Dear Boss

[Tom_Wescott]

Wescott's suspicion that Joseph Aarons was involved in Le Grand's alleged “scheme“ of the “Dear Boss“ letter simply because Aarons went out and gave a lot of quotes to the police comes completely unsubstantiated.

Oh Lord. Do you actually read anything I write? I never claimed Aarons and Le Grand conspired in any way regarding the 'Dear Boss' letter. I stated that circumstances surrounding the WVC and the Lusk letter/kidney strongly suggest that Joseph Aarons was the man behind it, and that his motive was one of publicity to drive more money into the WVC. His close association with Le Grand and Le Grand being associated with other such Ripper or Ripper-like letters, suggests Le Grand as a likely accomplice in the ruse, particularly since they went to Le Grand's people at the Evening News with the kidney before contacting the police.

I know what 'busted as in caught' means, but I stll do not know how it can be used in relation to 'Best' as in the alleged 'Jack the Ripper' letter writer.

Busted was the wrong word, since neither man was arrested. I should say 'fallen under suspicion', which Bulling evidently did at some point (Littlechild letter) as did Best (Monty's source above). What I stated was that between the two, Best seems the more likely to have written the 'Dear Boss' letter. I certainly do not think it's a 'foregone conclusion' that either men wrote it.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Stewart P Evans]

Chapter and Verse

...
Busted was the wrong word, since neither man was arrested. I should say 'fallen under suspicion', which Bulling evidently did at some point (Littlechild letter) as did Best (Monty's source above). What I stated was that between the two, Best seems the more likely to have written the 'Dear Boss' letter. I certainly do not think it's a 'foregone conclusion' that either men wrote it.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott

Without going into chapter and verse, the sole source we have for 'Best' writing 'Jack the Ripper letters' is the none too accurate and often inventive Nigel Morland.

However, in the case of Bulling we have Littlechild's statement that "it was generally believed at the Yard that Tom Bullen [sic] of the Central News was the originator but it is probable Moore, who was his chief, was the inventor."

I am sure that Littlechild and the men at the Yard would have known a lot more, and a lot better than, Morland, you, and I about the 'Jack the Ripper' letters.

So whilst, as with most things in this case, it is far from 'a foregone conclusion' the better evidence is in favour of the Bulling/Moore belief than the totally unsupported 'Best' contention.

[Tom_Wescott]

I didn't realize Morland had anything to do with the Best comment. I agree, nothing this man says regarding the Ripper can be trusted.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Stewart P Evans]

And...

And before anyone leaps in with information gleaned from the Andrew Cook book I would recommend that they read the Best entries in the new A To Z. They are very circumspect - and with good reason.

[Chris]

And before anyone leaps in with information gleaned from the Andrew Cook book I would recommend that they read the Best entries in the new A To Z. They are very circumspect - and with good reason.

I must say I was very surprised to read that Andrew Cook was aware of Morland's Best story but omitted it from his book for fear it would "interrupt the flow of his narrative." And that he "does not connect" Morland's journalist Best with his own journalist Best. Most peculiar.

[mariab]

Wescott wrote:
Busted was the wrong word, since neither man was arrested. I should say 'fallen under suspicion', which Bulling evidently did at some point (Littlechild letter) as did Best (Monty's source above).
Thus my interpretation of your usage of “busting“ was guessed correctly!
I apologize, I didn't realize that you were considering Joseph Aarons as the initiator of the “scheme“ (if scheme there was), and Le Grand the follower.That they went first to The Evening News with the kidney before contacting the police isn't straight at all, this I have to admit. I'm very tempted to ask what else all we know about Joseph Aarons (his line of business, his ethics), but I'm sure I'll get another lecture of “go do your required reading“, which is the most apt advise, but for which (and I profoundly apologize) there's simply NO time whatsoever right now.
I'm interested in the two different Bests and I'll try to read up on how Elaine Quigley identified Best's handwriting.
Now to get ready for a business related long event, but I'll be back much later tonight, and I'll look at ancestry.fr for Lacassagne's family, if he has left any antecedents in Lyon who might have ended up with any photographs. (And yes, I KNOW it's a very long shot.)

