The Tumblety Challenge

[mklhawley]

Thanks for replying Simon,

Hi Stewart, I hate to disagree with you, but I am actually more intelligent than to believe a Tumblety-as-Ripper-suspect scenario which defies every last vestige of logic and common sense, not to mention the available facts.

Pure anti-Tumblety rhetoric. On December 1, 1888, William Smith, the Deputy Minister of Marine in Ottawa stated to his colleague James Barber of Saint John: "My dear Barber.... Do you recollect Dr. Tumblety who came to St. John about 1860...He is the man who was arrested in London three weeks ago as the Whitechapel murderer...The police have always had their eyes on him every place he went..." This law enforcement official corroborates Chief Inspector Littlechild's comments AND confirms the US newspaper source in Scotland Yard. Tumblety himself even admitted it and he admitted it at a time when he was avoiding publicity for his business. This is far from 'every last vestige of logic and common sense AND available facts.'

"The sources for the US papers—Scotland Yard."

Hmmm. Always a worry. Scotland Yard spread more contradictory stories about the Ripper than you can shake a stick at.

I can't get enough of your theories about this issue. I enjoy every bit of it.

How do you know the police suspected him of being the Ripper? How do you know Scotland Yard was convinced they could hold him for at least a year?

Littlechild, Anderson, Deputy Smith, US papers that actually disregarded him being the killer but still stated Scotland Yard considered him a suspect, Pinkerton, Tumblety himself, and EVEN Charles A. Dunham (you'll like my upcoming article). As to the holding him for a year (I thought I got this from you), a conviction for gross indecence -especially four counts- had a maximum sentence of one year (maybe for each count).

Your 14th November arrest warrant only works if FT was given seven days' police bail, and there's more prima facie evidence against this notion than in support of it. All the police bail idea provides is a handy device for FT being out on the streets on the morning of 9th November and thus a viable suspect. Take it away and you're sunk without trace. A lick of proof would be appreciated.

If Tumblety had an iron-clad alibi, he would have presented it to the New York World reporter. He did the opposite; he stated he was on the streets.

Roger Palmer's argument about Anderson having initiated contact with Crowley in San Francisco ignores the available cablegraph technology of the time.

On the contrary.

Of course Scotland Yard had every opportunity to deny the Tumblety story. But they didn't. For whatever reason they wanted people in the US to believe it.

...because Scotland Yard would have lied if they denied it and would not have been able to hide behind 'plausible deniability'.

That should tell you something. By the way, I adore your romantic idea of Tumblety eluding the cops by dint of wearing a hat and cloak. Pure Jack the Ripper.

My wife would completely disagree with this. She tells me I don't have a romantic bone in my body.

Sincerely,

Mike

[Simon Wood]

Hi Stewart,

I hate to disagree with you, but I am actually more intelligent than to believe a Tumblety-as-Ripper-suspect scenario which defies every last vestige of logic and common sense, not to mention the available facts.

Hi Mike,

"The sources for the US papers—Scotland Yard."

Hmmm. Always a worry. Scotland Yard spread more contradictory stories about the Ripper than you can shake a stick at.

How do you know the police suspected him of being the Ripper? How do you know Scotland Yard was convinced they could hold him for at least a year?

Your 14th November arrest warrant only works if FT was given seven days' police bail, and there's more prima facie evidence against this notion than in support of it. All the police bail idea provides is a handy device for FT being out on the streets on the morning of 9th November and thus a viable suspect. Take it away and you're sunk without trace. A lick of proof would be appreciated.

Roger Palmer's argument about Anderson having initiated contact with Crowley in San Francisco ignores the available cablegraph technology of the time.

Of course Scotland Yard had every opportunity to deny the Tumblety story. But they didn't. For whatever reason they wanted people in the US to believe it.

That should tell you something.

By the way, I adore your romantic idea of Tumblety eluding the cops by dint of wearing a hat and cloak.

Pure Jack the Ripper.

Regards,

Simon

[mklhawley]

Hi Mike,

Your "Tumblety Challenge" is too loaded for my liking. A more searching question would have been: Does anyone have any knowledge of a Scotland Yard official in 1888 actually believing Francis Tumblety to be a Whitechapel murder suspect?

Hi Simon. It's exciting to have you reply in the thread. I do not believe it's a loaded question and believe it's perfectly valid, because Scotland Yard had every opportunity to publically deny it to the US papers when the London correspondences where hounding them. They didn't.

