Was Tumblety in Jail during the Kelly Murder?

[Simon Wood]

Hi Jonathan,

. . . and there we must choose to differ.

Regards,

Simon, [the tyro]

[Jonathan H]

With due respect to Mike's recent excellent work the only benchmark is R. J. Palmer.

His trilogy on Inspector Andrews ranks with the very best historical writing ever done on this subject, from what I have read.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Dr. John Watson,

I was merely establishing the benchmark.

Regards,

Simon

[Dr. John Watson]

Eagles Don't Notice Flies.

Hi Dr. John Watson [aka the Anticipator],

So Mike Hawley now qualifies as "the foremost expert on Tumblety."

I am certain that this will come as breaking news to Wolf Vanderlinden.

Regards,

Simon

Calm down, everyone! I wasn't aware my opinion meant that much! Fact is, I don't subscribe to Ripperologist anymore, nor have I bought any Ripper books for a good while. I mainly monitor these boards, so perhaps I've missed something recently from Wolf, who is of course an acknowledged expert on everything Ripper and hardly needs anyone to protect his standing, or the others. I simply connect Mike with a steady flow of fresh news articles, etc. on Tumblety (many of which I hadn't seen) that have appeared here in recent times. I appreciate Mike's research efforts, find him to be one of the most prolific donors of fresh information on the subject to these boards, and believe him to be among most knowledgable in the field of Tumblety research!

John, a mere Fly

[mklhawley]

Hi Dr. John Watson [aka the Anticipator],

So Mike Hawley now qualifies as "the foremost expert on Tumblety."

I am certain that this will come as breaking news to Wolf Vanderlinden.

Regards,

Simon

...and Simon Wood, and Joe Chetcuti, and Roger Palmer, and Stewart Evans. ...although, I do have a few articles coming up

[mklhawley]

Hi All,

It's interesting to note that, according to the New York Sun, Monday 19th November 1888, Tumblety was arrested on suspicion of the Whitechapel murders on Saturday 17th November, the day after he was bailed pending an Old Bailey appearance on charges of gross indecency.

[ATTACH]14419[/ATTACH]

Darn those pesky US newspaper reports.

Regards,

Simon

Looks like we have to reassess Joe's Saturday arrest, eh Simon! ...and why would you say this particular Saturday was not prior to November 9th?

Sincerely,

Mike

[Simon Wood]

Hi Phil,

Always abide by the rules.

Ripperology Rule #1—

Newspaper reports are accurate if you're defending an argument, and inaccurate if you're disputing an argument.

Regards,

Simon

[Phil Carter]

Hi All,

It's interesting to note that, according to the New York Sun, Monday 19th November 1888, Tumblety was arrested on suspicion of the Whitechapel murders on Saturday 17th November, the day after he was bailed pending an Old Bailey appearance on charges of gross indecency.

[ATTACH]14419[/ATTACH]

Darn those pesky US newspaper reports.

Regards,

Simon

Hello Simon,

Yes. Indeed. What was the description suggested by Mr Begg a few days ago, re newspaper reports? Prophetic, I believe.
Prophetic indeed.
Ever get the feeling the US papers were stirring up a manhunt?
Why? And more to the point, if so, who orchestrated it?

It is almost like somebody wanted the nameTumblety kept in a whipped up attention frenzy.

A bit like the name 'Jack the Ripper' in the UK.

Best wishes

Phil

[Simon Wood]

Hi Dr. John Watson [aka the Anticipator],

So Mike Hawley now qualifies as "the foremost expert on Tumblety."

I am certain that this will come as breaking news to Wolf Vanderlinden.

Regards,

Simon

[Dr. John Watson]

Hi John,

I believe your conclusion about this issue needs to be reassessed, since new information has come to light. I can't reveal all (not mine to give), but here's some . . . .

Mike

Hi Mike:

You make a good case for the "woman hater" appellation. Actually, I had read most of the citations you list, including your own, and while I grant you that Tumblety certainly disliked women, perhaps in the extreme, there is nothing in his history to suggest he would resort to murdering them, which is really what the "woman hater" tag is attempting to infer and/or support. I don't mean to quibble over semantics, but it's the repeated use of that term to suggest a connection with the Ripper murders that I think is unfair to the man. Still, there is no question that it was his latter-day surfacing as a Ripper suspect which led researchers like yourself to began the search which has provided us with so many new and fascinating details on Tumblety's life and history. I believe in this area your efforts in particular must now qualify you as the foremost expert on Tumblety, and I'll be very interested (as always) to hear of anything new you've found on this rascal!

John the Anticipator

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

It's interesting to note that, according to the New York Sun, Monday 19th November 1888, Tumblety was arrested on suspicion of the Whitechapel murders on Saturday 17th November, the day after he was bailed pending an Old Bailey appearance on charges of gross indecency.



Darn those pesky US newspaper reports.

Regards,

Simon

[Roy Corduroy]

It's a Holiday !

posters now change the goaplosts by completely disregarding the above theories and now are clinging to a misguided belief that Tumblety was bailed by the magistrate on Nov 7th.

Change the goalposts?

You are declaring a one day holiday. From skepticism.

For just one day we are supposed to believe the authorities actually followed the rules shared in your article. These members of the justice system including the police, who are mocked and ridiculed every day of the year on Casebook. For just one day we believe. Then the next day we go back to not believing. Not believing the police reports or anything else about the authority figures.

