Monday, June 30, 2014

Dinos straddled line between cold- and warm-blooded




[ My intention with my blog is to simply collect articles of interest to me for purposes of future reference.  I do my best to indicate who has actually composed the articles. NONE of the articles have been written by me.  – Louis Sheehan ]





Dinos straddled line between cold- and warm-blooded

Ancient creatures’ metabolisms were more like those of tuna, not birds or reptiles

MIDDLE OF THE PACK  Dinosaurs’ metabolisms fit somewhere in between cold-blooded reptiles and warm-blooded mammals and birds, a new analysis of growth rate and energy-use data suggests.
Dinosaurs weren’t quite like cold-blooded reptiles, but they weren’t like warm-blooded birds either. Instead, they fell smack-dab in the middle.
Comparisons with modern animals reveal that dinosaurs’ metabolisms probably resembled those of great white sharks, researchers report in the June 13 Science.
The findings offer new clues into how the animals lived and also rekindle a longstanding debate. “This paper will make us go back to the drawing board,” says paleobiologist Martin Sander of the University of Bonn in Germany.

Sunday, June 29, 2014

 
http://www.thirteen.org/13pressroom/press-release/secrets-of-the-dead-carthages-lost-warriors/
 
Secrets of the Dead: Carthage’s Lost Warriors
Air date: 04/02/2014

THIRTEEN’s Secrets of the Dead Uncovers Evidence That Could Rewrite the History of the Americas in Carthage’s Lost Warriors

 
[ My intention with my blog is to simply collect articles of interest to me for purposes of future reference.  I do my best to indicate who has actually composed the articles. NONE of the articles have been written by me.  – Louis Sheehan ]

Airing Wednesday, April 2 at 10 pm on PBS


Did the Carthaginians flee the conquering Romans in 146 BC and take refuge thousands of miles away in South America? Professor Hans Giffhorns of Hildesheim University near Hanover, Germany believes they did.
In Secrets of the Dead, Carthage’s Lost Warriors, premiering Wednesday, April 2, 10 p.m. ET on PBS (check local listings), Giffhorns offers the proof he has meticulously collected to support his hypothesis. “Over the course of time, I have come across such a large amount of evidence, from a wide variety of areas, which all points towards one theory: that in ancient times people from the Old World reached Peru and joined forces with the Chachapoya,” says Giffhorns.
Did Carthaginian sailors, with possibly Celtic Iberians, journey to Peru 2,000 years ago? Convinced there were Carthaginians, who survived when Carthage fell at the end of the Third Punic War, Giffhorns begins his search for clues about their fate on the Balearic Island. What clues does he find and what do they reveal?
Why does Giffhorn think the dead at Kuelap, the mountain fortress in Peru, are actually the descendants of the Carthaginians and Celts? Do the similarities between the Celtic-Iberian settlement in Spain and the mountain fortress in the Andes support his theory?
Professor Schultz, a paleopathologist, featured in Carthage’s Lost Warriors, has identified cases of tuberculosis among the Chachapoya mummies, 1000  years before the Spanish invaders brought the disease to the new world. Does this prove that there was transatlantic contact with the Chachapoya before Columbus?
Also featured in the documentary is molecular-geneticist Professor Manfred Kayser, whose team of scientists have identfied a special marker for hair color in the human genome.  Could, Kayser theorizes, certain blonde-haired, blue eyed indigenous people, be direct descendants of Celtic warriors?
Religious symbols and images of gods that are similar, a traditional slingshot from Mallorca practically identical to a reconstructed original Chachapoya slingshot from Peru – more than 6,000 mile away – as well as the same technique of skull holes for medicinal and ritual purposes used by the Celts and the Chachapoya also point to a connection between America and the Old World in ancient times.
Secrets of the Dead Carthage’s Lost Warriors is a Doc.Station Production in association with ZDF, Arte, ZDF Enterprises, S4C and THIRTEEN Productions LLC for WNET.  Producer is Jasmin Gravenhorst. Director and writer is  Michael Gregor.  Executive in charge for WNET is Stephen Segaller. Executive producer for WNET is Steve Burns.  Coordinating producer for WNET is Stephanie Carter.
This program is among the full-length episodes that will be available for viewing after broadcast on Secrets of the Dead Online (pbs.org/secrets). Along with the extensive online video catalog, the series website provides resources for educators with lesson plans for middle school and high school teachers.
As one of PBS’ ongoing limited primetime series, Secrets of the Dead is a perennial favorite among viewers, routinely ranking among the 10 most-watched series on public television. Currently in its 13th season, Secrets of the Dead continues its unique brand of archaeological sleuthing employing advances in investigative techniques, forensic science and historical scholarship to offer new evidence about forgotten mysteries. Secrets of the Dead has received 10 CINE Golden Eagle Awards and six Emmy nominations, among numerous other awards.



Posted but not written by:  Lou Sheehan

Los Angeles Times Something very different about Dodgers during their turnaround

Something very different about Dodgers during their turnaround




[ My intention with my blog is to simply collect articles of interest to me for purposes of future reference.  I do my best to indicate who has actually composed the articles. NONE of the articles have been written by me.  – Louis Sheehan ]

