Where does Joseph Fleming fit into the equation?

[Sally]

I see - so Fleming can't have been the Ripper because he was Fleming the giant and probably not Kelly's ex anyway.

That was the costermonger?

I'm sorry but I have to say I think you're all barking up the wrong tree here. I think Killeen did it. Medical knowledge - check. Eviscerated women - check. Left the area soon after the killing stopped - check. And who would ever suspect him?

But this is probably off topic...

[Lechmere]

DVV
Your somewhat, ahem, less than academic approach to debate is duly noted.

Since Fisherman's article (which I confess I haven't read) new evidence has arisen - such as the height and further to that the context in which the height is written. Context is everything.
Still further information has been released in the form of asylum papers held by the City of London Union and by Bethnal Green. All of this undermines the theory that Evans/Fleming was Kelly's ex and that the police had any interest in this character.
The police would have been interested in tracing any recent ex of Kelly's particularly as there was the possibility that he may have used violence (provided they did not know that the costermonger was someone else altogether). That doesn't make him a good suspect.

[Fisherman]

It's fine that you've been convinced by Lechmere's empty bag.
Cheers

Once again, I am not "convinced" either way. I just spent a longish post to tell you how I see things, but that did not help very much, did it?
Professionally misinterpreting other posters stance in a repetitive manner, in spite of having been asked to refrain from it, helps your cause very little.

Fisherman

[DVV]

DVV
you moan when the height is brought up yet show yourself incapable of addressing an other issues relating to Fleming's poor candidacy.

Oh !

Really not fair for your friend who wrote such a brilliant and convincing article in 2008.

The simple truth is that Fleming is an excellent suspect, and Charles Cross a non-starter.

Indeed, if Fleming was so poor a candidate, why would the police have feverishly looked for him up to 1893 ?

[Lechmere]

DVV
you moan when the height is brought up yet show yourself incapable of addressing an other issues relating to Fleming's poor candidacy.

[DVV]

It's fine that you've been convinced by Lechmere's empty bag.
And that Fleming/Evans' probably mistaken recorded height has prompted you to change your mind about everything.
It sure shows that the height "may be wrong".

Cheers

[Fisherman]

Has a thread been started about this? Asking before I begin digging. Many thanks.

I do not think that a specific thread exists about it. But the material can be found on the Tabram threads.

All the best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

David:

"It may be wrong"... all right, that's my opinion.

To me, it seems that your opinion is more of "It is almost certainly wrong", not merely that it "may" be wrong. You have clearly stated that the records do not take precedence over your suggestion that he was merely 5 ft 7, and I disagree very much about that. It also seems to me that you put yourself in a very awkward position by denying the value of the record, since we all know that you are a Hutchinsonian. You admit that if Evans/Fleming was 6 ft 7, then he would not have been the man Lewis saw, whom you identify with Hutchinson.
Clearly, the suspicion that you try to move the goalposts in order to maintain your theory becomes a very tantalizing suggestion. No doubt, you can see this too.

You just keep saying that it has to be right, right, right.

This is a blatant lie. I have adviced against it and I do so again. I do NOT say that the record has to be right. I say that it is the better suggestion, and that we have no evidence that goes to prove it wrong, wherefore it must remain the best bid.

And if I've well understood your 2008 article about Fleming, your opinion is that Fleming/Evans was MJK's ex.

"Is" and "was" are to different matters, David. Like I have told you, the Ripper saga has developed over time and there is every reason to adjust to the developments. Lechmere has pointed out that there can be no certainty that Evans/Fleming was Kellys beau, and I can only concur. When I wrote my piece, I was of the opinion that most things pointed to a match, but a certain height record has surfaced since then, demanding attention and afterthought.

