Did Anderson Know

[Natalie Severn]

Well as I stated in a previous post Jonathan,I cant see Macnaghten having gathered the necessary information from any "hands on " detective work in the East End that would have provided him with a basic framework from which to understand how the Ripper made his escapes.For example ,while Polly Nichols was being murdered in Bucks Row ,two policemen were patrolling either end of the street ,one passing the crime scene every 15 minutes.Yet nobody saw him.What would Macnaghten have been likely to know about the night light in these streets,the frequency of women taking men there after two in the morning, how he might have escaped and by using which routes, a concrete understanding of feasibility and management and of how the ripper on each occasion managed to escape detection -? What skills he may have needed, how "street wise" he needed to be to do what he did,how skilled he needed to be as a man who was able to allay fear in the women he chose to kill? The Mitre Square murder was even more hair raising in terms of its speed,darkness, the dodging by the ripper of numerous police -the two re Mitre Square,+ Morris with his door often open, and several in plain clothes around Aldgate= the night watchman Blenkinsop in St James Square which was one of the three Mitre Squares exits? Then there was the question of how he would have gained insight into the minds of murderers -experience Inspector Abberline would no doubt have gathered,like Walter Dew,during the course of his many years experience of Police Work.

So in my view,Macnaghten was ill equipped to assess the evidence he had ,which was only ,at best , circumstantial ,as it would not have been based on adequate ,acquired and appropriate experience .If he therefore reached his conclusions about Druitt based on the absence of properly informed opinion ,then his theory , was reached only from what he had "read" about Druitt from letters or "heard" about Druitt from gossip mongers or from concerned relatives ,and that wasnt really going to cut the mustard .

[Jonathan H]

Yes, that might all be true.

But it also might be true that he was well briefed about that kind of street detective work.

Or, it might also be true that it is completely irrelevant, one way or the other, because Macnaghten was handed the Ripper on a platter.

The dilemma then was not the identity of the fiend, but what to do about it since he was dead -- and by his own hand -- he had forever eluded the forces of justice, he had been gone for over two years, and the police had just made fools of themselves over a sailor and a witness, and the link was a Tory MP about a Tory-perceived suspect?

[Natalie Severn]

Who could possibly have "briefed" him ? The only man who had real hands on experience of the case, was Inspector Abberline--- who totally rubbished Macnaghten"s "drowned doctor" theory in 1903!

[Jeff Leahy]

Who could possibly have "briefed" him ? !

Er? Monroe?

[Chris]

See my previous post, re: Aberconway.

Why do you think Lady Aberconway was responsible for the title?

[Natalie Severn]

Er? Monroe?

Monro was far more involved in CID,like Anderson.None of the three were real policemen with any street cred whatsoever or real experience of the criminal mind -not in the East End - not in England -anyway. They were all ex public schoolboys who either worked in their colonies and used their old school tie or colonial networks to feather their nests.

[Jeff Leahy]

Monro was far more involved in CID,like Anderson.None of the three were real policemen with any street cred whatsoever or real experience of the criminal mind -not in the East End - not in England -anyway. They were all ex public schoolboys who either worked in their colonies and used their old school tie or colonial networks to feather their nests.

But he did become Chief commissioner after Warren resigned?

and was friends with MacNaughten?

Pirate

[Trevor Marriott]

But he did become Chief commissioner after Warren resigned?

and was friends with MacNaughten?

Pirate

"Jobs for the boys" springs to mind

All members of the same "Black hand gang" !

[Jonathan H]

To Natalie

We see Macnaghten, and in fact the entire mystery, quite differently, and will have to agree to disagree.

I think Mac met with the family and cut a deal that they told him everything they knew, which was plenty, and he agreed that their name would never be made public. A time-bomb waiting to go off for both the police and the family was that Montie had left instructions with a priest that the truth must come out in exactly ten years.

Macnaghten was an affable yet sharp political operator who was faced with a dead Ripper in the midst of hunting a live one, the wrong one, in terms of the conjunction of the MP revelation and the hunt for Sadler -- plus the impending embarrassment for the Yard in 1898.

This is, in my opinion, the real mystery/story of Jack the Ripper, about which we are left with but the barest of glimpses.

To Chris:

The 'Aberconway Version' of which not only is the original lost but we do not even have a complete copy, was found by Mac's daughter at some point after his death. She never claimed ,to Dan Farson, that it was her father's wish that it be preserved in perpetuity [quite the opposite: he may have wanted it destroyed and just simply forgot due to his severe illness?]

