Did Littlechild consider Dr. T a suspect for being a woman hater or for being gay?

[Jonathan H]

In my opinion Jack Littlechild has no idea about Druitt.

Nobody did at the Yard except Macnaghten.

Littlechild thinks that if Dr D -- a suspect supposedly almost arrested ccording to Sims -- exists as separate to Dr T, then this alternate suicided medico is a bit self-serving fluff from Anderson.

I believe Mac told Littlechild that Tumblety may have taken his own life in France but that, inevitably, the fomer could not caim direct knowledge of this only starting in mid-1889. He would have to say so the file claims, or even better so Anderson once mused to him.

No wonder Littlerchild is not sold on this notion.

[mklhawley]

Hi Jonathan,

I wonder if there's a connection between Littlechild emphasizing to Sims that Anderson only thought he knew and Littlechild revealing the police incompetence?

Sincerely,

Mike

[mklhawley]

Mike

Our discussion has nothing to do with this thread, although, I like the fact that you agree Scotland Yard most likely considered Tumblety a significant suspect, and Littlechild was privy to this in November 1888.

Where does it say anywhere in any document, that anyone other than Littlechild from Scotland Yard considered Tumblety as a significant suspect or any catergory of a suspect for that matter.

May I point out to you that un corrobrated opinions given by ageing police officers in later years on who they thought the killer might have been do not equate to prime suspect status for the person they are giving an opinion about

Trevor! Welcome back!

Well, the reality is that Assistant Commissioner Anderson himself did,

Brooklyn Citizen, November 23, 1888, “Is He The Ripper?”
A Brooklynite Charged With the Whitechapel Murders Superintendent Campbell Asked by the London Police to Hunt Up the Record of Francis Tumblety Police Superintendent Campbell received a cable dispatch yesterday from Mr. Anderson, the deputy chief of the London Police, asking him to make some inquiries about Francis Tumblety, who is under arrest in England on the charge of indecent assault. Tumblety is referred to in the dispatch in the following manner: “He says he is known to you, Chief, as Brooklyn’s Beauty.”

Brooklyn Standard-Union, November 23, 1888 …the London Police are evidently doing their level best to fasten the Whitechapel murders upon Dr. F. T. Tumblety. Today Police Superintendent Campbell received a telegram from Assistant Police Commissioner Anderson, acting Chief since the resignation of Police Commissioner Warren, in reference to Tumblety. Mr. Anderson wants some information as to his life in Brooklyn, and says he is accused of indecent assault in London, where some say he was known as “Brooklyn’s Beauty.”


If Littlechild was completely off his rocker and pulled Tumblety's name out of thin air, then we should find absolutely nothing about other Scotland Yard officials concerned about Tumblety with respect to the murders, but surprise, surprise, Littlechild's boss had taken a personal interest in Tumblety AT THE PEAK OF THE MURDERS when Anderson was working hard at finding the killer. Are you saying Anderson would waste time on a nobody at this very busy moment?


Think about this again Trevor. What would be the odds that an old fart would randomly select someone's name as a 'very likely' suspect and then to find out his immediate boss solicited information from senior law enforcement officials on the very same person AND on the Ripper case? ...or Littlechild was telling the truth.


Now, mind your pints and quarts, so you're still able to post. I will be very interested in your comments on my next article.

Sincerely,
Mike

[Jonathan H]

Sorry, written in haste -- errors corrected

To Mike

I'l let you deal with Trevor, eg. Anderson's 1888 machinations over Tumblety, Inspector Andrews being sent on a background check in Canada, Sims writing in 1907 that an American medical man is the other chief suspect, the newspapers accounts on both sides of the Atlantic, Dr T's own interview, and so on.

The significance of the Littlechild Letter is also that for Tumblety was back in the frame because Kelly, since 1898, was now the final victim. From id-1889 Dr T had been 'exonerated'.

This notion of Kelly as the final victim is from Mac.

As is the notion of the killer killing himself soon after Kelly.

He is the likely source of Littlechild claiming it was believed that the American had killed himself in France -- maybe.

For Jack Littlechild his status as a major suspect hung on his peculiar hatred of women but he admits he did not crack once in a police cell, and had to be gotten on a morals charge.

