|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** This is an archived, static copy of the Casebook messages boards dating from 1998 to 2003. These threads cannot be replied to here. If you want to participate in our current forums please go to https://forum.casebook.org **
The map view of the Murders
Casebook Message Boards: General Discussion: General Topics:
The map view of the Murders
Author: Ivor Edwards
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 12:28 am |        | One should not take things for granted. I am quite aware that if I present a theory, then I must expect to answer questions on it. Please dont assume that I came looking for blind acceptance.I am most certainly not unable to answer questions on my book.It was made clear from the outset that certain information, ( relating to routes and measurements ) were placed on this board because readers might find them interesting.
I have answered questions relating to this information and I may add on much more.However I must draw the line somewhere otherwise I will end up giving all information out on my book before it is published.However in your case I am prepared to make an exception.If you e-mail me with your question I will answer it so long as you dont place it in the public domain until my book is published. |
Author: Alegria
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 12:40 am | | That is fine. I have read the early edition of your manuscript and look forward to chatting with you. Will e-mail those questions in the morning.
Take care and goodnight. |
Author: Ivor Edwards
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 12:57 am | | Hello Joseph, I simply felt that Diana could reach her own conclusions with a little help. It is that simple.There is nothing more to be read
into it.I am sorry if my reply to her appears to be leading.Things are not always as they appear to be are they. Also I do not know if she intends to post the result of her research that is her decision not mine. |
Author: Joseph
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 02:30 am | | Hello Mr. Edwards,
If you help someone reach conclusions, you take the risk of prejudicing their opinion, which is the very definition of the term, "leading question", e.g. "What do you expect to find at or near the centre? You know somthing is there dont you" (By Ivor Edwards on Friday, January 12, 2001 - 09:23 pm). This is a tactic employed by used car salesmen to change lookers into buyers; I hope this isn't what you're all about.
I walked through a house of mirrors once; the experience was an education in things not being as they appear. My questions are not concerned with distortions; they are concerned with things that are exactly what they appear to be. For example: You complement Diana for her observation of time increments, and their similarities, yet Diana's message, (See: By Diana on Friday, January 12, 2001 - 06:14 pm) doesn't refer to time increments at all; can you explain your answer?
The main idea of my third paragraph remains valid as well as unanswered.
What advantage does Diana gain from answering your questions: "You know where the routes go but why do they go there ?Why do the routes lead to the centre? You were so right about the times you picked up on.Why are those times nearly all the same? Why are those distances nearly all the same? What do you expect to find at or near the centre? You know somthing is there dont you"
(Ibid, Edwards, January 12, 2001 09:23 pm).
How does one benefit by answering these questions?
Best regards
he |
Author: Davidoz
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 09:31 am | | Ivor,
The Who? The How? They are incidentals to you at this moment. Your question is WHY?
It seems the only person who could conceivably answer that question is ...no longer with us? |
Author: Davidoz
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 10:49 am | | Ivor,
Truly, "a house full of mirrors"! |
Author: Joseph
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 11:05 am | | Dear Ozzie babbling psycho jackanapes,
Have you noticed that no-one talks to you for long; even Mr. Edwards doesn't want much to do with you. Ask yourself why. It is because you're a fraud? See FYI By Joseph on Thursday, January 11, 2001 - 02:11 pm.
Answer the questions, or go back to your house of psychotic dreams, and hide under your bed. |
Author: Diana
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 01:02 pm | | | I'm far too stubborn, narrow minded, bullheaded and set in my ways to be led. I haven't gotten very far in my research yet because I have yet to secure a good map. Nichols was last seen at the juncture of Osborn Street and the Whitechapel Road. That looks promising but I haven't found a map yet that shows me where Osborn Street is. Chapman was last seen by Mrs. Long, but she had got where she was going by then. Before that she was seen at Crossingham's lodging house at 1:35 A.M. She left Crossinghams and headed up Little Paternoster Row in the direction of Brushfield Street. I have likewise ignored the later sightings of Stride when she was already in the vicinity of Berner Street. Stride started out from 32 Flower and Dean Street between 7 and 8 P.M. There was a probable sighting around 11:00 PM outside the Bricklayer's Arms in Settles Street. I consider the grape man doubtful, so those two sightings should at least allow us to infer a trajectory. Of course Eddowes started out from the Bishopsgate Police Station and was headed in the direction of Houndsditch. Mary Kelly's first customer (blotch face with the bucket of beer) was seen by Mrs. Cox entering Dorset Street from Commercial Street with her. Mary was later spotted by Hutchinson in Flower and Dean Street from whence she headed toward Thrawl Street where she picked up Mr. Astrakhan. I consider Hutchinson somewhat doubtful as well. In the absence of a good map I can't do much more at this point. |
Author: Davidoz
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 01:14 pm | | Joseph,
WATCH THIS SPACE...Ivor and friends most certainly are! |
Author: Diana
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 01:44 pm | | | I copied Grailfinder's Oh-so-excellent map of November 30 onto the clipboard and after about 4 tries found another program that would bring it up. I then tried enlarging it but to no avail. I still could not read the street names. Anybody got a good map? |
Author: Simon Owen
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 01:47 pm | | Oops !
