Two reasons AGAINST Tumblety being the Ripper

[Bridewell]

Secondly as to handwriting they had the chance to keep him in custody for up to 24 hours following his arrest. So if they had him under suspicion they had ample opportunity to have him give a handwriting sample and besides his handwriting would have been on the court documents he signed when being granted bail.

Did he have to sign court documents when granted bail? (Serious question as he wouldn't have to do so now.)

[Abby Normal]

Keep in mind Abby Normal, Tumblety did fit a specific witness description in November 1888, a lone man in an American slouch hat. I have posted a number of articles demonstrating this. It's what got young Sir Arthur into hot water.

Sincerely,
Mike

Thanks mike
Do we know who gave that description, and or how the police came by it?

Also, I have always been intrigued with the story of the American dr. Looking to procure specimens. That story, along with the info that tumblety had female organs/specimens has often lead me to the idea that if tumblety was somehow involved that it had to do with him finding someone to do his dirty work for him. Someone who he paid to procure the specimens, like a chapman perhaps.

[Trevor Marriott]

How is this as a plausible scenario (although one hard to prove):

The Yard feels stupid for letting Doc out so easily (a bail on a lesser charge - though the only one they had him on, apparently, that he finds he can pay easily, and then he skips to France and then America). In 1881 the railroad police looked stupidly incompetent when they allowed an opportunity to Percy Lefroy Mapleton to flee through a back door in his house when he was supposed to be returned to Brighton for more rigorous questioning about the railroad murder of Frederick Isaac Gold. It took two weeks or so to recapture Mapleton. The Yard was not doing too well with the Whitechapel Murders Case anyway, but to let a serious suspect escape too easily was just a huge new nightmare.

So they send Andrews to Canada to get further information, supposedly on Tumblety's possible criminal activities there. They also seek to try to connect him to the letters by contacting the police in the U.S. for samples of his hadwriting. They also send Andrews (supposedly more secretly but the news gets out) to New York to get any information on Doc, and possibly to arrest him (for bail jumping most likely). But they stope after a few weeks.
They don't even try to get Tumblety returned for the bail jumping!

In the meantime a family in Dorset has contacted some members at the Yard about their missing relative Montague, and how he as been very secretive and strange and even violent in his behavior recently. They have grave suspicions about what he may have been doing. Then Montague's drowned body is found, and the inquest finds he died a suicide when under unsound mind. Now there is an equally plausible local suspect, and the Yard decides it is now able to begin dismantling the investigation since Druitt (an equally good suspect to Doc is dead). They call Andrews home, and he does not even bother to seek extradition for Monty from the U.S. for the morals charge.

It might seem to fit together.

Firstly if they had suspected of him being the ripper they would not have bailed him on the gross indecency charges.They would have kept him in and tried to build a case for murder whilst they had him in custody for the gross indecency offences

Secondly as to handwriting they had the chance to keep him in custody for up to 24 hours following his arrest. So if they had him under suspicion they had ample opportunity to have him give a handwriting sample and besides his handwriting would have been on the court documents he signed when being granted bail.

As to why Anderson asked for handwriting we can only speculate but many things Anderson has said and written must be treated with suspicion he seems to have been a man trying to be a legend in his own lifetime, and would appear to have gilded the lily on more than one occasion

[mklhawley]

How is this as a plausible scenario (although one hard to prove):

The Yard feels stupid for letting Doc out so easily (a bail on a lesser charge - though the only one they had him on, apparently, that he finds he can pay easily, and then he skips to France and then America). In 1881 the railroad police looked stupidly incompetent when they allowed an opportunity to Percy Lefroy Mapleton to flee through a back door in his house when he was supposed to be returned to Brighton for more rigorous questioning about the railroad murder of Frederick Isaac Gold. It took two weeks or so to recapture Mapleton. The Yard was not doing too well with the Whitechapel Murders Case anyway, but to let a serious suspect escape too easily was just a huge new nightmare.

So they send Andrews to Canada to get further information, supposedly on Tumblety's possible criminal activities there. They also seek to try to connect him to the letters by contacting the police in the U.S. for samples of his hadwriting. They also send Andrews (supposedly more secretly but the news gets out) to New York to get any information on Doc, and possibly to arrest him (for bail jumping most likely). But they stope after a few weeks.
They don't even try to get Tumblety returned for the bail jumping!

