Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ripperologist 127: August 2012

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Toofew
    replied
    Originally posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
    Oh rats, the word 'signed' is missing from the pic. The writing bears a superficial resemblance to the 'From hell' letter, but none at all to 'Dear Boss'. I don't understand the practice of writing the word 'signed' to the far left of a signature. Rather like stating the obvious.
    <snip>

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott
    Tom, the term "signed" or an appropriate abbreviation for it has, in my experience looking at documents, always been indicative of a copy; if a true copy, it is normally, at least in American older documents, indicated on the top-left of the first page.

    Best of wishes,

    Billy

    Leave a comment:


  • Monty
    replied
    Thank you Hutch,

    Believe me, she is better in person.

    Chris,

    Here are a few Houndsditch/Sidney St related shots.

    1) The plaque Hutch mentioned. Cathy was part of the team which bought that to be placed on the wall near the scene. It couldnt be placed on the scene as its a little bit out of the way and its location is a private building, so they placed it near as they could to the spot.

    2) One of the guns used at the Houndsditch scene. I felt very uncomfortable holding it but I wanted to give an idea of its size. Extremely heavy and, as I said, I did not like holding it.

    3 & 4) Exhibits used at the inquest, including scale wooden models of the scenes.

    Cheers

    Monty
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • ChrisGeorge
    replied
    Originally posted by Hutch Orris View Post
    May I add my sincere thanks to all those who worked hard to bring us these pictures from Wood Lane. I would also echo the praise for Cath Coulthard, who I have never met in person but communicated with by email and found to be helpful. She under took her stewardship of the museum as a volunteer on top of her regular Police work.

    It is the periodic drip of new discovery that gives us hope and will keep us all bickering for years to come.

    Ah, Harrow Place Travelodge. A great place to stay. A cockerel's stride, (It censored the short version of cockerel! ), to the heart of Spitalfields and yet 3 minutes away from Liverpool Street station from where you can reach the rest of London.

    Looking towards the Travelodge the jewellers where the three Police Officers were callously murdered that led to the siege of Sidney Street would have been on the right where the modern office blocks are now.

    The memorial plaque to Sergeants Tucker and Bentley and Constable Choate is located on the low wall on the left, disappointingly positioned well below eye level of those that pass by.
    Thank you, Hutch, for your newsy and informative post. I shall have to look for the memorial plaque to Sergeants Tucker and Bentley and Constable Choate when next I am in the vicinity.

    Best regards

    Chris

    Leave a comment:


  • Hutch Orris
    replied
    May I add my sincere thanks to all those who worked hard to bring us these pictures from Wood Lane. I would also echo the praise for Cath Coulthard, who I have never met in person but communicated with by email and found to be helpful. She under took her stewardship of the museum as a volunteer on top of her regular Police work.

    It is the periodic drip of new discovery that gives us hope and will keep us all bickering for years to come.

    Ah, Harrow Place Travelodge. A great place to stay. A cockerel's stride, (It censored the short version of cockerel! ), to the heart of Spitalfields and yet 3 minutes away from Liverpool Street station from where you can reach the rest of London.

    Looking towards the Travelodge the jewellers where the three Police Officers were callously murdered that led to the siege of Sidney Street would have been on the right where the modern office blocks are now.

    The memorial plaque to Sergeants Tucker and Bentley and Constable Choate is located on the low wall on the left, disappointingly positioned well below eye level of those that pass by.
    Last edited by Hutch Orris; 08-15-2012, 11:15 PM. Reason: Spelling (The shame)

    Leave a comment:


  • Monty
    replied
    Its a good job one of us take photos of the important sites ;-)

    Here is a photo I too of the location during the last London Job. The second Photo is from the hotel looking back toward the spot.

    Cheers
    Monty
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • Stephen Thomas
    replied
    Originally posted by Rob Clack View Post
    I haven't Stephen as it's a pretty crap view. The photo was actually taken at the corner of Cuttler Street looking towards the Liverpool Street Travelodge.
    I've just downloaded this of Google Earth, it's more or less from the same spot.

    [ATTACH]14382[/ATTACH]
    Thanks Rob

    So everything on the 1912 photo is gone now. Ah well........

