Motivation for the Dear Boss

[lynn cates]

this, that, other

Hello Abby.

"Why would a conspirator with political motivations for the murders write a hoax letter claiming to be from the killer?-To make it seem like these killings are from a homicidal Maniac and not government conspirators?"

Not sure whether the motivation is political or personal. But WHATEVER the motivation, it seems obvious that Kate needed to be passed off as the next in the series. To their credit, the City of London Police did not buy it. There is a story from "The Times," October 2, I believe, in which they had discounted a single hand.

"Can you clue me in on your overall idea of what you think was going on here? I thought you think JI was resposible for a couple of the murders-is he in on it too?'

Polly and Annie, yes. He was sectioned September 12. By September 19 he was "prime suspect." But in "The Star", "The Daily News", and "The Pall Mall Gazette"--and only 2 days later--there was a false story about JI about to be released, having been vouched for by his brother. I am curious about which wire service provided that tit bit.

"And why would a bunch of prostitutes be "important" enough to knock off?"

A "bunch of prostitutes" wouldn't be. But what on earth has Kate to do with that?

Cheers.
LC

[DVV]

Bah, aaarfff, much ado about nothing.
I maintain the ignore list is stupid. You miss posts that can be of interest. No need to use the ignore function to ignore X or Y.

[Errata]

Hi Lynn

But using the function is a bit childish, isn't it ? Are you sure you can never learn anything from Hunter ?

Life is short, this is just a message board, and there is actual crap that people have to deal with in their lives without adding the manufactured drama of an intellectual dispute over an 130 year old unsolvable case. Who cares if someone uses ignore for a little while? It's a healthy way of minimizing exposure to personal unpleasantness. Just because you or I might prefer to try and argue our way out and potentially escalate a conflict doesn't mean everyone should. Or that you or I would be right to do so.

I'm just saying, there are real problems out there. Let's not confuse this dispute with one of them.

[DVV]

Hi Lynn

Hello David. The recommendation is to ignore attacks--not to respond in kind.

But using the function is a bit childish, isn't it ? Are you sure you can never learn anything from Hunter ?

Methodology? Well, how have the other ones worked for five quarters of a century.

No, it didn't take five quarters of a century to understand there was a serial killer in Whitechapel 1888.
Once again, just study some other cases and you'll see how wrong you are.

[Abby Normal]

Hello Abby. Thanks.

I don't think that the knifesman wrote the letter. But I, like you and Caroline, can see much in "Dear Boss" that conveniently came to pass.

My main idea is to figure out the precise mechanism whereby the letter could promote the "story." This seems especially acute given what Bulling said in his cover letter. If I were the police I would have likely given it back with, "We agree. It is a joke."

"If a hoaxer, and from someone in the CNA, why would they have the author say Hold it back till I get to work?"

Good point.

"If a hoax why would they then do just that and not send to the police for a couple of days-especially if was supposed to be for some sort of gain to the CNA. You would think they would send to the police immediately upon "receiving" it."

Another excellent point.

And of your 4 possible motives, I think that #3 is best. It seems the writer wishes to be SURE everyone links Polly and Annie with Kate who is to come.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn
Why would a conspirator with political motivations for the murders write a hoax letter claiming to be from the killer?-To make it seem like these killings are from a homicidal Maniac and not government conspirators?

Can you clue me in on your overall idea of what you think was going on here? I thought you think JI was resposible for a couple of the murders-is he in on it too?

And why would a bunch of prostitutes be "important" enough to knock off?

Thanks!

[lynn cates]

hoaxes et al

Hello Abby. Thanks.

I don't think that the knifesman wrote the letter. But I, like you and Caroline, can see much in "Dear Boss" that conveniently came to pass.

My main idea is to figure out the precise mechanism whereby the letter could promote the "story." This seems especially acute given what Bulling said in his cover letter. If I were the police I would have likely given it back with, "We agree. It is a joke."

"If a hoaxer, and from someone in the CNA, why would they have the author say Hold it back till I get to work?"

Good point.

"If a hoax why would they then do just that and not send to the police for a couple of days-especially if was supposed to be for some sort of gain to the CNA. You would think they would send to the police immediately upon "receiving" it."

Another excellent point.

And of your 4 possible motives, I think that #3 is best. It seems the writer wishes to be SURE everyone links Polly and Annie with Kate who is to come.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

methodology

Hello David. The recommendation is to ignore attacks--not to respond in kind.

Methodology? Well, how have the other ones worked for five quarters of a century. But thanks.

Cheers.
LC

[Abby Normal]

Hello All. The time seems right for a serious discussion of the “Dear Boss” letter. In particular, I’d like to talk about its motivation.

It has been alleged that the letter was intended to promote a legend and hence enhance the Central News Agency’s sales of news stories to the various papers.

This sounds appealing on the face of it but seems less convincing upon closer scrutiny. Here’s what I mean.

I have compared the hand of the “Dear Boss” to the hands of 3 people with various connections to the CNA. Those are William Henry Hurlbert, John Moore and Thomas Bulling. Only Moore’s hand looks even close. So let’s suppose that Moore indeed wrote it and for the reason given above.

The letter was dated September 25, just about the same time that the Chapman inquest was finishing. It supposedly arrived at the CNA on September 27. It arrived at the City of London Police two days later. It was sent with a cover letter from Bulling (although unsigned) which noted that his editor sent his compliments and that the letter itself was regarded as a joke.