[mariab]

OK, I get it, I'll leave Morland and his “other Best“ totally out of this. Which is good, 'cause, even less reading for me. And even from the first mentioning of this it sounded quite a bit fishy (about the “other Best“, I mean).

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Maria, that's what I'm saying, is that nothing fits with the WVC and the lusk kidney. The timing was too perfect for a group low on money and trying to muster publicity, then the letter arrives, they take it the Evening News, then you have Aarons (and notably not Lusk) in the press telling fibs about the kidney to make it appear to have come from Eddowes (and thus the Ripper). Only the WVC had anything to gain from their receipt of the kidney and letter.

As for Aarons, I once found him firing off comments in a socialist/anarchist journal, but I've since lost the source.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

Tom, thanks so much for the infos. I have to run to a business-related thing at the Opéra (involving a singer from Ohio whom I'm trying to recruit for a project and stuff), but I would suggest to research Aarons, and to look at the death statistics (perhaps Colin Roberts could help with that?) about how often fresh bodies entered graves in VWC, because the kidney might have been a grave robbery.
Gotta run, I'll be back in about 3-4 hours...(shXt, I'm not even dressed yet!)

[Simon Wood]

Doctor! Doctor! It's happening again.

I'm agreeing with Tom Wescott.

Regards,

Simon

[Stewart P Evans]

Buffs

Just love those conspiracy buffs...

[Simon Wood]

And so you should, Stewart, for there are many surprises in store.

Regards,

Simon

[Tom_Wescott]

I must not be on the right track at all if Simon agrees with me. I suppose I need to rethink this. Okay, Bulling it is.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

I'm back from my business related thing and I was totally expecting a big, long, fat debate to have taken place while I was out, perhaps new results about Bulling (produced by someone just like THAT! {insert clap of fingers}), perhaps even a nasty fight? But I see that everyone is all lovey-dovey with each other and agreeing with everybody. What's next, will you all hold hands and start singing “Kumba-ya“?
(But then again, how often does one experience people agreeing with each other on casebook?)
With many apologies to have taken up space with such a stupid comment.

[mariab]

Tom Wescott wrote:
The timing was too perfect for a group low on money and trying to muster publicity, then the letter arrives, they take it the Evening News, then you have Aarons (and notably not Lusk) in the press telling fibs about the kidney to make it appear to have come from Eddowes (and thus the Ripper). Only the WVC had anything to gain from their receipt of the kidney and letter.
Tom, I've been thinking about it and your theory about the WVC allegedly arranging a scheme with the Lusk kidney for financial gain also fits with Le Grand's (semi-documented) schemes with the grape stalk, the flower “found“ by the sisters, the “Lodger“ and, possibly, R. Batchelor's arranged appearance at a shop as “doctor“ with a “blood dripping bag“. Do you realize that such a theory would NOT necessarily imply Le Grand as the Ripper, but simply as a petty criminal interested in financial gain? Which incidentally fits even better with Le Grand's “profile“ (and God, do I hate that term!).
On the other side, I totally agree with you that one “should keep an open mind“, and I totally appreciate that you are willing to consider both Schwartz' testimony as truthful(ish), with Pipeman possibly being Le Grand and BS an accomplish, and that you're at the same time considering the possibility of the IWMC having manipulated Schwartz into a false restimony (i.e., the infamous “Lynn Cates stolen theory“). (In which case NO BS and Pipeman would have existed.)
For your Aarons/Le Grand-“scheme“-Lusk-kidney theory, I strongly suggest that you research Aarons's past. Socialist-anarchist is too generic, but was there any history of earlier schemes, any arrests, any records with the police, anything? One does not go from law abiding citizen into violating the sepulchral and sending human kidneys to the press. (And I'm NOT saying at all that I'm definitely buying that theory of yours...)