What is often missed here is that the story Littlechild was handing Sims was an extraordinary scoop, about potential police incompetence. eg. the Ripper was not about to be arrested -- he had been arrested.

The 'awful glut' thesis is not part of Littlechild's point.

Rather that Dr T was being closely pursued by the constabulary -- a motif of Sims' writings on this subject since 1899 -- and after skipping his bail he was on the run and allegedly vanished.

That Dr. T was alive and kicking until 1903 would not have changed Littlechild's mind. Instead it would have changed Sims' mind, because it was Mac's 'ace in the hole' if his writer chum queried him about this American suspect.

Mac could have replied, truthfully, that Jack has the wrong end of the stick: Dr Tumblety died years later of natural causes in the US.

Sure enough, in 1915, Sims is still happily wedded to the 'Drowned Doctor' solution; for the only time time he actually mentions the killer's suburb of residence: Blackheath.

A grown-up graduate of the Valentine School would think that was an amazing coincidence; that the Ripper not only killed himself in exactly same way and in the same location as poor Mr. Druitt -- though the fiend did it three weeks earlier -- but that 'Jack' also lived with his 'people' somewhere in Blackheath?!

But Mr Druitt was not a doctor, and he lodged at the school so obviously it is just a coincidence -- right?

[Jonathan H]

To Mike

I'l let you deal with Trevor, eg. Anderson's 1888 machinations over Tumblety, Inspector Andrew being sent on a background check, Sims writing in 1907 that an American medical man is other chief suspect, and so on, the newspapers accounts on both sides of the Atlantic, Dr T's own interview,. and so on.

The significance of the Littlechild Letter is also that for Littlechild was back in the frame because Kelly, since 1898, was now the final victim.

This is from Mac. As is the notion of the killer killing himself soon after Kelly.

For Jack Littlechild his sttus as a major suspect hung on his peculiar hatred of women but he admits he did crack once in a police cell and had to be gotten on a morals charge.

What is often missed here is that the story Littlechild was handing Sims was an extraordinary scoop, about potential police incompetence. The Ripper was not about to be arrested -- he had been arrested.

The 'awful glut' thesis is not part of Littlechild's point. Rather that Dr T was being pursued by the constabulary -- a motif of Sims' writings on this subject since 1899 -- and after skipping his bail hge was on the run and vanished.

That he was alive qand kicking until 1903, would not have changed Littlechild's mind. Rather it would have changed sims' mind, because it as Mac's acin the hole if his writer chum queried about this American suspect.

Mac could have replied, truthfully, that Jacko has thw wrong end of the stick: Dr Tumblety died years later of natural causes in the US.

Sure enough, in 1915, Sims is still happily wedded to the 'Drowned Doctor; for the only time time he actually mentions his suburb of residence: Blackheath.

A grown-up graduate of the Valentine School would think that was an amazing coincidence; that the Ripper not only killed himself exactly same way and in the same location as poor Mr. Druitt -- though the fiend did it three weeks earlier -- and 'Jack' also lived with his 'people' somewhere in Blackheath?!

But Mr Druitt was not a doctor, and he lodged at the school so obviously it is just a coincidence -- right?

[Trevor Marriott]

Mike

Our discussion has nothing to do with this thread, although, I like the fact that you agree Scotland Yard most likely considered Tumblety a significant suspect, and Littlechild was privy to this in November 1888.

Where does it say anywhere in any document, that anyone other than Littlechild from Scotland Yard considered Tumblety as a significant suspect or any catergory of a suspect for that matter.

May I point out to you that un corrobrated opinions given by ageing police officers in later years on who they thought the killer might have been do not equate to prime suspect status for the person they are giving an opinion about

[mklhawley]

Hi Caz,

Our discussion has nothing to do with this thread, although, I like the fact that you agree Scotland Yard most likely considered Tumblety a significant suspect, and Littlechild was privy to this in November 1888.

