Suppose a City PC did see something near Mitre Square

[Jonathan H]

Reneging? Oh God, please don't let me be thought a reneger ...!

By 'not at all' I meant that your caustic and crude version of my theory is not valid.

I do not think that Macnaghten thought the Druitts were important, in themselves, to the on-going health of the Conservative Party.

It is simply that he was a compassionate man, and a bit of a 'lone ranger' at CID, and the Ripper was quite dead, and the Tories would hardly be helped by this solution coming out, not to mention the potential for ugly libel suits--so what to do?

Part of thre sterility of many debates is not appreciating that these were once real, living people who had all the strengths and weaknesses of real, living human beings.

Can you imagine what it must have been like for Macnaghten when he discovered that the Druitt solution was not only strong, it was the solution! He had achieved--so he thought--some of his ambition about a case wtih which he was obsessed. He had found Jack, albeit too late.

By the way you are quite wrong about your notion of the cop seeing the fiend as an urban myth.

And Griffiths, who was not an historian at all, clearly used only Mac's alternate version of his Report.

This is obvious because it was an invention, deliberately or not, of Macnaghten's. I think it was to hide what he believed was a sighting of Druitt by Lawende.

It also meant he could beef up the Polish Jew suspect, somewhat, by giving the false impression that he was being investigated in 1888, and might have been seen by a Bobbie (and addingthat he hated all women, not just harlots--all females are in danger)m and was sectioned soon afterwards.

None of those bits of data are true and I think Macnaghten knew they were not true.

You are also mistaken in thinking that 'Aberconway' does not make it clear that it there may gave been a sighting of 'Kosminski' near the scene of a murder.

This is from 'Aberconway', wherein Macnaghten knows that the Polish suspect is very much alive:

'No. 2 Kosminski, a Polish Jew, who lived in the very heart of the district where the murders were committed. He had become insane owing to many years indulgence in solitary vices. He had a great hatred of women with strong homicidal tendencies. He was (and I believe still is) detained in a lunatic asylum about March 1889. This man in appearance strongly resembled the indivdual seen by the City P.C. near Mitre Square.'

[Lechmere]

The City PC story possibly had its genesis in this probably inaccurate early news story from the Derby Daily Telegraph, of 1st October 1888:
‘indeed one of the policemen who saw the body [Eddowes] in the mortuary expressed his confident opinion that he had seen the woman walking several times in the neighborhood of Aldgate High Street...
The police theory is that the man and woman, who had met in Aldgate, watched the policeman [Watkins] pass round the square, and they then entered it for an immoral purpose.’
In 1905 Sagar of course also mentioned that a City PC saw someone of Jewish appearance coming out of Mitre Square.

[Lechmere]

Jonathan

If I take you literally ‘No, not at all’ means that you think that:
Macnaghten thought it was true that the man seen by the City PC was Kosminski and not Druitt;
Macnaghten didn’t want to mask Montague Druitt’s guilt;
The Druitts were of no significance to the Conservative Party; and
The City PC story was not a lie and accordingly Macnaghten did not originate it nor spread it.

Is that you stance?
Or are you going all coy on this.

My take on the supposed City PC ID is that it is a localised urban myth that went around the police force and spread from there. I would suggest this myth matured through gossip over several years until it became a perceived as the truth.

The story is not mentioned in the February 1894 version of the Macnaghten Memorandum.

The Aberconway version, which was presumably written at a later date, says:
‘No one ever saw the Whitechapel Murderer (unless possibly it was the City PC who was a beat near Mitre Square).’
The identity of the murderer, who was only possibly seen, was not even hinted at.
Jonathan you incorrectly stated that:
‘Macnaghaten had written a second version of his 'Report' in which a PC sees maybe 'Kosminski' with Eddowes.’

In 1898 Griffiths said:
‘This man (the unnamed but obviously Kosminski suspect) was said to resemble the murderer by the one person who got a glimpse of him - the police-constable in Mitre Court.’
Clearly Griffiths' only source for information was not the Aberconway version as he provides extra information – the person seen by the City PC was said to resemble the ‘Polish Jew, a known lunatic’ which is presumed to be identical to Kosminski. Griffiths would be a poor historian if he relied on one source for his information, so maybe he fleshed out the details about the City PC from someone other than Macnaghten, with Anderson being the obvious source.

