New Article on the Swanson Marginalia in Ripperologist 128

[Simon Wood]

Hi Chris,

Have you ever found a date on which it finally turned up at Scotland Yard and was christened the Macnaghten Report?

Regards,

Simon

[Chris]

Have you ever found a date on which it finally turned up at Scotland Yard and was christened the Macnaghten Report?

I assume it was just slipped into the files on the date it bears, and has stayed there ever since.

[Hunter]

...This is the note from Warren and is the primary source for Swanson being placed ‘in charge‘ of the investigation into the Whitechapel murders.
I would suggest that this letter makes Swanson and his office the clearing house for documents and information relating to the case that came into Scotland Yard from a variety of locations and sources. This is somewhat different from suggesting that Swanson was ‘in charge’ of anything other than the documents themselves which he would collate and prepare reports for his superiors.

"I look upon him for the time being as the eyes and ears for the Commmr in this particular case...He must be consulted on every subject. I would not send any directions anywhere on the subject of the murder without consulting him. I give him the whole responsibility."

That sounds like someone being placed in charge to me.

In Evans & Skinner's The Ultimate, The authors present the words of the whole text verbatim. They would have, not only seen the document to transcribe it, but they also add commentary that most of it was probability written by a secretary, but the last paragraph is in Warren's own hand. I've never had reason to suspect that these two notable researchers might be unreliable.

[Lechmere]

'Why "strangely and inexplicably"?'

Why or how would an unused internal News of the World document turn up at the Scotland Yard Crime Museum?
I think it is a little strange.
There may be a logical reason, but...
'Inexplicably' literally means there is no explanation. There hasn't been an explanation. The article states:
'When and how it entered the Crime Museum is unknown at this point.'

[Lechmere]

Hunter
That doesn't sound like being put in operational charge - which is the usual claim.
It means his seniors will consult him as he has the information. It does not mean he will operationally control the investigation on the ground. That is what it would mean if Swanson was in operational control.

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

That is what it would mean if Swanson was in operational control.

Hello???

I give him the whole responsibility.

Explain the ambiguity here.

Oh, that's right - there isn't any.

[Lechmere]

Context

[AdamNeilWood]

'Why "strangely and inexplicably"?'

Why or how would an unused internal News of the World document turn up at the Scotland Yard Crime Museum?
I think it is a little strange.
There may be a logical reason, but...
'Inexplicably' literally means there is no explanation. There hasn't been an explanation. The article states:
'When and how it entered the Crime Museum is unknown at this point.'

Hello Lechmere,

One possibility which Keith and I considered is the access that News of the World journalists had to the Metropolitan Police in 1981, as revealed recently by the Leveson Inquiry. Perhaps Charles Sandell ran the draft article by a contact at the Met for opinion and this eventually made its way into the Crime Museum?

Best wishes
Adam

[Lechmere]

Hmmm - just about possible as an explanation but not likely.
May I ask if anyone has obtained any independent corroboration from the news of the world themselves that any of the news of the world related documents actually came from them in the first place.

What size paper were the 'jack' pages typed on - it doesn't look like foolscap or a4 - which one might expect for a draft article.

[Chris]

Hmmm - just about possible as an explanation but not likely.

Why do you think it's not likely?

[AdamNeilWood]

Hmmm - just about possible as an explanation but not likely.

Well, I can only suggest possibilities. Whether it's likely or not is your opinion.

May I ask if anyone has obtained any independent corroboration from the news of the world themselves that any of the news of the world related documents actually came from them in the first place.

I would have said that letters on a News of the World letterhead, bearing the signature of the News Editor Robert Warren, is pretty clear evidence, unless you think I Photoshopped it and forged his signature.

Regarding the unused article, Charles Sandell died in 1987, otherwise I'd have made contact with him. As I said in the Ripperologist article, it's unknown how and why Sandell's piece ended up in the Crime Museum. If I had any strong idea I'd have published it.

What size paper were the 'jack' pages typed on - it doesn't look like foolscap or a4 - which one might expect for a draft article.

