Tamworth Herald 26th July 1890

[Phil Carter]

Hello Observer,

I have a feeling, although perhaps mistaken, that Cutbush and Collicott are once again being mixed up here. But like you say, and I agree, the case for Thomas Cutbush being locked away far outweighs the case for Aaron Kosminski. But the wheels mustn't be allowed to fall off the bandwagon, must they?.. It has to keep rolling along. Myth upon myth perpetuated by? and for what reason?

One or two of us have seen the light a long time ago. We are no longer in darkness.


Phil

[Phil Carter]

Obviously, it's a denial of the specific story that the killer had been arrested in (or shortly before) July 1890.

It doesn't mean people hadn't been suspected before that date, or that suspects hadn't been arrested. We know they had. Logically, it doesn't even imply that the police were unaware of the killer's identity.

Hello Chris,

Thanks for the reply. I have replied with the answer in the postings above. My apologies for referring to posts in response back to front, as it were.

Hope you are well? Long time no see.


Phil

[robhouse]

ABSOLUTELY NO FOUNDATION.
RIDICULOUS CONCOCTION

That seems to put an end to all speculation catagorically. Night night all suspects up to this date.

Phil

Phil,

If the incident with Kozminski happened as stated in the sources—ie. Anderson became convinced he was guilty, witness refused to testify, police lacked sufficient evidence to convict him—(and it likely happened around July 1890), do you not think the police would have wanted to suppress this information from getting out to the public? Wouldn't they would have tried to squash the story, stop any leaks? If so, then "absolutely no foundation" and "ridiculous concoction" would do the trick.

RH

[Phil Carter]

Hello Rob,

Ok.. I will walk along with you a little here.....so WHEN exactly is it then safe to divulge ALL of this information to the public? What could so SO historically horrific about this man and his antecedants that ensure he and they are never known to the public? We cannot surely be talking about a hopeless wreck like Aaron Kosminski.


However...it is equally likely that the information needed not to be supressed and was just TRUE. (The Tamworth statement) You know Rob, a TRUE statement by the police, in response..

I keep being told that we have no reason to disbelieve them.. yet here you are telling me that they were making cover up stories?

Hang on a minute... we seem to have suddenly switched places! That's normally what I get thrown at me!

Try..the police knew nothing at this time Rob. And this was the truth. No cover up stories of any kind.

Where does that leave Kosminski in the frame now? Framed, long afterwards. That is where. And I wonder why.....well, actually, I don't.




Phil

[robhouse]

Hello Rob,

Ok.. I will walk along with you a little here.....so WHEN exactly is it then safe to divulge ALL of this information to the public? What could so SO historically horrific about this man and his antecedants that ensure he and they are never known to the public? We cannot surely be talking about a hopeless wreck like Aaron Kosminski.


However...it is equally likely that the information needed not to be supressed and was just TRUE. (The Tamworth statement) You know Rob, a TRUE statement by the police, in response..

I keep being told that we have no reason to disbelieve them.. yet here you are telling me that they were making cover up stories?

Hang on a minute... we seem to have suddenly switched places! That's normally what I get thrown at me!

Try..the police knew nothing at this time Rob. And this was the truth. No cover up stories of any kind.

Where does that leave Kosminski in the frame now? Framed, long afterwards. That is where. And I wonder why.....well, actually, I don't.




Phil

Phil,

You said you would "walk along with me". Did you? Really? Try actually thinking this through.

You ask "when exactly is it safe to divulge all the information to the public"?

The answer to this is twofold:

1. The police could never, I repeat NEVER divulge all the information... ie. the suspect's name, etc. This would be a) pointless, b) a security threat to his relatives, asylum staff, etc, and 3) quite probably illegal.

2. The police could—and did (Anderson 1910)—divulge enough information to tell the story in brief without revealing details, for reasons that Anderson gave in his book, so I won't bother giving here.

Now, what part of that do you disagree with?

RH

[Robert]

Hi Mr Lucky

Well, if the story originated from Halifax, Yorks, then it's very odd that, as far as I am aware, the only report of it that we have from a British newspaper, so far, is the Edinburgh report that you found. They had the story in Canada, and they had it in America, but as far as England goes - zilch.

This woman wasn't Wallis Simpson, was she?

[Observer]

Hello Observer,

I have a feeling, although perhaps mistaken, that Cutbush and Collicott are once again being mixed up here. But like you say, and I agree, the case for Thomas Cutbush being locked away far outweighs the case for Aaron Kosminski. But the wheels mustn't be allowed to fall off the bandwagon, must they?.. It has to keep rolling along. Myth upon myth perpetuated by? and for what reason?

One or two of us have seen the light a long time ago. We are no longer in darkness.


Phil

For what reason indeed Phil?

Myth's are usually born of ignorance. However some posters choose another route into mythology , and study the minutia to the nth degree. Of course the differing news reports, which differ again from the police and inquest reports, are rich fields for Myth, and conspiracy.

In the case of the Whitechapel murders, Mr Evans is absolutely correct in stating that police intelligence should take precedent over all other material available to us. The press reports of the inquests are also of great interest.

At the end of the day though this is just a forum where both amateur, and experienced researchers, and authors express an opinion. I don't think there are too many people who are going to take Fleetwood Macs version of the Cutbush versus Kosminski who should have been sent to Broadmoor or not myth too seriously.

