Did a police officer see a ripper suspect, right after the 2nd of the double murders?

[Richard Patterson]

Why?

Monty

Possibly he was outside his jurisdiction and did want to have his cover blown or have the Fenian/anarchist knowing details of the secret surveillance.

[Monty]

Possibly he was outside his jurisdiction and did want to have his cover blown or have the Fenian/anarchist knowing details of the secret surveillance.

We are talking about Stephen White yes?

Monty

[lynn cates]

cul-de-sac

Hello Richard.

"Let’s have another look at Mitre Square. As I have already explained, it would have been a cul-de-sac for anyone trying to escape if we place White’s men there. Both the East and West entrances were patrolled by police."

Mitre was NO cul-de-sac--but Dutfield's yard might qualify.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Special Branch

Hello (again) Richard.

"Possibly he was outside his jurisdiction and did want to have his cover blown or have the Fenian/anarchist knowing details of the secret surveillance."

Why would a beat copper do this? Both groups were under surveillance, but surely Special Branch would have been the logical choice?

Cheers.
LC

[Richard Patterson]

Hello Richard.

"Let’s have another look at Mitre Square. As I have already explained, it would have been a cul-de-sac for anyone trying to escape if we place White’s men there. Both the East and West entrances were patrolled by police."

Mitre was NO cul-de-sac--but Dutfield's yard might qualify.

Cheers.
LC

As I have said in post #16, on this thread.

'It could have well been Dutfield’s Yard. This would not lesson the likelihood that White spoke with Francis Thompson.'

[Richard Patterson]

We are talking about Stephen White yes?

Monty

If it is correct that the article the People's Journal, 26th September 1919, attributes the sighting of the Ripper to be by Stephen White. The jurisdiction may have been within White's domain, but I doubt he, or those commanding him, would have risked his fellow operatives and the secrecy of an ongoing surveillance, by having him appear at the inquests of the Ripper's victims.

[Monty]

If it is correct that the article the People's Journal, 26th September 1919, attributes the sighting of the Ripper to be by Stephen White. The jurisdiction may have been within White's domain, but I doubt he, or those commanding him, would have risked his fellow operatives and the secrecy of an ongoing surveillance, by having him appear at the inquests of the Ripper's victims.

Mitre Square is not within Whites domain. Any surveillance operation on Mitre Square would have been conducted by City detectives unless a specific request was made by the Met for their own men.

If the latter was in effect, then Watkins and Harvey would have been briefed, otherwise there would have been a risk of compromise. Any minor criminal activity may have been overlooked, however a serious crime such as murder, would have been acted upon, be it at the time or subsequent reporting. This event, if, true, would have required a Special Report, and included in the City file, and subsequent further summary reports. It is not mentioned.

Surveillance of Fenian activity would predominantly be taken by Special Branch or, if required, CID from Central Office Executive Branch, not local CID men such as White, as such criminals were usually recognised by the former, due to long periods of specialist work undertaken by SB and the EO.

The White story is suspect, and may be a confusion of second hand information.

Monty

[Richard Patterson]

Mitre Square is not within Whites domain. Any surveillance operation on Mitre Square would have been conducted by City detectives unless a specific request was made by the Met for their own men.

If the latter was in effect, then Watkins and Harvey would have been briefed, otherwise there would have been a risk of compromise. Any minor criminal activity may have been overlooked, however a serious crime such as murder, would have been acted upon, be it at the time or subsequent reporting. This event, if, true, would have required a Special Report, and included in the City file, and subsequent further summary reports. It is not mentioned.

Surveillance of Fenian activity would predominantly be taken by Special Branch or, if required, CID from Central Office Executive Branch, not local CID men such as White, as such criminals were usually recognised by the former, due to long periods of specialist work undertaken by SB and the EO.

The White story is suspect, and may be a confusion of second hand information.

Monty

Thanks for the clarification. I agree that the White story is suspect. Only, seeing a man walk past is not a serious crime. Perhaps, despite the detective feeling that the man was the murderer after the fact, this was not enough to warrant action. He did not after all see the man commit the murder or with the victim.

