Why did Macnaghten deny Cutbush as a serious suspect?

[Cap'n Jack]

No worries, Roy, your interest much appreciated.
One thing - amongst many others - which gives me pause for thought is the fact that Mac states in the memo that CEO Charles Henry Cutbush is the uncle of Tom Tom.
This relationship between the two men, Charles and Thomas, has still yet to be confirmed officially.
So it's a great shame that we cannot do what Macnaghten must have done to confirm that Charles and Thomas were indeed uncle and nephew.
That is push himself off his desk, walk the few feet from his private office to the Commissioner's Office next door and bellow at Chief Executive Superintendent Charles Henry Cutbush sat at his desk:
'Damn it Charles! Is this lunatic your nephew or not?'
Now there were only two answers that Charles could have given.

[White-Knight]

No I do not know that for a fact. "Sat in a drawer" is a figure of speech.

I see there are dueling threads on the memo, both here and as per Druitt, so I quote Stewart Evans in post 8 of this thread: " Macnaghten reported to the Assistant Commissioner (Crime) and the Chief Commissioner, ergo it was they whom this 1894 report was intended for."

Cutbush is a person of interest, AP, I'm not here to ambush you and your posse. Carry on. Beating the tom tom.
Roy

Yee -haa! don't mind if we do...the point is , it was travelling UP, and as such we might reasonably expect it was Mac's best case scenario, albeit necessarily perfunctory to be fit for purpose, yet it stills lacks anything substantial. You can be substantial AND pithy if you have any command of the lingo..but Mac gives us a few suggestions only, hardly enough to quell the suggestions he is said to be indirectly challenging..blimey i could go on like this all day, oh yes, I already did!

WK

[Roy Corduroy]

No I do not know that for a fact. "Sat in a drawer" is a figure of speech.

I see there are dueling threads on the memo, both here and as per Druitt, so I quote Stewart Evans in post 8 of this thread: " Macnaghten reported to the Assistant Commissioner (Crime) and the Chief Commissioner, ergo it was they whom this 1894 report was intended for."

Cutbush is a person of interest, AP, I'm not here to ambush you and your posse. Carry on. Beating the tom tom.

Roy

[Cap'n Jack]

'This memo sat in a drawer till, what 1959.So here we are.'

You don't know that for a fact.

[White-Knight]

Hello Roy, thanks for the invite.

That's good. Wish I had said that. "If needed" which it wasn't because the Sun didn't solar power Cutbush into the forefront of infamy. This memo sat in a drawer till, what 1959.So here we are.

Roy

I'm beginning to wish it had stayed there.

WK.

[Roy Corduroy]

White-Knight, Come by and sit a spell anytime. Glad to have you.

But this -

...the memorandum was not written for us. It was not meant to be a fully fleshed case for or against any of the suspects. Rather, Macnaghten was just presenting the Home Office with some notes on the men, if needed.

That's good. Wish I had said that. "If needed" which it wasn't because the Sun didn't solar power Cutbush into the forefront of infamy. This memo sat in a drawer till, what 1959.

So here we are.

Roy

[White-Knight]

blimey.just read that last post back.. bit i wrote to Natalie.. I seem to be turning into Russell Brand. Sorry about that. Must be the excitement of meeting all you jolly ripperollergisty-wisties.aagh.stoppit.its a serious site for debate and research, and in that spirit..yes I am imagining that stink Natalie, and it must have carried quite a way...

o.k. I've shut up now.thanks for putting up with me..especially you ,Chris since we seem to be in stark disagreement.

bye for now!

[White-Knight]

No Chris, I mean substantiate and elaborate on those he DOES put forward as supposedly stronger suspects. I mean he gives us very little doesn't he, especially considering he is claiming a strong conviction ,albeit in a superficially indirect way ,that Cutbush is no real suspect at all. How can he be so convinced its one of his bunch compared to Tom when he doesn't seem to know that much about any of 'em.....I say again he fails to elaborate and substantiate, he gets his facts wrong and yet he's still supposedly the man in the know and must have had good reasons...and oh he burnt 'em or they were lost or blah blah..it just doesn't wash..I still think he said what he said due to one or more of the motives discussed on this thread and summarized by myself above..I see no reason not to stand by'em. I think he knew little about his own suspects and less about Cutbush. The memoranda should and could have been a chance to slam his suspicions and information home but it wasn't and he didn't. He made a right pig's ear of it..'notes if needed' me fanny's aunt..do you think the home office weren't bothered about any real evidence accrued..just so long long as Tom got out of the firing line? surely they were both on the agenda as the two are interdependant. It was a chance to use the former to achieve the latter..but he wouldn't , couldn't or at the least just didn't do it.

