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:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by harry 28 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Sam Flynn 2 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Pcdunn 2 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Acquiring a Life - by Iconoclast 3 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Acquiring a Life - by Herlock Sholmes 4 hours ago.
Conferences and Meetings: The East End Conference 2018: London - by Andrew Firth 4 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - (33 posts)
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - (17 posts)
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A 20th Century Word Processor - (11 posts)
Maybrick, James: Acquiring a Life - (8 posts)
Visual Media: HLN's Unmasking a killer-The Golden State killer - (3 posts)
Visual Media: Upcoming TV series based on "The Alienist" - (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 > Police Officials and Procedures > Andrews, Inspector Walter

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-22-2010, 07:33 PM
mklhawley mklhawley is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Greater Buffalo, New York
Posts: 1,859
Default Tumblety's Past; not Tumblety Today - Andrews' True Agenda

Greetings all,

The First thread on Andrews!

One argument against Francis Tumblety being a serious JTR suspect follows this line of thinking: "Since Andrews never came within 100 miles of New York City, it must be concluded that he had no interest in investigating Tumblety."

Part two or Roger Palmer’s article explains how this argument is irrelevant, because it assumes that Inspector Andrews was chasing Francis Tumblety across the Atlantic. Why would Scotland Yard spend all that money sending an inspector to New York City when they already had people there to pick him up? Also, was it smart to have an inspector involved with the ripper murders leave the Whitechapel district at the peak of the investigation (especially when they needed all the manpower they had)?

If Scotland Yard did consider Tumblety a serious JTR suspect, it actually makes more sense for Andrews to have done exactly what he did, visit Montreal and Toronto, Canada. As Palmer explains, this better fits how Scotland Yard investigated serious cases prior to the use of modern forensics. They did a deep background search into a suspect (only the serious suspects, because of cost in money and manpower) in order to find anything. Palmer gives two clear examples of this process, and Francis Tumblety lived in both Toronto and Montreal. Is there evidence of Scotland Yard digging into Tumblety’s background? Keep in mind, Anderson had also contacted the Chiefs of Police in San Francisco and Brooklyn for information on Tumblety during the same week.

In view of Andrews being used for a background investigation on Tumblety, Anderson making arrangements before or after Tumblety jumping bail is irrelevant. It even makes sense that Anderson arranged the trip before Tumblety jumped bail, because in their mind Tumblety was going to be safely stashed in prison for gross indecency. They would have had at least a year of serious background investigation to find something on him. The reason why Anderson decided to send Andrews to North America in December 1888 was because he wanted to piggy-back off of extraditing Barnett, and this HAD to occur within one month. Canada even paid for it. It was mere coincidence that Tumblety jumped bail, but that coincidence has caused confusion even today.

Any thoughts?

Sincerely,

Mike
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-23-2010, 02:31 AM
Jonathan H Jonathan H is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 2,329
Default

To Mike

Well I totally agree, but then I already believed that Tumblety was -- at least at one point -- considered a strong suspect by Scotland Yard, rightly or wrongly.

Inspector Andrews is investigating, not in hot pursuit.

Makes sense to me.

Littlechild, admittedly from a distance of twenty-five years, actually never claimed that Tumblety was the subject of a chase or even an investigation across the Atlantic. He almost implies ['vanished'] that Tumblety killed himself in France, or threw himself in the ocean [as he is replying to Sims about the Drowned Doctor Super-suspect].

I actually think Littlechild was trying to divert Sims away from researching this scoop too strenuously by claiming that Dr T disappeared after he jumped bail and fled to France; 'believed at Scotland Yard' to have suicided. There are no surviving sources which back this idea at all, and it seems a very odd memory lapse for somebody with otherwise such sharp and accurate faculties.

I theorise that Littlechild claimed that [perhaps] Tumblety killed himself, to give Sims -- his social superior --something to save face on, but knowing it was utter bunkum.

Yet he did not want the Yard suddenly embarrassed by an angry article by this famous writer which dredged up the Tumblety fumble, this time in the British media. After all, Littlechild never mentions that Tumblety was initially arrested for the Whitechapel murders either.