In the meantime a family in Dorset has contacted some members at the Yard about their missing relative Montague, and how he as been very secretive and strange and even violent in his behavior recently. They have grave suspicions about what he may have been doing. Then Montague's drowned body is found, and the inquest finds he died a suicide when under unsound mind. Now there is an equally plausible local suspect, and the Yard decides it is now able to begin dismantling the investigation since Druitt (an equally good suspect to Doc is dead). They call Andrews home, and he does not even bother to seek extradition for Monty from the U.S. for the morals charge.

It might seem to fit together.

Hi Jeff,

You have a wealth of information and intriguing connections. Now with Andrews, he went to Canada. When Scotland Yard contacted the New York authorities prior to Tumblety making landfall on Dec 2, 1888, they had already informed them Tumblety was not extraditable for gross indecency. Also, I'm sure Andrews never intended to take Tumblety back, since his mission predated Tumblety's escape.

Sincerely,
Mike

[mklhawley]

Hello mr. Evans
Not sure what I said to deserve this response, I thought it was a fairly innocuous answer to the thread starters original question. That is simply that tumblety does not match any of the witness descriptions. And he does not. He was a very large man and none of the best witnesses describe a large man. Long, marshal, smith, Schwartz, cox none of them describe a big man.

I guess it's possible that none of them saw the ripper (if tumblety was the ripper) or if they did they missed describing the largeness of the man. But I would think that size would be one of the easier things to get right.

And since , as you have so graciously pointed out , you have way more experience than I do with witness descriptions I ask you-is size something that witnesses typically get so wrong?

Keep in mind Abby Normal, Tumblety did fit a specific witness description in November 1888, a lone man in an American slouch hat. I have posted a number of articles demonstrating this. It's what got young Sir Arthur into hot water.

Sincerely,
Mike

[Lechmere]

Mayerling
So in effect the 'Yard' winds the case up based a body that they can never prove was responsible and forget about a living 'prime' suspect and neglect to tell the boys on the ground any of this?

[Abby Normal]

Really? Please do tell exactly what the Ripper looked like, and who the witnesses were that actually saw him.

Have you ever taken a witness statement? I have, hundreds of them, in a police career spanning nearly thirty years. I think I know more about witnesses, and what they say, than you ever will.

Hello mr. Evans
Not sure what I said to deserve this response, I thought it was a fairly innocuous answer to the thread starters original question. That is simply that tumblety does not match any of the witness descriptions. And he does not. He was a very large man and none of the best witnesses describe a large man. Long, marshal, smith, Schwartz, cox none of them describe a big man.

I guess it's possible that none of them saw the ripper (if tumblety was the ripper) or if they did they missed describing the largeness of the man. But I would think that size would be one of the easier things to get right.

And since , as you have so graciously pointed out , you have way more experience than I do with witness descriptions I ask you-is size something that witnesses typically get so wrong?

[Mayerling]

How is this as a plausible scenario (although one hard to prove):

The Yard feels stupid for letting Doc out so easily (a bail on a lesser charge - though the only one they had him on, apparently, that he finds he can pay easily, and then he skips to France and then America). In 1881 the railroad police looked stupidly incompetent when they allowed an opportunity to Percy Lefroy Mapleton to flee through a back door in his house when he was supposed to be returned to Brighton for more rigorous questioning about the railroad murder of Frederick Isaac Gold. It took two weeks or so to recapture Mapleton. The Yard was not doing too well with the Whitechapel Murders Case anyway, but to let a serious suspect escape too easily was just a huge new nightmare.

So they send Andrews to Canada to get further information, supposedly on Tumblety's possible criminal activities there. They also seek to try to connect him to the letters by contacting the police in the U.S. for samples of his hadwriting. They also send Andrews (supposedly more secretly but the news gets out) to New York to get any information on Doc, and possibly to arrest him (for bail jumping most likely). But they stope after a few weeks.
They don't even try to get Tumblety returned for the bail jumping!

In the meantime a family in Dorset has contacted some members at the Yard about their missing relative Montague, and how he as been very secretive and strange and even violent in his behavior recently. They have grave suspicions about what he may have been doing. Then Montague's drowned body is found, and the inquest finds he died a suicide when under unsound mind. Now there is an equally plausible local suspect, and the Yard decides it is now able to begin dismantling the investigation since Druitt (an equally good suspect to Doc is dead). They call Andrews home, and he does not even bother to seek extradition for Monty from the U.S. for the morals charge.

