Bowyer´s inquest testimony

[Elamarna]

Historical accuracy means checking your pride at the door and sitting down to a plate of crow sometimes.

THE SHEFFIELD DAILY TELEGRAPH, November 18, 1888

HOW THE MURDERER EScAPED

The murderer must have got out of the window, as the door was barricaded from the inside with the bedstead.

Robert,

I have just checked the article, you have the date wrong its the 12th.

apart from what you quoted brief report. no details?

comments from others please

[Robert St Devil]

Steve,
Sorry, shouldve wrote nov 12. I found an archive thread saying J Tulley referenced the DT nov 12 edition for his layout. Went looking and found this. So the sheffield DT is a different paper? Im Texas so English history and geography stumps me.

[Elamarna]

Robert,

reported 9 days after murder
provincial paper.
Do you have access to the storey and who the writer was?

it does not agree with any other known source so one must be careful. we know from todays papers that not everything published is true.

However it does give one cause to think.
historical accuracy demands you do not take a single source as proof.

another report of same would be more telling

[Robert St Devil]

Historical accuracy means checking your pride at the door and sitting down to a plate of crow sometimes.

THE SHEFFIELD DAILY TELEGRAPH, November 18, 1888

HOW THE MURDERER EScAPED

The murderer must have got out of the window, as the door was barricaded from the inside with the bedstead.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jeff
The senior officers involved were desperate for a solution to the murders. As in any big inquiry there were no shortage of suspects, with many "flavours of the month" being discarded as it became clear they were innocent of the crimes. The case was long dead when those officers began to recount their involvment in the crimes, and time played an important part in distorting their memory's somewhat.

Hi Observer...rather off thread here. To address properly some complication. But the distortion of memory is an assumption often raised. I don't believe there is any evidence this is certain. Macnaughten of course made errors on Druit but the explanation for that is by his own admission he worked from memory, on Kozminski I believe he had the file infront of him so was far more accurate. I guess the often raised error is that Swanson and the police department general believed Koz was dead when he was still alive... Anderson also seems to have believed this... But there are two reasonable explanations 1. He was informed Koz was dead when he was transferred 2. The old master spy master deliberately created the myth knowing koz was beyond cure, to protect the family. He did after all never reveal the name and took great care not to do so. In my opinion he only ever said what he did about the suspect because he genuinely believed the police required more powers and the law should be changed (Luckily it never was) Yours Jeff

Hope you also have a merry Xmass and a happy New Year Regards Observer

Many thanks...still panicking that no cards have been posted, the fridge is emptie and its less that a week to go...Ah!

[Elamarna]

Hi Observer

Shark if you please.

have a good xmas

Elamarna

[Observer]

Hi Observer,
no he has not got us firmly in place.

Haha You are but plaice in his net Elamarna.

Regards

Observer

[Observer]

Hi Jeff

The senior officers involved were desperate for a solution to the murders. As in any big inquiry there were no shortage of suspects, with many "flavours of the month" being discarded as it became clear they were innocent of the crimes. The case was long dead when those officers began to recount their involvment in the crimes, and time played an important part in distorting their memory's somewhat.

I'm sure Sagar Cox, Monroe et al had serious suspicions with regard to certain suspects, but to to state the beleedin obvious no one was ever charged with the crimes. In effect every lead proved fruitless.

Again, regarding Kosminsk, I'm surprised no officer other than Anderson,(and he not actualy giving his name) Swanson and Macnaughton mentioned him as a suspect. It seems to me as if Anderson was the sole beleiver in Kosminski's guilt.

Hope you also have a merry Xmass and a happy New Year

Regards

Observer

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jeff
I did allude to Anderson in my previous post, and the passing of the years.

Hi Observer, I sort of thought you were, so a little naughty of me

And, although Abberline wound up a few reporters in 1903, (I beleive his revelation that Chapman was the killer to be rather tongue in cheek.) I don't believe Abberline had a clue to the identity of the killer either.

Abberline 1903 'and you must understand that e have never believed all those stories about JtR being dead, or that he was a lunatic. or anything of that kind'

You are of course correct, I think it doubtful aubergine seriously considered Chapman JtR. But what he says does seem to support the idea that the lunatic theory was entrenched in his old department by this date. Of course his reference to Jack being dead could be Kozminski or Druit, depends how you read it.... but then as I said Abberline transferred around May 1889, so what ever trial they were on they never got their man.

