Dr. Anderson Knows Best?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Whilst reading the book ‘Carroty Nell’ by John E. Keefe I was reminded of an incident that I hadn’t thought about for years but which used to bug me no end…to put it mildly. It occurred in the aftermath of Rose Mylett’s death and as it isn’t discussed often I thought that I’d do a brief recap as a memory jogger to save people haven’t to go and read up.

On Thursday 20th December 1888 the body of twenty six year old prostitute Rose Mylett was discovered in Clarke’s Yard, Poplar. As there were no visible signs of injury or assault the police initially suspected that she’d died of natural causes. The police surgeon, Dr. Brownfield, conducted a post mortem and discovered a mark around her neck where a cord had been tightened leading him to conclude that the killer had approached her from behind. There were no mutilations and the location was three miles from Whitechapel so there was no apparent link to the ripper attacks except for the fact that Mylett was a prostitute.

For some reason Robert Anderson wasn’t happy with Brownfield’s conclusion of murder so he asked Dr. Bond to look into the case for him. I don’t know how much time, if any, that Anderson usually spent second guessing Doctor’s post mortem conclusions but anyway, Bond was away at the time so his assistant, Dr. Hebbert, along with police surgeon Dr. McKellar took a look. Bond viewed the body the next day on his return. All three doctors agreed with Dr. Brownfield’s conclusion of murder.

Strangely, Anderson wasn’t at all happy with this so he called the three doctors in for a meeting where he told them that he disagreed with their conclusion. Initially at least the three doctors stood by their verdict but later the same day Bond decided to have another look at the body. He then saw the light and concluded that Mylett’s had indeed fallen and choked herself on her stiff, velvet collar. Accidental death just as Anderson had told them.

To Anderson annoyance two weeks later the Coroner concluded that she had been murdered by person or persons unknown. Angry Anderson then refused to assign a single officer to investigate Mylett’s murder as it would have been a waste of time in his opinion. Try imagining an Assistant Commissioner taking the same attitude today. He was at least consistent and stated this same opinion in his autobiography.

Questions

Why was Anderson so determined that this wasn’t a murder that he resorted to the bizarre theory of accidental death?
Why did this non-medical man feel that he knew better than 4 respected Doctor’s and a Coroner?
Why wouldn’t he investigate a death nominated as a murder by an Inquest?
Is there a precedent for the scenario above?
Why did Bond change his opinion to coincide with Anderson’s?
How could a woman (or anyone) accidentally choke on their own collar?

Answers on a postcard to….

[John Wheat]

I do wonder if Rose Mylett was a Ripper victim.

[Scott Nelson]

Anderson knew Cohen was confined at that time.

[GBinOz]

Whilst reading the book ‘Carroty Nell’ by John E. Keefe I was reminded of an incident that I hadn’t thought about for years but which used to bug me no end…to put it mildly. It occurred in the aftermath of Rose Mylett’s death and as it isn’t discussed often I thought that I’d do a brief recap as a memory jogger to save people haven’t to go and read up.

On Thursday 20th December 1888 the body of twenty six year old prostitute Rose Mylett was discovered in Clarke’s Yard, Poplar. As there were no visible signs of injury or assault the police initially suspected that she’d died of natural causes. The police surgeon, Dr. Brownfield, conducted a post mortem and discovered a mark around her neck where a cord had been tightened leading him to conclude that the killer had approached her from behind. There were no mutilations and the location was three miles from Whitechapel so there was no apparent link to the ripper attacks except for the fact that Mylett was a prostitute.

For some reason Robert Anderson wasn’t happy with Brownfield’s conclusion of murder so he asked Dr. Bond to look into the case for him. I don’t know how much time, if any, that Anderson usually spent second guessing Doctor’s post mortem conclusions but anyway, Bond was away at the time so his assistant, Dr. Hebbert, along with police surgeon Dr. McKellar took a look. Bond viewed the body the next day on his return. All three doctors agreed with Dr. Brownfield’s conclusion of murder.

Strangely, Anderson wasn’t at all happy with this so he called the three doctors in for a meeting where he told them that he disagreed with their conclusion. Initially at least the three doctors stood by their verdict but later the same day Bond decided to have another look at the body. He then saw the light and concluded that Mylett’s had indeed fallen and choked herself on her stiff, velvet collar. Accidental death just as Anderson had told them.

To Anderson annoyance two weeks later the Coroner concluded that she had been murdered by person or persons unknown. Angry Anderson then refused to assign a single officer to investigate Mylett’s murder as it would have been a waste of time in his opinion. Try imagining an Assistant Commissioner taking the same attitude today. He was at least consistent and stated this same opinion in his autobiography.

