A New Ripper Book

[Chris]

Hi Chris. BECAUSE the Star and the CNA did not have a working relationship, it's all the more reason for Best and co. to 'poison the waters' for the other papers by passing on false info to the CNA to distribute to their competition. The Leather Apron story, for instance.

I don't quite follow that. Surely the competition copied the Leather Apron stories directly from the Star, not from Central News?

Another interesting feature not touched upon by Cook, because he doesn't discuss the 1966 Crime and Detection article about "Best", is the claim that the letters were faked by Best in collaboration with a provincial colleague. I'm not sure what the siginificance of that is, unless it's just that it allowed him to claim responsibility for letters posted outside London.

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Chris. BECAUSE the Star and the CNA did not have a working relationship, it's all the more reason for Best and co. to 'poison the waters' for the other papers by passing on false info to the CNA to distribute to their competition. The Leather Apron story, for instance.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Chris]

This goes back to what I was saying last week. We KNOW that the Star was sued by John Pizer during the Ripper scare for articles they published calling Pizer 'Leather Apron'. Could the letter in Cook's book be referring to the host of 'Leather Apron' stories that built up the myth? If these were composed by Best and co. and transmitted via the Central News, then it explains everything, and has nothing at all to do with the 'Dear Boss' letters.

I think the thing that's difficult to explain in this way is the reference to Central News.

According to Cook, owing to a mixture of political and personal antipathy, the Star never printed Central News material, unless to rubbish it (as in the case of the Dear Boss letter; which seems rather a weakness in Cook's argument - if it was a plan to keep the story going, contrived with the blessing of the Star's management, why would the Star have denounced it as a fake?). I certainly can't see any suggestion that the Star supplied Central News with copy.

[Jeff Leahy]

Yes, that seems probable..cheers Tom.

Pirate

[Tom_Wescott]

Also, it's not clear what some of the other statements about Best's involvement in the Star's coverage are based on. For example, that he and O'Brian/Brien were despatched to the East End and came back with the "Leather Apron" story. I can't tell whether that comes from contemporary documentation, or family recollections, or what.

This goes back to what I was saying last week. We KNOW that the Star was sued by John Pizer during the Ripper scare for articles they published calling Pizer 'Leather Apron'. Could the letter in Cook's book be referring to the host of 'Leather Apron' stories that built up the myth? If these were composed by Best and co. and transmitted via the Central News, then it explains everything, and has nothing at all to do with the 'Dear Boss' letters.

Any thoughts?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[caz]

Hi Suzi,

To lighten the mood a tad, my facsimile reprint of an 1885 edition of Old London Street Cries puts such things in the vernacular rather well. It describes how "thet tchung men," the railway porter, would pronounce the following station names:

"Oldersgit Street"
"Mawgit Street"
"Ol'git"
"Mark Line"
"Menshun Ouse"
"S'n Jimes-iz Pawk"
"Emma Smith"

This current matter is a private affair between Philip Hutchinson and Andrew Cook and is no business of anyone posting here. If Philip chooses to discuss it with others that is his prerogative. However, the matter is technically sub judice and should not really be discussed publicly. Philip and I have had close contact and have discussed matters privately...

...It would be nice if people minded their own business and did not get involved with that which does not concern them.

Indeed so, Stewart. Well said. That's precisely why I thought we should all hold our horses, when I read Philip's reference here to having sent me an email about this matter.

Well, what do you know?
I bluffed with a blind hand and won the pot.
I didn't know a thing.

Hi AP,

You haven't 'won' anything since it's not your fight. And I don't know what you thought you knew, but you now know, courtesy of Stewart, all anyone needs to know:

Any images I supply for use are from my own collection and if I ever supply any belonging to others I always do so with permission and explain to the user that credit would be need to be given to the owner if used.

That makes it 100% clear that Stewart would not have supplied any image to Cook without its owner's permission and without advising that credit must be given to the owner when using it.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it - in place of whatever you have been using.

Love,

Caz
X

[Suzi]

Exactly!!! It can be difficult to walk too far in Ripperology before you're up to your elbows in it!! LOL Next stop Barber's Yard!!!! Then of course- nobody notices!!!!!

As a by the by-During WW2 allegedly the guard on the train when it stopped at Aldgate East had the immortal phrase 'Awwrldgate East...All gerrraght'..... bloody difficult to type tho' in the vernacular! ....Mi old mucker!

[John Bennett]

To be honest, the field of Ripperology is littered with cowpats. Anybody who strides into that field runs the risk of stepping in one (or two) along the way. The saga developing around Mr. Cook's book is a pretty good example.

[Suzi]

Oh dear..... it must be the heat chaps...can we keep it civil....

Suzi x

[Cap'n Jack]

And you, George, just stood in it.

[George Hutchinson]

Stewart, there is little wrong with the field of Ripperology. There's just a single cow pat sitting in it.

PHILIP

[Cap'n Jack]

And of course... I'd like to point out that I pointed no finger, nor named no name, nor made any insinuation, nor accusation, but simply posted a post asking who the third party involved was.
That's simple.
My interest was merely galvanised by the process of making rusty old tin look like stainless steel.
That interest has now been satisfied.
Thank you for your interest.

[John Bennett]

Of course it does...

[Cap'n Jack]

No, John, it just simply means that I am good at poker.

[John Bennett]

Well, what do you know?
I bluffed with a blind hand and won the pot.
I didn't know a thing.

To say you 'won the pot', AP, suggests that you feel you gained something (privately at least) from the above info.

Perhaps that was what you hoped to hear?