It might seem to fit together.

[Lechmere]

pinkmoon
You don't seem to have addressed what I said.
I don't agree that if all the suspects offered forward were lined up in 1888, then Tumblety would stand out above all others, because Fleming was taller for a start.

[pinkmoon]

I would like to know any of the reasons that you have heard of that suggest he was not the Ripper.

I have only ever heard two reasons, and they are (1) His age and (2) his height.

Does anyone know of any others? Please list them.

I believe it's very likely that Tumblety could have been JTR but I'd like to look at his case from both sides, I know all the reasons in favour of him being guilty and would now like to know what the other reasons against him are besides what I have said above.

Can we honestly take any of the so called sightings of the killer seriously I think the answer is no.Did some one see the killer when he was committing his foul deeds and not come forward quite possibly yes .You have to remember that anybody out and about in that area at that time was probably up to no good themselves .To try and dismiss tumblety purely because of so called eyewitnesses is wrong he is probley the best suspect discoverd in this case so far .I hasten to add that druitt is still my personal favourite purely because of the tales told by my great grandparents who both lived in Whitechapel during the autumn of terror.

[pinkmoon]

[QUOTE=Lechmere;277360]Careful Pinkmoon
According to the Tumblety theorists Andrews didn't go to Canada to arrest Tumblety but to collect information about him.
This supposed information would presumably have been left behind during Tumblety's forays north of the border... as if that would be incriminating anyway, but still.
Also the Canadian authorities paid for the visit as Andrews actually went over there to escort a prisoner back to Canada. Andrews had been involved in this case prior to Tumblety's arrest in London. For Gross Indecency. So Andrews had a legitimate reason to be in Canada.
I think the Tumblety theorists claim that Scotland Yard didn't want to pay out for someone to go to Canada to search for vital information about Tumblety as this would have to be explained so they used Andrews' trip for a dual purpose. The reason they didn't want the expense to show up in the accounts was that they thought they might look foolish in allowing Tumblety to escape. Because you see he was their prime suspect at the time yet they failed to keep him under lock and key but strangely granted him bail (on the Gross Indecency charges) and then didn't keep him under observation so he absconded. The incompetent fools.[/QUOTE
Of all the suspects that have been offerd over the years (and let's face it we have had a few ) were put forward to the police in 1888 the one that would stand out above all would be tumblety.His past history towards women his hobby of collecting human organs his appearing on the scene at the right time his leaving and murders stopping his posing as a doctor come on surely you would want to speak to him.

[Lechmere]

Careful Pinkmoon
According to the Tumblety theorists Andrews didn't go to Canada to arrest Tumblety but to collect information about him.
This supposed information would presumably have been left behind during Tumblety's forays north of the border... as if that would be incriminating anyway, but still.
Also the Canadian authorities paid for the visit as Andrews actually went over there to escort a prisoner back to Canada. Andrews had been involved in this case prior to Tumblety's arrest in London. For Gross Indecency. So Andrews had a legitimate reason to be in Canada.
I think the Tumblety theorists claim that Scotland Yard didn't want to pay out for someone to go to Canada to search for vital information about Tumblety as this would have to be explained so they used Andrews' trip for a dual purpose. The reason they didn't want the expense to show up in the accounts was that they thought they might look foolish in allowing Tumblety to escape. Because you see he was their prime suspect at the time yet they failed to keep him under lock and key but strangely granted him bail (on the Gross Indecency charges) and then didn't keep him under observation so he absconded. The incompetent fools.

[pinkmoon]

There is no way that the police would spend time and money looking for tumblety in America if they were not going to arrest him and bring him back to the UK so they must have thought he was the killer.Also if they are looking for him that must tell us that they didn't have any firm evidence or suspicion on any one in the UK at the time .

[mklhawley]

Very true. Now, combine this with Anderson's request for 'all details' and what he was requesting from Campbell in Brooklyn, and we should get a more complete picture.

Sincerely,

Mike

[curious]

HIS HANDWRITING.
"P. Crowley, Chief of Police, San Francisco, Cal.: Thanks. Send handwriting and all details you can of Tumblety.
Anderson,
"Scotland Yard." [/I]

Sincerely,
Mike

Very interesting is the request for examples of his handwriting . . .

curious