The Tumblety Challenge

[Jonathan H]

To Mike

Dr Tumblety was the dominant police suspect of 1888, in my opinion.

Ex-Chief Inspector of C.I.D, Tom Divall, one of Mac’s protégés, produced the colorfully titled memoirs, 'Scoundrels and Scallywags and Some
Honest Men' in 1929.

In it he wrote this:

"The much lamented and late Commissioner of the C.I.D., Sir Melville Macnaghten, received some information that the murderer had gone to
America and died in a lunatic asylum there. This perhaps may be correct, but after this news nothing was ever heard of any similar crime being committed."

This is from p. 231 of 'The Lodger' by Evans and Gainey, one of the great book ever written on this subject.

This is a scrambled egg by Sirr Melville Macnaghten, one which Jack Littlechild, I think, was trying to unscramble in 1913 by teasing out the 'Dr T' elements from the alleged chief suspect of Sims: 'Dr D.'

[mklhawley]

Greetings all,

This is less of a challenge and more of a serious question specific to Scotland Yard considering Francis Tumblety as a JTR suspect.

Here’s the question: Does anyone have any knowledge of a Scotland Yard official denying Francis Tumblety as being a Whitechapel murder suspect? –In 1888 or even years later.

I’ve looked everywhere, but I cannot find any. We of course have record of the contrary when Chief Inspector Littlechild commented to Simms about Tumbley (a comment which originated not from Simms but from Littlechild himself) in 1913. Keep in mind, this thread does not involve WHO the actual killer was but merely was Tumblety considered a suspect by Scotland Yard at the peak of the investigation in November 1888 just after the Mary Kelly murder.

Beginning on November 18, 1888, major US newspapers were reporting that Scotland Yard considered Francis Tumblety as a suspect. Note an example of this in the New York Times, Nov 19, 1888, “The Dr. Tumblety who was arrested in London a few days ago on suspicion of complicity in the Whitechapel murders…” If this statement is true, then Tumblety must have been considered AT LEAST a significant suspect since an arrest suggests there was significant evidence implicating him. It logically follows that insignificant suspects would merely be taken in for questioning and not arrested.


Let’s say the US reporters received bad information or misinterpreted the cable, thus causing the statement to be wrong. In either case, would the next logical step not have been for London correspondents of these major US papers - especially the New York papers- to do face to face interviews with Scotland Yard officials about Tumblety? Go to the source. Scotland Yard was reported to be the source of this story, since they did the arrest. The fact that the US papers reported details of the arrest, such as the gross indecency charge and jumping bail, clearly suggests the London correspondents WERE asking questions to Scotland Yard officials.

…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?

Sincerely,
Mike