    Leave a comment:


  • Rob Clack
    replied
    Originally posted by Stephen Thomas View Post
    For Rob Clack....

    Hi Rob

    As I said before, your work and Neil's here is top notch. This is just regarding the 1912 Kings Block photo which I've always liked and is obviously taken from the junction of what was Harrow Alley and Back Gravel Lane.

    Might you happen to have a photo of what this view looks like now?
    I Haven't Stephen as it's a pretty crap view. The photo was actually taken at the corner of Cuttler Street looking towards the Liverpool Street Travelodge.
    I've just downloaded this of Google Earth, it's more or less from the same spot.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	GoogleEarth_Image (1).jpg
Views:	1
Size:	83.4 KB
ID:	664144

    Rob

    Leave a comment:


  • Stephen Thomas
    replied
    Originally posted by Monty View Post
    My photos not good enough for you Stephen?
    What photos, Monty?

    Leave a comment:


  • Monty
    replied
    Originally posted by Stephen Thomas View Post
    For Rob Clack....

    Hi Rob

    As I said before, your work and Neil's here is top notch. This is just regarding the 1912 Kings Block photo which I've always liked and is obviously taken from the junction of what was Harrow Alley and Back Gravel Lane.

    Might you happen to have a photo of what this view looks like now?
    My photos not good enough for you Stephen?

    Sniff

    Monty

    Leave a comment:


  • Stephen Thomas
    replied
    For Rob Clack....

    Hi Rob

    As I said before, your work and Neil's here is top notch. This is just regarding the 1912 Kings Block photo which I've always liked and is obviously taken from the junction of what was Harrow Alley and Back Gravel Lane.

    Might you happen to have a photo of what this view looks like now?

    Leave a comment:


  • Trevor Marriott
    replied
    Originally posted by Bridewell View Post
    Three points:

    (1) There is no record of Tumblety mentioning this big mistake, but that doesn't prove he never did so.


    (2) Committal proceedings are a stage on the journey to the higher court, so the difference, if a 'Not Guilty' plea has been entered, is chronological only.

    (3) I have disagreed with Trevor on very many occasions, but I thought his article was well-presented and structured in its approach. He didn't (as I read it) claim that Tumblety couldn't be JtR, only that, if JtR killed all MacNaghten's canonical five victims, that individual could not, on the available evidence, be Francis Tumblety. I think that was an entirely rational conclusion to draw on the balance of probabilities.

    Trevor's article has been somewhat damned with faint praise. That saddens me because I think it deserved better. It gets an unequivocal "Well Done" from me.

    Regards, Bridewell.
    Thank you for the kind comments.

    You are totally correct with regards to your observations and comments in para 3 above.

    That was precisely the purpose of the excercise and is by no means loaded as has been suggested.

    Leave a comment:


  • mklhawley
    replied
    Originally posted by mklhawley View Post
    Bridewell,

    Your mistake is 'on the balance of probabilities'. As I stated earlier, in terms of logic his argument was quite valid (i.e., convincing) but it is not sound. I don't expect you to know there the cherry picking has occurred because you don't research Tumblety. Enjoy my next posts.

    Sincerely,
    Mike
    As promised, here is the first of my posts:



    Sincerely,

    Mike

    Leave a comment:


  • mklhawley
    replied
    Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
    Nice try Mike
    Thank you Trevor, thank you.

    It is fact that if a committal could not be completed in one court sitting then the magistrate had the power to adjourn proceedings and remand the prisoner in custody for not more than 8 days and then bring him back to complete the committal.
    I agree with this statement wholeheartedly. It's just that the hearing and committal was completed in one day -November 14th- so it just did not apply in Tumblety's case.


    Hi Simon,

    Cherry pie is forthcoming!

    Sincerely,

    Mike

    Leave a comment:


  • AdamNeilWood
    replied
    Ripperologist 128

    Originally posted by Bridewell View Post
    Well done to all concerned. Rip 127 will be a hard act to follow.

    Regards, Bridewell.


    Watch this space!

    Best wishes
    Adam

    Leave a comment:


  • Rob Clack
    replied
    Originally posted by Monty View Post
    Presarving history fella.

    Monty
    That's what I told the police I stole a Kelly Brook cardboard cut out.

    Rob

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X