Dear Boss

[Simon Wood]

Hi Mariab,

Lynn Cates is certainly an intellect to be reckoned with.

Regards,

Simon

[Stewart P Evans]

Speculative

Hi Stewart
If they couldn't wait but one day "to keep the story alive" and hoax/post the letter, why then did they wait several to send to the police?

This is developing into a speculative debate, and I do not like too much speculation. I merely offered a good reason for seeing it as a journalistic ploy - which is what the police thought it was.

However, to address your points, if written by a journalist, they would not want to seem too keen and would obviously be watching to see how best to 'play it'. Anyway the papers were still reporting on the Chapman inquest and the 'coroner's theory' for a few days after the inquest ended, so the need to boost the story wasn't immediate.

[mariab]

Mr Wood,
I didn't mean this in a disrespectful way in any fashion whatsoever.
I have the feeling that, pertaining to your disbelief in the existence of a serial killer in 1888/89 Whitechapel, you might see eye to eye with Lynn Cates. But then again, you two probably know each other and are in agreement about things since long years before I even started perusing casebook.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Mariab,

Thank you very much.

Your response, together with a bouncing emoticon, was exactly what I anticipated.

Thank you again.

Regards,

Simon

[mariab]

Hello Mr Wood,
Simon Wood wrote:
Bear in mind that there was no serial killer stalking the East End and you'll have your answer.
OK then!
Good luck with getting all your ducks in a row then, and I guess we might hear about your theory at some later point.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Mariab,

The other 50%?

Bear in mind that there was no serial killer stalking the East End and you'll have your answer.

As to your second question: no, I wouldn't care to be more specific until a later date. I like to get all my ducks in a row.

Regards,

Simon

[mariab]

Abby Normal wrote:
If they couldn't wait but one day "to keep the story alive" and hoax/post the letter, why then did they wait several to send to the police?
Hello Abby,
one word: bureaucracy.

Simon Woord wrote:
Author of Dear Boss?
Journalist 50%, Ripper 0%.
Hello Mr Wood. And as of the other 50%?

Simon Wood wrote:
Evidence is starting to emerge that the concept of JtR was in the pipeline as early as the week of 8th September 1888.
Could you be a bit more specific about the concept of JTR as early as Sept. 8th? I'm afraid I can't cross-reference anything tonight, as I'm sitting on an article for completion – although right now I'm chilling in the sun for a couple hours – I totally need a bit of chill first.

[Abby Normal]

But the timing also fits in with the belief that a journalist wrote the letter. Reports on the Chapman inquest, and inquiries, had given the newspapers subject matter to keep writing reports on the murders. However, with the ending of the inquest on 26 September 1888 they could no longer write about the ongoing inquest. Therefore something new to discuss, to keep the story alive, was needed and the 'Dear Boss' letter was posted the very next day.

Hi Stewart

If they couldn't wait but one day "to keep the story alive" and hoax/post the letter, why then did they wait several to send to the police?

[Simon Wood]

Hi Mariab,

Author of Dear Boss?

Journalist 50%, Ripper 0%.

Evidence is starting to emerge that the concept of JtR was in the pipeline as early as the week of 8th September 1888.

More later.

Regards,

Simon

[mariab]

Dear Nothing to See,
for the newest information on Matthew Packer, read Tom Wescott's article in Examiner 2. It discusses all the issues you mentioned in your post.

[Nothing to see]

I'll go back into previous posts from this site.

http://www.casebook.org/witnesses/w/Matthew_Packer.html

Matthew Packer

Matthew Packer, contemporary press illustration.Witness (though not called to Elizabeth Stride's inquest).

Matthew Packer was born in Goulston Street, Whitechapel[1] in 1831. He married Rose Ann Wallis (b.1832, Maidstone, Kent) in Bethnal Green in 1867. There is no record of any children.[2]

In 1871, the couple were living at 1 Princes Street, Whitechapel (now part of Old Montague Street)[3] where Matthew is listed as a fishmonger. They later moved to 25 Fairclough Street and were joined by Matthew's stepmother Sarah[4]. By 1888, the Packers were living at 44 Berner Street, with lodgers Sarah Harrison and Harry Douglas. Matthew ran a fruit and sweet shop from the premises.

