The Secret Special Branch Ledgers

[Phil Carter]

Hello Debs,

Interpration is indeed a wierd thing.. lol.

One thing I did think about in all of this, is that 30,000 entries is an awfullly large amount. If (speculatively) only 1% pertain to the Whitechapel murders, that is 300 entries. How many of those are of real value, is again speculative. However, 300 entries would keep researchers working hard. It may well open up the genre completely.
I believe SPE referred to this "opening up" in one of his books in reference to Special Branch Files (Scotland Yard Investigates).

best wishes

Phil

[Simon Wood]

Hi Debra,

It's a pound to a penny that this Hibernian Club, situated in Thomas Street, Whitechapel, would also have aroused the interests of the security services.

The Times, 17th August 1885–



Regards,

Simon

[Phil Carter]

Hello Simon, Debs,

Very nice finds, between you.Well done

best wishes

Phil

[Pontius2000]

any updates to this discussion?

[Trevor Marriott]

any updates to this discussion?

No still waiting for a decision notice to be issued from The Freedom Of Information Office. I suspect that when that is issued there is likely to be a lengthy appeal process from either myself or the met police dependant on who the decision favours.

[Phil Carter]

Hello all,

Here is the latest update of the Special Branch Ledgers and Registers

http://www.leaderpost.com/story_print.html?id=4785171&sponsor=

best wishes

Phil

[Phil Carter]

Also here

Hello all,

Additionally, here

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/05/15/secret-jack-the-ripper-files-censored-by-the-police-123-years-on-115875-23130620/

best wishes

Phil

[Lechmere]

I would say a more productive way of gaining access to the files would be by lobbying MPs - after all the Freedom of Information Act was a political decision.
The police are acting like literalist idiots in refusing to release the files. As if any modern day informer would not come forward if they thought their file might be released in, say 100 years time. They could make it say 110 years if need be. That would more than ensure no one was still alive, even with people living longer.

[lynn cates]

well done

Hello Phil. Thanks! Well done.

And all the best to Trevor.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

right

Hello Lechmere. Right. Good observation. I'm with you.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

....They could make it say 110 years if need be. That would more than ensure no one was still alive, even with people living longer.

I don't think that will suffice. I'll bet their principal concern is the IRA, and families & decendents of IRA informers who still live in the volatile parts of Northern Ireland.
The Fenian/IRA problem, as you know, predates the Ripper, so they are not likely to hand over anything that could open up that tinderbox.

Regards, Jon S.

[curious]

Phil,

Thanks for posting the link.
The final line:

Det Supt Julian McKinney, head of Covert Operations at the Met, said: “An informant today, if they know in 100 years their *identity will be given over, may not wish to co-operate with us.”

is total balderdash when I can Google "Supergrasses" and find this:

Derek Creighton "Bertie" Smalls (1935 – 31 January 2008) is considered by many as Britain's first supergrass.

So the identity of a person who has been dead just 3 years is released, but names from 123 years ago can NOT be . . . .

One can only speculate just how HUGE and shocking the truth is.

So glad you are pursuing this.

If Jon is right about the IRA concern . . . what does that tell you?

[Phil H]

I think that the question of the precedent being set will weigh very heavily with the authorities. This is in addition to any risk to the descendents of those named who might be subject to attack or defamation in their communities.

As I wrote in another recent thread, a few years ago Parliament turned down an idea of releasing raw UK census information before 100 years was up. The arguments for denying release were that those who had filled in the forms had done so on the understanding that their information would be secure for 100 years.

Secondly, it was considered that early release of the information would undermine public belief that in future censuses, or indeed anywhere information was given, that undertakings of confidentiality could be breached in the future and this not be relied on.

These are I think valid points.

In the broader picture, who now cares whether the JtR is case is solved when you are looking at a broader and longer-term perspective? Only a small coterie of eccentric enthusiasts is the answer - and that will not be a major factor in the balance against legal and governmental neccessity.

With respect, curious, I don't think these arguments are "total balderdash".

Information may get out, but did the material you "Googled" on Supergrasses come out officially or in other ways - through legal cases etc? If a person wishes to release personal data about themselves that is one thing - for Government to do so, despite prior undertaking would be another - and probably legally actionable!

I also find no grounds for some "conspiracy" as you seem to do when you write: "One can only speculate just how HUGE and shocking the truth is."

The truth is that Governments have a responsibility to those who entrust information to them, especially when that is information that could endanger individuals or families. There can be no set time-limit to those responsibilities as it might depend on how controversial issues remain in a locality; but also nothing must be done to deter those who volunteer information or services to the authorities which may benefit wider society.

No one could WANT the Special Branch registers opened up more than do I, but I am not hopeful they will be.

Thanks to whomever it was who provided the update - I asked for that in another thread. Don't know if the two things were related, but I'm grateful.

Phil

[Phil Carter]

Hello Phil H,

There are some other important points in all of this. Reading the short article, it seems that this has been a pretty lengthy process. If the Met Police are arguing that breach of confidentiality over informant's names are the prime reason why these ledgers and registers are not released in unredacted form,
I find it strange that entries unrelated to informants names are also redacted out. All proper names, from what I understand, were subject of redaction.

It goes without saying that only a very small percentage of the entries relate to informants. These informants names cannot be proven to be their real names either, as most if not all informants used pseudonyms.
It is all but impossible, I would surmise, for any person to be able to trace any current family name of a person based on a name that isn't a real name, down 5 or 6 generations to those living relatives on this basis. I cannot imagine that any terrorist organisation relating to these events 123 years ago would use the time and effort to do this. They have another focus of attack. I would therefore say there is no realistic danger to any living person and that is even IF the relatives could be traced based on a name that is not a real proper family name.

The events of 123 years ago in Whitechapel are well known, but the most important point is something that is easily overlooked. As the article explains, the Special Branch Registers and Ledgers contain suspect names that pertain to these events. 4 more suspects. Special Branch themselves therefore were involved in this investigation. That means there was involvement on a political or national security level of some sort. That is what Special Branch, deal with. ANY name in those registers and ledgers are directly and specifically related to Special Branch work.
Now that tells me that if the Whitechapel murders were subject to Special Branch involvement, there are things that we know nothing about. If Special Branch have listed suspects under THEIR watch, then political invovement exists. That is the nature of Special Branch activity.

I also note that the article mentions the thousands of pounds being used from public funds in defending this appeal. Well, the appellant, Trevor Marriott has been tireless in his efforts to get these ledgers opened for ALL of us, and has no doubt used his own money in trying to do this in appealing. It shows a genuine dedication to trying to unlock the secrets, if any, of this mystery once and for all. For that we all owe Trevor a great debt of thanks for his tireless efforts.

I note also that Sky News have picked up the story, with the newspaper review this morning highlighting the article. I personally hope that this is splashed over every newspaper in the world from now until the time when the results of the appeal become known.


best wishes

Phil

[Monty]

I find the use of taxpayers money appalling. It would has been better used elsewhere.

As for Trevor dipping into his own pocket, I find that a naïve comment. Afterall, some dipped into their pockets to buy his book. I'm sure we have book no2 lined up. No doubt in hopes of reimbursement.

I'd sooner the money goes to the NHS or another more worthy cause.

Monty