At this point, and given the delays, it hardly inspires confidence that publicity was the main motive. But stay.

Suppose for just a moment that the “Double Event” had never occurred. A perfectly natural response from the City of London Police might have been: “Please convey to your editor our compliments as well. We note that you regarded the letter as a joke. We tend to agree with that assessment. Your best procedure would be to destroy this and concern yourselves with the news.”

If the story were to have gone forward, not only would Moore and the CNA have looked silly but so would any paper choosing to carry the story. But if someone knew what would happen . . .

Alternative explanations?

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn
Great idea for a thread. I have always thought too many people dismiss the DB and SJ letters as hoaxes off hand, mainly because some higher ups in the police eventually did. I think this happened because DB created a major headache for the police, inspired many other hoax letters, and because the killer was never caught. I think it may be a natural reaction to then at a later date for the police to be able to wash their hands of DB by blowing it off as a hoax.

But, I think there is a good chance DB/SJ may be from the killer:
predicted wanting to start "soon"
Knew about "squealed a bit"
cutting of the ear

Thats three things right there. And then of course the police did take them very seriously at first.

A couple of other points:
If a hoaxer, and from someone in the CNA, why would they have the author say Hold it back till i get to work?
If a hoax why would they then do just that and not send to the police for a couple of days-especially if was supposed to be for some sort of gain to the CNA. You would think they would send to the police immediately upon "receiving" it. And lastly on this line, if someone from the CNA hoaxed it would they really tell the police-we thought it was a joke at first?

MOTIVATION (if from the killer)
The killer wanted to get a thrill by taunting everyone.
The killer wanted to take the credit and let everyone know its him and not this Leather Apron person.
The killer had not struck in a while, was itching to and wanted to let someone know. "My knife is so nice and sharp..."
The killer was living vicariously through this writing, talking about what he had done and wanted to do.

I also think that if it was a hoax, that chances are it was not from someone from the CNA or any other journalist. As others pointed out, there was still alot going on and alot to write about and to hoax a letter was pretty risky-one could lose there job or of course have major legal problems.

[DVV]

I even look occasionally at threads with serial killer motifs--silly, though I find them

You should occasionally have a look at serial killers, Lynn. If there is more than one killer in Whitechapel 1888, then there are 10 Shawcrosses and dozens of Kurtens.
Go Google it and you'll understand that personal attacks are not what they seem.
Right now, you have to understand your methodology cannot work. You keep saying there was no serial killer in Whitechapel 1888, because the murders are "too different".
Problem is that at the same time you confess knowing nothing about serial killing.

Stephen never advised to ignore Hunter's posts, as far as I'm aware.

[lynn cates]

recommendation

Hello David. Theories and opinions are welcome. (I even look occasionally at threads with serial killer motifs--silly, though I find them.) And sometimes people get spirited in addressing their views. No problem for me.

But personal attacks are right out. "Ignore" works MUCH better than responding in kind and having a shouting match. It is also superior to running to the pub and starting a "Farewell, I shall post no more" thread.

The Casebook recommendation is to use "ignore." I follow that recommendation.

Cheers.
LC

[DVV]

Whatever your opinion(s) and theory, Hunter's posts are always a joy to read. I'm surprised at you.

[DVV]

Hello David. You tell me. Chris' messages are blocked by the ignore function.
LC

Not my bizness, but disappointing.

[lynn cates]

Out the door, line on the left, . . .

Hello Caroline. You are dead on target--the timing is everything here.

I also completely agree that a "damaged" character might be involved.

Your reasoning about eventual discarding is interesting. Do you think that, given no eventual "fruition," the letter would have been "shown the door"?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

discuss

Hello David. You tell me. Chris' messages are blocked by the ignore function.

Is there something you would like to discuss? I'm game.

Cheers.
LC

[caz]

Well that an interesting question. Did CNA forward letters to the police before Dear Boss? I mean, I'm sure if previous letters were equally spectacular but wrong, like if he said he was going to cut someone's legs off, or set a cat on fire and leave it as a beacon at her head or something, I would think those would go directly to the trash bin. But you gotta wonder when CNA figured out that they might in fact get a letter from the actual killer, and so started sending them on. I mean, I'm sure they got a lot of "the Murderer is my neighbor because he plays his music too loud" kinda notes.

Sorry, Errata, I don't follow this. It's all in the timing. CNA sent the Dear Boss letter on to the police without knowing if any more women were going to be murdered on the streets of Whitechapel, let alone what Chapman's killer might try next. So they could not have put it in the trash bin if there had been no double event. Equally, had they previously received letters along the lines you suggest, I can't seem them hitting the trash bin if the killer didn't go out immediately and deliver exactly what was promised.

The author of Dear Boss could not have known that his handiwork would end up with the police unless he was in on the CNA's decision to send it. But it was a risky thing to write in any case, if there was even the slimmest chance that someone in the author's circle of family, friends or work colleagues could have recognised the hand and put two and two together.

For my money, this was either from a damaged character like the copycat Yorkshire Ripper hoaxer from a century later, or it was from a damaged character who was so determined to prove himself that Eddowes was the result, very shortly after the police had been 'tipped off' via the CNA about his intentions.

Love,

Caz
X