In the 30's Christabel Aberconway had it retyped, though she herself wrote the suspects section [which might be why the date for Druitt's body being recovered is incorrect?] but I don't think she ever understood the character or purpose of this source.

She had no idea that it was meant to be a Report for the Home Office, nor that it was never sent there, nor that it was quite different from the original in its agenda, nor that it was actually a rewrite, not a draft, of the original 1894 document.

Rewritten, I theorise, in 1898.

All of these are understanadble mistakes on her part. After all, if you have a copy of a document surely it must be the draft version, not a rewrite? She had no idea that it is really the Ur-Source for Griffiths, Sims, and the 'Drowned Doctor' Super-suspect which dominated Edwardian beliefs about the Ripper.

All manipulated by her father from bhind the scenes.

Therefore, she called this odd document her 'father's notes' --which they are not. As was only learned in 1974 the official 1894 version is not addressed to anybody either, and completely downplays the suspects, including Druitt.

So, she efficiently gave it a title. She was not going to call it a 'Report' as it did not look like one? It referred to the 1894 'Sun' stories on Cutbush and so she herself designated it a memorandum from that year.

But we know from other sources, Griffiths and Sims -- and the official version -- that it is in fact a Home Office Report, though never sent there and never requested.

In 1959, Christabel openly thought her father was being deceitful in claiming that he had destroyed all his papers relating to the prime suspect. What she could not have realised is that the document itself is also a bit of gentlemanly deceit, as it involved disguising Druitt as a middle-aged doctor whose body was pulled from the Thames on Dec 3rd 1888.

Lady Aberconway thought she was establishing her father's bureaucratic claim to have identified the Ripper. In fact, the primary sources on Druitt turned out to be at odds with what her father wrote. Thus she was, in the long run, destroying his rep on this mystery -- it is a smoking ruin to this day [eg. I am alone as a Macnaghten revisionist].

Mac hoped -- in vain -- that his memoirs would be the final word on the Ripper. But Mac had squared too many circles and finally outsmarted his own legacy.

The greatest irony is that Druitt remains veiled by Mac's machinations to this day.

The history of Ripperology might be quite different if the official version had emerged first, and then the unofficial rewrite?

[Jonathan H]

To Natalie

It's in no sense his fault, but Abberline knew nothing about Druitt, did not know about the 1894 Report, did not know that the current Commissioner he is anxious to contact about Chapman in 1903 is himself the background source for the 'Drowned Doctor' suspect.

[Chris]

Jonathan

What I'm trying to ascertain is whether you have any evidence for your claim that the title is an addition by Lady Aberconway, rather than part of the original document.

I can't see any evidence to that effect in anything you've written so far. (And of course, in any case, your assertion that "its not a 'memo' in any version" is just plain wrong.)

[Jonathan H]

I've made my case and -- no surprise -- you don't agree, and provide no counter-argument, just regurgitate the conventional wisdom as if it is gospel.

[Chris]

I've made my case and -- no surprise -- you don't agree, and provide no counter-argument, just regurgitate the conventional wisdom as if it is gospel.

It's not so much that I don't agree with your "case" - it's more that (as I've already said) I can't see anything at all in what you've posted that suggests the "Memorandum" heading in the Aberconway version was an addition by Lady Aberconway rather than part of the original document.

You did state that as a fact, not just as your opinion. Call me old-fashioned, but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect you to provide some kind of coherent reasoning to back up that statement, rather than just wheeling out the usual diatribes against "conventional wisdom".

[Jonathan H]

Is that it?

[Natalie Severn]

To Natalie

It's in no sense his fault, but Abberline knew nothing about Druitt, did not know about the 1894 Report, did not know that the current Commissioner he is anxious to contact about Chapman in 1903 is himself the background source for the 'Drowned Doctor' suspect.

I think you may be wrong over this, Jonathan .Abberline was fairly emphatic in 1903 according to the journalist who interviewed him from the PMG.
"you must understand said Abberline that we have never believed all those stories about Jack the Ripper being dead ,or that he was a lunatic, or anything of that kind .
Moreover, as a "hands on " policeman -with over twelve years experience of Whitechapel prior to his lead role in the ripper hunt,he made valued friends of colleagues who remained in the police force long after he had left.Godley and Neil were such detectives who kept a lifelong interest in the Ripper Investigation just like Abberline. So Abberline had a number of contacts in the police force upon whom he could have depended to verify rumours that were circulating. Where you get the idea that Abberline knew nothing of the Macnaghten report I dont know, but I believe its more than likely he knew all about it.It just didnt rock his boat----nor Smith"s who most certainly would have known,given the govt circles he moved in and his rich club pals.