One of the most astute detectives, Reid, believed the police didn't get close to catching the Ripper.

True. But then Reid does alude to a suspect who drinks at the Princess Allice and lived near Berner street... If this is the same man described by Sagar and Cox, then he's correct about not getting anyone.

As far as Kosminski is concerneed, are we to believe that only Anderson and Swanson conducted the investigation into whether he was the killer or not?

Today it might be a long jump of faith...but in 1888? Obviously other officers would have been involved in 1890, but they like Swanson were obviously sworn to secrecy, as Monroe stated 'its a Hot potato'

Other officers must have been involved in his investigation. Who accompanied the witness when he was taken to see Kosminski at the Convalescent home?

There were almost certainly other officers involved in 1890, if what Swanson describes is true. And i can see no reason why he would lie or make stuff up to himself?

Presuming it took place of course. Concerning human nature, and as the officers involved came to the end of their lives, Isn't it rather telling that not one smidgen of tittle tattle emerged other than what we have from Anderson Swanson, and Macnaughton?

Well there is other tittle tattle: Cox , Sagar to a less extent Smith and of course Monroe who claims wild horses wouldn't drag it from him...

I'd say there was a lot of evidence to support Anderson and Swansons story, the only real problem is why the pieces of the jig saw don't appear to fit...

But thats all rather off thread and topic and something I'd prefer to address longer in the new year..

Regards Observer

I trust you have a Merry Xmas and a Happy new year

all the best Jeff

[Elamarna]

Been a while since I visited, however, I see Pierre has all the usual suspects still firmly in place on the end of his line !

hahaha

Hi Observer,

no he has not got us firmly in place. some of us did ignore him for a while, but he continued to post, and started more and more threads. for those reasons i began posting again.

anyway good to have your observations.

Elamarna

[Elamarna]

Jeff
I would love to have an in depth discussion at some stage in the future, about K. This is not the thread for that.

Just one question, in your opinion are Sagar and Cox looking at the same man at the same time? my view is its at a different time.

[Observer]

Hi Jeff

I did allude to Anderson in my previous post, and the passing of the years. And, although Abberline wound up a few reporters in 1903, (I beleive his revelation that Chapman was the killer to be rather tongue in cheek.) I don't believe Abberline had a clue to the identity of the killer either. One of the most astute detectives, Reid, believed the police didn't get close to catching the Ripper.

As far as Kosminski is concerneed, are we to believe that only Anderson and Swanson conducted the investigation into whether he was the killer or not? Other officers must have been involved in his investigation. Who accompanied the witness when he was taken to see Kosminski at the Convalescent home? Presuming it took place of course. Concerning human nature, and as the officers involved came to the end of their lives, Isn't it rather telling that not one smidgen of tittle tattle emerged other than what we have from Anderson Swanson, and Macnaughton?

Regards

Observer

[Jeff Leahy]

Indeed, isn't it fair to say that, (apart from a few blustering high ranking officials claiming they knew who the killer was) after the furore had died down, as 1888 moved into 1889, and as the years rolled by, the police were no wiser as to the identity of the killer, as they were at the of the beginning of their search.

Hi Observer

Thats not quite true is it? Anderson clearly doesn't have a clue by August 1889, where he is still talking about police failure to catch the man..

However by 1892 he's changed this to a story about a 'Maniac revelling in blood'

So something happens between these dates to change his mind and bang slap in the middle Kozminski enters Colney Hatch Asylum...

Abberline who transfers around May 1889, presumably because the case has gone cold, is always aware of the two story's around his old department but tends to dismiss them... which suggests what ever happened happened after his transfer

Cox and Sagar both believed they were tracking the killer, who was placed in a Private Asylum in Surrey

MacNaughten doesn't have a clue what happened after March 1889 but prefers the drowned Doctor theory and counts Kelly as the last murder. This may be a theory he formed early on during his own investigations and before joining the MET.

Yours Jeff

[Observer]

Indeed, isn't it fair to say that, (apart from a few blustering high ranking officials claiming they knew who the killer was) after the furore had died down, as 1888 moved into 1889, and as the years rolled by, the police were no wiser as to the identity of the killer, as they were at the of the beginning of their search.

[Observer]

It should be said however, that the solid lead obtained after the Kelly murder did not come to fruition