Rippercast- The Jack the Ripper Podcast

[Mike Covell]

Hi Yatish

Technical difficulties have delayed the release of the latest podcast, and beavering away behind the scenes is what everyone, especially poor Jonathon Menges, is doing!

[Yatish]

Hi Guys,

Is the latest podcast available? or you busily beavering away in the editing suite still, Jonathan?


Thanks
Yatish

[Mike Covell]

Thanks much better now, I am blessed with a good family and great friends who take good care of me.
It kinda makes up for the dithering "Health Proffesionals" who seem to be running around in circles!!

All the guys on the podcast are really supportive and were like a little family, I guess that is apparent when listening to the shows.

Before and after we get the chance to hero worship the guests, and chuckle a lot like little kids!

[Natalie Severn]

Very sorry to hear you have been unwell Mike.Hope you are feeling better now.Some great podcasts you have made!
With All good wishes, Norma.

[Mike Covell]

Thanks for the feedback, I missed the Martin Fido show due to my heart condition but will be back with a vengance this evening to chat with the guys and gals, and of course special guest John Bennett.

The podcasts are really fun, informative, and great for the community. It is great to see that everyone enjoys listening, as much as we enjoy recording them.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Ben,
Is that so?---I thought it was the tradesman himself he was referring to.OK,then I still believe someone indicating their annoyance at being sold an ill fitting pair of shoes wouldnt have written their graffiti in half inch high letters.Ditto a salesman defending his products.More likely to have written in big,bold print.But its only a small thing I picked up on here.Maybe he"s right!
Best

[Ben]

Hi Nats,

I still remain doubtful that this evenly lettered writing in a "neat schoolboy hand" just half an inch in height,was written by a Jewish market tradesman to prove something about the quality of workmanship of the leather goods he was selling.

Unless I misheard or misread or both, Martin's position was not that the message was written by a Jew trying to advertise his work, but by a gentile expressing his dissatisfaction at being sold dodgy merchandise by a Jew; the implication being that the Jews won't take responsibility for hawking rubbish.

Why, incidentally, would a Jewish tradesman be a "mismatch" for a neat schoolboy hand?

Best regards,
Ben

[Natalie Severn]

today was my first chance to listen to any of the podcasts and it was Martin Fido"s I listened to.
I found it very interesting and Martin presented his case very well,as one would expect.
The bit I found most compelling was where he explained the possible confusion that may have arisen between the Met and City police over names and descriptions of the suspects Kosminski/Cohen.Very plausible.
Where I found his argument weak was when discussing the Swanson Marginalia.Martin suggests that the Marginalia"s provenance is 100% certain----but the impression one receives is that his reason for this is mostly to do with him believing Swanson"s grandson to have been a jolly nice chap who would not have stooped to do anything like forging these notes.That may well be the case and indeed its probably true--- but its not by any stretch of the imagination any kind of" proof" that it was not forged.Did they ever subject the "marginalia" to forensic or scientific testing or did they judge it solely on it bearing a "close resemblance" to Swanson"s handwriting?
Martin also appeared to assert that since Swanson"s grandson only became interested in this "marginalia" at the time of the "centenary" this in some way provided further proof of of its 100% provenance......but surely this is an arguement that can cut both ways?
Regarding Robert Anderson,Martin claims with similar "certainty" that Robert Anderson could not have lied about his claim to know who the Ripper was.Its not clear how exactly Martin arrives at his conclusion since actually Robert Anderson was "PROVEN" to have lied on several counts ,one at least by his own admission in 1910,which Martin to be fair to him acknowledges.Well there can be no question that Anderson ,this Spymaster "par excellence"had lived a life of continuous and constant "duplicity" from his early days in Dublin Castle in espionage in the 1860"s----indeed you could argue that in his particular work he was "paid" to be deceitful .Its therefore very likely a man such as this, when writing his autobiography which meant going public will not be someone certain to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth- especially regarding his role ,as the most senior Police Officer of all, in charge of an investigation, into the most famous murder case in the world.He would have been extremely reluctant,in my opinion,Sir Robert Anderson, to state that he actually " hadnt had a clue".[as Abberline and Major Henry Smith had done ].
So no, Martin has not "showed" Robert Anderson NOT to have been a liar over the Ripper.

