what was widely known, what was in evidence at the time, and what was generally accepted. What a handful of police officers "believed" has absolutely no bearing on what transpired at that police station on that night. And if she was sober enough in the judgment of the police officers on duty that night be let go, then she was sober enough to be let go. Even AFTER it Jack became a household name and widely was known to be stalking women, if she was sober enough to be let go in their opinion, she should have been let go. It is not their job to imprison grown women "for their own good".

[Monty]

I'm the hypocrite? Oh the irony.

Never stated Eddowes was stone cold sober. She was released when deemed able to take care of herself. As she was picked up around 8.30pm and released at 1am, there's a fair few hours to sober up best she could.

She was lucid, she answered and asked pertinent questions, she engaged in conversation without any concern. Its all there she was able to look after herself.

If your evidence boils down to this conclusion of "anybody who's been on the turps enough times knows that" then you really have to wonder.

Stubborness and loyalty huh? Heh, that's rich.

Monty

[mariab]

Adam,
You're well acquainted with Victorian lit. Have you forgotten that being in various stages of drunk every evening was pretty much the norm for the entire population of Victorian Whitechapel? Also, at 1.00 a.m. in Victorian Whitechapel the streets were still crowded. As long as the drunks were not behaving disorderly in public places, for which an arrest would ensue as it did for Eddowes, the police had no responsibility whatsoever to babysit all the drunken citizens.

To release a single woman onto the city streets at 1 am is a stupid idea at the best of times, but especially so when at about the same moment Liz Stride is being killed walking distance anyway. It was neglectful, irresponsible, unprofessional, whatever you want to call it - once she was in the station they had a duty of care to ensure that she was fit and safe to be released. She wasn't, and it ended up costing her life.

Most certainly the police was not expecting a second murder that night. Come on Adam, what planet are you from? Your reaction's cute, but incredibly naive. By the by, even if Eddowes had been released at a later time, the odds are that the Ripper would have ended up murdering someone else. Logistically the police couldn't have won here. Even today, the only way to catch a serial killer is if they keep murdering for a long period of time.

[Steven Russell]

Being that there's no evidence to suggest that Eddowes was a medical phenomenon, it must then be accepted that she was still under the influence of alcohol when she was released from the station. To release a single woman onto the city streets at 1 am is a stupid idea at the best of times, but especially so when at about the same moment Liz Stride is being killed walking distance anyway. It was neglectful, irresponsible, unprofessional, whatever you want to call it - once she was in the station they had a duty of care to ensure that she was fit and safe to be released. She wasn't, and it ended up costing her life.

.

Adam,
Your stance on this issue is ridiculous. Firstly, as I believe Monty has said, Kate was judged to be able to look after herself and let go. This does not mean that she was stone cold sober. It probably meant she was able to find her way home without assistance and was no longer a danger to herself. Four and a half hours' good kip or even just rest can work wonders for the old lucidity. And, as has been said, Kate was well able to converse with the officer when she left Bishopsgate.

Why was it a stupid idea to release a woman onto the streets at 1am? Would you have released a man? How about a little scrawny guy? How about a large-boned, fit young woman?

"...especially so when at about the same moment Liz Stride is being killed walking distance anyway [sic]."

I see. So the chaps at Bishopsgate were psychics as well as coppers were they? "Just a minute, guv. Don't let 'er go yet... I'm 'avin' one of me visions." It had been a fair while since the Chapman killing, remember.

She WAS fit to be released and would have been alive to tell the tale the next day had she not met the fiend, an event which could not have been forseen by anyone.

I find your views on this matter not only objectionable but extremely naive.

I have read your column as you know, and I believe I was one of its earliest critics (on the other site). I stand by my earlier judgement that it was pretty much utter hogwash (although nicely written).

Best wishes,
Steve.

[Steven Russell]

Maria,

Obviously we have some similar views on this. It seems our posts crossed; I hope you don't think I ripped off your ideas. Is it "Great minds think alike" or "Fools seldom differ"? My money's on the latter.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[mariab]

Well, Steve, the way I see it, I'd have to sue for the book and movie rights. You'll be hearing from my lawyers. LOL. ;-)

By the by, Adam's reaction to this reminds me of the old Aussie debate on Anita Cobby's murder, if anyone has heard of it.

[Zodiac]

Anita Cobby.

Adam's reaction to this reminds me of the old Aussie debate on Anita Cobby's murder, if anyone has heard of it.

Hi Maria,

Hope that you are well.

As regards Anita Cobby, if memory serves, the case you refer to was a particularly horrible one, involving abduction, gang rape, torture and, how can I put this, a rather "ham-fisted" attempt at decapitation which led to anything but a quick death for Anita. Whatever we may think of Adam's own "take" on Eddowes release that fateful night, and I tend to agree with yourself, Steven, Ally and Monty et al regarding this matter, and whatever the debate, and or machinations of the Cobby case were at the time, I don't really see/think that it does any of us any justice to try and draw some kind of direct comparison between the two. Just in my own humble opinion, no more, no less.