Okay then everyone , I will present a hypothesis of why I think three of the murders were committed not on the spot , but in a carriage ! Happy now ?
My hypothesis does use evidence and primary sources from the Inquests to come to the conclusion ; I am drawing my information from Evans and Skinner's " Ultimate Jack the Ripper Companion ".
Its not very much to do with removal of wombs at all actually !
I know very well that this is controversial , rest assured I got the hatches battened down ready for the oncoming storm !
Simon |
Author: Grailfinder
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 02:16 pm | | Hi Diana
I can help you out with your map problem if you mail me an e-mail address.
It is a 5.meg scan of the Whitechapel area with Street names etc, |
Author: Mike Anstead
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 02:28 pm | | To Christopher George,
Where did you get the photos of D'Onston's handwriting and the Lusk and Openshaw letters that were in your slide show? Do you think it would be possible to get a handwriting analyst to compare D'Onston's handwriting to some of the letters sent to George Lusk and the one sent to Dr. Openshaw to see if it can be determined whether D'Onston wrote them? I agree with you that this wouldn't prove D'Onston to be the killer, but it would be a strong piece of evidence against him, in addition to the ones I listed in an earlier message.
I'm glad you want to review Ivor's book. I think you will be quite impressed. |
Author: Stewart P Evans
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 03:51 pm | | 
(Copyright) |
Author: Christopher T George
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 03:51 pm | | Hi, Mike:
The majority of the images that I showed at the Park Ridge conference came from Stewart P. Evans to whom I must express my gratitude. These included D'Onston's letter of 16 October 1888, which is in the archives of the City of London Record Office. Stewart also sent me images of the Openshaw letter and envelope received on 29 October by Dr. Thomas Horrocks Openshaw at the London Hospital, and which is now in the Public Record Office at Kew. The Lusk letter is lost so I got it from one of the JtR books. The Openshaw envelope is part of the puzzle because it gives the game away that the writer of the letter, who spells "microscope" as "mikerscope" is not the illiterate oaf that he is pretending to be but an educated man, since he can spell "Pathological Curator" in the address perfectly well. As I noted to David Radka, I will be publishing on the matter of D'Onston and the Lusk and Openshaw letters in the April issue of Ripper Notes. The article promises to be controversial, since Stewart Evans for one has told me he does not agree with my findings. As for getting the judgement of a handwriting analyst, I am not sure I can do this before publication of the article, although such is not out of the question.
Best regards
Chris George |
Author: Stewart P Evans
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 03:58 pm | | 
(Copyright) |
Author: Stewart P Evans
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 04:02 pm | | 
(Copyright) |
Author: Joseph
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 05:02 pm | | Hello Diana,
I've been reading your Casebook contributions for a long time now, and instead of stubborn, I believe tenacious would be a better description. :-)
There is an excellent map of the Whitechapel/Spitalfields area of East London in the back of Stewart Evans book: Jack the Ripper, First American Serial Killer. You may also want to investigate this web site, http://www.bathspa.ac.uk/greenwood/map_e8h.html
it provides a focus capable map of London.
One of the concerns I had was that your exposure to Mr. Edwards leading questions, risked contaminating your research outlook. Even if your method of research doesn't use a control as a means of hypothesis measuring and testing, questions that guide a train of thought can distract as well as influence the investigation process, and unintentionally supply unearned support to other researchers theories.
