Plausibility of Kosminski

[Chris]

The fact is that there were never any files on those suspects in the first place, simply because they were never looked at as suspects by the police.
I wouldnt mind betting that the ledgers and registers are going to confirm that.

But how could the absence of a reference to a suspect in Special Branch records "confirm" that the Metropolitan Police didn't hold records on that suspect?

As for these suspects "never being looked at as suspects by the police," of the ones you mention, we have references by police officers to all of them except Chapman having been either "suspects" or "suspected." That being the case, it's very dangerous to make an argument from the silence of the existing records, given that we know they are incomplete.

[Trevor Marriott]

Correct me if i am wrong but the references you refer to are as previoulsy mentioned memoirs etc. That is not sufficient to say they were supects at the time.

Stewart has alreday stated there were files on other less likely suspects how come there were none on any of the likely suspects we talk about today. Its coincidence that we have 5 likely suspects but no police records or files to corroborate these suspicions.

Now if as you and others obvioulsy believe they did then its more than a coincidence that there is nothing on any of them. The only reason they have been looked upon as suspects is what the police officers wrote in later years and none of them could agree. And all had a different suspect. Were they all not working on the same case if that were so surely they would have all been in agreement.

In relation to the ledgers my thinking is that as there were no met police files on this band of suspects, and if there is nothing in the ledgers we might as well cross them off the list forever and re write the whole mystery.

[mariab]

I gotta run to the shops for a couple of hours before they close (and they close much too early here in Germany), I'll respond more in depth later on, but on a quick note:
To Robhouse:I don't have any great expectations for the SB ledgers containing much new info, but Clutterbuck in his disertation claims that 3 persons have been quoted there as “connected to the Whitechapel investigation“. Since Clutterbuck quotes “William Mg Garth“ as one of these 3 “persons of interest“, it's most probable that the other two “suspects“ might be different from the infamous “Macnagthen 3“.
The interest of the MET police to link the Whitechapel murders to the Fenian movement is well-documented, so I firmly believe that the SB ledgers must be consulted. If they should be trusted, depends obviously on their content, and on how it fits with the political context of the 1890s.

Mr. Marriot wrote:
As far as the entry to Magrath is concerned I am not able to give a definitive answer as to why he was looked upon as being connected. The original files apperatining to that and all other entries in the ledgers are apparenrly no longer in existence.
Thank you so much for answering, Mr. Marriot. When you say “no longer in existence“, do you mean redacted, or “lost“?
I don't suscribe to Tumblety as a prime suspect, but R.J. Palmer's recent research has my full interest. In fact, I'm back to considering Tumblety as a suspect to be taken very seriously. Still, we need more information.
Thank you all and I'm off for a while,

[Chris]

Correct me if i am wrong but the references you refer to are as previoulsy mentioned memoirs etc. That is not sufficient to say they were supects at the time.

Everyone must make up their own mind, but I think those statements are much stronger evidence than your argument from silence based on incomplete records.

Stewart has alreday stated there were files on other less likely suspects how come there were none on any of the likely suspects we talk about today.

But of course you don't know there never were any files. You only know there are no surviving files now.

[Phil Carter]

Hi Maria,

A question I have asked before (and which I am not sure anyone answered) is... why would we expect to find files on JTR in the Special Branch files at all.



My question is... why would such information be in the Special Branch files? The Special Branch was focused on domestic terrorism from Fenians. Why would any information about Kozminski or Druitt end up in there? The only plausible reason is that the SB (under Monro) was used to orchestrate a cover-up or something like press manipulation regarding the case, which to me seems highly doubtful.

Rob House

Hello Rob,

If I understand Special Branch correctly at the time, all Fenian, Anarchist and undercover work is witheld in these ledgers. You ask why the named suspects may be within these ledgers.

As regards suspects mentioned, Tumblety may have had Fenian links, being an Irish American. The Irish American band of troublemakers, of which we know of many, were certainly abound in Whitechapel at the time.