Dodgers' defense integral part of team's turnaround
There’s a turnaround within the Dodgers’ current turnaround, and clearly it’s not coincidental.
At the midpoint of their 2014 season, the Dodgers are two games back of the Once They Were Giants in the National League West. The Dodgers have made up 7 1/2 games in the standings in their past 17 games.
That’s in large part to the Giants losing 12 of their last 16 and the Dodgers having won 10 of their last 13.
But there is a common thread to the Dodgers’ recent turnaround that goes beyond great starting pitching -- they are suddenly playing excellent defense.
Think that’s a bit hyperbolic? Best think again.
The Dodgers were one the worst defensive teams in baseball through nearly the first two months of the season, but for the last month they have been one of its best.
“We’ve been happier with it,” said Manager Don Mattingly. “Teams are having to beat us. We’re not giving them extra outs.”
When you have a rotation that may be the best in baseball, that makes all the difference.
In the Dodgers’ first 50 games this season, they committed 42 errors (27th in the majors), had a .978 fielding percentage (28th ) and had given up 30 unearned runs. They were hard to watch.
In their last 31 games they’ve made eight errors (tied for first), have a .994 fielding percentage (second) and have allowed two unearned runs. Their overall fielding percentage has jumped to .984 (15th). Not so hard to watch.
Kemp, of course, was moved from center to left, with Andre Ethier sliding over to center, to help solidify the outfield defense. Dee Gordon has continued to improve as a second baseman. And most recently, Miguel Rojas seems to be making a highlight play a night, whether he’s at short, second or third.
They beat the Cardinals and ace Adam Wainwright 1-0 Thursday behind right-hander Josh Beckett and some terrific defensive plays by Rojas, Gordon and Kemp.
“Tonight was about defense,” Beckett said.
More and more it is, which would have been unthinkable in the middle of May. If it continues, so should their winning ways.
Copyright © 2014, Los Angeles Times
 
Posted but not written by:  Lou Sheehan
 
 

Wednesday, June 25, 2014

Goulston Street Graffito


[ My intention with my blog is to simply collect articles of interest to me for purposes of future reference.  I do my best to indicate who has actually composed the articles. NONE of the articles have been written by me.  – Louis Sheehan ]




The Goulston Street graffito was some writing on a wall that was found beside a clue in the 1888 Whitechapel murders investigation. The meaning of the graffito, and its possible connection to the crimes attributed to Jack the Ripper, have been debated for over a century.

Discovery

The Whitechapel murders were a series of brutal attacks on women in the Whitechapel district in the East End of London that occurred between 1888 and 1891. Five of the murders are generally attributed to "Jack the Ripper", whose identity remains unknown, while the perpetrator(s) of the remaining six cannot be verified or are disputed.
After the murders of Elizabeth Stride and Catherine Eddowes during the night of 30 September 1888, police searched the area near the crime scenes in an effort to locate a suspect, witnesses or evidence. At about 3:00 a.m., Constable Alfred Long of the Metropolitan Police Force discovered a dirty, bloodstained piece of an apron in the stairwell of a tenement, 108 to 119 Model dwellings, Goulston Street, Whitechapel.
The cloth was later confirmed as being a part of the apron worn by Catherine Eddowes. Above it, there was writing in white chalk on either the wall or the black brick jamb of the entranceway.[1]

Versions

Long reported that it read, "The Juwes [sic] are the men that will not be blamed for nothing."[2] Detective Constable Daniel Halse of the City of London Police, arrived a short time later, and took down a different version: "The Juwes are not the men who will be blamed for nothing."[3] A third version, "The Juws are not the men To be blamed for nothing", was recorded by City surveyor, Frederick William Foster.[4] A copy according with Long's version of the message was attached to a report from Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Charles Warren to the Home Office.[5]

Anti-semitic feeling

Since the murder of Mary Ann Nichols on 31 August 1888, rumours had been circulating that the killings were the work of a Jew dubbed "Leather Apron", which had resulted in antisemitic demonstrations. One Jew, John Pizer, who had a reputation for violence against prostitutes and was nicknamed "Leather Apron" from his trade as a bootmaker, was arrested but released after his alibis for the murders were corroborated.[6]
Police Superintendent Thomas Arnold visited the scene and saw the writing. Later, in his report of 6 November to the Home Office, he claimed, that with the strong feeling against the Jews that already existed, the message might have become the means of causing a riot:
I beg to report that on the morning of the 30th Sept. last, my attention was called to some writing on the wall of the entrance to some dwellings at No. 108 Goulston Street, Whitechapel which consisted of the following words: "The Juews are not [the word 'not' being deleted] the men that will not be blamed for nothing", and knowing in consequence of suspicion having fallen upon a Jew named 'John Pizer' alias 'Leather Apron' having committed a murder in Hanbury Street a short time previously, a strong feeling existed against the Jews generally, and as the Building upon which the writing was found was situated in the midst of a locality inhabited principally by that Sect, I was apprehensive that if the writing were left it would be the means of causing a riot and therefore considered it desirable that it should be removed having in view the fact that it was in such a position that it would have been rubbed by persons passing in & out of the Building."[7]
Moustached man in uniform emblazoned with medals
Police Commissioner Charles Warren
Religious tensions were already high, and there had already been many near-riots. Arnold ordered a man to be standing by with a sponge to erase the writing, while he consulted Commissioner Warren. Covering it in order to allow time for a photographer to arrive or removing a portion of it were considered, but Arnold and Warren (who personally attended the scene) considered this to be too dangerous, and Warren later stated he "considered it desirable to obliterate the writing at once".[8]

Investigation

While the Goulston Street graffito was found in Metropolitan Police territory, the apron piece was from a victim killed in the City of London, which has a separate police force. Some officers disagreed with Arnold and Warren's decision, especially those representing the City of London Police, who thought the writing constituted part of a crime scene and should at least be photographed before being erased,[9] but it was wiped from the wall at 5:30 a.m.[10]
According to the police officer supervising the Whitechapel murders investigation, the writing on the wall did not match the handwriting of the notorious "Dear Boss" letter, which claimed responsibility for the killings and used the signature "Jack the Ripper".[11] Contemporary police concluded that the text was a semi-literate attack on the area's Jewish population.[11]
Map showing the location of the graffito (red triangle) in relation to 6 of the murder sites (red circles). Bottom left: Mitre Square (where Catherine Eddowes was found); Bottom right: Berner Street (where Elizabeth Stride was found). Others (clockwise from top): Dorset Street (Mary Jane Kelly), Osborn Street (Emma Elizabeth Smith), George Yard (Martha Tabram), Castle Alley (Alice McKenzie).
The Police interviewed all the residents of 108–119 Goulston Street, but were unable to trace either the writer of the graffito or the murderer.
According to historian Philip Sugden there are at least three permissible interpretations of this particular clue: "All three are feasible, not one capable of proof." The first is that the writing was not the work of the murderer at all: the apron piece was dropped by the writing either incidentally or by design. The second would be to "take the murderer at his word"—a Jew incriminating himself and his people. The third interpretation was, according to Sugden, the one most favoured at the Scotland Yard and by "Old Jewry": The chalk message was a deliberate subterfuge, designed to incriminate the Jews and throw the police off the track of the real murderer.[12]
Walter Dew, a detective constable in Whitechapel, tended to think that the writing was irrelevant and unconnected to the murder.[13] Whereas Chief Inspector Henry Moore and Sir Robert Anderson, both from Scotland Yard, thought that the graffito was the work of the murderer.[14]

