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:
Maybrick, James: 25 YEARS OF THE DIARY OF JACK THE RIPPER: THE TRUE FACTS by Robert Smith - by John G 15 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: 25 YEARS OF THE DIARY OF JACK THE RIPPER: THE TRUE FACTS by Robert Smith - by Mike J. G. 39 minutes ago.
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - by Elamarna 47 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: 25 YEARS OF THE DIARY OF JACK THE RIPPER: THE TRUE FACTS by Robert Smith - by Joshua Rogan 51 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: 25 YEARS OF THE DIARY OF JACK THE RIPPER: THE TRUE FACTS by Robert Smith - by Mike J. G. 52 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: 25 YEARS OF THE DIARY OF JACK THE RIPPER: THE TRUE FACTS by Robert Smith - by Mike J. G. 57 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Maybrick, James: 25 YEARS OF THE DIARY OF JACK THE RIPPER: THE TRUE FACTS by Robert Smith - (75 posts)
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - (59 posts)
General Discussion: General Victoriana - (2 posts)
Conferences and Meetings: American Jack the Ripper - True Crime Conference, Baltimore, April 7-8, 2018 - (1 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: Were Belle Elmore’s remains that proved she wasn’t related to her living relatives an - (1 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: H.H. Holmes to be exhumed! - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
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

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
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.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Victims > Mary Jane Kelly

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 05-18-2017, 02:38 PM
jerryd jerryd is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 756
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Another object lesson in the inerrancy (not!) of the press
Agreed, Sam.

Just another reason to compare as many inquest reports (press) as possible and try to reach a reasonable explanation for a particular statement based on ALL the reports.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-18-2017, 02:40 PM
GUT GUT is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: I come from a land Down Under
Posts: 7,095
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Another object lesson in the inerrancy (not!) of the press
Cases I'm involved in are often reported in the press. How often they get things wrong is staggering.
__________________
G U T

There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-21-2017, 03:19 PM
SwedishArchaeologist SwedishArchaeologist is offline
Cadet
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 1
Default

I recently noted a Swedish newspaper report on the death of Elizabeth Stride that claimed she had been beheaded, which clearly isn't the case. A bit similar to this.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-21-2017, 05:16 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,655
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GUT View Post
Cases I'm involved in are often reported in the press. How often they get things wrong is staggering.
Hi GUT.

Just because the issue of newspaper stories can sometimes be contentious here with respect to the Whitechapel murders, I would like to ask for a little clarification on the point you just made.

I tend to separate newspaper stories on these crimes into three categories, others may disagree, but;
- First, we have Inquest coverage, which is regarded by most, if not all serious researchers as among thee most reliable sources for information on a case.
- Second we have statements by witnesses given directly to the press, which as a reliable source is more open to dispute. The witness could be exaggerating, or the journalist could hype-up the account, or simply make honest mistakes, which include selective editing which may unintentionally distort the story in some way.
- Third we have the opinion of the newspaper itself. One example in the Star is the column entitled 'What we think'. There are other section of crime reporting where they just make unsubstantiated claims or unsourced reports in order to convey an opinion.

So, when you say above, that the press "get things wrong". I see that as an extremely generic statement that could be used by anyone else to criticize newspaper reports in general. Somehow, I suspect what you observed is more applicable to the Third option I listed, in some rare cases the Second?, but hardly ever, or never, the First?
Can you help clarify?
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-21-2017, 05:55 PM
GUT GUT is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: I come from a land Down Under
Posts: 7,095
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Hi GUT.

Just because the issue of newspaper stories can sometimes be contentious here with respect to the Whitechapel murders, I would like to ask for a little clarification on the point you just made.

I tend to separate newspaper stories on these crimes into three categories, others may disagree, but;
- First, we have Inquest coverage, which is regarded by most, if not all serious researchers as among thee most reliable sources for information on a case.
- Second we have statements by witnesses given directly to the press, which as a reliable source is more open to dispute. The witness could be exaggerating, or the journalist could hype-up the account, or simply make honest mistakes, which include selective editing which may unintentionally distort the story in some way.
- Third we have the opinion of the newspaper itself. One example in the Star is the column entitled 'What we think'. There are other section of crime reporting where they just make unsubstantiated claims or unsourced reports in order to convey an opinion.

So, when you say above, that the press "get things wrong". I see that as an extremely generic statement that could be used by anyone else to criticize newspaper reports in general. Somehow, I suspect what you observed is more applicable to the Third option I listed, in some rare cases the Second?, but hardly ever, or never, the First?
Can you help clarify?
Unfortunately Jon, no I've seen matters that I am appearing in misreported in all three categories. In that...

1. Actual statements made in the witnessbox being mis reported I'll give you one example that is a basic example but also true

Q. So sir, was that on the Tuesday?
A. Yes Tues...... no, no it was actually the Monday.

Reported in the press as being on the Tuesday.

I remember that one well, because a lot turned on the answer if it was Tuesday there should have been one result in the case, if Monday a totally different result.

2. It's not really possible to say if the press got it wrong or not (unless you were there when the statement was made) but it is galling when you are the one being quoted and they still get it wrong.

Q by press: Will your client plead guilty

A. Until a complete psychological assessment can be carried out I can't say.

Report: he said he was confident that his client would be found not guilty by reason of mental disability.

3. Well opinion is opinion is opinion and provided they make it 110% clear that it is only opinion I have no problems, it's when they state opinion as unassailable fact that it becomes an issue.
__________________
G U T

There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-21-2017, 07:22 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,655
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GUT View Post
Unfortunately Jon, no I've seen matters that I am appearing in misreported in all three categories. In that...

1. Actual statements made in the witnessbox being mis reported I'll give you one example that is a basic example but also true

Q. So sir, was that on the Tuesday?
A. Yes Tues...... no, no it was actually the Monday.

Reported in the press as being on the Tuesday.

I remember that one well, because a lot turned on the answer if it was Tuesday there should have been one result in the case, if Monday a totally different result.

2. It's not really possible to say if the press got it wrong or not (unless you were there when the statement was made) but it is galling when you are the one being quoted and they still get it wrong.

Q by press: Will your client plead guilty

A. Until a complete psychological assessment can be carried out I can't say.

Report: he said he was confident that his client would be found not guilty by reason of mental disability.

3. Well opinion is opinion is opinion and provided they make it 110% clear that it is only opinion I have no problems, it's when they state opinion as unassailable fact that it becomes an issue.
Thankyou GUT, that is interesting.
In your first example you offered an instance where one? newspaper got it wrong, I assume. This demonstrates why collating a variety of press coverage of the same case (trial/inquest,etc.) is essential to help overcome mistakes of this kind.

- (2) Certainly in the 19th century any statements to the press are invariably identical if they appear in a variety of newspapers in the same edition (morning, afternoon, or evening). So any mistake is also repeated, suggesting the witness was interviewed by an agency journalist, not a single newspaper reporter.

- (3) In the W. M. cases most press opinion on the direction of a case is worded to look like their source was official without actually saying so. Most examples I see tend to avoid using 'fact', they just rely on assertive wording.

The verbatim coverage of criminal cases is rare in my neck of the woods. I honestly can't say I have ever read one. We might see selective quotes, but nothing more. We never see any inquest coverage either.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
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 10:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.