The Tumblety Challenge

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • mklhawley
    replied
    Originally posted by Jonathan H View Post

    To be fair to Byrnes, we do not know he did not say this, not only to protect his own rep, but also to put Tumblety under a false sense of security.
    Very interesting Jonathan.

    Mike

    Leave a comment:


  • mklhawley
    replied
    Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
    Hi Mike,

    Inspector Byrnes stated that " . . . there is no proof in his [Tumblety's] complicity in the Whitechapel murders . . ."

    How could he have said that unless he had been told by someone who actually knew?

    Regards,

    Simon
    Hi Simon,

    He WAS told that by Scotland Yard and they didn't have proof, but they certainly suspected him for numerous reasons. The lack of evidence is the reason why they wanted the gross indecency charges to stick (as per Byrnes' statement and the US papers). By extension of your logic Scotland Yard had no suspects, because they had no proof in anyone's complicity in the Whitechapel murders. No one saw the murders, thus, there were no true witnesses to the killings; just witnesses to punters, etc. In reality, they did have suspects and they investigated and followed them.

    Sincerely,
    Mike

    Leave a comment:


  • Jonathan H
    replied
    That's easy, Simon.

    Byrnes was the corrupt head of a notoriously corrupt police force.

    He protected a fellow Irish-American without breaking a sweat.

    He talks more like a brief than a cop: eg. no proof to trouble my client.

    Plus once he knew that Scotland yard had nothing they could charge Tumblety with, he would want to reassure his own constituents that they had nothing to worry about from the doctor -- that he, the police chief, was not letting them down.

    To be fair to Byrnes, we do not know he did not say this, not only to protect his own rep, but also to put Tumblety under a false sense of security.

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Wood
    replied
    Hi Mike,

    Inspector Byrnes stated that " . . . there is no proof in his [Tumblety's] complicity in the Whitechapel murders . . ."

    How could he have said that unless he had been told by someone who actually knew?

    Regards,

    Simon

    Leave a comment:


  • mklhawley
    replied
    Originally posted by mklhawley View Post
    Earlier I pointed out that Scotland Yard never told anyone, especially US newspaper reporters stationed in London, that Tumblety was NOT a JTR suspect. Something even more telling is what Scotland Yard told New York City Chief Inspector of the Detective Bureau, Inspector Byrnes. Scotland Yard clearly contacted Inspector Byrnes in late November 1888 that Francis Tumblety had jumped bail and was on his way to New York City with an estimated time of arrival of December 3, 1888, as evidence by Byrnes assigning detectives to wait for his arrival at the docks. Notice what Inspector Byrnes stated to the New York World:


    New York World (U.S.A.), 4 December 1888
    Inspector Byrnes was asked what his object in shadowing Twomblety. "I simply wanted to put a tag on him." he replied, "so that we can tell where he is. Of course, he cannot be arrested, for there is no proof in his complicity in the Whitechapel murders, and the crime for which he was under bond in London is not extaditable."



    Inspector Byrnes publically scoffed at the idea of Tumblety being Jack the Ripper. This would have been the perfect time for him to tell the reporter, "Scotland Yard informed me that he was not a suspect in the Whitechapel killings," but he did not. His statement clearly shows that Scotland Yard told him he was a suspect, but could only be arrested for gross indecency in order to hold him.
    Yes, I agree with you Simon, truth does smell of rubbish sometimes. As the above quote demonstrates, Byrnes clearly new Dr. T was a suspect of theirs.

    Sincerely,

    Mike

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Wood
    replied
    Hi Mike,

    No problem.

    I'm your man as long as you keep posting the same old Tumblety rubbish.

    Regards,

    Simon

    Leave a comment:


  • mklhawley
    replied
    Simon,

    What is this? You post and the number of views to this thread skyrockets. I'm telling you; keep on posting.

    Mike

    ...and I never did like that Byrnes guy anyway.

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Wood
    replied
    Hi Mike,

    I would have liked Inspector Byrnes.

    All reasonable people scoff at the idea of FT having been Jack the Ripper.

