Graphologist Claims Tumblety wrote the Lusk Letter

[caz]

Well, I have found a source, cant claim I know of its information integrity, but...... a site registered to The Cardinal Courier of Rochester New York, run by the St John Fisher College...

..."...John George Littlechild, the Chief Inspector who headed the search for the killer, had written a letter to a journalist identifying Francis Tumblety as a "very likely suspect." In the letter, Littlechild mentions that Tumblety was arrested after his landlord caught him changing out of a bloodstained shirt..."

For what its worth, seems vague in places and a stretch in others, but accurate enough for a superficial study I guess.

John Douglas… believes the Lusk letter could be the only authentic one. His reasons are...

…The writing style of the letter is virtually 'an illiterate parody of the cleverer and more sophisticated style of the first letter as if the writer is trying to show himself equal to the wit and flair of the pretender'
He believes the spelling suggests someone not terribly familiar with english writing,most likely an uneducated immigrant, but writing the way he hears it…

…Its interesting stuff, Douglas is not insistent, he just says its possible, consistent with the type of behaviour he would expect from a serial killer like jack.
If he is right, I think that excludes Tumblety.
Miss Marple

Not sure why that would exclude old Tumblebum if the ripper wrote it. He could have been using the opportunity to steer his enemies onto the wrong track by suggesting the killer was a semi-literate local man, possibly Irish, rather than the sharper, more sophisticated character who had authored Dear Boss. If so, it has worked spectacularly well. Most people today think the letter was either a hoax written by a semi-literate local man, or just possibly the work of a semi-literate local killer.

Hoaxing a letter means becoming an actor and playing a part. If hundreds of hoaxers could do it at the drop of a hat, so could a killer. So while I am not sold on the Lusk letter being genuine (and I don’t see Tumblety as a very likely ripper either) I just don’t get why anything about ‘From Hell’ would need to be taken at face value when considering the possibility of it coming from the killer himself, any more than when it is considered to be yet another hoax in a sea of ’em. Just as the killer’s real address wouldn’t need to be Hell, and the kidney wouldn’t need to have touched his lips for real, he would not have needed to be uneducated in order to play the role and send such a letter. Indeed, it would have been a chance for him to shift the blame onto a different suspect type.

A ripper who was truly rotten at writing might have been better off leaving the blame with the ‘pretender’ - the author of Dear Boss, with his ‘wit and flair’.

Love,

Caz
X

[perrymason]

I found some of those comments interesting Caz...seems you have an open mind on this communique.

For my money this is perhaps the only real letter. Its not like bits matching other bits taken from victims came in with regularity, and the estimate of its time in "spirits" is roughly the amount of time Kates would have been... had he opted to preserve it. Im not so convinced by the renal artery arguments ...the section had been "trimmed up" anyway, maybe the Nephritis...but it seems to me a rather long way to go for a hoax. And it is far to narrow a search if it was one.....it would have to be someone who handles dead bodies....physicians, morticians, students and such. Not that I think any were questioned directly about that though.

He doesnt mention a cop...he doesnt mention "funny little games", he doesnt threaten the recipient. I doubt very much that it was Tumblety who wrote it, but who knows...Im fairly sure that soon at least one letter will be attributed to Sickert.....but I do think Jack may have written this one. To a man chasing, from a man hiding. Not the press....and the authorities were hated by almost everyone in the area at the time.

Cheers Caz.

[caz]

Hi Perry,

Well I like to think I keep an open mind on most aspects of the case. That's why I can't exclude many of the possibilities that others do rather too readily, often seriously narrowing down their field of vision by chucking out potential clues willy-nilly.

There has to be a reason why the author singled out Lusk for attention, not knowing if he would ever go public with it, and having to imagine his reaction upon opening the sordid little package.

If the sender did indeed obtain the kidney from a human female, I would agree that they went to some trouble if this was just a sick prank that was not really intended to be taken seriously. At the very least it would suggest a hoaxer who wanted the thing to appear as authentic as possible, in case it was examined and basics like species and gender (if not age and condition) could easily be determined. A hoaxer would need to be a bit of an expert himself to know what could or could not be said about his little offering in 1888, so to be on the safe side he'd have taken care to get a reasonably compatible organ if he wanted the joke to last more than 24 hours.

Incidentally, Cornwell has of course tried to attribute all sorts of ripper letters to Sickert. But I'd like to see her prove that he wrote any of them.

I think we are straying a little too far from Tumblety now too.

Love,

Caz
X

[Nothing to see]

Well, that's a good point. Why was 'From Hell' and the part of a human kidney sent to Lusk in the first place? I always thought it was because he was the head of the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee so his name would be well known. And, sending it to Lusk would ensure max press coverage.

That's what makes me believe that 'From Hell' was a hoax and the kidney was from wherever. If it was Jack sending this I believe he would have sent it to the authorities. If you're going to taunt someone then the guys in authority chasing you would be the ones to stick it to.

Not Lusk.

[Ben]

For what it's worth, document examiner Thomas Mann studied the letter and came to the conclusion that the letter was written by a genuinely semi-literate individual, not an educated person trying to disguise his or her hand.

[Nothing to see]

Well, I've actually seen the original 'Dear Boss' letter. As many other people have.

