Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

5 Questions With : PART 2: Chris Scott

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Hi again, Chris. Great stuff on this thread. Regarding another favorite character of yours - Albert Bachert. I think it's fair to say that you're responsible for the lion's share info unearthed on Bachert in the last 10 years, which I am grateful for, because I find him quite intriguing as well, and the more we look at him, the more complex he becomes. I am curious to know what your gut tells you about him. Do you think of him as a possible Ripper?

    Comment


    • #17
      Hi Tom
      Personally I doubt that Backert could be taken seriously as a suspect but I would place him more in the category of Matthew Packer in that he got a kick out of ingratiating himself into the case. Having said that, Backert was unusual in that he was, from a civilian point of view, fairly centrally placed in that he ended up as chairman of the Vigilance Committee.
      This raises the question of what the police attitude was to the Vigilance Committe and what level of information they shared with them. Would members of the committe have been privy to more confidential police information than the general ublic?
      Also, unlike Packer, his involvement was not a "one off" but involved a series of incidents over a considerable period of time. In some events he was a more or less passive recipient of information - in the number of letters he received and the scrawl on the outide of his house, for example. In others, he played a more active role, such as the incident with the man in the Three Tuns and the whole episode of the woman who approached him with a version of the Lodger story.

      He does seem to have been an inveterate attention seeker - when not in the area of the Whitechapel murders, in his whole career with the unemployed meetings on Tower Hill and elsewhere.

      He also acquired a sizeable criminal career - some of the charges he faced ranging from forging money (of which if I remember right he was acquitted) to stealing food items. And he also had a few run ins with authority figures such as coroners and magistrates.
      There are still unanswered questions, especially about his later life. In the 1890s (I forget date) he is quoted in an altercation with a judge as saying that he planned to go to America, and it was thought at one time that this was what had happened, as there appeared to be no trace of him in the 1901 census.
      However, I found him under the surname of Beckert in 1901 still in the UK, living with his married sister. But after that the trail goes cold...

      Comment


      • #18
        Question For Chris :

        Which books that specialize in aspects of the Case do you use often for research ideas ? Not that ones you may not use are lesser in significance, but just those that you refer to often.

        Thank you.
        To Join JTR Forums :
        Contact [email protected]

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Chris Scott
          I neither favour nor disapprove of any type of research per se but am of the opinion that any direction of investigation can only be judged by its results and the evidence on which those are based.
          That statement should be etched in stone somewhere. I knew I liked you for more that just your fine research.

          Unfortunately we work within a field which has seen more than a few flights of fantasy, sensation seeking and even cases of outright invention and myth making. These do not make life any easier but place even more requirements upon the quality of the work of researchers.
          Amen to that.
          Best Wishes,
          Cris Malone
          ______________________________________________
          "Objectivity comes from how the evidence is treated, not the nature of the evidence itself. Historians can be just as objective as any scientist."

          Comment


          • #20
            Hi How
            The books I use most often are the A-Z, Ultimate Sourcebook, Sugden
            They are indispensable

            Hi Cris
            many thanks for the comments - much appreciated
            Chris S

            Comment


            • #21
              Question For Chris:

              How much time have you spent ( a rough estimate ) over the years looking for photographs through the various archives ?

              One more quickie:

              Are there, to you knowledge, files which have not been made accessible, but will, ( similar to the Broadmoor files which were made available either in 2008 or 2009 ) which might be of use to researchers in the years ahead?

              Thanks once more,CS.
              To Join JTR Forums :
              Contact [email protected]

              Comment


              • #22
                Hi How
                Thanks for your message.
                How much time have you spent ( a rough estimate ) over the years looking for photographs through the various archives ?
                Actually not very much - although I have posted a few bits and pieces to the East End Photographs thread on Casebook, and although I very much enjoy seeing old pics of the area, hunting down new gems of the photographic variety is not one of the areas I gravitate to. This area of research is very well served by Rob Clack, Philip Hutchinson et al. and I applaud their dedication and generosity in posting what they find.
                Are there, to you knowledge, files which have not been made accessible, but will, ( similar to the Broadmoor files which were made available either in 2008 or 2009 ) which might be of use to researchers in the years ahead?
                Not in the conspiracy theory sense of material being deliberately withheld by "the authorities" as part of a cover up. I do not subscribe to any of the Ripper related conspiracy scenarios. There is some material which some researchers might like to see which will probably never come to light officially but this would mainly relate to characters with a Royal connection such as Albert Victor or William Gull. The majority of documents in the UK are subject to various time periods (from 30 years upwards) before they are publicly accessible. For example, census data is closed for 100 years after the date of the census, but material in the Royal Archives at Windsor is not subject to any such period but is permanently closed. Thus, for example, Royal wills are never published. But I understand that the archivists at Windsor are very helpful and will assist genuine researchers wherever possible.
                But I firmly believe that there is material of at least great interest (even if not necessarily case breaking implications) available in official archives. Examples of this in which I was peripherally involved were the acquisition by Rob Clack of the asylum records of Joseph Fleming/James Evans and the similar work recently by Lynn Cates on the records of Jacob Isenschmid. There were images of Isenschmid and it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that misfiled or misidentified images of major figures in the case - Fleming, perhaps, or maybe even Kosminski - may be out there somewhere waiting to be found.
                Far more unpredictable is material of interest and/or importance that may reside in private family records. I can state categorically that there is material out of there regarding one of the major suspects and his family which has not been made public at the request of the family involved. They want nothing whatever to do with the Ripper "bandwagon" (the word used by one family member) and their wishes must be respected in this. I personally was approached with material regarding Mary Kelly - the so called "Mary Kelly in Tottenham" story - which the provider of the information was only willing for me to post to Casebook on the strict proviso that they were not in any way identified. Again that had to be respected.
                I hope these thoughts help
                Chris Scott

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Chris Scott
                  This raises the question of what the police attitude was to the Vigilance Committe and what level of information they shared with them. Would members of the committe have been privy to more confidential police information than the general ublic?
                  The original committee headed by Lusk and Aarons appear to have worked well with the police and there certainly appears to have been exchanges of information. However, Bachert's committee appears, from what I've read, to have been little more than himself and a few of his personal friends, in a venture to collect money and further Bachert's political career.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X