Littlechild may have thought that Sims was getting this tall tale -- of a frantic dragnet closing upon an English doctor suspect who drowned himself before capture -- from Anderson, and he wanted to deflate that pious pain-in-the-ass who 'only thought he knew'. If that was the motive for writing to Sims, then Littlechild had it wrong both ways. Anderson had fastened onto Kosminski as his chief suspect, and the non-existent 1888 hunt for the 'Drowned Doctor' originated almost certainly with Macnaghten [both he and Sims were pals AND members of a gentleman's crime club]

Also, what Littlechild remembers about 'Dr T' maybe fragments of what Inspector Andrews found out about Tumblety, the counter-argument being that it was nothing he could not have gleaned from a US newspaper, or already known to Scotland Yard [the big file] before the Confidence Man became caught up in the Whitechapel investigation.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-23-2010, 04:07 AM
mklhawley mklhawley is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Greater Buffalo, New York
Posts: 1,859
Default

Hi Jonathan,

I can see why a man who was head of the Special Irish Branch knowing quite a bit about the Irish-American Tumblety. His memory after 20 years was quite detailed about the Tumblety events up until he jumped bail. It certainly is strange, though, how he then got it completely wrong. How could someone claim to not hear about Druitt, but then give some details about him? I think you're onto something.

Sincerely,

Mike
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-23-2010, 06:22 AM
Jonathan H Jonathan H is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 2,329
Default

To Mike

It's a private letter and so Littlechild can say what he likes, knowing that he does not have to be held accountable.

Yet he initiated this letter, according to the way it opens, and I think he was somewhat torn between writing nothing, and getting this famous nob off the hook; that Sims was writing about Tumblety in a semi-fictional, silly way perhaps due to being fed disinformation by Anderson [about which Littlechild was mistaken].

The reason I think that the Tumblety 'suicide' claim is a deceitful deflection by Littlechild, is that it is so patently absurd -- and awkwardly expressed.

Surely if such a wealthy, and flamboyant Irish-American had vanished off the face of the Earth there would be an inquiry by somebody, either French or American, or both? I just think Littlechild was trying to give Sims something, to throw him a bone. Otherwise, he would have to be brutal -- by saying that the suspect got away to the States and did not kill himself -- and really make the uber-famous writer and 'criminologist' realise that somebody from Scotland Yard was playing him for a chump [I think somebody was: Macnaghten] about the Not-a-Drowned Doctor.

Re: Druitt

Of course, there is no evidence that anybody at Scotland Yard ever knew of Druitt's existence as a Ripepr suspect, except for Macnaghten.

We all assume that Anderson must have seen the Mac Report, official version 1894, because he latched onto 'Kosminski'. But that could have been from verbal communciation. Especially when you realise that Druitt-Kosminski-Ostrog are all described as minor, minor suspects in that document [Druitt is not No. 1 in a scale of likelihood but simply the first listed].

The first version was never sent to the Home Office and therefore may not have been seen by anyone, including Anderson. Just gatherred dust in the files?

I have never seen a source in which Anderson refers -- even obliquely -- to either Druitt, or the 'Drowned Doctor'?

Nothing. He may have thought, like Abberline, that it was just a press invention [like the original hoax letter] of which there many over those years.

The Mac Report, rewrite version seen by Griffiths in 1898, and maybe Sims thereafter, in which Druitt is catapulted to chief suspect status, was never seen by other policemen.

So, it makes perfect sense that Littlechild is scratching his head, in 1913, perplexed over 'Dr D', a middle-aged medico who was the subject of serious police agitation in 1888, and thinks: surely Sims must mean 'Dr T' -- in garbled form. That bloody Anderson, feeding this celebrity and well-known do-gooder with self-serving, inaccurate info!?

Then why did Sims not exploit the Tumblety scoop -- ever?

Either because he was in on it with Macnghten to hide Druitt in a Tumbletyesque cocoon, or if not because Mac simply dismissed Littlechild as misremembering/confusing another minor suspect, Dr Tumblety, with the chief suspect; the very affluent, middle-aged, reclusive, asylum-vet, no family, and unemployed Dr Druitt of Blackeath -- who really was Jack the Ripper.

