Tumblety and Pinkerton

[Supe]

Jonathan,

Don't get upset. As you have doubtless discovered, there are posters who, lacking anything substantive to say, can only aim blows below the belt, in this instance trying to smear R.J. Palmer as a homophobe. Of course, you and I know full well why some would like to blacken R.J.'s reputation. Just hold your nose and try to ignore.

Don.

[Jonathan H]

Yes, Wolf, even in your 'joke' you reveal yourself.

That adults are an elite who know it all, and children have nothing to contribute and should shut their mouths.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Wolf,

Can you tell me what else Palmer wrote about this during this discussion? I remember some of it, as, I’m sure others who were involved do, but all I have to post is one paragraph of one of his posts. What else did he say?

All I can remember of the discussion is that at least one other poster -and I can"t remember his or her name ,was emphatic that Tumblety was a"woman hater"and that this was widely spoken of at the time [1888].In response I think it was Ap who produced a poem Tumblety had written to one lady praising her character quite effusively ,illustrating that the theory that Tumblety "hated all women" was likely to have been a lot of biased Victorian nonsense about gay men.Indeed given the vicious prejudices that existed at the time * about gay men,any homosexual man appears to have been viewed as capable of all kinds of atrocities,particularly vicious crimes against women since it was believed that all homosexual men hated women.
But I am sorry that I can"t remember more of the discussion than that,and I can"t remember whether RJ Palmer indicated one way or another whether he agreed with Roy Hazlewood's assertions--which to me seem ridiculous and baseless.
Norma
* I am thinking here of the vicious court case brought by the homophobic Marquis of Queensberry against Oscar Wilde which resulted in him being sent to prison.

[Wolf Vanderlinden]

Apology for what? And that's MR. Souden to you.

Yeah, I really didn’t think you had the stones to apologize. Thanks for proving me right about you.

I follow your point but to me it seems clear that Roger Palmer isn"t saying he agrees with Roy Hazelwood and the FBI project, just that according to an FBI"s behavioural science project that looked at sexual sadism, there is a link.

Norma.

Can you tell me what else Palmer wrote about this during this discussion? I remember some of it, as, I’m sure others who were involved do, but all I have to post is one paragraph of one of his posts. What else did he say?

If you don’t know then you are taking one paragraph and making an assumption based on only that (while disregarding the fact that Palmer’s words were a rebuttal of my stand that homosexuality is in no way evidence that Tumblety, or anyone else, could be a vicious serial killer). Now, I understand that the whole theory against Tumblety is based on this type of rigorous research – i.e. jumping to conclusions based on the thinnest of evidence – but I’m surprised that you should stoop to this.

Jonathan, shhhhh, the grownups are talking.

Wolf.

[mklhawley]

Hi All,

William Pinkerton: "I first knew that man – this Dr, Tumblety or Tumbledy or Twombly, (I think the last is it) – in Washington during the latter part of ’61 . . . At that time my duties in Washington were connected with the secret service of the army . . ."

Interesting work for a boy of 15 [b.1846].

Regards,

Simon

"The Tent Picture" of Pinkerton, outside his quarters, after the Battle of Antietam, in October 1862, with President Lincoln and Gen. John McLernand, a former Chicago attorney. In letters from William Pinkerton, who accompanied his father during the Civil War as a 16-year-old cadet, he recalled that a portrait of the president alone had been planned, but Lincoln had ushered his two Chicago friends into the picture.

...The Civil War was the young agency's first real break, providing future contracts and profits totalling $40,000. The Founder, as Allen Pinkerton called himself, expanded business on a national scale. He installed his youngest and favorite son, Robert, in the newly opened New York office, while keeping oldest son William with him in the Chicago World Headquarters. ...


Well, it looks as though this 16 year old was indeed in Washington DC and already in the employ of the Army and his father, just as Billy stated in his 1888 comment. This would actually lend support to the veracity of his comments in its entirety.

Sincerely,

Mike

[Jonathan H]

To Natalie

I think you make an incisive point here.

R J Palmer was making a counter-point about the other researcher's reliance on a particular methodology, and that even the latter arguably backs the first writer's point -- even if you do not agree with it, in fact are repulsed by it.

I can undertand why that sort of nuance is lost on an absolutist or doctrinaire mentailty, as they always can slide into inaccurate accusations because such a mind cannot conceive of shades of gray, only back and white.

Perhaps they should 'slunk' away ...

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Wolf,
re the following quote originally posted by RJ Palmer:

“…As for your claim that the link between homosexuality and sadism against women is a thing of the distant past, (something I never said but apparently Palmer got confused with the “modern thinkers” line I wrote WV) I’m afraid this is not so. You are a great believer in F.B.I profiling, Vanderlinden, and have touted it many times over the years on this forum and elsewhere, but yet you seem oblivious to the fact that one of the main figures of the FBI’s behavioral science project that looked at sexual sadism--Roy Hazelwood-- said this very thing!! He said there WAS a link.”

