Tumblety: The Hidden Truth

[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]

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.

[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]

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...

[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]

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.

[jmenges]

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


JM

[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.

[Abby Normal]

so I'm confused. did Norris say that tumblety told him that prostitutes be disemboweled before or after the ripper murders?

[Ally]

Unless he was psychic, after 1888. In his testimony Norris recounts a conversation that he had with Tumblety about T thinking prostitutes should be disemboweled. He then says that as he'd read of the whitechapel murders and knew about them, he was disturbed by this and went and told the cops about the conversation. . However, Norris said that conversation took place in 1881. This was some 20 years later. So the options are: Norris was psychic. Or Norris was misremembering the year, when he was testifying almost 20 years later.

Take your pick.

[Steadmund Brand]

so I'm confused. did Norris say that tumblety told him that prostitutes be disemboweled before or after the ripper murders?

there is the question.....the way Norris rambles it is hard to tell.. As I said, they way I read it is he told him that before ( when he first tried to "seduce" him.. he took the cigarette and said negative things about the night walkers.....and I believe it was after the murders that ...ding... the light bulb went off and Norris thought.... he said night walker should be disemboweled when he threatened me with that knife......... Again... that is just how I read it....I could be wrong....but that is how it sounds

Steadmund Brand

[Ally]

Here is the relevant text:

He said, if he had his way they would all be disemboweled. Now, I read and knew of the White Chapel business and did know it at the time. I got a little scared of this man, and I went over to the Chief of Police, and told him of this fellow, and he told me that reminds him of the big tall man that he read of in the Chicago Herald, and Pittsburg Dispatch, as being Jack the Ripper, and I said, he answers the description.

Norris said this conversation happened in 1881. Which clearly could not have happened.

[Steadmund Brand]

Ally, I know you read it a different way... that's the great thing about debate, well not debate... more like discussion...since we are all on the same side (I think )however, would you agree that my interpretation is also a 3rd possibility.. as in when he said "Now, I read and new of the White Chapel business " could have meant "then when I read about"....it is possible...especially as it appears it is the start of a new thought...

Steadmund Brand

[Ally]

No because one, I think you are reading "read" past tense instead of "read" present tense, you are reading Now I red and knew of the whitechapel murders instead of Now I reed (as in, I am a reader), and knew of the whitechapel murders, but regardless of that specific words it is clear that he said "NOw", as in, so let me tell you "NOW when I heard that, I knew because I ...." He said he knew it "at the time". He didn't say later. He said, Now. Which anyone knows is how you follow up a Thought with a Thunderstruck. Now let me tell you what ... He heard tumblety say that about prostitutes and was using language in the moment. There is literally no separation in time. He heard tumblety say that, it struck a chord in him and disturbed him based on his knowledge and he hied himself off to the police.

There is not a single word in that passage that indicates a separation in time between the two events.

[Ally]

Part of the problem is you have a pack of yankees attempting to read in the voice of a southerner and you are hitting the stresses wrong and therefore because you aren't pausing or inflecting right, you aren't reading the meaning right. Not to start the civil war again but you need some sweet tea in you and to have tasted proper grits before you can hear this voice right, and you aren't hearing it right. This is a story, and it's all of a piece.

At the time he heard Tumblety say that about disemboweling prostitutes he already had knowledge. He heard and went well my gosh, Nooow, I'm a reader, and knew of those murders and what this man said disturbed me so I lit over to the police and told them about this fellow. He is telling a cause and effect relationship. "Now" isn't even an indicator of time, it's a verbal tic, a dialect marker setting up a revelation in the story.

I can HEAR the difference in my head but I can't explain it to you. Put a drawl on it and think kentucky fried and you can maybe see what I mean. This guy was from Lousiana. He had a drawl.