Senior Investigators-Inside Knowledge

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Are you sure that was in relation to the Ripper crimes, which is obviously what I was referring to?

[Wickerman]

His hands were tied behind his back when he was brought to the workhouse. Maybe a policeman's handcuffs weren't working. Or he didn't have them.

He's not arrested if he is been taken to the workhouse. Though lunatics can be violent so moving them with restraints is normal practice.

[Trevor Marriott]

He's not arrested if he is been taken to the workhouse. Though lunatics can be violent so moving them with restraints is normal practice.

The Lunacy Act 1890

"If a constable, relieving officer, or overseer is satisfied that it is necessary for the public safety or the welfare of an alleged lunatic with regard to whom it is his duty to take any proceedings, that the alleged lunatic should first be placed under care and control, he may be removed to the workhouse of the union in which the alleged lunatic is, and the master shall receive and detain him;"

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[DJA]

Lunacy Act 1845 - Wikipedia

[Trevor Marriott]

Lunacy Act 1845 - Wikipedia

Repealed by the 1890act

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Wickerman]

The Lunacy Act 1890

"If a constable, relieving officer, or overseer is satisfied that it is necessary for the public safety or the welfare of an alleged lunatic with regard to whom it is his duty to take any proceedings, that the alleged lunatic should first be placed under care and control, he may be removed to the workhouse of the union in which the alleged lunatic is, and the master shall receive and detain him;"

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

So, he isn't actually arrested then, thanks.

[Wickerman]

Look, lets just clarify this once and for all.
Swanson wrote about the police interest in a suspect.

"On suspect's return to his brother's house in Whitechapel he was watched by police (City CID) by day & night. In a very short time the suspect with his hands tied behind his back, he was sent to Stepney Workhouse, and then to Colney Hatch...."

The police were dealing with a suspect, there was no arrest, no charge, whoever this subject was he was a suspect and nothing more.

[Abby Normal]

All these policemen knew exactly what had been going on, so all these policemen invented their various "solutions."

if that were the case and they all "knew exactly what had been going on" then you would think they would have all opted for the same "solution". that they all had various different "solutions" (ie-suspects) is indicative of they really had no clue who the killer was.

[Abby Normal]

...undiscovered murders are rare in London, and the "Jack-the-Ripper" crimes are not in that category...I will merely add that the only person who had ever had a good view of the murderer unhesitatingly identified the suspect the instant he was confronted with him; but he refused to give evidence against him...In saying that he was a Polish Jew I am merely stating a definitely ascertained fact"




The Baron

bingo. it was the ID. the real question is how kos first came to the attention of the police. I would surmise it probably had something to do with him threatening his sister with a knife.

[The Baron]

bingo. it was the ID. the real question is how kos first came to the attention of the police. I would surmise it probably had something to do with him threatening his sister with a knife.

Exactly, also two other possibilties:


2.He had a great hatred of women, with strong homicidal tendencies.

Some prostitute must have been questioned by the police or agents and gave evidence or informations against him


3.This man in appearance strongly resembled the individual seen by the City PC near Mitre Square."

Here they had another witness too



The Baron

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Look, lets just clarify this once and for all.
Swanson wrote about the police interest in a suspect.

"On suspect's return to his brother's house in Whitechapel he was watched by police (City CID) by day & night. In a very short time the suspect with his hands tied behind his back, he was sent to Stepney Workhouse, and then to Colney Hatch...."

The police were dealing with a suspect, there was no arrest, no charge, whoever this subject was he was a suspect and nothing more.

What does 'sent' mean, in this context?
Does it mean; relocated under duress, and breaching the 'suspects' human rights, in the process

The great thing about 'suspects' who are locked up in asylums, or drown themselves, is that they are not in a position to fight back.

Scotland Yard were not only incompetent, they were unethical too.

[Trevor Marriott]

What does 'sent' mean, in this context?
Does it mean; relocated under duress, and breaching the 'suspects' human rights, in the process

The great thing about 'suspects' who are locked up in asylums, or drown themselves, is that they are not in a position to fight back.

Scotland Yard were not only incompetent, they were unethical too.

There was no such thing as humans rights in 1888 but there were procedures under the Lunacy Act that needed to be followed when dealing with those believed to be either insane or those perhaps on the brink. There is no evidence to show that the police were responsible for his incarceration the term relieving officer and overseer are also mentioned in the act, who it would seem had the same powers as the police. Hands tied behind the back seems to fit either of them than the police who would have used handcuffs.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Simon Wood]

Hi Abby,

Deflect and distract.

If they had all opted for the same solution/suspect, too many awkward questions would have been asked.

Regards,

Simon

[Wickerman]

What does 'sent' mean, in this context?
Does it mean; relocated under duress, and breaching the 'suspects' human rights, in the process

The great thing about 'suspects' who are locked up in asylums, or drown themselves, is that they are not in a position to fight back.

Scotland Yard were not only incompetent, they were unethical too.

I read Swanson's words as implying the suspect was taken to Stepney Workhouse by another authority. Earlier, in the same paragraph Swanson tells us the police "sent" the suspect to the Seaside Home ("sent by us with difficulty"). So when he next uses "sent", he doesn't identify by whom.

[Wickerman]

Hi Abby,

Deflect and distract.

If they had all opted for the same solution/suspect, too many awkward questions would have been asked.

Regards,

Simon

By whom?

If all the decision makers are telling the same story, who is there to ask any questions?
Wouldn't the press appreciate a little consistency for a change?