Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The reputation of Sir William Withey Gull

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

  • DJA
    replied
    The Royal Society met towards the end of the five murders.

    Both Gull and WE Gladstone attended.

    Gladstone's letter to The Times, telling it's readers that Jack the Ripper was actually conducting research that would benefit mankind, was most likely influenced by Gull.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fiver
    replied
    Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

    Lady Gull also.
    Neither Gull's wife nor his daughter ever made any accusations against him.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trapperologist
    replied
    Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

    Lady Gull also.
    She died in 1894. I think Stowell got his information in the late 1920's. But of course, Gull's daughter got married in 1888 so she probably wasn't present for the police intrusion, and would have heard it from her mother. Is that what you mean?

    Leave a comment:


  • FISHY1118
    replied
    It was Gull’s own daughter who allegedly got the ball rolling with the story of the police visit.
    Lady Gull also.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trapperologist
    replied
    It was Gull’s own daughter who allegedly got the ball rolling with the story of the police visit.

    Leave a comment:


  • FISHY1118
    replied
    Yes , if theres one chapter of knights book The Final Solution that i would encourage anyone to read, its the chapter simply titled ''GULL'', enough said

    Leave a comment:


  • Losmandris
    replied
    Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post
    Gull was suspected of being the ripper well before knights books and the bbc mini series , why wouldn't he be considered a suspect . A minor stroke and 70 years old doesn't remove him from be more than capable of murder.
    Can you point to some evidence to back this up? Would be interested to hear more.

    Tristan

    Leave a comment:


  • FISHY1118
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • Al Bundy's Eyes
    replied
    Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post
    Gull was suspected of being the ripper well before knights books and the bbc mini series , why wouldn't he be considered a suspect . A minor stroke and 70 years old doesn't remove him from be more than capable of murder.

    Jack The Zimmer?

    Leave a comment:


  • FISHY1118
    replied
    Gull was suspected of being the ripper well before knights books and the bbc mini series , why wouldn't he be considered a suspect . A minor stroke and 70 years old doesn't remove him from be more than capable of murder.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gman992
    replied
    Also, given the state of medical knowledge back then, I'm sure that--as much as they knew about what caused strokes--treatments would've been bloodcurling, let alone non-exsistent. With today's medicine, 90-95% recovery from a stroke is possible.

    Leave a comment:


  • nugnug
    replied
    i dont know how bad gulls stroke was but a lot of stroke victems are lucky if they can hold a knife let alone use one

    Leave a comment:


  • AllenChilver
    replied
    Originally posted by Gman992 View Post
    I read this on a Jane Seymour fan site about the Jack the Ripper movie


    "Commentary by Jonathan Sothcott of Sothcott Films:

    Ultimately, there was nothing decisive in the files, but a suspect was already beginning to emerge: Sir William Withey Gull, the physician-in-ordinary to Queen Victoria. Gull, who had suffered a minor stroke in 1897, fitted the bill in terms of influence and medical knowledge; he had been known to wave bloody human hearts around at dinner parties, suggesting that, perhaps, he wasn't all there."

    Has anyone heard this before???

    Part of this is true and part of it is nonsense.

    The true part is evidenced by this testimony from one Colonel Dunham, who describes this episode from a dinner party:

    He then invited us into his office where he illustrated his lecture so to speak. One side of this room was entirely occupied with cases, outwardly resembling wardrobes. When the doors were opened quite a museum was revealed -- tiers of shelves with glass jars and cases, some round and others square, filled with all sorts of anatomical specimens. The ‘doctor’ placed on a table a dozen or more jars containing, as he said, the matrices (uteri) of every class of women. Nearly a half of one of these cases was occupied exclusively with these specimens.

    The nonsense part is that the doctor was Francis Tumblety and not William Gull. You can read the full story on this site here.

    The original article by Jonathan Sothcott, which you can read here, has several similar mistakes, not least the statement that Gull suffered a stroke in 1897 (7 years after his death).

    All of which goes to show how frighteningly easy it is to make a careless and untrue statement on the Internet which is quickly accepted by others as fact.

    Leave a comment:


  • j.r-ahde
    replied
    Well, gman992!

    I wonder, if he would have been begging of being caught...

    All the best
    Jukka

    Leave a comment:


  • JTRSickert
    replied
    Even if it is true (which I highly doubt), acting strangely after having a stroke is hardly proof of committing horrible murders on women.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X