The profession of Jack the Ripper.

[Whitechapel]

Craig you always deliver thanks for keeping it real.

The article shows the degree of emnity between Monro and Warren. However I also understand that the Conservative Home Secretary Henry Matthews didn't get on with ex Liberal MP Charles Warren and Monro was merely a pawn in their battle.

"To make matters worse, Warren, a Liberal, did not get along with Conservative Home Secretary Henry Matthews, appointed a few months after he became Commissioner. Matthews supported the desire of the Assistant Commissioner (Crime), James Monro, to remain effectively independent of the Commissioner and also supported the Receiver, the force's chief financial officer, who continually clashed with Warren. Home Office Permanent Secretary Godfrey Lushington did not get on with Warren either. Warren was pilloried in the press for his extravagant dress uniform, his concern for the quality of his men's boots (a sensible concern considering they walked up to 20 miles a day, but one which was derided as a military obsession with kit), and his reintroduction of drill." (Wikipedia on Charles Warren).

Warren and Monro were Empire building, Warren with his ex-army buddies and Monro with his ex Anglo-Indian friend McNaghten, failing his request for extra detectives.

"In 1888, Warren introduced five Chief Constables, ranking between the Superintendents and the Assistant Commissioners. Monro insisted that the Chief Constable of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), his deputy, should be a friend of his, Melville Macnaghten, but Warren opposed his appointment on the grounds that during a riot in Bengal Macnaghten had been "beaten by Hindoos", as he put it. This grew into a major row between Warren and Monro, with both men offering their resignation to the Home Secretary. Matthews accepted Monro's resignation, but simply moved him to the Home Office and allowed him to keep command of Special Branch, which was his particular interest. Robert Anderson was appointed Assistant Commissioner (Crime) and Superintendent Adolphus Williamson was appointed Chief Constable (CID). Both men were encouraged to liaise with Monro behind Warren's back." (Wikipedia, Charles Warren).

Although Monro is a good fit for Pierre's suspect, Pierre has said JTR's motive was worse than being fired or forced to resign. If Monro was being looked after by the Home Secretary maybe he was not as bitter as he seemed after resigning as Assistant Commissioner.

Maybe we can draw into the frame Sir Charles Warren as he resigned before Mary Kelly's murder. But how did he know the next murder would be behind a closed door ?

"Warren's resignation hindered the investigation. He had given an order that if another murder occurred, nobody was to enter the scene – a strange turn of phrase as the four previous victims had all been found in the open street – until he arrived to direct the investigation. Consequently, when the murder of Kelly was discovered by a rent collector who looked in through the window of her room in a Spitalfields lodging house, the police did not enter the room for some three hours because, unaware of his resignation, they were waiting for Warren to arrive." (Wikipedia, Charles Warren).

Since Pierre is no longer answering direct questions about the identity of the suspect, this is just conjecture on my part trying to second guess what Pierre is thinking.

[David Orsam]

Maybe we can draw into the frame Sir Charles Warren as he resigned before Mary Kelly's murder. But how did he know the next murder would be behind a closed door ?

"Warren's resignation hindered the investigation. He had given an order that if another murder occurred, nobody was to enter the scene – a strange turn of phrase as the four previous victims had all been found in the open street – until he arrived to direct the investigation. Consequently, when the murder of Kelly was discovered by a rent collector who looked in through the window of her room in a Spitalfields lodging house, the police did not enter the room for some three hours because, unaware of his resignation, they were waiting for Warren to arrive." (Wikipedia, Charles Warren).

You are leading yourself up the garden path here Whitechapel. The Times of 9 October 1888 reported:

"It is stated by a news agency that definite instructions have been issued to the police that in the event of any person being found murdered under any circumstances similar to those of the recent crimes, they are not to remove the body of the victim, but to send notice immediately to a veterinary surgeon in the South-west District, who holds several trained bloodhounds in readiness to be taken to the spot where the body may be found, and to be at once put on the scent."

There was no knowledge shown by Sir Charles Warren in his instructions that the next murder would be behind a closed door and no instructions not to "enter" the scene. It's just silly unsourced Wikipedia nonsense.

[Hercule Poirot]

Well okay, Hercule, if you say so, but then there is no meaning in the circular argument itself. This is hardly surprising because a circular argument is, by definition, fallacious and thus meaningless....

In itself, exactly. But this kind fallacy goes beyond circular reasonning. Validation of evidence within the arguments used as 'proof' is also fallacious. This often happens when one streches way out a an already weak argument or divides an argument into pieces and thinking he now has more arguments. Edwards' and Robinson's theories are just two examples where we notice this kind of extended fallacy.

Incidentally, any argument which includes the sentence "Like Pierre said" is pretty much bound to fail.

It's a matter of opinion.

Cheers,
Hercule Poirot

[David Orsam]

In itself, exactly. But this kind fallacy goes beyond circular reasonning. Validation of evidence within the arguments used as 'proof' is also fallacious. This often happens when one streches way out a an already weak argument or divides an argument into pieces and thinking he now has more arguments. Edwards' and Robinson's theories are just two examples where we notice this kind of extended fallacy.