Everybody needs just one day when you let it all hang out.

Roy

[mklhawley]

Hi Phil,

I meant new info since John made his conclusion years ago, which includes Roger Palmer's article, my Dunham articles, and an event that occurred in 1875 that was emailed to me. It basically expresses his anger that women-folk are used to steal young lads away from who they're most likely created for; older men. It hints at why he hates women. That's it.

Sincerely,

Mike

[Phil Carter]

Hello Mike,

Excuse me for asking.

You state that 'new information has come to light'.
May I enquire as to 'since when'? Before or after Trevor's article?

And as you are not at liberty to quote it in full, would you mind telling us 'when' this 'new information ' will be revealed, and where? ( the boads, Ripperologist for example?)

I suppose it's also wrong to ask who is the presenter in waiting of this 'new information'?

With many thanks

best wishes

Phil

[mklhawley]

Hi Mike:

Frankly, I've never bought into the assertion that Tumblety "hated" women. He was undoubtedly a homosexual with a preference for boys and young men, but it does not necessarily follow that he had a violent aversion to women, as so often alleged. In fact, at least one press article in the U.S. makes note of the fact that he was popular with the ladies and that much of his income came from women. He may have disliked women in general, but there is no real evidence that he hated the female sex. He likely did warn young men of the dangers of venerial disease and caution them against having relations with women, and prostitutes in particular, as did many legitimate physicians of the time. Of course considering Tumblety's own sexual preferences, one suspects his motives for doing this were ulterior, perhaps having more to do with suggesting alternate avenues of sexual release (like with other men) than for health reasons.

John

Hi John,

I believe your conclusion about this issue needs to be reassessed, since new information has come to light. I can't reveal all (not mine to give), but here's some:

The evidence not only shows he was homosexual, but he also hated women; two different things. There are many gay men who do not 'hate' women. I do realize that 'woman hater' phrase may have been a term used for homosexual, but in Tumblety's case, it was more. When Littlechild stated that his feeling towards women were 'bitter in the extreme', it does not make sense that Littlechild meant he's really, really, really gay. Gay is gay. Note again what William Pinkerton stated.

[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 AND as a man who never associated with or mixed with women of any kind....”

Pinkerton’s point is that he thoroughly hated women and was brutal, which is different than merely being gay. Notice how he used “and” which means he is differentiating hating women with not associating with women (being gay). Remember, William Pinkerton had a close relationship with Scotland Yard and was even in London at the beginning of the murders. Chief Inspector Littlechild himself worked for Pinkerton after retirement. It would not be a surprise to me if Scotland Yard received a Tumblety background from Pinkerton. He knew him during the war.

Some have claimed the woman hater stuff originated with Charles Dunham, but Roger Palmer debunked this. Regardless, I wrote two articles on Charles Dunham, which made it clear he was not a pathological liar.



Note again what Littlechild stated about Tumblety (a window into Scotland Yard officials’ views).

[Chief Inspector Littlechild] “…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 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. Although a 'Sycopathia Sexualis' subject he was not known as a 'Sadist' (which the murderer unquestionably was) but his feelings toward women were remarkable and bitter in the extreme, a fact on record.

Regardless if Littlechild mixed his stories accidentally or on purpose, the woman hater issue was clearly about Tumblety. Notice how Littlechild separates Sycopathis Sexualis [Charles Gilbert Chaddock. M.D., in his 1894 book Psychopathia Sexualis refers to it as “contrary sexual instinct”, in other words – being gay] from his woman-hater comment with a “BUT”. He is differentiating being gay with extreme woman hatred just as Stewart Evans has suggested. Also, Pinkerton’s comments clearly show Littlechild’s comments were not merely commenting upon normal homosexuality but on extreme women-hatred as Stewart Evans claims.


John, you made a comment about warning his young men to stay away from them. It was more than that. Note the New York World article dated December 5, 1888:

When asked about Dr. Tumblety's aversion to women, McGarry said [in 1882]: "He always disliked women very much. He used to say to me: 'Martin, no women for me.' He could not bear to have them near him. He thought all women were impostors, and he often said that all the trouble in this world was caused by women."


One last thing; note the following report:

The Evening World, December 3, 1888
Dr. Francis Twomblety, the eccentric American physician who was arrested in London suspected of the Whitechapel murders… Men who were well acquainted with Twomblety during his life in this city and in Brooklyn say that they did not know by what right he assumed the title M.D. Reasons which led some of them to believe that Twomblety is the fiend who so successfully eluded the London police are that the “Doctor” had an inveterate hatred for women and kept an anatomical museum in which portions of human bodies similar to those cut from the Whitechapel victims predominated. The London police are anxiously searching for samples of his handwriting to compare with that of “Jack the Ripper.”

Note what San Francisco's Chief of Police stated about information from New York:

The San Francisco Examiner, November 23, 1888
Talking of the affair yesterday [Chief Crowley] said: “There may be more in the arrest that was at first supposed. This man Tumblety is evidently a crank. His course with the bank here does not indicate that he was a man of good business instincts, and in New York his behavior was that of a man who had no liking for women.”

November 23 predates the Dunham interview and certainly comments on the New York woman hatred thing. Many have discounted the above New York World article because they believe the info came from Dunham, but Crowley knew something.

Sincerely,

Mike