The pages found by Keith were a photocopied version, with the original page edges visible. On some the top-left corner is folded, indicating this article was stapled when the copying was done. It looks as if they were copied at a reduced size. I reduced them further to fit on the A4 Ripperologist page and into the framed image box.

Adam

[Bridewell]

Swanson

Hunter
That doesn't sound like being put in operational charge - which is the usual claim.
It means his seniors will consult him as he has the information. It does not mean he will operationally control the investigation on the ground. That is what it would mean if Swanson was in operational control.

"It does not mean he will operationally control the investigation on the ground."

On the contrary, that's exactly what it means.

Warren was in overall charge of the Metropolitan Police. Anderson was in overall charge of the CID. Swanson was placed in overall charge of the Whitechapel Murder enquiry (on the written instructions of Sir Charles Warren). Anderson could be seen as the titular head, but he played no active part in the investigation.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Bridewell,

Go here -

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?p=226432

Post #101 details Swanson's duties and working hours during the Whitechapel murders investigation.

Regards,

Simon

[Lechmere]

Adam

There’s the letter from R Warren dated 16th April 1981.
A remittance advice dated 14th May 1981.
And another letter dated 1st October 1987 also from Robert Warren
All these documents were provided to you by the Swanson family, so no I do not think you photoshopped them.
Mr Warren died in January 2009.
As I said before it is a great pity that all these documents were not released at an earlier date.

If all the known Van Gogh (I knew he had a connection somewhere along the line) paintings came from one source, and new ones kept appearing every so often, then it would be sensible for the art world to proceed with extreme caution and to examine these paintings in minute detail to ensure they are genuine.
Using documents that come from the same source to validate other documents is not sound.

In the scheme of things ‘Ripperology’ is not of world-wide importance but I guess it is important to people in this field of study. Hence it is important that all loose ends are cleared up. It is not my purpose to point the finger at anyone – contrary to earlier claims.
However if a load of documents are suddenly released it is important that they are scrupulously validated if they are to be taken seriously.
I think I have demonstrated that these documents have not been scrupulously validated – they have been taken on trust, which actually isn’t good for all sides involved.

We are all human and I can see how it can be difficult to press the point without seeming rude and accordingly act as if treading on egg shells. Hence the following telling passage:

“The use of different pencils is in the address book is reminiscent of Stewart Evans’s thoughts on viewing the Marginalia at his July 2000 meeting with Jim:
“Sitting on the sofa with Keith I then inspected the marginalia with a powerful magnifying glass. I was immediately struck by the fact that the writing in the bottom margin, patently very old in appearance, was in grey pencil but with a sort of purple tinge and was clearly indented. This was in stark contrast with the writing on the rear endpaper which was in a different pencil entirely – a pale hue, larger writing and not impressed on the page as was the other writing. I said, “Take a look at this Keith, the writing at the rear of the book is in a different pencil.” Immediately thinking that Mr Swanson may have interpreted this as a suggestion that it was a later addition in someone else’s hand, I added, rather obviously, “Perhaps he used a different pencil when he wrote that.” Keith looked at it and agreed with me that I was correct. In fact it was not even necessary to use the glass to see the difference. Mr Swanson made no comment.”

This is not conducive to the rigorous testing of documents.

In answer to an earlier point – it is blatantly and manifestly obvious that having the Marginalia version of ‘The Lighter Side of My Official Life’ in the Scotland Yard Museum massively increases its provenance as does its appearance on ‘Jack the Ripper – the Definitive Story’. Both testified to its historical importance and significance, and that it was genuine.

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

In answer to an earlier point – it is blatantly and manifestly obvious that having the Marginalia version of ‘The Lighter Side of My Official Life’ in the Scotland Yard Museum massively increases its provenance as does its appearance on ‘Jack the Ripper – the Definitive Story’. Both testified to its historical importance and significance, and that it was genuine.

I have no idea how you came to that conclusion.

Please elaborate as to how its exhibition enhances provenance.