Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Submitting the Dear Boss envelope for DNA testing

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

    Might as well start with the obvious then, the descendants of; Tom Bulling, Charles Moore & Fred Best, to keep the cost down.
    When writing this post I had in mind the video which explained the relevance of the shareholders letter at the Star newspaper, but I couldn't remember the title of the video.
    Here it is:
    https://youtu.be/fFTj_OmEVKM?list=PL...rngfyfq7TBSPaO
    It's only about 45 minutes long, but you can jump to the specific point where this is revealed around the 36th minute.

    Kelvin McKenzie, a former tabloid editor was researching into the role the Star newspaper played in publishing stories of the Whitechapel Murders, and their lack of regard for the truth.

    McKenzie meets up with Andrew Cook who was also conducting research into the Star newspaper when he found a shareholders letter which contained a very important sentence concerning certain dubious activities of one of their journalists - Frederick Best.

    The letter, written by the senior shareholder reads, in part:

    "I have submitted on a number of occasions that Mr. O'Connor's former use of compatriots such as Messrs Best and O'Brien have not only been responsible for several potential legal actions against the Star, but in the unfortunate case of Mr. Parke, a somewhat more serious consequence in January last.

    Furthermore, Mr. Best's attempt to mislead Central News during the Whitechapel Murders should have led to an earlier termination of his association with the newspaper."


    This letter appears to refer to the writing of the Dear Boss letter, that was sent to mislead Central News. An agency which provides newspaper stories by wire across the country, and is on what might be described as 'intimate' terms with Scotland Yard.

    What is more, Cook managed to locate an actual letter written by Best from his estate and taken had it taken to a graphologist to compare with the Dear Boss letter.
    The conclusion was, the graphologist was "as sure as she can be that Frederick Best wrote the Dear Boss letter."

    Incase you were not aware, The Star was almost taken to court by John Pizer for publishing accusations that he was the murderer known as Leather Apron. They settled out of court.
    The Star newspaper was a radical tabloid that didn't let the truth get in the way of a good fictional story.
    Regards, Jon S.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

      When writing this post I had in mind the video which explained the relevance of the shareholders letter at the Star newspaper, but I couldn't remember the title of the video.
      Here it is:
      https://youtu.be/fFTj_OmEVKM?list=PL...rngfyfq7TBSPaO
      It's only about 45 minutes long, but you can jump to the specific point where this is revealed around the 36th minute.

      Kelvin McKenzie, a former tabloid editor was researching into the role the Star newspaper played in publishing stories of the Whitechapel Murders, and their lack of regard for the truth.

      McKenzie meets up with Andrew Cook who was also conducting research into the Star newspaper when he found a shareholders letter which contained a very important sentence concerning certain dubious activities of one of their journalists - Frederick Best.

      The letter, written by the senior shareholder reads, in part:

      "I have submitted on a number of occasions that Mr. O'Connor's former use of compatriots such as Messrs Best and O'Brien have not only been responsible for several potential legal actions against the Star, but in the unfortunate case of Mr. Parke, a somewhat more serious consequence in January last.

      Furthermore, Mr. Best's attempt to mislead Central News during the Whitechapel Murders should have led to an earlier termination of his association with the newspaper."


      This letter appears to refer to the writing of the Dear Boss letter, that was sent to mislead Central News. An agency which provides newspaper stories by wire across the country, and is on what might be described as 'intimate' terms with Scotland Yard.

      What is more, Cook managed to locate an actual letter written by Best from his estate and taken had it taken to a graphologist to compare with the Dear Boss letter.
      The conclusion was, the graphologist was "as sure as she can be that Frederick Best wrote the Dear Boss letter."

      Incase you were not aware, The Star was almost taken to court by John Pizer for publishing accusations that he was the murderer known as Leather Apron. They settled out of court.
      The Star newspaper was a radical tabloid that didn't let the truth get in the way of a good fictional story.
      Great post there Jon,

      I seem to recall reading an article along these lines in Ripperologist, but I might be wrong, but it offered good evidence for Best being the author of the Dear Boss letter, based on later information regarding Bests conduct and later acknowledgment of the potential **** storm that might happen if the Central News Agency kept him on. Have I misremembered this detail?
      Thems the Vagaries.....

      Comment


      • #33
        Hi Al, I'll have to look, I do recall something in writing years ago. It was actually Ben who drew my attention to this video, he didn't like the fact the Star newspaper was being ridiculed. Ben didn't know a whole lot about the reputation of the Star in it's first year, and the depths they would go, to sell copy.
        It was the Star that dreamed up the story about Hutchinson being discredited, no other paper repeated it because it was a fiction purely intended to sell copy.

