Casebook Examiner No. 2 (June 2010)

[Phil Carter]

A response to your kind reply.

Hello Tom,

Thank you for taking the time to reply. I reply herewith, and stress, nothing personal against you.

[QUOTE=Tom_Wescott;137588]

I completely agree that it's crucial, which is why I didn't publish an essay on Le Grand 3 years ago when most of the information was found. Only recently has the evidence come forth which proves Le Grand was a police suspect. For those who think it's not enough proof, perhaps more will come in the future. However, I think it's quite sufficient proof that Le Grand was not only suspected of the Ripper murders, but was seriously suspected for a period of years.

I hope that the old chestnut (forgive my cynicism, not personally meant) about all the "files that have been purloined over the years" " the missing suspects file" won't come into play here. The fact is that we have very little written evidence of Le Grand/Nielson/Nilson etc being a suspect at the time of the murders. Third hand evidence becomes suppositionary.

The crux of my argument is based first and foremost on the fact that Le Grand was a serious police suspect for the Ripper murders. It just so happens that Le Grand's behavior following the Stride murder was extremely suspicious and points to complicity.

As stated earlier, I feel that Le Grand's involvement re Berner Street is a fair possibility. But there isn't any evidence to suggest he was anywhere near the Chapman, Nicholls, Eddowes and Kelly murder sites at the time of each murder. No witness statements puts the man in the frame. It must also be remembered what MacNaghten wrote...
"..many homocidal maniacs were suspected" my emphasis in bold.
That means that Le Grand, if suspected as a homocidal manic, and I use the term loosely, was only one of many. That makes any of them into a possible "prime suspect".

I had hoped I'd made it sufficiently clear that my essay was focused on providing a history for Le Grand and proof that he was a suspect.

The sub-title of the essay was "New Prime Suspect", whichever way you want to bend it, that is how it is read, without a question mark following it. You were putting forward Le Grand as a Prime Suspect as Jack the Ripper. You refer to this title later in the essay as well.

I would disagree with that.

You disagree that I state there is no evidence that he had the madness and used knives to mutilate/slash at/disembowell women? Where on earth, pardon my incredulity, is the proof of ANY psychological referral on Le Grand? Was he committed into an asylum? If so, where are there papers on him? If this man is worse than a woman beater, attacking with more than fists and an umbrella, where is it? I am sorry Tom, but I read your essay carefully. I saw a man who hit women, not a homocidal maniac.

He had knives, he was nuts, and he was walking Whitechapel in silent shoes and under the guise of a PI during the Ripper murders. I'd say the strength of his means/motive/opportunity is unprecedented as far as Ripper suspects go.

"He was nuts"... mad you mean? Err, mad people get committed to asylums do they not? And if he was as well known as you say, he would have been. Ask Ischensmidt.

In your essay, the man (Hall) who cleaned the knives was a household help/servant/clerk/head of staff etc. The knife cleaning you refer to, and if I may, I will quote you, says this...

"..-he gave me employment; that was principally at his private house, where I cleaned knives and so forth" "clerk, head of staff and general go to guy" and "his primary duty was to clean knives"

This man (Hall) cleaned knives as well as all the other things Tom. That doesn't make him in a job that "primarily" was the cleaning of the knives! He was a household servant and dog's body. How do you jump to it being a job where the "prime duty" was knife cleaning? In your essay, it isn't Hall you are quoting saying "my prime duty was cleaning knives"...You did.

The police wore silent shoes too. So did detectives. So did various newspaper reprters. Unprecedented proof of means/motive/opportunity?.. now the man is a prime suspect again, even though there were others, notably Ischensmidt, who also had knives (and walked around with them)threatened to kill women, was in and out of asylums, was suspected as a killer of at least one of the victims and investigated to a certain degree at the time by the police, was missing on the night of one of the murders, identified by a witness... yet Le Grand is the "unprecendented" example of a Ripper suspect?
Tom, I am sorry, but I fail to see where he trumps all others based on the evidence connected to each murder that you haven't provided. That isn't being a hard man to please, it is straight forward lack of evidence.

Le Grand made a habit of targeting prostitutes NOT under his control, such as the Ripper victims.

Tom, let's be fair here. He didn't target as in slash and mutilate...ever. He beat them up. And if getting rid of the competition, which is what you are referring to, is to get rid of the lowest of the low in prostitue terms, he had one heck of a clean-up campaign ahead of himto wipe out the competition.. there were thousands like the C5 knocking around all over the East End!