FT appeared at Marlborough Street magistrates court on 7th November 1888.

That the cops suspected him at this time of being JtR is unlikely, as according to Stewart Evans he was given police bail [although it must be asked why this fact did not appear on the Court Calender as it did with Jane Levy and Arthur Cottee]. Personally I incline to the view that he was held on remand, which rather upsets the apple cart, but let us gloss over what I think.

Recall, a warrant was out for his arrest on 14 November by Marlborough Street Court, because he was a no show (typical Tumblety). Do you deny a warrant was out for his arrest? It clearly suggests a one week max police bail from the 7 November arrest.

Two days later, Millers Court.

If FT had been JtR and knew the cops suspected him, would he be stupid enough to kill again while out on bail and possibly under surveillance?

So did the cops first suspect him of being JtR after Millers Court?

Why do you assume this (7 Nov) is when Scotland Yard informed him he was a suspect in the Whitechapel killings? He was arrested for gross indecency, but certainly did suspect him. They had no direct evidence on him for the Whitechapel killings, just as they did not have for all the other suspects since no one saw the murders. Once he was re-arrested on 14 November, Scotland Yard was convinced they could hold him for at least a year, since they finally had their ducks in order on the gross indecency charge. This would have been the perfect opportunity to start questioning him.

Unlikely again, as on 16th November he was actually allowed bail.

It would have been against the law for the judge to assign bail or even deny bail for being a Whitechapel murder suspect, since it was not part of the charge. Assigned bail was perfectly in accordance to gross indecency charges. Scotland Yard's hands were tied and all they could do was assign surveillance.

FT made a run for it. He was on the lam for eight days [I'd like to see some documentary evidence in support of his 20th November Old Bailey hearing], this "big, fine-looking man . . . with a heavy fierce-looking mustache, waxed at the ends" passing unnoticed amongst London's Finest and its country-wide network of port-watchers.

Tumblety ALWAYS used as his port of entry and exit as Liverpool where his niece lived. Why would Tumblety have chosen the opposite side of the country in Dover to leave the country? Because he knew they were watching his every move and Littlechild even stated Scotland Yard knew his travel habits. They underestimated this man. He was smart with lots of money and he had years of practice in eluding the law and skipping town. He could have easily looked inconspicuous in a world where everyone wore hats and cloaks, especially when you wanted to.

Let's say Scotland Yard suddenly woke up to the fact that they had allowed the Ripper to slip through their fingers. Why didn't Anderson request Inspector Byrnes to arrest FT on suspicion of having committed five murders, which would have been eminently extradictable?

Because it was NOT extradictable. What did they have on him or any suspect for that matter? No one saw the murders. Roger Palmer clearly demonstrated that Anderson was initiating the request for information against Tumblety. Why, because a British court would have rejected what they already had. Why do you think New York or Brooklyn would have allowed extradition?

Because Tumblety was never a suspect.

That's not was Littlechild said, a Canadian law enformement officer, and the sources for the US papers -Scotland Yard.


Sincerely,

Mike

[Stewart P Evans]

I thought...

...
Let's say Scotland Yard suddenly woke up to the fact that they had allowed the Ripper to slip through their fingers. Why didn't Anderson request Inspector Byrnes to arrest FT on suspicion of having committed five murders, which would have been eminently extradictable?
Because Tumblety was never a suspect.
Simon

I thought that you were more intelligent than that Simon, but obviously not.

I do not intend to get involved in this debate and I am not pushing Tumblety as being Jack the Ripper. But he was most definitely a suspect. Littlechild tells us that he was 'amongst the suspects', or is he lying or mistaken? (Also note that Littlechild didn't push him as the Ripper but merely called him a 'very likely' suspect). Tumblety also stated himself that he was detained as a suspect.

I have no doubt that there was no hard evidence on which to hold him as the Ripper, and without evidence of a charge you cannot be held on it - nor can you be extradited.

But your bland statement that 'Tumblety was never a suspect' is a patent nonsense.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Mike,

Your "Tumblety Challenge" is too loaded for my liking. A more searching question would have been: Does anyone have any knowledge of a Scotland Yard official in 1888 actually believing Francis Tumblety to be a Whitechapel murder suspect?

FT appeared at Marlborough Street magistrates court on 7th November 1888.

