Grainger and Jabez Balfour

[Paul Kearney A.K.A. NEMO]

Everything Deb is saying is how I read it

Grainger is often described as the Ripper being caught red-handed

I still think him a suspect as his explanation that hooligans had caused the injuries to his victim does not ring true and the real Ripper might be just like him, apparently sane and claiming innocence

Why did Kebble think he died in prison, same as Swanson believing Kosminski dead?

Would there be a reason for prison / hospital staff to be lazy and respond to any request for an inmate to reply "He's dead"?

[Debra Arif]

Thank goodness for that, Nemo.

Chris Phillips has kindly posted Grainger's Fullham Workhouse entries over on casebook.

http://forum.casebook.org/showpost.php?p=181595&postcount=47

I haven't looked how they compare to the PMG list. But Grainger's whereabouts at certain times wasn't checked up on just for the fun of it surely?

[Tom_Wescott]

I'm sorry, but before any serious discussion can go into the idea that Jabez was describing Grainger, we need to see solid proof that Grainger was a career criminal living amongst and surviving from prostitutes. The fact that Grainger was suspected in 1895 has no bearing on this article and I don't see why it's the lynchpin of the theory. Le Grand was ALSO in prison and a Ripper suspect in 1895, and happens to meet every other piece of the criteria. I appreciate the loyalty to Debs by members of these forums, but I think the silence on this thread from certain individuals speaks volumes. They know Debs is wrong here. Nemo is a stand alone because apparently he sees Grainger as a viable suspect. He'll have to look elsewhere than Jabez for support for that.

Again, give us proof that Grainger meets the criteria laid out by Jabez. There's already mountains of proof that Le Grand does, not to mention solid proof that Jabez did indeed know Le Grand in prison. Where's the proof he knew Grainger? This is a lost argument without any proof to back up the suppositions here.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Le Grand was not thought by many to have been the 'Ripper' we have a few measley lines in a newspaper in 1892 (and a reference in 89) saying that Scotland Yard claimed the Ripper was now locked up in Portland Prsion on another offence.

The dirth of press reportage should not be seen as indicitive of how Le Grand was held as a suspect. We know from these reports, as well as Jabez, that many people close to him believed him to have been the Ripper, as well as a number of investigators. Because Le Grand worked with the police for a short time in the Whitechapel murders and could be connected to many powerful people, a strong effort was made to keep suspicion regarding him out of the press.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Paul Kearney A.K.A. NEMO]

Yes, please feel free to disregard my often inane ramblings

I'm not certain that...

"...passing his life among abandoned women, and thriving on the wages of their sin"

...refers to pimping

Robbing prostitutes or extorting some form of protection money would fit just as well

The second description of the exemplary prisoner does fit Le Grand and is obviously not the prisoner suspected of being the Ripper

If the Ripper suspect is Grainger, the description by Balfour doesn't seem to fit with the character you imagine him being from his later dealings with Forbes Winslow, though a man entering prison will be quite a different man 7 years later

[Debra Arif]

The dirth of press reportage should not be seen as indicitive of how Le Grand was held as a suspect.

Why not? In relation to the question of which of the two men would be more likley to be the subject of prison gossip about being the Ripper, it must have a bearing?

We know from these reports, as well as Jabez, that many people close to him believed him to have been the Ripper, as well as a number of investigators.

Really? Who then? Show us the evidence. You can't include Jabez as support when it's that identification of Le Grand we are contesting!One newspaper report is all there was, in which Le Grand isn't even named.

Because Le Grand worked with the police for a short time in the Whitechapel murders and could be connected to many powerful people, a strong effort was made to keep suspicion regarding him out of the press.

He worked with the WVC didn't he?

Last question. Why do you insist on replying to other people's posts as if you are giving a running commentary to an audience and not discussing it with the actual poster?

Nemo, I agree with your last post.

[Tom_Wescott]

Why not? In relation to the question of which of the two men would be more likley to be the subject of prison gossip about being the Ripper, it must have a bearing?

I’m operating under the assumption that the prisoners of Parkhurst didn’t subscribe to the Times. Also, Jabez’s sources were a guard, and former policemen, who appear not to have been feeding him idle gossip.

Really? Who then? Show us the evidence. You can't include Jabez as support when it's that identification of Le Grand we are contesting!One newspaper report is all there was, in which Le Grand isn't even named.

I can include whatever I want. Just because Debra Arif decides to contest something, doesn’t make it something other than what it is. Pending proof that Grainger was a career criminal who lived among and from prostitutes, and garnered ANY police suspicion at all, it’s clear the man in question is Le Grand. In short, this entire debate is premature. Where’s YOUR evidence, dearheart? I keep asking for it, but only get ignored.