[Richard Patterson]

Good morning Richard,

What is your source material please for you stating in your articles and posts that Francis Thompson was in the East End, near Whitechapel, the docklands or Limehouse?

I ask because I find Thompson an interesting person and having now read three (3) biographies of him, Thomson 1912, Meynell 1913 and Shaw 1967, there's nothing in those books about the East End. The places mentioned in relation to Francis Thompson are all in another part of London.

Roy

Many years ago, while researching my “Paradox 2000”, non-fiction book on the Catholic poet, Thompson, as a Jack the Ripper, I referenced, “Strange Harp, Strange Symphony The Life of Francis Thompson”. This is a 1967 biography written by John Walsh. I recently purchased this book and was re-reading it when I found in, Chapter 3, page 50, Walsh had written on where Thompson was living, during his time of vagrancy until the end of 1888. Walsh states,

‘When neither food nor bed was available, he would, along with the other derelicts, often gravitate to one of the recently established Salvation Army shelters, or the Catholic Refuge in Providence Row. It was the later place that Thompson supplied, evidently from his own experience, a harrowing picture’

Walsh then quoted Thompson’s description of the Providence Row shelter. Thompson spoke of the “nightly crowd of haggard men,” who with, “sickening suspense and fear” waited to be admitted. Thompson’s account of his experiences in the Providence Row shelter was to be included in an essay, but before it was published, his editor removed all references to this shelter.

The first Salvation Army shelter to be opened was in 1888 at 21 West India Dock Road in Limehouse, soon after this, another Salvation shelter opened up on; 272 Whitechapel Road, Whitechapel. Much more important, in placing Thompson in Whitechapel during the time of the murders, is that Walsh specifies the Providence Row refuge. This homeless shelter for Catholics was opposite the western end of Dorset Street at 50 Crispin Street. It operated from this location from 1868, and today is still standing. That Thompson regularly sought this shelter is is proof that he was not just in the East End, during the murders, but living in Whitechapel, in the heartland of the Jack the Ripper murders.

[Trevor Marriott]

Many years ago, while researching my “Paradox 2000”, non-fiction book on the Catholic poet, Thompson, as a Jack the Ripper, I referenced, “Strange Harp, Strange Symphony The Life of Francis Thompson”. This is a 1967 biography written by John Walsh. I recently purchased this book and was re-reading it when I found in, Chapter 3, page 50, Walsh had written on where Thompson was living, during his time of vagrancy until the end of 1888. Walsh states,

‘When neither food nor bed was available, he would, along with the other derelicts, often gravitate to one of the recently established Salvation Army shelters, or the Catholic Refuge in Providence Row. It was the later place that Thompson supplied, evidently from his own experience, a harrowing picture’

Walsh then quoted Thompson’s description of the Providence Row shelter. Thompson spoke of the “nightly crowd of haggard men,” who with, “sickening suspense and fear” waited to be admitted. Thompson’s account of his experiences in the Providence Row shelter was to be included in an essay, but before it was published, his editor removed all references to this shelter.

The first Salvation Army shelter to be opened was in 1888 at 21 West India Dock Road in Limehouse, soon after this, another Salvation shelter opened up on; 272 Whitechapel Road, Whitechapel. Much more important, in placing Thompson in Whitechapel during the time of the murders, is that Walsh specifies the Providence Row refuge. This homeless shelter for Catholics was opposite the western end of Dorset Street at 50 Crispin Street. It operated from this location from 1868, and today is still standing. That Thompson regularly sought this shelter is is proof that he was not just in the East End, during the murders, but living in Whitechapel, in the heartland of the Jack the Ripper murders.

Along with thousands of other men !

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Richard Patterson]

Along with thousands of other men !

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

And how many men there were carrying a dissecting scalpel, had trained as a surgeon, had written about disemboweling women,

'And its paunch [stomach] was rent
Like a brasted [bursting] drum;
And the blubbered fat
From its belly doth come
It was a stream ran bloodily'

and were seeking out a prostitute/lover who had fled them after a massive argument?

