Tumblety: The Hidden Truth

[Ally]

The way it is makes perfect sense without the not. Tumblety says he thought prostitutes should be disemboweled. Norris said he'd heard of the Whitechapel murders and so he became disturbed and went to the cops. It makes no sense if you add the not. Prosittutes should be disemboweled, Norris hadn't heard of the whitechapel murders, so he goes to the cops. Er..what? The Not was what was making it make no sense. With that removed it's far less incoherent. So no. There was no Not.

[jmenges]

Or he said "did not" instead of "did" and the stenographer, bless their soul, screwed up.


JM

[Ally]

Nowhere have I said that he waited ten years to "attempt to molest". I have said the conversation which included disemboweling and the whitechapel murders took place much later than 1881 and in recounting the story and his history with him, he's conflating two separate instances into one story because memory is tricky. So he remembers a time Tumblety showed him a knife and a conversation where Tumblety talked about disemboweling prostitutes and 2o years later in the mush and mess of the human memory those two instances, which may well have been true separately have become conflated into one event. Where he saw the knife and had the conversation at the same time instead of two separate events.

[mklhawley]

He wasn't just admitting to as a teenager. He was admitting to scamming Tumblety throughout the years and even trying to set up other people he knew to scam him. And the brothel incident happened only ten years prior so you can hardly claim he was an innocent scamp then. He flat says that he kept up the acquaintance of 20 years because Tumblety was in the habit of spending money on him. That's not a youthful indiscretion. In addition he also squirms on how their association ends. He first tries to claim that he distanced himself from Tumblety (aint' he noble), then turns around and contradicts himself and admits Tumblety distanced himself from him!

He was clearly screwed in the head. If Tumblety actually told this guy that he thought prostitutes ought to be disemboweled and Norris took him to the brothel, which he said he did, simply for the squirming fun of it, Norris was seriously disturbed.

He never admitted to scamming Tumblety for 20 years. Where did you get that? It was a symbiotic relationship. The guy liked Tumblety's money but also did not mind hanging with him and Tumblety liked him. Tumblety never stayed with a young man for that long. Norris is just not saying everything, because this married man had to admit he did things she would not like (so it's not just the police station). Norris even claims he never had sexual relations with Tumblety after the 1881 event.

Tell me another young man Tumblety associated with for 20 years? There is only one other person and he made Tumblety's will. Norris had a friendship with Tumblety, because Tumblety pushed it.

Here is one thing you are not getting about Tumblety. He first hired a young man, but did not immediately attempt to molest him. But within a year, he attempts it. We have multiple accounts of this. Tumblety NEVER waited 8 years to attempt a molestation. You can believe that, Ally, but that does not fit the facts.

[Ally]

Oh yes and well, it may not even be all that secret. First of all we are talking about New Orleans here. I don't know if y'all are aware but New Orleans isn't exactly known for its piety and upstanding virtues. And my dad was cop for 40 years in a rather large city. So I well know just because you wear a badge doesn't necessarily mean you are a model of virtue and personal judgment. I mean don't get me wrong, my daddy was a saint but some of those guys...

[Steadmund Brand]

Remember there are many people who's work and personal life are TOTALLY different...he kind of reminds me of the people into the underground S&M Leather scene in NY in the 70's (not saying he was an S&M guy, just about the two TOTALY SEPERATE LIVES)...it's well known that there were Dr.s and Lawyers and Stock Brokers and Police etc that nobody would have guessed were into that lifestyle....
to me, seems like Norris was probably quiet and unassuming at work and in professional life, and out "hustling" at night....in the shady world of Tumblety....again, just a guess..but that is how it comes across

Steadmund Brand

[Ally]

He wasn't just admitting to as a teenager. He was admitting to scamming Tumblety throughout the years and even trying to set up other people he knew to scam him. And the brothel incident happened only ten years prior so you can hardly claim he was an innocent scamp then. He flat says that he kept up the acquaintance of 20 years because Tumblety was in the habit of spending money on him. That's not a youthful indiscretion. In addition he also squirms on how their association ends. He first tries to claim that he distanced himself from Tumblety (aint' he noble), then turns around and contradicts himself and admits Tumblety distanced himself from him!

He was clearly screwed in the head. If Tumblety actually told this guy that he thought prostitutes ought to be disemboweled and Norris took him to the brothel, which he said he did, simply for the squirming fun of it, Norris was seriously disturbed.

[mklhawley]

I am going to hold to my idea that I am starting to doubt a lot of Norris veracity entirely as he seems an entirely shady and rather gross individual the more I read.

For instance, he was alarmed enough by Tumblety's actions and claims of delight in disemboweling prostitutes... but he thought it was hilarious to take him to a brothel and taunt him with possible victims? WHAT?!

This guy is nuttier than a southern fruitcake. If anyone was a likely psychopath it was this jackhole.