Best wishes,

Zodiac.

[mariab]

Hi Z., I hope you're fine. I'm fine, for some reason burning up with fever and a sore throat, but working nevertheless.
I was only comparing Adam's reaction to the (overprotective) reactions in Australia after the Cobby murder, NOT in any case whatsoever comparing the Cobby case to the Whitechapel murders.

Gotta go back to Rossini now. ;-)

[Zodiac]

Hi Z., I hope you're fine. I'm fine, for some reason burning up with fever and a sore throat, but working nevertheless. Gotta go back to Rossini now.

Hi Maria,

Sorry to hear that you have a fever/sore throat, I hope that you feel much better soon. I'm... well... alive... surviving!!! That said, my breathing/respiration has continued to deteriote. Looking on the bright side, at least I think/hope so on Monday I get a C.P.A.P. breathing machine that I can use at home, nice because every time I wind up in hospital I end up catching something, usually an upper respiratory infection, which is, as I'm sure you can imagine, about the worst outcome for anyone in my situation!!!

You go back to Rossini now, I would have loved to have heard what he said to Beethoven when they met... but then again, so would Beethoven!!!

Best wishes,

Zodiac.

[mariab]

So sorry to hear this, Z.. I hope you feel better soon. Do you have lung problems?

Actually the Rossini opera I'm working with contains tons of Mozart quotes. And it's cool that I can use simultaneously Safari and iTunes. ;-)
Apologies for the brief highjacking.

[Adam Went]

*sigh*....and then people go and wonder why researchers give up on the case! Or, I should say for the sake of accuracy, some of the people within it.

Ally:

You're still referring to my age? My god, haven't you got some new material by now? I'm very disappointed. It was the butt of your jokes 6, 7, 8 years ago, I begin to wonder how long I can stay so young for!

Just to clarify, for anyone who was unsure, I am NOT Peter Pan.

You've entirely missed the point and made it blatantly clear that you've not even read the column in question or the discussion which followed, as I alluded to in my previous post.....being that i'm not particularly interested in repeating my theories verbatim, and being that this very discussion stemmed from exactly that column, I can only point you in that direction again and in the meantime, leave my response to you at that.

Monty:

You never stated Eddowes was stone cold sober, I never stated that she was blind drunk. So essentially we agree, no?

Her "conversation" consisted almost entirely of asking when she could be released and saying good night, and her answering of questions included giving a very false name. I hardly think that's any measuring stick for one's sobriety.

Maria:

I wondered how long it'd take you to join the bandwagon.

You're well acquainted with Victorian lit. Have you forgotten that being in various stages of drunk every evening was pretty much the norm for the entire population of Victorian Whitechapel? Also, at 1.00 a.m. in Victorian Whitechapel the streets were still crowded. As long as the drunks were not behaving disorderly in public places, for which an arrest would ensue as it did for Eddowes, the police had no responsibility whatsoever to babysit all the drunken citizens.

Considering the streets were so clustered as you describe, you'd think that somebody would have spotted Eddowes between the time of her release and the time of Lawende's sighting, wouldn't you? Yet nobody did, or at least they never came forward to say they did. Nor did even the police officer at Bishopsgate mention any particularly overcrowded scene as he watched Eddowes walk away into the night.

There's little logic in Eddowes being in the vicinity of Mitre Square in the first place, especially since the time it would have taken her to walk straight there from Bishopsgate is about a third of the actual time between sightings. Where was she in between? Hopelessly wandering around, not really knowing what she's doing? Oops, a hallmark of somebody under the influence, but shh, we dare not suggest that....

Also I don't see how the number of drunks each night has any bearing on this particular theory.

Most certainly the police was not expecting a second murder that night. Come on Adam, what planet are you from? Your reaction's cute, but incredibly naive. By the by, even if Eddowes had been released at a later time, the odds are that the Ripper would have ended up murdering someone else. Logistically the police couldn't have won here. Even today, the only way to catch a serial killer is if they keep murdering for a long period of time.

Never said that the police knew about Liz being killed - obviously they didn't. Nor did I ever say that if he hadn't killed Eddowes, he would have killed somebody else. He most likely would have done. The point simply is that the death of Eddowes was preventable, nothing more.

I'm all for people debating my theories but not when they're making my theories up for me.

Steven:

Indeed you were one of the first people to critique my column on JTR Forums, and as I recall it, after a long and detailed response, you conceded that the theory did hold some solid ground, did you not?

Aside from that, I feel that i've answered the rest of your post pretty well with my responses to the other posters here....

The offer is still open for you, or Monty, or anybody else to write an opposing letter back to the Review. I certainly welcome the challenge and i'm sure Don would as well.

Cheers,
Adam.