What was withheld??

[sdreid]

Hi all,

In high profile crime investigations, it is standard for authorities to withhold some information, mainly to guard against false confessions and to trip-up potential suspects who might "know too much". This leaves us with some questions.

Was information withheld in the Ripper Case? What information, if any, might have been withheld? Was the information later released or do we still not know what it was? And, if it was never released, is there any chance that we'll ever know what it was?

I would hate to think something important was known at the time that we will never know but that's how it goes I guess.

[JSchmidt]

Maybe the question is a little dumb but was withholding information on crimes a practice back then? Not that I question the intelligence or common sense of the coppers, just mildly curious. Care to enlighten me!

[sdreid]

Hi JS,

I don't know for sure but maybe someone else does. I'd like to think that, probably, the best crime investigation team on Earth had that figured out but maybe not.

If Kelly's heart was truly missing, that might be something along the line. If so, was that the only example?

Playing something close to the vest was certainly a practice here in the States in the first half of the 1900s.

[Mike Covell]

It's a possibility that certain "Facts" were not fed to the press, for example, why did several of the Police Officers from the period believe that the victims before and after the C5 were work of the Ripper? Is it because they were privy to information that the press was not?

Of course one could argue that if this was case we would know about it now, but I am from the School of thought that we actually know very little.

Another example could be withholding info at the inquests, as these were ultimatly reported in the press, but the counter argument there could be that, if this was the case, why were the awful mutilations revealed at the inquest?

In closing I am on the fence, I don't think we have enough "Evidence" to state that the Police were holding info back, it is true they "Held the pres at arms length".

[sdreid]

Hi Mike,

That's correct; we don't really have any evidence I can think of unless you do count the possibility of the Kelly heart business.

That said, with the inherent rivalry between investigating bodies, that is with City of London and Eddowes plus The Met with the rest, it would be counterintuitive to believe that they told each other all they knew, leaving the press out of it.

[Mitch Rowe]

Philips attempts to withhold information concerning the mutilations a few times but Baxter forces him to comply. Philips even says its a thrawting of justice when forced to do so.
I think the pertinent question is not what was with held but what was casually lost?
I bet that if all the Evidence and Police Reports were preserved most of us would have a different outlook on the Crimes and Theories behind them than we do now!
It sure couldnt hurt!

[perrymason]

Hi Stan,

Well we do already know of some things that were not publically aired when they occurred....like did they withhold Schwartz' sighting...or decide he was not being truthful and not valid Inquest testimony......they suppressed Lawendes description of the suspect he saw at Inquest, ...things of that nature. Likely just strategy moves, nothing sinister.

But it is an interesting question. Could they have found things that never were discussed openly? Could they have found something from a crime scene that they could attribute to someone specific? Just not prove that the carrier of it was that same man that night?

All sorts of interesting possibilities....but due to the nature of the question, we may never know about them.

I do have one I believe is along those lines...I believe there is circumstantial evidence that suggests perhaps 2 crimes were being investigated at 13 Millers Court...one relating to a robbery. We only know of the obvious one.

Best regards Stan.

[sdreid]

Hi Mitch and Michael,

Those are all some interesting points and then there's the conjecture put forward that the police did "know" who the killer was and stood down when they knew he was neutralized. The so-called Seaside Home ID and all that relates to it wasn't released of course but did it really happen as noted or at all?

[Mitch Rowe]

Hi Mitch and Michael,

Those are all some interesting points and then there's the conjecture put forward that the police did "know" who the killer was and stood down when they knew he was neutralized. The so-called Seaside Home ID and all that relates to it wasn't released of course but did it really happen as noted or at all?

All I can say to that is...
So far I know of only one Man who ever offered proof to an independant witness that what he was saying was the truth.
That was Abberline when he showed the reporter unquestionable proof that Police were still looking for the Ripper.
Ill have to read the interview over again but I think what the proof was was a later victim being considered as a Ripper Victim.
Ot it could have been a Comunique proving Scotland Yard was even considering Cutbush as the Ripper.
Ill get the quote later on and show ya.

[sdreid]

Yes, they didn't give out all the names of people they were considering as possible suspects either but that wasn't exactly the sort of thing I was thinking of. I was thinking of actual evidence of some kind.

[Mitch Rowe]

Yes, they didn't give out all the names of people they were considering as possible suspects either but that wasn't exactly the sort of thing I was thinking of. I was thinking of actual evidence of some kind.