[Trevor Marriott]

And how many men there were carrying a dissecting scalpel, had trained as a surgeon, had written about disemboweling women,

'And its paunch [stomach] was rent
Like a brasted [bursting] drum;
And the blubbered fat
From its belly doth come
It was a stream ran bloodily'

and were seeking out a prostitute/lover who had fled them after a massive argument?

But a dissecting scalpel was not used to inflict the injuries, a knife with a blade of at least 6 inches was suggested.

How many people write books about murder but never commit one ?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Richard Patterson]

But a dissecting scalpel was not used to inflict the injuries, a knife with a blade of at least 6 inches was suggested.

How many people write books about murder but never commit one ?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Because Thompson carried a dissecting scalpel, instead of a knife, I would be surprised if we should dismiss him as a likely if not prime suspect. You ask me how many people write books about murder but never commit one? I ask how many strictly non-fiction writers, like Thompson, who write that they’ve killed women, haven’t?

I suspect that you are playing devil’s advocate by indicating that you reject Thompson as likely suspect? I understand that you were once were detective on a murder squad and were in the CID. Your good book “Jack the Ripper – The Secret Police Files” states that a likely suspect might be someone, reported by the manger of a lodging-house, who is loner who is secretive and is out late at night and who carries a parcel. You could have been describing Thompson. He was a secretive loner, who told that he walked the streets late at night. When he did, he would go out carrying his dissecting scalpel, from his hospital days. Thompson said he was seeking out his prostitute friend who disappeared immediately after an argument with him.

Your well-researched book, says that a prime suspect would live in Whitechapel, fit a description of the offender, and carry a knife. He would have had convictions for assaults on women and associated with prostitutes. Thompson fits the description given by George Hutchinson, the last person to see Mary Kelly. Both Francis Thompson and Hutchinson’s man carried a parcel with a strap around it; were near the same height, were pale, had very dark hair, had a moustache, wore a dark coat and sported chains. Thompson lived in Whitechapel.

As to assaults on women, how many after committing one, write books about it? Thompson sure wrote a short “story”. Funnily, for a prodigious writer, the only one he ever wrote. I know people would immediately think, its just a story so what, but Thompson a devout Catholic, would have told you it was his confession. He would have known the full meaning of that word.

Thompson publisher, who first released Thompson’s works in a Catholic literary journal. In a private letter, written to his publisher, just after completing his story, Thompson told him how his writing was never fiction. In mid-November of 1888, he was placed in a country monastery. From there, in January 1890, he confided,

‘I am painfully conscious that they display me, in every respect, at my morally weakest...often verse written as I write it is nothing less than a confessional, a confessional far more intimate than the sacerdotal one. That touches only your sins.’

Thompson short ‘story’ (if we are gullible enough to call it that) was about a man who sacrifices a woman, by stabbing her to death with a knife.

His ‘story’ was written in the autumn of 1889. He wrote it in his small room, situated on the top floor of the walled in, attack dog patrolled, isolated monastery. Called “The End Crowining Work” and written by, an ex-Catholic seminary, Thompson story goes something like this,

‘If confession indeed give ease, I who am deprived of all other confession, may yet find some appeasement in confessing to this paper. With the scourge of inexorable recollection, I will tear open my scars. With the cuts of pitiless analysis, I make the post-mortem examine of my crime.’

My suspect then wrote how he killed her,

‘At that moment, with a deadly voice the accomplice-hour gave forth its sinister command. I swear I struck not the first blow. Some violence seized my hand and drove the poniard down. Whereat she cried; and I, frenzied, dreading detection, dreading above all her awakening, - I struck again and again.’

He told of his lack of remorse a year later.

• ‘I know you and myself. I have what I have. I work for the present. Now, relief unspeakable! that vindictive sleuth-hound of my sin has at last lagged from the trail; I have had a year of respite,’.. What crime can be interred so cunningly, but it will toss in its grave, and tumble the sleeked earth above it?... Nothing happened; absolutely nothing.... I do not repent, it is a thing for inconsequent weaklings...’