You lost me. You agree with me that I've successfully placed Le Grand within a mile and in the same hour of a Ripper victim's murder - something never done with another suspect - and you're suggesting it means nothing? You're a hard man to please, Phil.

A mile Tom, in that densely populated area, involves thousands upon thousands of men, mostly all from the lowest classes. Any one of whom could have been, by definition of placement, have the opportunity and a bolt hole. Yes, I am a hard man to please perhaps, but to label Le Grand as a prime suspect for JTR, needs consequential and corroberative proof of him being a sexual killer, proof of him having been akin to using knives in attacks on women, and proof that he was anywhere near any of the murders! Supposition that he is a prime suspect is not acceptable without these things. Ischensmidt, for example, fits the bill for the first two better. (See Lynn Cates' excellent work)

Tom, some of this stuff is excellent, as I said in my earlier posting. I will also kindly make you aware of the following if you are trying to trace the Danish years.. Christian Nelson could very well be an Englishism of the following Christian (or Kristian) Nielson, or Nielsen or Nilson or Nilsen (sen or son means son of Nils or Niels). Both sen and son are used in Denmark, sen or sønn in Norway, ssonn/sonn in Sweden, but the rules of allowing the use of this type of surmane changed in the LVP in all of these countries.

As I said in the previous posting, write that book! I am sure that by the time it appears in print, much much more will have been unearthed, hopefully, and I genuinely mean this, nailing the man as JTR. However, at present, I must disagree with your summary of him being the "New Prime Suspect" as the title of your essay states. A question mark after this heading would have been far better, imho.

best wishes

Phil

[Tom_Wescott]

Thanks for that, Phil,

The sub-title of the essay was "New Prime Suspect", whichever way you want to bend it, that is how it is read, without a question mark following it. You were putting forward Le Grand as a Prime Suspect as Jack the Ripper.

No 'a' prime suspect, 'THE' prime suspect, and he is. But that's a far cry from me saying he was Jack the Ripper, as you were suggesting I was or should do.

I hope that the old chestnut (forgive my cynicism, not personally meant) about all the "files that have been purloined over the years" " the missing suspects file" won't come into play here. The fact is that we have very little written evidence of Le Grand/Nielson/Nilson etc being a suspect at the time of the murders.

Of course not, but official fles are not the be all end all. Tumblety's not in there, but would you say he was never a suspect? Would you say Ostrog is a better suspect than Le Grand simply because he is mentioned? I can't yet prove who specifically suspected him, but it's quite clear from the news reports and the Jabez writings that he was suspected by Scotland Yard men (plural) for a quite a long time.

I saw a man who hit women, not a homocidal maniac.

Re-read it, or just wait for the book.

The police wore silent shoes too. So did detectives. So did various newspaper reprters.

Is that right, Phil?

Phil, I appreciate your playing devil's advocate with me, but you repeatedly want me to provide you with examples of where Le Grand killed and gutted a woman with a knife. If I could do that, we wouldn't be having this discussion, because the case would be solved. Jack the Ripper got away with his crimes, plain and simple. If Le Grand was Jack the Ripper, he got away with it. If per chance there is proof out there, I clearly haven't found it yet or I'd be offering him up as more than just the prime suspect.

By 'The Prime Suspect' I'm comparing Le Grand to the cases that have been made against the Koz, Druitt, Tumblety, and Chapman. Instead of inventing straw men for me to knock down, let's talk about these men and what evidence against them can compare to Le Grand and my bold statement that he's a better suspect.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Adam Went]

Ally:

I would very much appreciate it if you could find a post by myself anywhere where I claimed I was going to use moderating powers for evil? As I remember it, you joined JTR Forums and left a very, very short time afterwards on your own accord....

Monty:

There's a difference between this and me and Tom though, because while we've had some pretty full on debates, it really hasn't crossed the line of personal insults and tyrades from groups of people, and that's the line that has been crossed here.

Anyway, yes, point has been made, 'nuff said.

Cheers,
Adam.

[Phil Carter]

Hello Tom,

Thank you again for your reply. Kind of you to see that I am not "attacking".

Playing devils advocate? Perhaps. Examining your essay and your presentation of a New Prime Suspect? Certainly.

Ichenschmid is not a straw man. He is a real life, well documented (thanks to Lynn Cates, amongst others), suspect for at least one of the first two murders. He is an excellent comparison.