I do not lay down any Ripperological rules. What I think and speculate will not and has never guided the underlying truth of the case. All I can do is to take in the data and evidence that surfaces and continually reshape my stance to adjust to it. I urge you to do the same - always keep an open mind, never stop to accept that you may need to rethink and reassess the material. Ripperology is not like cheering on Tottenham Hotspur, come what may. Some years it will be a lousy idea to support Tottenham, whilst it may be a brilliant idea on other occasions, if we look to the outcome. And that is what we must do in the Ripper case - look for the best possible outcome. It is no shame to abandon things you have believed in when the evidence tells you that the time has come to do so. The shame lies in not being able to adjust to an ever changing reality, David.

I started out saying that Stride was a Ripper victim. I changed my mind after that, and claimed that the more probable thing was that she was not. Then I changed back to my original stance, and said that she probably does belong to the Ripper´s tally. Some think that points to a disability to stand by a decision. Wrong. It points to THREE decisions, all taken with differing evidence backgrounds. And quite contrary to being ashamed of this, I am actually proud to say that I will not marry myself to any idea. If I did, it would make me - or anybody else working to that methodology - a worthless Ripperologist. And it is this precise attitude that makes me very sour when you say that I somehow am claiming that the 6 ft 7 height must be correct. The second evidence surfaces that tells me it is probably wrong, I will accept that evidence. Until then, it stands that Evans/Fleming was PROBABLY 6 ft 7 since it says so in the records and since his weight does not nullify the suggestion.

All the best,
Fisherman

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Thanks Fish

Not the thread for it, I´m afraid, but the illustrations from the Illustrated Police News in combination with Hewitt telling us that she was found by a stone step tells us that Tabram was found adjoining the WC department in George Yard building.

All the best,
Fisherman

Has a thread been started about this? Asking before I begin digging. Many thanks.

[Fisherman]

"*The Tabram scavenger theory was just fine until evidence was uncovered that told us conclusively that she had been found not on the outside landing, but instead deep in the building where she died." Sorry, do what now? Making sure I'm not simply misunderstanding you. Tabram was murdered inside the building? I think I had a dream about that once. Help please.

Not the thread for it, I´m afraid, but the illustrations from the Illustrated Police News in combination with Hewitt telling us that she was found by a stone step tells us that Tabram was found adjoining the WC department in George Yard building.

All the best,
Fisherman

[DVV]

I have gone into why the identification of Barnett’s Joseph Fleming with Venturney’s Joe and McCarthy’s builder is not secure.

Yes, Lechmere.
You've gone alone and come back with an empty bag.

As for the police being still after Fleming in 1893, checking the registers with a list of suspects that would have included "Joseph Fleming"... I sincerely wonder how you can believe that.

[DVV]

No once again. I am not saying that it is the gospel truth. I am saying that it may be right and it may be wrong, but the records speak for it being right.
Fisherman

And here is the problem with you, Fish.

At first sight, it seems a reasonable point of view.

Which is actually contradicted by all your posts on this thread.

"It may be wrong"... all right, that's my opinion. And, as you wrote in 2009, it would be very surprising that, if Fleming was that tall, Mary wouldn't have told her friends.

Then, how come that you have never, never and ever, acknowledged any value to any point that has been made ?

That he was both extraordinarily tall and extraordinarily thin ? - No problem.

That nothing has leaked out about MJK being fond of such a freak ? - No problem either.

Again, the very fact that an unbiased researcher like Debs feels there is something wrong with this recorded height should prompt anybody to be cautious.... but instead, you have chosen to talk of Uma Thurman's BMI.

Therefore, why the hell "could it be wrong" ?

You just keep saying that it has to be right, right, right.

And if I've well understood your 2008 article about Fleming, your opinion is that Fleming/Evans was MJK's ex. You seem to agree, and you're right, that this has been established "way beyond reasonable doubt" (as Ben has rightly pointed out several times on this thread), and that Barnett's plasterer and Venturney's Joe are most probably one and the same - which is quite obvious.

So how come that you have never corrected Lechmere on this ?
Does the recorded height suddenly make your entire article rubbish ?
Or are you posting here for the sole purpose to hammer that Fleming was 6'7 tall, although the thread isn't specifically dedicated to Fleming's height ?