        I'm intrigued at the reference to Ernest Parke in January of 1890, that is when he was imprisoned for a year..
        https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/brow...=t18900113-139
        for Unlawful & malicious publication concerning the Cleveland Street Scandal, but he wasn't working for the Star at the time - a bit of a puzzle, unless it was some other infringement.

        Anyway, not to get off topic.....
        Regards, Jon S.

        Comment


        • #34
          Sounds like the Daily Star is the 1880’s equivalent of the Daily sport Uk newspaper.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

            When writing this post I had in mind the video which explained the relevance of the shareholders letter at the Star newspaper, but I couldn't remember the title of the video.
            Here it is:
            https://youtu.be/fFTj_OmEVKM?list=PL...rngfyfq7TBSPaO
            It's only about 45 minutes long, but you can jump to the specific point where this is revealed around the 36th minute.

            Kelvin McKenzie, a former tabloid editor was researching into the role the Star newspaper played in publishing stories of the Whitechapel Murders, and their lack of regard for the truth.

            McKenzie meets up with Andrew Cook who was also conducting research into the Star newspaper when he found a shareholders letter which contained a very important sentence concerning certain dubious activities of one of their journalists - Frederick Best.

            The letter, written by the senior shareholder reads, in part:

            "I have submitted on a number of occasions that Mr. O'Connor's former use of compatriots such as Messrs Best and O'Brien have not only been responsible for several potential legal actions against the Star, but in the unfortunate case of Mr. Parke, a somewhat more serious consequence in January last.

            Furthermore, Mr. Best's attempt to mislead Central News during the Whitechapel Murders should have led to an earlier termination of his association with the newspaper."


            This letter appears to refer to the writing of the Dear Boss letter, that was sent to mislead Central News. An agency which provides newspaper stories by wire across the country, and is on what might be described as 'intimate' terms with Scotland Yard.

            What is more, Cook managed to locate an actual letter written by Best from his estate and taken had it taken to a graphologist to compare with the Dear Boss letter.
            The conclusion was, the graphologist was "as sure as she can be that Frederick Best wrote the Dear Boss letter."

            Incase you were not aware, The Star was almost taken to court by John Pizer for publishing accusations that he was the murderer known as Leather Apron. They settled out of court.
            The Star newspaper was a radical tabloid that didn't let the truth get in the way of a good fictional story.
            For inventing make-believe people Best & Co did pretty well with the whole persona and moniker of Jack The Ripper.

            Surprised The Star never published a warts and all interview with The Ripper himself at his lodgings. Maybe he also lived with an interpreter too
            "When the legend becomes fact... print the legend"
            - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)

            Comment


            • #36
              Best didn't invent anybody.
              Regards, Jon S.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                Hi Al, I'll have to look, I do recall something in writing years ago. It was actually Ben who drew my attention to this video, he didn't like the fact the Star newspaper was being ridiculed. Ben didn't know a whole lot about the reputation of the Star in it's first year, and the depths they would go, to sell copy.
                It was the Star that dreamed up the story about Hutchinson being discredited, no other paper repeated it because it was a fiction purely intended to sell copy.

                I'm intrigued at the reference to Ernest Parke in January of 1890, that is when he was imprisoned for a year..
                https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/brow...=t18900113-139
                for Unlawful & malicious publication concerning the Cleveland Street Scandal, but he wasn't working for the Star at the time - a bit of a puzzle, unless it was some other infringement.

                Anyway, not to get off topic.....
                Your perspective on the Star report has been duly noted, but the article has never been proven to be fiction. Your contention that the Star plunged the depths is perhaps loosely accurate, but on a story by story basis, they cannot summarily be dismissed. A liar doesnt always lie.

                The fact that you support Hutchinson, like Abberline did, means little besides your own perspective. From my perspective his story, his fanciful details, his delay, all combine to make him extremely questionable. And the fact he vanishes back from whence he came might indicate his true value.

                I believe his story acomplishesd precisely what it was intended to do. Change the loitering man Sarah saw from a lurking malevolence which prompted a Pardon For Accomplices, to one of a concerned, albeit semi-stalker, friend. He claimed he knew Mary, do we have reasons to accept his word on that? Did anyone see Mary leave her room after entering it with Blotchy at 11:45pm?

                With Hutchinsons remarks Astrakan takes Primary Suspect spot, and Blotchy, the most obvious suspect, is just set aside. Huge mistake there. Which they corrected by abandoning Georgie. Sadly too late to avoid damaging the hopes of ever finding Blotchy.
                Last edited by Michael W Richards; 05-27-2021, 12:58 PM.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

                  Your perspective on the Star report has been duly noted, but the article has never been proven to be fiction. Your contention that the Star plunged the depths is perhaps loosely accurate, but on a story by story basis, they cannot summarily be dismissed. A liar doesnt always lie.