Regards

Observer

[Chris]

I personally just cannot see the problem here. If this story has "absolutley no foundation" and is a "ridiculous concontion".. it tells me that the police are in actual fact, still looking for JTR.

It doesn't, though. It just says that particular story - about the Ripper having been arrested - has no foundation.

[Mr Lucky]

Hi Mr Lucky

Well, if the story originated from Halifax, Yorks, then it's very odd that, as far as I am aware, the only report of it that we have from a British newspaper, so far, is the Edinburgh report that you found. They had the story in Canada, and they had it in America, but as far as England goes - zilch.

Hi Robert,

This is a little odd indeed, firstly, I'm not saying that it's definitely the Yorkshire Halifax that's the origin of the story, but that we can not actually make a judgement on which one, with the information available at the moment.

There are many news stories that appear to originate with the UK based agencies, yet may never appeared in print this side of the Atlantic. A favourite of mine is the description issued after the Buck's row murder of the man with the black beard who was being looked for, there is not a peep about him this side (as far as I know, there is a chance it could be Mr Morgan's 'Jim') , but it's in the American press.

However, later in connection with Henry Birch, his man (the milk drinker) apparently fitted the description issued after the Buck's row murder!

This woman wasn't Wallis Simpson, was she?

What the letter writer or the suspect? One can never be too rich or too thin to be a ripper suspect.

[Mayerling]

[QUOTE=robhouse;
1. The police could never, I repeat NEVER divulge all the information... ie. the suspect's name, etc. This would be a) pointless, b) a security threat to his relatives, asylum staff, etc, and 3) quite probably illegal.

RH[/QUOTE]

Hi RH,

I have to ask, what is the security threat to the relatives, asylum staff, etc. from anyone by divulging the name of the suspect? We have here (as far as we can surmise - short of wild speculations concerning "the highest in the land" a la Stephen Knight) that the victims are (with apologies to those victims) common prostitutes. Even Mary Kelly is a common prostitute. For members of their circles of friends or relatives (mostly on the bottom stratum of society) to go out of their way to wreak vengeance on relatives of say Kosminski, Osrog, Druitt, Cutbush, etc. is hard to believe. First the police would be supposedly keeping tabs on the suspects and note people who came around to their addresses too frequently. Secondly, while Kosminski and Osrog might reside nearby, the Druitt family are in Wimborne, and Cutbush is middle class - how would denizens of the East End approach them to do harm to them or their families. And assaults on asylums and their staffs? How about an attack reminiscent of the "Clerkenwall Outrage" of 1868? You might recall you needed a well organized group to pull off that one, with enough money to cover the expenses. This from the relatives of "Long Liz" or or Annie Chapman?

I may mention that some of the suspects would be extremely dangerous to approach with hostile intent. Imagine looking murderous with a weapon at Bury, Cream, Deeming, or Chapman. Who do you think would end up being hurt or killed.

On the other hand your third reason: "probably illegal" is more likely the reason. The Yard had enough headaches from the case to wish to bury it and go on with more current events and problems. They did not need to fight off slander suits from various families or even the named suspects regarding what were technically still wild allegations of identification. That is most likely to be the reason for police reticence.

Jeff

[Mayerling]

This woman wasn't Wallis Simpson, was she?

What the letter writer or the suspect? One can never be too rich or too thin to be a ripper suspect.

Hi Mr. Lucky,

I hate to burst this bubble, but Wallis Simpson came from Baltimore, Maryland, and was born in 1894. She could not have written any letters or visited London by herself (and probably could not have been allowed to discuss murder cases - especially involving prostitutes). If you must suggest a girlfriend of a Prince turned King for the 1890s, possibly Daisy, Countess of Warwick (Bertie's "Darling Daisy") or later Alice Keppel (though she was rather reticent about the relationship.

Jeff

[Robert]

Hi Jeff

I'm the one who mentioned Wallis. I know she was too young to be the woman - I was making a joke, because the rest of the world knew about her relationship with Edward VIII before most of the UK did. I was pointing up the near silence in the UK Press on the Halifax lady, compared with the North American Press (although the story didn't make much of a splash there either).

[Mayerling]

Hi Jeff

I'm the one who mentioned Wallis. I know she was too young to be the woman - I was making a joke, because the rest of the world knew about her relationship with Edward VIII before most of the UK did. I was pointing up the near silence in the UK Press on the Halifax lady, compared with the North American Press (although the story didn't make much of a splash there either).

Hi Robert,

Actually I realized it was a joke, but my pedantic side got the better of me. Sorry about that.

I guess it could not have been Magda Lupescu either!

Jeff

[Scott Nelson]

I have to ask, what is the security threat to the relatives, asylum staff, etc. from anyone by divulging the name of the suspect? ....And assaults on asylums and their staffs?

The populace would assume that anybody sharing the same last name was related to the suspect and that asylum staff knew who he was, but didn't say anything.

People having the last name of "Hitler" changed their names during and after WWII. Similarly with "Oswald" after JFK's assassination.

[Bridewell]

I checked the Ancestry UK incoming lists for port of departure Halifax and date 1890. The records for this seem to start at 1891.

Hi Robert,

I'm so glad that I read to the end of the thread before logging onto Ancestry!