To your point…

It seems presumptuous of you to claim that Littlchild would reject Tumblety as a likely suspect if he knew Tumblety actually lived for another 15 years without murdering anyone or committing suicide. Keep in mind, Littlechild had Tumblety’s record and knew Tumblety didn’t kill anyone for fifty-plus years before 1888, yet he considered him a very likely suspect. Why? Littlechild knew that Tumblety’s issue was a bizarre hatred of women, especially prostitutes, and not some burning unsatisfying impulse to mutilate women. This made such an impact on Littlechild that he still believed Tumblety was a significant suspect a quarter of a century later. The suicide addition is a nonstarter. The only reason why he mentioned suicide was because someone else proposed it, and he didn’t really put too much stake into this, anyway. Littlechild stated, ”It was believed he committed suicide but certain it is that from this time the 'Ripper' murders came to an end”. Besides, Littlechild did think Tumblety committed suicide at the time of his bail-jumping in November 1888. No one in Scotland Yard heard of any Ripper suspects drowning in the Thames in late November or early December.

You should have continued with post-1888 Tumblety in your hypothetical scenario. Littlechild would have realized that if Tumblety was completely innocent, he would have continued his life just the way he had always done, constantly travelling with young travel mates in semi-retirement, still dabbling in herb doctoring. He then would have realized that this did not happen. This man with lots of money rarely spent it and opted for a life in the shadows of society, only to end up dying with an unusual set of cheap brass rings (very similar to Chapman’s rings) in the same pocket as his usual diamond rings and gold chain.

Sincerely,

Mike

[caz]

Hi Caz,

We are actually in close agreement, but that would not have happened just a few years ago. My issue is what your last statement has summed up; a minimalization of Tumblety. In my opinion this is a vestige from the days when most were convinced that he was at best an insignificant suspect. The reality of it is, he was a significant suspect, as evidenced by busy Anderson getting personally involved in the Tumblety case immediately after the Kelly murder. Anderson would have focused upon the most promising leads, and that's what he did. Littlechild was privy to these discussions and saw how Tumblety was important to Anderson and company. ...and then to find out Anderson no longer considered him a suspect by 1913? That's what I see in the Littlechild letter. So what if he didn't know what happened to Tumblety post-November 1888. Littlechild was no longer involved in the Tumblety case.

So what, Mike? That has been my whole point all along. In 1913 Littlechild still thought Tumblety was 'very likely' to have been the ripper. But if this was even partly because he believed he had disappeared after Kelly's murder, never to be seen again because he took his own life, it could make all the difference in the world. If you could go back and inform Littlechild that Tumblety had gone on to live a long, non-murderous, non-suicidal life across the pond until his death in 1903, how do you know he wouldn't say "Well in that case I now consider him to be a completely shite suspect! The real murderer's brain would have given way after the horror of Miller's Court!"

Love,

Caz
X

[mklhawley]

Hi Jonathan,

Your point about Littlechild's comments directed towards Simms cannot be overstated and the fact that he's correcting him. Why would Littlechild attempt to correct Simms if he was not privy to inside November 1888 information?

Sincerely,

Mike

[Jonathan H]

Actually we do know why Littlechild considered Tumblety still a major suspect, if not the suspect of 1888.

We know this because of whom he wrote to, George Sims, and what about: the doctor suspect who took his own life.

Sims had written for years about a major suspect -- he just calls him the Jack the Ripper -- and that he was an affluent, middle-aged medical man with no patients and who was something of a recluse. He was about to be arrested when he drowned himself in the Thames.

This suspect was also English and had been sectioned twice because he desired to savage harlots.

Finally, in 1913, Littlechild corrects Sims, assuming that his 'Dr D' (who?) is the same suspect?

It was 'Dr. T' and he was a Yank and he had been arrested but fled. Somebody has told Jack Littlechild that Tumblety may have killed himself in France (did he drown himself there?) though the ex-police chief remains cautious.

Hey, I wonder who told him that?

Littlelchild seems to have forgotten two things.

That Inspector Andrews was sent to Canada to do a background check on Tumblety and thus he was still alive in NYC, or he does not want to mention it.

Secondly, and more significantly, he has forgotten that Tumblety was exonerated by subsequent Jack murders.

This is because Kelly has, retrospectively, become the final victim, which put Tumblety -- whether by accident or by design -- back in the frame.

Sims had also written in 1907 that the alternate major theory at the Yard was about an American medical man -- though young -- who had lived long after the murders.