Kosminski, Ostrog and Druitt you mention. I have already stated in print many times that these three were imho mentioned as a way of keeping the Press happy, and the public thirst for a suspect. Re Special Branch/police tactics. Ostrog was clearly nowhere near Whitechapel at the time (Sugden), Druitt and a named/unnamed Polish Jew were a police diversification, a way of fragmenting and dispersing attention away from what the police were up to in Whitechapel (a method mentioned about the police by I believe Butterworth, and others).

However, IF I were to compare Le Grand with them as you ask? As a suspect? I will stick to my original thought, and put him on the same par with Kosminski..around the area at the time, no proof of his being involved with any of the C5, with the possible exception of Stride. Thats just my view though. His background, to date, shows violence, but not with the use of slashing knives or any sign of violence leading to disembowlling low class prostitute women.

I would have liked to have seen a reply to my observation that it was you, not Hall, who turned the knife cleaning part of his job into the description in your essay, of "prime duty", because it misleads. Hall never said it nor indicate it, according to your essay, he only listed it amongst his duties. Polishing the cutlery was a duty of servant in such houses. It needed regular cleaning because at that time they didn't yet, as far as I am aware (I could be wrong) use stainless steel at this time. Cutlery became very dirty very quickly because of the use of open fires in houses. It required regular cleaning and polishing. That was very labour intensive and time consuming.

Also the quote from MacNaghten, that "...very many homocidal maniacs were suspected..", combined with your comment that Le Grand was "nuts". To state that, you really DO need evidence of madness. Written evidence. It may seem like nit-picking but there isn't any evidence or documentation from any asylum nor doctor nor medical person that he was mad, as far as I know?

Sociopath? Yes. Psychopath? Unproven at this juncture, I would have to say.
Homocidal maniac? Unproven, at this juncture as well.

But please, whatever you do, I support your chasing the details down and researching further. I am just pointing out things that I feel are valid counter points to your essay.

best wishes

Phil

[Ally]

Hi Adam,

I am not derailing the thread further. I will reply on the Pub Talk thread started by Dave.

[Archaic]

Re: Cleaning Knives In the LVP

Hi Phil.

'Stainless Steel' was came out in about 1913-1914 but wasn't widely available until after WWI.

A major cause of tarnish in the LVP (as well as general household sootiness) was the use of coal-burning fires, because they release sulfur dioxide, which rapidly tarnishes metal.

Knives were cleaned and polished with 'brick dust' and all sorts of things; it was very labor-intensive and had to be done frequently. Soaking in water was avoided as the glues etc used in the handles were weakened by moisture, and blades became discolored, stained, and rust-pitted from contact with dampness.

If Le Grand's knife collection was on display for his own enjoyment- say mounted on the wall, or laid out in a display cabinet- it would have been exposed to more sulfur fumes and sootiness and tarnished even more rapidly, requiring more frequent cleaning.

Best regards,
Archaic

[Natalie Severn]

I have now finished reading Tom"s article which certainly lived up to expectation in being written in an engaging writing style and the discovery of new and exciting information on Le Grand and his associates ,combined with fresh insights into his criminal activities and a look at the impulsive violence that caused him to viciously attack those who stood in his way. Clearly certain street prostitutes who he saw as having strayed onto "his" patch stood in danger of mortal injury.Before being swayed towards him as a prime suspect for JtR though,I would like to see more evidence of his assaults being other than overblown temper tantrums that happened whenever he was thwarted or he thought he was being thwarted in reaching his goals.Looking forward to more information on this from Tom and his ace researcher Debs!

I am also more than intrigued by RJ Palmer"s piece--also a joy to read because of its succinct and flowing writing style.Again,it would be helpful soon to have some concrete evidence of Tumblety"s misdemeanours being more than **** ups because of his lack of real medical knowledge and expertise.Look forward to the final installment Roger!

Finally those two gems from Stewart Evans and Chris Phillips were a very special treat.So interesting to see Lawende"s appearance as well as that of his family ,Chris---thanks a lot for sharing those photos with us.
Stewart"s article cleared up a lot of my doubts about colour being able to be discerned in the artificial gas light of the time and it enables one to look at some of the evidence of witnesses again without so much mistrust.

Thanks for such sterling stuff everyone!
Norma

[Ally]

No 'a' prime suspect, 'THE' prime suspect, and he is.

Sorry. No. I am afraid you do not get to decide who is THE prime suspect for anyone but yourself. I would agree with "a" but definitely, not "the".