Regarding Ostrog and Kosminsky, Druitt and Klosowski, I have an idea, and perhaps someone could correct me here, that there was supposedly, at one time or another, a Special Branch FILE that was labelled "The Whitechapel Murders". If the Special Branch did indeed do undercover work, it is not inconcievable that various suspects were indeed noticed by Special Branch Officers, that were attached to the Whitechapel Murder Inquiry. All reports by any SB officer, would have been filed away under which investigation it pertained to. Thereby, if Special Branch did indeed have their own file on the Whitechapel Murders, then it would be logical to presume that this was full of reports from SB men.

The possibility that there would have been a separate file on the Whitechapel Murders alone can be substantiated by the specific entering in the ledgers that info pertains to just that is recorded. And the same goes for Anarchists, Fenians, or even the Cleveland Street. scandal, which would no doubt be covered by Special Branch.

Perhaps this may explain the answer you look for?

Hope you are well.

best wishes

Phil

[Phil Carter]

But of course you don't know there never were any files. You only know there are no surviving files now.

Hello Chris,

I would hasten to add something which I feel is important. Special Branch have been playing peek-a-boo with much material over the last 60 odd years, saying it was destroyed, blown up, lost, stolen, lent out, borrowed but never returned etc etc etc. Some get access, some were denied. And I do not mean just these ledgers...all manner of things have suddenly turned up.

We do not actually know for certain if the files pertaining to the ledgers have been destroyed etc. Special Branch telling us that, isn't a good basis for belief. However, if the ledgers are revealed, unrestricted access would tell us exactly what the SB were up to re The Whitechapel murders. There are 30,000 entries in those ledgers. Some of which pertain to the Whitechapel Murder series. It would open up Ripperology for years to come.

best wishes

Phil

[Trevor Marriott]

Everyone must make up their own mind, but I think those statements are much stronger evidence than your argument from silence based on incomplete records.



But of course you don't know there never were any files. You only know there are no surviving files now.

Well is mighty coincidental that the files on the "none runners" were in existence, logical to think that if the others had been in existence they would be with the others. If someone was going to take files why not take them all ? and what use would they be to anyone ? Presumably if they did exist and were tsken then they didnt contain any ground breaking information otherwise the world would know about it by now

[Trevor Marriott]

Everyone must make up their own mind, but I think those statements are much stronger evidence than your argument from silence based on incomplete records.

But none of them came up with the same suspect and they were all involved in the case at some point. So how can you honestly rely on anything any of them wrote.


But of course you don't know there never were any files. You only know there are no surviving files now.

But do you know if there were any files ?

[robhouse]

Hi Phil,

I agree that the SB files would contain information about Fenians and anarchists, but as to containing all the files on "undercover work" I have to disagree. The vast majority of undercover work (surveillance, shadowing, use of informants) was conducted by the normal detectives of CID. The Special Branch at the time was a small organization within the MET that was only really concerned with terrorist activity and threats to domestic security. As such, it is not really all that surprising that Magrath showed up in there since he was at least a "suspicious Irishman." Also, as I understand, the SB index which is under discussion contains thousands if not tens of thousands of entries in the relevant period so it is not surprising that some of these would mention the Ripper murders just by chance, as a matter of statistics. Remember, the MET was flooded with "tips" from citizens who suspected various people of the murders. Some of these were sure to have been forwarded to the SB, if the CID thought the suspects might have an Irish connection (for example).

Also, the SB files did not contain just files by their own officers. The Chief Constable's CID Register, which is I believe the item in question, operated on 3 levels (according to Clutterbuck):

"1) As a register of correspondence sent to Special Branch by the
rest of the Metropolitan Police, other Police Forces, the Home
Office, other government departments and members of the
public.

2) As an index to the reports submitted by its own officers.

3) As a nominal and subject index of people and topics mentioned
at i) and ii) above."

How the absence any mention of a CID suspect in a criminal murder case from this index can allow us to determine that the man was never a police suspect is beyond me.

Rob H

[Phil Carter]

Hello Rob,

I thank you for your reply, and can only repeat what I have learnt from a while back, that the SB had a file containing info on and entitled "The Whitechapel Murders"..whether this is indeed true or not, perhaps others could help with?

best wishes

Phil

[MrTwibbs]

The files i am referring to I am suggesting are not missing lost or stolen. The fact is that there were never any files on those suspects in the first place, simply because they were never looked at as suspects by the police.

