Thomas Fogarty

[Edward Stow]

Mcnaghten still believed that Tabram had been with soldiers in 1894. This conclusively shows that the police believed Pearly Poll.


"The body of Martha Tabram, a prostitute was found on a common staircase in George Yard buildings on 7th August 1888; the body had been repeatedly pierced, probably with a bayonet. This woman had, with a fellow prostitute, been in company of 2 soldiers in the early part of the evening: these men were arrested, but the second prostitute failed, or refused, to identify, and the soldiers were eventually discharged."

[Gary Barnett]

But both Dew and McNaghten got things wrong. As far as I know, sailors weren’t in the frame at the time and no soldiers were arrested.


This is later theorising by officers from the comfort of their club armchairs, a decent single malt in hand. Dew in particular is just one notch down from that old spoofer Arthur Harding, IMHO.

[Gary Barnett]

In later life, Reid would claim that none of the victims (he favoured 9, I believe) were seen in the company of men on the night of their murder.

Tom cites that in BHM, but unless Reid genuinely and correctly discounted all of the sightings, it is a pretty meaningless statement. And in the case of the soldiers he could have believed in them but discounted them because of the timing.

Some Reid trivia:

His father worked for Pickfords.

When he retired, John McCarthy organised a whip-round.

[Edward Stow]

Reid clearly didn't think the soldiers killed Tabram because he believed Tabram was a Ripper victim.
I think Tabram was a Ripper victim and not killed by the soldiers. But I see no credible reason to disbelieve thst earlier that night Tabram had been in the company of soldiers.
In fact it find it somewhat ludicrous to argue that she wasn't given that it was universally accepted that she was at the time...
We have Reid, Swanson, Dew and Macnaghten.

This refusal to take on board contemporary sources is a typically Ripperological anti-historical approach.

NB
I doubt Macnaghten wrote his memorandum from the gin soaked armchair of his club.

[Gary Barnett]

Reid clearly didn't think the soldiers killed Tabram because he believed Tabram was a Ripper victim.
I think Tabram was a Ripper victim and not killed by the soldiers. But I see no credible reason to disbelieve thst earlier that night Tabram had been in the company of soldiers.
In fact it find it somewhat ludicrous to argue that she wasn't given that it was universally accepted that she was at the time...
We have Reid, Swanson, Dew and Macnaghten.

This refusal to take on board contemporary sources is a typically Ripperological anti-historical approach.

NB
I doubt Macnaghten wrote his memorandum from the gin soaked armchair of his club.

Ed,

Dew tells us Fanny Mortimer paused at her garden gate on the night of Stride’s murder. If I question that, am I being anti-historical? Perhaps Fanny did have a garden in 1888 and Dew saw it. Either that or he cobbled together his reminiscences from his fallible memory, the anecdotes of fellow officers and press cuttings.

I’m not an historian like Drew Gray, who I’m sure follows the historian’s rule book to the letter, I work on the principal that no source should be considered holy writ and certainly not the memoirs of police officers or octogenarian gangsters.

Do you have any thoughts as to why Reid asked for Poll alone of the inquest witnesses to be cautioned? Clearly she fell into a different category in his mind.

Gary

[Edward Stow]

And Dew gave a very accurate account of what might be termed the official case.
He was a local copper at the time and it was in his Division. Who is to say that sailors weren't suspected? But in any event that part of his account does not touch upon Dew's recounting of the circumstances around Pearly Poll.

Dew's personal involvement in the different murders would vary as would his memory.
His account of Pearly Poll is very accurate as per Reid's report' Swanson's report and her testimony.

I produced four sources that agree.
I did not produce Dew in isolation.
And bringing one person's - Harding - self serving memoir doesn't mean all mermoirs are nonsense.

[Edward Stow]

Why would Reid want Pearly Poll cautioned?
Its not exactly a mystery.
She was clearly unreliable, flighty , drunk, sickly - a rough street prostitute, she had absconded... she was unlike the other witnesses.
That does not mean she was telling porkies.
It does not mean the police disbelieved the fundamentals of her story.
Clearly Reid thought she had something useful to say despite her shortcomings.

It has to be understood that Reid would have taken her statement, that would have been in front of the coroner.
She cannot have significantly deviated from that statement in her testimony or Reid would have challenged her and he didn't.
He was obviously worried she might deviate.

[Gary Barnett]

Why would Reid want Pearly Poll cautioned?
Its not exactly a mystery.
She was clearly unreliable, flighty , drunk, sickly - a rough street prostitute, she had absconded... she was unlike the other witnesses.
That does not mean she was telling porkies.
It does not mean the police disbelieved the fundamentals of her story.
Clearly Reid thought she had something useful to say despite her shortcomings.

