Proof of Tumblety's Misogyny

[mklhawley]

"Tumblety did not avoid women at all cost"

...and what does that have to do with anything? It's quite obvious that if Tumblety was going to be successful at his Indian Herb Doctor business, he was going to have to deal with women. You've ignored the intention of the author of this statement. Tumblety had an unusual hatred of women.

[Fisherman]

Fisherman, you're using a fallacy, as well! Young earth creationists use the 'it's either this or it's that' ploy. There's a dozen ways of doing it. Actually as suspects go, I like Lechmere, but I also like Druitt and Le Grand. I just don't like alterior motives. But, this thread should be about Tumblety and Misogyny. I've given volumes of separate and distinct corroborating pieces of evidence that when Littlechild described Tumblety's feelings towards women, 'remarkable and bitter', it meant his hatred not his homosexuality. If you honestly believe he meant homosexual, then you think Littlechild meant, "Tumblety was not only gay, he was really, really gay." That makes no sense.

I have not entered the particular debate you speak of. I merely pointed out that there were two sentences on the thread that could not both be correct. And then I found out that this was so. Tumblety did not avoid women at all cost.

The two (yes, two) choices I spoke of were either you tell me what makes Charles Lechmere a non-starter or you don´t. There will not be a dozen answers to that particular equation.

Not that I´m holding my breath. Fallacy, was it?

Fisherman

[mklhawley]

So there´s two ways of doing it. The choice is yours.

Fisherman, you're using a fallacy, as well! Young earth creationists use the 'it's either this or it's that' ploy. There's a dozen ways of doing it. Actually as suspects go, I like Lechmere, but I also like Druitt and Le Grand. I just don't like alterior motives. But, this thread should be about Tumblety and Misogyny. I've given volumes of separate and distinct corroborating pieces of evidence that when Littlechild described Tumblety's feelings towards women, 'remarkable and bitter', it meant his hatred not his homosexuality. If you honestly believe he meant homosexual, then you think Littlechild meant, "Tumblety was not only gay, he was really, really gay." That makes no sense.

[Fisherman]

Fisherman! I wondered why you jumped into this conversation so quickly once I figured out what...Ed was doing. You're a crony of his.

Now, if it's true that Lechmere is Ed Stow, this is entirely different than my bias against his. He has a vindictive agenda against someone. So, why would Ed want to even research Tumblety when everyone in the world knows his baby is Mr. Cross? I actually realized 'Lechmere' was trolling on the first thread he invaded because of how he treated overwhelming evidence that Tumblety could not have been the source for the US articles, he kept it up.

Then! Ed attempted to sabotage Siobhan's brilliant find. Lastly, I've given volumes of corroborating evidence to show Tumblety was a woman hater and he resorts to rhetoric, supported by his cronies.

Now, it looks like Ed is trying to avoid my discovery of his vindictive agenda. Fisherman, you're certainly fighting for him and you were certainly reading this thread with your immediate response. Hmmmm.

If you can find no other way out of this than to mumble about my being "a crony" and speak of bias and vindictiveness, then that is your choice.
I was rather hoping that I would be entitled to a view of my own, just as I was hoping that you would produce some sort of substantiation for your statement that Charles Lechmre is a non-starter for the Ripper´s role.

So there´s two ways of doing it. The choice is yours.

The best,
Fisherman

[mklhawley]

Ed, I have absolutely no issues with you promoting Lechmere, or anyone promoting a suspect, AND scrutinizing others, as long as discovery of truth is the goal. I gave you clear evidence and all you've done is use fallacy after fallacy. It resonated with me because of my expertise in the evolution/creation controversy, so I wrote a book about it. Sure, I understand confirmation bias, where anyone, even scientists, emphasize some evidence and subconsciously de-emphasize contrary evidence, but a vindictive agenda is entirely different.

