A Likely Suspect?

[Shelley]

Dear Mr. Marriott:

His lawyer did invite the authorities to check on Feigenbaum and his past movements.

When,by chance, were those inquiries made? After his death and before going to the press or before he died and then going to the police and then the Press?

This would be my question too, as i haven't heard of the lawyer going to authorities, it's a little unfamiliar territory for me, i'm not well versed as to this, so i wouldn't mind being enlightened?

[Trevor Marriott]

It appears none of the authorities botherd to look into it just another one of what if`s surrounding the Ripper mystery.

Just beacuse the authorities did nothing no reason to malign his lawyer wasnt his fault.

[Howard Brown]

Dear Mr. Marriott:

No sir, thats not the question I asked.

I asked when did Lawton approach the police....before Feigenbaum died or after he died and whether or not he did so in either case before he went to the Press.

If he did approach the Police, do you have some sort of documentation that provides a source of that liasing other than Lawton saying he did...if even that?

[Howard Brown]

No offense Trevor but....


"However it appears no one bothered to just another one of the "What if`s " surrounding the Ripper mystery."

I believe you mean, in all reality, surrounding the Feigenbaum story as no police officials as you've just mentioned followed through on the story to begin with.

[Shelley]

Mr Marriott,
With How's post it would be interesting for you to answer How's question of the lawyer going to the authorities such as the police. I too would like to know about this question in detail, as i have stated i wouldn't mind being enlightened. Even if the authorities didn't bother to look into it, this information come to light for you to make mention of Trevor must have some documentation, so where is it Trevor?

[Trevor Marriott]

Howard you are not listening ! i said in a previous post he could not reveal the information whilst Feigenbaum was alive due to client confidentiality.

When interviewed by the press follwoing the execution he made the statement then. It was published and so if the police both there and here chose to disregard it then as i said its not the lawyers fault

[Howard Brown]

Dear Trevor:

It seems Lawton should have conferred with the police officials before making that rather bold... hearsay at best...declaration to the press. It served no purpose to blab that out, considering he should have had his client's confidentiality and best interests in mind.....

By the way, Feigenbaum,as we all know, did not confess to being Jack The Ripper or even Jack In The Box. Thats Lawton's hearsay musings and hearsay only.

That the police did not pursue the matter may likely have more to do with their belief in Lawton as a less than stellar mouthpiece in the long run.

[Shelley]

Howard you are not listening ! i said in a previous post he could not reveal the information whilst Feigenbaum was alive due to client confidentiality.

Yes, there is client confidentiality Trevor, however why not use such information and bring to light a bargain plea for his client, as the ripper killings could be due to a killer that is suffering some form of regression and perhaps more likely in a getting off plea for his client, psychiatry was basic in the victorian period, and had more of a likely supposition to write off his client as mad and not bad than it is by today's measures. Is it not possible that the authorities at the time still would have made a documentation regarding the lawyers claims, rather than this instance of conjecture?

When interviewed by the press follwoing the execution he made the statement then. It was published and so if the police both there and here chose to disregard it then as i said its not the lawyers fault

Also a lawyer would have a fair supposition of the fate of his client, it would be likely that he knew that his client would be sentenced to death, why not still try the plea of insanity and possibly the ripper of the east-end killings to save his clients neck, also persuade his client be interviewed on the grounds of him likely to ' get off ' with this plea, and also the lawyer being seriously listened to by the authorities at the same time. I'm sure if this was at all true, the lawyer would have pushed for those to listen to him as well as his client, thus a lawyer who found Jack the Ripper. The only explaination it sounds to me Trevor, is that feigenbaum made no such claims as to not being able to help himself when coming into contact with a woman that he has to mutilate them, and said actions show the lawyer to use a last minute thought, as a use for himself and extra cash, this is the reason why he could not do this while feigenbaum was alive because he said no such thing, not because of client confidentiality at all....What lawyer wouldn't want to be the man who could bring forth such a prize? If the lawyer had persuaded his client to come forth to save his own neck, as i have explained above this would in no way be breaking client confidentiality, having obtained permission as a means of a plea bargain would have ensured no confidentiality broken at all and his lawyer would have known this. This falls into the bounds of a story, and actions prove it to be untrustworthy information.

[Trevor Marriott]

Plea barganing was nver an issue to be considered Feigenbaum went on trial for one murder for which he pleaded not guilty. Based on his account which, gave him a slight chance of being acquitted. It would have been foolish on the part of his defence team to jepordise what slim chance he had of securing an acquittal.

Once he had been found guilty any mention of any other murders would have ruined his appeal. So it was right and proper for none of this to be mentioned in the public domain at that time. Once his appeal had failed there was still nothing to be gained even if he had confessed to being JTR it would not have saved him from execution. The legal system did not work in the same way then as it does today.

