Deconstructing Jack by Simon Wood

[David Orsam]

And here's another reference, this time to engravings in the nineteenth century and the artistic licence that was applied to make gruesome events more palatable

I'm sure that's right John. In this case the gruesome aspect was round the back. What's just ludicrous is Simon posting an engraving to make some kind of unspecified point - I don't quite think he ever told us what it was - and then Phil then saying the engraving doesn't look quite real. Well no, it's an engraving!

[David Orsam]

Thanks. Good to know.

You already knew what I think of your book Simon. Stop pretending to be upset.

And you can't even think up an original epithet with which to criticize my book.

I could think up plenty but am happy to stick with what I've already said. I didn't want you to pretend to take offence in order to avoid any further debate, flounce out of the thread and say "Goodbye".

Goodbye.

Oh.....

[Simon Wood]

Hi David,

I'm not in the least bit upset.

You appear to have mistaken me for someone who actually gives a rat's arse about what you have to say.

Sayonara,

Simon

[David Orsam]

Hi David,

I'm not in the least bit upset.

You appear to have mistaken me for someone who actually gives a rat's arse about what you have to say.

Sayonara,

What's the problem then? Why all the goodbyes and the sayonaras all of a sudden?

[David Orsam]

Hi All,

Richard Pigott in Madrid had something in common with Mary Jane Kelly in Spitalfields.

They both "died" in Room 13.

Possible factoid. I've seen a report from Spain that Pigott was actually staying in Room 3 of the Hotel de Embajadores.

[David Orsam]

For anyone unaccountably interested in the red herring that is the illustration of Pigott from the Graphic, the original caption to it in the Graphic of 11 March 1889 (which was a special edition) read:

"PIGOTT AFTER DEATH

THE LAST SCENE OF THE FIRST PART OF THE DRAMA

FROM AN INSTANTANEOUS PHOTOGRAPH BY OUR SPECIAL ARTIST AT MADRID, TAKEN BY PERMISSION OF THE PREFECT".

(Simon has apparently taken the caption he has reproduced from a book.)

Elsewhere in the same edition, it is stated:

"The special sketches and photographs from Madrid, engraved on another page, depict the last scene of all in the history of one of the most notable swindlers of our day and generation".

In fact, there was only the single sketch from Madrid (no photographs) in that edition (although more had been advertised).

Needless to say, the Graphic was satisfied that Pigott committed suicide, reporting in the same issue that:

"Entering an alcove in the apartment [in the Hotel des Ambassadeurs], he opened his hand-bag and, drawing out a revolver of large calibre, placed it to his mouth and blew out his brains."

[David Orsam]

Here's a translation from Spanish that I have created (using an online translator) of an extract from a report published in the Madrid newspaper La Epoca on 2 March 1889:

"The Civil Governor received a letter yesterday from the Ambassador of Great Britain, Sir Clare Ford, interested in the immediate capture of an English subject who, with the supposed name of Sir Roland, stayed at the Hotel de Embajadores.

Apprised of this, Deputy Inspector Visier appeared at five-thirty at the said Hotel and asked for Sir Roland; although the name was different, the address that Mr. Visier had obtained coincided with that of the foreign guest in room number 3.

Through the interpreter the deputy inspector told the Englishman: "I beg you to accompany me to the presence of the Governor, my boss, who has to inform you of news which you will be most interested in."

"With pleasure," he replied; "But first let me take my hat and some cards."

Sir Roland entered his room, and Mr. Visier remained in the corridor awaiting his departure.

Moments later there was a loud bang.

The stranger had killed himself by firing a revolver in his mouth, piercing his skull, dying instantly.

The inspector advised the judge on duty, who immediately came to the hotel, commencing the proceedings of an inquiry."

It will be noted that Pigott is here reported to have told the Spanish police officer (through an interpreter) "But first let me take my hat and some cards."

So Simon's suspicions arising out of the fact that some reports in English newspapers said that Pigott wanted his hat, while others said his business cards, is demonstrated to be the piffling nonsense that I have no doubt everyone already thought it was.

And, in the above, I suspect we have the most accurate reported account of events that exists.

