Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Missing Memorandum

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by Stewart P Evans View Post
    Great, that will at least mean that Simon has company along the way. Perhaps you can start an action with New Scotland Yard to demand the production of this 'missing' document. Best of luck.

    If you read Robin's book you will see that he did not really pay much attention to it, merely using it in his assessment of Druitt as presented by Cullen. He paid greater attention to Hutchinson's statement that was on blue lined paper. I shall, perhaps, give Bob a ring and discuss it with him.

    I can see from what you write you have little knowledge of the disposition of these documents back in the 1960s and 70s and you should have fun trying to trace this one!
    Stewart

    I am sure Simon will be grateful for an ally and he may pick up others on the way. However it is a fact that documents did go missing and are still going missing. As to tracing them well I will relish the challenge Who dares wins !

    Comment


    • #77
      Yes

      Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
      Stewart
      I am sure Simon will be grateful for an ally and he may pick up others on the way. However it is a fact that documents did go missing and are still going missing. As to tracing them well I will relish the challenge Who dares wins !
      Trevor, yes it is a fact that Ripper related documents went missing during that period (although they certainly can't go missing now) as I have photocopies of several that did go missing and some that Don saw in the files are no longer there. I have stated my opinion about this one though, and, as I say, best of luck with your search, you're the best man for the job - being an ex-detective and all that.
      SPE

      Treat me gently I'm a newbie.

      Comment


      • #78
        I don't want to throw a spanner in the works, or divert an interesting discussion, but does this focus and near obsession with the MM obscure the real possibility that the document may actually not bring us any closer to the killer? (I was going to put the document is virtually worthless but clearly it is of great value in showing us the police direction and introduces us to several suspects of the time.)

        I don't mean that we shouldn't analyse and discuss the MM in detail, but stripping everything away and looking at it in a cold unbiased way, it is only the opinion of a very? young gentleman, parachuted into a very senior position because of old boy network connections, who joined the force after the main group of killings had stopped, whose opinions were not supported by any other officer except Anderson and who makes demonstrable mistakes throughout.

        I have always thought that we take the MM so seriously because, sadly, there is such a dearth of original material available that we feel we have to cling to whatever scraps we do have desperately, fearing all the time that an accurate appraisal may sink our MM liferaft.

        And a final point, after Peter Sutcliffe was found to be the Yorkshire Ripper an inquiry went over the case in detail. The police had a major suspect file that contained (off the top of my head, happy to be corrected) 49 suspects. Sutcliffe wasn't even on the list. CF the MM.

        Regards,
        If I have seen further it is because I am standing on the shoulders of giants.

        Comment


        • #79
          I am sure Simon will be grateful for an ally

          An ally, or an Ally?

          Regards,
          If I have seen further it is because I am standing on the shoulders of giants.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Stewart P Evans View Post
            Trevor, yes it is a fact that Ripper related documents went missing during that period (although they certainly can't go missing now) as I have photocopies of several that did go missing and some that Don saw in the files are no longer there. I have stated my opinion about this one though, and, as I say, best of luck with your search, you're the best man for the job - being an ex-detective and all that.
            You are right they cant go missing today. There arent many left, they all went years ago.

            I am putting together an experienced team. You can most certainly join but you cant bring the zimmer frame.
            Last edited by Trevor Marriott; 11-11-2010, 02:44 AM.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Tecs View Post
              ...the opinion of a very? young gentleman....
              Well....when Macnaghten wrote the memo he would have been slightly over 40 which, in some circles, might be viewed as young. But I take your point, Tecs: we're so desperate for new data in this case that we'll clutch onto almost anything.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by The Grave Maurice View Post
                Well....when Macnaghten wrote the memo he would have been slightly over 40 which, in some circles, might be viewed as young. But I take your point, Tecs: we're so desperate for new data in this case that we'll clutch onto almost anything.


                Absolutely, I wasn't actually thinking of when he wrote the memo though but rather that when he took his post in 1889 he was "only" 36.

                I have to confess though, I am probably influenced towards thinking 36 is a young age because it's my age now! And the thought of me, who is still 13 in my head, being a chief constable just doesn't seem right!

                Whatever age he was, he had no experience of police work and got his ripper knowledge second hand.

                Regards,
                Last edited by Tecs; 11-11-2010, 03:15 AM.
                If I have seen further it is because I am standing on the shoulders of giants.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Tecs View Post
                  Whatever age he was, he...got his ripper knowledge second hand.
                  Quite true. But we're getting our knowledge at about 14th hand. He was a lot closer to the action and sources of information than we are, and I'm hesitant to discount his opinion.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    I can attest that I have difficulty remembering the paper color of important documents I've consulted or discovered 7 years ago, not 45. (45 years ago I wasn't even born.) And I'm not considered of weak memory among my colleagues. That's the unfortunate effect between using black-and-white xerox copies or microfilms vs. color photocopies and CD-ROMs for reproduction. Naturally, the great difference in price between the former and the latter is decisive in most cases.
                    Best regards,
                    Maria

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      I'm certainly all for getting back as many of the original ripper documents as possible, including this one, should it exist. Based on what I've read here I'd say I give it only about a 3 in 10 chance of existing and a 7 in 10 chance of being faulty memory - but nobody cares what I think.

