Ripperologist 125: April 2012

[mariab]

You know me, I HEART money. :-p

[Debra A]

The incorrect information? Perhaps they were worried about the possible connection?

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn.
Connection with what?
Isn't Macnaghten the sole source for a relationship between Supt. Cutbush and Thomas?

[lynn cates]

all in the mind

Hello Debs. I meant in Mac's mind.

Cheers.
LC

[Phil Carter]

Hello Debs. I meant in Mac's mind.

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

Doesn't it strike you rather odd that according to the Macnagthen writings, the two Cutbush's were related, yet as would have CERTAINLY been known with ONE question, they weren't?. Err. one question.. "Are you related to this Cutbush character?" "No".

I cannot believe that question was never asked. Macnagthen must have known the true answer.. So the conclusion is simple. He made it up, he is laying a deliberately falsey, he is playing games by using complete disinformation throughout the MM, or the other possibility... when exactly was the first mention of the two Cutbushes involvement known in Ripperology? (Noe, NOT as a related pair) aming the two? Anyone?

Because if the last answer is later than the MM (1894) but near to the Aberconway involvement in 1959, then you may have answers. Ihave no idea though. Anyone?



best wishes

Phil

[Debra A]

Doesn't it strike you rather odd that according to the Macnagthen writings, the two Cutbush's were related, yet as would have CERTAINLY been known with ONE question, they weren't?. Err. one question.. "Are you related to this Cutbush character?" "No".

Charles Henry Cutbush retired from the police force in August 1891. Macnaghten was writing in 1894?

[Simon Wood]

Hi Debra,

One would have thought that in 1891 when the THC shenanigans were going on, just out of sheer curiosity Macnaghten might have popped into Superintendent Cutbush's office and asked a rather obvious question.

Regards,

Simon

[lynn cates]

investigation

Hello Phil. Hadn't thought of that. I suppose an investigation would have been in order for Mac.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Cutbushes

Hello Debs. So Mac was worried about a possible relationship between the Cutbushes?

Cheers.
LC

[Debra A]

Maybe Macnaghten was just so supremely confident in his skills as a detective, he linked two quite rare names after reading in the Sun that Thomas was connected and didn't bother to check whether he was actually right or not?

Maybe Macnaghten did ask Charles H Cutbush if he was related and Charles mistakenly thought he was? he was quite ill in 1891 and could have been confused?

Maybe he did deliberately lie. But for what reason?

[Simon Wood]

Hi Debra,

"Charles mistakenly thought he was [related to THC]?"

Ill or not, people do tend to know about such things.

Regards,

Simon

[Debra A]

Hi Debra,

"Charles mistakenly thought he was [related to THC]?"

Ill or not, people do tend to know about such things.

Regards,

Simon

Well, I did write maybe, Simon.


OK then. For those who say it was a deliberate lie- what was the motive for that particular lie? There has to be a reason, some benefit for saying a Ripper suspect and a Metropolitan Police Superintendent were uncle and nephew?

[Phil Carter]

Well, I did write maybe, Simon.


OK then. For those who say it was a deliberate lie- what was the motive for that particular lie? There has to be a reason, some benefit for saying a Ripper suspect and a Metropolitan Police Superintendent were uncle and nephew?

Hello Debs,

In order to fathom out that, combine it with all the obviously wrong 'facts' in the MM.
Perhaps that gives an insight?

Hello Lynn,

Without seeing McCormick's book from 1959, which I would like to see the references to either Cutbush, or any references to what was known of the exact details of the MM between 1959 and say 1966, when Robin Odell discovered the Scotland Yard version, it would be interesting to know what was known or proposed re Cutbush at THAT time, would it not?

because I find it way beyond odd that this supposed piece of all-seeing, all-knowing literature penned by such a competant high-ranking policeman should have so many elementary errors from someone so well up to date with the goings on in the case, dont you?
Best wishes

Phil

[lynn cates]

Mac the tec

Hello Debs. Thanks.

"Maybe Macnaghten was just so supremely confident in his skills as a detective, he linked two quite rare names after reading in the Sun that Thomas was connected and didn't bother to check whether he was actually right or not?"

I could live with that.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

encyclopaedic knowledge

Hello Phil. Thanks.

"it would be interesting to know what was known or proposed re Cutbush at THAT time, would it not?"

Indeed it would. Wonder if questions were being asked?

"I find it way beyond odd that this supposed piece of all-seeing, all-knowing literature penned by such a competent high-ranking policeman should have so many elementary errors from someone so well up to date with the goings on in the case, don't you?"

Yes. You'd think there should have been those with an encyclopaedic knowledge of the case.

Cheers.
LC

[Debra A]

In order to fathom out that, combine it with all the obviously wrong 'facts' in the MM.
Perhaps that gives an insight?

But there has to be a specific reason for this particular 'lie' as you want to call it, surely, Phil?
I can't begin to understand what that would be. Why lie about a family link between a suspect and a quite highranking member of the Met.?
A lot of the rest of the incorrect information could be put down to error of memory or not working from up to date information can't it?