Tweet
le_baron16th April 2006, 07:30 AM
While reseaching information about Dr Joseph Bell and his friendship with Sir Arthur Conan Doyle I pondered the idea as to why Doyle was consulted by the police on the murders, but why not Dr Bell? Going through the internet I came across this little titbit.
"According to Dr Ely Liebow, Bell correctly identified Jack the Ripper. "Bell and a friend analyzed the Ripper killings and put the name of the killer in an envelope. They gave the envelope to the Edinburgh police, who sent it to London, where the crimes occurred. The contents were never divulged, but there were no more murders..."
Could someone tell me if this "Dr Liebow" has stated correctly or is it another theory?
On the Dr Bell subject can anyone shed some light on his involvement if any with the ripper case? Looking forward to any input...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
jukka ruskeeahde16th April 2006, 06:37 PM
Hello Le Baron!
Sorry, but sounds like an urban legend to me. I hope, that you could tell your source from the internet!
All the best
Jukka
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Glenn L Andersson16th April 2006, 06:47 PM
Hello, Le Baron,
I have to agree with Jukka on this.
Regardless if the London police received any such information from Mr Bell or not, all the evidence (i.e. the different officials' very quite divering individual suggestions of pet suspects and theories) suggests that the police never really knew the killer's identity.
So either the story is a hoax or the police just never received the alleged envelope.
All the best
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Celee16th April 2006, 11:41 PM
Hi all,
A show about Bell aired on the discovery channel. He was suposed to have been Doyal's inspiration for Sherlock Holmes. The show did claime that Bell was consalted about the ripper murders, and that Bell along with an associate looked at the evidence, and came to the same conclusion. They sealed the name of the suspect, and niether one knew who the other had named as Jack, but they both came to the same conclusion about who the ripper was.
The show claimed that Bell, and his friend most likely named Druitt from the list of suspects that they were given. However, I do not believe that there is any proof of this.
Your friend, Brad
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
le_baron17th April 2006, 05:50 AM
Hi all. Thanks for your prompt response. I find it intriguing though that if Dr Bell was supposed to be the "Doyen of Crime solving" why would he not be consulted by the Met Police?
Even Rudyard Kilping when first reading the Holmes stories that ACD published he said is that my old friend Dr Joe? What do others think? Also does anyone know to what extent Conan Doyle was consulted on the case if at all?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
jukka ruskeeahde17th April 2006, 05:54 PM
Hello Le Baron!
The only thing, that I have read about Conan Doyle's contribution to this case is: He made a theory, that Jack the Ripper escaped from the scene "dressed as a woman".
But when you think about the East Enders being afraid and furious, how they would have reacted to a transvestite?
I read this piece of information in the 1970's and I cannot cornfirm that right now. So, if the more experienced members of this website say I remember wrong, then I do.
All the best
Jukka
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
simonowen17th April 2006, 06:11 PM
I wonder if the answer that Dr Bell gave Scotland Yard was something like : he is a doctor or vetinary surgeon of around 41 years old living far from his family , he has a difficult relationship with his mother , he is probably employed as a teacher of young boys at the moment , he is a frustrated homosexual and he is criminally insane.
This could explain a lot about the misunderstandings concerning Druitt , and could also suggest where Sickert got the genesis of his ' Lodger ' story.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
le_baron18th April 2006, 04:00 AM
Doyle's point about a woman could be a more likely summise than first thought? Remember that midwives were very common to be seen at anytime of the day and sometimes drenched in blood if it was a particularly nasty situation. I remember my grandmother telling me of when she grewup in Balmain in Sydney Australia in the 1920's (Balmain representing a perfect example of a colonial working class area that would have resembled the East End in the same way at the time of the Ripper murders). Anyway she remembers after her 11th brother was born that the midwife was drenched in blood as my great grandmother had had complications and a doctor was brought in.