                      More importantly though, given that we seem to agree that the text of this 'missing' document is identical to the one we have - I'd like to pose the question of where finding this document gets us. It throws up no new candidates and apparently (from whats been said) gives us no additional info on the ones already named. So is this exercise just for posterity?

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by Tecs View Post

                        I don't mean that we shouldn't analyse and discuss the MM in detail, but stripping everything away and looking at it in a cold unbiased way, it is only the opinion of a very? young gentleman, parachuted into a very senior position because of old boy network connections, who joined the force after the main group of killings had stopped, whose opinions were not supported by any other officer except Anderson and who makes demonstrable mistakes throughout.
                        And this is the long and short of it.

                        This young illexperienced officer thought he solved the case!! Many do this today too, he was the first of his kind!



                        The Baron

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by The Baron View Post

                          And this is the long and short of it.

                          This young illexperienced officer thought he solved the case!! Many do this today too, he was the first of his kind!



                          The Baron
                          The only officer who really tried was Abberline. Street-wise, down to earth, committed. The only sketchy part was that Hutchinson mess.
                          Major Smith also had some very insightful opinions.
                          Overall though, Abberline deserves praise, despite his flawed assumption "post-fact" that George Chapman did it.
                          The case obviouly haunted him.
                          Under Munro's leadership something better might have come out, if for the simplie dismissal of quack emigrees with scissors and exotic moustaches.
                          Sir Charles was a disastrous choice , even politically speaking. He reflected Matthews, who was also disastrous.
                          The absurd "three men" of Mac's leaves little interest in anything withheld, unless it went in completely different courses. Hard to assume so, or why.
                          Because we can safely assume that no serious psychological assesment of the perpetrator was carried out by anyone else other than Dr. Winslow.
                          And he was brushed off at the time.
                          Winslow's profiling (and respectively, Douglas' later one) were faulty only in their assumption that this man drew gratification from the killings.
                          Spot-on in virtually all other serial killers, this is wrong in our case -- this is not the work of a sex offender, but an executioner.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by The Baron View Post

                            And this is the long and short of it.

                            This young illexperienced officer thought he solved the case!! Many do this today too, he was the first of his kind!



                            The Baron
                            More nonsense on this subject. Macnaghten cannot be dismissed. Unless you were there and know something that the rest of us dont
                            Regards

                            Herlock






                            "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                              More nonsense on this subject. Macnaghten cannot be dismissed. Unless you were there and know something that the rest of us dont
                              The bewildering failure to identify the perpetrator, let alone arrest him, speaks volumes.
                              The bewildering failure to narrow down the perpatrator to this acts/motive/method instead of providing suspects that go in totally different directions, speaks volumes.
                              The bewildering failure of police to track down the actions of the victims prior to murder, speaks volumes.
                              The bewildering failure of the much advertized bloodhounds to even appear while policemen waited outside a room containing a butchered corpse, speaks volumes.
                              A depressed barrister accused because his family "was suspicious of him" (with relatives like these, the suicide makes sense, duh), an exotic sex offender who may have been kosminski, or maybe kaminski or maybe kloslowski, and some random obscure russian weirdo?
                              When police narrow their efforts down to the size and nature of a moustache, you read "clueless" in shining dancing glitter bold font.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by Lipsky View Post

                                The bewildering failure to identify the perpetrator, let alone arrest him, speaks volumes.
                                A Victorian police force with Victorian knowledge and only Victorian technology to hand.
                                The bewildering failure to narrow down the perpatrator to this acts/motive/method instead of providing suspects that go in totally different directions, speaks volumes.
                                Again...a Victorian police force. This wasnít the CIA. No profiling available.
                                The bewildering failure of police to track down the actions of the victims prior to murder, speaks volumes.
                                Nondescript prostitutes to whom no one gave a second glance. No cctv, no mobile phone or credit card tracking.
                                The bewildering failure of the much advertized bloodhounds to even appear while policemen waited outside a room containing a butchered corpse, speaks volumes.
                                They werenít the property of the police. They werenít kept at the yard. They were trialled and didnít work.
                                A depressed barrister accused because his family "was suspicious of him" (with relatives like these, the suicide makes sense, duh), an exotic sex offender who may have been kosminski, or maybe kaminski or maybe kloslowski, and some random obscure russian weirdo?
                                When police narrow their efforts down to the size and nature of a moustache, you read "clueless" in shining dancing glitter bold font.
                                Macnaghten, the second most senior police officer in the country, stated that evidence existed that led him to believe that Druitt was a likely suspect. Either he lied (for what reason?) or he was so stupid he just believed anything (what evidence is there for this?) Or he got it right.
                                I wonder how long youíve been an expert on the case?
                                Regards

                                Herlock






                                "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X