As stated earlier, I feel that Le Grand's involvement re Berner Street is a fair possibility. But there isn't any evidence to suggest he was anywhere near the Chapman, Nicholls, Eddowes and Kelly murder sites at the time of each murder. No witness statements puts the man in the frame.

I have always wondered at Tom's fierce devotion to the idea that Stride had to have been a Ripper victim, and it has now with this essay become clear as to why that would be. It is the one victim where he can place his chief suspect in the relative vicinity and the only witness description that comes close to matching. He has hung his hat, so to speak, on this one victim's evidence and he must therefore include her, lest his case as a whole fall apart.

[Archaic]

Hi everyone. I haven't had a chance to read all of Issue #2 yet, but I want to say that what I have read was terrific.

Don's piece on Sherlock Holmes was very enjoyable, and I also liked the 2 pieces by Stewart as well as the articles by Rob and Chris. Jenni's intro was good too. I found Tom's article quite interesting and appreciate the fact that it's so long and detailed.

Lots of food for thought and discussion thus far. Look forward to reading the rest and reading some parts over again when I can give it the time and attention it deserves.

Thanks to everyone for their hard work.

Thanks and best regards,
Archaic

PS: I read it in "full-screen" as advised and that does seem the way to go.

[Tom_Wescott]

I have always wondered at Tom's fierce devotion to the idea that Stride had to have been a Ripper victim, and it has now with this essay become clear as to why that would be. It is the one victim where he can place his chief suspect in the relative vicinity and the only witness description that comes close to matching. He has hung his hat, so to speak, on this one victim's evidence and he must therefore include her, lest his case as a whole fall apart.

This is pure bulls**t. I discovered Le Grand while in the process of researching the 'Berner Street Mystery' for Ripper Notes. I had already by that point studied the murder and concluded that Stride was most likely a Ripper victim, as had 90% of writers prior to myself. Howard, Ivor Edwards, etc can attest that I argued just as strongly for Stride as a Ripper victm back when D'Onston was my favorite suspect. Accusing a writer of screwing with the evidence to fit a theory is about the worst accusation you can make. Stride is included as a Ripper victim for the obvious reason that she was. I came to suspect Le Grand solely because of his own suspicious behavior and recorded that suspicion in 'Berner Street Mystery'. Virtually all of my suspicions have turned out to be correct (i.e. that the police suspected him, that he was involved in the Batty Street Lodger story, etc.)

And while it's true that my suspicion settled on Le Grand through the Stride murder, that need not be the case with the contemporary police who came to suspect him of the Ripper murders, so my 'case' would in no way fall apart if you took Stride out, but the fact is you can't take Stride out.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Ally]

And while it's true that my suspicion settled on Le Grand through the Stride murder, that need not be the case with the contemporary police who came to suspect him of the Ripper murders, so my 'case' would in no way fall apart if you took Stride out, but the fact is you can't take Stride out.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Once again you are confusing your opinion with established fact. One can take Stride out, quite easily, if one is of the mindset to do so. There are more than enough discrepancies in her murder that a person can, upon viewing the evidence, decide she was not a Ripper victim.

And to be clear, I never accused you of "screwing with the evidence". I said you hung your hat on it. And as you have just said the exact same thing: "it's true that my suspicion settled on Le Grand through the Stride murder", you have basically confirmed what I said.

[GregBaron]

Le Grand continued....

Tom's essay was excellent and further research could yield interesting
results........he deserves commendation for a job well done........with that
said......Le Grand a suspect? Sure..... but I have some issues.........

Obviously, a big one(pun) for many of us is the fact that Le Grand
was a 6 footer. No 6 footers were ever described except for Pipe
Man......now as I suggested earlier if what Lawende and Long actually
saw was Le Grand's accomplice well that could explain some things
although that whole idea begs credulity.......possible yes, likely,
probably not....

The other thing that occurs to me is personality. From the essay Le
Grand seems a loud, obnoxious, violent alpha male. Attacking women
on the streets in daylight, trying to push a cop under a train, pulling
a gun on a cop at his residence, blatantly following and intimidating
people, blackmail, extortion etc....this guy seems a huge, infamous
monster.........I can't see him not being known throughout the district
especially by the prostitutes......

This is speculation of course but I and others see JtR as the quiet
nondescript loner.....the Jeffrey Dahmer that goes about his business
unremarked upon.........we could be wrong but Le Grand is just the
opposite of this.....

These are just a couple of things that come off the top of my head...I also
wonder about his residence(s) and how close they were to whitechapel and if
he could have pulled this off while being a member of the vigilante committee...?

