Ripperologist 125: April 2012

[Tom_Wescott]

Hello Tom,

Sadly, some will never believe that the background of 1888's ongoings in Whitechapel, London, Parliament, Scotland Yard and Politics is the key to all this. One of my first posts on here said so and was roundly scoffed at. It was a conclusion I personally came to in about 1978, after deciding that no author was at that time anywhere near the truth.

But I thought you were a Mac memoranda purist? You always told me that if Le Grand had been a good suspect, Mac would have named him on his list? Anyway, all that government stuff is over my head. However, what we've seen happen over the years is the memoranda has gone from the 'final word' to 'the closest we'll get to a final word' to finally being recognized for it actually is - a curious document so chock full of errors that even Ripperologist wouldn't publish it if it were an article written today. In short, it's important in that it's a window into how the propaganda machine of the police circa 1894 worked, but it's by no means a shortlist of prime suspects. I think most Ripperheads are starting to get that now, so that's progress. It got through my hard head. LOL. However, my mind is not at all made up about the real story behind it, which is why I always enjoy the points of view of Hainsworth and Simon and anyone else willing to put their neck on the chopping block with viable, original ideas.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[lynn cates]

thesis

Hello Tom. The thesis was stated initially, the bullet points were the argumentative strategy. A "proof" was beyond the scope of the paper. As you recall, I claimed a strong inductive argument.

Leather Apron was inspired, in part, by JI.

Cheers.
LC

[Jon Guy]

Leather Apron was inspired, in part, by JI.

Hey?

John Pizer was known to the Police as Leather Apron, and we can actually place Pizer in Whitechapel.

[lynn cates]

Piser

Hello Jon. Yes he was in the area. His family denied the epithet. All that was covered in the essay.

Cheers.
LC

[Jon Guy]

Like I said, Sgt Thick knew Pizer as Leather Apron?

[lynn cates]

legend

Hello Jon. Yes, that was his claim. And quite likely true.

But I refer to the story as related to "The Star" and against which "The Times" cautioned out and out dismissal.

It may be simpler to read the essay.

Cheers.
LC

[Debra A]

Hello All. Kudos to Simon Wood for the excellent Cutbush piece.

Is it possible for yet another suspect to bite the dust?

Cheers.
LC

As much as enjoyed Simon's piece on Cutbush, I didn't see anything in there that we didn't already know, that would suddenly make him 'bite the dust' as a suspect. What did I miss?

P.S. That's not a snub to your article BTW, Lynn. I haven't had a chance to read yours yet but will do soon.

[Jon Guy]

It may be simpler to read the essay.

I had a quick glance to see if you could prove he`d ever been to Whitechapel before going any further.

[lynn cates]

teh dead and dying

Hello Debs. Actually, he was moribund anyway.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

evidence

Hello Jon. If I had him on camera that would not be proof--merely evidence.

Cheers.
LC

[Debra A]

Hello Debs. Actually, he was moribund anyway.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn.
Well I used to think he was a possible when I read a summary of AP's work, then when it was discovered there was no police/family connection cover-up I went off him a bit.
I've been a bit worried for a while now though...didn't Macnaghten and the police take another look at Cutbush as a suspect at all in 1894 when the Sun was making accusations and Macnaghten was writing about him?! Why was Macnaghten repeating incorrect information from 1891 and not the correct information the Sun had?!

[mariab]

didn't Macnaghten and the police take another look at Cutbush as a suspect at all in 1894 when the Sun was making accusations and Macnaghten was writing about him?! Why was Macnaghten repeating incorrect information from 1891 and not the correct information the Sun had?!

Haven't had the time to read about Cutbush (I'll read your and Simon Wood's article soon, Lynn), but didn't Macnaghten use incorrect information from 1891 about Ostrog in his Memorandum? Still trying to clear this up, with sources presently missing (i.e., the original letter by Macnaghten to the Banstead Hospital superintendent).

[Stephen Thomas]

As much as I enjoyed Simon's piece on Cutbush, I didn't see anything in there that we didn't already know, that would suddenly make him 'bite the dust' as a suspect. What did I miss?

Hi Debra

Yes, like you I enjoyed Simon's excellent Cutbush essay and was pleased to note that he thanked you and Robert and AP, who a few years ago did absolutely terrific research into the Cutbush family. And, perhaps like you, I was waiting for the killer fact or theory that could rule out the Cutbush candidacy but it just didn't appear.

[Debra A]

Hi Debra

Yes, like you I enjoyed Simon's excellent Cutbush essay and was pleased to note that he thanked you and Robert and AP, who a few years ago did absolutely terrific research into the Cutbush family. And, perhaps like you, I was waiting for the killer fact or theory that could rule out the Cutbush candidacy but it just didn't appear.

Hi Stephen, I just find it odd that those who believe that the top cops were basically clueless when it came to knowing a good suspect or two, believe that one of those top cops can at least be relied upon to know a bad suspect!
Thanks for the compliments about the research. Robert had it all sewn up before I even heard of Cutbush to be honest.

[PaulB]

Debs, Stephen,
I think people should not lose sight of the fact that we are not necessarily trying to prove that someone was or wasn't Jack the Ripper, but are trying to establish why they were suspected.

Cutbush seems to have thought he was suspected of being Jack the Ripper, at least if we accept the story of "W.K." as recited in The Sun and seemingly confirmed by Lloyds, to the effect that Cutbush said “that they say I am Jack the Ripper – but I am not, though all their insides are open and their bowels are all out. I am a medical man, you know, but not Jack the Ripper – you must not think I am. But they do, and they are after me, and the runners are after me, for they want the £500 which is offered for my capture, and I have only been cutting up girls and laying them out.”

I think the "cutting up girls" refers to the crude illustrations he had done, but, whilst appreciating that he was a battery short of a working flashlight, he clearly thought - and probably rightly - that he was a suspect. I, too, seem to have missed where "W.K.'s" story and Cutbush's beliefs were addressed in Simon's article. I'd appreciate it is someone could draw my attention to this.