Interpretation

Author Martin Fido notes that the writing included a double negative, a common feature of Cockney speech. He suggests that the writing might be translated into standard English as "Jews will not take responsibility for anything" and that the message was written by someone who believed he or she had been wronged by one of the many Jewish merchants or tradesmen in the area.[15]
In the controversial book Jack the Ripper: British Intelligence Agent, author and "master of the paranormal"[16] Tom Slemen claims that "Juwes" is a Manchurian word[17] meaning "two", and that Sir Charles Warren, a respected archaeologist who had knowledge of both the Biblical and Manchu languages, must have recognised the out-of-place word, and yet claimed he was baffled by the reference. In 1909 (says Slemens), Warren presided over a lecture with Claude Reignier Conder entitled "The Origins of the Chinese" at London's Caxton Hall, in which the similarities to the Manchu and European languages were pointed out, and the word Juwe was said to be the root of the English words dual, duet, duo.[18] Slemen uses this theory to finger Conder as the Ripper.
A contemporaneous explanation was offered by Robert D'Onston Stephenson, a journalist and writer interested in the occult and black magic. In an article (signed "One Who Thinks He Knows") in the Pall Mall Gazette of 1 December 1888, Stephenson concluded from the overall sentence construction, the double negative, the double definite article "the Juwes are the men", and the unusual misspelling that the Ripper was most probably French. Stephenson claimed that an "uneducated Englishman" or "ignorant Jew" was unlikely to misspell "Jew", whereas it was similar to the French juives. He excluded French-speaking Swiss and Belgians from his suspicions because "the idiosyncrasy of both those nationalities is adverse to this class of crime. On the contrary, in France, the murdering of prostitutes has long been practised, and has been considered to be almost peculiarly a French crime."[19] This claim was disputed by a native French speaker in a letter to the editor of that same publication that ran on 6 December.[20]
A still from Murder by Decree showing its depiction of the Goulston Street graffito. Erroneously, the film portrays "Juwes" as a Masonic term, and the original graffito was written in cursive script not capitals.
Author Stephen Knight suggested that "Juwes" referred not to "Jews," but to Jubela, Jubelo and Jubelum, the three killers of Hiram Abiff, a semi-legendary figure in Freemasonry, and furthermore, that the message was written by the killer (or killers) as part of a Masonic plot.[21] There is, however, no evidence that anyone prior to Knight had ever referred to those three figures by the term "Juwes".[22] Knight's suggestion was used in fictional treatments of the murders, such as the film Murder by Decree, and the graphic novel From Hell by Alan Moore and Eddie Campbell.
In addition to the confusion over the exact wording and meaning of the phrase, and whether it was written by the murderer or not, author and former homicide detective Trevor Marriott raised another possibility: the piece of apron may not necessarily have been dropped by the murderer on his way back to the East End from Mitre Square. The victim herself might have used it as a sanitary towel, and dropped it on her way from the East End to Mitre Square.[23] In Marriott's own words, however, it is an explanation that "many experts will regard as unbelievable".[24]

Inconclusive

To this day it is not fully agreed upon whether or not the graffito is relevant to the murders. Many modern researchers prefer the latter explanation, believing the apron fragment was discarded rather than placed and the presence of the graffiti was coincidental. They cite that antisemitic graffiti was commonplace in Whitechapel at the time and that such behaviors as specific placement of evidence and taking the time to write a message while evading the police is inconsistent with most existing profiles of the killer.[25] However, if the murderer had simply discarded the piece of apron, there must have been places where he could have done so between Mitre Square and the Goulston Street building. If, as some writers contend, it was taken simply for the murderer to use to wipe his hands, he could have discarded it, immediately it had served that purpose, by the body. If that had been his purpose he need not in any case have cut it away but could simply have wiped his hands on it without removing it.[26]

