E Petitions and Ripper Files and papers

[PaulB]

fair point Paul..... no offence intended ...

None taken.

[curious4]

Transparency

I fail to see why anyone would be labelled a crank for supporting an appeal for freedom of information.

Transparency is ALWAYS important - if only to prove conspiracy theories wrong.

I also fail to see why information regarding a crime committed over a century ago can be a threat to national security.

So get out there and sign it. Not that my hopes are high - some people love to sit on information in order to boost their importance.

C4

[Jason]

nail well and truly hit on the head curious !

[Trevor Marriott]

I fail to see why anyone would be labelled a crank for supporting an appeal for freedom of information.

Transparency is ALWAYS important - if only to prove conspiracy theories wrong.

I also fail to see why information regarding a crime committed over a century ago can be a threat to national security.

So get out there and sign it. Not that my hopes are high - some people love to sit on information in order to boost their importance.

C4

The two ladies in question who set these petitions up are appalled by not only being called cranks but labelled "Stalinists" and "socialiasts"

[Jason]

sad state of affairs when the word "socialist" is a deemed a derogatory term ! what next ? "greedy capitalist" to be used in congratulation cards ?

[PaulB]

I fail to see why anyone would be labelled a crank for supporting an appeal for freedom of information.

Nobody is being labelled a crank for supporting an appeal for freedom of information.

Transparency is ALWAYS important - if only to prove conspiracy theories wrong.

Except that conspiracists will always claim that there is information which is being held back.

I also fail to see why information regarding a crime committed over a century ago can be a threat to national security.

It isn't and nobody has claimed that it is, but the ledgers apparently also contain the names of police informants and the MPS has claimed that modern day informers could be deterred from giving information if they believed that at some time in the future their names will be made public. So far this opinion has been upheld.

So get out there and sign it. Not that my hopes are high - some people love to sit on information in order to boost their importance. C4

If you think the petition will persuade anyone to release unseen data, then sign it. Nobody is stopping you. But it is as well to know what one is signing and why.

[Carol]

Nobody is being labelled a crank for supporting an appeal for freedom of information.

No, but it has certainly been more than implied.

Except that conspiracists will always claim that there is information which is being held back.

Why not?

It isn't and nobody has claimed that it is, but the ledgers apparently also contain the names of police informants and the MPS has claimed that modern day informers could be deterred from giving information if they believed that at some time in the future their names will be made public. So far this opinion has been upheld.

What a load of rubbish.

If you think the petition will persuade anyone to release unseen data, then sign it. Nobody is stopping you. But it is as well to know what one is signing and why.

Thanks to this thread we DO know what we are signing and why.

Carol

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

I will sign the petition, but don't hold out much hope of a favourable result even if it does receive the necessary 10,000 signatures.

The circumstances surrounding the Whitechapel murders were [and continue to be] a matter of secrecy. This much is obvious to the many well-informed people who don't buy into the traditional folk legend of Jack the Ripper and the belief that, but for a few pilfered files, all the surviving documentation is in the public domain. However, if nothing else, the MPS's argument against releasing the ledgers et al at Trevor Marriott's recent tribunal hearing told us in no uncertain terms that hell will freeze over before these or any other hitherto unseen documents which could be directly or tangentially related to the subject ever see the light of day.

The identity of Jack the Ripper remains a secret for a very good reason. He never existed, and until that same hell freezes over any attempt to put a name to him is destined to be nothing more than a futile exercise in trying to give flesh and blood to a wholly imaginary character.

The mystery is old and tired, its cliches exhausted, so now might be a good time for the MPS to come clean. Unless, of course, it is in their own interests not to do so.

Conspiracy? Who yet dare say? But, in the meantime, for all those who fling conspiracist accusations at people who do not subscribe to the status quo it is well worth them bearing in mind that such a cheap shot can be made to work in the opposite direction.

Regards,

Simon

[PaulB]

Doing a Trevor and inserting your replies in someone else's post isn't helpful and should be avoided.
......

Nobody is being labelled a crank for supporting an appeal for freedom of information.

"No, but it has certainly been more than implied."

