How realistic was it for JTR to disguise himself as a PC?
Here today in the States we have a problem with predators disguising themselves as police officers, pulling potential victims to the side of the road and assaulting them. It is not by any means an epidemic, but is realistic enough a danger that I had to school my teenage daughter how to act if an officer in an unmarked car tries to pull her over . . . I suspect you understand.
I feel certain that everyone on this forum is well aware of all the advantages the murderer would hold if he was actually a PC, so I won't relist them here, but is it possible for Saucy Jacky to have used such a disguise?
When contemplating the possibility, these questions came to mind and I realized I am quite ignorant on the details of the period.
1. The industrial revolution created a textile boom and manufactured clothing was readily available, that we know, (even the unfortunates via public charity were not suffering a want of clothing) but for that time would acquiring an unofficial PC uniform be at all realistic?
2. Was the Metropolitan police force large enough that a PC crossing paths with a 'fellow' officer, he does not recognize, not become suspicious?
3. By 1888 had the use of a metal badge (a 'copper') been added to the PC uniform (as already in use in the States), and would the milling of a realistic looking fake badge been possible?
4. Was police protocol commonly enough known that the disguised murderer could act in appropriate manners not to raise the suspicion of fellow PCs, or if rousing suspicion, give the correct replies when challenged?
5. Did CID entertain this possibly and educate/alert its PCs to the possibility?
I know that the possibility of JTR being a PC, or that he was an active member of one of the vigilantly groups has been discussed to ad nauseam, but has there been discussion on the possibility of a 'disguised' PC?
P.S. I don't include the possibility of a retired PC, that again would be the same as suspecting a PC, and all his answer to the above questions (1-4) would be in the affirmative.
Here today in the States we have a problem with predators disguising themselves as police officers, pulling potential victims to the side of the road and assaulting them. It is not by any means an epidemic, but is realistic enough a danger that I had to school my teenage daughter how to act if an officer in an unmarked car tries to pull her over . . . I suspect you understand.
I feel certain that everyone on this forum is well aware of all the advantages the murderer would hold if he was actually a PC, so I won't relist them here, but is it possible for Saucy Jacky to have used such a disguise?
When contemplating the possibility, these questions came to mind and I realized I am quite ignorant on the details of the period.
1. The industrial revolution created a textile boom and manufactured clothing was readily available, that we know, (even the unfortunates via public charity were not suffering a want of clothing) but for that time would acquiring an unofficial PC uniform be at all realistic?
2. Was the Metropolitan police force large enough that a PC crossing paths with a 'fellow' officer, he does not recognize, not become suspicious?
3. By 1888 had the use of a metal badge (a 'copper') been added to the PC uniform (as already in use in the States), and would the milling of a realistic looking fake badge been possible?
4. Was police protocol commonly enough known that the disguised murderer could act in appropriate manners not to raise the suspicion of fellow PCs, or if rousing suspicion, give the correct replies when challenged?
5. Did CID entertain this possibly and educate/alert its PCs to the possibility?
I know that the possibility of JTR being a PC, or that he was an active member of one of the vigilantly groups has been discussed to ad nauseam, but has there been discussion on the possibility of a 'disguised' PC?
P.S. I don't include the possibility of a retired PC, that again would be the same as suspecting a PC, and all his answer to the above questions (1-4) would be in the affirmative.
Comment