References

  1. Evans and Rumbelow, p. 132; Evans and Skinner, Jack the Ripper: Letters from Hell, pp. 23–24
  2. Constable Long's inquest testimony, 11 October 1888, quoted in Evans and Skinner, The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Sourcebook, pp. 213, 233; Marriott, pp. 148–149, 153 and Rumbelow, p. 61
  3. Detective Constable Halse's inquest testimony, 11 October 1888, quoted in Evans and Skinner, The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Sourcebook, pp. 214–215, 234 and Marriott, pp. 150–151
  4. Quoted in Evans and Skinner, Jack the Ripper: Letters from Hell, p. 25
  5. Letter from Charles Warren to Godfrey Lushington, Permanent Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, 6 November 1888, HO 144/221/A49301C, quoted in Evans and Skinner, The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Sourcebook, pp. 183–184
  6. Begg, p. 157; Marriott, pp.59–75; Rumbelow, pp.49–50
  7. Superintendent Arnold's report, 6 November 1888, HO 144/221/A49301C, quoted in Evans and Skinner, Jack the Ripper: Letters from Hell, pp. 24–25 and The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Sourcebook, pp. 185–188
  8. Letter from Charles Warren to Godfrey Lushington, Permanent Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, 6 November 1888, HO 144/221/A49301C, quoted in Begg, p. 197 and Marriott, p. 159
  9. See, for example, City Commissioner Sir Henry Smith's memoirs, From Constable to Commissioner, p. 161, quoted in Evans and Skinner, Jack the Ripper: Letters from Hell, p. 27
  10. Constable Long's inquest testimony, 11 October 1888, quoted in Evans and Skinner, The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Sourcebook, p. 214 and Marriott, p. 154
  11. Chief Inspector Swanson's report, 6 November 1888, HO 144/221/A49301C, quoted in Evans and Skinner, The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Sourcebook, pp. 185–188
  12. Sugden, p. 255
  13. Dew's memoirs, I Caught Crippen, quoted in Fido, p. 51
  14. Sugden, p. 254
  15. Fido, p. 52
  16. "Haunted Liverpool Ghost Tours". Retrieved 18 October 2013.
  17. Perhaps unfortunately for Slemen's theory, the book A Manchu Grammar (in which Paul Georg von Möllendorff introduced the romanization under which "juwe" represents the pronunciation of Manchu "two") would not be published until 1892, in Shanghai; and Manchu words are not pluralized with -s as in English.
  18. In fact the Latin duo derives from the same Proto-Indo-European root as English two, German zwei, and Sanskrit dvau. Manchu, being a Tungusic language, is unlikely to have had much cross-pollination with the Indo-European family.
  19. Pall Mall Gazette, 1 December 1888 (Casebook Press Project copy).
  20. Pall Mall Gazette, 6 December 1888 (Casebook Press Project copy).
  21. Stephen Knight (1976). Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution
  22. Begg, p. 200
  23. Marriott, p. 165
  24. Marriott, p. 164
  25. Douglas, John; Olshaker, Mark (2001). The Cases That Haunt Us. New York: Simon and Schuster. pp. 36-7.
  26. Kendell, Colin 'Jack the Ripper - The Theories and The Facts' Amberley Publishing 2010

Jack the Ripper mystery solved by top detective after 125 years FROM THE EXPRESS

 

 http://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/431148/Jack-the-Ripper-mystery-solved-by-top-detective-after-125-years

 

[ My intention with my blog is to simply collect articles of interest to me for purposes of future reference.  I do my best to indicate who has actually composed the articles. NONE of the articles have been written by me.  – Louis Sheehan ]

 

Jack the Ripper mystery solved by top detective after 125 years

THE Jack the Ripper mystery that has kept the world enthralled since the killer first struck on the streets of Victorian London has been blown apart on the 125th anniversary of the grisly crimes by a former murder squad detective.

The Ripper s killing spree has puzzled investigators for more than a century C5 The Ripper's killing spree has puzzled investigators for more than a century [C5]
And the bad news for the countless millions of amateur sleuths who have spent years trying to identify the nation’s most notorious serial killer is that he never existed.
He was just dreamed up by a drunken journalist called Thomas Bulling who wrote a forged letter to Scotland Yard in 1888 pretending to be “Jack” so he could obtain a scoop.
More than 300 books and dozens of films and TV programmes have named in excess of 100 different men, often on the flimsiest of evidence, as the serial murderer who slashed the throats of five women who he then disembowelled, bringing terror to the gas lit streets of Whitechapel.
The suspects have included everyone from Queen Victoria’s grandson the Duke of Clarence to Alice in Wonderland author Lewis Carroll.
Some even said a Sioux Indian warrior called Black Elk, who toured Britain with Buffalo Bill’s Wild West Show in the 1880s, was the guilty man. Others believed child charity campaigner Dr Barnardo was “Jack”.
But Trevor Marriott, a former murder squad detective with Bedfordshire police, has spent 11 years carrying out a detailed cold-case review of the killings, he has trawled Scotland Yard’s files and used modern-day police techniques backed up with state of the art forensic analysis.
“The facts of this case have been totally distorted over the years,” said Mr Marriott.
“The general public have been completely misled by any number of authors and publishers.
“Jack is supposed to be responsible for five victims, but there were other similar murders before and after the ones attributed to him, both in this country and abroad in America and Germany.”
jack the ripper, murder, whitechapelJack terrorised Victorian London
In total Mr Marriott has discovered 17 unsolved Ripper-like murders committed between 1863 and 1894. He believes a German merchant seaman called Carl Feigenbaum was responsible for some, but not all of those killings.
Feigenbaum was a crew member on ships that regularly docked near Whitechapel. He was executed in New York in 1896 after being caught by US police fleeing the scene of a Ripper-style murder there.
“The reality is there was just a series of unsolved murders and they would have sunk into oblivion many years ago, but for a reporter called Thomas Bulling,” said Mr Marriott.
Bulling was a drunken journalist with many police contacts at Scotland Yard, who in 1888 was working for the London-based Central News Agency. He was paid to supply crime stories for newspapers.
“Police got a letter that Bulling had written about the murders which he signed ‘Jack the Ripper’,” said Mr Marriott.
“It was the most ingenious piece of journalism that has kept this mystery alive for 125 years. Even now any modern-day serial killer is called a ‘Ripper’.
“You have to ask yourself if ‘Jack’ is an urban myth. Around 80 per cent of the books about him have a picture of a chap on the front stalking the streets of London in a long black cape and a top hat.
“They were the clothes of an upper class, wealthy man. But back in 1888  if someone dressed like that had actually walked around Whitechapel in the dead of night they wouldn’t have lasted five minutes.
“It wasn’t just one of the most crime-riddled areas of London, it was one of the worst areas in the country. It’s a false image that has been created by the likes of Hollywood film makers.
“New facts have come to light, we’ve now disproved the claim that the killer removed organs from the victims at the scenes of the murders, the organs were removed later once they were in a mortuary.
“There just isn’t a Jack The Ripper as such.”
But the interest in the Ripper murders is still so strong that just this month the East London Advertiser, the newspaper that covers the Whitechapel area published a 12-page souvenir pull out to mark the 125th anniversary of the crimes.
Meanwhile Trevor Marriott is mid-way through a 36-date theatre tour of the UK with his one man show called “Jack The Ripper A 21st Century Investigation” in which he reveals the research he has done and the forensic evidence that he says finally reveals the real story about the killings.