My question is this: If this is the case, why would anyone think it was a transvestite? If you saw a woman walking down Fashion Street or Dorset Street etc (not that you would. If the police would not go down DS on their own why would a woman LOL) noone would say a word. It does bring the point forward though would midwives be known in the area and therefore would it be hard for a man to impersonate one? The idea of the Jill the Ripper is an interesting one.
It does however make sense that a man dressed in womens clothing who could perform his butchering and then escape into the night not detected poses a theory.
I think you are on the right track with Bell's theory however I think his first question would have been what knowledge needs to be known in order to do what was done. Being a medical man and Physician to the Queen whilst she was in Scotland, the man was no ordinary Police Surgeon. His questions would have been pointing ones. And this is what baffles me over his lack of involvement.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
caz18th April 2006, 01:39 PM
"According to Dr Ely Liebow, Bell correctly identified Jack the Ripper. "Bell and a friend analyzed the Ripper killings and put the name of the killer in an envelope. They gave the envelope to the Edinburgh police, who sent it to London, where the crimes occurred. The contents were never divulged, but there were no more murders..."
It's not too far removed from Littlechild's observation that Tumblety was never heard of again after leaving Boulogne, but certain it is that from this time the 'Ripper' murders came to an end.
At least no one would ever get away with using Liebow's logic to claim that Jack had been 'correctly identified' by Littlechild on this basis alone.
There must have been quite a number of rippers fingered over the years because of something that happened to them, or concerned them, shortly after November 9 1888.
I doubt that Dr Ely knew his riase from his liebow.
Love,
Caz
X
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
chris10th May 2006, 02:22 AM
Hi Jukka
The quote at the head of this thread can be found at
Dr Liebow's own web page can be found at
Chris Scott
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mayerling10th May 2006, 04:01 AM
Hi all,
One of the two threads that were attached to the last message quoted Irving Wallace in his book THE FABULOUS ORIGINALS. It was a set of essay chapters dealing with literary characters and who the real people were who were the basis for them: Joseph Bell for Sherlock Holmes, Mary Cecilia Rogers for Edgar Allen Poe's "The Mystery of Marie Roget" (his second C. Auguste Dupin mystery story), George Francis Train (the eccentric American millionaire) who went around the world in 90 days in 1872, and was the original for Jules Verne's Phileas Fogg, Alexander Selkirk was the original for Daniel Defoe's Robinson Crusoe, etc.
He later expanded the essay on Bell in his collection THE SUNDAY GENTLEMAN. It included examples of dialogue by Doyle compared to Bell's original dialogue (as given in Doyle's autobiography MEMORIES AND ADVENTURES). He also linked Bell's detective services to three famous crimes: Eugene Chantrelle's opium poisoning of his wife in 1878 Glasgow, the Ripper Case (where he is working in tandem with Professor Harvey Littlejohn (the Scottish forensic expert of that day), and the trial of Alfred Monson for the murder of Cecil John Hambrough at the Ardlamont estate in the Highlands in 1893.
However, despite the fact that Bell certainly influenced Doyle's image of Holmes (and the fact that another of Doyle's professors was the original for Professor Challenger in Doyle's science fiction series), Doyle's surviving son Adrian Conan Doyle disputed Wallace's claims for Bell's brilliance as a detective and even as a model for Holmes. Adrian Doyle insisted that his father was the original for Holmes (and Watson) and that the proof was Doyle's own involvement in the Edalji and Slater Cases. He also questioned if Bell was as involved in the three cases that Wallace mentioned. Wallace did show sources for the Chantrelle and Monson cases - less for the Whitechapel Case.
I recommend reading the essay in THE SUNDAY GENTLEMAN - it has a selection of the letter writing controversy with Adrian Conan Doyle.