[Lechmere]

Mike
There is no secret who I am.
My dastardly agenda is to discuss the pros and cons of various suspects. I find it intetesting. I like to see if other suspects can stand up to searching questions.
When I discuss my favoured suspect I don't care what other theory a critic may have. I answer their points with respect to my suspect.
I have also engaged in the rough and tumble of debate over Hutchinson, Fleming, Kosminski, Druitt, Le Grand and even Maybrick so don't run away with the idea I am persecuting you.
I discuss the Tumblety theory critically and will continue to do so even if it makes you uncomfortable to the extent that you have to resort to rudeness and personal insults rather than engage in good natured debate.
I appreciate that when you are an enthusiast and put a lot of work
into a particular field it can be unsettling for your work to he subjected to rigorous criticism rather than just getting pats on the back.
But that's life I'm afraid.
If you have confidence in your theory then engage in debate and answer the points raised rather than resorting to personal remarks.
Falling back on the tired line that a critic is biased or should be debarred from commenting because he or she has their own theory is the last resort of the failure.
Be bigger than that.

[Brenda]

.

You can be polite to people even if you have personal disdain for them. I would imagine it would be in Tumblety's best interests to have been on his best behavior with his landlady, for obvious reasons.

I notice that the ladies listed in his will, with the exception of one, are his relations. I am throwing this theory out there....perhaps Tumblety was okay with the women that he felt no sexual pressure (real or perceived) from.

[mklhawley]

Fisherman! I wondered why you jumped into this conversation so quickly once I figured out what...Ed was doing. You're a crony of his.

Now, if it's true that Lechmere is Ed Stow, this is entirely different than my bias against his. He has a vindictive agenda against someone. So, why would Ed want to even research Tumblety when everyone in the world knows his baby is Mr. Cross? I actually realized 'Lechmere' was trolling on the first thread he invaded because of how he treated overwhelming evidence that Tumblety could not have been the source for the US articles, he kept it up.

Then! Ed attempted to sabotage Siobhan's brilliant find. Lastly, I've given volumes of corroborating evidence to show Tumblety was a woman hater and he resorts to rhetoric, supported by his cronies.

Now, it looks like Ed is trying to avoid my discovery of his vindictive agenda. Fisherman, you're certainly fighting for him and you were certainly reading this thread with your immediate response. Hmmmm.

[Lechmere]

From The Daily Picayune - New Orleans, Monday 10th December 10 1888
NEW YORK, 4th December 1888
We have in our midst once more here in New York that unique personage known as Dr. Tumblety. The man is not a criminal in the ordinary sense, but the suspicion that he is one in some extraordinary sense makes him interesting. He is big, tall and brawny. His heavy moustache exudes black hair dye. He is on the sunny side of 60 and by no means unprepossessing. "Bless you," says Mrs. McNamara, "he wouldn't hurt a fly. He is a perfect gentleman and he always pays me punctual."
Mrs. McNamara keeps a boarding-house at No. 79 East Tenth street and she is a landlady of irrefragable respectability and irreproachable veracity. Tumblety has boarded with her off and on for years. That is why it came to be known he was in town again.

[Lechmere]

Will 2
Mr. Joseph R. Kemp was in possession of a will that Tumblety was said to have written in Baltimore on Oct 3, 1901. In it, he left all of his jewelry and $1,000 to the Home for Fallen Women. This will was later disregarded by the Probate Court.

[Lechmere]

Will 1 - note the number of female beneficiaries:

* $10,000 to his sister Mrs. Jane Hayes of Vallejo, California.
* $10,000 to his niece Mrs. Thomas Brady of Liverpool, England.
* $10,000 to Mrs. Mary Fitzsimmons of Plymouth Avenue, Rochester.
* $10,000 to Cardinal Gibbons of Baltimore.
* $10,000 to John Ireland, Archbishop of St. Paul, Minnesota.
* $5,000 to his niece Mrs. Barrett of Gibbs Street, Rochester.
* $5,000 to his niece Mrs. Jane Moore of Gibbs Street, Rochester.
* $5,000 to his former coachman Mark A. Blackburn.