Greg

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Nats, and thanks for taking the time to read it. As you know, I always appreciate your thoughts and perspective on things. Like you, I look forward to learning more about Le Grand, as I'm certain there's much more to learn. But please let me address your main point.

Before being swayed towards him as a prime suspect for JtR though,I would like to see more evidence of his assaults being other than overblown temper tantrums

I think if any of us were attacked in the street by a man twice our size and had our face beat in with a heavy stick, we might take umbrage at it being called a mere 'temper tantrum'. But I understand the point you're trying to make. Then there's also the evidence that Le Grand would stalk his victims and pay his toadies to stalk women in order to terrorize them before moving in for a physical attack. That can only be considered premeditated and thus not a 'temper tantrum'. Then we have Le Grand attempting to throw a policeman under a train; and this policeman was adamant that Le Grand truly meant to kill him. Then there's the matter of his threatening to blow women up unless they paid him money - at a time when he didn't need money. When his house was searched they found the makings of a bomb. Then we have on record that Le Grand actually confessed to a murder. And of course there's the matter of his weapons arsenal. This was not a normal guy occassionally given to 'temper tantrums'. While I would also love to find more detailed information about Le Grand's criminal past, there's two things we must consider.

1) For every crime Le Grand was caught for, there must have been dozens or hundreds he got away with. The more serious the crime, the more he'd work to cover his tracks. As great a researcher as Debs is, I'd be amazed if she found this documentation you, Phil and Trevor demand of Le Grand cutting up prostitutes in front of the police, who choose not to arrest him, but document the crime for future generations. Instead, we have to ask ourself 'Is this man capable of murder?' Could we see him killing a woman?'

2) There's not a shred of evidence that Druitt so much as raised his voice. Kosminski's worst criminal offense seems to have been walking a dog without a muzzle. How many women did Tumblety attack?

This is why I call Le Grand the 'prime suspect'. He was suspected by police at the time of the murders and for years after; he had a very violent criminal history, a good portion of which was directed at prostitutes; he was in the vicinity of at least one of the canonical murders; he inserted himself in the investigation and risked his neck to conjure false evidence to thwart the investigation. These are very, very serious points to consider, and I can't see how the other four contemporary suspects even come close.

The only disadvantage Le Grand has is that he's the new kid on the block. The others have been beat into our head, but as time passes and students become just as familiar with Le Grand as Druitt, et al, who do you think they'll perceive, based on the evidence, as being the 'prime suspect' - i.e. the one of the five police suspects most suited for and likely to have been the Ripper?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

I'm curious why the issue of Le Grand's height is such a big problem considering Tumblety - who was taller than Le Grand - seems to be accepted as a legit suspect by most.

Whenever we consider a new suspect, we have to set our biases aside and re-evaluate the evidence by placing that suspect into the frame. Because Le Grand is known to have used criminal accomplices who - in the case of John Tysell - were willing to do time for Le Grand, and for whom Le Grand was willing to do time by avenging Tysell, we have to more seriously consider the possibility of a Ripper team. Like you, I've never been comfortable with the accomplice idea, but that's because it doesn't make sense when fitting a Druitt or Koz into the frame. It makes good sense with Le Grand, particularly considering the only murder in which a tall, fair-haired man was clearly witnessed is also the only murder where Le Grand is all over the place trying to throw police on the wrong scent. It's also the only murder where two men are seen in the vicinity and considered by both the witness and police to have been accomplices (note I said considered and not decided).

In short, the evidence of Le Grand's history, his movements on the night of the double event, the witness evidence of Schwartz, and his suspicious behavior after the murder all dovetail and force us to consider a scenario of a two-man Ripper team. It's by all means not the only possible scenario, but it would certainly explain the Ripper's level of confidence and his ability to get away undetected time after time.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Natalie Severn]

Tom,
The women that we attribute to the Ripper were a bit different than the ones Le Grand pimped for who were a bit more upmarket by the sound of it.What I cant get past also is why he suddenly began, in the Autumn of 1888, to murder and cut up destitute women who were apparently strangers and no sort of threat or rivals to his girls.Also his known assaults involved him in sudden paroxysms of murderous rage, we dont really know whether the ripper was "enraged" so to speak,when he murdered- he may have been-but he may equally have been pretty cool when he got the urge to go out and cut women's throats and then mutilate them.We need to know some more about this complex character,
Best
Norma