Good luck Diana. |
Author: Simon Owen
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 05:56 pm | |  |
Author: Simon Owen
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 06:21 pm | | | |
Author: The Viper
Sunday, 14 January 2001 - 07:23 pm | | For anybody looking for good reproduction maps at affordable prices - which includes international mailing, try the following:-http://www.alangodfreymaps.co.uk/
The number of maps worth acquiring will vary from student to student, according to individual need and budget. My personal Top 8 recommendation is listed below (highest priority first). The first five maps, especially, have proved to be hugely beneficial. A second Shoreditch map is a bit of a luxury - you can make do perfectly well with either one of them.
1. Whitechapel, Spitalfields & Bank, 1894. Sheet 63
2. Whitechapel, Spitalfields & Bank, 1873. Sheet 63
3. Shoreditch, 1893. Sheet 51
4. Aldgate, 1873-1894. Sheet 7.67 **
5. Bank & The City, 1873. Sheet 7.66 **
6. Stepney & Limehouse, 1914. Sheet 64
7. Bethnal Green & Bow, 1894. Sheet 52
8. Shoreditch, 1872. Sheet 51
** denotes Godfrey's large-scale map series, others are standard series.
Regards, V. |
Author: Ivor Edwards
Monday, 15 January 2001 - 11:05 am | | | Maps used for Ripper research should be O/S maps which were available to the killer. Such maps are very accurate.During my investigation I traced the son of G Hutchinson.I was informed by the son that George did indeed have money on his person on the night of Nov 9th 1888.George had informed Kelly he had none. After leaving Kelly George changed his mind about giving Kelly money. The father stated that George turned round to offer her the price of a cup of tea.It was at this point that Hutchinson saw the suspect stop Kelly.Due to increasing work pressure and other commitments I am now leaving this board.I hope to be back in the near future with more information.Good luck to you all including the oracle of Delphi. |
Author: The Viper
Monday, 15 January 2001 - 11:28 am | | No. Maps used for Ripper research should be those offering the best possible representation of the area to the researcher. Nobody knows which maps - if any - the murderer might have used.
Maps should certainly be accurate and date from the correct period. The one recommended by Joseph, (14th January, 5:02 p.m.) is an excellent reproduction of London, but is as it looked c1830. Many features had changed by 1888.
The Godfrey maps recommended in my previous poste are in fact reductions from the original Ordnance Survey maps. Standard series maps are reduced from 1:2500 scale to 1:4340. The large-scale series from 1:1056 to 1:1760.
Regards, V. |
Author: Guy Hatton
Monday, 15 January 2001 - 11:35 am | | Hang on a minute, Ivor. We are told that you started your research in 1993. Now you claim, in the course of that research, to have tracked down George Hutchinson's son. Whilst I accept that this is not an absolute impossibility, I feel obliged to ask: Are you sure you had the right person? And how reliable might the memories of a person that age be? I'm sure it would be appreciated if you could tell us how you verified this person's identity, before you go.
All the Best
Guy |
Author: Ivor Edwards
Monday, 15 January 2001 - 02:43 pm | | | Guy, I interviewed the same man as Joesph Sickert interviwed. Melvin Fairclough wrote of him in The Ripper And the Royals. He told me how the meeting with him and Sickett came about by accident, this meeting was due to a young girl. While I was shown information relating to the murders and a photo of George. I was not shown concrete evidence.His wife supported his story. I was shown photocopy material given to him from his friend in the police. This friend believes his story.However I maintain an open mind on the matter. George must have been around 50 when his son was born I felt that while this was not impossible it played on my mind somewhat.I cannot prove his statement one way or the other. But I found no motive for him to not tell the truth. |
Author: Ivor Edwards
Monday, 15 January 2001 - 02:55 pm | | | If the killer planned his murders on a map ( as I believe he did ) then he would have used good maps available to him at the time. I have used maps which were available to the killer. I cannot answer anymore posts after Guys.Best wishes. |
Author: The Viper
Monday, 15 January 2001 - 03:41 pm | | That the murderer used a map to plan his crimes is only your opinion, Ivor. Even if he did (which sounds extremely unlikely to most of us here), you can't prove that he used any given map. There were good maps and plenty of cheap ones available to him. The point, however, is neither here nor there.
