Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Red Handkerchief...

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

  • Gut

    Hi Yes he wrote it and it was published in Thomsons Weekly Advertiser about 15 years later (when he ritired I think). If you look at the Wiki on this site he is under police officials. Henry Cox... It does mention it there.

    Pat............................................

    Comment


    • G'Day Pat

      Thanks for that I'll have another look.
      G U T

      There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

      Comment


      • sometimes I wonder that abberline may have initially beleived hutch because he did make the connection between Hutch admission of waiting and watching and sarah Lewis waiting and watching man. she corrobarates (at least part of) his story.
        "Is all that we see or seem
        but a dream within a dream?"

        -Edgar Allan Poe


        "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
        quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

        -Frederick G. Abberline

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Bridewell View Post
          Maurice (or Morris) Lewis was a tailor and, as his claim of having seen MJK twice on the morning of 9th November conflicted with the police surgeon's estimate TOD, he could have been subject of covert observation. It's not forced to be him, of course, but the reference to tailors is interesting.
          i doubt the police would have spent the time and reources trailing a witnes like Maurice Lewis. Out of all the named supects/witnes I would say it is most likely to be Koz.
          "Is all that we see or seem
          but a dream within a dream?"

          -Edgar Allan Poe


          "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
          quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

          -Frederick G. Abberline

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
            i doubt the police would have spent the time and reources trailing a witnes like Maurice Lewis. Out of all the named supects/witnes I would say it is most likely to be Koz.
            I don't know. The writer says the person being watched "left his little shop," as though he were the owner/manager.

            You could go fairly often to a butcher shop as a customer, less often to a barber shop or even tailor. Perhaps the policemen rotated, but even then, how could you go to a tailor shop very frequently in the guise of a customer.

            What other options might there be? Cat's meat?

            And who among the suspects ran his own business? Jacob Levy? William Henry Bury, but not in that area . . .

            curious

            Comment


            • Left his shop

              Henry also said that he occupied more than one shop??
              He occupied several shops in the East End, but from time to time he became insane, and was forced to spend a portion of his time in an asylum in Surrey.

              But at the time of the murders and three months while henry and others watched he was in one street While the Whitechapel murders were being perpetrated his place of business was in a certain street, and after the last murder I was on duty in this street for nearly three months.

              I suppose if the factories took on repairs there might have been a roll for Aaron. I dont know it just doesnt fit somehow. Could Koz have been doing shoe repairs for his brother in law Maurice?
              If Sagars suspect was the same chap, it was more likely he was a butcher, slaughterer or a dresser of meat (even cats meat)....

              The more I read it the more confused I become. Where would they have been sat drinking Kosher Rum with a load of tailors??? Day after day we used to sit and chat with them, drinking their coffee, smoking their excellent cigarettes, and partaking of Kosher rum. Before many weeks had passed we were quite friendly with them, and knew that we could carry out our observations unmolested.

              Pat............................................... ...

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                sometimes I wonder that abberline may have initially beleived hutch because he did make the connection between Hutch admission of waiting and watching and sarah Lewis waiting and watching man. she corrobarates (at least part of) his story.
                Hi Abby.
                We know from a variety of press reports over the next couple of weeks after the Kelly murder that police still showed interest in men wearing similar attire as described by Hutchinson.
                We have to weigh all these accounts against one unsourced claim in the Star that he was discredited.
                You are right about Abberline making the connection between the story given by Sarah Lewis and the subsequent story offered by Hutchinson.
                Abberline also has the note books from the beat constables, one of which walked across the top of Dorset St. seen by Hutchinson. This constable may have been able to confirm that aspect of the story too. Not to mention at least 50+ witness statements concerning 'male suspects' that were not brought up at the Coroner's Inquest.

                Abberline had access to so much more information that we can ever know about. His opinion is of prime importance.
                Regards, Jon S.

                Comment


                • G'Day Jon

                  Abberline had access to so much more information that we can ever know about. His opinion is of prime importance
                  While I certainly don't disagree, does that go to his opinion on suspects as well.
                  G U T

                  There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Paddy View Post
                    Many thanks for that info, that explains it !

                    Might I ask if Hutchinson actually accompany police around Brick Lane where he claimed to have seen the man with kelly before? Or was this just another non official press release?
                    Abberline wrote a report to his superior mentioning the fact that plans are being made 'tonight' for two officers to accompany Hutchinson around the streets looking for the suspect.

                    One wonders if they actually did accept Hutchinsons stated Jewish (changed to foreign by police) Jack?
                    The press seemed to think so, for the following two weeks at least.
                    Regards, Jon S.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by GUT View Post
                      G'Day Jon

                      While I certainly don't disagree, does that go to his opinion on suspects as well.
                      G'day Sport.

                      There weren't any suspects.

                      The police did not have any suspects, from the beginning with Tabram or Nichols, right through to the end, whether you feel the 'end' was Kelly, McKenzie or Coles.

                      On the few occasions where they temporarily suspected someone as the case unfolded, these 'suspects' were eliminated almost immediately.
                      Regards, Jon S.

                      Comment


                      • G'Day Wickerman

                        I was talking about his comments on Chapman or:

                        Morland claimed that Abberline told him that the case was shut and that "I've given my word to keep my mouth permanently closed about it." Abberline went on to say that "I know and my superiors know certain facts."and that the Ripper "...wasn't a butcher, Yid or foreign skipper...you'd have to look for him not at the bottom of London society at the time but a long way up."
                        G U T

                        There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

                        Comment


                        • G'Day again Wickerman

                          And do we place the same credence on the opinions of other cops, ie Mac, Littlechild, Smith and Swanson.

                          Personally I believe we have to listen very carefully to what those who were on the spot have to say, in all probability they were privy to material we will never know about.
                          G U T

                          There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by GUT View Post
                            G'Day again Wickerman

                            And do we place the same credence on the opinions of other cops, ie Mac, Littlechild, Smith and Swanson.

                            Personally I believe we have to listen very carefully to what those who were on the spot have to say, in all probability they were privy to material we will never know about.
                            I sympathize with you, but I can't agree.
                            Memoirs are not a reliable source, they contain too much emotion (I almost had him!, or, he fooled my peers, but he didn't fool me, I knew who he was, etc.).
                            Seriously, how can any responsible researcher place credit on self adulation written so long after the murders.

                            If there had ever been any serious evidence against anyone Scotland Yard would have demolished the East End to find him.
                            Regards, Jon S.

                            Comment


                            • G'Day Wickerman

                              But don't confuse suspicion with evidence.
                              G U T

                              There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by GUT View Post
                                G'Day Wickerman

                                But don't confuse suspicion with evidence.
                                Isn't suspicion typically the result of some type of evidence?
                                Regards, Jon S.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X