WILLIAM THICK

http://www.casebook.org/ripper_media/book_reviews/non-fiction/cjmorley/183.html
 Jack the Ripper: A Suspect Guide 
This text is from the E-book Jack the Ripper: A Suspect Guide by Christopher J. Morley (2005). Click here to return to the table of contents. The text is unedited, and any errors or omissions rest with the author. Our thanks go out to Christopher J. Morley for his permission to publish his E-book.

 

 

 

William Thick 

 

 

[ My intention with my blog is to simply collect articles of interest to me for purposes of future reference.  I do my best to indicate who has actually composed the articles. NONE of the articles have been written by me.  – Louis Sheehan ]

 

 

 

Sergeant William Thick was accused of being Jack the Ripper by a member of the public, Mr H.T Haslewood, who wrote to the police on the 10 September 1889 saying that he had very good grounds to believe that, 'The person who committed the Whitechapel murders was a member of the police force', and who's name he would forward. Haslewood admitted that his suspicion was based on very slight evidence, but with the help of the police records could ascertain where this person was on the respective days of the murders. Haslewood wrote to the police again a few days later, this time naming his suspect as Sergeant T. Thicke, misspelling Thick's name. He stated that, 'Thicke should be watched, and his whereabouts ascertained upon other dates where certain woman have met their end'. Written in the margin of the letter was the official police response to the accusation, 'I think it is plainly rubbish, perhaps prompted by spite'.
William Thick was born in Salisbury, Wiltshire, on 20 November 1845. He joined the police force in 1868 and was appointed to H-division, Whitechapel, where he earned the nickname Johnny Upright, due to his uprightness, both in his walk and his methods. He was described as 5ft 8"tall, with dark hair and a heavy drooping moustache. The press at the time commented on his striking checked suits and went on to describe him as a smart officer. F. P Wensley, ex- chief Constable CID, described Thick as, 'One of the finest policemen he had ever known'. Thick retired in 1893. His most prominent action during the Ripper investigation was the arrest of John Pizer (Leather Apron).
In 1902 he showed Jack London around the East End when the writer was researching his book The People of the Abyss.
http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/dst-legrand.html





 A Ripperologist Article 
This article originally appeared in Ripperologist No. 42, August 2002. Ripperologist is the most respected Ripper periodical on the market and has garnered our highest recommendation for serious students of the case. For more information, view our Ripperologist page. Our thanks to the editor of Ripperologist for permission to reprint this article.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Le Grand of the Strand Gerry Nixon
Mr. LeGrand found the grapes – or did he? This excellent article, first published in Ripperologist issue 18, uncovers new information about the detective hired by leading newspapers and the Vigilance Association.


 
[ My intention with my blog is to simply collect articles of interest to me for purposes of future reference.  I do my best to indicate who has actually composed the articles. NONE of the articles have been written by me.  – Louis Sheehan ]