Finally,regarding the fraffiti in Goulston Street.While I was very impressed with some of Martin"s reasoning here, I still remain doubtful that this evenly lettered writing in a "neat schoolboy hand" just half an inch in height,was written by a Jewish market tradesman to prove something about the quality of workmanship of the leather goods he was selling.Such a "neat schoolboy hand" appears to be a mismatch.


But thanks Mike and all who took part,for a wonderfully interesting programme.

[Mike Covell]

Mike,

Just about to PM you

Monty

Got it Monty, whenever I have technical difficulties, I follow the sage like advice of the Asian Helpdesks, "Turn it off turn it back on again!"

[Monty]

Mike,

Just about to PM you

Monty

[Mike Covell]

If he fails to bring those points up I will ask him, funnily enough, I have my shorts on today, its a good job the webcam is not plugged in!!

[Monty]

Hi all,

Episode # 12 will record tomorrow and feature special guest John Bennett, photographer and author of the upcoming book E1, which will be a tour of Whitechapel and Spitalfields, past and present.

If you've any questions for Mr. Bennett, get them to me in the next 24hrs or so, as I'm late in making the announcement.

Stay tuned,

JM

Oh no, not John Bennett...yawn !!

Heh heh, only joshing Mr B. Looking forward to this 'un.

Ive a challenge for you John, I challenge you to mention....

1) The infamous Lens cap incident
2) Leman Street nutter.
3) Philip Hutchinsons amazin shorts.

Failing that, have a good one matey. Catch you on the other side.

Monty

[Chris]

The most interesting piont for me was the fact that the Jewish records of the home Cohen staid at have never been researched?

Surely this is an obvious place to look for more information on Cohen and Kosminski...Is there not a Hebrew speaking researcher we could call on?

Unfortunately, Martin Fido is mistaken about this.

The earliest surviving register for the Poor Jews' Temporary Shelter is for 1896-1897. The surviving registers are written in English, not Yiddish. A database compiled from the registers for 1896-1914 is available online:

http://chrysalis.its.uct.ac.za/shelter/shelter.htm

(Of course, there is no question of Aaron Kozminski having appeared in the earlier registers, as the Shelter was not established until 1885, about four years after Aaron and his family arrived in England.)

This is what the compilers of the database have to say about the Shelter's records:
A considerable amount of information is available for the Shelter. There are a number of Annual Reports which though incomplete give series of figures and comments illustrating the working of the institution. There are a number of Minute books covering the activities of the Executive Committee (though only until 1900) and of the General Committee. But, most importantly, after May 1896 there is a series of registers drawn up by the officers of the Poor Jews' Temporary Shelter. They quite clearly mark a significant new departure for the Shelter, evinced by the fact that the first entry in the first book is numbered ONE. Thereafter the numbers are usually continuous, changing only with the beginning of the Shelter's financial year, i.e. 1st November. Even when there are volumes missing for various periods thereafter none of these ever open with number 1. Clearly there must have been some registers kept before 1896; for instance according to evidence given in 1888 by Hermann Landau, its President, to a House of Commons Select Committee on Foreign Immigration there were lists noting for each inmate his name, his age, the place from which he came, whether he was married or single, and if married the number of children he had left behind him. There were notes about whether he had a trade, a record of the number of days he stayed in the Shelter, and finally where he went on to after he left the Shelter. None of these early volumes survives, and there are important question marks as to why this new series was compiled.

http://www.le.ac.uk/hi/teaching/papers/jewspap.html

[Doctor X]

Aside from what tree he would be . . . the most obvious one is the one you will probably ask: what has changed and what has not changed?

--J.D.

[jmenges]

Episode #12

Hi all,

Episode # 12 will record tomorrow and feature special guest John Bennett, photographer and author of the upcoming book E1, which will be a tour of Whitechapel and Spitalfields, past and present.

If you've any questions for Mr. Bennett, get them to me in the next 24hrs or so, as I'm late in making the announcement.

Stay tuned,

JM