Your belief that "Maps used for Ripper research should be O/S maps which were available to the killer." shows that you have blinkered vision. Researchers and other interested readers of these boards may use maps for many reasons besides that of putting your theory to the test. For a range of valid research they must be free to consider any relevant materials so long as they are appropriate, (see earlier notes on age and accuracy). For example, useful observations can be derived from studying Goad fire plans and Booth's poverty map. Good reproductions of the OS Map, albeit scaled down, are certainly valid also.
Regards, V. |
Author: Wolf Vanderlinden
Monday, 15 January 2001 - 05:36 pm | | According to the A to Z, document and forensic handwriting examiner Sue Iremonger states that the signature on the marriage certificate belonging to the George Hutchinson who's son Mr Edwards and Mr Fairclough are supposed to have interviewed does not match the signature of the George Hutchinson who gave a signed statement to the police regarding Mary Kelly.
Wolf. |
Author: Caroline Anne Morris
Tuesday, 16 January 2001 - 04:33 am | | Maybe Ivor could join forces with Feldy - between them, their faith in dubious sounding family connections could surely move mountains - or perhaps not.
Love,
Caz
PS Sorry everyone, I have a very nasty cold and it's making me extra mischievous. (Well, others have been known to use such excuses, it's my turn today. ATCHOOOO!) |
Author: Guy Hatton
Tuesday, 16 January 2001 - 05:54 am | | Thanks for clarifying that point, Ivor. I had suspected that you may have been referring to the same Reg Hutchinson as Melvin Fairclough. If the interview took place, as you imply, not long after the publication of The Ripper and the Royals, and before the handwriting analysis was carried out, I think you could be forgiven for believing you had found the right man.
All the Best
Guy |
Author: The Viper
Thursday, 18 January 2001 - 06:52 am | | For attention of Chris George (in particular):
An answer to your question re-the origin of the names of Mitre Square/Street that you posted last week. Since these are not straight derivations from the Holy Trinity Priory they are listed here, as promised. These definitions are taken from A Dictionary Of London by Henry A. Harben, 1918.
Mitre Street. – Former streets on the site: The site was formerly occupied at the western end by "New Court, Duke's Place" and at the eastern end by "Mitre Court" (Horwood, 1799). "Sharp's Buildings," "Adam’s Court, Duke's Place" (Rocque, 1746). "Rose Alley, Duke's Place" (Oliver and Mills, 1677) at the western end.
In Lockie, 1816, this name was given up to "Mitre Court, Aldgate."
Probably named after the Mitre Tavern. (my itallics)
See Mitre Tavern, Yard.
Mitre Square. – First mention: O.S. 1848-51. Former names: "Duke's Place" (1677, 1746), "Little Duke's Place" (1799; Elmes, 1831).
Mitre Tavern, Yard. – On the south side of Shoemaker Row, Aldgate. In Mitre Ward (Rocque, 1746).
Adjoined the remains of Lady Chapel, etc. of the Holy Trinity Priory, the gateway of which led to the yard of the Mitre Inn (Home Co. Mag. Jan 1900, Vol II, p49).
Duke’s Place, Duke’s Place Court. – See James’ (St.) Place; Mitre Square; also Duke Street, Aldgate.
Duke Street, Aldgate. – First mention: Horwood 1799. Former names: "Duke’s Place," (Stow 1598, O. and M. 1677, London Guide 1758). "Shoemaker's Row" (Rocque, 1746; Maitland, 1775). Named after the house of the Duke of Norfolk, which had been built by Sir T. Audley after he pulled own the priory of Holy Trinity, and which, coming to the Duke of Norfolk by marriage with Sir T. Audley's daughter, was called Duke’s Place.
As you will see, my skepticism about Stephen Knight’s derivation of the street names from the Mitre Tavern is unfounded. Unfortunately I could not trace the age of said tavern or why it was so named. A possible clue is that the road immediately to the north is Bevis Marks. This is a corruption of Burics Marks, derived from the fact that in the middle ages the land north of the Holy Trinity belonged to the Abbot of Bury St. Edmonds. His house was on the site where the Spanish and Portuguese synagogue stands, and that building is no more than a hundred yards from where the Mitre Tavern was located. Sorry but I can’t spend any more time on this periferal investigation. Can we agree that the masonic origination of Mitre Square's name remains both unproven and unlikely?
