The GOGMAGOG-letter

[MysterySinger]

I think the sentence regarding Sir Charles Warren is the most telling there.

But quess what, the provision of rubber soled boots could have assisted JTR if he was a policeman.

[David Orsam]

Incredible new evidence

I believe I have cracked this case wide open.

At a public meeting on 9 October 1888, Edward Hare Pickersgill, the Member of Parliament for Bethnal Green South West, suggested that police should be supplied with rubber boots because:

"everyone knew the heavy military tread of the policeman could be heard at night time a quarter of a mile distant."

This was reported in the Standard of 10 October 1888 (as below).

How is it possible that a full month before the murder of Mary Jane Kelly, Mr Pickersgill could have had in his mind the exact address at which that murder would be committed? Is it not incredible that the M.P. mentioned 13 Miller’s Court in metaphorical language at a public meeting?

More than this, he also knew that the killer would make an attempt on the life of Elizabeth Prater at number 20 Miller’s Court.

Someone needs to let Pierre know urgently. It looks like the murderer was not a police official after all but the local member of parliament.

[GUT]

Popped in for a quick butchers to see if anything new had come up .....quick scan of the place, then turns around and leaves the building

Don't expect any change while Pierre is starting a new thread (or hijacking an old one) every day or two.

[Jason]

Popped in for a quick butchers to see if anything new had come up .....quick scan of the place, then turns around and leaves the building

[Elamarna]

"That is absolutely correct. By writing on the Monday and referring to Thursday the most logical conclusion would be that same Thursday. However, if the letter was truly from JTR, then he is clearly a clever person"

Sorry MysterySinger, i don't necessarily accept that he was clever. that is not proved.

"and he may well have made the assumption that it might take a few days for the letter to be published (is indeed happened with the 6th November publication) or passed to the Met. Another thing is, he may well simply have missed its publication - how likely would it be for someone to have access to every newspaper each day? "

your next line suggest that indeed there was no reason for the writer to think it would be published

It was sent to the Police and would not necessarily have been published at "all - the question being that if it was so obviously a hoax why would the Police bother letting the papers know about it? In this case it appears to be certain details from the letter that made it out rather than the letter itself by which I understand the Police might have otherwise expected someone to recognise the hand writing - as I think had been the case previously.

Another possibility is that in the end he couldn't do his work that Thursday at all and instead had to wait until the following week. True, technically MJK was murdered on the Friday but I personally wouldn't necessarily distinguish Thursday (overnight) from the early hours of Friday morning.

But here's the thing - we cannot prove that the letter was written by anyone connected with JTR but neither can it be disproved. However, the 14 Dorset Street connection is too much of a co-incidence to ignore. The case is clearly not ready to pass to the CPS though we're not actually in the business of prosecuting - we're still investigating and testing. I think it would be foolish to ignore a potential clue like this. It goes up on the white board with all the other little clues."

I understand your thinking, however I do not buy into the killer wrote these letters, of course I am open to persuasion with enough evidence. so for the time being, it stays off my white board.

I think looking at why people write hoax letters is of great interest in itself, I include the tape sent to the police in the Yorkshire ripper case, which of course eventually resulted in court action against the sender.
it is possible the police were were trying to track time wasters writing such letters.
Do we know if the letter was officially passed by the police or leaked? i suspect we do not know?


cheers

[MysterySinger]

Hi there MysterySinger

a question for you on the 2 reports of the "YARMOUTH" letter.

You may not have an answer, from the information available:

The letter is post marked Monday 29th,

It says to look out Thursday.

Is there any logical reason, given that the letter writer would have expected the letter to arrive at its destination by the 31st at the latest to assume that the Thursday refereed to is anything other than the 1st?

Surely if the writer meant the 8th he would say next Thursday, or Thursday next.

I Would suggest that the papers report that it was a hoax is absolutely correct.

Therefore while absolute proof is impossible to provide, I would suggest that in a civil court, where the onus of proof is not as high as a criminal court a verdict of not guilty would be returned( no connection to killer)

hope you had a good Christmas day

Steve

That is absolutely correct. By writing on the Monday and referring to Thursday the most logical conclusion would be that same Thursday. However, if the letter was truly from JTR, then he is clearly a clever person and he may well have made the assumption that it might take a few days for the letter to be published (is indeed happened with the 6th November publication) or passed to the Met. Another thing is, he may well simply have missed its publication - how likely would it be for someone to have access to every newspaper each day?

It was sent to the Police and would not necessarily have been published at all - the question being that if it was so obviously a hoax why would the Police bother letting the papers know about it? In this case it appears to be certain details from the letter that made it out rather than the letter itself by which I understand the Police might have otherwise expected someone to recognise the hand writing - as I think had been the case previously.

