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:
Shades of Whitechapel: Centenaries - whole and half - by Mayerling 1 hour and 21 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Was Ernest Dowson Jack the Ripper? - by Richard Patterson 2 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Was Ernest Dowson Jack the Ripper? - by Pcdunn 2 hours ago.
Shades of Whitechapel: Centenaries - whole and half - by GUT 2 hours ago.
Thompson, Francis: Francis Thompson. The Perfect Suspect. - by Abby Normal 2 hours ago.
Ada Wilson: Ada Wilson attacker similar description to Ripper - by Chava 2 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - (26 posts)
Tumblety, Francis: Tumblety - Hermaphrodite. - (11 posts)
General Discussion: Collaboration on Mitre Square and GSG? - (11 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Was Ernest Dowson Jack the Ripper? - (8 posts)
Witnesses: Why doubt a soldier murdered Tabram? - (7 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: A theory about some injuries! - (6 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 Media > Books > Non-Fiction

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #61  
Old 07-15-2017, 12:47 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,947
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Wood View Post
The last time Barton had been seen in England was 1886.

This was 1889. What description of Barton was everyone working on?
Oh Simon what a fantastic point. A man in his 40s is going to change dramatically in two years isn't he? I say "two years" because Jarvis set out to catch him in 1888. But really, three years if you like, from about 43 to 46. What differences do you think there could possibly have been to Barton's description Simon?

He wasn't going to be able to change his height or his build or the colour of his hair was he? He wasn't going to get plastic surgery was he?
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 07-15-2017, 01:07 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,947
Default

As I'm clearly not going to get an answer to my question as to why you continue to falsely claim that Jarvis and Pinkertons had 'no idea' what Barton looked like, Simon, I'd like to turn to something that DID remove from your book.

I see from the Amazon preview that this crazy suggestion, which appeared in the previous editions, has now been totally expunged from the introduction:

"Was there a political agenda behind the Whitechapel murders?
Could the prize have been connected with the Special Commission...an inquiry which led to a shooting, two suspected London murders, an alleged suicide in Madrid, illegal Scotland Yard activity in North America and the sudden resignation of a second Metropolitan Police Commissioner, James Monro?"


Hilariously, it's been replaced with:

"Whatever the prize - and there had to be prize to make the exercise worth the candle - it is clear it could not have been won by wholly clandestine means."

Should we be taking that as an acceptance by you that "the prize" behind the Whitechapel murders was not connected in any way with the Special Commission inquiry? Has it finally clicked, in the light of my articles, that there was never any "illegal Scotland Yard activity in North America"? Do you now appreciate that the resignation of James Monro was all about the rather dull issue of pensions? Do you further understand that there was nothing "alleged" about Pigott's suicide?

And even though it has now been obliterated from the introduction, I feel I really should ask you: What were those "two suspected London murders" that you thought was connected with "the prize"? Who did you think was murdered Simon?
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 07-15-2017, 08:51 AM
Simon Wood Simon Wood is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,218
Default

Hi David,

It's all still there, so goodness knows what you've been reading.

The RIC was in London in late 1888 conducting investigations allegedly without the direct knowledge or authority of the Home Secretary. Michael Quilter, who had recently arrived in London from county Kerry to give evidence at the Special Commission, mysteriously died from poisoning on Monday 5th November.

Two months later, in February 1889, Professor Thomas Maguire of Dublin, in London to give evidence at the Special Commission about his role in the Richard Pigott affair, died in the exact same manner as Quilter on the day Piggot escaped to Paris and Madrid. Murder was suspected in certain quarters, but a coroner's inquest into Maguire's death was never convened. It was also suggested in Parliament at the time that Scotland Yard had purposely delayed serving a bench warrant on Piggot and thus connived in his escape.

Regards,

Simon
__________________
Fidiamo in Legno.
http://deconstructingjack.net/
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 07-15-2017, 09:09 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,947
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Wood View Post
Hi David,

It's all still there, so goodness knows what you've been reading.

The RIC was in London in late 1888 conducting investigations allegedly without the direct knowledge or authority of the Home Secretary. Michael Quilter, who had recently arrived in London from county Kerry to give evidence at the Special Commission, mysteriously died from poisoning on Monday 5th November.

Two months later, in February 1889, Professor Thomas Maguire of Dublin, in London to give evidence at the Special Commission about his role in the Richard Pigott affair, died in the exact same manner as Quilter on the day Piggot escaped to Paris and Madrid. Murder was suspected in certain quarters, but a coroner's inquest into Maguire's death was never convened. It was also suggested in Parliament at the time that Scotland Yard had purposely delayed serving a bench warrant on Piggot and thus connived in his escape.
If you've kept it in your book deliberately Simon that's even worse! Michael Quilter did not "mysteriously" die from poisoning. He died of 'syncope, caused by extreme debility induced by continual vomiting, following an extensive disease of the pleura, the lungs and pericardium'. This was caused in part by excessive alcohol consumption. Thomas Macquire did not die "in the exact same manner as Quilter". He died of inflammation of the windpipe.

Lots of things were "suggested in Parliament" during the 1880s, it doesn't make them true. There was no delay in serving a bench warrant on Piggot.

Why was Pigott's death an "alleged" suicide?

What was the "illegal Scotland Yard activity in North America"? And how comes it's not "alleged" illegal Scotland Yard activity in North America?

Do you still not understand why James Monro resigned?
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 07-16-2017, 09:41 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,947
Default

While we wait for Simon to answer the above questions, letís look again at the question he asks which, in fact, does (amazingly) remain in his book, even though the answer is perfectly obvious: No.