He worked with the WVC didn't he?

I don’t know, did he? Is that the next thing open for debate? According Monty’s essay on the WVC, they worked closely with the police. As Le Grand was the head of their patrol, that connection alone would be devasting to the police. Also, as you’re aware, Le Grand claimed to have also worked DIRECTLY with the police as a paid informant. Given his nature, as indictated by his playing both sides of the fence in the Parnell Commission, it’s not hard to believe that Le Grand at times may have received renumeration from the police for information he held. Le Grand certainly employed ex-policemen and would have used their contacts for his own needs. There are numerous associations between Le Grand and the police, and if you’re willing to concede at least ONE of them, then it’s clear to see why the police could not publicize their suspicion against Le Grand.

Last question. Why do you insist on replying to other people's posts as if you are giving a running commentary to an audience and not discussing it with the actual poster?

Do I post differently than everyone else on the forums, other than being the only person willing (and stupid enough) to publicly disagree with you? If I’m quoting you and responding, I’m talking to you. If I’m not quoting you, then I’m talking to whoever cares to read. Nemo was also contributing, so a post or two of mine were directed at yourself, him, and whoever else gives a damn. If you have suggestions for better posting etiquette, I’m all ears.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott
P.S. My kid gloves are on at the moment, but as you say you'd like to be treated the same as every other poster/theorist on the boards, I hope you know what that means, what it entails, and are working on a thicker skin. I'm saying this as a friend and not to be patronizing or rude.

[Paul Kearney A.K.A. NEMO]

Could someone be so kind as to post a link the the Pall Mall Gazette article from May 7 1895 if they have one please

Thanks in advance

[Howard Brown]

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=12180

There you are, Nemo...

[Paul Kearney A.K.A. NEMO]

Thanks Howard!

[Tom_Wescott]

Thanks for that link, Howard. I enjoyed perusing the thread. Lots of good clippings, not to mention observations from Nemo and others. Seems the police never really suspected Grainger for the murders, though of course they would look into his past, nor really did anyone outside of Kebble think he was the Ripper, and the press mistook the identification of Kozminski for Grainger.

For the purposes of our discussion here, it's interesting to note that the police never discovered his whereabouts during the Ripper murder, so didn't know where he was living. There's no hint of his having enjoyed any kind of criminal career, or having been a violent, cruel, lustful character, well-known for his depravity. Yet Jabez's man was known to police, his associates were known to police, it was known where and with whom he had lived, and how he had earned his income, and how he would prey on fallen women, etc.

Does anyone still believe Grainger could have been Jabez's man?

By contrast, here's excerpts from a letter to the PMG published in their Nov. 26th, 1891 edition in response to Le Grand's highly publicized 'blackmailing' trial. The unnamed author of the letter first met Le Grand 'a few years' before and had followed his career since.

"The 'King of Blackmailers,' as I see the reporters have christened Grande, is really a very mean and squalid creature."

"Some time before the date of his last sentence but one for blackmailing, he had appeared in a police-court and provoked a magistrate to an almost unjudicial warmth of execration by a cowardly and brutal assault on one of the miserable women on whom he preyed (i.e. prostitutes)."

"He used to practice as a 'private inquiry agent' off and on, and the terror which he inspired among the more helpless class of his victims was due as much to the show he made of being 'in with the police' (en mouchard) as to his probably absurd boast of having a murder in his past."

"For with all his show of knuckle-dusters and pistols and personal violence..."

"...his pristine reputation for almost devilish astuteness."

I hope you can see why I take issue with Debs describing Le Grand as having carried himself like a gentleman and in no way resembling a 'ruffian'. I was surprised, however, to read in the May, 1895 article that Grainger was in fact described as having a gentlemanly appearance!

Again, I ask, is there really any doubt as to whom Jabez was describing? It seems Debs made up her mind before I joined the thread, so I'm asking everyone else their honest opinion.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Paul Kearney A.K.A. NEMO]

Hi Tom, could I just clarify please that you also think the man described as being sentenced to 27 years and being involved in blackmail is also Le Grande?

I haven't found anything that would denote Grainger as cruel and the like except perhaps, though Alice Graham herself claimed to have been slashed/stabbed in the stomach, one report states...

