William Grant Grainger and censorship

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Chris
    Inactive
    • Feb 2008
    • 3840

    #91
    Originally posted by Nemo View Post
    Maybe they did find out and dismissed him as the Ripper without telling anyone

    I think the phrase used was something like he couldn't be linked to the East End at the time of the Ripper murders, not that he had a good alibi because he was in prison, which might be the same thing in press language
    But the Pall Mall Gazette article did print that very detailed account of his movements that had been traced between 1888 and 1891, including time spent in the militia, workhouses and asylum. I can't imagine they would have omitted prison terms - unless they were deemed too early to be relevant (the account starts in May 1888). So it will certainly be interesting to see when in 1888 he was in prison.

    Comment

    • Debra A
      Assistant Commissioner
      • Feb 2008
      • 3504

      #92
      Originally posted by Chris View Post
      But the Pall Mall Gazette article did print that very detailed account of his movements that had been traced between 1888 and 1891, including time spent in the militia, workhouses and asylum. I can't imagine they would have omitted prison terms - unless they were deemed too early to be relevant (the account starts in May 1888). So it will certainly be interesting to see when in 1888 he was in prison.
      So far, it looks like he was in prison for 4 days only in early April 1888. There are a couple of entries in the index I looked at for 1888 but I think one is just referencing the actual index in the register itself. There appears to be an entry for 1890 though, if so, that was missed in the PMG article.

      Comment

      • Nemo
        Detective
        • Feb 2008
        • 354

        #93
        Hi Chris,

        I was thinking more that the police were aware of him being in prison but it wasn't mentioned in the PMG article

        There was a suggestion of a cover-up of his "antecedents" so there's a possibility these arrests Deb has uncovered were known but not disclosed in 1895

        Was he under the name Grant/Grainger or Green in 1888/89 do you know Deb?

        Comment

        • Tom_Wescott
          Commissioner
          • Feb 2008
          • 6996

          #94
          Originally posted by Debra A
          So far, it looks like he was in prison for 4 days only in early April 1888.
          Before/during/after the murder of Emma Smith?

          Yours truly,

          Tom Wescott

          Comment

          • Debra A
            Assistant Commissioner
            • Feb 2008
            • 3504

            #95
            Originally posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
            Before/during/after the murder of Emma Smith?

            Yours truly,

            Tom Wescott
            19th to 22nd April 1888

            Comment

            • Debra A
              Assistant Commissioner
              • Feb 2008
              • 3504

              #96
              Originally posted by Nemo View Post
              Hi Chris,

              I was thinking more that the police were aware of him being in prison but it wasn't mentioned in the PMG article

              There was a suggestion of a cover-up of his "antecedents" so there's a possibility these arrests Deb has uncovered were known but not disclosed in 1895

              Was he under the name Grant/Grainger or Green in 1888/89 do you know Deb?
              He was under 'William Granger or Green' (that's how it's written in the records), in 1888, Nemo.

              Comment

              • Debra A
                Assistant Commissioner
                • Feb 2008
                • 3504

                #97
                I've just been checking the descriptions in the prison records compared to the habitual criminal register descriptions, posted by Chris earlier in the thread.
                They match in almost everything apart from eye colour. In the HC registers Grant/Grainger is said to have blue eyes but in the Irish prison records they are described as Hazel.
                Apart from that, his age (b c 1860 but varies over each prison a year on either side as well as 1860), height of 5ft 9.5 in, brown hair , sallow complexion, occupation of sailor and ships fireman (both given) are exactly the same in both sets of records and there's a link to Grant Grainger research done by Chris with addresses of Ballyhooley rd and Barrackton given in the prison records. Both have tattoos as distinguishing features ( Prison records says tattooed hands and sears and tumour on neck. )

                Comment

                • Cogidubnus
                  Assistant Commissioner
                  • Feb 2012
                  • 3266

                  #98
                  But that's a pretty different eye-colour...hmmm

                  All the best

                  Dave

                  Comment

                  • Debra A
                    Assistant Commissioner
                    • Feb 2008
                    • 3504

                    #99
                    Originally posted by Cogidubnus View Post
                    But that's a pretty different eye-colour...hmmm

                    All the best

                    Dave
                    hmmm...musn't be him then.

                    Comment

                    • Cogidubnus
                      Assistant Commissioner
                      • Feb 2012
                      • 3266

                      #100
                      You're putting words in my mouth Debs!

                      But eye colour surely isn't one of the more usual innacuracies is it?

                      All the best

                      Dave

                      Comment

                      • Debra A
                        Assistant Commissioner
                        • Feb 2008
                        • 3504

                        #101
                        When first my brave Johnie lad came to this town,
                        He had a blue bonnet that wanted the crown..

                        Comment

                        • Cogidubnus
                          Assistant Commissioner
                          • Feb 2012
                          • 3266

                          #102
                          I'll refrain from the very obvious and unsavoury Burnsian comments Debs and merely ask what 1684 has to do with 1888?

                          All the best

                          Dave

                          Comment

                          • Debra A
                            Assistant Commissioner
                            • Feb 2008
                            • 3504

                            #103
                            Nothing except how people can suddenly turn once they get a feather in their cap?

                            Comment

                            • Cogidubnus
                              Assistant Commissioner
                              • Feb 2012
                              • 3266

                              #104
                              Hi Debs

                              Fair enough, but I wasn't aware anybody had either turned or got a feather in their cap.

                              All the best

                              Dave

                              Comment

                              • Debra A
                                Assistant Commissioner
                                • Feb 2008
                                • 3504

                                #105
                                You have certainly changed, Dave.
                                And I won't waste another minute or pound on posting research to casebook from now on.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X