CoL Police find photo of graffito? - NOT Goulston St!

[Trevor Marriott]

The photographs are owned, and are currently with the City of London Police. So our hands are tied until they give us there permission.

Rob

Thank You Rob

[Rob Clack]

Let me say I had my information from a City of London Police source who spoke about this freely and didn't tell me it was confidential. In fact he wasn't sure why they were taking so long to release it.

Had I understood respected Ripperologists were researching this I would have kept it to myself. Because I don't believe that anything should be held back about a 124 year old case and because if I have something that may be of interest or help fellow enthusiasts I believe in sharing and not sitting on what I know without being given good reason.

It is ironic that the Police should have insisted on keeping this quiet and then been responsible for it getting out while the historians have kept schtum. Wasn't it always thus?

Apologies to those working hard on researching this exciting find. I didn't intend to steal your thunder. I shall say no more about this until the official release.

I'll get me coat.

Hi Hutch,

You have nothing to apologise for. These things happen.

Regards

Rob

[Rob Clack]

I have always personally maintained that City Police material in connection with the Whitechapel murders existed. What I do not understand is how the archives have remained seemingly untouched for so long. If, like 'Alf' says, a jar with a kidney was known of, then people knew what it pertained to as well- 50-60 years ago.
On this point I am pretty sure I have seen comment on here that the 'kidney' was known to have been kept for many years but was 'thrown out years ago'.

I suggest you read Don Rumbelow's "Notes for the curious" in Scotland Yard Investigates.

This told me, ignorant person that I am, that logically this 'evidence' survived the war. The jTR letters adressed to the City Police ALSO survived the war, upon which when I suggested that the Eddowes case material also survived the war that the JTR letters were not kept with the case evidence, but 'elsewhere'- I was not told where these letters WERE found.

Why should you be told? It's no secret anyway. Don found them in the basement of the City Police Headquarters at Old Jewry.

So I have to ask the obvious here. If photographs pertaining to the Whìtechapel murder case have now been found, in archives, then as these would be specific evidence material, has the Eddowes case written documentation material been found WITH the photographic material? Perhaps I am being daft, but one would logically think that photographs pertaining to the Whitechapel Murder case in City Police hands would be normally put together with the rest of the case material?

All will be revealed when me and Neil have permission from the City of London Police.

Rob

[Rob Clack]

Just curious to know why if an official document or photograph has been lodged with the archives for public viewing why have the City of London Police become involved in making a decison to hold it back. Surely you can answer that question ?

The right course of action would be for them to withdraw it surely

The photographs are owned, and are currently with the City of London Police. So our hands are tied until they give us there permission.

Rob

[Trevor Marriott]

Grammatically, your question was poor.

Again, as stated, we aren't answering questions on the subject directly.

Have a nice day.

Monty

I bet I will have a better day perhaps even a field day when you publish it

[Monty]

What if I were to ask you if the graffito has anything to do with Buffalo Bill Cody's Wild West show that toured London? Would you answer that?

Mike

Mike,

If I thought for one moment you were being serious....no.

Monty

[The Good Michael]

Again, as stated, we aren't answering questions on the subject directly.

What if I were to ask you if the graffito has anything to do with Buffalo Bill Cody's Wild West show that toured London? Would you answer that?

Mike

[Monty]

Simple questions even for you why have the City of London police asked for it to be held back and for what purpose.

I cant see the logic if you are saying its going to be posted anyway

Grammatically, your question was poor.

Again, as stated, we aren't answering questions on the subject directly.

Have a nice day.

Monty

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor,

Your question makes no sense.

Besides, as stated numerous times, all will be revealed in due course properly and as it should be.

Monty

Simple questions even for you why have the City of London police asked for it to be held back and for what purpose.

I cant see the logic if you are saying its going to be posted anyway

[Monty]

Just curious to know why if an official document or photograph has been lodged with the archives for public viewing why have the City of London Police become involved in making a decison to hold it back. Surely you can answer that question ?

The right course of action would be for them to withdraw it surely

Trevor,

Your question makes no sense.

Besides, as stated numerous times, all will be revealed in due course properly and as it should be.

Monty

[Trevor Marriott]

Hutch,

Rob and I agreed not to post on this thread simply because we were aware of speculation and we have had experience of what speculation does.

However it is important that we make this very clear, here, on this thread.

You are by no means whatsoever to blame and should hold no guilt on this matter.

You acted in good faith and honestly, and did what was only natural.