I follow your point but to me it seems clear that Roger Palmer isn"t saying he agrees with Roy Hazelwood and the FBI project, just that according to an FBI"s behavioural science project that looked at sexual sadism, there is a link.
Best,
Norma

[Supe]

Wolf,

Apology for what? And that's MR. Souden to you.

Don.

[Wolf Vanderlinden]

The original discussion, on Andrew Cook’s book on William Melville, was lost in a crash of the boards therefore I can’t direct readers to it. However, I do have a copies of my original posts on the matter.

On 22 January, 2008, I posted, in part, this:

“…It is clear, from the information in the longer interview with Pinkerton that when, in Mr. Palmer’s first post, the newspaper article states “Tumblety was guilty of the most disgusting and unnameable vices,” Pinkerton is talking about Tumblety’s homosexuality. In fact, Pinkerton states that the reason he believes Tumblety was capable of being the Whitechapel Murderer was that he was a homosexual and thus obviously insane. He goes on to point out that Dr. William A. Hammond, one of the leading American neurologists of the day, supported this opinion of a homosexual killer. Pinkerton then states that '[Dr. Hammond said that] when the murderer of those women was discovered he would undoubtedly be found to be a woman-hater and a man guilty of the same practices which I have described, and Twombley, or Tumblety, as being guilty of, and that such men were crazy and as likely as not to murder women.' (The Chicago Daily Inter Ocean, 20 November, 1888.)

Mr. Palmer’s sentence that there 'may' be more than a 'touch' of homophobia guiding Pinkerton’s opinion is disingenuous. Pinkerton thoughts about Tumblety’s possible guilt stem directly from Tumblety’s sexuality and the belief that any man who was gay was a “woman hater” and insane and thus capable of being the Whitechapel Murderer (Littlechild also points to Tumblety’s homosexuality as evidence of guilt when he describes him as a 'Sycopathia Sexualis' subject). Modern thinkers must dismiss this out of hand….”

Sometime between the 22nd of January, when the above was posted, and the 30th of January, 2008, Palmer posted a response. I know this because I posted a response to Palmer’s post on the 30th. In this post I quoted from Palmer:

“…As for your claim that the link between homosexuality and sadism against women is a thing of the distant past, (something I never said but apparently Palmer got confused with the “modern thinkers” line I wrote WV) I’m afraid this is not so. You are a great believer in F.B.I profiling, Vanderlinden, and have touted it many times over the years on this forum and elsewhere, but yet you seem oblivious to the fact that one of the main figures of the FBI’s behavioral science project that looked at sexual sadism--Roy Hazelwood-- said this very thing!! He said there WAS a link.”

After there was some condemnation for his post Palmer slunk away.

I’ll await your apology Souden, but I won’t hold my breath.

Wolf.

[Supe]

Wolf,

I hope your "cheap shot by recollection" is not typical of your scholarship. if you are going to claim that an adversary said something, in this case R.J. Palmer, quote him fully and cite the source. Of course, this sort of thing was a favored tactic of that guy for whose magazine you once wrote, so i would guess you learned from him. In any case, it is bad form to make ad hominem attacks based on no more than "I seem to recall."

Don.

[Natalie Severn]

I am beginning to feel a bit sorry for Tumblety. Sounds as though he was being persecuted for being a dandy and being gay.Remind you of anyone?
Pinkerton wasn"t related to the Marquis of Queensbury was he?

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

William Pinkerton: "I first knew that man – this Dr, Tumblety or Tumbledy or Twombly, (I think the last is it) – in Washington during the latter part of ’61 . . . At that time my duties in Washington were connected with the secret service of the army . . ."

Interesting work for a boy of 15 [b.1846].

Regards,

Simon

[Wolf Vanderlinden]

Hi Caz.

No, I was talking about Palmer.

There had been a discussion on Andrew Cook’s book on William Melville and its, supposed, evidence against Tumblety which had morphed, as these things usually do on the boards, into a discussion of American police attitudes towards Tumblety as a Ripper candidate.

A. P. Wolfe had stated that, to his knowledge, William Pinkerton didn’t think Tumblety was a good suspect. Palmer then posted the same, or similar, newspaper account that Mike has above showing that Pinkerton actually did consider Tumblety a good candidate. I then pointed out that Pinkerton’s belief was based on Tumblety’s homosexuality and so his reasoning was greatly flawed and, to my mind, worthless. Palmer, however, stated that I was wrong because homosexuality and violence were linked by one of the FBI’s top profilers (I think it was Roy Hazelwood) and that, therefore, Pinkerton’s views were correct. He later posted something similar on another board I seem to recall. Sad, really.

Wolf.

[caz]

Although R. J. Palmer has claimed on these boards that he believes that homosexuality can be linked with violent crimes, more enlightened minds will strongly disagree.

Crikey, that really would be selling one's soul for the sake of keeping a ripper theory alive. Wolf, please reassure me that the 'he' in this sentence refers to Pinkerton, or someone else from the dark ages, and not our very own RJ.

I don't think I could bear it.

Love,

Caz
X

[mklhawley]

This does answer many questions. I wonder if Conover read this particular article before he was personally quoted.

Mike