[Howard Brown]

Shell:
It certainly wouldn't be the first time that a lawyer did a poor job of representing his or her client by avoiding extending his client's date of execution by withholding evidence until after the fact. I knew when Lawton first made the statement to anyone about his client's possible connection to the WM.
There are far too may problems,not necessarily with Feigenbaum, but with Lawton's claims. Not the least of which can be found in Wolf Vanderlinden's outstanding dissection of the affair,an excerpt of which is provided here:
******************


Almost the whole case against Feigenbaum rests with the testimony of William S. Lawton. If it hadn’t been for Lawton, nobody would even remember Feigenbaum today, let alone consider him a viable candidate for London’s Jack the Ripper. When looked at closely, however, Lawton’s theory offers some problems.
Lawton wrote of the confession: “When Feigenbaum was in the Tombs awaiting trial I saw him several times. The evidence in his case seemed so clear that I cast about for a theory of insanity. Certain actions denoted a decided mental weakness somewhere. When I asked him point blank:
“‘Did you kill Mrs. Hoffman?’ he made this reply:
“‘I have for years suffered from a singular disease, which induces an all absorbing passion. This passion manifests itself in a desire to kill and mutilate the woman who falls in my way. At such times I am unable to control myself.’” 26
This statement is interesting for several reasons. First, Lawton states that he heard Feigenbaum’s “confession” when the prisoner was “in the Tombs awaiting trial,” so, in other words, before the 26th of October, 1894, or very early in a long legal process that would eventually stretch to April of 1896.
Second, according to Lawton the evidence against his client in the murder of Juliana Hoffman was “so clear” that he was forced to look at an insanity defence in order to try and save his clients life. In this context we see that the “confession” conveniently offers Lawton exactly what he was desperately looking for: evidence of insanity.
Feigenbaum suffered from a “disease,” a “passion” which he was unable to control. Perhaps the open and shut case wasn’t so open and shut after all…except that Lawton never used this defence. Not during the trial, not during the appeal process and not, amazingly, when he and his co-counsel, Hugh Pentecost, were trying to save their client’s life by trying to have him declared insane. In fact Lawton never told Pentecost that Feigenbaum had ever confessed to anything, let alone that he had a “desire to kill and mutilate the women who fall in my way.” Lawton also never mentioned his growing suspicion that Feigenbaum might be the Ripper, or any of his supposed transatlantic research which turned suspicion into conviction. Supposedly it never came up, even in passing, and was only revealed after the death of their client - and then to a reporter. This strains the bounds of credulity to breaking. -Wolf Vanderlinden


That sort of sums it up to me Shelley...

[Shelley]

Howard,
Ah, now i get it.......So with even Hugh Pentecost, Lawton never made any such declaration of such a confession, that is odd as Lawton would not be breaking confidentiality there. Lawton's after minute thought as i suspected, as his client being possibly JTR.
Oh, i'm familiar of good lawyers and bad lawyers ( not that i've ever been in trouble with the police that is!!! Nor do i have any sort of criminal record of any kind.....I thought i'd point that out!).
Also as religion was rife and socially intergrated then, a priest or a vicar was always at the gallows for a last confession, so why not in order to save his soul from damnation, if feignbaum did kill any other woman ( ie: ripper killings )not make a confession? As it was different back then as well, in consideration of the religion mania! Feigenbaum made no confessions to a vicar/preist and would be more fitting in his circumstances and fate to confessing to a lawyer.

[Howard Brown]

Shell..

I believe that the fact that Pentecost ( who went into the religious field upon retiring from Law..) had no knowledge of what his partner on the case was talking about speaks volumes about this alleged "jailhouse confessional" from Feigenbaum. Wolf Vanderlinden laid it out as plainly as can be explained in his excellent dissertation....all I'm doing is bringing it up since its the best explanation possible....at least to me. If Mr. Marriott cares to pursue the story,more power to him. Its just when people insinuate individuals....such as Feigenbaum, into the pantheon of Ripper suspects, it should be made clear from the outset that no one ever took Feigenbaum seriously...at least to our knowledge...in 1896, as being a potential Ripper suspect. It all boils down to one of the two and not both defense lawyers opening up after his client was dead.

Plus this doesn't help matters for Lawton either:

"Second, according to Lawton the evidence against his client in the murder of Juliana Hoffman was “so clear” that he was forced to look at an insanity defence in order to try and save his clients life. In this context we see that the “confession” conveniently offers Lawton exactly what he was desperately looking for: evidence of insanity. -Wolf Vanderlinden

[Shelley]

Hi Howard,

That's about a tidy job done and sums up Lawton doing a one man after the fact story teller of fabrication to me. So Pentecost became part of the clergy then? Where is the dissertation for this so i can have a good read, i'm behind on a lot that has progressed and a friend is helping me get some back copies and info ( i have a lot of reading to do). So Lawton was struggling in the case and bottom barrel for an insanity plea, which sounds like he couldn't produce.
Cheers How
Shelley

[Howard Brown]

Shell...

On the link to The Forums, I thought I had a link to a specific story about Pentecost,but my lazy arse didn't write it out...just condensed it.

I think you can locate material on Pentecost fairly easily on Google or through a newspaper search engine,such as the Boston Public Library or ProQuest.

Anyway, here's the two links to some new material from Wolf and of course his dissertation here on Casebook. Good stuff.

http://casebook.org/suspects/carl-feigenbaum.html

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?p=53645&highlight=hugh+pentecost#post53645

[Philbee]

Ok has anybody seriously thought about the marks to kellys arms... I can make out c f on the left arm but I am pretty sure I will be proved wrong ...