Best wishes,
Jeff
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
captaincan26th October 2007, 11:39 PM
saw this thread and had to post this its a doc that aired on discovery channel in canada yesterday about joe bell,how he solved crimes and how he was asked to solve the ripper crimes.enjoy
While reseaching information about Dr Joseph Bell and his friendship with Sir Arthur Conan Doyle I pondered the idea as to why Doyle was consulted by the police on the murders, but why not Dr Bell? Going through the internet I came across this little titbit.
"According to Dr Ely Liebow, Bell correctly identified Jack the Ripper. "Bell and a friend analyzed the Ripper killings and put the name of the killer in an envelope. They gave the envelope to the Edinburgh police, who sent it to London, where the crimes occurred. The contents were never divulged, but there were no more murders..."
Could someone tell me if this "Dr Liebow" has stated correctly or is it another theory?
On the Dr Bell subject can anyone shed some light on his involvement if any with the ripper case? Looking forward to any input...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
jukka ruskeeahde16th April 2006, 06:37 PM
Hello Le Baron!
Sorry, but sounds like an urban legend to me. I hope, that you could tell your source from the internet!
All the best
Jukka
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Glenn L Andersson16th April 2006, 06:47 PM
Hello, Le Baron,
I have to agree with Jukka on this.
Regardless if the London police received any such information from Mr Bell or not, all the evidence (i.e. the different officials' very quite divering individual suggestions of pet suspects and theories) suggests that the police never really knew the killer's identity.
So either the story is a hoax or the police just never received the alleged envelope.
All the best
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Celee16th April 2006, 11:41 PM
Hi all,
A show about Bell aired on the discovery channel. He was suposed to have been Doyal's inspiration for Sherlock Holmes. The show did claime that Bell was consalted about the ripper murders, and that Bell along with an associate looked at the evidence, and came to the same conclusion. They sealed the name of the suspect, and niether one knew who the other had named as Jack, but they both came to the same conclusion about who the ripper was.
The show claimed that Bell, and his friend most likely named Druitt from the list of suspects that they were given. However, I do not believe that there is any proof of this.
Your friend, Brad
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
le_baron17th April 2006, 05:50 AM
Hi all. Thanks for your prompt response. I find it intriguing though that if Dr Bell was supposed to be the "Doyen of Crime solving" why would he not be consulted by the Met Police?
Even Rudyard Kilping when first reading the Holmes stories that ACD published he said is that my old friend Dr Joe? What do others think? Also does anyone know to what extent Conan Doyle was consulted on the case if at all?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
jukka ruskeeahde17th April 2006, 05:54 PM
Hello Le Baron!
The only thing, that I have read about Conan Doyle's contribution to this case is: He made a theory, that Jack the Ripper escaped from the scene "dressed as a woman".
But when you think about the East Enders being afraid and furious, how they would have reacted to a transvestite?
I read this piece of information in the 1970's and I cannot cornfirm that right now. So, if the more experienced members of this website say I remember wrong, then I do.
All the best
Jukka
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
simonowen17th April 2006, 06:11 PM
I wonder if the answer that Dr Bell gave Scotland Yard was something like : he is a doctor or vetinary surgeon of around 41 years old living far from his family , he has a difficult relationship with his mother , he is probably employed as a teacher of young boys at the moment , he is a frustrated homosexual and he is criminally insane.
This could explain a lot about the misunderstandings concerning Druitt , and could also suggest where Sickert got the genesis of his ' Lodger ' story.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
le_baron18th April 2006, 04:00 AM
Doyle's point about a woman could be a more likely summise than first thought? Remember that midwives were very common to be seen at anytime of the day and sometimes drenched in blood if it was a particularly nasty situation. I remember my grandmother telling me of when she grewup in Balmain in Sydney Australia in the 1920's (Balmain representing a perfect example of a colonial working class area that would have resembled the East End in the same way at the time of the Ripper murders). Anyway she remembers after her 11th brother was born that the midwife was drenched in blood as my great grandmother had had complications and a doctor was brought in.