Cheers

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Fish

"*The Tabram scavenger theory was just fine until evidence was uncovered that told us conclusively that she had been found not on the outside landing, but instead deep in the building where she died." Sorry, do what now? Making sure I'm not simply misunderstanding you. Tabram was murdered inside the building? I think I had a dream about that once. Help please.

[Fisherman]

Balderdash ?

That is the very matter of his theories. Like the Scavenger, for example.

I will tell you how this all works, David. The Tabram scavenger theory was just fine until evidence was uncovered that told us conclusively that she had been found not on the outside landing, but instead deep in the building where she died. Once I got the information, I immediately reprocessed the case, and changed my view accordingly. It still stands that it could have been a scavenger deed, but the chances are much, much smaller for it.

See what happened? New evidence emerged, and I acted upon it, adjusting my view.

In The Fleming case, new evidence ALSO emerged - the records of Evans/Flemings height and weight. Before that, I thought Fleming was an interesting candidate, but when the new evidence arrived, guess what I did? Correct, I processed it and adjusted my view to fit as closely as possible with the evidence.

And what did YOU do? You denied that the evidence was true.

If I was to follow your line of research, I would still be sayng that Martha Tabram must have been found on the landing outside the house. Nobody would be able to conclusively prove me wrong - and if they did, I´d not listen anyway. Otherwise I would not be doing it your way.

This is what you try to mock me for, and this is where we differ.

That was what I meant when I spoke of balderdash. It still stands.

All the best,
Fisherman

[Lechmere]

DVV
It’s not just about saying the height record says 6 foot 7 and so the matter is closed.

I have gone to some detail of the nature of that particular record and why, in the context in which it is written, it is less likely to be an error than for example an age being wrong in a census return or for that matter a height on an Army pension record that is not re-referred to.
We have been given no indication by anyone that the various health authorities measured height in inches.

I have also gone into some detail to show that there is no reason to suppose that the Stone authorities ever knew Evans/Fleming's true date of birth and accordingly the age 'error' was not one that they could be expected to have corrected.

We now know the detail that Evans/Fleming had 8 shillings in his pocket when he was detained. That would have been more than enough to have alterations made to his clothing if need be to make them fit.

I have gone into why the identification of Barnett’s Joseph Fleming with Venturney’s Joe and McCarthy’s builder is not secure.

I have gone into the circumstance of Evans/Fleming’s alias details being spelled out in the Bethnal Green ‘List of Lunatics in the Various Asylums’ and the likelihood of this being picked up on by Bethnal Green police at some stage.

Do you think the police investigation was closed down by 1893?
When the last papers were placed in the Jack the Ripper file in 1896?
When Macnaghten wrote his memorandum making it clear the case was officially regarded as being unsolved in February 1894?
When Superintendent Arnold of H Division made it clear in February 1893 that the case was not solved, and no stone was left unturned?

I will give you some more…

The City of London Poor Law Union’s offices were located at 61 Bartholomew Close, EC. It was from here that the investigation into Evans/Fleming’s settlement was conducted and the papers relating to his original detention were kept.

The celebrated City of London detective Robert Sagar was the City Police’s representative at the nightly conflabs at Leman Street with the Met during the Ripper investigation. Sagar is reported to have later expressed the opinion that the perpetrator of the Whitechapel murders was locked up in an asylum.

Sagar, who was regarded as a real life Sherlock Holmes, used to live at 47 Bartholomew Close at one point so I have no doubt he was familiar with the City of London Union Offices.

Do you think Sagar never thought to take a look at the asylum records held by the City of London Poor Law Union – the ones that first established that James Evans was Joseph Fleming?

In short because the tall Joseph Fleming appeared in asylum records kept by both the City of London Union and Bethnal Green under his real name, it is stretching it to think that both the City of London Police and the Met failed to pick up on it.

Or perhaps you think that they could have done but it remained a tight-lipped secret?