Cap'n..thanks for the explaining ..I was being a bit disingenuous about me idiot's guide but you put it clearly and simply whilst I was still jobbing around your allusion.ta.and yes I am in a punk covers band called 'mutoids'.we are on My Space..if you fancy a laugh..and guess what I play ..of course.. I am the drummer!

Natalie..honoured to get a reply..layin' down me silky cape on the puddle of me relative ignorance on all things ripper..ma'am!

W.K.

[Natalie Severn]

Thanks for your words White Knight-very chivalrous and kind!
I am not sure how rigorous Macnaghten was, he comes across as a bit dilettante -or Southern sophisticate, compared say, to his Edinburgh pal Monro.Supt Cutbush had been very highly thought of in Scotland Yard, and a troublesome and nagging thought occurring to fellow police chiefs, may have been that Supt Cutbush could have been Thomas"s natural father. Imagine the concern that might have caused to the powers that be in Scotland Yard, especially now they had all got more than a whiff of the stink caused by the Sun Newspaper claiming that the Ripper was none other than Thomas Cutbush ---and had done so for five consecutive days that February in 1894 .
Norma

[Cap'n Jack]

Chris, you ignore Colicitt at your peril.
HMP means life.

Knights in White Satin
you have a punk band?
Letters I've written never meaning to send.
Grass captured the heart of the sexually confused boy in his absolute epic master work, and turned that boy into a man who was not sure about what his fingers did while he slept, so he beat a drum to keep beat to his madness.
Tom Tom beat similar drum.
Okay back to punk. The Sex Pistols 'Pretty Vacant', best song of century.
Tom Tom would have loved it.

[ChrisGeorge]

which begs the obvious question, Chris , why didn't he substantiate and elaborate on these genuine beliefs? surely he had every reason to do so..but he didn't ..did he?

Hi again White-Knight

You mean substantiate and elaborate on his genuine beliefs that Cutbush was not the Ripper? Isn't that like trying to prove a negative? He had no need to elaborate further if he was giving the Home Office the names of three men whom he thought were more likely to be the Ripper.

This shows the limitations of basing a theory on Macnaghten's memorandum or memoranda, in this case you and AP trying to build your case or Cutbush on what he was not saying: that is, the memorandum was not written for us. It was not meant to be a fully fleshed case for or against any of the suspects. Rather, Macnaghten was just presenting the Home Office with some notes on the men, if needed.

And AP, Cutbush was not sentenced to life was he? Because he wasn't tried, as you say. Rather he was put away as being a lunatic.

Best regards

Chris George

[White-Knight]

which begs the obvious question, Chris , why didn't he substantiate and elaborate on these genuine beliefs? surely he had every reason to do so..but he didn't ..did he?

no problem, thanks to you too and good evenin' cap'n! dab o' lime with that? give me a minute whilst I peruse me idiot's guide to German literature...to work out to what extent you may be taking the p***!? Ah yes, I see ...mmm child that wouldn't grow, mental institution, rise of horrors of Nazi-ism, manic drum beating,..sounds like the punk band I play in.....

WK.

[Cap'n Jack]

Chris
I believe the San Antonio fault that gapes in your argument is a young chap called Colicitt, or even Colicott.
For young Thomas and Colicitt were at the same time in court for identical crimes, and it was not a case of mistaken identity at all, but one walked free and the other sentenced to life.
Perhaps you would tell me why Mac did not think Colicitt was a viable suspect for Jack; or alternatively why the Sun did not suspect him of being the Ripper?
Tom Tom was sentenced to life is what makes all the difference, without a trial, to keep things sweet, comprende?

[Cap'n Jack]

Thanks White Knight
your comment a tonic... which I'll take with some gin.
Tom Tom is a most interesting study I must say.
I first met him as a small boy when my mother gave me 'Tin Drum' to read, he was called Oscar then, but I knew it was him straight away.

[ChrisGeorge]

Mac only strengthens the case for Cutbush by his dismissiveness..its gotta be down to one or more of the above hasn't it? Sure its a response to the Sun but is this all he's got!?.. a few nutters with little or no pre-disposition to violence? It's not that good really is it?

Hello White-Knight

Macnaghten's dismissiveness does not necessarily strengthen the case for Cutbush, although I will admit there may have been an element of Mac wanting to dispell suspicion that a suspect seemingly close to a senior police officer could have been the infamous Jack the Ripper.

Rather the memorandum neither strengthens nor weakens the case for Cutbush.

My thought is that Macnaghten, besides wanting to contradict a report naming a suspect who was a relative of a police official, genuinely thought there were better suspects than Cutbush, who, as far as anyone knew, had killed no one, despite his nutty behavior with the knife, and that he simply wanted the Home Office to know that The Sun were barking up the wrong tree in case questions were asked in Parliament about The Sun article. Comprendé?

All the best

Chris