Cracking The Calendar Code

[Chris]

Its not irrelevant because he says that bail was not normally granted on misdemeanors until after committal.

"The generally received impression appears to be that the right of bail in misdemeanor does not arise until committal for trial.” now he was in a position circa 1907 to have more knowledge about this than we do 126 years later.

If you still don't understand what this means after all the explanations, you're never going to understand it.

I'm not going to respond to you further, because it's obviously a complete waste of time.

[shaun1956]

Well if you want to be politically correct

"The generally received impression appears to be that the right of bail in misdemeanor does not arise until committal for trial.”

what you have not mentioned which surprises me as an ex cop is status in society, you were far more likely as is the case now to get bail were you in the upper echilons of society as was Tumbletee than a sewage worker from poplar come on trev you should know better not every copper was as honest as you!

[GUT]

But if he alreday had sureties in place there would have been no need to lock him up after committal, The sureties would have to have attended on Nov 14th they would already have been checked out.

The question of upping the bail based on this is another smokescreen. One simple question to the sureties on the day "Are you able to accommodate an increase"? but of course we have no evidence to support that do we other than conjecture. Another ploy to suggest he was bailed before committal

And if they said "No" or "Yes but we aren't willing to risk that much" What then I wonder.

Like your ploy the Prosecutor would have said he was a flight risk or a string of other things, but no evidence by you that it was said

[John G]

Trevor this must be at least the 1000th time, but it seems to be a waste of time, Newspapers are PRIMARY sources, always are.

I would have to respectfully disagree. Primary sources are where the information originates from, such as official court records. Publications that cite or comment on the primary source are secondary sources.

[GUT]

I would have to respectfully disagree. Primary sources are where the information originates from, such as official court records. Publications that cite or comment on the primary source are secondary sources.

With all due respect John this has been done to death Historically a newspaper is a Primary Source, open and shut case. In Legal terms there is no such thing as a primary or secondary source one may be more reliable than another but the distinction Primary and Secondary is a purely historical differentiation.

[PaulB]

and how do you explain the two or three days ? surely he would have known whether it was two or three? Perhaps he was happy to go with the flow that he was looked on as a suspect, I have no doubt someone like him would have thrived on this kind of false notoriety

I suggest we forget about paper talk and stick to the known facts they are more accurate

Mmmmm. A lot of squirming going on here, Trevor. Let's see, let's suppose - just suppose - that Tumblety was held for the afternoon and night of day one, the whole of day two, and the morning of day three. Is that two or three days?

I am inclined to agree with you that Tumblety relished being looked on as a Ripper suspect, but he vehementy denied that he was and in the context of that newspaper interview it would have benefited him to point out that he was in custody on the 9th.

As for sticking to the facts, there's you saying one thing and David, along with pretty much everyone else on this thread, saying something else. Which one is stating the facts?

[PaulB]

With all due respect John this has been done to death Historically a newspaper is a Primary Source, open and shut case. In Legal terms there is no such thing as a primary or secondary source one may be more reliable than another but the distinction Primary and Secondary is a purely historical differentiation.

Hi GUT
Pretty much spot on.

Sorry John, but GUT is correct. There are lots of definitions of primary and secondary sources on the internet, unfortunately pretty much all of them are written for high school students and they don't go too far into discussing problemtic sources like newspapers which can be both primary and secondary. A very broad rule of thumb is that a primary source is a news story like an account of the murder of Mary Kelly or something like the interview with Tumblety, and accuracy plays no part in deciding whether it is primary or secondary. A secondary source might be an editorial, the author having analysed the material he is using and venturing an opinion. However, the opinion would be contemporary and could make it a primary source.

I have a feeling I haven't described it very well, but it'll have to do....

[GUT]

Hi GUT
Pretty much spot on.

Sorry John, but GUT is correct. There are lots of definitions of primary and secondary sources on the internet, unfortunately pretty much all of them are written for high school students and they don't go too far into discussing problemtic sources like newspapers which can be both primary and secondary. A very broad rule of thumb is that a primary source is a news story like an account of the murder of Mary Kelly or something like the interview with Tumblety, and accuracy plays no part in deciding whether it is primary or secondary. A secondary source might be an editorial, the author having analysed the material he is using and venturing an opinion. However, the opinion would be contemporary and could make it a primary source.

I have a feeling I haven't described it very well, but it'll have to do....

No explained well Paul.

I admit I at times have and perhaps do struggle, but I'm lucky my wife is a historian, has in the past been a lecturer in history on eof her best friends is a professor in history, you have got t pretty much spot on, of course a newspaper article written today on the Ripper Murders is a secondary source.

And as I said earlier at law there is no such thing, there the question is reliability and or the weight to be given to a piece of evidence if it passes the admissibility test.

[Batman]

and how do you explain the two or three days ? surely he would have known whether it was two or three? Perhaps he was happy to go with the flow that he was looked on as a suspect, I have no doubt someone like him would have thrived on this kind of false notoriety

Trevor, this can't be Tumblety you are describing, but someone completely different. Tumblety published a small book to refute any accusations after poor/criminal character when he was accused of such in the Lincoln assassination. It is called "The Kidnapping of Dr. Tumblety". It's a terrible book written by an ego-manic, full of lies, pumped up to make him look like a respectable public figure who would never engage in crime. Someone like him publicly would never go with the flow or thrive in public on false notoriety. False exaltations, false reputability, false excellence, sure, but the spotlight you claim he would enjoy, is in fact the one he firmly rejects. You couldn't have picked a suspect more adverse to it as this one even decided to publish on the matter.