[Lechmere]

The Wheeling Register (West Virginia) 8th December 1888
THE WHITECHAPEL FIEND
Is Not Dr. Twomblety - The Story Told by the Doctor's Friend
NEW YORK, December 7. - The Star publishes a lady's story as to the past life of Dr. Twomblety who is suspected of the Whitechapel murders. She is a friend of the Doctor's and says she knows of his whereabouts. She maintained that the Doctor had committed no crime, and it was preposterous to hound him simply because he was suspected of being implicated in the Whitechapel murders.
According to her story the Doctor was living quietly in Charing Cross, doing quite an excellent business with his "pimple eradicator." He was known to be an odd genius, and appeared on the streets clad in old-style garments that characterized him during his stay in this city. When the English detectives had been baffled on every hand, and could not find any one in answer the description of "Jack the Ripper," they finally swooped down on quack surgeons and cranks in every walk of life. It was in one of these general hauls that Dr. Twomblety was arrested, but he was not held by the authorities, for he easily proved that he was not a surgeon. His arrest and the unenviable fame occasioned thereby forced the Doctor to leave the country.

[Lechmere]

I was wondering what my hidden agenda was - now I know!
I guess I gave it away with my name - oops.
You need to be a latter day Sherlock Holmes to find me out and locate press coverage from my biased yet well receieved theory.
Anyway back to Tumblety - can his proponents make a case that he was a misogynist? Seems not!

[Fisherman]

Lechmere, sounds like you're upset that I discovered your hidden agenda. It's not my fault that Lechmere is a nonstarter as a suspect, except of course for you and Fisherman.

Once again you are wawering. Either Lechmere IS a non-starter or he is not. Both can´t be true, you see.

It is a pretty parallel to the two sentences I chose earlier, therefore. And just like that time, it still lies on the ones who say things like these to put them beyond reproach.

Putting it otherwise, it lies on you to prove your point that Charles Lechmere is a non-starter as a Ripper suspect.

As for the other issue, it was easy enough to find that Tumblety´s landlady, Mrs McNamara, was quoted in the papers as saying that Tumblety was a perfect gentleman. That tells us that the sentence involving the claim that Tumblety would not associate with women at all since he hated them all, was a false sentence. Tumblety did associate with women, and seemingly in a charitable manner too.

So that score is settled by now, implications included.

The next score is the one about Lechmere being a non-starter. I put it to you that you need to produce proof for that claim, preferably on one of the Lechmere threads. Once you´ve done that, we´ll all know why a man found alone by the freshly killed victim of a woman, a man that seemingly lied his way past the police, a man that did not give his true name to the police, a man whose working trail seemingly took him past or close to the murder sites at the relevant murder hours in five cases and a man who had close connections and good reasons to visit the area where the reamining two victims of 1888 were killed, would be a non-starter.

Not that the discussion on this thread has anything at all to do about Lechmere, but it would seem that having Tumblety scrutinized and criticized as a candidate has produced an urge for you to claim that our candidate is not better. It´s a type of reaction that is not uncommon, but the problem connected to it this time is that you are very wrong. Point by point, Lechmere is a far better candidate than Tumblety, provided that we can free ourselves of the misconception that the 1888 police was always right to suspect various people of being the Ripper.
So if Lechmere is a "non-starter", I fail to see what that makes Tumblety.

The other way of doing this is to live and let live. Tumblety was a police suspect. It is reasonable to suggest that there was something in his background and/or actions that sparked the interest on Littlechild´s behalf. Once we accept that we have no specific evidence whatsoever of any involvment in the Whitechapel killings on Tumblety´s behalf, it is therefore still fair enough to keep him under surveillance and dig up as much as we can about him.
That, however, cannot be done with credibility by somebody who takes it upon him to call a suspect like Lechmere a non-starter as long as this claim is not built under by some sort of robust confirmation. Especially not if that somebody has made it his business to shout "bias!" in every other post. If no confirmation can be produced that Charles Lechmere is a non-starter, then a huge bias against his candidature is all that has been produced.

So which is it?

Is it "Ha-ha, people have not accepted that Lechmere was the killer, stupid, stupid you!"

Or can you substantiate what you are saying? On another thread of your choice, please. Then we can use this one to analyze what relationship Tumblety had to women - in an unbiased manner, hopefully.

All the best,
Fisherman

[mklhawley]

Ah ha! Cogidubus called you Ed on the other thread! Now it really makes sense.

Mike