That the cops suspected him at this time of being JtR is unlikely, as according to Stewart Evans he was given police bail [although it must be asked why this fact did not appear on the Court Calender as it did with Jane Levy and Arthur Cottee]. Personally I incline to the view that he was held on remand, which rather upsets the apple cart, but let us gloss over what I think.

Two days later, Millers Court.

If FT had been JtR and knew the cops suspected him, would he be stupid enough to kill again while out on bail and possibly under surveillance?

So did the cops first suspect him of being JtR after Millers Court?

Unlikely again, as on 16th November he was actually allowed bail.

FT made a run for it. He was on the lam for eight days [I'd like to see some documentary evidence in support of his 20th November Old Bailey hearing], this "big, fine-looking man . . . with a heavy fierce-looking mustache, waxed at the ends" passing unnoticed amongst London's Finest and its country-wide network of port-watchers.

Let's say Scotland Yard suddenly woke up to the fact that they had allowed the Ripper to slip through their fingers. Why didn't Anderson request Inspector Byrnes to arrest FT on suspicion of having committed five murders, which would have been eminently extradictable?

…which leads me to this question. Since Scotland Yard had the opportunity to clarify that Tumblety was not a suspect, then why did they not do it?

Because Tumblety was never a suspect.

Regards,

Simon

[mklhawley]

(Littlechild) "He was an American quack named Tumblety and was at one time a frequent visitor to London and on these occasions constantly brought under the notice of police, there being a large dossier concerning him at Scotland Yard."

His frequent visiting to London caused him to have a LARGE DOSSIER. The gross indecency was only one charge with four young men. That may have taken up a couple of pages, which is a far cry from a large dossier. Also, how could a gross indecency charge warrent Littlechild knowing Tumblety was a frequent visitor? Littlechild most likely also knew of him because of his Irish connections.



Are you kidding me! The only source that claimed Tumblety was married (Charles Dunham) was also the only source that claimed he had an anatomical museum of women's parts. You can't have one without the other, so you must now accept he had an anatomical museum. Multiple sources that even predate the Dunham interview discuss Tumblety's hatred of women. Just as Littlechild stated, "but his feelings toward women were remarkable and bitter in the extreme, a fact on record".




So. In his private letter to Simms it says, "I never heard of a Dr D. in connection with the Whitechapel murders but amongst the suspects, and to my mind a very likely one, was a Dr. T. (which sounds much like D.) He was an American quack named Tumblety..."

"a very likely one" only means Littlechild considered him a strong suspect, regardless if it says "a" and not "the". My point is not 'did Littlechild believe he was the killer?' it is 'Did Littlechild believe he was a strong suspect?' ...and yes.



They did interview him and he did not give them a confession, thus, they had nothing on him -just as they had nothing on everyone else since no one saw any of the murders. Just as Roger Palmer pointed out, they at least had him on gross indecency, so they could incarcerate him for at least a year in order to do a thorough background investigation. It would at least stop the killings if he was the killer.




That's where you're wrong. The court case was not scheduled until early December, so they could not officially say he jumped bail until then. Also, they did try, but his point of entry (and exit) into England was Liverpool where his niece lived. They would have clearly had people there (and in Birmingham). How many people do you think they would put on the guy? The elusive Tumblety slipped to the opposite side of the country in Dover. All of Tumblety's life was him gaining the experience to skip town just as he did in Canada in 1860. The fact that he left the country from Dover and not from Liverpool clearly suggests Tumblety was attempting to evade a surveillance.



Feigenabum is burnt toast in the 'has-bin'.

Trevor, I've countered each and every one of your perfectly valid arguments, without a reply (except about Feigenabum). Since you now realize your understanding of Tumblety is limited, have you changed your mind? If not, then the real reason for rejecting the idea that Tumblety was a significant suspect must be something else. Would you mind posting it, so that I can reply to it? ...or have you given up

[Trevor Marriott]

You know Trevor, I thoroughly enjoy when someone presents a case for a new suspect, such as you with Feigenabum, but because of your bedside manner, I love when Paul rips holes in it.

Sadly he hasnt

[Trevor Marriott]

(Littlechild) "He was an American quack named Tumblety and was at one time a frequent visitor to London and on these occasions constantly brought under the notice of police, there being a large dossier concerning him at Scotland Yard."