Another possibility is that in the end he couldn't do his work that Thursday at all and instead had to wait until the following week. True, technically MJK was murdered on the Friday but I personally wouldn't necessarily distinguish Thursday (overnight) from the early hours of Friday morning.

But here's the thing - we cannot prove that the letter was written by anyone connected with JTR but neither can it be disproved. However, the 14 Dorset Street connection is too much of a co-incidence to ignore. The case is clearly not ready to pass to the CPS though we're not actually in the business of prosecuting - we're still investigating and testing. I think it would be foolish to ignore a potential clue like this. It goes up on the white board with all the other little clues.

[Pierre]

Hi Pierre,
Is your "police official" suspect a police surgeon?

No, he isn´t.

Regards Pierre

[Elamarna]

What is known -

The newspaper was published on 6th November 1888.
The postmark had to be 29th October 1888.
The address quoted is 14 Dorset Street.

Possible inferences -
a) Look out for him on Thursday night - either 1st or 8th November.
b) at either of the piers - Yarmouth piers Britannia and Wellington - Whitechapel pubs The Britannia and Duke of Wellington.
c) where he intends to do for two Norwich women before closing time - intends to murder 2 women who are getting more than their fair share.

Seems like a letter that could have been written by someone who knew the intentions of the Ripper. No proof that it was, no proof that it wasn't.

Hi there MysterySinger

a question for you on the 2 reports of the "YARMOUTH" letter.

You may not have an answer, from the information available:

The letter is post marked Monday 29th,

It says to look out Thursday.

Is there any logical reason, given that the letter writer would have expected the letter to arrive at its destination by the 31st at the latest to assume that the Thursday refereed to is anything other than the 1st?

Surely if the writer meant the 8th he would say next Thursday, or Thursday next.

I Would suggest that the papers report that it was a hoax is absolutely correct.

Therefore while absolute proof is impossible to provide, I would suggest that in a civil court, where the onus of proof is not as high as a criminal court a verdict of not guilty would be returned( no connection to killer)

hope you had a good Christmas day

Steve

[SuspectZero]

Steve, I think perhaps you should not waste so much time on me, but go ahead and have a very nice Christmas day instead.

Regards Pierre

Hi Pierre,
Is your "police official" suspect a police surgeon?

[MysterySinger]

The two press reports are similar but published on different dates. They don't disagree with each other and both support the fact that the letter was postmarked Monday (29th October 1888). Whether there is significance in that date is unclear, other than the fact it is before the murder of MJK and points to a Thursday night (which if it referred to 8th November is quite significant). If genuine, it would also support the view that there was an intention to commit 2 murders that night.

[GUT]

Aren't the two press reports all but identical?

[MysterySinger]

Here is the Ipswich info.

[Pierre]

please Pierre,

"People are owners of property and wealth!",

not all the people, just the top few percent,
The law is biased inn the favour of the rich, always has been and probably always will be.

Sure. But the rich are still people, I guess.

"From James Monro".

so what, that’s what he was paid to do, say the right thing.

I am afraid I can´t follow you now.

Senior police offers are also politicians to some extent you know.
Its the same as when a politician makes promises, you must understand that

As for the rest of your post, with all due respect it is based on your perception of the the letter and the totally idealistic and unreal view you have of policing.

Pardon?

regards

elamarna

Steve, I think perhaps you should not waste so much time on me, but go ahead and have a very nice Christmas day instead.

Regards Pierre

[Pierre]

What is known -

The newspaper was published on 6th November 1888.
The postmark had to be 29th October 1888.
The address quoted is 14 Dorset Street.

Possible inferences -
a) Look out for him on Thursday night - either 1st or 8th November.
b) at either of the piers - Yarmouth piers Britannia and Wellington - Whitechapel pubs The Britannia and Duke of Wellington.
c) where he intends to do for two Norwich women before closing time - intends to murder 2 women who are getting more than their fair share.

Seems like a letter that could have been written by someone who knew the intentions of the Ripper. No proof that it was, no proof that it wasn't.

Hi MysterySinger,

And it was in the Ipswich Journal on the 2nd of November.

Regards Pierre

[Elamarna]

please Pierre,

"People are owners of property and wealth!",

not all the people, just the top few percent,
The law is biased inn the favour of the rich, always has been and probably always will be.

"From James Monro".

so what, that’s what he was paid to do, say the right thing. Senior police offers are also politicians to some extent you know.
Its the same as when a politician makes promises, you must understand that

As for the rest of your post, with all due respect it is based on your perception of the the letter and the totally idealistic and unreal view you have of policing.

regards

elamarna