At 9am, 30th September 1888, Sergeant Stephen White called at No.44 to take statements from all the tenants. Packer claimed that he closed his shop at 12.30am that morning as he felt it was not worth staying open on account of the wet weather. When asked if he had seen anybody at the time he replied, "No. I saw noone standing about neither did I see anyone go up the yard. I never saw anything suspicious or heard the slightest noise and know nothing about the murder until I heard of it in the morning".

On 2nd October, two private detectives (Messrs. Grand and J.H.Batchelor of 283 Strand) had found a grape stalk in the drain of Dutfield's Yard. They subsequently took Packer to Golden Lane mortuary to view the body of Catherine Eddowes (without telling him she was the Mitre Square victim in order to test his veracity) - Packer did not recognise her. The Evening News of 4th October criticised the Police in the wake of this discovery of a new witness by two independent detectives.

Thus, on 4th October 1888, White was instructed to make further enquiries and called once again at 44 Berner Street, where Rose Packer told him that the two private detectives had called and that Matthew had gone with them to the mortuary to view Stride's body. On his way there, White met Packer who was in the company of the two detectives. Packer had seen the deceased in the mortuary and recognised her as a woman who had bought grapes from him at 11.00pm, 29th September.[5]

At 4.00pm the same day, Grand and Batchelor returned to Berner Street stating that they were to take Packer in a cab to Scotland Yard to see Sir Charles Warren. It is unlikely that Warren actually did meet Packer and a report written by (Senior) Assistant Commissioner Alexander Carmichael Bruce revealed what Packer had to say[6]:


"Matthew Packer keeps a shop in Berner St. has a few grapes in window, black & white.

On Sat night about 11pm a young man from 25-30 - about 5.7 with long black coat buttoned up - soft felt hat, kind of yankee hat rather broad shoulders - rather quick in speaking, rough voice. I sold him 1/2 pound black grapes 3d. A woman came up with him from Back Church end (the lower end of street) She was dressed in black frock & jacket, fur round bottom of jacket with black crape bonnet, she was playing with a flower like a geranium white outside and red inside. I identify the woman at the St.George's mortuary as the one I saw that night-

They passed by as though they were going up Com- Road, but- instead of going up they crossed to the other side of the road to the Board School, & were there for about 1/2 an hour till I shd. say 11.30. talking to one another. I then shut up my shutters.


Before they passed over opposite to my shop, they wait[ed] near to the club for a few minutes apparently listening to the music.

I saw no more of them after I shut up my shutters.I put the man down as a young clerk.

He had a frock coat on - no gloves

He was about 1 1/2 inch or 2 or 3 inches - a little higher than she was"[7]


Due to the drastic changes in his statements, Packer was considered unreliable and was not called to the inquest, despite the possible importance of his testimony. The Illustrated Police News felt he was important enough to have Inspector Abberline depicted as taking down Packer's details.[8]


As for the private detectives, 'Grand' was in fact a gentleman with a long criminal record who operated under numerous aliases, often known as 'Le Grand of the Strand', aka Charles Grant, Christian Nielson and 'Briscony' to name a few. In consequence of this reputation and allied with Packer's changing story, Chief Inspector Donald Swanson was moved to report that "any statement he (Packer) made would be rendered almost valueless as evidence".[9]


Packer returned to the news again when on 27th October he claimed to have seen the man who bought grapes on the night of Stride's murder again:

Mr Matthew Packer, who keeps a fruit shop near the gateway where the Berner Street murder was committed, stated on Wednesday that he felt just then greatly alarmed owing to his having seen a man exactly like the one who bought some grapes from him for the murdered woman Stride, a short time before the murder was committed. He alleges that he had often seen the man before the murder, as well as the woman; but he had not seen anyone resembling the man since the murder ___ Saturday night. He was then standing with his fruit stall in the Commercial Road when he observed the man staring him full in the face. After passing and repassing him several times, the man got into the roadway and looked at him in a menacing manner. Packer was so terrified that he left his stall and asked a shoeblack, who was near, to keep his eye on the man. His fear was that the fellow was going to stab him. No sooner, however, had he called the shoeblack's attention to the man than the latter ran away and jumped onto a passing tramcar.[10]


Another incident involving Packer occurred at the time of the discovery of the Pinchin Street Murder in 1889. He claimed to have been attacked on his doorstep by somebody who mentioned the Ripper, spending three weeks at the London Hospital as a result. This story is as yet unconfirmed by contemporary sources, however.