No, it hasn't. Stewart said he didn't want to be regarded as a crank by signing a factually incorrect and otherwise facile worded petition. Neither he nor anyone else has said or implied that they think supporting freedom of information makes anyone a crank.

.....

Except that conspiracists will always claim that there is information which is being held back.

"Why not?"

That should be obvious

...........
It isn't and nobody has claimed that it is, but the ledgers apparently also contain the names of police informants and the MPS has claimed that modern day informers could be deterred from giving information if they believed that at some time in the future their names will be made public. So far this opinion has been upheld.

"What a load of rubbish."

As is maybe, but it's the position of the MPS and has been upheld. How do you know they're wrong?
........


If you think the petition will persuade anyone to release unseen data, then sign it. Nobody is stopping you. But it is as well to know what one is signing and why.

"Thanks to this thread we DO know what we are signing and why."

Good. I'm glad you think so.

[PaulB]

Hi All,

I will sign the petition, but don't hold out much hope of a favourable result even if it does receive the necessary 10,000 signatures.

The circumstances surrounding the Whitechapel murders were [and continue to be] a matter of secrecy. This much is obvious to the many well-informed people who don't buy into the traditional folk legend of Jack the Ripper and the belief that, but for a few pilfered files, all the surviving documentation is in the public domain. However, if nothing else, the MPS's argument against releasing the ledgers et al at Trevor Marriott's recent tribunal hearing told us in no uncertain terms that hell will freeze over before these or any other hitherto unseen documents which could be directly or tangentially related to the subject ever see the light of day.

I think not. I don't think the tribunal was hostile to Trevor's argument at all. It was obviously a little ticked off that he presented 42 pages of argument rather than a page or two of fact, but otherwise seemed open to persuasion, and it was stated that the MPS argument, if applied in a wider historical context, was ludicrous, citing keeping secret the identities of informers during, say, the English Civil War. The tribunal itself therefore raised the question of when the MPS's argument was no longer valid. It was a point that generally cuts through the MPS's objections and was, I'd have thought, a point requiring considered clarification.

There was also the question of protection of documentation which, as far as I am aware, wasn't resolved. The National Archives rejected the ledgers on the grounds of their historical unimportance, yet Clutterbuck thought them valuable. Who is right and why, and, dependent on the answer to that question, should potenially important documents be destroyed or preserved on the basis of what appears to be an arbitrary decision?

The identity of Jack the Ripper remains a secret for a very good reason. He never existed, and until that same hell freezes over any attempt to put a name to him is destined to be nothing more than a futile exercise in trying to give flesh and blood to a wholly imaginary character.

The mystery is old and tired, its cliches exhausted, so now might be a good time for the MPS to come clean. Unless, of course, it is in their own interests not to do so.

Conspiracy? Who yet dare say? But, in the meantime, for all those who fling conspiracist accusations at people who do not subscribe to the status quo it is well worth them bearing in mind that such a cheap shot can be made to work in the opposite direction.

Regards,

Simon

To accuse someone of being a conspiracist when they use conspiracist terminology isn't a cheap shot. It's the truth.

Paul

[Lechmere]

I support the idea of a petition to ensure public access to government records but agree that this particular petition is badly worded.
This sentence is off putting for people who don’t subscribe to the view that the Ripper murders have been shrouded in any extraordinary way by official secrecy. It also adds nothing to the terms of the petition.
“The unwarranted secrecy surrounding this historically-important series of unsolved murders has prevailed for over 120 years.”

In order to get the required number of signatures you need to attract a broad church and not put people off.
This one is far too narrowly drawn.
There will be many records that are tangentially linked to the Whitechapel murders but which would not be labelled as such. Papers on Le Grand for example or Tumblety or any number of patients in asylums.

There will be many many more who think that people who obsess over the Ripper crimes are a bit weird, yet who are interested in all sorts of aspects of criminalty, political or diplomatic history and would join in a petition to provide free access to all records after 100 years without any but the most pressing exception.
The exceptions should be so extraordinary that the Home Secretary should sign for those documents to be kept secret for a further period of no more than say ten years after which the decision should be reviewed.

