Home office report

[Chris]

Indeed! Id say that of all the Home Office reports that may or may not still exist,or indeed have ever been written.The Druitt report would be the first port of call for me.

As I said at the start of the thread, I don't think there can be any doubt that when Sims mentioned a "report to the Home Office ... made by the Commissioner of Police" he was referring to a version of the Macnaghten memorandum. Macnaghten had been appointed Assistant Commissioner two weeks before Sims wrote.

[glyn]

But given that this thread is about Abberlines report about Druit, a subject that has long since wandered, its unlikely anyone can add anything not off topic..


Jeff

Indeed! Id say that of all the Home Office reports that may or may not still exist,or indeed have ever been written.The Druitt report would be the first port of call for me.But the whole issue regarding these Home office /Special Branch reports is intriguing.

[Chris]

No, I don't think it will be the answer and I do not hint at anything.... but I do think that it will open up Ripperology for many years to come. Which is something SPE tells of in Scotland Yard Investigates. That I DO believe.

As I read it, Stewart was referring to the files themselves rather than the register, though. We don't know whether the files have survived - of course, it's been claimed that they haven't.

[Jeff Leahy]

Phil it never occured to me that it was....

But given that this thread is about Abberlines report about Druit, a subject that has long since wandered, its unlikely anyone can add anything not off topic..

Happy to continue chatting over the way

Jeff

[Phil Carter]

Hello Jeff,

If you do not know that people have seen the ledgers before, I suggest you haven't read the appropriate thread pertaining to them, nor read a thesis and a book or two, etc etc, , and are not up to date.

No, I don't think it will be the answer and I do not hint at anything.... but I do think that it will open up Ripperology for many years to come. Which is something SPE tells of in Scotland Yard Investigates. That I DO believe.

Jeff, you have no idea what I know and I don't. Never assume. It makes an ASS out of U and ME.

'And as far as laughing at my expense.. have a chuckle on me by all means... Hidden agendas are par for the course in Ripperology too, as we both know.
Time for food now.

best wishes

Phil

[Jeff Leahy]

Hello Jeff,

And therein lies the rub. We know of the names mentioned by all.. most do. We know of those who have handled the ledgers too.

I haven't mentioned files by the Jeff.. do tell. since you know and we don't. Isn't that a case of put your money where your mojo is?... otherwise you are just playing games.. which is par for the course.

How's the boat btw? (thats a serious question)

best wishes

Phil

The ledgers contain information about transfer of files...

I think what is being hinted at here is what if any relavence that will have to the Whitechapel murders. Especially as you have said people have seen these ledgers before...

The other worry of course is whether the names or information there contained will be recognised by people without broad historical understanding of the period...but thats is just speculation on my part..

But you Phil have been making hints that these files will blow away the key sources in the JtR case...which is probably why people who know more than you, have had a laugh at your expense.

lots of sub-agendas and hidden aces around here Phil...I'm a puppy.

Pirate

[Phil Carter]

Hello Chris,

Yes, I agree with you here. That Special were involved, is clear. Now Special have had, and still have a reputation that they go their own way.
The MM, we have presumed, was supposed to have been meant, possibly, for the Home Secretary. I would find it strange that given the nature of the synopsis (for want of a better word), that Mac didn't have a complete overview of the situation on the books, as it were.

best wishes

Phil

[Phil Carter]

Hello Jeff,

And therein lies the rub. We know of the names mentioned by all.. most do. We know of those who have handled the ledgers too.

I haven't mentioned files by the Jeff.. do tell. since you know and we don't. Isn't that a case of put your money where your mojo is?... otherwise you are just playing games.. which is par for the course.

How's the boat btw? (thats a serious question)

best wishes

Phil

[Chris]

The point I am trying to make here is that Mac would have known all about the activities of Special Branch IF his written piece was the be all and end all of a summing up.

As regards the reasons for SB chasing anyone, we can again only speculate.

I think that would depend on the Special Branch activities vis a vis the Whitechapel Murders being worth mentioning in the memorandum, which isn't clear (and probably isn't going to be easy to judge from the surviving records anyway).

Regarding Special Branch involvement, surely there would have had to be some reason for it? Either that someone they were interested in for other reasons was a suspect, or that one of their informants said something about the murders, or something like that?

[Monty]

Phil

I'm sorry, but I still don't understand from that what you said about the implications of known suspects not being named in Special Branch records.

As I said, I wouldn't expect suspects to be named there unless SB was interested in them for its own reasons. I'm not clear whether you agree with that or not, but if that belief is correct, we should expect most of the known suspects not to be mentioned in SB records. And that wouldn't tell us anything either way about their merits as Ripper suspects, would it?

Your ability to cut through the hype and lay upon the essential is admirable Chris.

Alas I fear you will be labelled as blinkered rather than realistic.

Monty

[Phil Carter]

Hello Chris,

Finally, sensible discussion again. Thank you.

The point I am trying to make here is that Mac would have known all about the activities of Special Branch IF his written piece was the be all and end all of a summing up.

As regards the reasons for SB chasing anyone, we can again only speculate.

best wishes

Phil

[Chris]

Phil

I'm sorry, but I still don't understand from that what you said about the implications of known suspects not being named in Special Branch records.

As I said, I wouldn't expect suspects to be named there unless SB was interested in them for its own reasons. I'm not clear whether you agree with that or not, but if that belief is correct, we should expect most of the known suspects not to be mentioned in SB records. And that wouldn't tell us anything either way about their merits as Ripper suspects, would it?

[Phil Carter]

Jack the Ripper was a lone serial killer..

Helo Jeff,

Prove it, name him and we can all go home.

best wishes

Phil

[Jeff Leahy]

Hello Jeff,

Nobody can label anybody as a lone serial multi-murdering killer without proof. Is that hard to comprehend? Nobody can tell anyone that someone WAS a killer without proof. You have none. Nobody has. Period.

best wishes

Phil

Jack the Ripper was a lone serial killer..

I make that comment based purely on the rediculous theories put forward by the various 'flat earth societies' that think other wise...

PS what is your latest conspiracy theory? give us all a laugh?

[Phil Carter]

Hello Jeff,

Nobody can label anybody as a lone serial multi-murdering killer without proof. Is that hard to comprehend? Nobody can tell anyone that someone WAS a killer without proof. You have none. Nobody has. Period.

best wishes

Phil