Casebook Examiner No. 2 (June 2010)

[Rob Clack]

Thanks so much for the info, Rob. (I almost assumed “The ultimate“ would be something along the line of a sourcebook by Evans/Skinner, but I got mixed up due to the additional existence of The Jack The Ripper A-Z by Begg, Fido, and Skinner.)
I shamefully have to admit I've so far only read (and for some parts: just perused!!) these books online on amazon.com . My budget and frequent mobility at the moment only allow me to buy JUST one of the major works in print, and I've been trying to make up my mind between Sugden, Rumbelow, or perhaps even Begg. (But I have a feeling it'll be Sugden.) I've already ordered Paley (I'm interested in Barnett as a suspect) and a couple of Ripper Notes at my German address to find them when I get there, and it's probably unavoidable that it'll start to accumulate from now on, but everything else ripperological I've ever read so far has been online. I know, cheapskate ! (But I'm very mobile right now, so I have to be careful about expenses and additional purchases ...)
Hutt looks kinda like a “good cop“ on picture (despite having indulged in occasional beatings of people on lockup when the mood stroke sometimes, but it's just a perk that comes along with the job. I wish I had that!). I wonder what kind of poetry he wrote, and if it ever got published?
Thank you all so much for your patience with answering so many (dumb) questions,
Maria

Well if your new to Ripperology I would recommend Rumbelow and then Sugden. Rumbelow is great for beginners as he covers just about everything.

One of Hutts published works appeared in Lloyds Weekly News about a dog called 'Sweep' who saved a woman from being assulted. And he published a work (don't know if it was a book or pamphlet) called 'A Horse's Letter to Ex-Police Constable 365, John Pegg, who ... obtained 1300 convictions for cruelty to Horses' which sounds like a great read

Rob

[Rob Clack]

To Monty and Rob: You two together totally crack me up.
(And I wish I coulda stayed 28 forever, it's a nice age... Older than that , but a lot younger than that .)
Maria

We're the Laurel & Hardy of Ripperolgy. I'm the thin one (just).

Rob

[mariab]

“The ultimate“ and monographies

Rob wrote: Well if your new to Ripperology I would recommend Rumbelow and then Sugden. Rumbelow is great for beginners as he covers just about everything.
I'm a newbie, but have been perusing casebook for over a year (mostly when procrastinating from writing a paper on deadline, or when sick in bed, or in other such productive moments), so I don't know if I'm a complete beginner (yeah, doesn't everyone hate that label?!). Rumbelow's book looks a bit basic to me, but I'd definitely take one of his tours, although I've heard that he doesn't do them anymore. Sugden (from what I've perused from his book online) sounds a bit more scholarly, and it has often even been described as “monumental“, which sounds promising, so I think I'll go with that. And despite a certain amount of theorising, argumentation, and speculation, I like the fact that Philip Sudgen doesn't “push“ a suspect on the reader, but lets him come to his own conclusions.
As for Begg's book, I don't really see how one could keep Kosminski as a prime suspect and I don't agree with his quick dismissing of Barnett. When considering the Jewish suspect, I'd definitely prefer the Fido book and his theory of a possible mix-up of names and identities, plus I've heard that his book has the best maps of East End. (But no idea if this is a fact.) ?
By the by I've just ordered “The ultimate“ from a second hand seller in Illinois for $8. It'll take an entire month of shipping, but “the price was right“. As a reference book, i wanted to have something containing transcripts of (some of) the primary sources.
Wow, so Hutts was a proto-animal-activist, kinda? Good for him.
Thank you, and many apologies to all for the silly jokes and for having drifted off-subject (again).
Maria

[Monty]

We're the Laurel & Hardy of Ripperolgy. I'm the thin one (just).

Rob

And Im the good looking, funny one.

Monty

[Rob Clack]

Rob wrote: Well if your new to Ripperology I would recommend Rumbelow and then Sugden. Rumbelow is great for beginners as he covers just about everything.
I'm a newbie, but have been perusing casebook for over a year (mostly when procrastinating from writing a paper on deadline, or when sick in bed, or in other such productive moments), so I don't know if I'm a complete beginner (yeah, doesn't everyone hate that label?!). Rumbelow's book looks a bit basic to me, but I'd definitely take one of his tours, although I've heard that he doesn't do them anymore. Sugden (from what I've perused from his book online) sounds a bit more scholarly, and it has often even been described as “monumental“, which sounds promising, so I think I'll go with that. And despite a certain amount of theorising, argumentation, and speculation, I like the fact that Philip Sudgen doesn't “push“ a suspect on the reader, but lets him come to his own conclusions.
As for Begg's book, I don't really see how one could keep Kosminski as a prime suspect and I don't agree with his quick dismissing of Barnett. When considering the Jewish suspect, I'd definitely prefer the Fido book and his theory of a possible mix-up of names and identities, plus I've heard that his book has the best maps of East End. (But no idea if this is a fact.) ?
By the by I've just ordered “The ultimate“ from a second hand seller in Illinois for $8. It'll take an entire month of shipping, but “the price was right“. As a reference book, i wanted to have something containing transcripts of (some of) the primary sources.
Wow, so Hutts was a proto-animal-activist, kinda? Good for him.
Thank you, and many apologies to all for the silly jokes and for having drifted off-subject (again).
Maria

The reason I asked is that Sugden might be a bit heavy going for a beginner. Sugden's book is in my opinion the best Ripper book out there.