His frequent visiting to London caused him to have a LARGE DOSSIER. The gross indecency was only one charge with four young men. That may have taken up a couple of pages, which is a far cry from a large dossier. Also, how could a gross indecency charge warrent Littlechild knowing Tumblety was a frequent visitor? Littlechild most likely also knew of him because of his Irish connections.

I think you wil find that it was separate charges, separate dates, separate offences separate victims. All suggestive of a police operation, which would have resulted in a large file regading the operation and its results.

If Tumblety was a frequent visitor then know doubt he would have been logged coming and going via Special Branch officers who were stationed at ports to record the movements of possible anarchists etc. The SB registers confirm this.

Are you kidding me! The only source that claimed Tumblety was married (Charles Dunham) was also the only source that claimed he had an anatomical museum of women's parts. You can't have one without the other, so you must now accept he had an anatomical museum.

Why does possessing specimens in a jar suggest a hatred of women ?

Multiple sources that even predate the Dunham interview discuss Tumblety's hatred of women. Just as Littlechild stated, "but his feelings toward women were remarkable and bitter in the extreme, a fact on record".

Hearsay !


So. In his private letter to Simms it says, "I never heard of a Dr D. in connection with the Whitechapel murders but amongst the suspects, and to my mind a very likely one, was a Dr. T. (which sounds much like D.) He was an American quack named Tumblety..."

Note "very likely" hard enough to send him to the gallows

"a very likely one" only means Littlechild considered him a strong suspect, regardless if it says "a" and not "the". My point is not 'did Littlechild believe he was the killer?' it is 'Did Littlechild believe he was a strong suspect?' ...and yes.

He considered him such a strong suspect that he names another suspect in the registers and not a mention of Tumblety by him.

They did interview him and he did not give them a confession, thus, they had nothing on him -just as they had nothing on everyone else since no one saw any of the murders. Just as Roger Palmer pointed out, they at least had him on gross indecency, so they could incarcerate him for at least a year in order to do a thorough background investigation. It would at least stop the killings if he was the killer.

Well if they hadnt any evidnce in 1888 what evidence was likley to surface 12 months later

Where does it say that he was ever interviewed in connection with any of the murders. To interview him would they not have to have arrested him on suspicion first. If that had happened again the world and his brother would have known about it.

That's where you're wrong. The court case was not scheduled until early December, so they could not officially say he jumped bail until then. Also, they did try, but his point of entry (and exit) into England was Liverpool where his niece lived. They would have clearly had people there (and in Birmingham). How many people do you think they would put on the guy? The elusive Tumblety slipped to the opposite side of the country in Dover. All of Tumblety's life was him gaining the experience to skip town just as he did in Canada in 1860. The fact that he left the country from Dover and not from Liverpool clearly suggests Tumblety was attempting to evade a surveillance.

You clearly no absolutley no nothing about surveillance if he had been a suspect they would have followed him and kept watch on him the moment he got bail.

Feigenabum is burnt toast in the 'has-bin'.

He was burnt toast when they ran 12000 volts through his body when strapped to the elctric chair

[mklhawley]

Mike,


It is just my opinion, but I would suggest that Tumblety was remembered because he was a flamboyant character who did everything he could to make himself known, and fame or infamy didn;t seem to matter to him. This makes him a less likely suspect in my book, as no one could forget a well-known quack of giant stature and enormous mustache, plus pinache. I don't see him getting away with murder. Again, no one denied him in the papers, but many never mentioned him which makes his viability questionable.

Mike

Hi Mike,

Excellent points. Remember, my issue is not if he was the killer but if Scotland Yard considered him a serious suspect just has Special Branch Chief Inspector Littlechild stated. His flamboyant character would have not only made him memorable but it would also have made him less likely to be a suspect. Just as Littlechild stated, his hatred was extreme (and it would be interesting to know what evidence they had which demonstrated this), the fact that he was in the East End during the murders, and he fit the discription of witnesses (we know this because of the American Slouch Hat issue) made them at least want to keep him incarcerated for awhile. I'm sure the fact that the murders stop further convinced Littlechild.

The 'many never mentioned him' statement of yours needs to be further addressed. Tumblety hung his hat and was arrested on the West End, so H-Division CID investigators would not have been involved directly with the Tumblety case. Abberline AND Moore were 'augmented' to H-Division, so they too would not have been directly involved. Their opinions would have been biased towards suspects they personally investigated. Few reporters would have asked CID personnel in other districts about their opinions in later years. Headquarter would have been involved with Tumblety, but we know Anderson was communicating with San Francisco and New York about Tumblety.