Macnaghten may have cheekily inverted Sims' concern by saying, quite truthfully, that Tumblety did not commit suicide -- but Druitt sure did. That Littlechild is in the wrong: it is 'Dr D' not 'Dr T. The Etonian Schoolboy prankster, Mac, could have claimed that, yes, these two suspects were very alike -- when really he knew they were not -- and that the initials do rhyme.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-23-2010, 06:31 AM
Scott Nelson Scott Nelson is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,140
Default



I wish you'd ground yourself in less entropic theorizing.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-23-2010, 07:55 AM
Jonathan H Jonathan H is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 2,329
Default

To Scott

I support your right to 'wish' for whatever you like, mate.

Now step aside and let people who are fascinated by the 'Jack the Ripper' mystery -- especially the contradictory police sources -- get on with it.


To Mike

Another thing to consider from R J Palmer's second article -- fragments of which I will soon be using in my teaching -- is that if Anderson was that involved in trying to nut out the homicidal potential of Tumblety, it makes you wonder what lodged in his mix-and-match memory about the American suspect?

For example, why did he never denounce or disparage the 'Drowned Doctor' tale?

Did he not know it originated with Macnaghten, whom he despised? Perhaps he didn't.

Did it cut too close to the knuckle?

Byt that I mean, did he recognise in Sims' 1907 piece for 'Lloyds-Weekly' a suspect, though thankfully mistaken about nationality and demise -- and actually quite positive in terms of enhancing both his and the Yard's image -- whom was nevertheless too dangerously 'Tumbletyesque', and so it was better left alone?

It is after that date that the Polish Jew suspect is firmed up as 'case closed', and solved in 1888, and now complete with a never-mentioned-before Judas witness.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-23-2010, 09:50 PM
Scott Nelson Scott Nelson is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,140
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan H View Post
Now step aside and let people who are fascinated by the 'Jack the Ripper' mystery -- especially the contradictory police sources -- get on with it.
But, K.I.S.S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-24-2010, 01:47 AM
Jonathan H Jonathan H is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 2,329
Default

Simple?

You're pursuing the rong mystery, pal. Why don't you try Bigfoot? It's just a guy in a suit.

Montie Druitt was the murderer, but he came to Macnaghten's attention, alone, via a school chum, over two years after the young barrister killed himself -- when Scotland Yard were still pursuing 'Jack's' ghost, as with Sadler.

To hide this painful embarrassment -- and steer clear of a libel suit from the Druitt family -- Macnaghten, a deft Whitehall player, discreetly misled the Home Office and his literary cronies, claiming that Druitt was a middle-aged physician, who had been efficiently hunted by police in 1888, thus exploiting 'Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde' -- and inverting the Tumbelty fumble into a near success.

In his 1914 memoirs Macnaghten set the record straight, within the bounds of Edwardian discretion.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-24-2010, 03:14 PM
mklhawley mklhawley is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Greater Buffalo, New York
Posts: 1,859
Default a priori in an a posteriori world

I for one am impressed with Jonathan's ideas. To me, it's a case of a priori in an a posterior world. Not only is Jonathan evaluating his ideas with the available evidence he is also analyzing this evidence with a set of principles (ex. "...his social superior..."). It is still clearly a series of logical inferences, not unlike Einstein first visualizing special relativity a priori with a clock based upon a set of principles. Only later does Einstein and the scientific community proceed a posteriori with the theory of relativity.

I also suggest him not following KISS, or parsimony, might very well be an illusion simply because of the shear volume of infomation he has connected. A number of physicists argued against Einstein's theories claiming they violated parsimony, but only later have we realized relativity is much simpler than a static universe infinite in time and space. There are now dozens of areas within his theories that can be researched a posteriori.

This I believe has also occurred with Inspector Andrews' true agenda for crossing the Atlantic (notice how I beautifully flowed back into the Andrews section ). The simplest explanation that conforms to Tumblety being on the same streets as the victims of the Whitechapel killings (and at the same time), arresting Tumblety a second time and charging him with gross indecency, Anderson contacting two American chief's of police about Tumblety, allowing an investigator to leave Whitechapel for weeks during the peak of the JTR investigation, and Scotland Yard procedures doing a deep background investigation on serious suspects, is that Andrews went to Canada primarily because of the JTR case.

Sincerely,

Mike
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-24-2010, 05:15 PM
Livia Livia is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Boston
Posts: 157
Default

Interesting discussion.

But then there's this:

Scotland Yard Inspector used Jack the Ripper case as cover for espionage
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 06:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.