And Im the good looking, funny one.

Monty

I don't know about the funny bit.

Rob

[mariab]

Originally Posted by Monty
And Im the good looking, funny one.
Monty
The funny part I've already noticed, particularly during the fights with David Rada (I think that was the name) and his “alternative Ripperology“ (sic!) and during the exchange with Trevor Marriott last week – I think it was...
(Now don't ask me why I was reading that thread instead of doing my homework.)
Rob Clack wrote:
The reason I asked is that Sugden might be a bit heavy going for a beginner. Sugden's book is in my opinion the best Ripper book out there.
Yeah, but this beginner likes a heavy start. (Jokes aside, I very much appreciated the Sugden book online and the only reason for not having bought it yet are logistics and the price.)
Maria

[Rob Clack]

Hi Maria,

Try and remember to get the revised edition if you can.

Rob

[mariab]

Sudgen revised edition?

Rob,
I assume you mean the revised edition of Sudgen? Thanks so much for the tip. Could you tell me which year it came out revised? Because I'll buy it second hand from some online seller, and they don't always indicate which edition it is.
Thanks so much,
Maria

[The Grave Maurice]

Maria,

I think the edition you want is the 2002 paperback which included some "corrections", as Sugden says in the acknowledgements, by Stewart Evans and others. It says "New Edition" on the cover.

[mariab]

Sudgen revised by Evans et al

Thanks so very much, Maurice.
I'll look it up and buy it. Classic Sudgen revised by Evans and by more recent ripperologists certainly sounds like the ideal combination.
Maria

[mariab]

Got it! Revised edition paperback 2002 ordered from Germany for 4-€, I just love the price. Now I'll let you all in peace, so that this poor thread goes on about Examiner 2.
Many many thanks and a thousand apologies,
Maria

[Tom_Wescott]

Therefore one cannot simply assume these were the people he meant. It is not fact. Therefore the Swanson connection shows doubt.

Of course it is fact and you know that. I question whether or not you're aware of the comment I'm referring to. I don't appreciate my writing or integrity being questioned, particularly about a point that is an established and accepted fact - that being that Le Grand and Batchelor were the detectives who found Matthew Packer, found the grapestalk, took him to make his statement, and were jointly employed by the WVC. These are established facts and it is not appreciated by anyone when you try to manipulate the data for your own ends.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Phil Carter]

Hello Tom,

First of all, it is time you understood something important. I am not "manipulating any data for my own ends". I have no "end" as you put it, as I have no particular suspect in mind for JTR. Also, I do not need to belittle your your work in order to bolster any work I am doing. Indeed I have on multiple occasions, here and on JTRForums, praised and encouraged your work. I hope that makes things crystal clear. I just don't see things your way.

Additionally, I am not questioning your integrity. Nor would I ever do so. I merely offered an opinion, which I am perfectly entitled to do.

So instead of verbal attacks on people, I suggest you channel your considerable talent into research, which you are clearly good at.

Keep up the good work.

Best wishes

Phil

[Tom_Wescott]

I just don't see things your way.

But that's the point, it's not 'my' way. The facts are the facts and they were that way before I pointed them out. Challenging my theories is one thing - in fact I welcome it - but I will get testy when proved data is questioned without the presentation of new, contradictory data.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Simon Wood]

Hi Tom,

Not yet having read your article I don't know if you've already mentioned this, but the Timaru Herald [NZ], 5th December 1888, gave the name of Le Grand's detective agency. You're probably ahead of the game here, but it's certainly the first time I've seen it.

"Two private detectives named Grande and Bachelor, of the British and Foreign Private Enquiry Agency, appear to have obtained one mark of the murderer, a 'quick, rough, voice.' These gentlemen claim that they were the first to discover the important fact that the Berner-street victim was in company of a man just before the murder, and that the man bought grapes at the greengrocer's shop in Berner-street, kept by Matthew Packer, and gave them to the woman. It will be remembered in this connection that grapes were found in the dead woman's hand. They took Packer to Scotland Yard, and he recognized without difficulty the body of the woman Stride as the female who received the grapes bought at his shop. In regard to the identity of the man he is not so positive, but he informed the Scotland Yard authorities that he thought he could recognise the fellow if not by his face, at any rate by his voice, which was 'quick and rough'."

Regards,

Simon