Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Witnesses: Kennedy and Lewis - by Michael W Richards 34 minutes ago.
Witnesses: Kennedy and Lewis - by Sam Flynn 5 hours ago.
Witnesses: Kennedy and Lewis - by Wickerman 12 hours ago.
Witnesses: 36 Berner Street............... - by Robert 14 hours ago.
Witnesses: 36 Berner Street............... - by MrBarnett 14 hours ago.
Witnesses: 36 Berner Street............... - by Debra A 15 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Witnesses: 36 Berner Street............... - (16 posts)
Witnesses: Kennedy and Lewis - (5 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Did Mary Kelly meet the Bethnal Green Botherer? - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Police Officials and Procedures > Swanson, Chief Inspector Donald

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 03-11-2009, 12:22 AM
Tom_Wescott Tom_Wescott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,676
Default

To me it looks like either 'Lead' or 'Head', but that's an excellent suggestion, Mitch. And a great point, Sam. Perhaps he just wanted to qualify that this information was known only to a small group of people, none of whom were apparently Anderson's critics.

An alternative suggestion is not that the identity of the man was known to the head offices of CID, but that the man was PERSONALLY known. Allegedly, Bulling had the fullest confidences of Monro, so he was likely personally known to quite a few ranking officials.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-11-2009, 12:39 AM
Tom_Wescott Tom_Wescott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,676
Default

The word we're reading as 'officers' and offices' might in fact be 'officials'. Notice the second 'i' and the 'extra' letter.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-11-2009, 07:01 AM
ChrisGeorge ChrisGeorge is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,598
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Wood View Post
Hi All,

Stewart's post seems to add, "known to Scotland Yard head office[rs] [of/and?] CID".

Attachment 4848

Regards,

Simon

Hi Stewart

Many thanks for posting the scan, Stewart, and to Simon and Tom for adding their opinions. Yes I agree it appears to read, as Simon thinks, "known to Scotland Yard head office[rs] [of/and?] CID".

This notation thus seems to confirm the notions of Anderson, Macnaghten and Littlechild that the name of the journalist behind "Dear Boss" was known, and was presumably Thomas J. Bulling of the Central News Agency if we go by the Littlechild letter.

Although, as does Tom Wescott, I continue to find the police suspicion somewhat suspect and a bit too certain. Still it's good to get the opinion of one more top official on the matter, for what it's worth!

All the best

Chris
__________________
Christopher T. George
Organizer, RipperCon #JacktheRipper-#True Crime Conference
just held in Baltimore, April 7-8, 2018.
For information about RipperCon, go to http://rippercon.com/
RipperCon 2018 talks can now be heard at http://www.casebook.org/podcast/
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-11-2009, 07:19 AM
robhouse robhouse is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,211
Default

I am posting another scan of the marginalia that make make the writing a bit clearer.

It should also be pointed out that Swanson has underlined the part of the sentence that reads "and it would ill become me to violate the unwritten rule of the service." He also drew a line to the left of the paragraph that states: "Scotland Yard can boast that not even the subordinate officers of the department will tell tales out of school..." apparently to highlight it. This followed the sentence where Anderson states that "the ‘Jack-the-Ripper’ crimes are not within that category." (ie. the category of undiscovered crimes)

I think this makes it at least feasible that the phrase "known to Scotland Yard head officers of CID" refers not to the Jack the Ripper letter, but instead to the identity of the Ripper.

Rob H
Attached Images
 
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-11-2009, 12:36 PM
Stewart P Evans Stewart P Evans is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,994
Default Belief

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisGeorge View Post
Hi Stewart
This notation thus seems to confirm the notions of Anderson, Macnaghten and Littlechild that the name of the journalist behind "Dear Boss" was known, and was presumably Thomas J. Bulling of the Central News Agency if we go by the Littlechild letter.
Although, as does Tom Wescott, I continue to find the police suspicion somewhat suspect and a bit too certain. Still it's good to get the opinion of one more top official on the matter, for what it's worth!
All the best
Chris
Chris, in view of the clear cut statement of Littlechild that "it was generally believed at the Yard that Tom Bullen [sic] of the Central News was the originator..." I see no reason to doubt that what he says here is correct and that Bulling (and or Moore) was the one that Anderson and Macnaghten had in mind. Of course, Warren thought it was a hoax too.