Furthermore, we may note that the report about the actions of the British Ambassador in requesting the "capture" (not murder!) of Pigott on 1 March 1889 are corroborated entirely by a communication from him to the British Prime Minister (and Foreign Secretary) on 1 March 1889 which I discovered buried away in Foreign Office files (as referenced in part 3 of my Suckered! Plus Quadrilogy). Sir Clare Ford wrote to Salisbury on 1 March 1889 as follows:

"On receipt of your Lordship's telegram last evening, I took measures to have the arrest of the fugitive effected this afternoon. An agent of the police went to the hotel indicated and inquired after the man, who, no doubt, having his suspicions aroused, committed the fatal act of suicide."

Just look at that please conspiracy theorists. Here we have the British Ambassador to Spain confirming in a private communication that the British Prime Minister had given instructions by telegram on 28 February to have Pigott arrested in Spain.

Not murdered! Arrested.

And Sir Clare goes on to inform the Prime Minister that Pigott "committed the fatal act of suicide".

This communication was not for publication or public consumption. It was two very senior officials communicating privately between each other.

[Phil Carter]

Why do I need evidence? I'm just giving you an example of the kind of thing that could be done to support the posture if they wanted to do it. Clearly you don't like it.

The posture doesn't even need to be maintained for more than a few seconds. You're totally overthinking this Phil.

David,

To imagine what you are suggesting takes more than a great leap of faith. Can you supply photographic examples of this ever having been done?

It makes no odds about time David. The neck muscles would not support a head on a dead body sitting upright in a chair...without fixed support.

That is not overthinking anything.


Phil

[David Orsam]

Now, let's look at a report in the Daily Telegraph (by a Central News agency reporter) written on Saturday 2 March 1889 and published on Monday 4 March 1889:

"I have just returned from a visit to the Southern Judicial Depot, which, for want of an institution like the famous Morgue in Paris, is used practically as the chief dead house for Madrid. This temporary resting place is a gruesome spot. Just now it contains five corpses. Pigott’s body has been placed in a shell of roughly joined planks, covered with common black linen or cloth. The shell is lined with a coarse kind of sackcloth, upon which the body immediately rests. The other corpses are scarcely like human beings, for they have been brought from the dissecting-rooms of the Medical College and Hospital. They are placed some on stone tables, others on the floor. One does not expect anything cheerful-looking in the appearance and appointments of a deadhouse, but there is something peculiarly repulsive about this place. Pigott’s body is dressed as it was in life in a very dark blue cloth undercoat, striped tweed trousers, and a brown overcoat. The Catholic scapular which Pigott had worn beneath his underclothing has been placed outside on the breast of the overcoat, the idea being that it would assist, if necessary, in the identification. It is small, and dirty and greasy from long wear. On one side there is painted upon it the sacred monogram “I.H.S.,” surmounted by a small painted cross. The clothing looks like it had been worn a long time, and the whole appearance is mean.

To-morrow (Sunday) the corpse is to be photographed, in order to preserve a permanent record, but it will not be buried until Tuesday next, by which time an English police officer whose departure has been notified to the authorities here, will have arrived. He will formally identify Pigott’s remains, and it is understood that, at the request of the British Embassy, the effects of the dead man will be handed over for removal to England, and probably for production before the Special Commission. No member or official of the British Embassy has yet visited the Morgue, but the Embassy, in accordance with precedents, the body being that of an English subject, has given instructions which will ensure a decent burial for all that remains of the fugitive forger."

Phil Carter might want to take note that, despite being in a shell in the mortuary, "Pigott’s body is dressed as it was in life."

And if one looks at the illustration posted by Simon Wood we can actually see the scapular which the reporter describes as being "outside on the breast of the overcoat" - and it is outside Pigott's breast in the illustration.

At this stage, Phil might want to note, the post-mortem examination does not yet appear to have taken place. The same newspaper which quotes the witness cited by Simon Wood earlier in this thread states:

"The post-mortem examination will be postponed as long as is possible in order to await the arrival of an officer from Scotland-yard with a photograph of Pigott".

Inspector Quinn did not arrive in Madrid until the morning of 5 March.

So the post-mortem was probably held on that day, after the formal identification.