I wouldnt mind betting that the ledgers and registers are going to confirm that.

Dear Trevor

When you mention the main board of suspects and the reports relating to these, do you mean the likes of Kosminsky, Tumblety, Druitt, Cutbush?

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Phil,

I agree that the SB files would contain information about Fenians and anarchists, but as to containing all the files on "undercover work" I have to disagree. The vast majority of undercover work (surveillance, shadowing, use of informants) was conducted by the normal detectives of CID. The Special Branch at the time was a small organization within the MET that was only really concerned with terrorist activity and threats to domestic security. As such, it is not really all that surprising that Magrath showed up in there since he was at least a "suspicious Irishman." Also, as I understand, the SB index which is under discussion contains thousands if not tens of thousands of entries in the relevant period so it is not surprising that some of these would mention the Ripper murders just by chance, as a matter of statistics. Remember, the MET was flooded with "tips" from citizens who suspected various people of the murders. Some of these were sure to have been forwarded to the SB, if the CID thought the suspects might have an Irish connection (for example).

Also, the SB files did not contain just files by their own officers. The Chief Constable's CID Register, which is I believe the item in question, operated on 3 levels (according to Clutterbuck):

"1) As a register of correspondence sent to Special Branch by the
rest of the Metropolitan Police, other Police Forces, the Home
Office, other government departments and members of the
public.

2) As an index to the reports submitted by its own officers.

3) As a nominal and subject index of people and topics mentioned
at i) and ii) above."

How the absence any mention of a CID suspect in a criminal murder case from this index can allow us to determine that the man was never a police suspect is beyond me.

Rob H

The answer is quite simple lets take Tumblety for example not only is he considered a ripper suspect by Littlechild in later years but he is also suggested of having fenian connections.

Aside from Littlechilds belief which isnt altogther conclusive having regard he mentions Dr D there is nothing else recorded.

Now i know that in the ledgers there is an entry from Littlechild naming a suspect for the ripper. Now if that suspect isnt Tumblety and there is no further mention of him what are all the Tumbleites going to say then.

The answer is ?

[MrTwibbs]

There was also Morley House Seaside Convalescent Home for Working Men in St Margaret’s Bay which reserved several beds for members of the City Police.

Incidentally, I do not see why the identification had to have taken place at a Police seaside home anyway. It seems entirely possible to me that the reason the identification took place at "the seaside home" is that the witness was convalescing there, therefore requiring the police to bring the suspect to the witness.

Rob H

Or perhaps the witness was Charles Cutbush and the suspect was his supposed nephew?
that to me seems more logical. But instead they substituted Cutbush's name for Kosminsky's.(I can't prove this but I can only go by what is given on their personalities of what we know and the evidence)

[robhouse]

Hi Phil,

Thanks for your reply and PM.

Regarding a Special Branch titled "The Whitechapel Murders" or something along those lines... as far as I know, there is nothing like this in existence. Where did you hear this from?

Incidentally, I used to have the same impression, but I am now fairly certain that the Special Branch "files" relating to the Whitechapel murders (as mentioned, I believe, by SPE in Scotland Yard Investigates) actually refer to these files that were accessed by Clutterbuck. I could be wrong here, but that is my current impression. I think the Special Branch once did have many actual "files" from this period, but they no longer exist to my knowledge. The Chief Constable's Register, for example, is basically an index to files (which no longer exist).

Rob

[MrTwibbs]

Well is mighty coincidental that the files on the "none runners" were in existence, logical to think that if the others had been in existence they would be with the others. If someone was going to take files why not take them all ? and what use would they be to anyone ? Presumably if they did exist and were tsken then they didnt contain any ground breaking information otherwise the world would know about it by now

It is a shame that the information is apparently missing. An author writing a book on the Rippers would have benefited as it means he or she then has mroe to go on and anyone else during research after that...well it does make it harder for the competition. Someone may release a book in a few years with all the missing files. You never know :-)