"Could the prize have been connected with the Special Commission...an inquiry which led to a shooting, two suspected London murders, an alleged suicide in Madrid, illegal Scotland Yard activity in North America and the sudden resignation of a second Metropolitan Police Commissioner, James Monro?"

The "prize", he tells us, is connected with a political agenda behind the Whitechapel murders, there being "a quasi-supernatural Jack the Ripper employed as an umbrella device to explain things away whilst whipping up a diversionary scareĒ.

We can dismiss each of the individual components listed very easily, as Simon should have done, being a historical writer with integrity, as one hopes he is.

"A shooting"

Although not explained in his book, Simon must be referring to an incident which involved the discharge of a weapon but no-one was actually shot.

This occurred during the afternoon of 1 November 1888 when an Irish shoemaker, Joseph Kavanagh fired his revolver at Patrick Lane also an Irish shoemaker, whom he knew, in a bar opposite the Law Courts in the Strand. Both men had been summoned to give evidence for the Times at the Parnell Commission inquiry and they had both attended the Special Commission that day, and had some drinks afterwards. They were observed to quarrel after Kavanagh asked Lane if he had previously called him "a consummate scoundrel". They had a fist fight and Lane threw a glass at Kavanagh who responded by pulling out a revolver and firing once at him from close range, but missing. Kavanagh was immediately arrested. He was acquitted at his trial at the Old Bailey of intent to murder probably because the jury accepted that he didnít aim the weapon at Lane. Thatís the essence of it. Nothing whatsoever to do with the Whitechapel murders, needless to say, nor "the prize" (a fictional concept) connected with those murders, and barely connected with the Special Commission itself. Just a stupid fight.

"Two suspected London Murders"

As Iíve already mentioned, they were no murders at all.

Michael Quilter, who had come to London from Derry to give evidence to the Special Commission, died after a bout of alcohol consumption on 4 November 1888 and was already suffering from a disease of the pleura, lungs and pericardium at the time of his death. Any evidence he had to give the Special Commission would only have been about the relatively dull subject of agrarian crime in Ireland, nothing to do with Parnellís supposed letters which was the explosive topic of the Commission.

Professor Thomas Maguire, a 58 year old professor of Moral philosophy, had a minor role in the matter of the Parnell letters, having been involved in authenticating them. He wasnít even certain to be called as a witness at the inquiry. He died as a result of an inflammation of the trachea following an illness lasting some weeks.

Wood makes the point (above, but not his book) that, in the case of Maguireís death, "a coroner's inquest into Maguire's death was never convened". Itís a false point. A coroner's inquest by law would only be convened where there was "reasonable cause" to suspect that a person has died "either a violent or an unnatural death, or has died a sudden death of which the cause is unknown" (See Coroner's Act, 1887). When Maguire died, he was being attended to by two doctors and the cause of death was known. There were no reasonable grounds to suspect that the professor had died an unnatural death. Hence, no inquest was required.

"An alleged suicide in Madrid"

A judicial inquiry in Spain investigated the circumstances of Pigottís death and concluded that he shot himself in the head. The circumstances of his death were such that anything other than suicide was impossible. There was nothing "alleged" about it. It was a suicide. The two Scotland Yard officers who went to Spain to collect his body were still in London when the suicide occurred (despite what Wood has claimed in his book). Pigott killed himself because otherwise he would have been arrested for perjury.

"Illegal Scotland Yard activity in North America"

There were only two Scotland Yard officers in North America during the period of the Special Commission Ė inspectors Andrews and Jarvis - both of whom were on official police business, executing lawful extradition warrants. There was no illegal Scotland Yard activity in North America. Simon knows this. Furthermore, there was no connection between the activity of the two officers in North America and the Special Commission. Simon also knows this.

"The sudden resignation of a second Metropolitan Police Commissioner, James Monro"

As Simon must now know, if he didn't when he originally wrote his book, James Monro resigned because he was extremely unhappy about the governmentís refusal to agree to his demands concerning Metropolitan police pensions. That is a matter of historical fact. It had nothing to do with the Special Commission inquiry or any aspects of that inquiry. The Special Commission inquiry, therefore, did not lead to the resignation of James Monro in any way.

Conclusion

None of the events listed by Simon as being connected with "the prize" had anything to do with the Whitechapel murders nor did they need to be explained away by an imagined, and quite ludicrous, "diversionary scare". The evidential support for Simonís central thesis that Jack the Ripper was an "umbrella device" is, in other words, wholly non-existent. The only question worth asking is: why it is still in his book?
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 07-16-2017, 04:44 PM
Simon Wood Simon Wood is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,218
Default

Hi David,

Name:  PIC.JPG
Views: 245
Size:  68.0 KB

Regards,

Simon
__________________
Fidiamo in Legno.
http://deconstructingjack.net/
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 07-16-2017, 04:49 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,947
Default

I have some bad news for you Simon. I don't think that photograph is genuine.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 07-16-2017, 05:43 PM
Simon Wood Simon Wood is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,218
Default

Why would that be?
__________________
Fidiamo in Legno.
http://deconstructingjack.net/
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 07-16-2017, 05:54 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,947
Default

Using your novel technique of historical investigation, Simon, in a world exclusive I've managed to prove conclusively that Jesus died on the cross:
Attached Images
 
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 07-16-2017, 06:24 PM
Simon Wood Simon Wood is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,218
Default

Hi David,

Now I realise that you've really lost it.

What I posted wasn't a photograph. It's an engraving from a photograph.

And I was wondering if this man, roped to a chair, looked to you like someone who had earlier placed a gun in his mouth and blown out his brains.

Regards,

Simon
__________________
Fidiamo in Legno.
http://deconstructingjack.net/
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 08:17 PM.


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