I find it hard that any professional investigator would not bother questioning this man, just because we only knew he wrote about harming women. Given everything I’ve said comes from reliable and respected sources, what good officer would do any less then investigate Thompson? Considering that sensible, reasonable people have investigated everyone from prince to pauper, I am bewildered that we are, after a century, still quibbling over Thompson’s merit, due to his choice of knife.

[Paddy]

No I think it was Dutfields

The Truth about the Whitechapel Mysteries told by Harry CoxEx-Detective Inspector, London City Police. Specially written for "Thomson's Weekly News"

Henry was explaining being on undercover work after Mary Kelly's death. They were watching a man who lived amoung Jewish tailors. And around their workshops

The least slip and another brutal crime might have been perpetrated under our very noses. It was not easy to forget that already one of them had taken place at the very moment when one of our smartest colleagues was passing the top of the dimly lit street.


When Henry wrote colleagues I take this he meant it was of his own professional group, the detectives.
I have always thought it was Dutfields being watched.
The only thing I cant reconcile is how one of the undercovers walked in and discovered the body. Did he just walk away again?
Also to see the entrance to Dutfields yard they would have had to have been within eyesight of it. More likely on the opposite side of the road from Dutfields and the Nelson.

Pat.............................

[Billiou]

The Site of Detective White's "Report"

I have been reading various posts re which murder would be the likeliest to correspond to the situation described in The People's Journal article in 1919 of Detective Steve White's "report" (which the Journal writes as: "One of White's reports on his nightly vigils contains the following passages").

I will not go into the validity of the report as that is probably left to people who know more than I do.

What I have been considering is whether White was at a) Dutfields Yard, Berner St , b) Castle Alley or c) Mitre Square. These seem to be the valid candidates in relation to the murders in Whitechapel around that time.

a) Berner St.
While people have had doubts about the sites because of the mention of the site being a "cul-de'sac", Dutfields Yard in Berner St seems to be to some to be the only one that resembles a cul-de-sac. While the Yard probably does, but where is the alley?
And more importantly, the alley was supposed to be "just behind Whitechapel Road". That for me eliminates Dutfields Yard as it is nowhere near Whitechapel Rd or Whitechapel High St. The nearest major road at the end of Berner St is Commercial Rd.

b) Castle Alley.
While Castle Alley does run north from Whitechapel High St, it once again is not a cul-de-sac. It is a through-way and runs north and becomes Old Castle St and goes through to Wentworth St. Also, more importantly, as the report mentions the night being a "bitter cold night", I doubt that this could be the site as Alice McKenzie's murder took place in July 1889, in the middle of the summer.

c) Mitre Square.
I have read that some people discount Mitre Square as they think it is not a cul-de-sac. If it is not a cul-de-sac, then what is? A cul-de-sac is a road that ends in a dead-end, a "no through road". A dead-end for traffic. Any pedestrian alley or passage does not make a dead-end not a dead-end for traffic. Mitre Square has only one entrance for traffic on the Mitre Street side. Any traffic entering would have to leave through that same entrance. Therefore Mitre Square is a cul-de-sac. Please note other placenames: Jeffrey's Square off St Mary's Axe, Haydon Square off Haydon St, Devonshire Square near Liverpool St Station seem to be all cul-de-sacs, and some also have pedestrian alleys running off them. So maybe "Square" means "cul-de-sac"?
One thing that may eliminate Mitre Square is that technically it is not "just behind Whitechapel Road". Technically it is just behind Aldgate St (for a very small distance). But Aldgate St becomes Aldgate High St which becomes Whitechapel High St which becomes Whitechapel Rd. It is the same road that changes name as you move along it. So you could easily call it Whitechapel Rd and mean the same road.
The night of Catherine Eddowes murder on 30 September 1888 was cold (dropping to around 43F or 6C).

So I lean toward c) Mitre Square as the site of White's "report".