It needs to be remembered that the Spanish authorities knew very well how Pigott had died. His suicide had taken place in front of the nose of one of their officers, after all, who had prised the pistol from Pigott's dead fingers. The most important thing to establish was that it really WAS Pigott who had died.

In this respect, it will be noted that the report says that the corpse was to be photographed the next day and I would suggest that it was for this reason (and for convenience of visitors who came to identify the body) that it was taken from the shell and propped up, by being tied to a chair.

And about that photograph. Whose idea was it?

Note this communication from the British Prime Minister to the British ambassador to Spain, telegraphed at 1.50pm on Saturday 2 March (and referenced in my Suckered! Plus Quadrilogy part 3):

"Officer will be sent to identify Pigott, and to take charge of all articles found on him. Keep body unburied until identification, and have it photographed. No property should be given up to any one except to police officer authorized to receive it. Officer starts tonight."

Conspiracy theorists take note! Here is the Prime Minister demanding that the body of Pigott which, we are told, shows no signs of having been shot in the head, should not only NOT be buried immediately (thus preserving the evidence of precisely how Pigott died) but a photograph should be taken of it!

What a brilliant conspiracy. Have Pigott murdered in some way which does not involve being shot in the head (exactly how he was killed, they don't tell us) - create a fantastic conspiracy involving a Spanish police officer and hotel interpreter to peddle a false story of Pigott shooting himself in the head, enlist the assistance of the judicial authorities and, no doubt, the Spanish government but then parade the corpse for anyone, including journalists, to come and see no damage to the skull and not only that BUT HAVE IT PHOTOGRAPHED. Just to show the world that Pigott did not shoot himself in the head.

Of course, it's all perfectly crazy.

For the record, here is what the British ambassador wrote back to the prime minister later on 2 March:

"Have taken immediate steps to have burial deferred until officer's arrival. Photograph of body will be taken. All his papers are in safe custody."

And that is entirely consistent with what the Daily Telegraph tells us when its reporter saw the body, presumably some time during the afternoon of 2 March. Then the body would have been photographed on 3 March and the Belgian gentleman mentioned in Simon's news story must have visited at some point between 3 and 5 March while Pigott was tied to the chair.

[David Orsam]

David,

To imagine what you are suggesting takes more than a great leap of faith. Can you supply photographic examples of this ever having been done?

It makes no odds about time David. The neck muscles would not support a head on a dead body sitting upright in a chair...without fixed support.

That is not overthinking anything.

Phil,

You asked why the rope was tied around Pigott's dead body and, being the helpful person I am, I told you.

For some reason, you didn't like the answer and, not only that, but you now appear to doubt whether the scene depicted in the illustration is even genuine.

That's up to you. But what is perfectly clear to me is that the rope in the illustration is preventing Pigott's dead body from slumping and falling to the floor which is all it needed to do. Even you, with your advanced knowledge of physics, can't claim that his body could have fallen off the chair to the floor can you?

The only thing that could move would be the neck, and that could be put back into position for a photograph, or for the purpose of identification. Then his body is just put back under the sheet, where it matters not what it looks like.

I do not know what your problem is.

I've asked you what you think is going on but there has only been silence.

[Pcdunn]

Ah, I see.

Hi PC Dunn,

[ATTACH]18149[/ATTACH]

Regards,

Simon

That clarifies things for me, Simon, thank you.

By the way, the blanket or coat draped around the poor man's shoulders could be hiding the mess of the back of his head-- but may also conceal a photographer's support of some sort. These were used for both living and deceased subjects, to help them stay still (and upright) long enough for the exposure time needed.

[Phil Carter]

Hello David,

Pardon my tardiness in replying.

I do not deny that the tying of the rope around the body to the chair would stop the body from falling to the floor.
I merely state about the neck and shoulder muscles being relaxed..causing the head and shoulders to slump forward.

As regards any "conspiracy" as you introduced the word. I am not convinced of that either. However, the possibility of things unknown going on cannot be ruled out.

I have not stated nor opined the photo/engraving is manipulated either..Those are your suggestions. I do however find it very odd indeed that a photograph taken in this position was even officially necessary.