Just my thoughts.

Mike

[mklhawley]

Tumbey was notarrested in connection with the ripper murders he was arrested for gross indecency following what appears to have been some police operation. Thats how he came to have a police file.

(Littlechild) "He was an American quack named Tumblety and was at one time a frequent visitor to London and on these occasions constantly brought under the notice of police, there being a large dossier concerning him at Scotland Yard."

His frequent visiting to London caused him to have a LARGE DOSSIER. The gross indecency was only one charge with four young men. That may have taken up a couple of pages, which is a far cry from a large dossier. Also, how could a gross indecency charge warrent Littlechild knowing Tumblety was a frequent visitor? Littlechild most likely also knew of him because of his Irish connections.

The only haterd to women appears to be towards his wife. not women persee.

Are you kidding me! The only source that claimed Tumblety was married (Charles Dunham) was also the only source that claimed he had an anatomical museum of women's parts. You can't have one without the other, so you must now accept he had an anatomical museum. Multiple sources that even predate the Dunham interview discuss Tumblety's hatred of women. Just as Littlechild stated, "but his feelings toward women were remarkable and bitter in the extreme, a fact on record".

Dont forget Littlechild also mentions another suspect only this time it is in
official police records.

So. In his private letter to Simms it says, "I never heard of a Dr D. in connection with the Whitechapel murders but amongst the suspects, and to my mind a very likely one, was a Dr. T. (which sounds much like D.) He was an American quack named Tumblety..."

"a very likely one" only means Littlechild considered him a strong suspect, regardless if it says "a" and not "the". My point is not 'did Littlechild believe he was the killer?' it is 'Did Littlechild believe he was a strong suspect?' ...and yes.

Scotland yard had ample time to interview him following his arrest. What could they screw up by doing that at that time. They either had something to put to him or they did not.

They did interview him and he did not give them a confession, thus, they had nothing on him -just as they had nothing on everyone else since no one saw any of the murders. Just as Roger Palmer pointed out, they at least had him on gross indecency, so they could incarcerate him for at least a year in order to do a thorough background investigation. It would at least stop the killings if he was the killer.

He was so much a suspect that they didnt even bother to keep him under surveillance after he was released on bail othewise he wouldnt have been able to abscond.

That's where you're wrong. The court case was not scheduled until early December, so they could not officially say he jumped bail until then. Also, they did try, but his point of entry (and exit) into England was Liverpool where his niece lived. They would have clearly had people there (and in Birmingham). How many people do you think they would put on the guy? The elusive Tumblety slipped to the opposite side of the country in Dover. All of Tumblety's life was him gaining the experience to skip town just as he did in Canada in 1860. The fact that he left the country from Dover and not from Liverpool clearly suggests Tumblety was attempting to evade a surveillance.

Taxi for Tumblety to the bin

Feigenabum is burnt toast in the 'has-bin'.

[ChrisGeorge]

Well seeing as you are all mouth and trousers and cant cut the mustard its best you wait a little longer.

That has to be a classic mixed metaphor, Trevor.

[The Good Michael]

Didn't Tumblety have a reputation for being extremely litigious or at least threating litigation? The police might have wanted to avoid being hit with a liable or slander suit.

c.d.

Yes. he threatened litigation in America if my memory serves me correctly. I think the guy was all bluster, however.

Mike

[Trevor Marriott]

Didn't Tumblety have a reputation for being extremely litigious or at least threating litigation? The police might have wanted to avoid being hit with a liable or slander suit.

c.d.

I am sure all the police would have needed would have been "reasonable suspicion" then their actions would have been lawful.

[c.d.]

Didn't Tumblety have a reputation for being extremely litigious or at least threating litigation? The police might have wanted to avoid being hit with a liable or slander suit.

c.d.

[The Good Michael]

Mike,


It is just my opinion, but I would suggest that Tumblety was remembered because he was a flamboyant character who did everything he could to make himself known, and fame or infamy didn;t seem to matter to him. This makes him a less likely suspect in my book, as no one could forget a well-known quack of giant stature and enormous mustache, plus pinache. I don't see him getting away with murder. Again, no one denied him in the papers, but many never mentioned him which makes his viability questionable.

Mike