Was Tumblety Charged?

[McNab]

Hi guys,

This is my first post, and just read the casebook info on Tumblety. It said that he was charged with the Whitechapel murders and then bailed.

Surely this can't be right, why would the Police allow bail in such a high profile crime?

Maybe I've got it wrong.......

Cheers

Andy

[Roy Corduroy]

Hi Andy and welcome to Casebook

Recently at a Ripper conference, Tumblety expert Timothy Riordan gave his opinion about this, as reported by Martin Fido in Ripperologist magazine #100, Feb 2009, page 36 -

"The rash of publicity – exclusively in American papers – was far less welcome. Tumblety had been charged with four counts of gross indecency with young men in London, and Timothy had high praise for Evans and Gainey’s completely convincing and historically accurate account of the police bail which they felt allowed him to be out of custody at the time of Mary Jane Kelly’s murder. But Timothy totally rejected the suggestion that his breaking bail and fleeing the country had anything to do with the Ripper case. Once it was clear that the charges were not going to be dropped, Tumblety faced the virtual certainty of imprisonment with four charges standing against him and he was very wise to disappear back to America under the name of Townsend. The rash of accounts of him as a Ripper suspect in the American press all appeared to Timothy to be derivative from an original canard, and the motive was consistently selling newspapers with a sensational story rather than looking for the truth."

Again, welcome,

Roy

[Cap'n Jack]

'and Timothy had high praise for Evans and Gainey’s completely convincing and historically accurate account of the police bail which they felt allowed him to be out of custody at the time of Mary Jane Kelly’s murder'

That is the most unconvincing statement I have heard in fifty years, for they didn't do that thing at all.

[Wolf Vanderlinden]

That is the most unconvincing statement I have heard in fifty years, for they didn't do that thing at all.

The Addendum - Part II, found in the paperback version of Stewart and Paul's book (Kodansha America Inc., 1998) goes into great detail on the ins and outs of the police bail. I found it to be very convincing myself.

Wolf.

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

If Tumblety was given police bail after his 7th November arrest how do we account for his remarks in the New York World, Tuesday 29th January 1889?—

" . . . in his opinion, his arrest was due, in a measure, to the police desiring his diamonds and thinking they could force him to give them up.

"How long were you in prison?" [asked the reporter].

"Two or three days; but I don't care to talk about it."

If true, at the earliest he was released on 9th November—sometime after the early morning Millers Court murder.

Regards,

Simon

[Roy Corduroy]

Simon,

I think he was referrring to Nov 14th to the 16th.

Roy

[Cap'n Jack]

As ever, Wolf, we appear to be inhabitants of two different planets.
On the planet I inhabit any attempts to provide or prove that Tumblety was on police bail, and free, at the time of Kelly's murder are based on pure speculation and have nothing whatsoever to do with the fact of the matter.

[Wolf Vanderlinden]

Actually, I inhabit a planet where getting at the truth is the most important goal while you seem to inhabit a planet where you feel the need to fabricate evidence to suite your own bias while baselessly accusing others of doing the same thing. That’s the nature of the hypocrite.

Personally, I don’t support Tumblety’s candidature as the Ripper and I have been consistent on that point in both my published writings and here on the Casebook (just ask your friend R. J. Palmer about that. He has called me a liar and “debunker” just because I have disproved some of his cherished and long held beliefs on Tumblety). However, based on the known facts of Tumblety’s arrest and of police procedure, i.e. “the fact of the matter,” it seems more than likely that Tumblety was in fact bailed shortly after his arrest. That appears to be the truth and without bias.

Wolf.

[Cap'n Jack]

In other words, Wolf, you smply do not know the fact of the matter, but are merely speculating, like everyone else.

[celee]

Hi All,

If Tumblety was given police bail after his 7th November arrest how do we account for his remarks in the New York World, Tuesday 29th January 1889?—

" . . . in his opinion, his arrest was due, in a measure, to the police desiring his diamonds and thinking they could force him to give them up.

"How long were you in prison?" [asked the reporter].

"Two or three days; but I don't care to talk about it."

If true, at the earliest he was released on 9th November—sometime after the early morning Millers Court murder.

Regards,

Hi,

Simon

I thought Tumblety, during the same interview, discussed the fact that he had been questioned concerning the Kelly murder. He claimed that the police had questioned him because of the type of hat he wore. I wonder if Tumblety had been picked up and questioned as a direct result of Hutchinson's description.

Your friend, Brad