My question is this: If this is the case, why would anyone think it was a transvestite? If you saw a woman walking down Fashion Street or Dorset Street etc (not that you would. If the police would not go down DS on their own why would a woman LOL) noone would say a word. It does bring the point forward though would midwives be known in the area and therefore would it be hard for a man to impersonate one? The idea of the Jill the Ripper is an interesting one.
It does however make sense that a man dressed in womens clothing who could perform his butchering and then escape into the night not detected poses a theory.
I think you are on the right track with Bell's theory however I think his first question would have been what knowledge needs to be known in order to do what was done. Being a medical man and Physician to the Queen whilst she was in Scotland, the man was no ordinary Police Surgeon. His questions would have been pointing ones. And this is what baffles me over his lack of involvement.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
caz18th April 2006, 01:39 PM
"According to Dr Ely Liebow, Bell correctly identified Jack the Ripper. "Bell and a friend analyzed the Ripper killings and put the name of the killer in an envelope. They gave the envelope to the Edinburgh police, who sent it to London, where the crimes occurred. The contents were never divulged, but there were no more murders..."
It's not too far removed from Littlechild's observation that Tumblety was never heard of again after leaving Boulogne, but certain it is that from this time the 'Ripper' murders came to an end.
At least no one would ever get away with using Liebow's logic to claim that Jack had been 'correctly identified' by Littlechild on this basis alone.
There must have been quite a number of rippers fingered over the years because of something that happened to them, or concerned them, shortly after November 9 1888.
I doubt that Dr Ely knew his riase from his liebow.
Love,
Caz
X
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
chris10th May 2006, 02:22 AM
Hi Jukka
The quote at the head of this thread can be found at
Dr Liebow's own web page can be found at
Chris Scott
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mayerling10th May 2006, 04:01 AM
Hi all,
One of the two threads that were attached to the last message quoted Irving Wallace in his book THE FABULOUS ORIGINALS. It was a set of essay chapters dealing with literary characters and who the real people were who were the basis for them: Joseph Bell for Sherlock Holmes, Mary Cecilia Rogers for Edgar Allen Poe's "The Mystery of Marie Roget" (his second C. Auguste Dupin mystery story), George Francis Train (the eccentric American millionaire) who went around the world in 90 days in 1872, and was the original for Jules Verne's Phileas Fogg, Alexander Selkirk was the original for Daniel Defoe's Robinson Crusoe, etc.
He later expanded the essay on Bell in his collection THE SUNDAY GENTLEMAN. It included examples of dialogue by Doyle compared to Bell's original dialogue (as given in Doyle's autobiography MEMORIES AND ADVENTURES). He also linked Bell's detective services to three famous crimes: Eugene Chantrelle's opium poisoning of his wife in 1878 Glasgow, the Ripper Case (where he is working in tandem with Professor Harvey Littlejohn (the Scottish forensic expert of that day), and the trial of Alfred Monson for the murder of Cecil John Hambrough at the Ardlamont estate in the Highlands in 1893.
However, despite the fact that Bell certainly influenced Doyle's image of Holmes (and the fact that another of Doyle's professors was the original for Professor Challenger in Doyle's science fiction series), Doyle's surviving son Adrian Conan Doyle disputed Wallace's claims for Bell's brilliance as a detective and even as a model for Holmes. Adrian Doyle insisted that his father was the original for Holmes (and Watson) and that the proof was Doyle's own involvement in the Edalji and Slater Cases. He also questioned if Bell was as involved in the three cases that Wallace mentioned. Wallace did show sources for the Chantrelle and Monson cases - less for the Whitechapel Case.
I recommend reading the essay in THE SUNDAY GENTLEMAN - it has a selection of the letter writing controversy with Adrian Conan Doyle.
Best wishes,
Jeff
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
captaincan26th October 2007, 11:39 PM
saw this thread and had to post this its a doc that aired on discovery channel in canada yesterday about joe bell,how he solved crimes and how he was asked to solve the ripper crimes.enjoy