Are you going to suggest that Macnaghten deliberately fed this disinformation to Anderson – in which case we are back to square one and you are reneging on your ‘no not at all’ response.

[pinkmoon]

I think we most agree this story is not true it's the most obvious answer boring I will admit but the right one

[Phil H]

seriously, COULD it have been a well-known foreigner, but not Jewish? Thus the description?

In 1888 the word "foreign" was mainly a synonym for "Jewish" so far as i am aware.

In the politically ICORRECT 1880s there were precise words for many non-British groups - you'll find many of them in the Sherlock Holmes books - words like lascar, levantine, wog, oriental, eastern, as well as specific (and now not quotable) words for people of African descent etc etc.

Phil

[pinkmoon]

seriously, COULD it have been a well-known foreigner, but not Jewish? Thus the description?
Well-known in terms of suspicious criminal activity or reprobate?

Foriegn, Jewish, Mexican, Alaskan ,Albanian,Indian,African what ever nationality if this person was known to the police and a suspect in such a high profile case like this he would have been visited by the police straight away

[crberger]

Leaving aside my fatuous conspiracy

seriously, COULD it have been a well-known foreigner, but not Jewish? Thus the description?
Well-known in terms of suspicious criminal activity or reprobate?

[lynn cates]

announced

Hello (again) Damaso. Thanks.

"In 1888, would it be plausible for Watkins's superiors to tell him NOT to discuss his sighting or tell the inquest?"

Well, this was done with part of Lawende's evidence. But it was duly announced, yes?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

conundrum

Hello Damaso. Thanks.

"If you had just committed a murder in Mitre Square and were carrying organs, would you flee south, towards presumably the busiest street?"

Certainly not. For, besides the busy street, if I knew the lay out, I'd know that Watkins would soon be there.

But neither would I head through Church Passage and run bang into Harvey.

And, a fortiori, neither would I go through St. James and risk meeting Blenkingsop and the volunteer lads.

So . . . conundrum?

Cheers.
LC

[pinkmoon]

well known

Recollections of Det. Insp. Robert Sagar, City of London Police.

As you know, the perpetrator of these outrages was never brought to justice, but I believe he came the nearest to being captured after the murder of the woman Kelly in Mitre-square. A police officer met a well-known man of Jewish appearance coming out of the court near the square, and a few moments after fell over the body. He blew his whistle, and other officers running up, they set off in pursuit of the man who had just left. The officers were wearing indiarubber boots, and the retreating footsteps of a man could be clearly heard. The sounds were followed to King's-block in the model dwellings in Stoney-lane, but we did not see the man again that night.
Daily News, 9 Jan. 1905.

So here we have a person who is "well known" to the police who might possibly be a multiple murderer.If this story is true surely he would have been visited straight away by police certainly I think he would have been followed day and night by the police I think we can assume this is just another "story".

[pinkmoon]

Person doing this is obviously disturbed in the mind to what degree we will never know .We do have to keep this in mind when trying to make sense of the killers behaviour before and after murder

[Damaso Marte]

Hello Stewart. Had Watkins seen someone exit Mitre sq, and had not testified to that effect at inquest, would that not have been grounds for immediate dismissal?

But he was not dismissed. Therefore, it seems that he did not come forward with a sighting after the fact.

Cheers.
LC

Well that's the question I started this thread with. Today, it would not be out of the ordinary for the police to withhold evidence from the public for some strategic reason.

In 1888, would it be plausible for Watkins's superiors to tell him NOT to discuss his sighting or tell the inquest?

[Damaso Marte]

Hello Damaso.

"Watkins approached the square from the north, right?"

Not if he came in through Mitre st, as he said.

Cheers.
LC

If you had just committed a murder in Mitre Square and were carrying organs, would you flee south, towards presumably the busiest street?

[Jonathan H]

No, not at all.

[Lechmere]

Jonathan
So, it was a lie deliberately propagated by Macnaghten to throw people off the scent to protect the continued innocence of young Montague, as the Druitts were essential to the maintenance of the Conservative regime.
And others - including experienced policemen -merely unwittingly repeated Macnaghten's crafty lie?
That is your suggestion isn't it?