[edit]

[mariab]

Tom Wescott wrote:
I noticed and remarked some time back that the “Dear Boss“ author was obviously waiting until the Chapman inquest concluded to see what had been learned, which explains the post script. Likewise, the Ripper was waiting until the inquest ended to see what the police knew. For different reasons, both men where waiting for the inquest to end to make their move.
Stewart P. Evans:
Reports on the Chapman inquest, and inquiries, had given the newspapers subject matter to keep writing reports on the murders. However, with the ending of the inquest on 26 September 1888 they could no longer write about the ongoing inquest. Therefore something new to discuss, to keep the story alive, was needed and the 'Dear Boss' letter was posted the very next day.
For whatever my uneducated, newbie estimation's worth, I too always thought it very significant that the “Dear Boss“ letter turned up in perfect timing JUST after the Chapman inquest concluded, post scriptum and all. My completely uninformed gut feeling says, journalist 80%, the Ripper 20%. I know that Wescott is concentrating on the numerous threat-letters his favorite suspect Le Grand wrote to several ladies, and my suggestion would be, try to find le Grand's original handwriting, and compare it to the Ripper letters. How about bank records, could someone research such for Le Grand? (Apologies for being so fixed on this bank records thing, but I was able to find some relevant information through early 19th century bank records in Naples a couple years ago. But I'm afraid I've no experience whatsoever about the London situation for bank records.)

[Nothing to see]

But the timing also fits in with the belief that a journalist wrote the letter. Reports on the Chapman inquest, and inquiries, had given the newspapers subject matter to keep writing reports on the murders. However, with the ending of the inquest on 26 September 1888 they could no longer write about the ongoing inquest. Therefore something new to discuss, to keep the story alive, was needed and the 'Dear Boss' letter was posted the very next day.

Wow!! Stewart Evans!! Man, I'm in fan mode.

And I absolutely agree. Dear Boss was written by a journalist.

[Stewart P Evans]

Journalist

Regarding timing, I noticed and remarked some time back that the Dear Boss author was obviously waiting until the Chapman inquest concluded to see what had been learned, which explains the post script. Likewise, the Ripper was waiting until the inquest ended to see what the police knew. For different reasons, both men where waiting for the inquest to end to make their move. That's not to say it wasn't the same man, but there's nothing in the letter that tells us the letter had to have been written by the killer.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott

But the timing also fits in with the belief that a journalist wrote the letter. Reports on the Chapman inquest, and inquiries, had given the newspapers subject matter to keep writing reports on the murders. However, with the ending of the inquest on 26 September 1888 they could no longer write about the ongoing inquest. Therefore something new to discuss, to keep the story alive, was needed and the 'Dear Boss' letter was posted the very next day.

[FrankO]

While that may reflect the author's thinking on the matter at the time of writing,...

Hi Caz,

That was the only thing I was trying to say: if he was a hoaxer, this might have been his way of thinking at the time of the writing, obviously not actually knowing if other bodies would turn up and not knowing if his letter would be published anyway if no other bodies would turn up - only guessing (but not baseless) and perhaps even hoping.

The police published it even though they suspected a prankster was behind it, so I can only assume they would have done so anyway, and not just because of Stride and Eddowes.

I don't know about that, Caz. To me, it seems that it was the postcard that convinced the police to take both communications seriously, which caused them to placard posters of the letter & postcard at every police station asking the public for help and sending facsimiles of them to the press. As the postcard was a result of the double event, I am not so sure the police would in fact have published the communications if Stride and Eddowes hadn’t been murdered.

Genuine or hoax, whoever wrote Dear Boss could be no more sure than anyone else that more murders were on the cards. The killer could have been run down by a horse and cart first.

Can't argue with you there.

All the best,
Frank