12 Tumblety Articles Timelined

[caz]

Hi Caz,

Sounds like you agree that JtR's motive was not sado-sexual.

Eh? I merely recited a few facts about what was/wasn't mutilated, extracted and/or taken away, Mike. I gave no opinion at all regarding what motivated the killer(s).

Regardless, mutilation of the womb certainly did occur, along with a mania for anatomical parts. It does fit.

Extraction of three wombs, yes; one imperfectly (Eddowes); and one left at the scene (Kelly). I notice you didn't say if you include Kelly in your reasoning, but either way you fail to demonstrate the killer's 'mania' for anatomical parts. He actually collected very few intact ones, and Kelly's killer left plenty behind, even after extracting them.

Dunham isn't the only source, just the most blatant upon this issue. I wrote about other pieces of evidence.

Sorry, Mike, I must have missed this. Could you remind me, very briefly, who else wrote about Tumblety's collection and when, and where they got their information from? Many thanks.

...his unique and tremendous hatred of women...

Unique? How so? Plenty of men - gay and straight - can be said to hate women. What have you read that would make Tumblety's hatred unique?

...murders discontinuing after Tumblety left England...

Naughty, naughty Mike. Mylett, McKenzie and Coles are all potential ripper victims, so you would need solid proof against Tumblety before you could legitimately exclude them. Excluding them to fit the theory is doing things arse about face and not good form.

...Tumblety using the alias 'Frank Townsend' only two times (leaving England and checking in to St. Johns to die) as if there's a connection...

Oh Blimey, it's Crossmere all over again. 'As if' there's a connection? Not terribly convincing, is it? Tumblety had good reason to use an alias when buggering off abroad to avoid being banged up on the buggery charges.

...bequeathing moneys to fallen women (Tumblety trying to buy his way to Heaven would so be like him to do)...

Would it? I appreciate that many sinners suddenly get the willies when facing death and turn to God for forgiveness, but as this only happens once to each individual, near the end, how can you know if this was Tumblety's motivation, or that it would have been typical of the man? Isn't that a contradiction in terms?

Love,

Caz
X

[mklhawley]

Eh? I merely recited a few facts about what was/wasn't mutilated, extracted and/or taken away, Mike. I gave no opinion at all regarding what motivated the killer(s).

Wanna bet?

Extraction of three wombs, yes; one imperfectly (Eddowes); and one left at the scene (Kelly). I notice you didn't say if you include Kelly in your reasoning, but either way you fail to demonstrate the killer's 'mania' for anatomical parts. He actually collected very few intact ones, and Kelly's killer left plenty behind, even after extracting them.

Hmmm, three wombs. I did include Kelly and her breasts being cut off. ...and failing to demonstrate the killer's mania? Compare him with other serial killers. Most collect none. Really, Caz?

Sorry, Mike, I must have missed this. Could you remind me, very briefly, who else wrote about Tumblety's collection and when, and where they got their information from? Many thanks.

Reread my Tumblety's anatomical collection reconsidered. Your welcome.

Unique? How so? Plenty of men - gay and straight - can be said to hate women. What have you read that would make Tumblety's hatred unique?

I stand corrected, Caz, you are a minimalist. Littlechild, with the corroboration of numerous newspaper reports, even British papers, talked about it.

Naughty, naughty Mike. Mylett, McKenzie and Coles are all potential ripper victims, so you would need solid proof against Tumblety before you could legitimately exclude them. Excluding them to fit the theory is doing things arse about face and not good form.

Sooo, since Mylett, McKenzie, and Coles MIGHT be ripper victims, I must produce SOLID proof, even though there's no solid proof against ANYONE. Hmmm. Did I really exclude them to fit a theory? I wonder why the 'canonical five' phrase originate? Oh yah, Tumblety proponents. Not.

Oh Blimey, it's Crossmere all over again. 'As if' there's a connection? Not terribly convincing, is it? Tumblety had good reason to use an alias when buggering off abroad to avoid being banged up on the buggery charges.

Are you losing it, Caz? Of course he had good reason, but that's not what I was talking about. You had better reread.

Would it? I appreciate that many sinners suddenly get the willies when facing death and turn to God for forgiveness, but as this only happens once to each individual, near the end, how can you know if this was Tumblety's motivation, or that it would have been typical of the man? Isn't that a contradiction in terms?

So what. He went to St. Johns because he knew he was dying. By itself, I get your point, but this man had convinced Scotland Yard senior officials at the peak of the murders he might be the Ripper; a person who mutilated the very same women Tumblety was bequeathing moneys. Also, he hated women, so why else would he bequeath to them?

You're seriously doing the minimalist thing Caz. I do realize you always want to get the last word in, but don't ruin it for yourself.

Best,

Mike

[Lechmere]

Minimalist = someone who argues against
Tumblety's candidacy as a credible Ripper suspect to the point where a Tumblety advocate can't handle it any more.

[caz]

There, I think I'll leave the last word to Lech. He just about nailed it for me, Mike.

Love,

Caz
X

[Lechmere]

But you didn't leave the last word to me!

[mklhawley]

But you didn't leave the last word to me!

Of course Ed would jump in. Since you got nasty... I don't consider you a minimalist, you have a now 'less than secret' hidden agenda against Tumblety. Someone ripped into the candidacy of Lechmere, and you don't like it. Hurt your feelings did it? Naughty, naughty.

No, the minimalism I refer to deals with an issue involving 'accommodation v. assimilation'. I'll let you look it up.

Regards,

Mike

[Lechmere]

When did I get nasty?
When did I have a 'secret' agenda.
I've never been secretive about anything on here - I am a blabberer.
I don't mind at all when anyone wants to discuss or attack the Lechmere theory. Caz does it sometimes! My main failing is on putting stuff up about 'my' theory piecemeal with keeping nothing back (although I am now!)
I confess that if anything I am bored with discussing the same issues again and again with regard to Lechmere but inevitably new posters appear who are unfamiliar with old arguments so I try to be patient and answer their questions or even their hostile lines of argument
Perhaps you should try that approach?
It might do you some good rather than hauling up the drawbridge and getting all defensive at the first sign of criticism.

[caz]

But you didn't leave the last word to me!

Hi Ed,

Of course, I meant the last word on Tumblety minimalism. I didn't think that needed saying.

Love,

New Minimalist Caz
X

[Lechmere]

I'm not a minimalist anymore - I'm a 'less than secret hidden agenda-ist'

[caz]

Ooh get you dear!

Love,

Plain ordinary minimal Caz
X

[mklhawley]

Oh the love amongst minimalist. Refreshing.

[Scott Nelson]

off topic - Sir James Dewar..was he the scientist who discovered the dewar implosion?