    Regards,

    Simon

    Leave a comment:


  • mklhawley
    replied
    Earlier I pointed out that Scotland Yard never told anyone, especially US newspaper reporters stationed in London, that Tumblety was NOT a JTR suspect. Something even more telling is what Scotland Yard told New York City Chief Inspector of the Detective Bureau, Inspector Byrnes. Scotland Yard clearly contacted Inspector Byrnes in late November 1888 that Francis Tumblety had jumped bail and was on his way to New York City with an estimated time of arrival of December 3, 1888, as evidence by Byrnes assigning detectives to wait for his arrival at the docks. Notice what Inspector Byrnes stated to the New York World:


    New York World (U.S.A.), 4 December 1888
    Inspector Byrnes was asked what his object in shadowing Twomblety. "I simply wanted to put a tag on him." he replied, "so that we can tell where he is. Of course, he cannot be arrested, for there is no proof in his complicity in the Whitechapel murders, and the crime for which he was under bond in London is not extaditable."



    Inspector Byrnes publically scoffed at the idea of Tumblety being Jack the Ripper. This would have been the perfect time for him to tell the reporter, "Scotland Yard informed me that he was not a suspect in the Whitechapel killings," but he did not. His statement clearly shows that Scotland Yard told him he was a suspect, but could only be arrested for gross indecency in order to hold him.

    Sincerely,

    Mike

    Leave a comment:


  • mklhawley
    replied
    Littlechild stated, "but his feelings toward women were remarkable and bitter in the extreme, a fact on record".

    [Pinkerton]: “People familiar with the history of the man always talked of him as a brute, and as brutal in his actions. He was known as a thorough woman-hater ...”

    Pinkerton was quoted on November 20th in Chicago only a day or two after those in the US heard about Tumblety being suspected of the Whitechapel crimes and only four days after Tumblety posted bail. He seems to be the very first person publically suggesting his woman-hater feelings as a motive. We also know Pinkerton had a working relationship with Scotland Yard headquarters IN 1888. It's interesting that 'bitter in the extreme' and 'thorough' have similar connotations.

    Sincerely,
    Mike
    Last edited by mklhawley; 09-28-2011, 04:57 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Wood
    replied
    Hi Mike,

    Sorry to say, I've never set foot in the Lyceum Theatre.

    Many others, but not the Lyceum.

    You must have me confused with another impresario.

    Regards,

    Simon

    Leave a comment:


  • mklhawley
    replied
    Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
    Hi Mike,

    Me hold out on you? Heaven forfend.

    It's all there to be found.

    There were a number of Captain Streeters.

    My favourite is Ben Streeter, who fathered loads of kids, was jailed for forgery, and at the age of 92 fell down drunk, dying at the foot of a flight of stairs leading from the Erie railroad to a bar.

    What a way to go.

    Regards,

    Simon
    Just like that Simon. Let's see... George Lusk...remodeled the Lyceum Theatre...theatre designer...Simon Wood...

    Simon, you know darn well you've been in the Lyceum Theatre haven't you!

    Mike

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Wood
    replied
    Hi Mike,

    Me hold out on you? Heaven forfend.

    It's all there to be found.

    There were a number of Captain Streeters.

    My favourite is Ben Streeter, who fathered loads of kids, was jailed for forgery, and at the age of 92 fell down drunk, dying at the foot of a flight of stairs leading from the Erie railroad to a bar.

    What a way to go.

    Regards,

    Simon

    Leave a comment:


  • mklhawley
    replied
    Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
    Hi Mike,

    William Smith, Deputy Minister of Marine and Fisheries, but hardly a law enforcement official, was enlarging upon what he'd read in an Ottawa newspaper the previous month.

    If you enjoy my Scotland Yard fables I suggest you sharpen your spade and get digging. There are many treasures to be found.

    Keep it up.

    Regards,

    Simon
    It's funny you should clarify that. In New York State, the conservation officers have greater authority than even the state police.

    I'm searching all the time for those treasures and I'm still waiting for the Captain Streeter stuff. You're holding out on me again!

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Wood
    replied
    Hi Mike,

    William Smith, Deputy Minister of Marine and Fisheries, but hardly a law enforcement official, was enlarging upon what he'd read in an Ottawa newspaper the previous month.

    If you enjoy my Scotland Yard fables I suggest you sharpen your spade and get digging. There are many treasures to be found.

    Keep it up.

    Regards,

    Simon
    Last edited by Simon Wood; 09-27-2011, 01:37 AM. Reason: spolling mistook

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X