Rob and I, along with many experienced researchers here, are not naïve. We know that a risk is run with such finds. The problem is do we rush it out half verified? Or do we work on it? Its difficult.

Again, to clarify, the request to hold was the City of London Polices, not ours. We are aware of their reasons and complied.

These reasons, along with everything, will be revealed in due course and as soon as possible.

Again we ask for patience. Just judge it once its wholly out there.

Many thanks

Neil & Rob

Just curious to know why if an official document or photograph has been lodged with the archives for public viewing why have the City of London Police become involved in making a decison to hold it back. Surely you can answer that question ?

The right course of action would be for them to withdraw it surely

[Phil Carter]

Hello Hutch, Neil, Rob,

Many thanks to you all for your opined openess in this matter, without any hint of personal desire for any unnecessary secrecy.

I have always personally maintained that City Police material in connection with the Whitechapel murders existed. What I do not understand is how the archives have remained seemingly untouched for so long. If, like 'Alf' says, a jar with a kidney was known of, then people knew what it pertained to as well- 50-60 years ago.
On this point I am pretty sure I have seen comment on here that the 'kidney' was known to have been kept for many years but was 'thrown out years ago'.

This told me, ignorant person that I am, that logically this 'evidence' survived the war. The jTR letters adressed to the City Police ALSO survived the war, upon which when I suggested that the Eddowes case material also survived the war that the JTR letters were not kept with the case evidence, but 'elsewhere'- I was not told where these letters WERE found.

So I have to ask the obvious here. If photographs pertaining to the Whìtechapel murder case have now been found, in archives, then as these would be specific evidence material, has the Eddowes case written documentation material been found WITH the photographic material? Perhaps I am being daft, but one would logically think that photographs pertaining to the Whitechapel Murder case in City Police hands would be normally put together with the rest of the case material?

Let me make this clear. If the City Police material has been discovered and is in the pipeline for publication, I would be delighted and like all others patiently and respectfully wait for them to be revealed. All I would like to know is has anything been found pertaining to this? Now THAT would REALLY be a sensational book to look forward to! Research and transcribing this would take time and the wait would be well worth it.

Whatever the answer, any ORIGINAL photographs from 1888, would be very welcome. Hopefully they arent 'touched-up' either. Sceptic that I am, I just hope this isnt going to be a Museum piece that only Policemen will be allowed to see in person, along with the already done 'Newspaper revelation' like 1987, a year before the 100th anniversary, which no doubt helped re-launch the interest in the Museum. I hope to goodness the Police arent holding this back for that reason. Cynic that I am though..
I hope to be pleasantly surprised.

No disrespect meant to any individual, please. Like all others, I praise all those concerned and wish them the best of luck with the project.

Best wishes

Phil

[The Grave Maurice]

Leave your coat on the hook, Hutch. As Neil says, you've done nothing wrong. I find it very interesting that you and Neil and Rob should have unearthed the same bit of news. But, without your contribution, we wouldn't have heard about it for a while. So, thanks!

[Monty]

Hutch,

Rob and I agreed not to post on this thread simply because we were aware of speculation and we have had experience of what speculation does.

However it is important that we make this very clear, here, on this thread.

You are by no means whatsoever to blame and should hold no guilt on this matter.

You acted in good faith and honestly, and did what was only natural.

Rob and I, along with many experienced researchers here, are not naïve. We know that a risk is run with such finds. The problem is do we rush it out half verified? Or do we work on it? Its difficult.

Again, to clarify, the request to hold was the City of London Polices, not ours. We are aware of their reasons and complied.

These reasons, along with everything, will be revealed in due course and as soon as possible.

Again we ask for patience. Just judge it once its wholly out there.

Many thanks

Neil & Rob

[Hutch Orris]

Let me say I had my information from a City of London Police source who spoke about this freely and didn't tell me it was confidential. In fact he wasn't sure why they were taking so long to release it.

Had I understood respected Ripperologists were researching this I would have kept it to myself. Because I don't believe that anything should be held back about a 124 year old case and because if I have something that may be of interest or help fellow enthusiasts I believe in sharing and not sitting on what I know without being given good reason.

It is ironic that the Police should have insisted on keeping this quiet and then been responsible for it getting out while the historians have kept schtum. Wasn't it always thus?

Apologies to those working hard on researching this exciting find. I didn't intend to steal your thunder. I shall say no more about this until the official release.

I'll get me coat.