Tweet
Originally posted by Trevor Marriott
View Post
But that means you’re are saying the report about Assistant Commissioner Anderson soliciting information from US Chiefs of police is all fabrication, because this would have been logically impossible if Tumblety was in jail during the murders. Or… your interpretation of the law is wrong while interpretations that fit are correct. Read it again:
The Brooklyn Citizen,23 November 1888
“Is He The Ripper?” A Brooklynite Charged With the Whitechapel Murders.
Superintendent Campbell Asked by the London Police to Hunt Up the Record of Francis Tumblety
Captain Eason supplies the information and it is interesting Police Superintendent Campbell received a cable dispatch yesterday from Mr Anderson, the deputy chief of the London Police, asking him to make some inquiries about Francis Tumblety, who is under arrest in England on the charge of indecent assault. Tumblety is referred to in the dispatch in the following manner: “He says he is known to you, Chief, as Brooklyn’s Beauty.” Tumblety was arrested in London some weeks ago as the supposed Whitechapel murderer. Since his incarceration in prison he has boasted of how he had succeeded in baffling the police. He also claimed that he was a resident of Brooklyn, and this was what caused the Deputy Chief of Police to communicate with Superintendent Campbell. The superintendent gave the dispatch immediate attention, and through Captain Eason...
I discovered that the source of this was none other than the Associated Press, and their London correspondent in 1888 was James MacLean. This organization was created to be a fact finding body distributing news to COMPETING daily newspapers. It avoided sensationalism. But of course, you use a broad brushstroke on ‘newspapers’, because it doesn’t fit your biased interpretation. Point, the purpose of your Lost at Sea article was absolutely NOT an unbiased attempt to discover truth but an agenda to prove your preconceived notion that Tumbletly was not a suspect.
But your bias was caught red-handed. Notice the proof of your anti-Tumblety bias. in the San Francisco Chronicle on November 18, 1888:
BOSTON GLOBE, November 18,1888
DOING WHITECHAPEL
TWO ARRESTS ON SUSPICION MADE YESTERDAY.
ONE A CHUM OF THE PRINCE OF WALES AND THE OTHER AN AMERICAN PHYSICIAN.
London, Nov. 17-
Just think of it ! One of the Prince of Wales' own exclusives, a member of his household and cavalry and one of the best known swells about town who glory in the glamor of the Guelphs, getting into custody on suspicion of being the Whitechapel murderer. It is the talk of all clubdom tonight.
Just now it is a fashionable fad to slum it in Whitechapel and every night scores of young men who have never been in the East End before in their lives, prowl around the neighborhood of the murders talking with frightened women. So long as two men keep together and do not make nuisances of themselves, the police do not interfere with them. But if a man goes off alone and tries to lure a woman off the street into a secluded corner, he is pretty sure to get into trouble.
This was the case of Sir George Arthur of Prince Wales set. He put on an old coat and slouch hat and went to Whitechapel for a little fun. He got it. It occurred to two policemen that Sir George answered very much to the description of Jack The Ripper and they watched him and when they saw him talking with a woman they collared him. He protested and threatened them with the vengeance of the royal wrath, but in vain. Finally a chance was given him to send to a fashionable West End Club and prove his identity and he was released with profuse apologies for the mistake. The affair was kept out of the newspaper, but the jolly young baronets at the Brooks Club considered the joke too good to keep quiet.
Another arrest was a man who gave the name of Dr. Kumbelty of New York. The police could not hold him on suspicion of the Whitechapel crimes, but he has been committed for trial, under a special law passed soon after the modern Babylon exposures. The police say this is the man's right name as proved by letters in his possession from New York and that he has been in the habit of crossing the ocean twice a year for several years.
A score of men have been arrested by the police this week on suspicion, but the right man still roams at large and everybody is momentarily expecting to hear of another victim.
The large sums offered by private individualsas rewards have induced hundreds of amateur detectives to take a hand in the chase, but to no avail.
Leon Rothschild has offered an income of 2 pounds a week for life for the man who gives the information leading to the arrest and conviction of the assassin.
I don’t get it Trevor; the very same New York World Cable, where their Chief London correspondent, Tracy Greaves, reported on Tumblety first being arrest on suspicion, was the only report about Sir George Arthur also being arrested on suspicion. You whole-heartedly believe this discovery of Greaves, yet you whole-heartedly reject the other. How do I know this? Your own article:
“On 30 November 1888, the Wrexham advertiser, Clwyd, Wales, Britain, also published the story, but withheld Sir George Arthur’s name. Wild coincidences aside, Tumblety seems to have appropriated it, complete with slouch had, for himself. His story would appear to have been an elaborate fiction.” (Lost at Sea, p. 44, Rip 127) Trevor Marriott
So, how can we accept your interpretation of events when you clearly show bias against Tumblety as a Ripper suspect?
You asked when was he suspected of the Ripper murders. Let's see if you can finally get around your clouded judgment; just as the reliable sources state, he was arrested on suspicion 'just like countless others'. What does that mean? He was arrested on suspicion, just like Sir George Arthur; OFF THE STREETS. He was brought in and they figured out who he was by the letters in his pocket (he always had these letters in his pocket, so that when he got arrested it would show the police he was a 'gentleman'). They then searched this residence to confirm this and found out he would come six months at a time.
Mike
Comment