Ha! For me, this guy was working for two decades with the police and working with classified cable communications. They had to trust him. He married in 1995, so now that he's giving this testimony, he had to admit he participated in illegal acts as a teenager. Not so good to say if you worked in the police department. I think he was telling the truth but smoothed it over.

After all is released, everyone else can rip on it.

Sincerely,

Mike

[Ally]

Unlocked!

So, the original plan was to not only publish in the book but also have a series of articles. And then an idiot local St. Louis documentary company was going to podcast the news and screw it up, since they were going to claim the impossible. I contacted Jonathan so that at least the Ripper community heard it first. I have one computer that I was on Skype, a six foot five inch cigar-smoking gentleman next to me, and transcribed documents spread out for Brian and I to read. The documents are still electronic, and my computer was being used for Skype.

Brian was never going to allow me to be deceitful or he'd beat me up (not really, he's a gentle giant).

Much has not been released and much is still going to surprise you. By all means, I expect skepticism, which is actually helpful. I'm just not in the habit of lying.

And Ally, his discussion was in 1904. Recall, Tumblety had pointed one of those knives at him, the same knives he saw earlier. If you believe Norris claimed his molestation and Night Walkers comment was post-1888, then I will hold you to that claim as you should. There is more.


Sincerely,

Mike

I am going to hold to my idea that I am starting to doubt a lot of Norris veracity entirely as he seems an entirely shady and rather gross individual the more I read.

For instance, he was alarmed enough by Tumblety's actions and claims of delight in disemboweling prostitutes... but he thought it was hilarious to take him to a brothel and taunt him with possible victims? WHAT?!

This guy is nuttier than a southern fruitcake. If anyone was a likely psychopath it was this jackhole.

[Steadmund Brand]

Unlocked!


Brian was never going to allow me to be deceitful or he'd beat me up (not really, he's a gentle giant).

Tis true I am a 6'5 ex boxer.... but what Mike isn't saying is he is a 6th degree Aikido blackbelt....so I may not mess with him

and remember folks... sometimes a cigar is just a cigar

Steadmund Brand

[Steadmund Brand]

What I thought was... when Tumblety threatened Norris and mentioned the disemboweling may have been in 1881- in 1888 after he spoke to him about the Whitechaple murders he remembered what Tumblety had said and got freaked out...but Ally you may be correct as well, sadly no way to clarify as he is long gone

Steadmund Brand

[Ally]

....I don't feel his intent was to deceive by any means, hence why it was bracketed in the book (with a footnote I am sure)

Steadmund Brand

Mike was entirely forthcoming when asked if this was his addition. I do hope there is a footnote in the book as well, but when questioned there was no attempt at hiding or obfuscation. I don't want people to think this is some AHA gotcha thing, I was trying to do here. I saw something that made me question the read as given and I wanted to put the clarification down. Just an attempt to put down exactly the facts.

[mklhawley]

Unlocked!

So, the original plan was to not only publish in the book but also have a series of articles. And then an idiot local St. Louis documentary company was going to podcast the news and screw it up, since they were going to claim the impossible. I contacted Jonathan so that at least the Ripper community heard it first. I have one computer that I was on Skype, a six foot five inch cigar-smoking gentleman next to me, and transcribed documents spread out for Brian and I to read. The documents are still electronic, and my computer was being used for Skype.

Brian was never going to allow me to be deceitful or he'd beat me up (not really, he's a gentle giant).

Much has not been released and much is still going to surprise you. By all means, I expect skepticism, which is actually helpful. I'm just not in the habit of lying.

And Ally, his discussion was in 1904. Recall, Tumblety had pointed one of those knives at him, the same knives he saw earlier. If you believe Norris claimed his molestation and Night Walkers comment was post-1888, then I will hold you to that claim as you should. There is more.


Sincerely,

Mike

[Ally]

Given in context I think it is quite clear that what Norris said and what Norris meant and it is quite clear that all this took place after the events of 88.

Norris confused the dates. He clearly thinks this conversation happened in 81 and he clearly already knew about the Whitechapel murders when this conversation happened. So it didn't happen in 81. So if it happened, it happened after 88. The only logical read is: Norris is talking to Tumblety, Tumblety says he thinks prostitutes should be disemboweled. Norris said he'd read about and knew of the Whitechapel murders. Therefore he was disturbed.

Therefore this conversation, if it occurred, occurred after 1888 and Norris, twenty years later, had his dates wrong.

[Steadmund Brand]

I can't speak for Mike (sounds silly since I just posted for him... but that was a quote ) But I think what happened is he was reading his copy of the testimony from the word file for his book....not the actual copy, and with it being a "lets get this recorded fast" situation that is what happened.... as for me, at the time I did not have a copy of it in front of me as it was being read so I couldn't jump in and point that out(or I would have, as you know how I am) and Mike would have corrected, or explained....I don't feel his intent was to deceive by any means, hence why it was bracketed in the book (with a footnote I am sure)

Steadmund Brand