Sorry Trevor, the stars don't aline for you on this topic. Besides it doesn't mean Tumblety IS JtR, just we can dispense with the myth of him being in prison for MJKs murder.

[John G]

Hi GUT
Pretty much spot on.

Sorry John, but GUT is correct. There are lots of definitions of primary and secondary sources on the internet, unfortunately pretty much all of them are written for high school students and they don't go too far into discussing problemtic sources like newspapers which can be both primary and secondary. A very broad rule of thumb is that a primary source is a news story like an account of the murder of Mary Kelly or something like the interview with Tumblety, and accuracy plays no part in deciding whether it is primary or secondary. A secondary source might be an editorial, the author having analysed the material he is using and venturing an opinion. However, the opinion would be contemporary and could make it a primary source.

I have a feeling I haven't described it very well, but it'll have to do....

Hi Paul,

Thanks for the reply. I must admit that I was trying to recall what was said about primary and secondary sources during those Halcyon days when I was studying law at university. However, I must concede that that was a few years ago now and I seem to recall that even then I found the concept somewhat confusing!

I would definitely agree that a newspaper interview by a journalist for a newspaper would qualify as a primary source, but if, say, another newspaper were to comment on, or cite, the same interview then that would be a secondary source!

[GUT]

Trevor, this can't be Tumblety you are describing, but someone completely different. Tumblety published a small book to refute any accusations after poor/criminal character when he was accused of such in the Lincoln assassination. It is called "The Kidnapping of Dr. Tumblety". It's a terrible book written by an ego-manic, full of lies, pumped up to make him look like a respectable public figure who would never engage in crime. Someone like him publicly would never go with the flow or thrive in public on false notoriety. False exaltations, false reputability, false excellence, sure, but the spotlight you claim he would enjoy, is in fact the one he firmly rejects. You couldn't have picked a suspect more adverse to it as this one even decided to publish on the matter.

Sorry Trevor, the stars don't aline for you on this topic. Besides it doesn't mean Tumblety IS JtR, just we can dispense with the myth of him being in prison for MJKs murder.

G'day Batman

I don't always agree with you. But on that bit we are total accord, there is no proof he was in gaol 9 Nov, he may have been, but it is far from certain, but even if he wasn't there would need to be a lot more to prove he was Jacky Boy.

[Trevor Marriott]

what you have not mentioned which surprises me as an ex cop is status in society, you were far more likely as is the case now to get bail were you in the upper echilons of society as was Tumbletee than a sewage worker from poplar come on trev you should know better not every copper was as honest as you!

But he is more likely to abscond and had the resources to do so more than a sewage worker, where is a sewage worker going to gom down the pan?

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor, this can't be Tumblety you are describing, but someone completely different. Tumblety published a small book to refute any accusations after poor/criminal character when he was accused of such in the Lincoln assassination. It is called "The Kidnapping of Dr. Tumblety". It's a terrible book written by an ego-manic, full of lies, pumped up to make him look like a respectable public figure who would never engage in crime. Someone like him publicly would never go with the flow or thrive in public on false notoriety. False exaltations, false reputability, false excellence, sure, but the spotlight you claim he would enjoy, is in fact the one he firmly rejects. You couldn't have picked a suspect more adverse to it as this one even decided to publish on the matter.

Sorry Trevor, the stars don't aline for you on this topic. Besides it doesn't mean Tumblety IS JtR, just we can dispense with the myth of him being in prison for MJKs murder.

You can, but I am sure there are others like me that dont accept that

[Trevor Marriott]

Mmmmm. A lot of squirming going on here, Trevor. Let's see, let's suppose - just suppose - that Tumblety was held for the afternoon and night of day one, the whole of day two, and the morning of day three. Is that two or three days?

I am inclined to agree with you that Tumblety relished being looked on as a Ripper suspect, but he vehementy denied that he was and in the context of that newspaper interview it would have benefited him to point out that he was in custody on the 9th.

As for sticking to the facts, there's you saying one thing and David, along with pretty much everyone else on this thread, saying something else. Which one is stating the facts?

Paul
I am certainly not squirming, I am fully focused with regards to how I have set my stall out with regards to Tumblety being is prison the night MK was killed. It is others who seem to be squirming trying to come up with nothing more than conjecture on how he could have been out.

You are a very astute man perhaps you would care to answer the question I have asked several posters on here but none seem to want to answer it and I wonder why? because it is a an important question

That question is "If the magistrates had a discretion on the granting of bail before committal, what would the factors be whereby they didn't grant bail" ?

[PaulB]

Hi Paul,

Thanks for the reply. I must admit that I was trying to recall what was said about primary and secondary sources during those Halcyon days when I was studying law at university. However, I must concede that that was a few years ago now and I seem to recall that even then I found the concept somewhat confusing!

I would definitely agree that a newspaper interview by a journalist for a newspaper would qualify as a primary source, but if, say, another newspaper were to comment on, or cite, the same interview then that would be a secondary source!

It kind of depends on the context in which the comment or citation was made and on the context in which the historian is using it. But we're going off topic!
Paul