 
‘GRAND, MR (OR LE GRAND) Private detective of 283 The Strand, employed with his colleague J H Batchelor by the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee and certain newspapers (including the Evening News) to make enquiries following the night of the double murder.”
Thus runs the slim biographical information available on Le Grand1 in the A-Z, which then accurately proceeds to recount his role, together with Batchelor, of recovering a grape-stalk in Dutfield’s Yard as well as interviewing Matthew Packer.
It has always been perceived that the police were less than impressed with the interference of the two private detectives into their investigations. They were even less amused when Le Grand and Batchelor whisked Packer off in a hansom for a personal interview with none other then Sir Charles Warren.
However, the police may also have had other reasons for doubting the integrity of Le Grand in his rote as private detective. For this was a man with a shady past and sinister future. In 1877 he had been convicted for a series of thefts and sentenced to eight years penal servitude.2 This earlier offence, as well as another conviction in 1889, was further added to in 1891 - three years after his work for the Vigilance Committee - following a remarkable affair which the Newmarket Journal called “The Extraordinary Threatening Letters”. Although he was now charged under the name of Charles Grant, it is clear that Grant and Le Grand were one and the same person. On 17 October, 1891 it reported that “James Hall, a clerk employed at the Polytechnic, said he knew the prisoner by the name of Grand, and from 1888 to 1889, was in his services as clerk. The prisoner was then living at 3 York-place, Baker Street, and had formerly lived in Charlotte-street, Portman-square. Prisoner carried on the business of private enquiry agent, and had an office in the Strand.
The charges against Le Grand in 1891 involved the sending of a series of letters demanding money under threat of death. All the recipients were ladies of some wealth. Three of his intended victims - Mrs Baldock, Baroness Bolsover and Lady Jessel - promptly took the letters to the police. Interestingly, all the letters were written in red ink. To Lady Jessel, Le Grand wrote: “Take notice, if you do not pay me the sum of £500 within ten days I will dash your brains out by a means that may prove fatal to those surrounding you.” He also threatened that “Hell itself will not protect you from my hand, far less the English detectives, who could not even find the man who murdered seven or eight women in the open streets of Whitechapel. If you look to protection from them, you might as well look to protection from your lap-dog.”
He wrote almost identical lines to Mrs Baldock, adding that: “Remember, Madam, that desperate men, or rather a man, brought to despair by the villainy of a woman, will do desperate things, and, indeed, a woman shall pay for it.”
The equally unfortunate Baroness Bolsover was threatened with dynamite “or a thousand other ways by which I may send you into an unknown eternity.” Disarmingly, this letter concluded: “I hope you will consider my request. It may be that one day I may be able to pay it back to you, only I must have it now. If you knew who I am I am sure you would pity me - to see I am come to act like this, which is highly criminal, and void of all human feeling. I knew you once. But enough.”
It confirmed that the prisoner in the dock at Westminster Police Court was a Dane “who gave the name of Charles Grant and who is known by the alias of Le Grand.” A week later it informed its readership that his real name was Christian Bnscony, alias Nelson, Le Grand, Grant, “French Colonel” and Captain Anderson, the last mentioned being the name most recently adopted...” It also announced that the prisoner “is stated to be well connected, his father having held a very respectable position in the Danish diplomatic service.”
The various Times accounts of his criminal career, whilst eventually identifying him as one and the same man, called him Christian Nelson in 1877. By 1889 he was “Charles Colnette Grandy or Grand”. In 1891 he was initially referred to as “Charles Grande alias Le Grand”.
Piecing together the court proceedings of the various reports, it seems that Le Grand served only seven of the prescribed eight years for the felony charge and was released in 1884. Under the terms of his sentence he was then supposed to report under police supervision for seven years. But Sergeant Bartells of Scotland Yard told the court in 1891 that on 6 May 1884 the prisoner had merely “reported himself on his liberation, and had never done so since.” His movements are then unknown until he re-invented himself as Private Detective Le Grand in 1888. In June 1889 he was convicted at the Central Criminal Court of sending letters to a doctor demanding money with threats, in company with a French woman named Amelia Porquoi alias Demay, who seems to have been livng with Le Grand as common-law wife.3 He was sentenced to two years hard labour. (Curiously, the Times originally reported that he was given five years.)
Le Grand was obviously at liberty for only a brief time before sending the threatening letters in 1891. One of the strange features of these letters is that they were signed A.M.M. These were the initials of A. Malcolm Morris, the Harley Street surgeon whom he had demanded money from two years earlier! lt was also made clear that Le Grand was never actually short of money when he sent the threatening letters. His landlady Nellie Fisher spoke of a three-day trip he made to Paris during this period. He was also in the habit of leaving large quantities of money (“£0 or £50”) on his table.
That Le Grand was suffering from some mental disorder seems beyond doubt. It was reported that in 1887 he had written to the Chief Commissioner of Police, complaining of the conduct of a constable and had threatened to burn down public buildings. This letter was also written “partly in violet and partly in red ink.”
It is surprising that this enigmatic figure has never before been suggested as a candidate for JTR. There have certainty been less likeIy suspects nominated. Le Grand appears to have spent much of his life in prison both befoi and after 1888. Yet during the latter part of that fateful yel he was able to wander the streets of Whitechapel as “detective” under the auspices of the Mile End Vigilance Committee. It would be interesting to know whether he approached them to offer his services.
It is also clear that he considered women were responsible for his problems and should “pay for it”. Set against this the fact that his known misdemeanours consisted of felor and of threats rather than actual violence. However, Le Grand was not averse to using force. When he was arrested in 1891 at Maldon in Surrey he had in his possession “an eight-chambered revolver and a life preserver” (A life preserver was a type of cosh). He also endeavoured to push one of the arresting officers “under a train as it entered the station”. Perhaps further research will throw more light on his criminal career.
The Times described Le Grand in 1891 as a “tall, well dressed man of military appearance”. His age in 1888, if was correctly given, would have been 35. The fact that he habitually wrote in red ink certainly conjures up images of 1888 and that other famous letter in red ink. That one concluded Don’t mind me giving the trade name. This has always been taken as a reference to the signature “Jack the Ripper”. Was this just a clever diversion? For there another well known line in that same letter which may of course be entirely coincidental:
Grand work the last job was.
References
1. Although known as both Grand and Le Grand, I have referred to him throughout by the latter as the more likely man during his detective days. Sergeant Stephen White reported in 1888 that one of the “private detectives” carried a letter addressed to “Le Grand & Co., Strand”.
2. The thefts included purses, pocket books and knives(!) - all stolen from shops. Le Grand appears to have been inveterate shop-lifter and admitted two previous convictions.
3. It was a complicated case which involved a trumped-up claim by Porquoi for breath of promise against Dr Morris. Mo specialised in diseases of the skin. His involvement with Porquoi appears to have begun when he treated Le Grand 1889 for an unspecified ailment.
Sources
Newmarket Journal, 17 October 1891; 24 October 1891.
Begg, Fido, Skinner: The Jack the Ripper A-Z (1996)
The Times: 12 July 1877; 8 June 1889; 27 June 1889; 29 September 1891; 7 October 1891; 13 October 1891.

Aaron Kosminski

Aaron Kosminski

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
[ My intention with my blog is to simply collect articles of interest to me for purposes of future reference.  I do my best to indicate who has actually composed the articles. NONE of the articles have been written by me.  – Louis Sheehan ]
 
 
 
 
Aaron Kosminski (born Aron Mordke Kozminski; 11 September 1865 – 24 March 1919) was an insane Polish Jew who was a suspect in the Jack the Ripper murders. He emigrated to England from Poland in the 1880s and worked as a hairdresser in Whitechapel in the East End of London, where the murders were committed in 1888. From 1891, he was institutionalized in an asylum.
Police officials at the time of the murders named one of their suspects "Kosminski" (without a forename), and described him as a Polish Jew in an insane asylum. Almost a century after the final murder, the suspect "Kosminski" was identified with Aaron Kosminski, but there was little if any evidence to connect him with the murders, and the reasons for his inclusion as a suspect are unclear. Possibly, Kosminski was confused with another Polish Jew of the same age named Aaron or David Cohen (real name possibly Nathan Kaminsky), who was a violent patient at the same asylum.