What is interesting though, is the fact that Littlechild doesn't state that it was 'Bullen', but that it was believed that it was, thus indicating that it wasn't a proven fact, but was a belief. There can be several reasons for this, not least of all the fact that it is most difficult to actually prove in a court of law that something was written by a particular person.

Like much else in the case, the likelihood is that we shall never know for sure.
__________________
SPE

Treat me gently I'm a newbie.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-11-2009, 12:45 PM
ChrisGeorge ChrisGeorge is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,598
Default

Hi Rob

Indeed Swanson could have meant that the identity of the Ripper was known to the top officials of the Yard, although his handwritten note leads on naturally from the text at the end of the paragraph, viz., "[printed] the creation of an enterprising London journalist. [handwritten] known to Scotland Yard head officers of CID." Since the idea of each these annotations seems to expand on Anderson's printed word with more information from his own knowledge, I do believe he is saying the journalist responsible for Dear Boss was known to the top officers of the Yard. Case Closed.

Chris
__________________
Christopher T. George
Organizer, RipperCon #JacktheRipper-#True Crime Conference
just held in Baltimore, April 7-8, 2018.
For information about RipperCon, go to http://rippercon.com/
RipperCon 2018 talks can now be heard at http://www.casebook.org/podcast/
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-11-2009, 05:45 PM
Tom_Wescott Tom_Wescott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,676
Default

I'd like to thank Stewart and Chris for this thread, and Rob for his awesome addition above.

Just so it's clear, I'm not questioning that Bulling was Anderson's suspect for the Dear Boss letter. I merely question that it was the certainty Anderson makes it out to be. As Stewart noted, Littlechild doesn't appear to have shared Anderson's certainty on the matter, and I personally suspect Bulling and Moore only came under suspicion for the 'original' missives when the 'Moab and Midian' letter appeared much later, which is suspicious to say the least and does scream of a CNA hoax.

Having said all this, Rob House's offering above raises some questions about the marginalia which I'm going to post about on the 'other' thread, where I feel it's more appropriate.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-11-2009, 06:08 PM
ChrisGeorge ChrisGeorge is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,598
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
As Stewart noted, Littlechild doesn't appear to have shared Anderson's certainty on the matter, and I personally suspect Bulling and Moore only came under suspicion for the 'original' missives when the 'Moab and Midian' letter appeared much later, which is suspicious to say the least and does scream of a CNA hoax.
Hi Tom

You know, Tom, I rather think the opposite, and that the "Moab and Midian" letter adds extra complexities and some rather strange psychology not present in the original Dear Boss letter and postcard where the writer comes across more as a street-smart small time crook with a simple and joshing tone.

If the coppers (i.e, Anderson/Swanson, Macnaghten, and Littlechild) were right and Bulling and the Central News Agency were responsible With "Dear Boss", why would they complicate matters? They had got away with it. It doesn't quite make sense.

I think the Moab and Midian letter throws a monkey wrench into the works and makes it less plausible Bulling and colleagues actually were responsible for Dear Boss.

Best regards

Chris
__________________
Christopher T. George
Organizer, RipperCon #JacktheRipper-#True Crime Conference
just held in Baltimore, April 7-8, 2018.
For information about RipperCon, go to http://rippercon.com/
RipperCon 2018 talks can now be heard at http://www.casebook.org/podcast/
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-11-2009, 06:41 PM
Tom_Wescott Tom_Wescott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,676
Default

Hi Chris. To keep this thread on topic, I've created a thread for the Moab & Midian letter and moved your post there. I hope you don't mind.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-11-2009, 06:48 PM
Cap'n Jack Cap'n Jack is offline
*
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: jersey, channel islands
Posts: 1,497
Default

And is it not ever so slightly provoking that a suspect I know who was a very prolific letter writer was so well known to the senior officers of Scotland Yard that he was in fact related to one of 'em.
Is this now't but further misinformation and disinformation designed to mask the truth behind the suspect I know and his dear old uncle?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.