It has to be understood that Reid would hsvectsjedn her statement that would have been in front of the coroner.
She cannot have significantly deviated from that statement in her testimony or Reid would have challenged her and he didn't.
He was obviously worried she might deviate.

But she was giving her evidence under oath, so why the need for an additional caution? Coroners often issued cautions when it looked possible that the jury might bring in a verdict identifying the witness as being criminally responsible for the death.

There’s nothing in any of the police reports to suggest that Reid or his superiors suspected Poll was attempting to ‘pervert the course of justice’, but if they had done, they might have wanted her to be given an additional caution to ensure that anything she said could be subsequently used against her for that offence rather than simply the one of perjury which was covered by the oath she had sworn before the coroner.

Having spent much of last week watching the proceedings in the supreme court, I’m feeling a bit Perry Mason.

[Gary Barnett]

Make that Horace Rumpole. It’s almost Chateau Thames Embankment time.

[Edward Stow]

It wasn't an additional caution.

One is an oath, as in to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth - on pain of being found guilty of perjury.

The other was a caution, as in the right to remain silent but anything you say will be taken down and may be used in evidence agsinst you.

There is no reason to believe she may have been an accessory to the murder nor that the police suspected her in any way of being.
So logically the caution also related to possible perjury.

My guess is that Reid wanted to reinforce the issue, to prevail upon her the importance of testifying truthfully. And she was probably very used to the standard caution.
It also told her she could keep silent. But she didn't.
I don't see any other logical explanation.

[Gary Barnett]

It wasn't an additional caution.

One is an oath, as in to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth - on pain of being found guilty of perjury.

The other was a caution, as in the right to remain silent but anything you say will be taken down and may be used in evidence agsinst you.

There is no reason to believe she may have been an accessory to the murder nor that the police suspected her in any way of being.
So logically the caution also related to possible perjury.

My guess is that Reid wanted to reinforce the issue, to prevail upon her the importance of testifying truthfully. And she was probably very used to the standard caution.
It also told her she could keep silent. But she didn't.
I don't see any other logical explanation.

It was additional. The purpose of the oath was to ensure that there would be legal consequences if Poll gave false evidence.

What was the purpose of the caution?

What evidence do you have that Poll was familiar with court procedure?

[Gary Barnett]

The police caution is not a warning to someone not to tell lies. It’s a warning that what they say may be used as evidence against them. It’s meant to give them pause for thought before they incriminate themselves.

[Edward Stow]

Now you are engaging in semantics.
I said it wasn't an additional caution as one was an oath the other a caution.
I didn't say it wasn't 'additional'. It was clearly 'additional'.

I suggested a purpose for the caution - to impress upon her the importance of the matter.

I didn't suggest Pearly Poll was familiar with court procedure and I have no evidence that she was.
But now you mention it' I suspect she was no stranger to the police courts.

What I did suggest was that she was probably familiar with the standard caution as I expect she had been arrested and cautioned before - with the standard caution. Whether those arrests ended in court would be another matter.
Without any immediate evidence to support this possible suggestion, givem her lifestyle I think its a reasonable one to make.
Or do you disagree?

[Gary Barnett]

Now you are engaging in semantics.
I said it wasn't an additional caution as one was an oath the other a caution.
I didn't say it wasn't 'additional'. It was clearly 'additional'.

I suggested a purpose for the caution - to impress upon her the importance of the matter.

I didn't suggest Pearly Poll was familiar with court procedure and I have no evidence that she was.
But now you mention it' I suspect she was no stranger to the police courts.

What I did suggest was that she was probably familiar with the standard caution as I expect she had been arrested and cautioned before - with the standard caution. Whether those arrests ended in court would be another matter.
Without any immediate evidence to support this possible suggestion, givem her lifestyle I think its a reasonable one to make.
Or do you disagree?

You were suggesting that its purpose was the same as the oath - to discourage the witness from giving false evidence. Can you provide other examples of this very odd and superfluous use of the police caution?

I wonder if the police formally cautioned every legless ‘unfortunate’ they banged up in the cells overnight? Have you found evidence of Poll being arrested or convicted of anything?

[Pat Marshall]

I am afraid I have not read all through but just wanted to say there is an Ellen Fogarty born 1825 Ireland in the 1901 Mile End Old town district infirmary. Right age for Thomas's mum. She is blind too....
Pat............