Questions

Why was Anderson so determined that this wasn’t a murder that he resorted to the bizarre theory of accidental death?
Why did this non-medical man feel that he knew better than 4 respected Doctor’s and a Coroner?
Why wouldn’t he investigate a death nominated as a murder by an Inquest?
Is there a precedent for the scenario above?
Why did Bond change his opinion to coincide with Anderson’s?
How could a woman (or anyone) accidentally choke on their own collar?

Answers on a postcard to….

Hi Herlock,

Postcard of answers:

Q1-Q3 - Anderson was appointed to the job because of his social position rather than his ability.
Q4 - Don't know.
Q5-Q6 - He wanted to appease Anderson.

Mylett was garrotted from behind like Ellen Bury. This took place near where the Bury's lived in Bow. Not a ripper murder, but a possible explanation for Bury fleeing the area.

Cheers, George

[John Wheat]

Hi Herlock,

Postcard of answers:

Q1-Q3 - Anderson was appointed to the job because of his social position rather than his ability.
Q4 - Don't know.
Q5-Q6 - He wanted to appease Anderson.

Mylett was garrotted from behind like Ellen Bury. This took place near where the Bury's lived in Bow. Not a ripper murder, but a possible explanation for Bury fleeing the area.

Cheers, George

How do you know for definite that Mylett wasn't a Ripper victim? And how do you know for definite Bury wasn't the Ripper?

[GBinOz]

How do you know for definite that Mylett wasn't a Ripper victim? And how do you know for definite Bury wasn't the Ripper?

Hi John,

Nothing is definite, it's all conjecture, but there was no signature cut throat.

There is no evidence that Bury killed anyone but his wife. If he was the ripper and killed Kelly, despite his self proclaimed "squeamishness", why the gap until he scurried off to Dundee?

Cheers, George

[John Wheat]

Hi John,

Nothing is definite, it's all conjecture, but there was no signature cut throat.

There is no evidence that Bury killed anyone but his wife. If he was the ripper and killed Kelly, despite his self proclaimed "squeamishness", why the gap until he scurried off to Dundee?

Cheers, George

There wasn't much of a gap until Bury scurried off to Dundee.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock,

Postcard of answers:

Q1-Q3 - Anderson was appointed to the job because of his social position rather than his ability.
Q4 - Don't know.
Q5-Q6 - He wanted to appease Anderson.

Mylett was garrotted from behind like Ellen Bury. This took place near where the Bury's lived in Bow. Not a ripper murder, but a possible explanation for Bury fleeing the area.

Cheers, George

Hello George,

I think that this is one of those situations when no answer is particularly convincing. We have the second most senior police officer commenting with total confidence on a body that he hadn’t seen. The strange thing is that if Anderson was keen to let the public know that the murders were over (as in Scott’s suggestion…because the culprit was under lock and key) he would surely have had little problem convincing anyone that this wasn’t a ripper murder. No throat-cutting, no mutilation, no raised skirts and the crime scene was three miles from Whitechapel. I can’t see why he appears so desperate that he goes to such lengths.

And what could he have said to a man of Bond’s knowledge and experience to change his opinion (which he’d given twice) so that he would support the most unbelievable of explanations for a death. This one was only marginally more believable than if it had been stated that Liz Stride was about to peel an apple, slipped in the mud and accidentally cut her own throat!

If there’s ever anyone commenting on Bond’s integrity then I’d suggest the word ‘Mylett’ should be quoted. He (and Anderson) don’t emerge from this episode smelling of roses. You’d have to have sympathy for Rose Mylett’s family (I can’t recall what family she had but there’s a biography thread on here I believe) that no one ever investigated her murder so no one was ever brought to justice.

[Herlock Sholmes]

A very quick glance at the biography thread and some excellent work by Debra Arif, Rob Clack and Chris Scott tells me that Rose had a daughter called Florence. I’m unsure whether any other family alive. In some ways she may even be the saddest of the wider victims. No one even bothered looking for her killer.

[The Rookie Detective]

And of course, the chronology of the murders doesn't work in Mylett's favour as a potential Ripper victim; had she have been murdered prior to MJK, then she would have been considered more likely the victim of the Ripper.

The same applies to McKenzie and Coles.

The idea that MJK had to have been the final victim, is something that has stuck over time and still causes the same issues today as it did back then.

The construct of the "Canonical 5" was nothing more than 1 man's opinion, and those who didn't make the cut then fell out of credible contention.

But that aside...

The key reasons why a senior police officer like Anderson would persuade a man like Bond to go against the idea that Mylett was a murder victim could include...


The police KNEW who the killer was, but chose not to tell the public.

The police THOUGHT they knew who the killer was.

The authorities wanted to try a different tactic and completely cut and stop the publicity of the Ripper by disregarding any murders AFTER MJK; perhaps in a reverse psychological bid to tempt the killer out of the woodwork.

The killer was a policeman.


The truth lies therein somewhere.