Why did Macnaghten deny Cutbush as a serious suspect?

[Natalie Severn]

...or even to Martha Tabram, come to that.

On the other hand,Sam, it seems extraordinary to me that Thomas Cutbush was sent to an institution for the criminally insane on the basis of an "unheard" court case that rested simply on his arrest for malicious woundings,if all he ever did regarding these "malicious woundings" was cause a mild superficial wound in the backside of one woman.That is nasty----but Broadmoor?
Anyway it is a court case which we may hopefully be able to hear more about now that the files on Cutbush are being released.
It has to be remembered too that the Sun introduced their series of articles in 1894 by stating that in both his defence and prosecution statements at court , he was suspected of being "Jack the Ripper".

[Ben]

Where the Napper/Cutbush comparison falls short, in my view, is Cutbush's failure to conform to the process of escalation which clearly characterized Napper's crimes. The Green Chain rapes occured before the stabbing of Rachel Nickell, after which he murdered Samantha Bissett and her daugher with even more brutality and even more mutilations. There is clear escalation in both the severity of the mutilations and the efficiency of the crimes, as I believe there was in 1888. None of this rules out Cutbush as JTR, but on the other hand, we would need to accept that the whole learning/emboldening/progressing process happened in reverse towards the end.

Best regards,
Ben

[Natalie Severn]

Robert,sometimes just tapping the stuff out on the keyboard too fast is when a wrong letter or digit gets in.

[Robert]

I know, Nats. And my keyboard seems to want to type what it wishes, and sod me.

[Chris]

The source is from the series of articles contained in the Sun,and can be cross referenced to a large degree in Macnaghten"s 1894 memorandum.

I think you have that quite badly muddled.

[Natalie Severn]

Where the Napper/Cutbush comparison falls short, in my view, is Cutbush's failure to conform to the process of escalation which clearly characterized Napper's crimes. The Green Chain rapes occured before the stabbing of Rachel Nickell, after which he murdered Samantha Bissett and her daugher with even more brutality and even more mutilations. There is clear escalation in both the severity of the mutilations and the efficiency of the crimes. None of this rules out Cutbush as JTR, but on the other hand, we would need to accept that the whole learning/emboldening/progressing process happened in reverse towards the end.

Best regards,
Ben

Ben, Napper did actually "get caught" soon after Rachel, Samantha and her daughter were murdered in the 1992/3 spree,suggesting he may have begun to become more careless and begun to lose it.The only thing I can think of that may explain the Cutbush apparent slide backwards is that he had become careless and his illness had affected his concentration and sense of caution?

[Chris]

It's complicated. Thomas may have committed a crime, but he was not convicted of anything, and his solicitor averred that he could have established his client's innocence, given the chance. Thomas was, however, dangerous.

Yes - strictly I should have said Cutbush was indicted on a criminal charge. But my point was that the difference between him and Aaron Kozminski is that the latter wasn't committed as a result of any criminal charge.

[Natalie Severn]

I think you have that quite badly muddled.

Well if you think so Chris I will spell out for you what I mean.

from page 2 of Macnaghten"s 1894 memorandum:

".....he [Cutbush] believed that people were trying to poison him[ The Sun say Cutbush accused his doctor of trying to poison him]."

"......He wrote to Lord Grimthorpe and others and also to the Treasury,complaining of a Dr Brooks of Westminster Bridge Road who he threatened to shoot for having supplied him with bad medicines."


Not muddled at all mate!

[Chris]

Well if you think so Chris I will spell out for you what I mean.

from page 2 of Macnaghten"s 1894 memorandum:

".....he [Cutbush] believed that people were trying to poison him[ The Sun say Cutbush accused his doctor of trying to poison him]."

"......He wrote to Lord Grimthorpe and others and also to the Treasury,complaining of a Dr Brooks of Westminster Bridge Road who he threatened to shoot for having supplied him with bad medicines."


Not muddled at all mate!

You claimed that "Cutbush had crept up behind his doctor, drawn a gun on him and threatened to kill him". If you look at the Sun article you'll see where you've got muddled. The story in the Sun - if there is any truth at all in it - relates to someone else and there is no mention of a gun or a threat to kill the person - other than a suspicion in that person's own mind.

[Cap'n Jack]

'None of this rules out Cutbush as JTR, but on the other hand, we would need to accept that the whole learning/emboldening/progressing process happened in reverse towards the end.'

Ben, my opinion has always been that Thomas saw his escalation period during 1888, when he threw that old chap down the stairs, and was then confined in an institution where he underwent some kind of treatment to 'cure' him. It was a common misconception in the LVP that such violent behaviour in young men could be cured by a two year stay in a private institution where they would be unable to indulge in masturbation which was held as the root cause of all their problems.
'Cured' in 1891, Thomas would have been released onto the streets, and without even waiting for nightfall would have been jabbing at some kind of reality. If not caught when he was, there is no doubt in my mind that this simple 'jabbing' would have quickly turned to violent murder.
He was just getting back. Not going forward.

[Cap'n Jack]

'Yes - strictly I should have said Cutbush was indicted on a criminal charge. But my point was that the difference between him and Aaron Kozminski is that the latter wasn't committed as a result of any criminal charge.'

Due respect and all that shite, Chris, but I think Robert was expecting a reply from you on the differing sentencing policies employed in the Cutbush and Colicitt cases.

[Roy Corduroy]

Something caused Inspector Race, the arresting officer in 1891, to suspect Cutbush of being the Ripper. Race got the ball rolling and thank you Stewart and Jake for the information earlier in this thread about him.

Mac's memo only made mention of three other policemen - "Cutbush's antecedents were enquired into by C.Insp (now Supt.) Chris by Inspector Hale, and by P.S. McCarthy C.I.D. -- (the last named officer had been specially employed in Whitechapel at the time of the murders there,) -- and it was ascertained that he was born, and had lived, in Kennington all his life."

Underline mine.

Did Insp. Race also work in Whitechapel at the time of the murders?

Roy

PS - Looking forward to hearing what you have to share from the newly released files.

[Ben]

If not caught when he was, there is no doubt in my mind that this simple 'jabbing' would have quickly turned to violent murder.

Very possibly, AP, which is why I believe that a strong argument can be made for Cutbush being an offender whose criminal career was in its infancy, and whose crimes could have escalated to the point of violent murder had he not been caught, as opposed to an offender who had already reached that stage.

Best regards,
Ben

[Robert]

The Victorian policy on insanity seems to have been - er - insane.

Here's an item where a man was not sent to Broadmoor, because he hadn't been found guilty!

TIMES JUNE 14th 1895

[Robert]

AP, could you post that item at reasonable size please? Computer playing up - I haven't even got Paint at the moment.