Regards, V. |
Author: Christopher T George
Thursday, 18 January 2001 - 11:34 am | | Hi, Viper:
Thank you so much for looking into this for us. It's interesting and plausible to think that the name of the street and court might get their name from the Mitre Tavern rather than from the priory. Although it seems a bit of a chicken and egg question!
I did a net search and though I was not able to find out anything more about the Aldgate tavern of that name, the search has shown me that a more famous Mitre Tavern, located in Fleet Street, was a haunt of Dr. Samuel Johnston. The Fleet Street Mitre Tavern does have (wouldn't you know it!!!!) a masonic connection:
"Bro. William Preston in 1772 organized his first Gala Meeting in order to submit his work for the approbation of the Grand Officers and leaders of the Craft. An oration which he delivered on that occasion was so well received that he decided to print it, which with a description of the proceedings and other matter formed the first edition of his Illustrations of Masonry 1772.
He then proceeded to complete the lectures by adding the second and third degrees and their delivery as public 'Lectures to the Craft' took place at the Mitre Tavern, Fleet Street, during 1774 and were published as the second edition of the Illustrations of Masonry in 1775."
From HAVE WE LOST OUR WAY?
by Bro. Howard Wyatt, P. Asst. Prov. G.M., P.M.
Grand Lodge of New Zealand
Reprinted from the Proceedings of United Masters Lodge No. 167,
http://www.kcinter.net/~mstilwell/masonic/library/lost_way.html
The Fleet Street Mitre Tavern was visited by the American writer Nathaniel Hawthorne in October 1856. I thought the following from Hawthorne's notebooks might be of interest as a bit of Victorian London bearing on our interests, not so much for anything on Mitre Square, but London of the time in general. It includes a passage on a London unfortunate that recalls the pathos of Mary Jane Kelly's singing, "A Violet from Mother's Grave":
"Turning into Fleet Street, I looked about for a place to dine at, and chose the Mitre Tavern, in memory of Johnson and Boswell. It stands behind a front of modern shops, through which is an archway, giving admittance into a narrow court-yard, which, I suppose, was formerly open to Fleet Street. The house is of dark brick, and, comparing it with other London edifices, I should take it to have been at least refronted since Johnson's time; but within, the low, sombre coffee-room which we entered might well enough have been of that era or earlier. It seems to be a good, plain, respectable inn; and the waiter gave us each a plate of boiled beef, and, for dessert, a damson tart, which made up a comfortable dinner. After dinner, we zigzagged homeward through Clifford's Inn passage, Holborn, Drury Lane, the Strand, Charing Cross, Pall Mall, and Regent Street; but I remember only an ancient brick gateway as particularly remarkable. I think it was the entrance to Lincoln's Inn. We reached home at about six.
"There is a woman who has several times passed through this Hanover Street, in which we live, stopping occasionally to sing songs under the windows; and last evening, between nine and ten o'clock, she came and sang 'Kathleen O'Moore' richly and sweetly. Her voice rose up out of the dim, chill street, and made our hearts throb in unison with it as we sat in our comfortable drawing-room. I never heard a voice that touched me more deeply. Somebody told her to go away, and she stopped like a nightingale suddenly shot; but, finding that S----- wished to know something about her, Fanny and one of the maids ran after her, and brought her into the hall. It seems she was educated to sing at the opera, and married an Italian opera-singer, who is now dead; lodging in a model lodging-house at three-pence a night, and being a penny short to-night, she tried this method, in hope of getting this penny. She takes in plain sewing when she can get any, and picks up a trifle about the street by means of her voice, which, she says, was once sweet, but has now been injured by the poorness of her living. She is a pale woman, with black eyes, Fanny says, and may have been pretty once, but is not so now. It seems very strange, that with such a gift of Heaven, so cultivated, too, as her voice is, making even an unsusceptible heart vibrate like a harp-string, she should not have had an engagement among the hundred theatres and singing-rooms of London; that she should throw away her melody in the streets for the mere chance of a penny, when sounds not a hundredth part so sweet are worth from other lips purses of gold."
All this from a site giving the text of passages from Hawthorne's English Notebooks, at
http://www.eldritchpress.org/nh/pfenb01.html
Best regards
Chris George |
|
|
|
|