As to the point regarding suicide. Pat has suggested the blanket would cover the damage to the rear of the head.
As far as that is concerned. Yes it is possible.

Just one thing David. Please do not assume that people whi question things are "conspiratorial". This isn't a winner takes all thing. I suggested you give me a photo of a board being used to prop up a dead body for a photograph. I'm still waiting. I'd be surprised if you found one though. Even if you didn't. .it doesn't matter. . Im not insisting Im right either way.



Phil

[David Orsam]

Phil, I don't think you even know what you are saying. I certainly asked you on more than one occasion to tell me what you think was going on but there was only silence from you.

Here is what you have said in your previous posts:

"If the engraving. .from a photograph as Simon shows.. is of a dead person, having died by suicide in the manner described, with the exit wound in the place you quote, there is no way on God's earth the neck could support the head in an upright sitting position without being affixed as exampled by the Eddowes mortuary photograph."

"The neck muscles would not support a head on a dead body sitting upright in a chair...without fixed support."

"If the engraving is from a photograph..which it is.. there is no way the head would support itself WITHOUT being held up. The head is not being held up in the photographic engraving. And..the head would slump forward onto the chest. There is nothing supporting it."

"Piggots head would have fallen forward onto his chest. And the ropes cannot contain the upper body muscle relaxation or neck muscle relaxation."

So there you are saying categorically that what we see in the illustration is impossible according to the laws of physics. Yet the illustration is supposed to be taken from a photograph. So what else are you doing but challenging the authenticity of the illustration?

Even in your most recent post you say:

"I do however find it very odd indeed that a photograph taken in this position was even officially necessary."

But if the illustration comes from a photograph then clearly such a photograph was taken. Unless of course you challenge the authenticity of the illustration. Do you?

Or are you saying that you don't think Pigott was dead in the illustration (and photograph)? But that would involve a conspiracy of the most enormous proportions!!!! The very thing you deny alleging.

But then you did say:

"Err..if he was dead..tied to the chair in the mortuary.. Please explain the point in tying him up after death?"

"if" he was dead, you say. Do you doubt it?

You have also said:

"I find the whole scenario most odd. A body washed and cleaned yet dressed..fully dressed..and sat on a chair..tied up..after death..for id purposes?"

Again you seem to be challenging exactly what we see in the illustration.

As for a conspiracy, here is what you said:

"I also note the very slight injuries to the face. Extremely slight given a gun had just gone off in his mouth methinks."

So you seem to be doubting that Pigott did shoot himself in the mouth. Do you not realise the massive conspiracy that would have to have been in place if Pigott did shoot himself in the mouth?

Perhaps you don't.

You need to think it through Phil.

Here is what actually happened.

Pigott committed suicide before he could be arrested. Proving his identity was essential. A photograph needed to be taken. It was most convenient for the photographer, and for any visitors making an ID, to view Pigott dressed in an upright position for the purposes of the identification, rather than horizontal on a slab and naked. His corpse was therefore placed onto a chair, to which he needed to be tied onto to stop him slumping down and falling on the floor.

If there was a problem with his posture this could have been resolved with some form of support. And, no, Phil I do not carry around photographs of dead people in chairs with me. It doesn't matter if this was the first time anything like this was done, it was clearly done.

If you don't think it was done, please tell us what could CONCEIVABLY be going in the illustration? I've answered all your questions, it's time for you to start answering some yourself.

[Wickerman]

Sorry for this being a double photo, I couldn't separate the two, but it's the aparatus on the right that was commonly used to support a corpse whether standing or sitting.
At point 'R' there is a two-pronged clamp which supports the head under the ears.

[David Orsam]

Yes, I'm sure all kinds of contraptions were available.

My thinking is that because the Spanish mortuary used the crude solution of a rope, which was visible from the front, they didn't have access to such sophisticated devices. There might nevertheless have been some hidden support used behind Pigott's back but, frankly, I don't think it would have been necessary, because I don't agree with Phil Carter and his physics lesson at all . The rope, tied tightly, would, in my opinion, have produced exactly what we see in the illustration, with the corpse's head drooping slightly. But there's just no room or ability for any other parts of the body to move.