There is another slight problem, that of space. Should every record be kept? Who should decide what is of no historic importance and so what should be destroyed?
I would suggest that any documents that the National Archive declines, should be offered to all other public record holding bodies, including educational establishments before being destroyed. That would be a pretty water tight fail safe.

I would suggest that a petition along these lines would have the chance of success, but I am afraid that, despite the best intentions, the chances of this one getting 100,000 signatures is less than minimal.

[Chris]

I would suggest that a petition along these lines would have the chance of success, but I am afraid that, despite the best intentions, the chances of this one getting 100,000 signatures is less than minimal.

This 100,000 signatures business is a bit of a red herring. That relates to a parliamentary debate, which is a gimmick introduced by this government, and which wouldn't in itself achieve anything anyway.

If I understand correctly all the petitions will be looked at by someone from the relevant department, and I suppose they will notice how much support has been attracted by each one. Having said that, I think the chances of this petition actually changing anything are close to nil. It's a way of registering a protest.

Can I ask again - does anyone know what the cost would be of getting a full copy of the redacted version of the Special Branch records? There may still be some interesting information that's accessible, even as things stand.

[Tom_Wescott]

This 100,000 signatures business is a bit of a red herring. That relates to a parliamentary debate, which is a gimmick introduced by this government, and which wouldn't in itself achieve anything anyway.

That's conspiricist talk.

Simon,

You keep saying there was no Jack the Ripper. Jack the Ripper is the name we've given to the man, men, or entity that killed an unknown number of women in Whitechapel in 1888, possibly before and/or after. Unless you're suggesting that all 11 of the 'Whitechapel murders' were individual homicides, or you're saying no women were killed at all (the murders themselves were an invention), then how can you say there never was a Jack the Ripper?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Stewart P Evans]

Two Questions

I fail to see why anyone would be labelled a crank for supporting an appeal for freedom of information.
Transparency is ALWAYS important - if only to prove conspiracy theories wrong.
I also fail to see why information regarding a crime committed over a century ago can be a threat to national security.
So get out there and sign it. Not that my hopes are high - some people love to sit on information in order to boost their importance.
C4

I think that Paul has already more than adequately addressed this post.

As it was I who first used the word 'crank' in this thread I shall, however, address this point. Again, as Paul has pointed out, the above post is incorrect as no one has said, or implied, that anyone would be labelled a crank for supporting an appeal for freedom of information. But that is not what I said.

What I said was 'I do not wish to be regarded as some sort of crank by signing this petition'. N.B. 'This petition', not simply 'supporting an appeal for freedom of information'. We are dealing in specifics here and the specific is supporting this petition.

I also said, 'Ripperology in general already has a poor reputation. To suggest that the Whitechapel murders files and documents have been surrounded by 'unwarranted secrecy for over 120 years' is, quite frankly, a cranky idea, and is only one step removed from Royal conspiracy ideas.'

All of which is true. And, yes, I believe that some of Simon's ideas, lovely chap that he undoubtedly is, are a bit cranky. He knows I do. That there are some cranky theories in Ripperology is a widely held perception of the subject which hasn't been helped by Royal and Masonic conspiracy theories, diaries, and such nonsense.

Anyone signing this petition, as it is worded, is agreeing that there has been 'unwarranted secrecy surrounding the case for over 120 years' and that there are 'hitherto unpublished files, documents and papers relating to these murders.'

Two questions for those of you signing this petition.

1. What evidence is there for 'unwarranted secrecy surrounding the case for over 120 years'?

2. What, exactly, are the 'unpublished files, documents and papers relating to these murders'?

[Stewart P Evans]

Cranky

...
The identity of Jack the Ripper remains a secret for a very good reason. He never existed, and until that same hell freezes over any attempt to put a name to him is destined to be nothing more than a futile exercise in trying to give flesh and blood to a wholly imaginary character.
The mystery is old and tired, its cliches exhausted, so now might be a good time for the MPS to come clean. Unless, of course, it is in their own interests not to do so.
...
Simon

The above statement, in my humble opinion, is cranky.