Well, you started off this discussion, Hercule, by saying that a circular argument "actually can be meaningful" without demonstrating how, and I'm saying it can't. That's all.

[David Orsam]

It's a matter of opinion.

Of course, but I think you will find that if you use the phrase "Like Pierre said" and then quote from this piece of waffle:

"So logical reasoning in a circular form can be meaningful in real dimensions at the same time as it is being uttered: it can point to a meaning outside of the logical circle."

then you should not be surprised to find that it is my opinion that triumphs.

[Whitechapel]

I have to agree with David here, it is possible to be relativistic and say there is value in everything even a circular argument.

However when you are dating and working out a chronology, a circular argument is the kiss of death as it has no end and no beginning.

I remember an Archaeology tutorial I had where I unknowingly presented someone else's work that turned out to be a circular argument. It was used to date Roman levels in Cirencester, I got absolutely grilled and flambayed by the tutor and I have never forgotten it.

I don't think it's an accident that since Pierre has decided not to answer questions about the identity of the killer, the vacuum has been filled by theoretical debate.

I have already been up one blind alley tonight, courtesy of Wikipedia and have no wish to go up another one.

My favourite suspect is Tumblety as he was a woman hater picked up on by the American press, mentioned by Littlechild who once from an anecdote showed someone his collection of uteri and left behind some suspicious rings. Setting aside the question of where he was held after his arrest, I think in the absence of any tangible clues from Pierre for his policeman theory, I might get back to it as this is all getting a little bit too abstract.

[Elamarna]

Dear Whitechapel,

while I don't see Tumblety as the killer, I think you will achieve far more from looking more at him than from this "theory".
Especially if you see the latest thread

Steve

[Pierre]

Dear Whitechapel,

while I don't see Tumblety as the killer, I think you will achieve far more from looking more at him than from this "theory".
Especially if you see the latest thread

Steve

Hi Steve,

in my research there is a core.

Outside the core is the exploring area.

Regards, Pierre

[DJA]

Think it might be a worm

[Craig H]

The other Chief Constables, and Assistant Chief Constables, in 1888, incidentally, were: Andrew Howard, Major Gilbert, Captain Knollys and Captain Dean.
.

Hi David

Thanks for providing information on the additional Chief Constables Warren appointed.

Several of them fit the clue that JTR was from a wealthy family.

Captain Arthur Cypian Knollys was from a wealthy, respected family. He was born in 1851 – father William (Army Colonel). He pursued an army career before moving to Police. When he died on September 1890, he was living in an expensive home at 67 St Georges Rd, Pimlico.His first wife’s (Elizabeth) grandmother was Lady St Aubyn.

Captain George Henry Dean was born in 1850 in Barbados. In 1880 he was married and living in the East Indies,
where his daughter was born. In 1891 Census he was living with his wife (Mabel) and daughter (also Mabel) in an expensive home at 128 Ebury St, Belgravia.

Andrew Howard was born 1849 in Ringmore, Devon. In 1891 he was living with wife Susannah and kids in Southwark.

Do you know Major Gilbert’s first name ? I found his initials (W.A.) but couldn’t find him on Ancestry without more information (need more detail). He is probably the W.A. Gilbert who filed for bankruptcy in 1897.

Craig

[DJA]

Have you tried W.E.Gilbert?

[Craig H]

The article shows the degree of emnity between Monro and Warren. However I also understand that the Conservative Home Secretary Henry Matthews didn't get on with ex Liberal MP Charles Warren and Monro was merely a pawn in their battle.

Hi Whitechapel,

Thanks for your additional information.

The more I read about Warren, the more I can understand why hatred from him may have been a motive for the killer.

JTR as a police official would also explain why the killer always managed to just escape being discovered by a police man on a beat. This should have been a clue to the Police that JTR was one of their own, as he must have known their beat routines. It also explains why Kelly was murdered in-house as he knew there were more police on patrol, as well as plainclothes police (who were not working a known beat).

Finally, it also explains why the killings started around the time when Warren humiliated Monro by rejecting his appointment of Macnaghten, and ended (if Kelly was the final murder) when Warren resigned and was replaced by Monro.

If we take a bigger picture of what was actually achieved by JTR, the main “outcome” was that a disliked leader (Warren) who created negative morale was replaced by a more professional leader (Monro) who implemented a number of changes.

I don’t think Monro was JTR as he was too old (born 1838). I still think the most likely candidate was Macnaghten who had a close friendship with Monro, and had a personal motivation to discredit Warren (as Macnaghten moved his family from India to London based upon a job appointment that was overturned).

Craig

[Craig H]

Have you tried W.E.Gilbert?

Good morning DJA

It could be W.E. Gilbert. However, there's too many W.Gilberts in the Census and he didn't list "police" or "constable" in his census job title

Craig

[Simon Wood]

Hi Craig H,

Chief Constable, Major Walter Edward Gilbert.

Regards,

Simon

[Craig H]

Does anyone have a copy of Bernard Brown’s story “The rise and fall of Sergeant Kirkby” from Ripperologist magazine (May 2003) that they could post ?

Craig