"Although the charge sheet defines the charge as "wounding in the abdomen", it is said the wound is internal and of a serious character"


(Post 9 here... http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread....grant+grainger)

Which, although an apparently erroneous report, may imply that he stabbed her in the genitals, making him a cruel and sadistic person to the readers, rather than the usual stabber

That article also gives different details about the lead-up to the crime, Grainger having given her money and considering her to be trying to "bilk" him

I take that to mean that he had treated her for a bit and she was trying to get out of any sexual interaction - ie she had been extorting money from him, rather than being extortionate (pricey)

We might be missing details from any investigation made before his arrest for the attack on Graham, as his solicitor states that he was suspected of the Whitechapel murders for some time and had been shadowed by the police

Was he on remand in Holloway for the previous charge that was dropped?

[Debra Arif]

The police never suspected Grainger of the murders but yet they tried to discover his whereabouts during the Ripper murders?
That doesn't make much sense.
I don't understand how anyone convicted of stabbing a woman can be descibed as non-violent! He had also been charged with a similar crime previously, the woman later dropping the charge.
Grainger was a drunkard, hung around with loose women (in the Whitechapel area) and was discharged from the Militia with a bad character...hardly a saint.
Jabez says the Ripper was alustful , delighting in every kind of abominable wickidness, a cruel, evil man, depraved,passing his life among abondoned women.Wonderfully skilled in the use of a knife,
known to have been the perpetrator of many serious offences, he had only been convicted of two.
Le Grand did nor pass his life among abandoned women. he passed his life among 'kept' women and high class prostitutes in the West End who operated from brothels.
None of Le Grand's previous crimes involved the use of a knife, Graingers crime did.The details of that crime itself were not published in the Old Bailey transcripts, being labelled as unfit for publication,
suggesting something more than the newspapers reported.

Tom, where does Jabez, in his description of the Ripper say that the Rippers associates were known to police,or that it was known where the Ripper lived?
Jabez gives us an acoount of Le Grand in his 1907 book, a man he describes as middle aged and seemingly respectable, a man he came into contact with almost daily but mentions none of his past wickedness
or cruel, lustful ways. He is surprised by the length of the sentence Le Grand received, but is unsure of the exact details, believing the crime to be blackmail, and the circumstances of the crime were probably of
the worst kind. That's it, that's all he says. Jabez doesn't seem to know anything of Le grand's criminal past in that excerpt.
This is in contrast to the Ripper, described by the same man in his Crimson Crime series.
Why would Jabez describe Le Grand as 'respectable' in one source and cruel, wicked, lustful, etc. in another?
It is not my impression of Le grand that counts Tom, it is Jabez' impression of him. In 1907 Jabez gave us his description of Le Grand! It's there for us all to compare to his description of the Ripper and his previous crimes.
And you cannot use Jabez' account of the Ripper to support your theory that Jabez' was describing Le Grand, that is just ludicrous.

[Howard Brown]

Thanks for that link, Howard. I enjoyed perusing the thread. Lots of good clippings, not to mention observations from Nemo and others. Seems the police never really suspected Grainger for the murders, though of course they would look into his past, nor really did anyone outside of Kebble think he was the Ripper, and the press mistook the identification of Kozminski for Grainger.


Tom...the police took extraordinary lengths if they were not considering Grainger as the possible culprit of the WM. His antecedal history is there for all to see in the PMG article. In fact, they inquired so extensively that they shook Swanson's opinion loose...in that Swanson believed the Ripper to have been dead already. The fact that the police did investigate Grainger in 1895 is the foundation of my belief that the police were not certain of the killer's identity in 1895...7 years after the skein.

For the purposes of our discussion here, it's interesting to note that the police never discovered his whereabouts during the Ripper murder, so didn't know where he was living. There's no hint of his having enjoyed any kind of criminal career, or having been a violent, cruel, lustful character, well-known for his depravity. Yet Jabez's man was known to police, his associates were known to police, it was known where and with whom he had lived, and how he had earned his income, and how he would prey on fallen women, etc.

It must have been overlooked ( I know its not on the thread you just perused, Tom, as its on another one in another thread in the Grainger Forum ) but Alice Graham claimed that Grainger stabbed her but he was not intoxicated. In other words, his brutality was not a result of him being drunk as so often is the case where the mask drops and a man acts in a different manner than when sober.

Does anyone still believe Grainger could have been Jabez's man?

Sure do. Grainger was pinched twice for d & d and arrested twice for assaults perpetrated upon women.

[Debra Arif]

three hours later...The main thrust of Jabez' argument was that the 'Ripper' got away with more crimes than he was convicted for, yet we know that Le Grand spent very little time as a free man.