Why a Cover-Up could be possible...

[Michael W Richards]

"The special branch, spies and espionage were all at its very infancy. Monro's department which he was so precious to protect, was in its very nature clandestine, keeping vital information limited to a select group of people. We know even kept his own copies of files, if not the originals too."

Since people get their knickers all knotted up when others mention the dreaded..."conspiracy"...perhaps they should familiarize themselves with National Security and Counter Espionage general practices. As indicated above, the government then....and any government today.....has secrets, and they protect them daily. The agencies Conspired to keep volatile information private.

Maybe when someone says someone lied to prevent the truth coming out these conspiracy-phobic people might consider that ALL the major players in the Ripper Investigations lived in that world in their regular duties.

[Michael W Richards]

It's just kinda annoying most of the documents which served as the basis for the origin of the royal conspiracy and many others ended up 'missing' or destroyed. If we still had them we could disprove almost all the conspiracies once and for all.

Also I want to know what happened to Dutton's Chronicles of Crime which were supposedly taken away by detectives. I assume they probably got destroyed in WW2.

Your presumption that if we had all the documents that were used or created in support of any kind of conspiratorial endeavor we could use them to dismiss said information reveals your distaste for that line of questioning or theorizing. In fact some of those documents might validate some positions involving said speculations.

[Michael W Richards]

At the time of the Ripper actions and investigations certain information was being protected by the same senior ripper investigation individuals with respect to the Parnell Commission. For example, did these investigators disclose all information they had from informants to that Commission? Was the commission told of HMG payrolls with respect to agents who in the past had plotted against the government? Why would certain information from people identified with Terrorist agencies be paid extravagantly for? Who gave the authority to Monroe to withhold a credible bomb threat on the Royal Family at the previous years Jubilee celebration? Under what authority could he not tell the intended Royal targets that they were being credibly threatened?

The world the senior Ripper investigators lived in was full of secrets, dangerous people and questionable alliances. Is it so impossible that the management of information on the Ripper cases followed similar, clandestine operations rules? Could the senior men know things that they never told other authorities about? Monroe and his "hot potato" remark suggest that is possible.

[c.d.]

The world the senior Ripper investigators lived in was full of secrets, dangerous people and questionable alliances. Is it so impossible that the management of information on the Ripper cases followed similar, clandestine operations rules? Could the senior men know things that they never told other authorities about? Monroe and his "hot potato" remark suggest that is possible.

No, not impossible at all. But just because something is possible doesn't necessarily mean that it actually occurred. You seem to have trouble understanding that distinction.

c.d.

[Michael W Richards]

The world the senior Ripper investigators lived in was full of secrets, dangerous people and questionable alliances. Is it so impossible that the management of information on the Ripper cases followed similar, clandestine operations rules? Could the senior men know things that they never told other authorities about? Monroe and his "hot potato" remark suggest that is possible.

No, not impossible at all. But just because something is possible doesn't necessarily mean that it actually occurred. You seem to have trouble understanding that distinction.

c.d.

I have no such problem cd, its the summary discounting of the possibility and the distaste for exploring those possibilities that creates the need for my reminders. We already have evidence the men I speak of did Conspire to keep secrets unrelated to Ripper crimes, why should we imagine they would change when assigned to the Ripper investigations. Perhaps the owness has been on the ones discounting that possibility.....in that, what evidence is there that any of these men would act differently when also working on Ripper cases? And what if what they normally did overlapped with the Ripper crimes, might that alone be enough reason to supress, deny, or withold information?

[caz]

I have little doubt that if and when those in authority felt it necessary or even just desirable to suppress, deny or withhold certain politically sensitive information from the public, they'd have done so.

What I struggle with is what precisely they'd have been covering up concerning the Whitechapel murders. They tried and publicly failed to solve a single one of these crimes, which is perfectly understandable given the time and place. The killer in each case had only to put a street or two between himself and his victim and there was very little that could have been done to stop him. If he wasn't caught in the act, or didn't offer a credible confession, these cases were bound to go cold.

Yet people in 2021 continue to exploit the fact that these murders resisted a solution as evidence of some kind of sinister 'interference' by the authorities, when the reality is that they simply didn't have the means in 1888 to interfere - more's the pity - with this type of killer's monomania.

Love,

Caz
X