Littlechild mentions Wilde, not as a murderer but rather as having a secret life which was 'deviant' and criminal (and which Littlechild helped expose as a gumshoe) and also the bizarre and despicable Harry K Thaw who was a murderer.

Thaw had shot his wife's lover, the architect Stanford White, in Madison Square Garden -- which White had designed -- in plain view and later got off scott free, because his fortune paid for an insanity defense.

eg. Another rich, American, deviant who had gotten away with murder?

[mklhawley]

That's about it really.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz,

We are actually in close agreement, but that would not have happened just a few years ago. My issue is what your last statement has summed up; a minimalization of Tumblety. In my opinion this is a vestige from the days when most were convinced that he was at best an insignificant suspect. The reality of it is, he was a significant suspect, as evidenced by busy Anderson getting personally involved in the Tumblety case immediately after the Kelly murder. Anderson would have focused upon the most promising leads, and that's what he did. Littlechild was privy to these discussions and saw how Tumblety was important to Anderson and company. ...and then to find out Anderson no longer considered him a suspect by 1913? That's what I see in the Littlechild letter. So what if he didn't know what happened to Tumblety post-November 1888. Littlechild was no longer involved in the Tumblety case.

Interesting thoughts Greg.

Sincerely,

Mike

[GregBaron]

No Marquis de Sade...

Tumblety was not a known sadist, but Jack the Ripper was.

The ripper didn't appear to be a sadist as the victims were dispatched quickly and effectively. It seems mutilation was the motivation..

Most of the damage was done post-mortem...

Littlechild may have conflated extreme violence with sadism......



Greg

[caz]

Hi Mike,

Yes, we know all that about Littlechild considering Tumblety a ripper suspect because he was 'among' the suspects back in the days before Anderson and co decided it was somebody else. I have no particular problem either with your claim that he was once considered to be a 'significant' suspect.

But what we don't know is precisely why Littlechild - uniquely it seems - was describing him as a 'very likely' suspect in 1913.

We can only go by his personal observations about the man in the same letter, so you can hardly claim that his comments about homosexuals and sadomasochism; Tumblety's extremely bitter feelings towards women; and Littlechild's (erroneous) statement of fact that this suspect was never seen again after leaving France, and was believed to have topped himself in the wake of Miller's Court (clearly Littlechild didn't know otherwise), had no bearing on why he believed as late as 1913 that this man was 'very likely' to have been the murderer. That just doesn't make any sense. Words mean something, so what was he going on about, if not backing up his 'very likely' opinion as best he could with whatever he knew, or believed, about the man, his sexual inclinations and what became of him?

Tumblety was among the suspects - tick.

He hated women - tick.

He disappeared after MJK's murder - tick.

He was gay, and gays tend to be cruel - tick.

But we know better, don't we? The man was among the suspects - okay, a significant suspect for a while - and actively gay. That's about it really.

Love,

Caz
X

[Simon Wood]

Hi Mike,

Thank you. Ingenious is one of my middle names.

"Although a 'Sycopathia Sexualis' subject he [Tumblety] was not known as a 'Sadist' (which the murderer unquestionably was) . . ." I quote Littlechild verbatim.

Tumblety was not a known sadist, but Jack the Ripper was.

Discuss.

Regards,

Simon

[mklhawley]

Hi Simon,

The ripcord comment is quite ingenious!

"It is very strange how those given to 'Contrary sexual instinct' and 'degenerates' are given to cruelty, even Wilde used to like to be punched about." (Littlechild)

"Contrary sexual instinct" was not referring to Wilde, since he stated "even Wilde". Contrary sexual instinct referred to the subject in the first paragraph, Tumblety. You claiming that "contrary sexual instinct" referred only to Wilde is wrong.

You said, "Littlechild did not write that "Tumblety was a 'Sycopathia Sexualis' with 'contrary sexual instincts' ", and I never said that. I said, "or was it because Tumblety was a “Sycopathia Sexualis” with “contrary sexual instincts”, i.e., he was gay?" I am merely making the point that Littlechild meant "contrary sexual instincts" for Tumblety.

But that's not the issue. The issue is Littlechild considered Tumblety a suspect because Scotland Yard CID, headed by Anderson, did.

Sincerely,
Mike




I know full well that