                  The fact that you support Hutchinson, like Abberline did, means little besides your own perspective. From my perspective his story, his fanciful details, his delay, all combine to make him extremely questionable. And the fact he vanishes back from whence he came might indicate his true value.

                  I believe his story acomplishesd precisely what it was intended to do. Change the loitering man Sarah saw from a lurking malevolence which prompted a Pardon For Accomplices, to one of a concerned, albeit semi-stalker, friend. He claimed he knew Mary, do we have reasons to accept his word on that? Did anyone see Mary leave her room after entering it with Blotchy at 11:45pm?

                  With Hutchinsons remarks Astrakan takes Primary Suspect spot, and Blotchy, the most obvious suspect, is just set aside. Huge mistake there. Which they corrected by abandoning Georgie. Sadly too late to avoid damaging the hopes of ever finding Blotchy.
                  Hutchinson is suspicious but didn't Sarah lewis say she saw a young man and a woman + another man looking up at the court (presumably Hutchinson) at 2:30am (as per Spitalfields clock) which would make it 1 and a half hours approximately after blotchyman entered MJK's room. This suggests to me that MJK went out again and met another man?

                  By the 15th November 1888, The Star newspaper had reported that Hutchinson’s statement was discredited and that Mrs Cox’s blotchy faced man was more important so only 3 days had passed so not sure if it would derailed the investigation too much. Just my opinion. What puzzles me is why Abberline seemed to think Hutchinson's witness description held water? easy to say in retrospect given what we know about eye witness descriptions and the studies that have been done on it by such people as Loftus.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by MrTwibbs View Post

                    Hutchinson is suspicious but didn't Sarah lewis say she saw a young man and a woman + another man looking up at the court (presumably Hutchinson) at 2:30am (as per Spitalfields clock) which would make it 1 and a half hours approximately after blotchyman entered MJK's room. This suggests to me that MJK went out again and met another man?

                    By the 15th November 1888, The Star newspaper had reported that Hutchinson’s statement was discredited and that Mrs Cox’s blotchy faced man was more important so only 3 days had passed so not sure if it would derailed the investigation too much. Just my opinion. What puzzles me is why Abberline seemed to think Hutchinson's witness description held water? easy to say in retrospect given what we know about eye witness descriptions and the studies that have been done on it by such people as Loftus.
                    She saw a man and a woman passing by, and Wideawake looking into the court.

                    ""I live at 24 Great Powell[sic] Street, Spitalfields. I am a laundress. I know Mrs. Keyler in Miller's Court. I was at her house at half past 2 on Friday morning she lives at No.2 in the court on the left on the first floor I know the time by having looked at Spitalfields Church clock as I passed it - When I went in the court I saw a man opposite the court in Dorset Street standing alone by the lodging house. He was not tall - but stout - had on a black wideawake hat - I did not notice his clothes - another young man with a woman passed along - the man standing in the street was looking up the court as if waiting for someone to come out, I went to Mrs ["Kelsey's" - deleted] Keyler's I was awake all night in a chair I dozed I heard no noise I woke up about half-past three - I sat awake until nearly five - a little before four I heard a female voice shout loudly one Murder! the sound seemed to come from the direction of deceased's room there was only one scream"

                    She describes the couple passing as a "young man with a woman", would anyone describe Astrakan Man as a young man? He's at least 34 or 35 according to Georgie. Think of the average life span in East London in 1888....35 is at best middle aged, or older.
                    Last edited by Michael W Richards; 10-02-2021, 08:39 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Its worth noting that Abberline supported 2 witness statements specifically and neither were entered into the respective Inquest records. Abberlines willingness to support their remarks I believe reveal more of his fervent desire to end this nightmare for the district which made his reputation. Because when you think about it, his support amounts to a departure from the official evidence as presented. He supports people, who in terms of the official accounting of the relevant witnesses, are apparently officially not relevant to the question of how these women die.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
                        Its worth noting that Abberline supported 2 witness statements specifically and neither were entered into the respective Inquest records. Abberlines willingness to support their remarks I believe reveal more of his fervent desire to end this nightmare for the district which made his reputation. Because when you think about it, his support amounts to a departure from the official evidence as presented. He supports people, who in terms of the official accounting of the relevant witnesses, are apparently officially not relevant to the question of how these women die.
                        Hi Michael,

                        Pardon my ignorance but who were the witnesses you refer to you. Hutchinson I assume was one. Who was the other one?

                        Thanks in advance.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X