Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

John McCarthy

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

  • #46
    TRD - what makes you describe McCarthy as a ‘rogue’?

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
      Charlie and Harry Muddle - Esq - were local publicans and criminals.
      Another brilliant observation Gary


      So, are we saying that known criminals and respected policemen were mingling at this event?


      It would be remarkable if there was links to dodgy funding and corruption.


      There must have been some as we would say in the UK "bent coppers" at the time who were on the payroll of criminal gangs.


      Let's take for example William Thick.


      A very suspicious officer involved heavily with the Chapman case and Mizen of course, who himself was put forward as being the ripper back in 1889.


      And John McCarthy and his associates the Smith Brothers, who either intimidated Thick or paid him off. Either way, Thick was complicit in helping John McCarthy avoid jail.


      If the Ripper was a Copper (or Coppers) it would explain why he was never caught, why the Ripper always operated conveniently between Police Beats and why William Thick was accused.


      What if the ripper was a copper and McCarthy knew him.

      It was all one big criminal enterprise.


      Unfortunately i don't really buy too much into that theory. The MO of the ripper suggests he worked alone.


      But it doesn't rule out that he was a policeman.



      The case continues


      TRD


      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
        In the US it seems that Esq. is used for someone who is qualified to practice law. Not in the UK though, as far as I know. I used to get addressed that way on all the correspondence from my bank when I opened my first savings account. I don't recall being a barrister at the age of eight, but it did make me feel vaguely important... ....I miss those days.
        Is that what Scott is referring to? How odd.
        Last edited by MrBarnett; 10-23-2020, 12:58 AM.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by The Rookie Detective View Post

          Another brilliant observation Gary


          So, are we saying that known criminals and respected policemen were mingling at this event?


          It would be remarkable if there was links to dodgy funding and corruption.


          There must have been some as we would say in the UK "bent coppers" at the time who were on the payroll of criminal gangs.


          Let's take for example William Thick.


          A very suspicious officer involved heavily with the Chapman case and Mizen of course, who himself was put forward as being the ripper back in 1889.


          And John McCarthy and his associates the Smith Brothers, who either intimidated Thick or paid him off. Either way, Thick was complicit in helping John McCarthy avoid jail.


          If the Ripper was a Copper (or Coppers) it would explain why he was never caught, why the Ripper always operated conveniently between Police Beats and why William Thick was accused.


          What if the ripper was a copper and McCarthy knew him.

          It was all one big criminal enterprise.


          Unfortunately i don't really buy too much into that theory. The MO of the ripper suggests he worked alone.


          But it doesn't rule out that he was a policeman.



          The case continues


          TRD

          I’ll get my coat.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post

            Esq was just a courtesy title that any businessman might be given.

            W. Cressingham (Crossingham) Esq
            John Cooney Esq
            John McCarthy Esq

            Who do you imagine these people were - members of the aristocracy?
            Esq. -- attorney, solicitor, esteemed gentleman

            Slumlord John McCarthy, Esq.

            I don't think so. Over half of those in attendance that night were Metropolitan policemen. The tradesmen (butchers, tailors, merchants publicans) were from the immediate vicinity, not Dorset Street.
            Last edited by Scott Nelson; 10-23-2020, 05:44 PM.

            Comment


            • #51
              Also, you can't use a donations list from 1886 to say so-and-so was at the retirement dinner because they have "Esq." after their names, except for maybe Abberline and Arnold and J.C. McCarthy.
              Last edited by Scott Nelson; 10-23-2020, 05:53 PM.

              Comment


              • #52
                I have respect for all the combatants, so I'll steer clear of the debate, but there were fully 4 men named "John McCarthy" in the Metropolitan Police in February 1892.

                Two were PCs, and two were Sergeants. It's kind of like the old joke, "An Irishman, an Englishman, and a Welshman walked into a pub..." because two were Irish, one was a Londoner, and the other was a Welshman.

                Two only had daughters in 1892, and the other two had sons, but both were under the age of three.

                The PS John McCarthy mentioned in connection with the Whitechapel Murders was in L Division. The 1891 Census, taken a few months before Abberline's retirement, shows his young son John, only a year old, living in Bury St. Edmunds with McCarthy's wife and in-laws, so he may have only seen the lad on his days off.

                Although the census taker lists PS McCarthy's wife by her maiden name, 'Folkerd,' I don't think too much can be read into it; the couple can be seen living together in 1901 and 1911.

                From my own experience, the difference between a respectable businessman and a 'slum lord,' largely depends on whether or not you're one of his tenants!

                It looks different from the 'outside,' if you know what I mean...

                Click image for larger version

Name:	John McCarthy's wife 1891.JPG
Views:	74
Size:	75.5 KB
ID:	744320

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post

                  Esq. -- attorney, solicitor, esteemed gentleman

                  Slumlord John McCarthy, Esq.

                  I don't think so. Over half of those in attendance that night were Metropolitan policemen. The tradesmen (butchers, tailors, merchants publicans) were from the immediate vicinity, not Dorset Street.
                  Esq was a pretty meaningless term of respect for any adult male of substance.

                  Look at Harry and Charles Muddle for God’s sake. Don’t just parrot some generalisation you’ve read somewhere. They ran pubs in Whitechapel and Spitalfields - and were criminals. And I’m assuming you’ve heard of William Crossingham Esq and John Cooney Esq - both ‘slum landlords’ in your terminology.

                  The 1886 People’s Palace donations from those people, and from Abberline, Arnold and McCarthy, were co-ordinated by The same J. C. McDonald who was instrumental in the Three Nun’s Presentation from the East End tradesmen to Abberline.


                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Just look at the order in which the ELO lists the attendees: tradesmen first, followed by coppers in strict order of seniority.

                    Their man on the scene obviously got himself in a muddle and included the L Div PS between the tradesmen and the cops.



                    Attached Files

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Scott presumably has some secret info up his sleeve.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        No I don't but it remains for you to show that the John McCarthy of Dorest Street was in attendance that night.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Scott Nelson View Post
                          No I don't but it remains for you to show that the John McCarthy of Dorest Street was in attendance that night.
                          Does it? You kicked this all off by stating categorically that he wasn’t.

                          My argument is that one of the most prominent local businessmen and his prominent son are more likely to have attended an event wherein local businessmen made a presentation to Abberline than a low-ranking police officer who had been briefly seconded to H Div some years previously.

                          Over to you.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Incidentally, the R. A. Kearsey mentioned was the head of Tingle, Jacobs & Co., Carmen, of Hanbury Street.

                            I had a great uncle who worked for them.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post

                              ...one of the most prominent local businessmen and his prominent son
                              Really? Says who?

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Oh wait a minute! I just had a thought. Abberline was there in Dorset Street on the day of the Kelly murder conducting an inventory of her room and sifting through the fireplace ashes. And Jack McCarthy would have been right there too, so he would have known who Abberline was.

                                Ok, you're right. Now I see where you're coming from.
                                Last edited by Scott Nelson; 10-23-2020, 09:49 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X