Nothing that pointed to any Suspects. Not if you believe Abberline.
Here is the line I was thinking of. I know Ive posted it before but it just grabs me that after reading what Mc Naghtan and Dew have to say it just seems much much more sincere:

To convince those who have any doubts on the point, Mr. Abberline produced recent documentary evidence which put the ignorance of Scotland Yard as to the perpetrator beyond the shadow of a doubt.

So the evidence was recent. So even 15 years later police were inquiring about possible Ripper Suspects and/or Crimes.

Now...Abberline goes on to say something equally surprising about Druitt:

"Yes," said Mr. Abberline, "I know all about that story. But what does it amount to? Simply this. Soon after the last murder in Whitechapel the body of a young doctor was found in the Thames, but there is absolutely nothing beyond the fact that he was found at that time to incriminate him. A report was made to the Home Office about the matter, but that it was 'considered final and conclusive' is going altogether beyond the truth. Seeing that the same kind of murders began in America afterwards, there is much more reason to think the man emigrated. Then again, the fact that several months after December, 1888, when the student's body was found, the detectives were told still to hold themselves in readiness for further investigations seems to point to the conclusion that Scotland Yard did not in any way consider the evidence as final."


Soo...They considered Druitt but he must not have been very important because after 15 years of his "Investigation" being open Abberline is still referring to him as a young Doctor!
No reason to keep his file open if the Killer is caught!
I believe they considered Druitt but there was nothing much to warrant further investigation. I doubt if his own Family believed him to be the Ripper. If they did Police probably took it with a grain of salt.

[perrymason]

Ill offer up a little bit more of what I suggested about Millers Court to answer that Stan.

I believe its possible that police were either looking for, or found, evidence of a prior crime in Marys room, and her ashes. Abberline, the Whitechapel Fenian fighter, Reid and some other men were there again Saturday morning, re-sieving the ashes. Some might say thats because they found out later Friday that her heart was missing and thought it might have been tossed in there. I think biological material if present would have been caught during the initial sieving.

And an unusual group of Government men visited that courtyard, I believe on the day of the inquest, Members of Parliament, members of the Royal Irish Constabulary, and oddly a Senior Post Office Official. The first two, maybe just curious....but the last, there is absolutely no reason we know of that he should be interested in this crime, other than as a London resident....so why would he choose to visit at the height of the crowds in Dorset St.

For background color....Fenians had a hit planned for Lord Balfour that very Fall...a plan that was foiled in France...Andersons month of rest in Switzerland?..., there was a Post Office Robbery the weekend of the Double Event, one that required the robbers to cut through an adjoining buildings wall to get in. Almost like the effort one would make to rob a bank...but the Post Office?

It appears that plates used to make currency at that time were mailed about, I believe there was no single secure central location that they were kept in.

All real events laced with my innuendo....but, what if there was evidence of some crime even bigger than the Ripper murders, a robbery linked with an assassination plot for example, that they sought to find,...or did find, in Marys room? One that would implicate the Irish men in her life in some way.

Would someone kill to prevent such evidence from being found? Were they looking for traces of counterfeit bills in the ashes...

All my own storyline, and not very feasible I agree...but on the thread premise.....I could see them obtaining information from crime scenes we never heard about...nor will. Something more to do with the Government, than a whore killer.

Best regards Stan.

[sdreid]

Thanks to Warren, the GSG was withheld from everyone, including investigators. Why wasn't he charged with spoliation of evidence or isn't that crime in England?

[lovejoy]

witholding facts about killer

thank god someone on here is asking a serious question along the right lines nice to meet you sdreid im new but have fresh mind on this and like you am seeking to find this villan evidence was withheld by a few top men ive read it it was stated 20 years approx later by one of the big three in charge and they didnt disclose it then y not is a mystery and they should have stated it at sometime as this case is bigger then them especially with advances in modern detection you could say they failed during inquiries and failed after also

[Cap'n Jack]

I remember working on a very posh estate in Hampshire, years ago, it belonged to the Seymour family, of Henry 8th fame, and we had one of those lovely old-fashioned pigeon houses, but something was breaking into the pigeon house at night and killing the pigeons, so we got a live-trap from the RSPCA, and the very next day I caught this cat in the trap with a pigeon in its mouth. Trouble is it was my cat, that had travelled a mile or more to kill pigeons that it couldn't eat, and didn't need, so I took the cat home, never told anyone about it, gave the trap back to the RSPCA, and never let my cat roam again.
The murders stopped.
It's all rather simple really. Who owned the cat?