Life

Aaron Kosminski was born in the Polish town of Kłodawa, which was then in the Russian Empire. His parents were Abram Jozef Kozminski, a tailor, and his wife Golda née Lubnowska.[1] In 1881, he emigrated to England with his family, and moved to Whitechapel, an impoverished slum in London's East End that had become home to many Jewish refugees who were fleeing pogroms and economic hardship in eastern Europe and Tsarist Russia.[2] His sister and two brothers also left Russia and lived in Whitechapel, and his widowed mother later emigrated and joined them there.[3]
On two occasions in July 1890 and February 1891, Kosminski was placed in Mile End Old Town workhouse because of his insane behaviour. On the second occasion, he was discharged to Colney Hatch Lunatic Asylum, where he remained for the next three years until he was admitted on 19 April 1894 to Leavesden Asylum.[4][5] Case notes indicate that Kosminski had been ill since at least 1885. His insanity took the form of auditory hallucinations, a paranoid fear of being fed by other people that drove him to pick up and eat food dropped as litter, and a refusal to wash or bathe.[6] The cause of his insanity was recorded as "self-abuse", which is thought to be a euphemism for masturbation.[5] His poor diet seems to have kept him in an emaciated state for years; his low weight was recorded in the asylum case notes.[5] By February 1919, he weighed just 96 pounds (44 kg). He died the following month.[5]

Jack the Ripper suspect

Between 1888 and 1891, the deaths of eleven women in or around the Whitechapel district of the East End of London were linked together in a single police investigation known as the "Whitechapel murders". Seven of the victims suffered a slash to the throat, and in four cases the bodies were mutilated after death. Five of the cases, between August and November 1888, show such marked similarities that they are generally agreed to be the work of a single serial killer, known as "Jack the Ripper". Despite an extensive police investigation, the Ripper was never identified and the crimes remained unsolved. Years after the end of the murders, documents were discovered that revealed the suspicions of police officials against a man called "Kosminski".
An 1894 memorandum written by Sir Melville Macnaghten, the Assistant Chief Constable of the London Metropolitan Police Service, names one of the suspects as a Polish Jew called "Kosminski" (without a forename). Macnaghten's memo was discovered in the private papers of his daughter, Lady Aberconway, by television journalist Dan Farson in 1959,[7] and an abridged version from the archives of the Metropolitan Police Service was released to the public in the 1970s.[5] Macnaghten stated that there were strong reasons for suspecting "Kosminski" because he "had a great hatred of women ... with strong homicidal tendencies".[8]
In 1910, Assistant Commissioner Sir Robert Anderson claimed in his memoirs The Lighter Side of My Official Life that the Ripper was a "low-class Polish Jew".[9] Chief Inspector Donald Swanson, who led the Ripper investigation, named the man as "Kosminski" in notes handwritten in the margin of his presentation copy of Anderson's memoirs.[10] He added that "Kosminski" had been watched at his brother's home in Whitechapel by the police, that he was taken with his hands tied behind his back to the workhouse and then to Colney Hatch Asylum, and that he died shortly after.[11] The copy of Anderson's memoirs containing the handwritten notes by Swanson was donated by his descendents to Scotland Yard's Crime Museum in 2006.[12][13]
In 1987, Ripper author Martin Fido searched asylum records for any inmates called Kosminski, and found only one: Aaron Kosminski.[14] At the time of the murders, Aaron apparently lived either on Providence Street or Greenfield Street, both addresses of which are close to the sites of the murders.[15] The addresses given in the asylum records are in Mile End Old Town, just on the edge of Whitechapel.[16] The description of Aaron's symptoms in the case notes indicates that he was a paranoid schizophrenic, and known paranoid schizophrenics include serial killers such as Peter Sutcliffe.[5] Macnaghten's notes say that "Kosminski" indulged in "solitary vices",[8] and in his memoirs Anderson wrote of his suspect's "unmentionable vices",[17] both of which may match the claim in the case notes that Aaron committed "self-abuse".[18] Swanson's notes match the known details of Aaron's life in that he reported that the suspect went to the workhouse and then to Colney Hatch,[19] but the last detail about his early death does not match Aaron, who lived until 1919.[20]
Anderson claimed that the Ripper had been identified by the "only person who had ever had a good view of the murderer", but that no prosecution was possible because both the witness and the culprit were Jews, and Jews were not willing to offer testimony against fellow Jews.[9] Swanson's notes state that "Kosminski" was identified at "the Seaside Home", which was the Police Convalescent Home in Brighton. Some authors express skepticism that this identification ever happened, while others use it as evidence for their theories. For example, Donald Rumbelow thought the story unlikely,[21] but fellow Ripper authors Martin Fido and Paul Begg thought there was another witness, perhaps Israel Schwartz,[22] Joseph Lawende, or a policeman.[23] In his memorandum, however, Macnaghten stated that "no-one ever saw the Whitechapel murderer", which directly contradicts Anderson's and Swanson's recollection.[24] Sir Henry Smith, Acting Commissioner of the City of London Police at the time of the murders, dismissed Anderson's claim scathingly in his own memoirs written later in the same year, calling it a "reckless accusation" against Jews.[25] Edmund Reid, the inspector in charge of the investigation initially, also challenged Anderson's opinion.[26] There is no record of Aaron Kosminski in any surviving official police documents except Macnaghten's memo.[27]
In Kosminski's defence, he was described as harmless in the asylum. He brandished a chair at an asylum attendant in January 1892 and threatened his sister with a knife, but these two incidents are the only known indications of violent behaviour displayed by him during his illness.[28] The "canonical five" killings that are most frequently blamed on the Ripper ended in 1888 but Kosminski's movements were not restricted until 1891.[29]

