Are There Good Arguments Against Bullen/ing?

[Tani]

It seems to be taken for granted by some, and by me for a long time, that Tom wrote this letter.

Upon what arguments does this rest, and how strong are they?

I'm not arguing for Ripper authorship, just wondering about the pros/cons of Tom authorship.

[Kattrup]

Hi Tani

there’s an old but thorough article by Tom Westcott about the authorship here: https://www.casebook.org/dissertatio...-bulling2.html

As far as I know, not much if anything has been added since then.

I think the main argument against Bulling is that I believe the idea that the letter writer was a journalist is a much later addition to the police officers’ recollection of events.
I forget when the idea was first mentioned but Anderson writes in 1910 and Littlechild in 1913.
So long after the murders - during which the police spent a great deal of effort trying to identify the writer.

If we are prepared to accept that a journalist could have written the letters for fun or in order to further his own career or make himself more interesting, we probably also have to accept that a journalist could have taken credit for writing the letters for those same purposes.

I personally believe the letters to be from the killer.

[Lewis C]

Hi Tani

there’s an old but thorough article by Tom Westcott about the authorship here: https://www.casebook.org/dissertatio...-bulling2.html

As far as I know, not much if anything has been added since then.

I think the main argument against Bulling is that I believe the idea that the letter writer was a journalist is a much later addition to the police officers’ recollection of events.
I forget when the idea was first mentioned but Anderson writes in 1910 and Littlechild in 1913.
So long after the murders - during which the police spent a great deal of effort trying to identify the writer.

If we are prepared to accept that a journalist could have written the letters for fun or in order to further his own career or make himself more interesting, we probably also have to accept that a journalist could have taken credit for writing the letters for those same purposes.

I personally believe the letters to be from the killer.

Hi Kattrup,

I thought that the most common suggested motive for a journalist writing the letters is to increase newspaper sales.

Which letters do you think came from the killer? There are hundreds of them.

[Kattrup]

Which letters do you think came from the killer? There are hundreds of them.

I believe the Dear Boss letter, Saucy Jack and Moab and Midian letter were genuine communications from the killer.
There’s no proof of this and there’s also good reason to consider them hoaxes. Nevertheless, after thinking it over I presently believe them genuine.

[Scott Nelson]

Bulling, Best or perhaps, Harry Dam?

[c.d.]

But didn't Anderson come out years later saying that Scotland Yard never took the letters seriously believing them to be the work of an enterprising journalist and would have said so publicly but didn't want to get hit with a libel suit? It would seem he was referring to Bulling.

c.d.

[Kattrup]

But didn't Anderson come out years later saying that Scotland Yard never took the letters seriously believing them to be the work of an enterprising journalist and would have said so publicly but didn't want to get hit with a libel suit?

yes, he did essentially (he didn’t say anything about a libel suit, I think)

It would seem he was referring to Bulling.

It’s unknown who he was referring to. Frederick Best is another journalist who’s been touted as the author.

[c.d.]

Didn't Sugden point the finger at Bulling (or is it Bullen)? I think (but am not sure) it was in connection with Anderson's statement.

c.d.

[rjpalmer]

As a refresher, Anderson alluded to a libel suit in a footnote to his March 1910 article in Blackwood's.

"Having regard to the interest attaching to this case, I should almost be tempted to disclose the identity of the murderer and the pressman who wrote the letter above referred to, provided the publishers would accept all responsibility in view of a possible libel action."

This footnote was not included in the printed version of Anderson's book.

Maybe the publisher wanted it removed?

[Kattrup]

As a refresher, Anderson alluded to a libel suit in a footnote to his March 1910 article in Blackwood's.

"Having regard to the interest attaching to this case, I should almost be tempted to disclose the identity of the murderer and the pressman who wrote the letter above referred to, provided the publishers would accept all responsibility in view of a possible libel action."

This footnote was not included in the printed version of Anderson's book.

Thanks for the reminder, RJ

[Wickerman]

yes, he did essentially (he didn’t say anything about a libel suit, I think)
It’s unknown who he was referring to. Frederick Best is another journalist who’s been touted as the author.

There was more of a known circumstance against Frederick Best, his partner, his boss and the new owner of the paper asked why Best had not been fired for embarrassing the newspaper by trying to mislead the police, or words to that effect.

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.

[rjpalmer]

There was more of a known circumstance against Frederick Best, his partner, his boss and the new owner of the paper asked why Best had not been fired for embarrassing the newspaper by trying to mislead the police, or words to that effect.

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.

One potential criticism of McKenzie's investigation is that when it came to comparing Best's handwriting to the 'Dear Boss' letter, he relied on a graphologist rather than a mainstream handwriting analyst, and she didn't appear to have had access to the original documents.

Another oddity is that the Moab and Midian letter is not in the official files--only a transcription of it by Bulling.

[Kattrup]

Another point against Bulling is speculative and my own personal opinion.

When Bulling left the Central News in 1898 or 1899 he was referred to as perhaps better known in Whitehall and Scotland Yard than among his peers or the public, I forget the exact wording.
This is echoed by Littlechild’s mention of Bulling being allowed much more leeway by SY than others: “No journalist of my time got such privileges from Scotland Yard as Bullen. Mr James Munro when Assistant Commissioner, and afterwards Commissioner, relied on his integrity”

In my opinion Bulling, having such privileges and status in his career, would see no need to stoop to stratagems like faking letters.

[Scott Nelson]

Agree. Maybe we should consider a person who had experience writing spoofs.