So that's neither here nor there.

Graphologists I have a problem with. Mostly stemming from the Maybrick Diary.

Anyway

[Ben]

I was talking about the Lusk letter, Nts.

I've little doubt that the "Dear" Boss letter was penned by an educated individual trying to appear less so, which wasn't the case with the Lusk letter, according to professional opinion.

[perrymason]

Well, that's a good point. Why was 'From Hell' and the part of a human kidney sent to Lusk in the first place? I always thought it was because he was the head of the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee so his name would be well known. And, sending it to Lusk would ensure max press coverage.

That's what makes me believe that 'From Hell' was a hoax and the kidney was from wherever. If it was Jack sending this I believe he would have sent it to the authorities. If you're going to taunt someone then the guys in authority chasing you would be the ones to stick it to.

Not Lusk.

Howdy NTS,

I think you should consider this before you formulate too far ahead...Lusk received the package and note...and stuck them in his office drawer for 24 hours. The next evening, after a meeting of the committee, he tells two of his board friends of the parcel. The next morning they went in to see him and the delivery. He wants it out of his sight. And then they go to the authorities, not the press .....2 days after he got it.

Cheers

[Nothing to see]

Howdy NTS,

I think you should consider this before you formulate too far ahead...Lusk received the package and note...and stuck them in his office drawer for 24 hours. The next evening, after a meeting of the committee, he tells two of his board friends of the parcel. The next morning they went in to see him and the delivery. He wants it out of his sight. And then they go to the authorities, not the press .....2 days after he got it.

Cheers

Damn I just posted a reply and my computer logged me out. I got the 2 letters mixed. Sorry. Why would Jack send the letter and the kidney to Lusk?
If Jack's after his jollies, surely he'd send the parcel to the cops who are chasing him. The Zodiac killer did the same. Not a kidney but the taunts. If Jack wrote any letters and IMHO he didn't, he wouldn't be sending them to George Lusk.

[caz]

For what it's worth, document examiner Thomas Mann studied the letter and came to the conclusion that the letter was written by a genuinely semi-literate individual, not an educated person trying to disguise his or her hand.

Hi Ben,

As you say: 'For what it's worth'...

Graphologists claim to be professionals too, but it doesn't necessarily mean anything.

This is the worst kind of pseudo-science because it fools otherwise intelligent individuals. An educated person - being educated (the clues are there) - can always dumb down, in a thousand ways, while an uneducated one cannot 'smarten up' without giving themselves away.

Or are you seriously suggesting that the Lusk letter would have been simply beyond you to compose, while your ubiquitous semi-literate local scumbag had no trouble whatsoever?

Love,

Caz
X

[Nothing to see]

I agree. It would be much easier for someone with a better education to 'dumb down' than for an illiterate or poorly educated person to be so eloquent.

[perrymason]

Damn I just posted a reply and my computer logged me out. I got the 2 letters mixed. Sorry. Why would Jack send the letter and the kidney to Lusk?
If Jack's after his jollies, surely he'd send the parcel to the cops who are chasing him. The Zodiac killer did the same. Not a kidney but the taunts. If Jack wrote any letters and IMHO he didn't, he wouldn't be sending them to George Lusk.

To a point Ben made first...I think you can rule out the author of Dear Boss also being the From Hell author and parcel sender....if that was the case and he was at all credible...Kates ear would have been in the parcel.

Who says Jack the Ripper wanted press? Where is that in evidence? By Zodiaks behaviour? Nope.....not even the investigators thought many if any were really from the killer, and not one missive has any "only killer knows" information in it.

And what in From Hell is a taunt of any kind? He offers to give the man his knife when he's finished....taunt? I dont see that myself.

Cheers NTS

[Ben]

Hi Caz,

An educated person - being educated (the clues are there) - can always dumb down

They can, and they'll acheive varying degrees of success. An expert in the examination of documents came to the conclusion that the author of the Lusk letter was not an educated person attempting to dumb down but by a genuinely semi-literate individual. We, by contrast, are hobbyist theorizers with little or no experience in the field, and are therefore not in any position to assert that the professionals are wrong, let alone invalidate the entire profession. I'm sure you wouldn't like it if someone told you that your professional experience and insight was worthless, and that their opinion is somehow more valid than yours.

Regards,
Ben

[caz]

Hi Ben,

So if a professional graphologist, for example (as opposed to a professional 'literacy detective', linguistics expert, or straightforward document examiner) were to look at your handwriting and conclude you had certain unflattering personality traits, you would be happy for me - nay, expect me - to take their word for it, simply because they can make a living out of flogging their opinions to the unwary?

Interesting.

And if a professional ghost hunter were to...

well I'm sure you get the point.

You do know what 'professional' means?

Love,

Caz
X

PS Sorry for the tardy response! Finally made it back to 'Letters' to see if I had any mail.

[Ben]

Hi Caz,

I really thought we'd clarified the distinction between a document examiner and a graphologist on the Hutchinson thread. If a graphologist looked at my writing and decided I was a serial killer, I wouldn't be overly saddened of that particular view, given that the entire field of graphology is the subject of legitimate scepticism. No such suspicions are realistically entertained against document examiners, and Thomas Mann is one such individual.

Best regards,
Ben