David Cohen

Ghastly murder in the East End. Dreadful mutilation of a woman. Capture: Leather Apron
Newspaper broadsheet referring to the Whitechapel murderer as "Leather Apron", September 1888
Another Polish Jew proposed as a suspect in the Jack the Ripper murders was Aaron Davis Cohen or David Cohen, whose incarceration at Colney Hatch Lunatic Asylum roughly coincided with the end of the murders. He was committed on 12 December 1888, about one month after the murder of Mary Jane Kelly on 9 November. He was described as violently antisocial, exhibited destructive tendencies while at the asylum, and had to be restrained. He was the same age as Kosminski, and died at the asylum in October 1889.[30] Author Martin Fido suggested in his book The Crimes, Detection and Death of Jack the Ripper (1987) that the name "David Cohen" was used by the asylum as a simple name for an inmate whose true name (Kosminski or Kaminsky) was too difficult to spell or easily misunderstood.[31] Fido identified Cohen with "Leather Apron", a Polish Jewish bootmaker blamed for the murders in local gossip, and speculated that Cohen's true identity was Nathan Kaminsky, a bootmaker living in Whitechapel who had been treated at one time for syphilis. Fido was unable to trace Kaminsky after May 1888, and records of Cohen begin that December.[32] Fido suggested that police officials confused the name Kaminsky with Kosminski, resulting in the wrong man coming under suspicion.[20] As with Kosminski, the asylum case notes say he spoke only Yiddish.[33]
The implication is that Kaminsky's syphilis was not cured in May 1888 but in remission, and he began to kill prostitutes as an act of revenge because it had affected his brain. However, Cohen's death certificate makes no mention of syphilis but gives the cause of death as "exhaustion of mania" with phthisis, a then prevalent form of pulmonary tuberculosis, as the secondary cause. Kaminsky might have died as an "unknown" as hundreds of people did each year in the late 19th century. That would account for Fido's inability to find a record of his death in England and Wales during the probable period of his life.[34]
Nigel Cawthorne dismissed Cohen as a likely suspect because in the asylum his assaults were undirected, and his behaviour was wild and uncontrolled, whereas the Ripper seemed to attack specifically and quietly.[35] In contrast, former FBI criminal profiler John Douglas has asserted in his book The Cases That Haunt Us that behavioural clues gathered from the murders all point to a person "known to the police as David Cohen ... or someone very much like him".[36] Using criminal profiling techniques Douglas and Roy Hazlewood concluded that the Whitechapel murderer would have been someone of Kosminski's or Cohen's age, marital status and social class who exhibited erratic or irrational antisocial behaviour and who lived close to the scenes of the murders.
John Pizer
John Pizer was another Polish Jew who worked as a bootmaker in Whitechapel. Police Sergeant William Thicke arrested him on 10 September 1888 on suspicion of being "Leather Apron". Thicke apparently believed that he had committed a string of minor assaults on prostitutes, and he did have a prior conviction for a stabbing offence.[37] The investigating inspector, however, reported that "there is no evidence whatsoever against him",[38] and he was cleared of suspicion when it turned out that he had alibis for two of the murders. He was staying with relatives at the time of one of the murders, and he was talking with a police officer while watching a spectacular fire on the London Docks at the time of another.[39] Pizer successfully obtained monetary compensation from at least one newspaper that had named him as the murderer.[40]

See also

Notes

  1. House, Robert (March 2006), "The Kozminski File", Ripperologist, No. 65
  2. Kershen, Anne J., "The Immigrant Community of Whitechapel at the Time of the Jack the Ripper Murders", in Werner, pp. 65–97; Vaughan, Laura, "Mapping the East End Labyrinth", in Werner, p. 225
  3. Begg, pp. 269–273
  4. Colney Hatch Register of Admissions, quoted in Begg, pp. 269–270
  5. Lekh, S.K.; Langa, A.; Begg, P.; Puri, B.K. (1992), "The case of Aaron Kosminski: was he Jack the Ripper?", Psychiatric Bulletin, vol. 16, pp. 786–788
  6. Asylum case notes quoted by Begg, p. 270; Fido, p. 216 and Rumbelow, p. 180
  7. Woods and Baddeley, p. 125
  8. Macnaghten's notes quoted by Evans and Skinner, pp. 584–587; Fido, p. 147 and Rumbelow, p. 142
  9. Quoted in Begg, p. 266; Evans and Rumbelow, p. 236 and Evans and Skinner, pp. 626–633
  10. Begg, p. 269; Evans and Rumbelow, p. 243; Evans and Skinner, p. 635; Rumbelow, p. 179
  11. Begg, p. 269; Evans and Rumbelow, p. 253; Evans and Skinner, p. 635; Rumbelow, p. 179
  12. BBC News (13 July 2006) "Ripper case notes given to museum", retrieved 20 January 2010
  13. Tendler, Stewart (14 July 2006) "Official: Jack the Ripper identified" The Times, retrieved 20 January 2010
  14. Begg, p. 269; Fido, p. 215
  15. Marriott, p. 238
  16. Begg, pp. 269–270
  17. Fido, p. 170
  18. e.g. Fido, p. 229
  19. Begg, p. 273
  20. Whitehead and Rivett, p. 109
  21. Evans and Rumbelow, pp. 249–253; Rumbelow, p. 182
  22. Begg, p. 276
  23. Fido, pp. 77, 152, 207
  24. Evans and Rumbelow, p. 255
  25. Wilson and Odell, p. 78
  26. Interview with Reid in the Morning Advertiser, 23 April 1910, quoted in Cook, p. 178
  27. Evans and Skinner, pp. 262, 604
  28. Fido, p. 228; Rumbelow, p. 182; Whitehead and Rivett, p. 108
  29. Whitehead and Rivett, p. 108
  30. Fido, pp. 219–220
  31. Fido, pp. 219, 231
  32. Fido, pp. 216–219
  33. Fido, p. 220
  34. Kendell p80
  35. Cawthorne, Nigel (2000) "Foreword", in Knight, p. 2
  36. Douglas, John; Olshaker, Mark (2001). The Cases That Haunt Us. New York: Simon and Schuster. pp. 79–80. ISBN 978-0-7432-1239-7.
  37. Marriott, p. 251
  38. Report by Inspector Joseph Helson, CID 'J' Division, in the Metropolitan Police archive, MEPO 3/140 ff. 235–8, quoted in Begg, p. 99 and Evans and Skinner, p. 24
  39. Rumbelow, p. 49
  40. O'Connor, T. P. (1929). Memoirs of an Old Parliamentarian. London: Ernest Benn. Vol. 2, p. 257, quoted in Begg, p. 166 and Cook, pp. 72–73